Removal of Low Bar Fabric

[Eric Scheuing]

And the robots weren't getting dinged on G12, or was it a problem that rounding corners can't fix?

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by Kristian Calhoun

Personally, I'd like to see a beaded curtain .. but I would settle for plastic strips. ����

We built sidewalls on our robot, depending on the pipe, speed of transit, and the nap of the fabric to keep the flap out of our internals. Beads or strips would behave MUCH differently. We'd probably survive with the plastic strips, but our canopy design would have been much different with beads or strips than with the single flap. I have seen plenty of robot photos posted with similar flap/portcullis deflectors.

[evanperryg]

Originally Posted by EricLeifermann

Can't change the field and then add a rule that doesn't exist.

Seems like a team update could extend G40 to include "ROBOTS and HUMAN PLAYERS." I agree, though, that the removal of the flap was an overstep. There's no way a little bit of duct tape couldn't have fixed it while they tried to find some more fabric to replace it.

[jvriezen]

Duluth regionals are using bumper fabric to refurbish low bars. Saw a pic of someone with a sewing machine on the side lines.

[Anupam Goli]

Originally Posted by jvriezen

Duluth regionals are using bumper fabric to refurbish low bars. Saw a pic of someone with a sewing machine on the side lines.

The mental image I have of this process is quite funny.

[Christopher149]

On the webcast for Standish-Sterling, I saw a low bar fabric get ripped and replaced with a spare piece of fabric.

[Orthofort]

FiM Southfield event just announced they are removing the fabric as well. They cited a FIRST ruling and said HP's can roll a ball all the way through once on accident, any more is a tech foul.

[Jared Russell]

Removing the fabric makes sense.

Adding a new penalty for rolling balls too well does not make sense.

[IronicDeadBird]

They could use chain mesh it fits the theme.

[thinker&planner]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

Removing the fabric makes sense.

Adding a new penalty for rolling balls too well does not make sense.

You took the words out of my mouth.

[Edxu]

Originally Posted by Orthofort

FiM Southfield event just announced they ate removin the fabric as well. They cited a FIRST ruling and said HP's can roll a ball all the way through once on accident, any more is a tech foul.

Yeah...That was partially answered in one of our Q&A questions.

Originally Posted by FIRST Q&A

Q878
While we can't answer conclusively on a hypothetical scenario, generally, there are no rules that penalize inadvertent flap flipping or the act of rolling a BOULDER through the LOW BAR. If the REFEREES determine that an action is done intentionally to circumvent G40-1, the REFEREES will deem that action as egregious and will issue a YELLOW CARD per Section 5.5.4.

The specific question that we asked was: "If a ROBOT, in the process of CROSSING the LOW BAR, accidentally flips the flap such that it no longer stops boulders from rolling through the LOW BAR when thrown forcefully, then drives through the LOW BAR, will that ROBOT be assessed any penalties, since it now enables teams to throw boulders through the LOW BAR without violating G40-1, as the ROBOT is not specifically holding the LOW BAR flap up? If the HUMAN PLAYER chooses to take advantage of this situation, are they assessed any penalties?"

However, the point that pertains to this thread is the last part. FIRST's ruling on it implies that Human Players are free to abuse the low bar throw as much as they want, since it is not specifically covered under G40-1.

It would be nice to see an official FIRST ruling on this in order to wrap up the GTC scenario. Although we're not competing this week, I can easily see this situation happening again at other regionals as a band-aid fix to the problem.

If this ruling stays, I'm sure that it'll affect other teams as well as mine, as we trained our human player to throw boulders such that we can intake them the moment we cross the low bar. If he now has to precisely control his power such that it doesn't go straight through, I think that it'll significantly reduce cycle time.

[Rangel(kf7fdb)]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

Removing the fabric makes sense.

Adding a new penalty for rolling balls too well does not make sense.

It makes pretty good sense to me. The intent of the fabric was so robots have to carry balls into the courtyard. It would change the game drastically if you could just roll it through no problem.

[orangemoore]

If they are going to remove the fabric at some events they should remove it at all events.

There is now an obvious inconsistency for teams to play in. FIRST either needs to fix the fabric OR remove it permanently.

[CVR]

At GTR-C there was no readily available resources to repair or create new low bar flaps, and 2 out of 3 were damaged pretty early in the day (they received a good amount of damage on Thursday as well). Matches were run with both flaps removed to ensure an even playing field.

From the existing game rules as well as Q&A answers it is, in my opinion, fairly clear that the GDC did not intend to allow any circumvention of "carrying a single ball through a defense" method of getting balls into the courtyard. Whether that be through the opponent's secret passage, launching over defenses, or a robot moving the low bar flap out of the way. I think considering the GDC's intent, it is pretty clear that if the low bar flaps are removed, they would not like human players being allowed to bowl a boulder directly into the opponents courtyard.

In fact, I would argue that the entire point of the low bar flap as well as the lower bar, was intended to prevent this scenario. Therefore, I think it's reasonable to award a Tech Foul for the action. This is the same foul a robot would receive if a robot were to do this. Allowing bowling under the low bar would make boulder starvation much easier and possibly significantly change the game.

As far as unfair awarding of Tech Fouls, as soon as the flaps were removed, an announcement was made regarding the new rule (more like an amendment or clarification imo). Even if teams didn't hear (or flat-out ignored) the announcement, a good deal of leniency was given to human players in regard to the Tech Fouls.

The field crew had already been having problems with boulders getting stuck in the sensors of the low goals and had the referees who were on break stationed behind the towers to rectify the situation (as well as ensure there weren't more than 6 boulders at any time). After the flaps were removed, these refs were instructed to remind any human players vigorously bowling boulders that the next attempt would result in a Tech Foul. Any Tech Fouls received after this change should have been from a human player who was previously warned. Of course, that is near impossible to monitor, but I had seen refs warning HPs even in the last few matches of the day.

It's definitely a difficult situation that is not easy to deal with, but I think the team at GTR-C did the best with what they were given, and did it in a way that would satisfy the GDC and the spirit of the game. If anything, it raised the skill requirement of the human players as there was a sweet spot between the boulder staying in the secret passage and rolling under the low bar .

[MechEng83]

Kevlar. Go.