What we learned from week 1

[Mr. Lim]

Originally Posted by Jay Money 1058

And the one match that 610 lost at GSR was the one where the best defense was played on them (By far). There was a lack of defense in them in parts of qualifications and even in eliminations, and their scores reflected that.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xPbuEmmgxE

The above is a link to the match you mentioned. I think the loss is far more attributable to 1519 bombing full-court shots off-screen than to defense played on us. We had the unfortunate event of our partner 319 dying near the middle of our pyramid preventing 610 from getting to our preferred shooting spot. It also prevented our 30 pt hanging partner, 3467, from getting to their preferred hanging spot. At 1:15 you can even see 3467 trying to push 319 out of the way, only to be blocked by both the leg of the pyramid and 610 shooting! The credit for this match really has to be given to 1519, who simply shot the lights out... simply an amazing team and robot.

There are a many examples of defense played on at GSR, in quals and elims. One of my favorites is this match, where both 509 and 166 play some very significant defense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3FMKiaUXIM

Truthfully, we faced some form of defense in nearly every match we played. Our drive team did practice a fair amount playing against real defenses. They were fortunate enough to do drills against robots piloted by Nick Lawrence and Kaj Anantharajah. Nick and Kaj were given tall robots, and ours is of course short. Our driver (Austin) was told to make them look as silly as possible.

Let's just say there were some silly looking drivers...

...and a lot of broken robots

[coalhot]

I must say, week one was interesting. Not as high of scored at HH than I expected.

I did notice, however, some really mean and borderline illegal defense being played by a few teams when their robots malfunctioned during qualifications (lookin at you, 341 and 25). Between slamming mechanisms into opposing robots, driving on top of opposing robots, and slamming into the opposing driver station repeatedly, to the point that the field broke; it was...interesting.

All in all, a good weekend. Not what I expected, but hey, I only got hit by a frisbee once...in the face...

[bduddy]

As related to defense, I think that "anti-defense", or running interference on defending robots, is a potentially valuable role, especially to help full-court shooters get into position and also if teams start trying to block robots from getting to their pyramid. I wasn't able to watch many matches, but I saw this kind of play paying dividends pretty often...

[MooreteP]

Originally Posted by Libby K

Weird Ref Happenings: 229 got bumped in the last few seconds of the match as we were on the 10-point hang, and the other 'bot was touching us when the buzzer sounded. Ref called for a reset before we could ask, but we were NOT awarded the climb-impedance-foul-points. The answer upon challenging was "Oh, sorry, we reset too quickly, I didn't see it." Sorry, Head Ref whose name I don't know, but that's all on you. If you're a ref, PLEASE look at the field at rest before you signal the all-clear.

Week one was a whole lot of fun for me. Looking forward to next week!

Ah, the travails of week one.

I am sure these and the other referee issues will be addressed in their conference call. I would love to listen in.

[sircedric4]

Originally Posted by Alexa Stott

Sorry, but the smiley face at the end of your post doesn't make it any less offensive to all the teams that worked their butt off (same as you) to build their effective frisbee shooters and 10 point climbers.

The quotes, the smiley face, and the explanation after the PS is there to ensure that no offense was given. This is the internet and even if you go to lengths to try and show that your statements are your own opinion and are not disparaging there is still a possibility of miscommunication.

I apologize to all those that took my remarks as disparaging when they were not meant that way. So another lesson learned from this thread. :-)

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

I think you're underestimating what a 50 point climber (climb + dump) can accomplish with a team who is a top notch shooter.

Yes these climbers and dumpers can be beaten with two solid shooters, but it all depends on the full alliance.

Actually I am feeling a lot better today than when I made my previous remarks, I was reading the average scores posted earlier as being per robot instead of per alliance. I do think we will find a place to fit in with our climber / dumper after all. And regardless we will have a cool looking robot and a lot of lessons learned to go forward with. Another lesson is don't post on Chief Delphi disappointed, stop and evaluate first. Emotions suck sometimes. :-)

[Jared Russell]

G30 is called very inconsistently.

In eliminations, a lot of matches turned into 6 robot scrums at midfield, with each side trying to get back to their feeder stations with 1 or 2 bots while the other(s) played D.

The lower rung of the pyramid is a bit lower than everyone expected.

Being 1/32" of an inch off the ground is as good as being 27" off the ground.

The pyramid is FAR less rigid than I expected. Anyone attempting a 30 point climb, especially on the corner, better hold on tight.

[Anupam Goli]

Originally Posted by Jared341

G30 is called very inconsistently.

This. Had to exit in the quarterfinals because G30 wasn't called at all. We also had some bad planning and poor strategy on our part, and I don't think we would've gotten past semis, but I was absolutely furious when we lost our last match and the 3 infractions of G30 weren't counted, but one accidental instance of G36 was counted.

[thefro526]

Originally Posted by Jared341

G30 is called very inconsistently.

For anyone competing in the coming weeks and planning on using the pyramid as a protected area, I suggest you keep the following handy:

Originally Posted by G30

Regardless of who initiates the contact, a ROBOT may not contact an opponent ROBOT

contacting its PYRAMID or
touching the carpet in its LOADING ZONE.


Violation: FOUL. If purposeful or consequential, TECHNICAL FOUL. If an opponent's CLIMB is affected, each affected opponent ROBOT will be awarded points for a successful Level 3 CLIMB.

Originally Posted by Q&A Q138

Q138

Q. G30 has different penalties if the act is consequential or purposeful. Please define 'Consequential' and 'purposeful' with respect to violations of G30 in the LOADING ZONE.

A. Consequential means the action has an effect on the outcome of the MATCH. Purposeful means the action was deemed intentional.

Originally Posted by Q&A Q145

Q145

Q. Does this rule also apply to robots that are contacting the pyramid while shooting? That is to say, can a robot contact its pyramid to aim and shoot at its goals and consider this a "safe zone"? Or is this rule only active when climbing the pyramid?

A. [G30] applies regardless of what the ROBOT is doing, so long as it is contacting its PYRAMID.

I think it's very clear to anyone that reads G30, Q138 and Q145 that intentional contact between a robot touching it's pyramid or loading station and a defender/opponent is prohibited and the opponent will be penalized. With that being said, if you are shooting, and that contact causes one of your shots to miss, a technical foul should be assessed as the match score has now been changed (effect on the outcome of the match).

That being said, there was a certain degree of 'right of way' protection that was assumed to have been created by G30 - that being if you're touching/nearly touching the pyramid and attempting to play the game (score) you would more or less be allowed to do what was required to continue playing - which we were told was not the case. Whether or not this will be called uniformly across all events has yet to be seen...

I guess the TLDR here is to go over G30 in detail with the head ref if it's relevant to your strategy, whether it be climbing or shooting, and make sure that if you're touching the pyramid, that it's CLEARLY visible from all/most angles on the field. A few teams had little flags and fiberglass sticks that would deform when they were in contact which seemed to make things a bit easier.

[Spatel7793]

Well after 1422 caught fire, I learned that Team 639 had the right idea in putting a smoke detector on their robot.

[MikeE]

Originally Posted by Jared341

The pyramid is FAR less rigid than I expected. Anyone attempting a 30 point climb, especially on the corner, better hold on tight.

It was also noticeable how the practice pyramid rigidity deteriotated as the regional progressed. By the end of qualifications it was significantly looser than the field pyramids. I suspect that absent some upgrades the field pyramids will become interestingly dynamic by Week 6 competitions.

[Daniel Brim]

Originally Posted by Jared341

The lower rung of the pyramid is a bit lower than everyone expected.

Do you have a specific measurement for the height of the first bar? Or at least a ballpark value?

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by Daniel Brim

Do you have a specific measurement for the height of the first bar? Or at least a ballpark value?

We measured ~28 1/4" from the floor to the bottom of the first bar (+/- 1/4" depending on which rung and which pyramid).

[EricLeifermann]

Originally Posted by Jared341

We measured ~28 1/4" from the floor to the bottom of the first bar (+/- 1/4" depending on which rung and which pyramid).

How are they that far out of spec? That is completely unacceptable.

[Racer26]

Originally Posted by Mr. Lim

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5xPbuEmmgxE

The above is a link to the match you mentioned. I think the loss is far more attributable to 1519 bombing full-court shots off-screen than to defense played on us. We had the unfortunate event of our partner 319 dying near the middle of our pyramid preventing 610 from getting to our preferred shooting spot. It also prevented our 30 pt hanging partner, 3467, from getting to their preferred hanging spot. At 1:15 you can even see 3467 trying to push 319 out of the way, only to be blocked by both the leg of the pyramid and 610 shooting! The credit for this match really has to be given to 1519, who simply shot the lights out... simply an amazing team and robot.

There are a many examples of defense played on at GSR, in quals and elims. One of my favorites is this match, where both 509 and 166 play some very significant defense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3FMKiaUXIM

Truthfully, we faced some form of defense in nearly every match we played. Our drive team did practice a fair amount playing against real defenses. They were fortunate enough to do drills against robots piloted by Nick Lawrence and Kaj Anantharajah. Nick and Kaj were given tall robots, and ours is of course short. Our driver (Austin) was told to make them look as silly as possible.

Let's just say there were some silly looking drivers...

...and a lot of broken robots

I remember thinking to myself watching the webcast that the 610 robot driving looked an awful lot like Nick driving 1503's 2011 bot. Now I don't have to wonder why, Nick helped train Austin!

[TD78]

Originally Posted by Jared341

We measured ~28 1/4" from the floor to the bottom of the first bar (+/- 1/4" depending on which rung and which pyramid).

We were going with 29-1/4" that we measured at NH.

We believe it was from the 1/2" plywood base + carpet lining + carpet underneath the pyramid. So the 30" from the actual floor the bots drive around on is 30"...but then you need to take into account the 3/4" of base underneath the pyramid.

The practice field didn't have the plywood base, so it threw my team all off until late Friday afternoon. Our hanger still didn't work as well as we would have hoped...but we didn't expect that curveball.