Lessons learned 2005: The negative

[Jasmin]

I only attended one regional and the nationals, but at both I experienced the same problem; Teams standing up during their matches.

It really doesn't seem like that big of deal, but when those teams are sitting in the closest (or near closest) seats to the field, it's rather vexing when you're trying to scout or just sit back, relax, and watch the matches.

When asked to sit down, they ignored the request. Maybe they didn't hear us? Doubtful. At least one or two members would turn around and see us motioning the request, but denied it. Not just students, either, but the adults as well.

Perhaps this issue could be addressed amongst the teams. If you insist on standing up during the match, then maybe you could sit nearer to the back? Or just stand up while they're announcing your team/alliance? It'd be much appreciated.

Thank you.

[Ali Ahmed]

From reading all these posts I feel that there was a lack of GP this year. I have personally felt this. There could be many reasons for this, maybe FIRST is getting too big or maybe some people don't understand what it is. I am proposing that everybody get reacquainted with gracious professionalism. It would help things greatly.

[Rombus]

Might i say something here?

Everyone take a step back, There is alot of PERSONAL discussion going on here, Lets direct the negative at FIRST and not each other

I'm kidding, really, First is doing a great job!

Here is my view of all this negative:

Negative vs. Positive is a bad comparison, Think of this: You have a good day, not exceptional, but good overall. Now say some random guy walks up and kicks you in the shin. What are you more likely to tell people about? The good overall day, or the guy kicking you in the shin?

Now lets say you have a bad day, not much goes right, but there is nothing exceptionally bad. A random guy walks up and hands you a $100 bill and walks away, what are you going to tell people about then?

Look at what we are discussing here, The major reoccurring topic is the ref inconsistencies. Alot of other things brought up are mainly small things in the overall scale of FIRST, this shows me that in general 2005 was a good year for FIRST.

So again, take a step back, and really take a good look at what your about to post, Keep specific teams or people OUT of your post to avoid discussions like the whole Technokats fiasco.

Then again, what do i know, I'm only a rookie

[Andy Baker]

With regard to cheering, requiring teammates to stand and cheer, and being bothered by teams in front of you who are cheering, I would like to start a new thread. This seems to be a sticky issue with a few different sides and opinions. I can see what Ally (and others are saying), and I would like to take the time to address this logically by starting another thread.

This other thread is called Cheering, standing ovations, and required team actions.

Go there to debate that issue as you wish. Continue to whine about FIRST in this thread. (sorry... couldn't resist... )

Andy B.

[kulisb]

While the entire FIRST crew did an awesome job at the Championship Competition, many people have mentioned that consistency in calling penalties was a big problem. I have to agree on that one. You should really check out this match (#74 in Galileo) for one of the strangest calls I have ever seen.

http://soap.circuitrunners.com/2005/...eo/gal_074.wmv

Keep an eye on team 126 (the closest robot on the blue alliance.......the one capping multiple tetras at once). They stay on their side of the field for just about the whole match. With somthing like 11 or 12 seconds left in the match, a robot on the far red side of the field can be seen being tipped over. With time running out, 126 attempts to run the field and cap in a red home row goal, passing the downed robot with about 2 seconds left in the match. While there was about 6 seconds in between the robot tipping, and 126 being on even the same SIDE of the field as them, they are somehow hit with a ten point penalty and disqualified in the match for being responsible for the tipping.
What do you guys think? I understand how calls should not be arguable. But, in a case like this, should calls be able to be changed or reviewed? This year, a simple mistake like this in one match costs any team a LOT! Thanks for your input!

Congrats to all teams on another successful FIRST season!

[abeD]

Well from what I saw on the video someone definately got tipped and it even looked like it was tipped becuase of a high push. I couldn't make out team #'s and such but that can be grounds for a dq


On another note: we all know that there were some bad calls made and this has been said in this thread many times (as well in maybe 10 other threads if not more) If you're going to post a bad call or say that the ref's were inconsistent and such please reconsider because this topic has been beaten to death then dragged outside revived and beaten again.

[kulisb]

[quote=abeD]Well from what I saw on the video someone definately got tipped and it even looked like it was tipped becuase of a high push. I couldn't make out team #'s and such but that can be grounds for a dq


Yes, a robot was tipped over. But, the dq was charged to the wrong team.

[Jack Jones]

Maybe next year FIRST can do away with the refs altogether. It could be done with pressure pads, contact switches, and tip sensors. The onboard computers could calculate how hard and where they’d been hit and signal the master computer to disable the right bot.

Heck, while we’re at it, let’s do away with the drivers, HPs, and coaches. Run the full two minutes in autonomous mode; put bar codes on the game pieces and scanners on the goals.

That way there’d be no need for moan and groan posts. Not one person cheated. No one to disparage.

[xzvrw2]

Originally Posted by kulisb

While the entire FIRST crew did an awesome job at the Championship Competition, many people have mentioned that consistency in calling penalties was a big problem. I have to agree on that one. You should really check out this match (#74 in Galileo) for one of the strangest calls I have ever seen.

http://soap.circuitrunners.com/2005/...eo/gal_074.wmv

Keep an eye on team 126 (the closest robot on the blue alliance.......the one capping multiple tetras at once). They stay on their side of the field for just about the whole match. With somthing like 11 or 12 seconds left in the match, a robot on the far red side of the field can be seen being tipped over. With time running out, 126 attempts to run the field and cap in a red home row goal, passing the downed robot with about 2 seconds left in the match. While there was about 6 seconds in between the robot tipping, and 126 being on even the same SIDE of the field as them, they are somehow hit with a ten point penalty and disqualified in the match for being responsible for the tipping.
What do you guys think? I understand how calls should not be arguable. But, in a case like this, should calls be able to be changed or reviewed? This year, a simple mistake like this in one match costs any team a LOT! Thanks for your input!

Congrats to all teams on another successful FIRST season!

It may not have been team 126 but it was still a team on the blue alliance that tipped that robot, unless my eyes were playing tricks on me. So they should have got the DQ for the alliance but not because of team 126.

[Gerbs]

Originally Posted by xzvrw2

It may not have been team 126 but it was still a team on the blue alliance that tipped that robot, unless my eyes were playing tricks on me. So they should have got the DQ for the alliance but not because of team 126.

Look closely at the bottom where the two bots come into contact. The Blue Alliance bot tipped the bot by turning left and touched it at the BASE. This sure doesn't look like a High CG tip. I'd call it legal.

Anyway...I can say that our team also had a match with a ref error.
It happened in the Human Player loading zone. We were clearly on the Pad and the other side backed right into us as they moved away from our goal. It looked like a 30pointer to me (I our favour)...but no penalty was awarded. Go figure!

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Gerbs

Look closely at the bottom where the two bots come into contact. The Blue Alliance bot tipped the bot by turning left and touched it at the BASE. This sure doesn't look like a High CG tip. I'd call it legal.

Anyway...I can say that our team also had a match with a ref error.
It happened in the Human Player loading zone. We were clearly on the Pad and the other side backed right into us as they moved away from our goal. It looked like a 30pointer to me (I our favour)...but no penalty was awarded. Go figure!

This isn't a thread to tell everyone that you got penalties you didn't deserve.
Please keep on topic.

[Stephen Kowski]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

- The return of Sir Charles. 'nuff said.

I am gonna have to disagree with you there. I found his announcing very entertaining and he kills himself because he is so into it. In fact, he is by far one of my favorite announcers....I know several people that thought he was hilarious....so I am gonna have to disagree with him being a negative of FIRST 2005. There are other things to concentrate on other than a volunteer's performance....

[the_short1]

i LOVED seeing larry page, and the patent guy.. and all the VOLUNTEERS ! WE THANK YOU!.. . we had an AWSOME MC at galileo!..

but enuf of that.. the only thing they MUST change, is be more strict on colors, for autonomous, as i will be doing coding next year and i hope the camera is there next year.. i dont want to see a repeat of what happened to team 66 (they broke their bot due to someone wearing GREEN next to field.. in the rules it states no green is to be used as to affect the autonomous.. and it was a bummer that they did not control that so well

[Ryan Albright]

Originally Posted by Stephen Kowski

I am gonna have to disagree with you there. I found his announcing very entertaining and he kills himself because he is so into it. In fact, he is by far one of my favorite announcers....I know several people that thought he was hilarious....so I am gonna have to disagree with him being a negative of FIRST 2005. There are other things to concentrate on other than a volunteer's performance....

I will have to concur with you. I really liked him last year and this year. He gets himself into it and what i can tell he works on getting the people in the stands into it.

[UCGL_Guy]

More concerns than anything else ---
1.Segways mixing with heavy pedestrian traffic - If FIRST is going to start promoting safety we must start looking at behaviors that cause accidents and I saw a couple of near misses with the segways.

2. Grinding in the pits - never saw it but heard it several times - Each division needs an area to do this kind of work in.

3. Robot traffic mixing with regular people traffic - caused a lot of congestion - needs to be a "robot only trail"

4. Use Einstein field again so teams can have more mathces / at $715 a match that is a little steep. Looked like to me there is enough space for 6 playing fields --- more mathces

5. Closing ceremonies were waaaaaay too long. I did like some of the flash they put into the finals. I did however get a nice nap in.

6. I wonder ---- could they set up a local radio broadcast of each field - so you could listen in the pit - you cannot hear the Pit admin announcements.

8. I agree on the penalty thing - the game should be designed so as to not have the possibilty of bot / human interaction. Other than that I love this game.

9. Again safety related - the announcers should exhibit safe behavior alos - jumping on the field elements is not a good example of this.

10. Hard hats --- Osha would have a field day writing this one up with all of the potential overhead projectiles for the field crew and players.


What I liked
1. Wednesday night unloading this is a must have and would not mind seeing this implemented in the regionals.

2. The building we were in --- keep this arrangement 100X better than last year's fiasco.

3. The police actually helped you out - still ticked about the ticket we got last year.

4. The Game --- this is the best in my six years

5. although the field was crowded I like the 3 on 3

Overall a very good year
congratulations to all.