Go to Post I applaud teams that make signs of all kinds - giant numbers, large banners, humongous heads. It's all good. - Ryan Dognaux [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Competition > Rules/Strategy
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2007, 19:35
Jack Jones Jack Jones is offline
Retired
no team
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Waterford, MI
Posts: 964
Jack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond reputeJack Jones has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Elimination Time-Outs: or Gracious Professionalism vs. The Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory View Post
There's an easy way around the rule... just look over, if theyre still madly working after their timeout ends, tell the head ref you'd like to take your timeout to let your motors cool, upload some code and change autonomous mode, go get a snack, whatever. They can't tell you you can't take your timeout, unless you tell them you're taking it for the other team.
Is dishonesty the best policy to combat hypocrisy?
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2007, 19:40
CraigHickman
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Elimination Time-Outs: or Gracious Professionalism vs. The Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Jones View Post
Is dishonesty the best policy to combat hypocrisy?
In this case, yes it would be. In other cases, such as getting through pointless paperwork systems in the schools, no, not at all.

However, for this case, It's entirely different. FIRST is saying "no, you can't be nice and promote GP by having a good fair match, because we need those extra 6 minutes."
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2007, 19:47
Cory's Avatar
Cory Cory is offline
Registered User
AKA: Cory McBride
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: May 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 6,795
Cory has a reputation beyond reputeCory has a reputation beyond reputeCory has a reputation beyond reputeCory has a reputation beyond reputeCory has a reputation beyond reputeCory has a reputation beyond reputeCory has a reputation beyond reputeCory has a reputation beyond reputeCory has a reputation beyond reputeCory has a reputation beyond reputeCory has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Cory
Re: Elimination Time-Outs: or Gracious Professionalism vs. The Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Jones View Post
Is dishonesty the best policy to combat hypocrisy?
In general, no. But absolutely nobody is hurt by doing so in this case. As a spectator or a competitor, I'd much rather see the competition run 10 minutes longer to see an exciting finals match, instead of one alliance getting creamed because their bot broke and then couldn't finish repairing it, when the other alliance was perfectly willing to give up their timeout.
__________________
2001-2004: Team 100
2006-Present: Team 254
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2007, 20:08
shtylman shtylman is offline
some sort of programmer
FRC #2420
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Marietta, GA
Posts: 37
shtylman has a spectacular aura aboutshtylman has a spectacular aura about
Re: Elimination Time-Outs: or Gracious Professionalism vs. The Schedule

Saying that you need time to let your motors cool or whatnot to allow the other team to work is not wrong/lying/ or bad in any way. I approach it the same way I approach return policies. They have given you a timeout to use; it isn't any of their business what you are using it for, it is yours to use. That's my though on the matter.
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-02-2007, 10:51
kawelch kawelch is offline
Formerly of 1653
FRC #1984
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: kansas
Posts: 109
kawelch is a splendid one to beholdkawelch is a splendid one to beholdkawelch is a splendid one to beholdkawelch is a splendid one to beholdkawelch is a splendid one to beholdkawelch is a splendid one to beholdkawelch is a splendid one to behold
Re: Elimination Time-Outs: or Gracious Professionalism vs. The Schedule

[quote=Cory;583634] But absolutely nobody is hurt by doing so in this case. /QUOTE]

No one gets hurt? My team was first back-up team in a regional when a bot broke... we were ready to compete and were a higher rank than some of the teams competing... the other Alliance calls a time out giving an additional six minutes. The bot was repaired and the match concluded. We were left out because the no cascade rule was not followed... but hey no one got hurt.
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-02-2007, 11:18
Paul Copioli's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero Woodie Flowers Award
Paul Copioli Paul Copioli is online now
President, VEX Robotics, Inc.
FRC #3310 (Black Hawk Robotics)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Rockwall, TX
Posts: 1,382
Paul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Elimination Time-Outs: or Gracious Professionalism vs. The Schedule

Quote:
I find it interesting that refs would knowingly ignore a rule and that it would be mentioned during kickoff this year as a fine example of GP.
Since the allinace of 296, 217, and 522 were the recipients of the GP mentioned in the Kickoff, let me clear up some things immediately.

1. Only 1 time out was called during that time frame (legal then, legal now).

2. We called the time out, not them. They gave us the #25 chain 296 needed since 217 and 522 used #35 chain and had none to give.

3. If they called the timeout for us (because we did not have one), that was legal then and legal now. What is not legal is for them to call one after us to gain an additional 6 minutes. Thet was also not allowed last year. If some regionals allowed it, then your teams got lucky.

4. What they are clarifying this year are two things:
a. No cascading timeouts as it was clearly confusing last year.
b. SInce you now have coupons, it would have been perceived that a team that got knoked out before they used the coupon could give it to another team. The GDC cleared that up so that you only get one per alliance. A team can't give their coupon to another team. An opposing alliance can call their timeout for the other team, but a team sitting on the sideline can't give their coupon to an alliance competing on the field.

This clarification is to make sure only one timeout is alloted per alliance and to make sure only one timeout maximum is used per match.

Here is a link to another post regarding this same topic earlier: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=51111

My post is post #10.
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-02-2007, 11:27
theun4gven theun4gven is offline
What time is it?
AKA: Tom Filipek
FRC #0079 (Team Krunch)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 23
theun4gven is just really nicetheun4gven is just really nicetheun4gven is just really nicetheun4gven is just really nicetheun4gven is just really nice
Re: Elimination Time-Outs: or Gracious Professionalism vs. The Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by kawelch View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory View Post
But absolutely nobody is hurt by doing so in this case.
No one gets hurt? My team was first back-up team in a regional when a bot broke... we were ready to compete and were a higher rank than some of the teams competing... the other Alliance calls a time out giving an additional six minutes. The bot was repaired and the match concluded. We were left out because the no cascade rule was not followed... but hey no one got hurt.
I have to disagree here. The teams competing in the elimination matches have earned their right to be there either by being top teams and getting to pick their alliance or by displaying qualities that are advantageous to a choosing alliance.

Matches can be punishing on a robot and over time things break. FIRST allows for this by allowing time-outs in the first place. During qualifying matches, teams tend to have ample time to fix problems that occur and time-outs help to remedy this situation for elimination matches. Six minutes is not a lot of time, but it may be the difference between competing in a match or not competing because you have a functioning robot that needed a minute more to replace a sprocket that is back in the pits.

I am not saying that your team didn't earn a chance to compete, we too have been passed over for teams that we didn't feel warranted a selection over ourselves, I am just saying that if six minutes is enough time to fix a problem between a match, and an alliance is willing to give up their own time-out to allow this, then this the ideal of gracious professionalism at work and completely within the spirit of the competition. And if six minutes isn't enough, the next backup team has now earned itself a second chance to compete for robotics glory.
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-02-2007, 11:42
Jaine Perotti Jaine Perotti is offline
...misses her old team.
AKA: BurningQuestion
FRC #0716 (The Who'sCTEKS)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: May 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Melbourne, FL
Posts: 979
Jaine Perotti has a reputation beyond reputeJaine Perotti has a reputation beyond reputeJaine Perotti has a reputation beyond reputeJaine Perotti has a reputation beyond reputeJaine Perotti has a reputation beyond reputeJaine Perotti has a reputation beyond reputeJaine Perotti has a reputation beyond reputeJaine Perotti has a reputation beyond reputeJaine Perotti has a reputation beyond reputeJaine Perotti has a reputation beyond reputeJaine Perotti has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Jaine Perotti Send a message via MSN to Jaine Perotti Send a message via Yahoo to Jaine Perotti
Re: Elimination Time-Outs: or Gracious Professionalism vs. The Schedule

I don't like it when I see the phrase "gracious professionalism" flung around without first examining the situation very, very closely and objectively. I think we need to be a bit more careful in that regard with this discussion. What actions/rules do or do not constitute "gracious professionalism" is very subjective, making it poor fodder for an objective, non-emotionally driven argument.

One can look at this particular rule from many different angles with regards to "gracious professionalism". One could say that this rule does embody GP because it allows all alliances to have the same amount of time to fix their robot in between matches. Yes, it may seem "GP" to the spectators when an alliance allows their opponents extra time by taking another time out, but how fair is that to the other alliances on the field? They might not be lucky enough to be given extra time by their opponents, and they would be put at a disadvantage. Did you ever consider that perspective before calling out the rule as "un-GP"?

I'm sorry if the above came off as sounding harsh, but please - next time you are discussing a rule, can you please leave the GP phrase out of it? Stick to the specific implications of the rule when supporting your argument. It is completely inappropriate to judge a rule as being "un-GP" when you haven't yet considered every side to the story and all the facts surrounding the situation.

A recent example - the recent blizzard caused many teams to complain that FIRST should have extended the ship date. I felt that alot of people posted inappropriately, saying that "if FIRST had any GP, they would extend the deadline." A better way to go about this (which many other people did properly), would be to discuss and present arguments using the particular facts of the situation in calm and reasonable manner. It was also important to consider FIRST's perspective, reasoning, and response to the situation before labeling it's actions as "un-GP".

So, with regards to this rule, I think people need to step back and consider that perhaps this rule is (arguably, anyways) fair because it gives everyone the same amount of time to fix their robot. Just as FIRST gives everyone six weeks to build their robot - they also want to make sure that no alliance is given an unfair advantage over the other at the competition. It is not in fact "gracious" to try to circumvent this rule, because it's not fair to the rest of the competitors.

-- Jaine
__________________
Florida Institute of Technology
Ocean Engineering, '12

Last edited by Jaine Perotti : 22-02-2007 at 12:16. Reason: tried to make it less harsh-sounding
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-02-2007, 11:52
Dave Flowerday Dave Flowerday is offline
Software Engineer
VRC #0111 (Wildstang)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Rookie Year: 1995
Location: North Barrington, IL
Posts: 1,366
Dave Flowerday has a reputation beyond reputeDave Flowerday has a reputation beyond reputeDave Flowerday has a reputation beyond reputeDave Flowerday has a reputation beyond reputeDave Flowerday has a reputation beyond reputeDave Flowerday has a reputation beyond reputeDave Flowerday has a reputation beyond reputeDave Flowerday has a reputation beyond reputeDave Flowerday has a reputation beyond reputeDave Flowerday has a reputation beyond reputeDave Flowerday has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Elimination Time-Outs: or Gracious Professionalism vs. The Schedule

Quote:
Originally Posted by kawelch View Post
We were left out because the no cascade rule was not followed... but hey no one got hurt.
You can't make that assumption. There's no guarantee you would have been called up even if the timeout hadn't been available. The other robot may have competed with reduced functionality, or possibly just sat there and done nothing.

I can certainly see a situation where an alliance would choose to compete in a quarter or semifinal round with one robot broken in hopes that said robot will be repaired in time for the finals, rather than permanently replacing that robot with a backup which may not fit well into the alliance's strategy.

Teams are on the standby list just in case an alliance chooses to make use of them. There is nothing saying that they automatically have a right to compete if someone else breaks.
Closed Thread


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
In the spirit of Gracious Professionalism, I give you: My MultiDrive. Sachiel7 Technical Discussion 6 14-11-2003 19:59
Gracious Professionalism carries the day at UTC archiver 2001 5 24-06-2002 01:43
Gracious Professionalism? archiver 1999 0 23-06-2002 23:04
Gracious professionalism and the NYC regional Jessica358 Thanks and/or Congrats 1 24-03-2002 12:46


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 22:25.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi