Two Boulder Auto

[MrJohnston]

We spent some time thinking on this and are skeptical as to whether or not even top teams will be able to score both boulders consistently enough to overcome the potential of a penalty.

* Teams trying this will have to have multiple routines prepared and be able to breech several different defenses during auto as there is no guarantee that the "ideal" defense will be set up for you. At higher levels, teams can anticipate that the "wrong" defense will always be in place. In other words, unless you can either easily damage all 8 defenses (not low bar), or drive to your preferred defense without bumping into alliance members, it will be nothing more than a cutesy thing to show off once in a blue moon.

* Even with the "ideal" defensive set up, the potential for the defenses to through you off by an few inches is very, very high. You'll need very good vision-tracking that can quickly re-align the robot.

* Relative to the size of the boulders, the tower windows are small. Accuracy is going to be imperative.

* Because the additional boulders are on the mid-line (which you cannot cross at all), your acquisition devise must be able to take the boulder by grabbing it an inch short of the center. Very possible. However, if the robot should (after crossing a defense, shooting and returning) be off by so much as an inch, the risk of a penalty is very high.

* If you cannot score the second boulder more than half as often as you commit the penalty, it's a losing proposition.

So, it looks like that second boulder during auto is possible -but far more difficult than things like the three-tote auto we did well last year - with much less potential for reward. We decided we were not willing to put forth the amount of time it would likely take to perfect such a stunt... We believe that we can get much more "bang for the buck" by perfecting other attributes.

Will somebody do it? Yup. Will it have warranted the effort to make it work (scoring benefit v. time to develop and implement)? I doubt it. Of course, I am pleasantly surprised to be proven wrong about something every year in FRC....