Car Nack Predicts 13-3

[IndySam]

For you young folk out there. Carnac the Magnificent was a character of the great talk-show host Johnie Carson on the Tonight Show.


Youtube

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

Alot of low performers would rather fail spectacularly than go for the low hanging fruit. For some reason they see inspiration in this.

I think it is a cultural thing. People don't want to be seen as building a "boring" or simple robot. We've seen a shift towards recognizing that a significant number of teams build robots that do not score points well. Hopefully that trend will continue, and people will realize that the simple robot you were mocking on Thursday is kicking your butt on Saturday.

I don't think I've ever seen a well executed low goal scorer miss elims at the regional level, and in multiple cases I've seen them do quite well. If you showed up to any regional with a 1 point dumper with a working autonomous, 2 rounds in teleop, and a working 10 point hangar you would be a 2nd round steal.

[EricH]

Car Nack did not specify that EACH robot would score 30 climbing points. Therefore, I agree with Car Nack, and suggest that it will happen at most if not all regionals.

3 robots at 10 points apiece is all three robots on an alliance scoring 30 climbing points. Or 1 robot at 20 and 1 at 10...

[LeelandS]

Originally Posted by EricH

Car Nack did not specify that EACH robot would score 30 climbing points. Therefore, I agree with Car Nack, and suggest that it will happen at most if not all regionals.

3 robots at 10 points apiece is all three robots on an alliance scoring 30 climbing points. Or 1 robot at 20 and 1 at 10...

I could be wrong, but I think the intent of the prediction was that each robot scores 30 climbing points, with all of them in the top zone of the pyramid.

I would agree with Car Nack's prediction (and certainly with your's too, Eric). I can see a large amount (but not a "vast majority") of teams aiming for the 30 point climb. Not many (i.e. few) of them will be "reliable" or "consistent", but I can easily see a match where things just line up perfectly at some regionals.

[Racer26]

If this happens, I am fairly certain it would be during qualifications, or from a #8 seed. The top few seeded alliances just don't have enough field depth left to choose from at all events except maybe MSC, IRI, or CMP.

[Alpha Beta]

Originally Posted by Car Nack

Car Nack predicts 13-3

Surprisingly there will be a least one match where all three robots on an alliance will score 30 climbing points.

Car Nack has spoken.

Just can't see this one happening. One normal sized robot using a balanced CG approach to hoist themselves to the third level will occupy the majority of the area inside the pyramid by themselves.



That would require the other two robots to have mechanisms that do not conflict with that space while achieving their climbs. Attempts to put multiple robots in the 30 point zone also put each robot at risk of being knocked off by an alliance partner.

I can't wait to be proven wrong here, but even if it is possible I'm not sure the teams would choose to risk it in season.

[MetalJacket]

Originally Posted by Alpha Beta

Just can't see this one happening. One normal sized robot using a balanced CG approach to hoist themselves to the third level will occupy the majority of the area inside the pyramid by themselves.
That would require the other two robots to have mechanisms that do not conflict with that space while achieving their climbs. Attempts to put multiple robots in the 30 point zone also put each robot at risk of being knocked off by an alliance partner.

I can see this causing issues in qualifications if you somehow end up with multiple 30-point inside climbers on the same alliance. During elims however, you could remedy this by going with an outside climber (or two, or three) and (maybe) an inside climber. My team is planning on going up the outside to avoid conflict with other robots. I'm sure we will see the 3-robot 30-point climb at some point this year.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by MetalJacket

I can see this causing issues in qualifications if you somehow end up with multiple 30-point inside climbers on the same alliance. During elims however, you could remedy this by going with an outside climber (or two, or three) and (maybe) an inside climber. My team is planning on going up the outside to avoid conflict with other robots. I'm sure we will see the 3-robot 30-point climb at some point this year.

"Outside climbers" don't automatically rectify the issue he's talking about. His point is that if you're dangling from a horizontal bar, then a large chunk of your robot is occupying a rather limited space inside of the pyramid. This is irrelevant of whether you climbed on the inside or the outside of the pyramid.

[MetalJacket]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

"Outside climbers" don't automatically rectify the issue he's talking about. His point is that if you're dangling from a horizontal bar, then a large chunk of your robot is occupying a rather limited space inside of the pyramid. This is irrelevant of whether you climbed on the inside or the outside of the pyramid.

Sorry about not being specific, I meant a robot that climbs up the corner or other outside part in a way that doesn't leave a large portion of the robot hanging inside.

[SteveGPage]

I would agree with this prediction, but not in the way most have taken it - <G30> could be the cause of this! If you have an overly aggressive defender, who tries to stop the members of an alliance from climbing, it could result in each member of the alliance being awarded the 30 pts. without actually having them make the full climb.

[SteveGPage]

.... Silly mobile devices, it cut out "G30" from my response!

[Jay O'Donnell]

Just out of curiosity, did this ever happen? I know it never happened in a match, but I was hoping to have it happen in a practice match or an offseason or something.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by Jay Money 1058

Just out of curiosity, did this ever happen? I know it never happened in a match, but I was hoping to have it happen in a practice match or an offseason or something.

It hasn't happened this year and I doubt it will. The most our team participated in was a double 30 point hang with 236 in a practice match on Archimedes. Also did a double 20 with 1831 at Pine Tree (5 more seconds and it would have been a double 30) and in a match at IRI 1334 hung for 30 and we got stuck on level 2.

[Calvin Hartley]

Originally Posted by BrendanB

It hasn't happened this year and I doubt it will. The most our team participated in was a double 30 point hang with 236 in a practice match on Archimedes. Also did a double 20 with 1831 at Pine Tree (5 more seconds and it would have been a double 30) and in a match at IRI 1334 hung for 30 and we got stuck on level 2.

I would like to remind you of a fact previously mentioned in this thread. The prestigious Car Nack did not say that each of the three robots on an alliance would achieve a level 3 climb, he said each robot would score 30 climb points. Each robot (team) on an alliance scores 30 points when just one robot gets a level 3 climb.

By my interpretaion of Car Nack's 13-3 prediction, it was correctly predicted.

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by Calvin Hartley

I would like to remind you of a fact previously mentioned in this thread. The prestigious Car Nack did not say that each of the three robots on an alliance would achieve a level 3 climb, he said each robot would score 30 climb points. Each robot (team) on an alliance scores 30 points when just one robot gets a level 3 climb.

By my interpretaion of Car Nack's 13-3 prediction, it was correctly predicted.

You don't even have to go that far, Arkansas match 82 had 90 climb points awarded to 1421, 456, and 1939. See http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...7&postcount=42