What we learned from week 1

[Greg Needel]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

Do you know if 2848 got called for a foul when 16 shoved them into the pyramid? By rule they shouldn't have since you can't be forced into taking a foul for anything except a G30. I'm just curious how the refs at Hub City called that.

There were no fouls in that match at all. We got exactly what we expected in the match and even confirmed with the ref's before that being shoved into the pyramid by another team would not be our penalty.

As for 16 getting a penalty, they didn't and thats fine. They hit us, we hit them, it happens. Build your robots to take a hit and it doesn't matter.


We went into the match knowing full well we were going to loose, we just wanted to show other teams that it was possible to block 1986. As good as their shooter is from under the pyramid, their accuracy drops from anywhere else on the field. ( just like any other team which calibrates for a specific shot)

As good as 1986 is, I think they will not have such an easy run in Oklahoma, as teams learn how to defend elite robots, such as installing blockers at 60" to force them to leave the spot under the pyramid and shoot on the fly. The biggest advantage they have is that they are already performing at a high level with things like a 7 disk auto (which is awesome), but by week 4 others will have had the opportunity to study the game and mod their robots to adapt.



*edited to better reflect my options in a way that does not put down 1986. They are a great team with a great robot, and it was not my intent to take anything away from the team and their accomplishments. I was just pointing out, from a lessons learned standpoint that even the best of teams will have to deal with teams that learn more about how to play the game as the weeks roll on.

[Alpha Beta]

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

We went into the match knowing full well we were going to loose, we just wanted to show other teams that it was possible to block 1986. As good as their shooter is from under the pyramid, their accuracy drops to less than 50% from anywhere else on the field. ( I think this is mostly due to driver practice and not robot functionality)

As good as 1986 is, I think they will not have such an easy run of it in Oklahoma, as teams are going to install blockers at 60" to force them to leave their perch under the pyramid and shoot on the fly. The biggest advantage they have is the 7 disk auto (which is awesome), but by week 4 others will have it also (through programming changes or robot mods)

We were surprised too that no one picked up on your blocking idea and used it on us in eliminations. Your team did an excellent job of strategizing ways to keep the score down. Teams that emphasize the climbing aspects of the game should be very interested in lowering the teleop shooting so their points matter more.

Saw another interesting strategy where the defensive bot sat in the opponents protected feeding zone, and the loading bot couldn't get to the zone to draw the penalty, much less load discs.

We definitely had a sweet spot to shoot from, although by the time Oklahoma rolls around we should have about 11 other equally sweet spots to pull up to. We have all of the KC regional to practice with in week 3 before heading to Oklahoma in week 5.

Just noticed 2848 is going to be in Oklahoma too. Our scores were higher playing together than playing against each other. Hope to see you on our side next time we meet.

[Greg Needel]

Originally Posted by Alpha Beta

Saw another interesting strategy where the defensive bot sat in the opponents protected feeding zone, and the loading bot couldn't get to the zone to draw the penalty, much less load discs.

The refs were calling this wrong until saturday when we asked about it. While you can't get a regular G30 because the other team is not in contact with the carpet, you can get a Technical Foul under G30 because of the intent of the action. (while I disagree with this interpretation of the rules, thats how they were calling it at Hub City after we specifically asked if we could block like that)

Originally Posted by Alpha Beta

Just noticed 2848 is going to be in Oklahoma too. Our scores were higher playing together than playing against each other. Hope to see you on our side next time we meet.

Oh yeah, the team will be there.....with a few mods already in progress. We hope to be on your side of the field also.

[Nuttyman54]

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

The refs were calling this wrong until saturday when we asked about it. While you can't get a regular G30 because the other team is not in contact with the carpet, you can get a Technical Foul under G30 because of the intent of the action. (while I disagree with this interpretation of the rules, thats how they were calling it at Hub City after we specifically asked if we could block like that)

I don't see how G30 can possibly be interpreted to give a foul if the team is not in contact with their feeder station carpet. Simply put, I think the refs called this wrong if they are giving fouls only for blocking teams' access to their own feeder station.

Originally Posted by G30

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

A. contacting its PYRAMID or
B. 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 granted credit for a Level 3 CLIMB at the end of the MATCH.

Intent is only in play if the rule is violated, and the ONLY way to violate the rule is if they are in contact with their loading zone or pyramid. If Blueabot gets to Redabot's loading zone first and prevents Redabot from contacting the loading zone carpet, G30 simply does not apply, because neither of the conditions can be violated, intent or not.

TLDR: If neither of the rule conditions apply, you cannot receive a foul for violating those conditions.

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by Nuttyman54

I don't see how G30 can possibly be interpreted to give a foul if the team is not in contact with their feeder station carpet. Simply put, I think the refs called this wrong if they are giving fouls only for blocking teams' access to their own feeder station.



Intent is only in play if the rule is violated, and the ONLY way to violate the rule is if they are in contact with their loading zone or pyramid. If Blueabot gets to Redabot's loading zone first and prevents Redabot from contacting the loading zone carpet, G30 simply does not apply, because neither of the conditions can be violated, intent or not.

TLDR: If neither of the rule conditions apply, you cannot receive a foul for violating those conditions.

The violation comes with teams working together to obstruct the flow of a game. AKA sitting in the opposing alliances safe zone in front of their feeder station.

[Nuttyman54]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

The violation comes with teams working together to obstruct the flow of a game. AKA sitting in the opposing alliances safe zone in front of their feeder station.

This is an iffy call, and it's a G25 penalty. Greg said specifically that they were assessing technical fouls under G30 for the situation he described, which is what I think is wrong.

G25 cannot apply unless the alliance is working together to do this (eg. both feeder stations are blocked by opposing robots). G25 applies only to the actions of multiple robots (plural), so a single robot preventing access to the feeder station should not be penalized under G25.

[Clinton Bolinger]

See the following Q&A:

https://frc-qa.usfirst.org/Question/...eeder-stations

Q. Is it in violation of G25 for an alliance to restrict/block access to one or two of the opposition feeder stations?
2013-02-14 by FRC1884

A. We rely on the judgement of our Referees to make this decision in each MATCH. Generally, blocking access to a FEEDER STATION is not considered a violation of [G25]. Blocking access to all FEEDER STATIONS would be considered a violation of [G25].

-Clinton-

[Alpha Beta]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

The violation comes with teams working together to obstruct the flow of a game. AKA sitting in the opposing alliances safe zone in front of their feeder station.

That would be a G-25, but has no bearing if it is not multiple robots working together. Would also have no bearing if the field wasn't blockaded. Their is an alternate location to get discs from.

G25
ROBOTS on the same ALLIANCE may not blockade the FIELD in an attempt to stop the flow of the MATCH. This rule has no effect on individual ROBOT-ROBOT interaction.

Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL

Edit: Beaten to it.

[notmattlythgoe]

Touche.

[Nuttyman54]

I found the Q&A I was looking for to support my original statement, FWIW:

Originally Posted by Q26

Q.If part of our robot is in contact with the carpet on our side, but has part of the robot in contact
with the opponents carpet, and comes in contact with another opponent robot in autonomous,
would a technical foul be assessed? If so, would the foul be assessed to both teams who make the
contact?
A.If the ROBOT has not violated [G19], no penalty will be assessed.

This is in regards to G19, but it general supports an official ruling that if the terms of the rule have not been violated, no penalty can be assessed.