Low-Bar capable robot discussion

[Type]

I think it helps with cycle times. If anyone watched the St Joe competition in Michigan, 3620, the Average Joes had a low bar robot and if RoboZone was right, their alliance cycled 11 balls into the tower. I think some of this had to do with being able to go under the low bar to quickly grab a bar and shoot. The top 4 (or at least top 2) alliances at St Joe were filled with only low bar robots. Actually, I think there were only 2 robots at the entire event that weren't low bar robots. I don't think its hurt anything, but just made it more interesting.

[GeeTwo]

As most robots are capable of driving over at least one other defense, I have not seen the low bar become a bottle neck.

Several (though not all) of the robots that obviously did not design to go under the low bar also seem to be more likely to tortuga on the category B and D defenses via tipping due to their high center of gravity. While there are certainly teams that made a mistake each way, I believe that more teams made a poor decision by deciding not to do the low bar than by deciding to do the low bar.

[ctt956]

Originally Posted by GeeTwo

As most robots are capable of driving over at least one other defense, I have not seen the low bar become a bottle neck.

Several (though not all) of the robots that obviously did not design to go under the low bar also seem to be more likely to tortuga on the category B and D defenses via tipping due to their high center of gravity. While there are certainly teams that made a mistake each way, I believe that more teams made a poor decision by deciding not to do the low bar than by deciding to do the low bar.

Agreed. From the competitions I've seen so far this year, taller robots tend to get stuck/flip when crossing anything other than Category C, with the exception of the Portcullis. Some of them also seem to be a bit slower, but maybe that's because the tall 'bots have high goal shooters, so they spend most of their time trying to shoot high goals.