Should the stretcher have been used more?

[Tom Fairchild]

Another thread gave me the idea to start this one up - people seem to have varying opinions on the matter. Peronsally I think that the stretcher is like picking up small balls with your robot - not worth missing the time multiplier for. Unfortunately, there was really no way for a team to convince other memebers of an alliance that they could do this.

~Tom~

[Joe Ross]

I think that the game this year conspired against the stretcher. In the qualification matches, there wasn't enough time to plan a complicated strategy. This precluded the use of the stretcher and many other things.

The elims would have been a good time to try something like this, but there weren't enough matches. It was possible to win with just 4 matches, and 2 sometimes didn't count. This wasn't enough time to get to thoroughly know the capabilities of all the members. If there had been more elim matches, I would think that more complex strategies would have been attempted and the stretcher would have been used more.

The only time that I saw the stretcher used effectively in a actuall match was in the finals at VCU, though I saw many teams use it effectively in practice.

[Bill Gold]

I think the stretcher wasn't worth using as the rules were written. It might have been useful if it was worth more points (like 15 or 20 pts). Plus, I only saw two teams that could reliably get the stretcher to the endzone (368 Kika Mana & 383 from Brazil). So my answer to your question 'Should the stretcher have been used more?' is a simple "no"

my $0.02

[mike o'leary]

i think that if the stretcher had been used more it would certaintly have been interesting to see what different teams could do, though i dont know if it would have yielded a signifacant benifit had it been used.

[Anne Lam]

When we had decided to build a stretcher bot, we knew it'd be hard to convince the other teams to sacrifice their robot for ten points. The most obvious reason for us to be a stretcher bot is to be able to contribute something to the alliance if more than one robot is able to balance goals (we didn't feel that picking up small balls were really worth it). Even though we had a video of our bot pulling a stretcher across the field around the clock at our pit, no one seemed to believe we could do it! Of the ten matches we played, we only used the stretcher three times (Kika Manans correct me if I am wrong). I completely agree that the stretcher isn't worth missing the multipliers for. However, I do have a mixed feeling about this, and I guess I should say it all depends on who and in what shapes your alliances were to "yield a significant benefit" from the utilization of the stretcher.

[mike o'leary]

Originally posted by Anne Lam
However, I do have a mixed feeling about this, and I guess I should say it all depends on who and in what shapes your alliances were to "yield a significant benefit" from the utilization of the stretcher.

thats really what i was trying to say. basically i dont think using the stretcher was a high percentage gamble.

[Mike Soukup]

The stretcher would have been a great strategy if teams had enough time to practice with it, and if strategies had developed enough. As I've said before, the first rounds of regionals are pretty bad strategy wise. Teams struggle to find out what their robot can do, they aren't as efficient as in later regionals or nationals, and therefore won't take as many chances. By the time nationals came around, teams knew they had to score ~700 points to win, so they developed strategies to do so. If teams had more time to develop & practice strategies with the stretcher, teams would have used it more. Everyone at IRI saw Beatty use the stretcher to try to get 800 points in every seeding match. I know they came close at least once; it must have been because of 111's excellent job riding the stretcher And I'm sure with more practice and with the perfect alliance, they could get it.

Mike

[Wayne Doenges]

Our robot (Viking I) was an fantastic stretcher bot.
During a qualifying match, at Disney, we pulled a fully loaded stretcher across the bridge (major traction), crossed over to a big ball, did a 180, deposited the stretcher in the endzone and than placed the ball on the goal. It was totally awesome!!! It would have been a high scoring match if one of our alliance robots hadn't fallen on the bridge

But my real feelings are that the use of the stretcher is a sucker bet. Not only do you have the bot on the stretcher, but you have to have another bot tow it around. I didn't see any stretcher bots doing anything other getting a free ride to the endzone.

*tosses $.02 into kitty.

Wayne Doenges

[Griff]

Our bot could move 140 on the strecher pretty fast, and it really wasn't desinded to at first, it was an afterthought modifacation. But all things considered if Someone could have efectivly come up with a way to move a Strecher, and still do something else in the mean time, while not giving up the 10 points for a robot...it would be worth it to bring a dead robot from Start to End zone and still do other things, but not many teams thought about it that much, and your really basing your hopes that someone's robot dosn't work, or will throuw in the towle for you to keep going.