Go to Post We're all human, we all make mistakes. How you deal with mistakes and problems, is what really elevates successful people, robotics teams, organizations, etc. above the rest. - artdutra04 [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Competition > Championship Event
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 21-04-2010, 22:26
TEE's Avatar
TEE TEE is offline
Registered User
FRC #0201
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 94
TEE has a spectacular aura aboutTEE has a spectacular aura aboutTEE has a spectacular aura about
Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

The final matches were really close. I think Curie probably would have won it if they had strategized differently; as it was, they had nobody playing defense in either match, and 2041 stayed in the offensive zone throughout both matches. (In the second match, 2041 got stuck in the goal during autonomous, and remained there for over half of the match, until 1114 came and helped them out, which was a fluke in favor of Newton) Curie should have had every robot except 469 focus on moving balls from the far and middle zones to the offensive zone (scoring when possible, which would have been often for 1114), where there would be only one defender, and then go to town on scoring; every ball except those 294 would be able to clear would remain in that zone to score, while Newton's offensive, 67 and 177 would be starved of balls. At first, they would not have scored as much (because 294 would have an easier time blocking), but in the long-run, the tide of the match would turn towards Curie, as 294 would have trouble blocking successive shots from 469 and 1114, considering 294 would also have to deal with 2041. The fact that many of 469's shots wouldn't make it (because of the number of robots in the offensive zone) wouldn't matter, as 1114 and 2041 together would have been able to get many of those shots past 294.

This strategy takes into account the fact that 469's robot not only scores quickly, but that it also locks balls in the offensive zone. If it turned out that most of 469's shots made it past 294, then 1114 would be able to go back to midfield, or the far zone and fight for any balls 294 had cleared.

This all goes to show how much strategy plays in robotics. Newton, 67, 177 and 294, had a better strategy, and won it all because of it.

That said, could 2041 kick over the bump? Was 1114 able to hang with 469 expanded?

Also, looking over what I've written, it seems I may not have given due credit to Newton; 67, 177, and 294: you played wonderfully! Curie may have tried the strategy above and you could possibly have prevented them from pulling it off!

Any thoughts or comments?
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-04-2010, 22:30
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is offline
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,755
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

You underestimate what 294 and 254 could have done if left alone. Playing defense the way they did and running the cycle with 5 balls in it was probably the right move. 1114 only needed to throw one or two balls out of the 67 faux-cycle to gain essentially permanent ball advantage. I think they had the right strategy, just execution problems. Plus they had to play with an alliance that had 177 as their third best scorer. I mean, wow.

In my opinion, 67 won because they had 177, and 1114 didn't do as good of a job denying balls in the opponent's zone as they needed to do to make their cycle excel. The second match where they had a much better chance due to a high scoring auto was when 2041 got stuck in the goal.
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
--2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
.
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
-- 2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design -- 2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
-- 2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
-- 2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 MN 10K Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-04-2010, 22:39
TEE's Avatar
TEE TEE is offline
Registered User
FRC #0201
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Michigan
Posts: 94
TEE has a spectacular aura aboutTEE has a spectacular aura aboutTEE has a spectacular aura about
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

I should have qualified what I said; I think Curie would have stood a better chance, not that they would have won in any situation. I agree that 67 + 177 + 294 = extremely strong alliance.
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-04-2010, 22:44
jblay's Avatar
jblay jblay is offline
Here comes StuyPulse
AKA: Joe Blay
FRC #0694 (StuyPulse)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 984
jblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

I actually had a similar thought but I wasn't sure if it was appropriate to start such a thread.

In my opinion the problem with the Curie alliance was that they had 1114 put balls from the middle into the home zone and with 294 being in that zone they simply took those balls that 1114 put there and put them into their home zone for 67 and 177 to score and with no bot clearing that zone those balls were free to sit there and give Newton the ball control until they decided to score. In my opinion 1114's role on that alliance shouldn't have been putting in the ball from the middle and pushing them in but making sure all the balls stayed in their home zone for 469 to cycle with the help of 2041. It also didn't hurt the Curie alliance's scoring ability that 67 could hang after the buzzer.

This was the initial flaw I saw in the Curie alliance and the only reason that Archimedes didn't manage to capitalize on this was that the hangers on their alliance weren't the ones who played the two closer zones. Either 233 or 254 needed to stay in the back zone and that alliance didn't have the advantage of the double hang unless they freed up the far zone at the end of the match. 3357 was a great close zone scoring bot and did a great job throughout the competition but I don't think they were the right fit for that alliance. With all the talent on Archimedes I think that 233 and 254 should have picked up either a close zone robot that could hang or a robot that could solidly play the far zone.
__________________
It's pronounced StighPulse like HighPulse
2016 Curie Champions
2016 New York City Champions
2016 New York City Engineering Inspiration
2015 New York City Finalists
2013 New York City Champions
2012 Connecticut Chairman's
2011 Connecticut Chairman's
2010 Connecticut Chairman's

2010 New York City Champions
2008 New York City Engineering Inspiration
2007 New York City Finalists
2006 New York City Finalists
2005 New York City Chairman's
2003 New York City Champions
2002 New York City Engineering Inspiration
2001 New York City Finalists

Last edited by jblay : 21-04-2010 at 22:46. Reason: punctuation
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-04-2010, 22:55
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is offline
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,755
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jblay View Post
This was the initial flaw I saw in the Curie alliance and the only reason that Archimedes didn't manage to capitalize on this was that the hangers on their alliance weren't the ones who played the two closer zones. Either 233 or 254 needed to stay in the back zone and that alliance didn't have the advantage of the double hang unless they freed up the far zone at the end of the match. 3357 was a great close zone scoring bot and did a great job throughout the competition but I don't think they were the right fit for that alliance. With all the talent on Archimedes I think that 233 and 254 should have picked up either a close zone robot that could hang or a robot that could solidly play the far zone.
I wonder if having 233 and 254 switch places would have worked better. The Poofs had a faster hang anyway, so why not put them in the easiest hanging position? Maybe a more versatile pick like 118 would have worked better for the alliance than their rookie striker. Who knows?

All this talk is fun.
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
--2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
.
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
-- 2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design -- 2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
-- 2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
-- 2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 MN 10K Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-04-2010, 23:29
Peter Johnson Peter Johnson is offline
WPILib Developer
FRC #0294 (Beach Cities Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Redondo Beach, CA
Posts: 265
Peter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud ofPeter Johnson has much to be proud of
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

What was interesting about 294's alliance was we essentially had 3 midfielders with slightly different strengths, although we could each play any place on the field (and did both across matches and even in a single match).

294: excellent midfielder/defense (no hang)
67: excellent midfielder/forward (w/hang)
177: great all-arounder (w/hang)

In the quals, 294 mostly sniped (very effectively) from the midfield, and occasionally played forward to clean up (we never played defense in the quals). As in the elims, we always started in the back in quals because of our consistent 3-ball autonomous (although in the quals we usually kicked 3, then went over the bump to gain a head start in the midfield).

In the Newton QFs, 294 played forward, 67 played mid, and 177 played far/defense. It worked, but was uncomfortable for all of us. We switched it up after that. It was the perfect combo of teams in the Einstein finals because of reasons already stated: 294 couldn't hang, but was good at defense, thus freeing up 67 to play forward (amazing to watch) and 177 to play mid, and freeing up both of them to hang. It also helped that 294's kicker consistently cleared both bumps, and occasionally even scored from the far zone. Having two hangers on our alliance was key: 2, and especially 4, points is hard to make up in scoring, which we witnessed in the LA finals against 330 & 1717, both of whom are great hangers.

Interesting footnote to all this: I'm not sure this Newton alliance would have happened without 294 being the #1 seed and 67 (#2 seed) accepting us... note only 12 seeding points separated us in the end, so the reverse seeding could have easily happened! While I don't want to speak for 67, 294 would not have been an obvious first pick for 67 (gutsy but not obvious like our pick of them was). I'm thinking it would have been more likely for 67 to have picked 971... what different matchups that would have resulted in, particularly in Newton elims (anyone want to fantasize the picks & matchups had 67 been #1 and 294 been #2?).
__________________
Author of cscore - WPILib CameraServer for 2017+
Author of ntcore - WPILib NetworkTables for 2016+
Creator of RobotPy - Python for FRC

2010 FRC World Champions (294, 67, 177)
2007 FTC World Champions (30, 74, 23)
2001 FRC National Champions (71, 294, 125, 365, 279)
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-04-2010, 23:54
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: 6,816
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: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jblay View Post
This was the initial flaw I saw in the Curie alliance and the only reason that Archimedes didn't manage to capitalize on this was that the hangers on their alliance weren't the ones who played the two closer zones. Either 233 or 254 needed to stay in the back zone and that alliance didn't have the advantage of the double hang unless they freed up the far zone at the end of the match. 3357 was a great close zone scoring bot and did a great job throughout the competition but I don't think they were the right fit for that alliance. With all the talent on Archimedes I think that 233 and 254 should have picked up either a close zone robot that could hang or a robot that could solidly play the far zone.
We lost because we played poorly, not because one of our two hangers was in the back. We simply could not get free from 2041 who did a fantastic job neutralizing us.

We knew exactly what we needed to do to break 469's cycle. We watched every single video there is of them. We studied how 217/67 won (and lost) against them. We spent hours practicing in our lab against a looper. We knew exactly where the balls were going to go...we just could not get to them. Again, 2041 did an unbelievable job locking us up for the duration of both matches.

In the finals I thought 1114 should have played 67 exactly how they played us. Versus us they stayed in the middle and fought 233 for control of midfield. 233 did an admirable job and held their own, but 1114 definitely slowed them down, as well as put a few more balls in their own cycle.

Against 67 1114 played home zone almost exclusively and as a result 67 was in the midfield completely uncontested and scored nearly every single shot they took.
__________________
2001-2004: Team 100
2006-Present: Team 254
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2010, 00:25
Unsung FIRST Hero
Greg Marra Greg Marra is offline
[automate(a) for a in tasks_to_do]
FRC #5507 (Robotic Eagles)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 2,031
Greg Marra has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Marra has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Marra has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Marra has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Marra has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Marra has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Marra has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Marra has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Marra has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Marra has a reputation beyond reputeGreg Marra has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory View Post
Against 67 1114 played home zone almost exclusively and as a result 67 was in the midfield completely uncontested and scored nearly every single shot they took.
With 469 in position and 2041 neutralizing 294, the game became a 2v1 with 177 and 67 playing against 1114.
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2010, 00:39
jblay's Avatar
jblay jblay is offline
Here comes StuyPulse
AKA: Joe Blay
FRC #0694 (StuyPulse)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 984
jblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond reputejblay has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory View Post
We lost because we played poorly, not because one of our two hangers was in the back. We simply could not get free from 2041 who did a fantastic job neutralizing us.

We knew exactly what we needed to do to break 469's cycle. We watched every single video there is of them. We studied how 217/67 won (and lost) against them. We spent hours practicing in our lab against a looper. We knew exactly where the balls were going to go...we just could not get to them. Again, 2041 did an unbelievable job locking us up for the duration of both matches.
Although I agree that 2041 played superb defense and them riding up on 254 basically stopped any kind of maneuver 254 could make, 254 still effectively limited 469's cycle. In the first match of the semis, the match was within 2 but 469 was let loose when 254 went over the bump to try and hang and that is where that match was lost in my opinion. If 3357 could hang, that match would have been very close and Archimedes could have taken it. I'm not saying 3357 wasn't awesome, and I'm not saying you guys would have topped Curie with another team, all I'm saying is that 3357 may not have been the perfect fit for the strategy you guys ran, because you essentially left the opposing scoring zone open during the finale.

As a side note I was wondering about something that happened in the first match of the semis. 254 entered the opposing tunnel at the end of the autonomous period to try and prevent 469 from setting up, 469 pushed them out of the tunnel at either the end of autonomous or at the start of teleop. When I was checking out 254's pit I noticed that they have a ratcheting system on their gearboxes to prevent people from pushing them. This ratcheting system looked like it also disengaged to allow 254 to back up. Was the gearbox I saw not from their drive train or did something else happen during that match?
__________________
It's pronounced StighPulse like HighPulse
2016 Curie Champions
2016 New York City Champions
2016 New York City Engineering Inspiration
2015 New York City Finalists
2013 New York City Champions
2012 Connecticut Chairman's
2011 Connecticut Chairman's
2010 Connecticut Chairman's

2010 New York City Champions
2008 New York City Engineering Inspiration
2007 New York City Finalists
2006 New York City Finalists
2005 New York City Chairman's
2003 New York City Champions
2002 New York City Engineering Inspiration
2001 New York City Finalists
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2010, 00:39
Lil' Lavery Lil' Lavery is offline
TSIMFD
AKA: Sean Lavery
FRC #1712 (DAWGMA)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,640
Lil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Lil' Lavery
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

2041 playing in the offensive zone was the reason the Curie alliance not only reached the Einstein finals, but reached Einstein at all. Their role was critical to how the alliance played and how they performed all throughout the tournament. I don't think trying to change your strategy dramatically in the final two matches is nearly as easy as you think it is. And that strategy still worked to within inches of victory in both matches.

Does it look ideal in hindsight now that they've lost? No, you have to wonder how it would have changed if they played it differently. But ultimately I think they made the right choice for the circumstances, they were just outperformed at the most critical moment. It's unfortunate for them, but that seems the case. Good execution can often surpass good strategy.
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2010, 00:46
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: 6,816
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: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jblay View Post
As a side note I was wondering about something that happened in the first match of the semis. 254 entered the opposing tunnel at the end of the autonomous period to try and prevent 469 from setting up, 469 pushed them out of the tunnel at either the end of autonomous or at the start of teleop. When I was checking out 254's pit I noticed that they have a ratcheting system on their gearboxes to prevent people from pushing them. This ratcheting system looked like it also disengaged to allow 254 to back up. Was the gearbox I saw not from their drive train or did something else happen during that match?
We forgot that 469 changed to a new autonomous that ends with them fully in the tunnel, so once we were in, we stopped driving forward and promptly got pushed back by them.

The ratchets don't have an effect on normal driving. The only thing they do is prevent the arm from backdriving.
__________________
2001-2004: Team 100
2006-Present: Team 254
  #12   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2010, 00:48
Eugene Fang's Avatar
Eugene Fang Eugene Fang is offline
The Blue Alliance
no team
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Bay Area, CA -> Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 772
Eugene Fang has a reputation beyond reputeEugene Fang has a reputation beyond reputeEugene Fang has a reputation beyond reputeEugene Fang has a reputation beyond reputeEugene Fang has a reputation beyond reputeEugene Fang has a reputation beyond reputeEugene Fang has a reputation beyond reputeEugene Fang has a reputation beyond reputeEugene Fang has a reputation beyond reputeEugene Fang has a reputation beyond reputeEugene Fang has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jblay View Post
As a side note I was wondering about something that happened in the first match of the semis. 254 entered the opposing tunnel at the end of the autonomous period to try and prevent 469 from setting up, 469 pushed them out of the tunnel at either the end of autonomous or at the start of teleop. When I was checking out 254's pit I noticed that they have a ratcheting system on their gearboxes to prevent people from pushing them. This ratcheting system looked like it also disengaged to allow 254 to back up. Was the gearbox I saw not from their drive train or did something else happen during that match?
I'm pretty sure that those ratchets are for their "Power Take-Off" of their drive transmissions to hang. When they engage their hanger from the drive transmissions, those ratchets keep the robot up after the round ends.
__________________
Eugene Fang
2010 Silicon Valley Regional Dean's List Finalist

Various FLL Teams - Student (2000-2006), Mentor (2007-2010)
FRC Team 604 - Student (2007-2010), Mentor/Remote Advisor (2011-2015)
FRC Team 1323 - Mentor/Remote Advisor (2011-2014)

The Blue Alliance | TBA GameDay | TBA Android App
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2010, 00:49
XaulZan11's Avatar
XaulZan11 XaulZan11 is online now
Registered User
AKA: John Christiansen
FRC #1732
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Milwaukee, Wi
Posts: 1,329
XaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond reputeXaulZan11 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to XaulZan11
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

Some one on my team said that the red alliance purposefully missed their shots in autonomous so 1114 would be 'tricked' to going to their close zone early, leaving half the balls for the red alliance to score with undefended. I haven't seen any video, but is this true?

Edit: Ok, I see TBA has the video. While they scored in auto in match 1, they didn't score any in match 2.

Last edited by XaulZan11 : 22-04-2010 at 00:55.
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2010, 00:50
Tom Bottiglieri Tom Bottiglieri is offline
Registered User
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,188
Tom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

Quote:
Originally Posted by jblay View Post
Although I agree that 2041 played superb defense and them riding up on 254 basically stopped any kind of maneuver 254 could make, 254 still effectively limited 469's cycle. In the first match of the semis, the match was within 2 but 469 was let loose when 254 went over the bump to try and hang and that is where that match was lost in my opinion. If 3357 could hang, that match would have been very close and Archimedes could have taken it. I'm not saying 3357 wasn't awesome, and I'm not saying you guys would have topped Curie with another team, all I'm saying is that 3357 may not have been the perfect fit for the strategy you guys ran, because you essentially left the opposing scoring zone open during the finale.

As a side note I was wondering about something that happened in the first match of the semis. 254 entered the opposing tunnel at the end of the autonomous period to try and prevent 469 from setting up, 469 pushed them out of the tunnel at either the end of autonomous or at the start of teleop. When I was checking out 254's pit I noticed that they have a ratcheting system on their gearboxes to prevent people from pushing them. This ratcheting system looked like it also disengaged to allow 254 to back up. Was the gearbox I saw not from their drive train or did something else happen during that match?
That was the drive gearbox, but the ratchet was used to prevent back drive on the arm. Bad things would happen if you engaged that and drove at the same time. Just ask some of the other 254 members what the early software tests for the arm did to the robot ;-)

We planned for the robot to exit the other side of the tunnel in auto, but 469 beat us there. All and all that particular auto mode (kick 3, block tunnel from far zone) was about 90% done. We never quite finished the part that made the robot hold it's ground. Whoops.
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2010, 11:15
PerpetualMotion PerpetualMotion is offline
Registered User
no team
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 23
PerpetualMotion is a glorious beacon of lightPerpetualMotion is a glorious beacon of lightPerpetualMotion is a glorious beacon of lightPerpetualMotion is a glorious beacon of lightPerpetualMotion is a glorious beacon of lightPerpetualMotion is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

I don't think anyone can argue that it was 1114/469's championships to lose. They were favorites going into the weekend, and rolled through just about every alliance they saw in elims without much trouble.

And thats exactly what happened, the Curie alliance lost it. I don't mean to take anything away from the Newton alliance, because even with the Curie alliances failures, it still takes an awesome alliance to beat them.

I think the strategy the Curie alliance used was the right one. Once they have 6 balls in their system, no alliance should be more efficient then 469 at getting the balls in the goal, so let the Newton alliance do what they wanted with the balls they had. Would having an extra ball or two in the system be better? Absolutely, but it probably wasn't worth the effort.

From the first video, it is clear that 469 wasn't hitting the shots they usually make. As a result, 469's efficiency was less than 67 + 177 so surprise surprise, the Newton alliance was able to out score them, barely.

The second match 2041 was stuck in a goal for over half a match. The Curie alliance came within 3 pts of tieing the match which just shows how dominant the Curie strategy is when it worked for 55 seconds. Had 1114 got 2041 out of the goal 15 seconds earlier, it could have been a very different match. Add in the fact that 469 sat in the tower and did nothing for at least 30 seconds when they had no balls in the system. 469 could have got out of the tower and slowed down 67 or even got a ball or two out of their system. Even more, 2041 blocked a 469 shot toward the end of the match. 1114 looked very slow as they went to hang, which leads me to believe they had a bad battery. Had 2041 not blocked the goal, and 1114 had hung, we suddenly have a tie game.

The second final match was ridiculously close given all the challenges the Curie alliance saw. Had that match been a tie or a win for the Curie alliance, I think it would have been very interesting to see the next match or two.
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
Thanks and Congrats 1114, 469, 2041 Al Skierkiewicz Thanks and/or Congrats 9 19-04-2010 22:08
Congratulations to 294, 67, and 177! Chris is me Thanks and/or Congrats 20 19-04-2010 00:01
1114 vs. 469 ISITME_YESITIS Regional Competitions 31 02-04-2010 14:43
Thank you 1507, 177 & NEWTON division! Rob Thanks and/or Congrats 7 27-04-2009 18:33
[TBA]: Parsing Newton, Curie Greg Marra The Blue Alliance 9 20-04-2009 14:22


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 23:36.

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