OCCRA
Go to Post Parking Lot T-Shirt Bootleggers are NOT approved suppliers - Rich Kressly [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Competition > Off-Season Events
CD-Media  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #106   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 08:14 PM
lcraig910's Avatar
lcraig910 lcraig910 is offline
average analysis and average memes
AKA: Kevin Swift's Biggest Fan
FRC #0910 (The Foley Freeze)
Team Role: Student
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Rookie Year: 2016
Location: Madison Heights
Posts: 138
lcraig910 has a brilliant futurelcraig910 has a brilliant futurelcraig910 has a brilliant futurelcraig910 has a brilliant futurelcraig910 has a brilliant futurelcraig910 has a brilliant futurelcraig910 has a brilliant futurelcraig910 has a brilliant futurelcraig910 has a brilliant futurelcraig910 has a brilliant futurelcraig910 has a brilliant future
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

For next year, please find more mods for Twitch chat. Many rule violations were made, but miklast was the only person banned, for a relatively minor issue.
__________________
2016-present: Student, Team 910 (The Foley Freeze)
My views do not represent the views of my team
My time in FIRST:
-2018: Lincoln District; Troy District (Chairman’s); Forest Hills District; MSC Dow; Curie Subdivision
-2017: Gull Lake District (Winner; 5623 and 5675); Troy District (Winner; 5460 and 818); Shepherd District (Winner; 74 and 6582); MSC Consumers (Finalists; 217 and 4237); Daly Subdivision; IRI
-2016: Center Line District; Troy District; Windsor Essex Great Lakes Regional (Winner; 2056 and 4920); Carver Subdivision (Finalist; 133, 230, and 1775); IRI
Reply With Quote
  #107   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 08:27 PM
MikLast's Avatar
MikLast MikLast is online now
Waiting for my Tableau Sponsorship
AKA: Mikal Dieatrick
no team (Volunteer)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Medical Lake, WA
Posts: 1,695
MikLast has a reputation beyond reputeMikLast has a reputation beyond reputeMikLast has a reputation beyond reputeMikLast has a reputation beyond reputeMikLast has a reputation beyond reputeMikLast has a reputation beyond reputeMikLast has a reputation beyond reputeMikLast has a reputation beyond reputeMikLast has a reputation beyond reputeMikLast has a reputation beyond reputeMikLast has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by lcraig910 View Post
For next year, please find more mods for Twitch chat. Many rule violations were made, but miklast was the only person banned, for a relatively minor issue.
To be clear, my mute was totally justified. Its just that there were multiple others also doing wrong and there was nobody there to deal with it for an extended period of time (and never was actually dealt with, they just left.)


If you missed the 3rd finals match and dont want to try and use Twitch VODs, shudders the full match, along with postmatch, is uploaded here.
__________________


Join the FRC Discord!
FRC4513 (Circuit Breakers)
*Student: 2014-2017
*Drive Coach: 2016-2017

Volunteer
A/V: West Valley, PNW DCMP 2018

Last edited by MikLast : 09-30-2018 at 08:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #108   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 08:28 PM
bkahl bkahl is offline
Unregistered User
AKA: Bailey Kahl
FRC #0195
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Southington, CT
Posts: 670
bkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

HOT TAKE INCOMING:

I think the interpretation of the rule at Chezy Champs may actually be (at least somewhat) correct?

The foul called was G12, here is the Definition from the Game Manual:

Quote:
Don’t collude with your partners to shut down major parts of game play. Two or more ROBOTS may not isolate or close off any major component of MATCH play, e.g. blocking the EXCHANGE, blocking both PORTALS simultaneously, shutting down all access to POWER CUBES, quarantining all opponents to a small area of the FIELD, etc.
Violation: YELLOW CARD for the ALLIANCE.
The keyword here is "ALLIANCE" in the violation line. As far as I can tell, this is the only instance where a Yellow Card is assigned to an 'ALLIANCE' in the definition of the rule.

By that definition of the rule, and because the word 'ALLIANCE' is capitalized in the definition, we refer to the glossary:

Quote:
cooperatives of up to four (4) FIRST® Robotics Competition Teams
Which means that it CAN be interpreted that up to 4 yellow cards can be assessed for this foul. For instance, if this foul were called in a qualification match, by definition, I believe all 3 'ALLIANCE' members would receive a card. Thus, an an 'ALLIANCE' in the elims match would be treated the same way? Right?

Then, by that line of logic, we turn to T03 of the Game Manual:

Quote:
Egregious or repeated violations of any rule or procedure is prohibited.
Violation: The Head REFEREE may assign a YELLOW CARD as a warning, or a RED CARD for
DISQUALIFICATION in MATCH.

.......

During the Playoff MATCHES, if a Team receives a YELLOW or RED CARD, it results in the entire ALLIANCE receiving the YELLOW or RED CARD for that MATCH. If two different Teams on the same ALLIANCE are issued YELLOW CARDS, the entire ALLIANCE is issued a RED CARD. A RED CARD results in zero (0) points for that MATCH, and the ALLIANCE loses the MATCH. If both ALLIANCES receive RED CARDS, the ALLIANCE which committed the action earning the RED CARD first chronologically loses the MATCH.
Thus, because multiple yellows (Maybe?) CAN be assigned by G12, we get to where Chezy refs did... multiple yellows = Red Card.
------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I am not a ref, nor have I ever been one. I am, however, friends with Marshall, and he taught me how to lawyer the game manual pretty well. I think we found a very interesting grey area here today.
__________________
add me on snap: baykahl

Last edited by bkahl : 09-30-2018 at 08:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #109   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 08:58 PM
gingerschmidt gingerschmidt is offline
Registered User
FRC #0971 (Spartan Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: California
Posts: 14
gingerschmidt has a reputation beyond reputegingerschmidt has a reputation beyond reputegingerschmidt has a reputation beyond reputegingerschmidt has a reputation beyond reputegingerschmidt has a reputation beyond reputegingerschmidt has a reputation beyond reputegingerschmidt has a reputation beyond reputegingerschmidt has a reputation beyond reputegingerschmidt has a reputation beyond reputegingerschmidt has a reputation beyond reputegingerschmidt has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by drewsapple View Post
Aside from the controversy over F1M3, what was the song they were playing during it? I can't help but groove instead of be mad at any call made by the refs.
It was Catch Me by Vicetone
Reply With Quote
  #110   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 08:58 PM
ns3517's Avatar
ns3517 ns3517 is offline
Registered User
FRC #0316 (Lunatecs)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: south jersey
Posts: 166
ns3517 has a spectacular aura aboutns3517 has a spectacular aura about
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkahl View Post
HOT TAKE INCOMING:

I think the interpretation of the rule at Chezy Champs may actually be (at least somewhat) correct?

The foul called was G12, here is the Definition from the Game Manual:



The keyword here is "ALLIANCE" in the violation line. As far as I can tell, this is the only instance where a Yellow Card is assigned to an 'ALLIANCE' in the definition of the rule.

By that definition of the rule, and because the word 'ALLIANCE' is capitalized in the definition, we refer to the glossary:



Which means that it CAN be interpreted that up to 4 yellow cards can be assessed for this foul. For instance, if this foul were called in a qualification match, by definition, I believe all 3 'ALLIANCE' members would receive a card. Thus, an an 'ALLIANCE' in the elims match would be treated the same way? Right?

Then, by that line of logic, we turn to T03 of the Game Manual:



Thus, because multiple yellows (Maybe?) CAN be assigned by G12, we get to where Chezy refs did... multiple yellows = Red Card.
------------------------------------------------------
Disclaimer: I am not a ref, nor have I ever been one. I am, however, friends with Marshall, and he taught me how to lawyer the game manual pretty well. I think we found a very interesting grey area here today.
This is not a qualification match. In elimination if 1 robot gets a yellow card the card is assigned to the entire alliance. I believe this was a tough call because the rules are vague, however If I'm understanding correctly then my opinion is it should have been 1 yellow card.
__________________
775 PROS and Mini Cims
Reply With Quote
  #111   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 09:00 PM
Caleb Sykes's Avatar
Caleb Sykes Caleb Sykes is offline
Knock-off Dr. Strange
AKA: inkling16
no team (The Piztons)
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Posts: 1,770
Caleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

My takes, if anyone cares. I think it's important to break this thing down since there are so many dimensions:

1. With the benefit of after-match video review, I personally think blockading should not have been called. The actions I saw did not meet any of the enumerated examples of blockading in the manual, although that is not an exhaustive list.
2. Without the benefit of video review, I think a blockade could have been reasonably called by the refs.
3. There is no reasonable way that 3310 being blockaded or not would have changed the winner of the match, the blockading started at the earliest with 40 seconds left in the match, and blue was down by well over a hundred points. There's no "match impact" factor for this call, but it's unfortunate that we got so much drama for something that had negligible match impact.
4. It looks pretty clear to me (again with hindsight) that 1678 did not intend to blockade 3310.
5. From 3310's perspective, I can see how they would consider themselves to have been blockaded, and it is reasonable for them to bring this to the attention of the refs, so 3310 has no fault in this to me.
6. G12 alone is clearly intended to provide only one yellow card to the entire alliance, not two or three.
7. It's unfortunate that a single yellow card is meaningless in the last match of the event, as this incentivizes teams toward risking yellow-cards with strategies that they would otherwise avoid.
8. It's not clear to me that C01 is meant to be a counter to (7), although it could be interpreted otherwise.
9. If C01 was actually invoked for the red card, it really should have been stated, as the explanation for the red card we got on stream was in opposition to (6).
10. The match outcome absolutely should not have been declared until the refs were firmly set in their decision. Even if they decided on something that we would call "wrong" with hindsight, at some point they need to decide that their decision is final, and only then should they input the scores.

Rough situation all around, glad I wasn't the head ref. Points 9 and 10 are my biggest issues.
__________________
I'm currently looking for a job starting in early 2019, and I'm willing to move anywhere. I have a BS and an MS in EE and would like to work in Controls, Power Electronics, or Embedded Systems. If you know of a job like this feel free to PM me.

Check out my FRC Statistics Blog
Reply With Quote
  #112   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 09:03 PM
bkahl bkahl is offline
Unregistered User
AKA: Bailey Kahl
FRC #0195
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Southington, CT
Posts: 670
bkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by ns3517 View Post
This is not a qualification match. In elimination if 1 robot gets a yellow card the card is assigned to the entire alliance. I believe this was a tough call because the rules are vague, however If I'm understanding correctly then my opinion is it should have been 1 yellow card.
You're correct in that it is not a qualification match, but we need to look specifically at the 'Violation Line', where it is different than any other rule.

By definition, no matter what 'style' of match it is, a 'YELLOW CARD for the ALLIANCE', can very easily be interpreted as a 'YELLOW CARD for '...up to 4.... teams'' by the definition of 'ALLIANCE', which is quoted in my above post as: 'cooperatives of up to four (4) FIRST® Robotics Competition Teams'

I'm not saying I agree with the call, or whether it was right, rather I am saying I understand how it can be interpreted to get the outcome we saw this afternoon.
__________________
add me on snap: baykahl
Reply With Quote
  #113   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 09:18 PM
ns3517's Avatar
ns3517 ns3517 is offline
Registered User
FRC #0316 (Lunatecs)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: south jersey
Posts: 166
ns3517 has a spectacular aura aboutns3517 has a spectacular aura about
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkahl View Post
You're correct in that it is not a qualification match, but we need to look specifically at the 'Violation Line', where it is different than any other rule.

By definition, no matter what 'style' of match it is, a 'YELLOW CARD for the ALLIANCE', can very easily be interpreted as a 'YELLOW CARD for '...up to 4.... teams'' by the definition of 'ALLIANCE', which is quoted in my above post as: 'cooperatives of up to four (4) FIRST® Robotics Competition Teams'

I'm not saying I agree with the call, or whether it was right, rather I am saying I understand how it can be interpreted to get the outcome we saw this afternoon.
The refs didnt assign a yellow card per team on the alliance. They announced that it was 2 yellow card because 2 robots participated in it and 2 teams got a yellow card. Don't the rules state that it's a yellow card if 2 or more robots blockade the field... not a yellow card per robot that participates? I don't blame any of the mentors in the question box as I think it was a yellow card... but should it have been a yellow card for 2 teams?
__________________
775 PROS and Mini Cims

Last edited by ns3517 : 09-30-2018 at 09:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #114   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 09:24 PM
bkahl bkahl is offline
Unregistered User
AKA: Bailey Kahl
FRC #0195
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Southington, CT
Posts: 670
bkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by ns3517 View Post
The refs didnt assign a yellow card per team on the alliance. They announced that it was 2 yellow card because 2 robots participated in it and 2 teams got a yellow card. Don't the rules state that it's a yellow card if 2 or more robots blockade the field... not a yellow card per robot that participates?
by definition, it states that 'up to 4...teams' can be assessed a yellow card for blockading. So yes, it CAN be interpreted to state that it is a per robot penalty, not a single penalty.

Blockading is the only rule that includes this Violation.

This is a really weird grey area and I'm still not 100% sure what is actually correct. I am just simply looking at it as unbiased as I can, and I can see where the interpretation may lead to the Red Card. The precedent is what you are describing, but I am also reading the rules as literally as I can, and the definitions of the rules and the terms in the rules are potentially contradicting the precedent.
__________________
add me on snap: baykahl
Reply With Quote
  #115   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 09:27 PM
jaunvie's Avatar
jaunvie jaunvie is offline
Registered User
FRC #5090 (Torque-Nados)
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Rookie Year: 2015
Location: Trenton MI
Posts: 81
jaunvie will become famous soon enough
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by Caleb Sykes View Post

6. G12 alone is clearly intended to provide only one yellow card to the entire alliance, not two or three.
I agree with every one of the points that you made, but I do think the intention (to be clarified in future manuals I would assume) of this rule would be that in Quals every team would get a yellow card because otherwise it would be difficult to carry over to future matches and wouldn't mean anything.
Reply With Quote
  #116   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 09:31 PM
ns3517's Avatar
ns3517 ns3517 is offline
Registered User
FRC #0316 (Lunatecs)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: south jersey
Posts: 166
ns3517 has a spectacular aura aboutns3517 has a spectacular aura about
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkahl View Post
by definition, it states that 'up to 4...teams' can be assessed a yellow card for blockading. So yes, it CAN be interpreted to state that it is a per robot penalty, not a single penalty.

Blockading is the only rule that includes this Violation.

This is a really weird grey area and I'm still not 100% sure what is actually correct. I am just simply looking at it as unbiased as I can, and I can see where the interpretation may lead to the Red Card. The precedent is what you are describing, but I am also reading the rules as literally as I can, and the definitions of the rules and the terms in the rules are potentially contradicting the precedent.
It says a yellow card for the alliance.. so wouldn't that be 4 yellow cards if they went the route of assigning one to every member of the alliance? So it should have been either 1 or 4 yellow cards issued right? 4 if they took they looked at it and decided that a yellow card to the alliance means 1 per team, and 1 yellow card if they thought that the yellow card for the alliance means 1 card?
__________________
775 PROS and Mini Cims
Reply With Quote
  #117   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 09:32 PM
Caleb Sykes's Avatar
Caleb Sykes Caleb Sykes is offline
Knock-off Dr. Strange
AKA: inkling16
no team (The Piztons)
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Posts: 1,770
Caleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond reputeCaleb Sykes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaunvie View Post
I agree with every one of the points that you made, but I do think the intention (to be clarified in future manuals I would assume) of this rule would be that in Quals every team would get a yellow card because otherwise it would be difficult to carry over to future matches and wouldn't mean anything.
Yeah, I should have been more clear that I was talking about playoff matches only for that point.
__________________
I'm currently looking for a job starting in early 2019, and I'm willing to move anywhere. I have a BS and an MS in EE and would like to work in Controls, Power Electronics, or Embedded Systems. If you know of a job like this feel free to PM me.

Check out my FRC Statistics Blog
Reply With Quote
  #118   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 09:55 PM
bkahl bkahl is offline
Unregistered User
AKA: Bailey Kahl
FRC #0195
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Southington, CT
Posts: 670
bkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by ns3517 View Post
It says a yellow card for the alliance.. so wouldn't that be 4 yellow cards if they went the route of assigning one to every member of the alliance? So it should have been either 1 or 4 yellow cards issued right? 4 if they took they looked at it and decided that a yellow card to the alliance means 1 per team, and 1 yellow card if they thought that the yellow card for the alliance means 1 card?
Correct.

The intrinsic difference in the way G12 is written as opposed to the other rules is what makes this situation hard. By the literal definition in the rules, there would be "up to 4" YELLOW CARDs assigned to the ALLIANCE, which by T03, merits a RED CARD.

It took me a little bit to get my mind twisted around this too, but if you try and remove any precedent from your head and read this as literally as you can, it makes sense.
__________________
add me on snap: baykahl
Reply With Quote
  #119   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 10:14 PM
ns3517's Avatar
ns3517 ns3517 is offline
Registered User
FRC #0316 (Lunatecs)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: south jersey
Posts: 166
ns3517 has a spectacular aura aboutns3517 has a spectacular aura about
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkahl View Post
Correct.

The intrinsic difference in the way G12 is written as opposed to the other rules is what makes this situation hard. By the literal definition in the rules, there would be "up to 4" YELLOW CARDs assigned to the ALLIANCE, which by T03, merits a RED CARD.

It took me a little bit to get my mind twisted around this too, but if you try and remove any precedent from your head and read this as literally as you can, it makes sense.
I just think that if it takes at least 2 robots to get this penalty and the intention of the rule was multiple yellow cards depending on how many teams participated then why didnt the violation just be a red card in the rules..
__________________
775 PROS and Mini Cims
Reply With Quote
  #120   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-30-2018, 10:16 PM
bkahl bkahl is offline
Unregistered User
AKA: Bailey Kahl
FRC #0195
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Southington, CT
Posts: 670
bkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond reputebkahl has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Chezy Champs 2018

Quote:
Originally Posted by ns3517 View Post
I just think that if it takes at least 2 robots to get this penalty and the intention of the rule was multiple yellow cards depending on how many teams participated then why didnt the violation just be a red card in the rules..
I don't think this was EVER the intent of HQ, rather it is just an unfortunate result of how literal the rules are written.
__________________
add me on snap: baykahl
Reply With Quote
Reply


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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:11 AM.

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


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi