Time-Outs, Give it or keep it?

[Jack Jones]

Originally Posted by SECTION 9 - The Tournament

<T19> In the elimination matches, each ALLIANCE will be allotted one TIME-OUT of up to 6 minutes. If an ALLIANCE wishes to call for a TIME OUT, they must submit their TIME OUT coupon to the Head Referee within two minutes of the Head Referee issuing the field reset signal preceding their match. When this occurs, the Time-out Clock will count down the six minutes starting with the expiration of the arena-reset period. Both ALLIANCES will enjoy the complete 6-minute window. In the interest of tournament schedule, if an ALLIANCE completes their repairs before the Time-out Clock expires, the ALLIANCE CAPTAIN is encouraged to inform the Head Referee that they are ready to play and remit any time remaining in the TIME-OUT. If ALLIANCES are ready before the 6-minute window, the next match will start. There are no cascading time-outs. An opposing ALLIANCE may not offer their unused TIME-OUT to their opponent.

While it may be the courteous thing to do, offering your TIME-OUT to your opponent is against the rules. There is no need to anguish over a chioce that was not your's to make.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

While it may be the courteous thing to do, offering your TIME-OUT to your opponent is against the rules. There is no need to anguish over a chioce that was not your's to make.

Yes. but if I, instead of offering my timeout to my opponent, use my time out to 'talk about strategy' while they repair their robot, then all is according to the rules

[Jack Jones]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Yes. but if I, instead of offering my timeout to my opponent, use my time out to 'talk about strategy' while they repair their robot, then all is according to the rules

The intent of T-19 was implied by their mention of an alliance completing their repairs. If that was indeed their intent, then perhaps they should have been more explicit, so that we would not even try to wiggle our way around it.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

The intent of T-19 was implied by their mention of an alliance completing their repairs. If that was indeed their intent, then perhaps they should have been more explicit, so that we would not even try to wiggle our way around it.

Agreed.

The GDC has a very tough job because there are a lot of very smart people out there looking at the rules.

I understand the intent of the rule, however, I Like many others want to beat our opponent when they are at their best. Winning because your opponent is broken (possibly through no fault of their own ... or even possibly because of MY team) does not make for a good spectator sport, which is what FIRST needs in order to change the culture.

In fact, I would go so far as to say I'd rather lose in the finals, and have used my timeout for my opponent, than win with my opponent having a broken 'bot. The reason is because I believe we've already won by that point ... and the competition is the celebration of our hard work and learning over the 6 weeks. to do otherwise, IMHO, lessens the gains we make and opens up the 'win at any cost' mentality.

[Jack Jones]

In my opinion, there is no however. In the interest of fair play, we must adhere to the obvious intent of the rule. It does not matter that the cause is noble, nor whether we agree with the rule, nor whether we’ll feel good about ourselves by going against it, nor whether we feel that little white lies are different from big dark ones.

It is a very slippery slope we’re on when we decide to violate the rule. A team could break down in the quarterfinals, take their time out, and then be awarded another one match later by the opposing alliance. They could enjoy the same gift in the semifinals and finals for a total of 24 minutes to repair their machine. Meanwhile, another team that was not as well known or well liked could break down and have just the six minutes allowed by the rules, maybe because their opponents had already given their time out away. The only way to insure that each and every team has the same opportunity is to obey the rule. If you want to be fair, then be fair to us all.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

The intent of T-19 was implied by their mention of an alliance completing their repairs. If that was indeed their intent, then perhaps they should have been more explicit, so that we would not even try to wiggle our way around it.

My strategy just took a full time-out to fix.

If they had said straight out, "you can't call a timeout so your opponent can repair their robots", there would be a massive protest. They are trying to stay on schedule, hence the "no cascading timeouts."

Also, if they really wanted to be explicit... I could, if I wanted to, hurt my opponent, even though they called the TO. (I don't want to.) Legally. "Their repairs" only refers to "an alliance", not "the calling alliance". Again, I wouldn't use this.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by EricH

If they had said straight out, "you can't call a timeout so your opponent can repair their robots", there would be a massive protest.

They did say that straight out.

Originally Posted by <T19>

...An opposing ALLIANCE may not offer their unused TIME-OUT to their opponent.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

They did say that straight out.

And there were complaints until someone pointed out that you can call it to repair your own robots. Same effect, different methods.

And it isn't enforced under the new method.

[Brandon Holley]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

They did say that straight out.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone

However what eric is implying is that YOU can call your timeout, if the opposing team happens to work on their bots during YOUR timeout, then good for them.


Again I am not agreeing or disagreeing with anyone here.