Einstein Finals: Curie (469, 1114, 2041) vs. Newton (67, 177, 294)

[akeisic]

Finally...whole field Einstein videos surface!

Match 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYdbNMGT-r0
Match 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOWmn4fBVCQ

[jblay]

Originally Posted by akeisic

Finally...whole field Einstein videos surface!

Match 1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYdbNMGT-r0
Match 2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOWmn4fBVCQ

I have been waiting so long for this. Match 1 had the best end to a match I have ever seen and I've been known to watch some match video. Kind of upset they missed the majority of 67 pulling up in this video too.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Cory

We forgot that 469 changed to a new autonomous that ends with them fully in the tunnel, so once we were in, we stopped driving forward and promptly got pushed back by them.

The ratchets don't have an effect on normal driving. The only thing they do is prevent the arm from backdriving.

Cory,
My only question after watching the first match, was why not start from near the middle and go straight into the tunnel. Why kick the balls out first, since it seemed that you folks got there what seemed like, a tad bit late?
I asked some of your team members this past weekend at the VEX tournament, and some said that's exactly what they wanted to do.


And did anyone else notice that the balls looped from 469 were slightly off when unopposed to the goal?
If that was the case, why play defense on the defender, but instead have both 2041 and 1114 focus on scoring?

I'd have to agree that having 2 front bots that can hang was vital to advancing on Einstein. 294 impressed me the most because they could do 3 things effectively. Defense on the line of the looped balls, kick from far zone to near consistently, and move quickly.

[jblay]

Originally Posted by waialua359

Cory,
My only question after watching the first match, was why not start from near the middle and go straight into the tunnel. Why kick the balls out first, since it seemed that you folks got there what seemed like, a tad bit late?
I asked some of your team members this past weekend at the VEX tournament, and some said that's exactly what they wanted to do.

I obviously can't explain the choices made by 254 but in my opinion the autonomous they ran was perfect aside from the fact that 469 managed to push them out of the tunnel. 254 managed to get inside the tunnel at the right time they just weren't pushing 469 and keeping them out.

Also I think in almost every single match this year it was very crucial to clear those 3 balls out of your opponents home zone in autonomous mode. My only exception would be if you are against a weak alliance in qualification matches and you want to give your opponent a shot to score. This way you can build up your seeding score.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

Originally Posted by jblay

I obviously can't explain the choices made by 254 but in my opinion the autonomous they ran was perfect aside from the fact that 469 managed to push them out of the tunnel. 254 managed to get inside the tunnel at the right time they just weren't pushing 469 and keeping them out.

Yup. It got there in time. It just didn't push back hard enough.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

Yup. It got there in time. It just didn't push back hard enough.

If that's the case, it would have been exciting to see what would have happened if 469 couldnt loop the balls.
Being that 469 was a good robot even without the looper, it would have been great to see both alliances adjust on the fly and try to win!

[Cory]

Originally Posted by waialua359

If that's the case, it would have been exciting to see what would have happened if 469 couldnt loop the balls.
Being that 469 was a good robot even without the looper, it would have been great to see both alliances adjust on the fly and try to win!

The problem with our autonomous is that it was effectively worthless.

Had we stopped 469 from getting in the tunnel we'd have needed to stay there the entire match, or they would go right back in. We'd be taking our best robot out of the game completely. We might be able to win 2v3 if we had our two best robots out of the tunnel, but there's just no way it would have worked if we were in the tunnel. At some point we would have to come out and score. We might have bought 15-30 seconds of no looping, but it would ultimately still have happened.

Particularly when you consider that 469 is still a VERY good midfielder.

[jblay]

Originally Posted by Cory

The problem with our autonomous is that it was effectively worthless.

Had we stopped 469 from getting in the tunnel we'd have needed to stay there the entire match, or they would go right back in. We'd be taking our best robot out of the game completely. We might be able to win 2v3 if we had our two best robots out of the tunnel, but there's just no way it would have worked if we were in the tunnel. At some point we would have to come out and score. We might have bought 15-30 seconds of no looping, but it would ultimately still have happened.

Particularly when you consider that 469 is still a VERY good midfielder.

In that case why have your autonomics bring your robot to the tunnel? It doesn't seem like your strategy from the start was to stay there and stop 469 from entering so why even run that autonomous?

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Cory

The problem with our autonomous is that it was effectively worthless.

Had we stopped 469 from getting in the tunnel we'd have needed to stay there the entire match, or they would go right back in. We'd be taking our best robot out of the game completely. We might be able to win 2v3 if we had our two best robots out of the tunnel, but there's just no way it would have worked if we were in the tunnel. At some point we would have to come out and score. We might have bought 15-30 seconds of no looping, but it would ultimately still have happened.

Particularly when you consider that 469 is still a VERY good midfielder.

Actually,
I thought if 469 couldnt get in there because you folks did, then you could proceed to play defense with them, making it a 2 vs 2. If they hung around the tunnel just in case you folks came out, they'd be hard-pressed to try to score also.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by waialua359

And did anyone else notice that the balls looped from 469 were slightly off when unopposed to the goal?
If that was the case, why play defense on the defender, but instead have both 2041 and 1114 focus on scoring?

This was really variable, depending on the direction, the match, and the angle. Of course, in F2 the 2 or 3 that didn't go in on the "right" (from the driver's) side were key to the match, but many matches they did score. 294 kept them busy in the more reliable direction for match 2.

Originally Posted by akeisic

As you can imagine, I've been watching the final matches over and over again!

Not counting auto, it took you guys enough time to clear them that if 1114 used that strategy it would have probably allowed them to keep their lead a little better than they did, IMO. They were still basically facing their worst nightmare in the back though.

[Chris Hibner]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

This was really variable, depending on the direction, the match, and the angle. Of course, in F2 the 2 or 3 that didn't go in on the "right" (from the driver's) side were key to the match, but many matches they did score. 294 kept them busy in the more reliable direction for match 2.

That is still really weird for 469. I've seen them play a lot and prior to Atlanta, I don't think I've ever seen them miss the goal altogether (except for when they get hit as the ball falls to the ground). If their redirections don't score, it's usually the result of the chains or a lack of momentum, but they were on target to both goals at least 95% of the time during the regular season. As I watched the finals on Einstein, I was surprised to see how many were missing.

[jblay]

Originally Posted by Chris Hibner

That is still really weird for 469. I've seen them play a lot and prior to Atlanta, I don't think I've ever seen them miss the goal altogether (except for when they get hit as the ball falls to the ground). If their redirections don't score, it's usually the result of the chains or a lack of momentum, but they were on target to both goals at least 95% of the time during the regular season. As I watched the finals on Einstein, I was surprised to see how many were missing.

I did notice that 67 bumped them a couple of times when the balls hit 469's chute. I think this was what caused their issues.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Chris Hibner

That is still really weird for 469. I've seen them play a lot and prior to Atlanta, I don't think I've ever seen them miss the goal altogether (except for when they get hit as the ball falls to the ground). If their redirections don't score, it's usually the result of the chains or a lack of momentum, but they were on target to both goals at least 95% of the time during the regular season. As I watched the finals on Einstein, I was surprised to see how many were missing.

We heard that due to slight variances of the Einstein field relative to Curie, 469 had tweaked the positions their chutes swing to. It seems like maybe they weren't quite able to get the positions down perfectly.

[Greg Marra]

Originally Posted by Cory

We heard that due to slight variances of the Einstein field relative to Curie, 469 had tweaked the positions their chutes swing to. It seems like maybe they weren't quite able to get the positions down perfectly.

I know that this is a problem 125 faced between Boston's practice field and competition field. Especially with variations in how the ball exited the tower's chute, it was tough to move from field to field and even alliance to alliance.

[TEE]

Originally Posted by Greg Marra

I know that this is a problem 125 faced between Boston's practice field and competition field. Especially with variations in how the ball exited the tower's chute, it was tough to move from field to field and even alliance to alliance.

aren't all of the fields supposed to be identical?