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

[TEE]

The final matches were really close. I think Curie probably would have won it if they had strategized differently; as it was, they had nobody playing defense in either match, and 2041 stayed in the offensive zone throughout both matches. (In the second match, 2041 got stuck in the goal during autonomous, and remained there for over half of the match, until 1114 came and helped them out, which was a fluke in favor of Newton) Curie should have had every robot except 469 focus on moving balls from the far and middle zones to the offensive zone (scoring when possible, which would have been often for 1114), where there would be only one defender, and then go to town on scoring; every ball except those 294 would be able to clear would remain in that zone to score, while Newton's offensive, 67 and 177 would be starved of balls. At first, they would not have scored as much (because 294 would have an easier time blocking), but in the long-run, the tide of the match would turn towards Curie, as 294 would have trouble blocking successive shots from 469 and 1114, considering 294 would also have to deal with 2041. The fact that many of 469's shots wouldn't make it (because of the number of robots in the offensive zone) wouldn't matter, as 1114 and 2041 together would have been able to get many of those shots past 294.

This strategy takes into account the fact that 469's robot not only scores quickly, but that it also locks balls in the offensive zone. If it turned out that most of 469's shots made it past 294, then 1114 would be able to go back to midfield, or the far zone and fight for any balls 294 had cleared.

This all goes to show how much strategy plays in robotics. Newton, 67, 177 and 294, had a better strategy, and won it all because of it.

That said, could 2041 kick over the bump? Was 1114 able to hang with 469 expanded?

Also, looking over what I've written, it seems I may not have given due credit to Newton; 67, 177, and 294: you played wonderfully! Curie may have tried the strategy above and you could possibly have prevented them from pulling it off!

Any thoughts or comments?

[Chris is me]

You underestimate what 294 and 254 could have done if left alone. Playing defense the way they did and running the cycle with 5 balls in it was probably the right move. 1114 only needed to throw one or two balls out of the 67 faux-cycle to gain essentially permanent ball advantage. I think they had the right strategy, just execution problems. Plus they had to play with an alliance that had 177 as their third best scorer. I mean, wow.

In my opinion, 67 won because they had 177, and 1114 didn't do as good of a job denying balls in the opponent's zone as they needed to do to make their cycle excel. The second match where they had a much better chance due to a high scoring auto was when 2041 got stuck in the goal.

[TEE]

I should have qualified what I said; I think Curie would have stood a better chance, not that they would have won in any situation. I agree that 67 + 177 + 294 = extremely strong alliance.

[jblay]

I actually had a similar thought but I wasn't sure if it was appropriate to start such a thread.

In my opinion the problem with the Curie alliance was that they had 1114 put balls from the middle into the home zone and with 294 being in that zone they simply took those balls that 1114 put there and put them into their home zone for 67 and 177 to score and with no bot clearing that zone those balls were free to sit there and give Newton the ball control until they decided to score. In my opinion 1114's role on that alliance shouldn't have been putting in the ball from the middle and pushing them in but making sure all the balls stayed in their home zone for 469 to cycle with the help of 2041. It also didn't hurt the Curie alliance's scoring ability that 67 could hang after the buzzer.

This was the initial flaw I saw in the Curie alliance and the only reason that Archimedes didn't manage to capitalize on this was that the hangers on their alliance weren't the ones who played the two closer zones. Either 233 or 254 needed to stay in the back zone and that alliance didn't have the advantage of the double hang unless they freed up the far zone at the end of the match. 3357 was a great close zone scoring bot and did a great job throughout the competition but I don't think they were the right fit for that alliance. With all the talent on Archimedes I think that 233 and 254 should have picked up either a close zone robot that could hang or a robot that could solidly play the far zone.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by jblay

This was the initial flaw I saw in the Curie alliance and the only reason that Archimedes didn't manage to capitalize on this was that the hangers on their alliance weren't the ones who played the two closer zones. Either 233 or 254 needed to stay in the back zone and that alliance didn't have the advantage of the double hang unless they freed up the far zone at the end of the match. 3357 was a great close zone scoring bot and did a great job throughout the competition but I don't think they were the right fit for that alliance. With all the talent on Archimedes I think that 233 and 254 should have picked up either a close zone robot that could hang or a robot that could solidly play the far zone.

I wonder if having 233 and 254 switch places would have worked better. The Poofs had a faster hang anyway, so why not put them in the easiest hanging position? Maybe a more versatile pick like 118 would have worked better for the alliance than their rookie striker. Who knows?

All this talk is fun.

[Peter Johnson]

What was interesting about 294's alliance was we essentially had 3 midfielders with slightly different strengths, although we could each play any place on the field (and did both across matches and even in a single match).

294: excellent midfielder/defense (no hang)
67: excellent midfielder/forward (w/hang)
177: great all-arounder (w/hang)

In the quals, 294 mostly sniped (very effectively) from the midfield, and occasionally played forward to clean up (we never played defense in the quals). As in the elims, we always started in the back in quals because of our consistent 3-ball autonomous (although in the quals we usually kicked 3, then went over the bump to gain a head start in the midfield).

In the Newton QFs, 294 played forward, 67 played mid, and 177 played far/defense. It worked, but was uncomfortable for all of us. We switched it up after that. It was the perfect combo of teams in the Einstein finals because of reasons already stated: 294 couldn't hang, but was good at defense, thus freeing up 67 to play forward (amazing to watch) and 177 to play mid, and freeing up both of them to hang. It also helped that 294's kicker consistently cleared both bumps, and occasionally even scored from the far zone. Having two hangers on our alliance was key: 2, and especially 4, points is hard to make up in scoring, which we witnessed in the LA finals against 330 & 1717, both of whom are great hangers.

Interesting footnote to all this: I'm not sure this Newton alliance would have happened without 294 being the #1 seed and 67 (#2 seed) accepting us... note only 12 seeding points separated us in the end, so the reverse seeding could have easily happened! While I don't want to speak for 67, 294 would not have been an obvious first pick for 67 (gutsy but not obvious like our pick of them was). I'm thinking it would have been more likely for 67 to have picked 971... what different matchups that would have resulted in, particularly in Newton elims (anyone want to fantasize the picks & matchups had 67 been #1 and 294 been #2?).

[Cory]

Originally Posted by jblay

This was the initial flaw I saw in the Curie alliance and the only reason that Archimedes didn't manage to capitalize on this was that the hangers on their alliance weren't the ones who played the two closer zones. Either 233 or 254 needed to stay in the back zone and that alliance didn't have the advantage of the double hang unless they freed up the far zone at the end of the match. 3357 was a great close zone scoring bot and did a great job throughout the competition but I don't think they were the right fit for that alliance. With all the talent on Archimedes I think that 233 and 254 should have picked up either a close zone robot that could hang or a robot that could solidly play the far zone.

We lost because we played poorly, not because one of our two hangers was in the back. We simply could not get free from 2041 who did a fantastic job neutralizing us.

We knew exactly what we needed to do to break 469's cycle. We watched every single video there is of them. We studied how 217/67 won (and lost) against them. We spent hours practicing in our lab against a looper. We knew exactly where the balls were going to go...we just could not get to them. Again, 2041 did an unbelievable job locking us up for the duration of both matches.

In the finals I thought 1114 should have played 67 exactly how they played us. Versus us they stayed in the middle and fought 233 for control of midfield. 233 did an admirable job and held their own, but 1114 definitely slowed them down, as well as put a few more balls in their own cycle.

Against 67 1114 played home zone almost exclusively and as a result 67 was in the midfield completely uncontested and scored nearly every single shot they took.

[Greg Marra]

Originally Posted by Cory

Against 67 1114 played home zone almost exclusively and as a result 67 was in the midfield completely uncontested and scored nearly every single shot they took.

With 469 in position and 2041 neutralizing 294, the game became a 2v1 with 177 and 67 playing against 1114.

[Lil' Lavery]

2041 playing in the offensive zone was the reason the Curie alliance not only reached the Einstein finals, but reached Einstein at all. Their role was critical to how the alliance played and how they performed all throughout the tournament. I don't think trying to change your strategy dramatically in the final two matches is nearly as easy as you think it is. And that strategy still worked to within inches of victory in both matches.

Does it look ideal in hindsight now that they've lost? No, you have to wonder how it would have changed if they played it differently. But ultimately I think they made the right choice for the circumstances, they were just outperformed at the most critical moment. It's unfortunate for them, but that seems the case. Good execution can often surpass good strategy.

[jblay]

Originally Posted by Cory

We lost because we played poorly, not because one of our two hangers was in the back. We simply could not get free from 2041 who did a fantastic job neutralizing us.

We knew exactly what we needed to do to break 469's cycle. We watched every single video there is of them. We studied how 217/67 won (and lost) against them. We spent hours practicing in our lab against a looper. We knew exactly where the balls were going to go...we just could not get to them. Again, 2041 did an unbelievable job locking us up for the duration of both matches.

Although I agree that 2041 played superb defense and them riding up on 254 basically stopped any kind of maneuver 254 could make, 254 still effectively limited 469's cycle. In the first match of the semis, the match was within 2 but 469 was let loose when 254 went over the bump to try and hang and that is where that match was lost in my opinion. If 3357 could hang, that match would have been very close and Archimedes could have taken it. I'm not saying 3357 wasn't awesome, and I'm not saying you guys would have topped Curie with another team, all I'm saying is that 3357 may not have been the perfect fit for the strategy you guys ran, because you essentially left the opposing scoring zone open during the finale.

As a side note I was wondering about something that happened in the first match of the semis. 254 entered the opposing tunnel at the end of the autonomous period to try and prevent 469 from setting up, 469 pushed them out of the tunnel at either the end of autonomous or at the start of teleop. When I was checking out 254's pit I noticed that they have a ratcheting system on their gearboxes to prevent people from pushing them. This ratcheting system looked like it also disengaged to allow 254 to back up. Was the gearbox I saw not from their drive train or did something else happen during that match?

[Cory]

Originally Posted by jblay

As a side note I was wondering about something that happened in the first match of the semis. 254 entered the opposing tunnel at the end of the autonomous period to try and prevent 469 from setting up, 469 pushed them out of the tunnel at either the end of autonomous or at the start of teleop. When I was checking out 254's pit I noticed that they have a ratcheting system on their gearboxes to prevent people from pushing them. This ratcheting system looked like it also disengaged to allow 254 to back up. Was the gearbox I saw not from their drive train or did something else happen during that match?

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.

[XaulZan11]

Some one on my team said that the red alliance purposefully missed their shots in autonomous so 1114 would be 'tricked' to going to their close zone early, leaving half the balls for the red alliance to score with undefended. I haven't seen any video, but is this true?

Edit: Ok, I see TBA has the video. While they scored in auto in match 1, they didn't score any in match 2.

[Adam Freeman]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

Some one on my team said that the red alliance purposefully missed their shots in autonomous so 1114 would be 'tricked' to going to their close zone early, leaving half the balls for the red alliance to score with undefended. I haven't seen any video, but is this true?

Edit: Ok, I see TBA has the video. While they scored in auto in match 1, they didn't score any in match 2.

There was no strategy to not score the balls in autonomous. But, there was strategy to get into the mid-field and score balls from there, before scoring balls in the home zone. The thought was to limit the number of balls returning to the mid-field for 1114 to kick into their cycle. Eventually during the matches it became score balls from whereve and whenever b/c the Curie alliance was scoring like crazy.

With regards to the final matches....just because we won the first two matches, doesn't mean that 1114, 469, and 2041 would not have been able to beat us if we kept playing. We were very fortunate in the last match that 2041 was stuck in the goal for half the match.

1114 was a scoring machine. 469 has a robot design that will go down in history as one of the most awesome designs ever. Not to mention both are great teams with awesome strategists. Given more time (one more match?), they would have figured out how to win. Then we would have had to adjust to those changes.

Originally Posted by PerpetualMotion

I don't think anyone can argue that it was 1114/469's championships to lose. They were favorites going into the weekend, and rolled through just about every alliance they saw in elims without much trouble.

And thats exactly what happened, the Curie alliance lost it. I don't mean to take anything away from the Newton alliance, because even with the Curie alliances failures, it still takes an awesome alliance to beat them......

I'd like to say both alliances were evenly matched, but I'm not sure I can say that. I have been trying to figure out how we defeated them for 5 days now, and there isn't one thing that really jumps out at me. I think we suprised them in the first match and had some luck in the second one. After that it was over.

But, you know what? We had a very balanced alliance, with lots of versatility. 67, 294, and 177 worked extremely hard to find a strategy that worked for us throughout the Newton eliminations, defeated Galileo with it, then adapted it to defeat Curie.

I know the HOT team is going to hold our heads high based on the fact that our alliance defeated the an alliance with the consensus top two teams in FIRST this season.

[Leeebowitz]

Watching that final video, I noticed that besides getting stuck in the goal, 2041 also blocked two consecutive shots from 469 towards the end. I can't say that it was entirely 2041's fault because even if both of those goals had been scored, it still would have ended up being 15-16 Newton. Who knows what else might have happened? I think 294 did an awesome job making a quick and effective decision to take advantage of a tremendous opportunity and block the other goal. Other teams with lesser drive teams may not have taken advantage of that situation.

Props to 67, 177, and 294 for taking down what may have been the most intimidating alliance this year!

[akeisic]

As the coach for 294, I'd like to bring a little insight to the conversation...

Reading through the tread, I'm not surprised by some of the comments that 2041 and 1114 were blocking some of 469s shots, but I am surprised at the conclusion that it was somehow their fault. It was not a fluke that they were blocking some of their own shots. Nor was it a fluke that 2041 got stuck in their own goal... In fact, we were doing everything in our ability to ensure that these things happened.

To start off...

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

Some one on my team said that the red alliance purposefully missed their shots in autonomous so 1114 would be 'tricked' to going to their close zone early, leaving half the balls for the red alliance to score with undefended. I haven't seen any video, but is this true?

294, 67 and 177 were not purposefully missing shots in autonomous. We did make a strategic change during Einstein semi’s match #3 that we carried over into the finals through. 294 and 177 could not automatically aim in autonomous. Furthermore, 294 could not kick over 177 if they lined up collinearly. Consequently, one of us needed to start offset. Through much of the elims, we put 177 in line with the goal as their shots were more likely to go in, but after in losing semi match #2, we noticed that a number of 294’s shots ricocheted to the other side of the field and were easy pickings the defender. Hence, we moved 294 in line and 177 offline to minimize this and to use 67’s position to help coral the balls in front of the goal. We kept this arrangement through both finals matches. As a result though, we didn't score as many in autonomous.
On to the strategy...
Prior to the finals our strategy was: (In order of strategic importance
1. Jam up a goal. If an opportunity arose to jam either 2041 or 1114 into their own goal, stop everything and make it happen.
2. Clear out as many balls as possible before they entered the cycle.
3. Block shots within the cycle.
4. Clear out any blocked shot.

1. Jam up a goal.

Originally Posted by TEE

In the second match, 2041 got stuck in the goal during autonomous, and remained there for over half of the match, until 1114 came and helped them out, which was a fluke in favor of Newton)

2041 getting stuck in the goal was not a fluke. They may have gotten hung up (1 wheel in the goal) in autonomous, but they definitely were not stuck (3 wheels in the goal) until we tapped them into the goal. In the TBA video, you can see us rounding the corner to do so just before they cut to another frame.
Naturally, this made our job easier. I was constantly on the look out for this opportunity. While it never came up in the first match, it certainly did in the second and we didn't hesitate. 2041 had about 1 second to get out before we were there.
2. Clear out as many balls as possible before they entered the cycle.
Once the balls are in the cycle, they're 10x harder to stop. Why wait? In each match we cleared 1 ball before trying to block shots. While it gave 1114/469/2041 an easy couple of redirects, it reduced the total count by one and put it in the hands of 67/177.
I feel this is where 217 went wrong in MSC. At the start of the match, they positioned themselves and waited for the cycle to start - allowing precious balls to enter the cycle.
3. Block shots within the cycle.
While I studied the motion of 469's redirecter during the semi's, we paid no attention to it during the match. In stead, we wanted to force them into a decision. We sought to push 2041 (and 1114) to one side of the field forcing 469 to choose the open side. Then, at the last moment, we shifted into high gear and darted to block the shot. As the balls tended to travel in waves, we sought to block the first shot and use 2041 and 1114 to block the second. During the brief moment of chaos, 2041 and 1114 were momentarily out of position and blocking their own goal before they could recover. This meant 469 didn't have a clear shot to either goal when the second ball hit their chute.
4. Clear out any blocked shot.
If we blocked a shot, we immediately tried to clear it. One less ball in the loop. While this left the goals exposed I return to my observation that the balls tended to travel in waves. 2041 did an excellent job in preventing our clear. By the time we had the ball, we were T-boned by 2041 and caught in the corner of the field. In both matches, we found that we had no other choice, but to abandon to the midfield and then return.
If all went to plan, 294 blocked the first shot and 1114 or 2041 blocked the second - forcing 1114 to collect it and score it again. As a result, I feel 1114 felt the need to stay in the home zone.
Why we were successful?
There's a couple of things that come to mind as to why we were successful in defending the 1114/469/2041 alliance.
1. Our driver has been on the drive team for 4 years - 3 of which he was driving. He also loves playing D!
2. Out codriver has been on the drive team for 3 years - 3 of which he was the co-driver to the driver.
3. For the previous 3 years, our primary role was defense during the eliminations - with the occasional offensive flare. We definitely know how to play D!
4. Before our robot was an offensive threat, we played 1.5 full elimination rounds as the defender.
5. We used current sensing and a heads up display to inform the driver/co-driver when we had a ball in possession.
6. We mounted the camera under our bumpers so we could see balls hidden behind the bump. (From the driver team's perspective, you can't see balls immediately behind the 2nd bump).
7. Our ball control device had an iron grip on the ball. We stole multiple balls out of the grasp of other teams with our intake.
8. Our kicker could clear both bumps (and occasionally score).
9. We had a 2 speed transmission. Nothing new, but I'd put us up for the fastest robot as well as the strongest robot with the design we fielded.

I apologize for being long winded, but I had a lot to contribute. I hope this gives you an "insider" perspective to the final matches.

On a side note: I'm a little disappointed in the videos thus far as they absolutely don't capture the excitement of those matches. As I was focused on our robot, I missed much of the rest of the match. I was really hoping to get to watch the whole match for the first time!