What we learned from week 1

[jspatz1]

Originally Posted by PVCpirate

Something I just learned 5 minutes ago from the Central Valley webcast: Teams who make a major change to their robot(like adding a tall screen for blocking shots during eliminations) must be reinspected before their next match. The whole alliance of 973, 1323 and 4135 were just DQ'd from semifinal 2-1, which they had won. Let this be a lesson to all alliance captains suggesting an alliance member should make a similar change.

EDIT: Ike beat me to it

This rule has always been in effect for any change, major or minor, at any time in the event. Nothing new.

[PVCpirate]

I figured that, but I thought it was significant because of all the talk about adding blocking screens to robots in eliminations.

[Dr. Shocker]

Originally Posted by PVCpirate

I figured that, but I thought it was significant because of all the talk about adding blocking screens to robots in eliminations.

There was something we wanted to add to our bot in case we were against certain bots, so we got inspected with them and took them off if they weren't in that match.

[PayneTrain]

^^We both know that rule doesn't see as much use as it should, but you're right.

Coming from a team on an alliance that got knocked out from a red card in 2011, teams, READ THE RULES BEFORE YOU SHOW UP. So many people don't do that. It blows my mind.

[MikeE]

Originally Posted by jspatz1

This rule has always been in effect for any change, major or minor, at any time in the event. Nothing new.

I don't think anyone objects to reinspection for major modification such as adding a mechanism (active or passive) per rule T11, but it is impractical to reinspect for every modification. If you follow the letter rather than the spirit of the rules, which of these would *not* require a reinspection?

1. Filing down a corner to give better clearance between parts
2. Replacing a nut with a locknut
3. replacing a faulty motor
4. ziptie several wires together
5. updating a timeout in the code
6. adding an accelerometer sensor

[CalTran]

Originally Posted by MikeE

I don't think anyone objects to reinspection for major modification such as adding a mechanism (active or passive) per rule T11, but it is impractical to reinspect for every modification. If you follow the letter rather than the spirit of the rules, which of these would *not* require a reinspection?

1. Filing down a corner to give better clearance between parts
2. Replacing a nut with a locknut
3. replacing a faulty motor
4. ziptie several wires together
5. updating a timeout in the code
6. adding an accelerometer sensor

T10, but technically, yes, that's true. I think certain things, from a practicality standpoint, can be ignored. IMHO, it only elicits a full reinspection after a visible physical change.

Originally Posted by T10

If a ROBOT is modified after it has passed Inspection, other than modifications described in T8, that ROBOT must be re-Inspected.

Originally Posted by T10 Blue Box

If an observation is made that another Team’s ROBOT may be in violation of the ROBOT rules, please approach FIRST officials to review the matter in question. This is an area where Gracious ProfessionalismTM is very important.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by MikeE

I don't think anyone objects to reinspection for major modification such as adding a mechanism (active or passive) per rule T11, but it is impractical to reinspect for every modification. If you follow the letter rather than the spirit of the rules, which of these would *not* require a reinspection?

1. Filing down a corner to give better clearance between parts
2. Replacing a nut with a locknut
3. replacing a faulty motor
4. ziptie several wires together
5. updating a timeout in the code
6. adding an accelerometer sensor

1 would not. You are removing material, not adding it.
2 could. A large nut could cause a weight limit breakage. However, I don't think this would necessarily be checked or caught.
3 is a repair, not a modification. No reinspection necessary--unless you used a different motor type.
4: see 2.
5 is a code change. No reinspection necessary. Software is not inspected, though versions are checked to make sure they are the proper ones.
6 would be a reinspection, albeit a quick one. Added wire needs to meet the rules, added sensor needs weight check. That would be a "Hey, we added _this_ to the robot, are we A-OK still?" check--5 minutes and out to the field.

Under most situations, the only one that would actually be inspected would be #6, if a robot was going to elims (the inspectors will ask if there are any changes at that point).

[Jaxom]

Originally Posted by EricH

Under most situations, the only one that would actually be inspected would be #6, if a robot was going to elims (the inspectors will ask if there are any changes at that point).

If any of the other caused a significant change from your last recorded weight (remember, we re-weigh before elims) you'd also potentially get questioned about 1, 2, and 4. Assuming 50 locknuts or zip ties, or a very large "corner".

Bottom line...regardless of what you're changing it's safer & a lot quicker to pop over to the inspection table on Thursday afternoon to say "we're doing this; do you want to take a look?" If you don't, what could have taken 2 minutes when you have lots of time (and remember what you did) turns into 20 minutes when *everyone's* getting re-weighed & changes discussed. And when you'd rather be prepping for that important first quarterfinal.

[Chris is me]

Line defense is the easiest way to play penalty-free defense on arbitrary opposition.

Cycle time is what separates the good from the great.

A pure hanger that doesn't move isn't nearly as valuable as people expected. A moving drive base, especially if you're under 30, makes you far more useful to an alliance since you can play defense.

Defense is more about top speed than pushing power this year.

There better be a good reason if you're more than 30 inches tall.

[smistthegreat]

If you're a dedicated hanger and hang from the front, back, or inside of the pyramid, you'll probably be in the way of any back of the pyramid shooters on your alliance.

[Saberbot]

Originally Posted by Wing

1.) Scheduling gods exist when there are 65 teams at a regional.
2) Being a consistent shooter is something that's not being seen much, but a lot of teams can do it if they use their resources wisely.
3) Defense is not being played, but when it is, there is a severe impact on an alliance's offense when.
4) A 50 point dumper is not enough to offset an alliance with 2 good scorers that have 10 point hangs.

Some of the more controversial stuff:

4) Referees are NOT calling the 10 point hang properly. I have videos of this, but in our Quarterfinals match 1-2 Team 1772 was not hung up properly, but they got the points, which ended up being the deciding factor and sending our quarterfinals to a 3rd match.

5) G30 exists, referees. Referees are not calling G30, and it's been affecting outcomes of matches! Our Quarterfinals match 1-3, 1772 infracted G30 5 different times, yet it was not called once. We tied that match 70-70, but because the referees instead called us for our human player putting a foot outside of the white line, we ended up losing 70-71, despite numerous infractions of G30 by 1772.

I understand the referees can't see everything, but 5 blatant infractions of G30 shouldn't go unnoticed, and everytime a climb is suspicious, DO THE PAPER TEST!

The toughest thing I had to do this afternoon was to help keep the students calm and explain to them the situation and about us getting unlucky. Toughest thing I have had to say.

I'll post another thread about this issue with some videos to make sure that any referees on CD can be prepared.

Did you ever send anybody to the question box?

[Anupam Goli]

Originally Posted by Saberbot

Did you ever send anybody to the question box?

We did. but before we could debate the climb and the foul points, the fms was finalized in both matches. Perhaps another lesson we learned was to speed walk to the question box as soon as the match is over.

[ttldomination]

Did anyone else notice that the text on the event display is clear? Like, the team number, scores, and the timers are clear so that your see the feed through them?

IMO, it makes the numbers harder to read. Completely unnecessary change.

- Sunny G.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by ttldomination

Did anyone else notice that the text on the event display is clear? Like, the team number, scores, and the timers are clear so that your see the feed through them?

IMO, it makes the numbers harder to read. Completely unnecessary change.

- Sunny G.

Seen this before. Someone screwed up the chroma key setting so the chroma key on the scoring overlay was black instead of green. So then when you're chroma keying the overlay, it keys out everything black on the screen...

Originally Posted by Rangel(kf7fdb)

I think you mean 862 At least I don't remember winning Kettering.

Or having a simple fixed angle shooter and passive hanger for that matter.

[F22Rapture]

We drove down to Palmetto to watch, and it seemed to me as though fouls were not being called nearly as often as they should have been. While I can't remember numbers, I recall one incident where a red robot repeatedly (at least 3 times) rammed into a blue robot touching it's pyramid. One minute later... 0 foul points.

The situation did seem to improve in the finals.

@Text change

I could swear I saw the regular, black numbering on the streams from other regionals. The only one I noticed that *did* have the clear numbering was Palmetto. I could be wrong however.