YMTC: Bluabot "Descores" Red Tetra

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

Wow, Dave! I find it incredible that you’d take this position. It seems to me that, for scoring purposes, causing a robot to touch it’s own tetra and causing the tetra to be knocked off the stack is a distinction without a difference.


(Definition?) De-scored: When a tetra no longer satisfies the definition of SCORED



Which is it? Are we going to follow the spirit of the rules; or are we going to lawyer-up and pick nits?

"Bluabot bumps Redabot forcing them into the center goal stack at the end of the match." The key words here, in my opinion, are "bump" and "force". When we put them together, we find the cause. More yet, we see that the intent was to turn a ligitimate offensive win into a defensive victory with an act of agression, which is exactly what update #18 intends to discourage.

At any rate, I think it's more "lawyeristic" to claim that red should get the win. Reading the rules--as written--leaves no doubt that Team Update 18 does not apply to this situation. When you start to make inferences from it, such as that since they were talking about a similar action, and red should be the winner, you've just changed the rules.

Also, what I really think it boils down to is this is a part of the game challenge. You don't build a robot with a high cg if you don't want to tip. If you don't want to be pushed, you should make a stronger drivetrain. FIRST said there are elements that are part of the game challenge. I would define this as one of them.

$0.02

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by Cory

At any rate, I think it's more "lawyeristic" to claim that red should get the win. Reading the rules--as written--leaves no doubt that Team Update 18 does not apply to this situation. When you start to make inferences from it, such as that since they were talking about a similar action, and red should be the winner, you've just changed the rules.

Also, what I really think it boils down to is this is a part of the game challenge. You don't build a robot with a high cg if you don't want to tip. If you don't want to be pushed, you should make a stronger drivetrain. FIRST said there are elements that are part of the game challenge. I would define this as one of them.

$0.02

At this point, I think that I am just going to have to adopt Cory (hey Sean! you have a new brother! ). He obviously "gets it." Listen to him, he is a wise person (at least this week).

-dave

p.s. Cory, now that you are a member of the family, I need to fill you in on a few family rules. #1: the typical allowance structure you may be used to is different for us. Allowance is limited to $20 per week - but you pay me, not the other way around. #2: Krispy Kremes for breakfast are OK, as long as you leave some for me. #3: Taking the last Krispy Kreme will result in a punishment of double allowance for that week. #4: You can work off your allowance by mowing the lawn, as long as you do not drive through the neighbors fence on the lawn mower. #5: When arguing over who gets to use the computer, Dad's game of Railroad Tycoon III takes precedence over anyone else's game of Warcraft at all times.

[Wetzel]

Originally Posted by dlavery

At this point, I think that I am just going to have to adopt Cory (hey Sean! you have a new brother! ). He obviously "gets it." Listen to him, he is a wise person (at least this week).

-dave

p.s. Cory, now that you are a member of the family, I need to fill you in on a few family rules. #1: the typical allowance structure you may be used to is different for us. Allowance is limited to $20 per week - but you pay me, not the other way around. #2: Krispy Kremes for breakfast are OK, as long as you leave some for me. #3: Taking the last Krispy Kreme will result in a punishment of double allowance for that week. #4: You can work off your allowance by mowing the lawn, as long as you do not drive through the neighbors fence on the lawn mower. #5: When arguing over who gets to use the computer, Dad's game of Railroad Tycoon III takes precedence over anyone else's game of Warcraft at all times.

Cory, when you get out here I can show you around the area.

Wetzel

[Andy Baker]

Wow... a first on ChiefDelphi: adoption.

We've had alliances, co-opertition, and collaboration. Now, we have an adoption. Congrats to the McBride and Lavery family.

Does this mean that Dave has to pay Cory's tuition at WPI?

Andy B.

[Spikey]

I have seen this situation happen twice. Once at the NJ regional our robot had made a back row, but one of our allaince partners touched one of our tetras and we lost the row. Also at Philly we were in the semi-finals and the opposing alliance was placing a tetra on their home row, time ran out they were still touching the tetra so it did not count, also we had a tetra underneath that goal, and our tetra was higher then the tetra which they had under the goal so our alliance got that goal.

[Jack Jones]

Originally Posted by Cory

...Reading the rules--as written--leaves no doubt that Team Update 18 does not apply to this situation. ...

$0.01

Reading the rules as written this year is often an exercise in futility, at least when it comes to finding anything that resembles the essence of law in its purest and most concentrated form. One such case in point is:

<S05> A ROBOT may not impede the placement of TETRAS on the
loading structures or the hand-off of a TETRA by a HUMAN PLAYER
to a ROBOT. No HUMAN PLAYER or field attendant may be
accosted by a ROBOT while placing TETRAS. Violations will result
immediate disabling of the offending ROBOT, and disqualification of
the alliance.

I have a problem with the part that mentions a human being accosted by a robot. My problem with it stems from the definition of “accost.”

Main Entry: ac·cost
Pronunciation: &-'kost, -'käst
Function: transitive verb
: to approach and speak to often in a challenging or aggressive way

While it may be that machine vision has been added to this year’s game, I have yet to hear one talk. Should we then seize upon this loophole and take it to mean that we’re free to drive our robot into the opposition’s zone and use it to beat the tar out of their human player? Of course not! We are not barbarians!

We know, or should know by now, darned well how this year’s game is supposed to be played. We should not seize upon the fact that a particular Q & A did not address every possible twist and turn. We should either follow the spirit of the ruling, or start downloading the rules for next year’s game tomorrow. I expect it would take that long to fetch the rule set needed to counter every devious scheme that you all may come up with.

Originally Posted by Cory

...
Also, what I really think it boils down to is this is a part of the game challenge. You don't build a robot with a high cg if you don't want to tip. If you don't want to be pushed, you should make a stronger drivetrain. FIRST said there are elements that are part of the game challenge. I would define this as one of them.

$0.01

And you don't build a robot that powers down when the clock strikes zero?
And you do build a robot that defies Newton's Laws?

Sorry for changing the $0.02 at the end of the quotes to $0.01. It was the only way I could make it add up.

[Steve W]

Dave, I have to disagree with you (nothing new I guess). I voted blue to win but have since changed my mind. According to the rules if a robot causes another robot to descore then they are at fault. Descore has already been quoted from the rules. If blue robot pushes red robot causing red to descore (not count the tetra) then the goal belongs to red and the descored tetra counts. The red robot had scored and was moving away from the goal and then pushed back in. If the red robot had not let go or stopped touching the tetra you would be correct but once they had left the tetra and met the conditions of a scored tetra then the only way that it would not be counted was to descore. If done by themselves the tetra would not count but the fact that blue caused the descoring the goal should be awarded to red.

[Jack Jones]

Originally Posted by Steve W

Dave, I have to disagree with you (nothing new I guess). I voted blue to win but have since changed my mind. According to the rules if a robot causes another robot to descore then they are at fault. Descore has already been quoted from the rules. If blue robot pushes red robot causing red to descore (not count the tetra) then the goal belongs to red and the descored tetra counts. The red robot had scored and was moving away from the goal and then pushed back in. If the red robot had not let go or stopped touching the tetra you would be correct but once they had left the tetra and met the conditions of a scored tetra then the only way that it would not be counted was to descore. If done by themselves the tetra would not count but the fact that blue caused the descoring the goal should be awarded to red.

So Steve, you actually voted for it before you voted against it?

I think you should run for President in '08'.

[Keith Jones]

Originally Posted by Cory

Also, what I really think it boils down to is this is a part of the game challenge. You don't build a robot with a high cg if you don't want to tip. If you don't want to be pushed, you should make a stronger drivetrain. FIRST said there are elements that are part of the game challenge. I would define this as one of them.

If you don't want to be pushed into your own stack of tetras while scoring, don't build a mechanism to score them!

Blue caused the de-score. -> Red tetra counts, red owns goal.