Team Update 4

[Chris is me]

http://usfirst.org/uploadedFiles/Rob..._Update_04.pdf

Good: Passing tubes in the air is legal! Woo hoo! This is seriously cool and I'm really glad this happened.

Bad: Mini bot rules AGAIN. FIRST craftily outlaws "prepunched" aluminium and overtly states that supporting FIRST means giving money to Lego:

Supporting FIRST means supporting FTC and FLL and their kits

Oh well. Win some, lose some.

[Prontopwnage]

"<G39> ROBOTS and FEEDERS may not SCORE on opponent's PEGS or de-score opponent's GAME PIECES." LOL thought that was kinda a given.
And "<G49> ROBOTS may not attempt to POSSESS a GAME PIECE that is being POSSESSED by an opponent another ROBOT." Seems to me you cant hunt people down for tubes anymore, well back to the drawing board

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Prontopwnage

"<G49> ROBOTS may not attempt to POSSESS a GAME PIECE that is being POSSESSED by an opponent another ROBOT." Seems to me you cant hunt people down for tubes anymore, well back to the drawing board

This rule already existed, just before it applied to your partners as well.

[Akash Rastogi]

Its Funny how a sIngle statement can make you lose any and all respect you once had for a group or entity. Just sayin', interpret that as you wish.

[ttldomination]

Woops, totally misunderstood/misread Chris's comment.

Nvm,
Sunny

[IndySam]

Apparently because I prefer to support a different mid-level robot program I no longer support FIRST. Thanks GDC for clearing that up.

I will continue to support FRC but I won't be supporting FIRST anymore.

Please tell Dean that I will not be calling my team a FIRST robotics team.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by IndySam

Apparently because I prefer to support a different mid-level robot program I no longer support FIRST. Thanks GDC for clearing that up.

I will continue to support FRC but I won't be supporting FIRST anymore.

Please tell Dean that I will not be calling my team a FIRST robotics team.

I guess I will no longer be running for a Chairman's award either because the thought of starting (hypothetical situation here) 20 VRC teams in India and the Philippines instead of FTC would apparently get me nowhere!! Yay! These types of things are good to know before I waste my time promoting science and technology through any media possible. Very excited to finally have a concrete idea of where FIRST stands on these types of issues though. /sarcasm.

Excuse the language or not, but that is a load of BS. This'll be my last comment on this issue though. Call me a fanboy or over exaggerating if you want too.

[JewishDan18]

Its the "and their kits" part that gets me. We're supposed to use the money we've raised to buy kits for a completely different program just to make sure the producer of said kits stays profitable?

[ATannahill]

I would like to convey my disgust, but I think IndySam or Akash's statements are enough.

[Prontopwnage]

I dont get how that was on topic at all....

[Kevin Sevcik]

LOOK, LOOK! It's a moderately on topic post that's not about the FTC debacle!

Originally Posted by Prontopwnage

"<G39> ROBOTS and FEEDERS may not SCORE on opponent's PEGS or de-score opponent's GAME PIECES." LOL thought that was kinda a given.

Originally Posted by ghostmachine360

Well, if the score gap was really large, and you had some extra pieces left in your feeder station, you could have (before the ruling, of course) thrown the game pieces over the feeder station wall onto one of the nearest opposing alliance's pegs to shorten the scoring gap.

You two clearly aren't thinking creatively enough. Scoring for your opponent makes loads of sense when there's 9+ points sitting on the top row in the form of a completed LOGO. All you do is have your feeder score the wrong GAME PIECE for your opponent, and you wipe out the LOGO bonus. Scoring for your opponent to lower their score! I thought it was pretty brilliant and hilarious, personally. Anyways, I posted a question to the Q&A a while back that outlined this scenario. So I'm taking credit for the <G39> rule change in this update until anyone else admits to having a twisted enough mind to think that up.

However, I'm not taking credit for this:

Originally Posted by EricS-Team180

The updated clarification of <R49> is a breath of fresh air for the controls community. Kudos to Kevin Sevcik for bringing it up this morning and for the GDC to make a common sense clarification.

All I did was post about the rule change before someone else did. And show back up in the thread to nod along with everyone else and bring a little order to things. I suspect that the biggest push came from people who developed all the CAN technology and either wandered across the thread or were otherwise informed about the rule change.

[Trent B]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

Anyways, I posted a question to the Q&A a while back that outlined this scenario. So I'm taking credit for the <G39> rule change in this update until anyone else admits to having a twisted enough mind to think that up.

I actually thought of it too but with using the robot however that could have been flagged for yellow carding under egregious behavior. But you aren't the only twisted one

[dmitch]

This is me conveying disgust

[JesseK]

So how exactly does Canada relate to Update #4? Or was this another thread hijack?

[Racer26]

I know that Canadians represented about 6% of teams in attendance at 2010 CMP. I counted them when I was making my post about that originally.

Based on Mark's numbers, that means roughly twice as many Canadian teams go to CMP than would be a fair representation. Furthermore, Canada has 2 regionals of its own, and I believe there is one in the works out on the west coast (Vancouver-area) to be started in the next few seasons. For a market share of 3% to be controlling 4.16% of the regional events (counted from the list on frclinks.com, subtracting CMP divisions, and MI districts), we're doing alright.

Also, of the teams that have won 3 regionals in the same year, fully 50% of the times this has happened, it was a Canadian team, and a Canadian team holds both the record for being the only team in FRC to do this twice, and the only 3peat regional winner to also win Championship in the same year:

51 (ex 47/65) (1998)
359 (2010)
1024 (2008)
1114 (2006, 2008, 2010)
1503 (2006)

NB: Edited for mistakes.