G10, The Dallas Disable & Crickets Chirping in Manchester

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by rich2202

Assuming when you enter the field with the Robot you proceed directly to your placement point, and that the placement point is not blocked by a leaving robot: It starts when you in the general area of the placement point.



Assuming the field reset people are inhibiting your ability to setup the robot, an allowance will be made.



60 seconds is a guide, not a requirement. Hence, a regular watch is sufficient. If you are at your placement point at 3:35:00 pm, then your 60 seconds is up at 3:36:00 pm.



Each robot has its own 60 second period. If your team unnecessarily delays entering the field (standing around yacking and not entering the field when they are first able to) then that delay will count against your 60 seconds.

That said: the 60 second rule gets progressively more strict as the tournament proceeds. Numerous teams were warned at the beginning of qualification matches when they were taking too long. By the time we got to the elimination matches, we didn't have a problem with setup.

If we were having a problem, here is what I would do: I would identify the problem teams, and make it clear to them when the 60 seconds starts (stand there and say your 60 seconds starts now). I would warn them at 50 seconds, and again at 60 seconds. I would then give them 15 seconds to clear the field. At that point, they would have earned the disabled. Whether they are disabled or not would depend upon whether they are delaying the start, or if other things are going on (field connection problems with another bot, another bot still in their 60 seconds, etc.).

BTW: By the time you get to 50 seconds, you should make sure the robot can play as is. That is, it is at an allowable placement on the field. If you don't have time to screw on the last part, then play without the last part. Playing hobbled is not a problem (as long as it is not dangerous). Starting in the wrong place is a problem.

60 seconds is a guideline... so teams will be rigidly held to 60 seconds?

60 seconds wasn't even enough time for most teams last year.

The 60 seconds should really only refer to the exiting of transport config, the usual undetermined amount of time for loading in and alignment should be separate.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by rich2202

Assuming when you enter the field with the Robot you proceed directly to your placement point, and that the placement point is not blocked by a leaving robot: It starts when you in the general area of the placement point.

Assuming the field reset people are inhibiting your ability to setup the robot, an allowance will be made.

60 seconds is a guide, not a requirement. Hence, a regular watch is sufficient. If you are at your placement point at 3:35:00 pm, then your 60 seconds is up at 3:36:00 pm.

Each robot has its own 60 second period. If your team unnecessarily delays entering the field (standing around yacking and not entering the field when they are first able to) then that delay will count against your 60 seconds.

That said: the 60 second rule gets progressively more strict as the tournament proceeds. Numerous teams were warned at the beginning of qualification matches when they were taking too long. By the time we got to the elimination matches, we didn't have a problem with setup.

If we were having a problem, here is what I would do: I would identify the problem teams, and make it clear to them when the 60 seconds starts (stand there and say your 60 seconds starts now). I would warn them at 50 seconds, and again at 60 seconds. I would then give them 15 seconds to clear the field. At that point, they would have earned the disabled. Whether they are disabled or not would depend upon whether they are delaying the start, or if other things are going on (field connection problems with another bot, another bot still in their 60 seconds, etc.).

You seem to have a much more rigid and strict interpretation of the rule than several of the other refs on this thread. Which, I believe, is Dr. Joe's whole point. G10 as written is vague, so refs have to make up their own definitions of what a violation is. It's not a good state of affairs to have that level of penalty hinge on such a vague definition.

[mwmac]

Just as a matter of cya, #1 question of officiating crew at every event's drivers meeting should be "How will the 60 second setup timing be handled during this event?" #2 "How will the enforcement of the 60 second setup timing be changed as the event proceeds whether due to schedule lag or the beginning of playoffs?"

[pathew100]

As mentioned previously, the 60 second guideline is just that. A guideline, NOT a rule. I hope that it is being treated as such at all events.

The rule is this:
G10 DRIVE TEAMS may not cause significant or repeated delays to the start of a MATCH.
VIOLATION: The offending ROBOT will be DISABLED

My take: When are you actually delaying a match? Assuming you have turned on your robot in a timely manner (which you presumably will be reminded of constantly by the field crew) you are only delaying the match if you are still on the field adjusting things when the stack light on the scoring table goes green. At least that's the way I see it.

Of course there are teams that try to game the system by being the last robot to turn on, thus giving them more time to position for auto or whatever. Those teams may fall under the repeated delay situation, but more often that not, we're talking about an extra 20-30 seconds. Hardly enough time to justify making them sit out a match.

[protoserge]

As a key volunteer, we want to provide teams a quality event experience. This doesn't mean that every team will be happy with the outcome of every decision or call on the field, but as a whole, the team will leave an event having had a good time and an overall positive experience. Even if events are running behind schedule, we still want teams to have an enjoyable experience and feel like they were given every reasonable accommodation to compete.

The 60 second guideline is a measure for teams to understand that there needs to be some reasonable approach to their robot design. It is understood that early on in a competition, there will be delays as teams are not necessarily well-practiced or efficient in setting up their robot. If a single team takes 5-6 minutes to set up every match, it could potentially delay a competition an hour.

The refs and FTAs really do not want to disable a robot. It is a last-call measure and it has to be reported.

As far as the comments about "crickets chirping in Manchester", I don't know if I read the tone of the statement correctly as being that of inaction by FIRST HQ. I will say that there is no lack of conversation on this topic and there has been some communication on the subject enforcing the priority of a quality team experience. I am sure we will hear more from Frank in the coming days. I would expect that if there is no explicit rule change, FTAs and refs will have been informed of the policy guidance on this rule to adhere to the priority of a quality team experience.

[rich2202]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

You seem to have a much more rigid and strict interpretation of the rule than several of the other refs on this thread.

If there is a team that is known to take a long time, then they will know when the end of the reasonable period is reached. Will they be disabled at that point? It all depends upon what else is going on. If other teams are still setting up, if the FTA's are working on a connection problem, etc, then, as far as I'm concerned, they can keep working. But, if they reach the end of the reasonable period, and we are all standing around waiting for them, we are 5 minutes from the end of the last match (7 minute intervals), etc. then they risk being disabled if they do not promptly wrap it up and leave the field.

With a problem team, I'll be strict in letting them know they have reached the end of the reasonable period. I'll then let the Head Ref know they have been adequately warned, and it is their call whether to impose the disabled penalty. The issue is that it is not a surprise to the team when the disabled penalty is given. If I were the Head Ref, I would be flexible to the point of the team becoming a nuisance. One of my team's scouting questions is whether the team take a long time to get on or get off the field. I would advise my team to avoid selecting a team that has any chance of disabled delay penalty.

So, if you are on an alliance with a bot that takes a long time to set up, then make sure that bot is the first one onto the field. That gives them the maximum amount of time to setup before anyone notices how long it is taking.

Note: Q437 says that G7 repositioning should be a matter of seconds, so don't rely upon another 15 seconds to position your robot.

[Brandon Holley]

Originally Posted by rich2202

If there is a team that is known to take a long time, then they will know when the end of the reasonable period is reached. Will they be disabled at that point? It all depends upon what else is going on. If other teams are still setting up, if the FTA's are working on a connection problem, etc, then, as far as I'm concerned, they can keep working.

.....

With a problem team, I'll be strict in letting them know they have reached the end of the reasonable period.

.....

Note: Q437 says that G7 repositioning should be a matter of seconds, so don't rely upon another 15 seconds to position your robot.

Bold emphasis is my own.

Hey Rich-
I just wanted to point out why so many people in this thread are concerned about the interpretation and enforcement of the 60 second setup rule.

The bold statements above are all extremely concerning to me as a team mentor. These are all 'judgement calls' and interpretation of individual referees which WILL be different, ref to ref, day to day and event to event.

Things like setup time varying based on whats going on elsewhere on the field? That doesn't seem like rigid enforcement, but then holding teams to 'a matter of seconds' not meaning 15 seems like a rigid enforcement of an unwritten time limit (aka an interpretation of a rule which will vary). What constitutes a problem team? A one time offender? Two times? Every single time? Can a team be moved off the 'problem' team list if they make adjustments?

It's simply too vague right now and is leaving a wide array of interpretations that have already reared their head in a bad way at an event resulting in corrective action from HQ.

-Brando

[wireties]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

I prefer to think of myself, my students, and all the other teams as the customer... because you know, the giant stacks of cash we give FIRST every year.

The "Team Experience" is very important, and the fact that we pay so much to compete makes it harder to let things slide.

In a real sense, of course, you are correct. We are all paying FIRST but then large components of FIRST are volunteers.

But that is not how the game itself is played. Our "customer" gives us a set of design criteria on the first Saturday and we have 6+ weeks to design, construct and test a product. In the context of the game, FIRST and the GDC is the customer.

On the higher plane (where we are paying big $$$), Frank has spoken for FIRST promising just what you ask for. Maybe it is time to move on?

[Jared]

It's important to note that the sixty second guideline (not rule) is in a blue box. The standard blue box disclaimer makes them somewhat useless. The referee can always tell you that a rule takes precedence and can ignore the blue box legally. The same goes for any q and a response that doesn't make it into a team update.

At the beginning of the manual, this disclaimer about blue boxes is posted inside of a blue box.

Warnings, cautions and notes appear in blue boxes. It is strongly recommended that you pay close attention to their contents as they’re intended to provide
insight into the reasoning behind a rule, helpful information on understanding or interpreting a rule, and/or possible “best practices” for use when implementing
systems affected by a rule.
While blue boxes are part of the manual, they do not carry the weight of the actual rule (if there is an inadvertent conflict between a rule and its blue box, the
rule supersedes the language in the blue box).

This weakens the power of the blue box significantly. In addition, the blue box has 60 seconds as a guideline.

A team may delay the start of the match, even if it takes them less than 60 sixty seconds to set up. If the match would have normally started 30 seconds after the robots were placed on the field (not likely), and you force them to wait sixty seconds, you have delayed the match. If you do this twice, it's a repeated delay.

[ehochstein]

http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprogr...hes-resolution

Blog Date:
Wednesday, March 4, 2015 - 13:03
As I noted in an earlier blog, we have been gathering data from participants regarding the events that took place during the final matches at the Dallas Regional. Based on the information I have, I believe the teams were not treated in a way that meets FRC standards. At a minimum, it appears two teams were not given the opportunity to make the ‘quick remedy’ promised under G7 to get them in a compliant starting position before the final match. Beyond the rules themselves, I believe the teams were not kept well informed of the situation, with at least one team not knowing they had been disabled until the match started and their robot did not move. Also, I got the sense the teams were not being treated as respectfully as they deserved, at least on occasion. While some may characterize this situation as a problem with the decisions of a few volunteers, I do not. Ultimately, the responsibility for ensuring all teams have a positive experience at FRC events falls to me, with, of course, the support of the rest of the FIRST staff.

Our volunteers have very difficult jobs, and my working assumption is that every volunteer has the best interests of the teams at heart. Every day I am thankful for their commitment and dedication to FIRST. FIRST would not exist or be what it is without them. However, volunteers do not train themselves, and FIRST has the responsibility to train and regularly reinforce the need to make the team experience the priority, balanced, of course, with proper consideration for the rules to ensure fairness. We also need to acknowledge that our many different volunteer roles require different skill sets, and not every volunteer is suited for every role. We need to make sure we have a good fit between our volunteers and the roles we need filled.

Immediately, we are contacting our key volunteers to reinforce the idea that the team experience should take priority at events. Longer term, working with the FIRST Volunteer Resources Department, we will be reviewing our key volunteer training process for 2016 to ensure it properly emphasizes the team experience. Other specific actions may also be taken.

The teams involved in the final match at Dallas were 624, 118, 2613, 987, 148, and 3802. Five of these six teams have already earned a slot at the FIRST Championship, with the lone exception being 3802. As a way to attempt to partially make up for the frustrations of the final match, I am offering 3802 a Wild Card slot at Championship. This should not be interpreted to mean that I believe that, had all robots been enabled, the 987/148/3802 Alliance would have won that final match. I would not attempt to predict that. The 624/118/2613 Alliance are the Winners of the Dallas Regional, and this offer is not intended to minimize that very significant accomplishment.

I apologize to the teams involved in the finals, the rest of the attendees in Dallas, and the FIRST community for this. We are working to make it right, and minimize the chance of it happening again.

Frank

[Gregor]

Personally I'm looking forward to pushing past my alliance partners to be first on the field so they can be disabled not me!

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by Gregor

Personally I'm looking forward to pushing past my alliance partners to be first on the field so they can be disabled not me!

So glad I'm not playing with you at least so far this season.

I'm also glad our robot requires no adjustment from transport configuration so we can avoid these setup time issues.

[Peyton Yeung]

The head ref at the Indy event gave us a warning about us taking to long during set up.