2005 FRC Team Update 14

Didn’t see a thread on it yet, so i figured I’d post it.

The 2005 FRC Team Update 14 is now available on the Team Updates page or directly at Team Update 14

Enjoy …

Looks like Andy got the baseball analogy spot on.

Guess this means the currnet YMTC Is actually valid.

Wasn’t that Jason?

14 Updates in a whole build season. That’s impressive. You can’t deny FIRST isn’t doing something right… there have been fewer total updates, with more put up on time, and with less significant changes than ever before.

I guess Andy was referring to Jason when he mentioned the baseball analogy, so yes. I did not catch that. Strangely, I didn’t connect “wise guy” and Jason, although that seems perfectly clear now. :smiley:

I think a team meber said it best when I explained the rule to him…
him — "you are kidding right? what? you aren’t?

A suggested way to solve the problem – Have zip ties hanging down, or string to contact the loading zone"

… what does this do…??? it’s obvious to me that cuting 20 pieces of 1 inch string protect all field attendents and all the viewers of Nasa Tv who see robtos will frilly things hanging off the front of robots…

If first is going to do this… I suggest they put a pressure pad conencted to a light that turns on if you are on teh loading zone…
Otherwise imagine this…
Team blue1 is clearly not on the loading bay… but they aren’t going to get a penalty… they proceed to pick up a tetra from the auto loading bay… team red1 notices and slams them at 12fps… Team red gets a 30 point penalty…
But why? Because the ref had enough common sense to make more sense of a rule that has little… but because of that… he must give the penalty to red.
Imagine another ref that doesn’t penalize red… must he then penalize blue?
Who knows what happens… FIRST really needs to rethink this –

And the baseball analogy… when a baseball player is on a base he just sits there… he goes to the base to avoid being tagged out…
When a robot goes to a loading zone… he doesn’t just sit there (auto loading zone) he attempts to perform a task… the baseball analogy is just irrelevant

So here is my analogy… My fiance calls me… I’m in another girls house!!!
She asks if I’m at her sisters house… I say no… only because I jump up in the air (I’m not touching her hosue… ergo I’m not in/on it

</rant> I guess I just have a problem with things not making sense
Post your thoughts pls :stuck_out_tongue:

ya know what here is my response, and everyone can take it for what its worth, its a game, it has rules play by the rules, or don’t, **BUT **if you don’t want to play by the rules prepare to deal with the results, i think i say this 200,000 times a season but may as well make this my second for 2005 season, THE REFS ARE ONLY HUMAN THEY CANNOT SEE EVERYTHING THAT IS GOING ON. so yes there will be mistakes, and yes there will be “Bad calls” but ya know what deal with it, THIS IS LIFE if you are that worried about the medal guess what you get one every year anway (participation medals), i don’t want to make it seem like i am just going off on you this is just somthing i have been wanting to say for a while

Thats my rant, take it for what its worth

With all my respect

I hate these methods of logic…
1st… yes it is a game… FIRST is a blast it’s the ‘hardest fun you can have’
I think we can all agree that the atmosphere at a first competition is something out of this world. But think of it honestly and not try to appeal to the popular mass on this forum… and how almost everyone feels… If you play any sport… are involved in any game… or hobby… that has a deadline… and you teach/learn/improve/work your hardest – that is if you made goals – and you meet your deadline… it becomes a little more than a game… everyone on this forum is lying if they respond with " no we just want to have fun " it’s not actually about how well we do… I think you can see where this is going…

2nd… “live by the rules”… extreme correlation… Blacks and both women should have just accepted their fate… why speak out for reason, why try to educate the masses… same with the jews… they should have submitted to their german ‘elite’… Live by the rules or just leave… Just because I express extreme distaste for something doesn’t mean I hate the system… you speak out to improve… this is becoming another rant…

3rd…People make mistakes… I think this is the basis of my argument. IF first is to maintain the rule… there will be much confusion and many more bad calls during the season… I agree completly with you that people make mistakes… but they can make significantly fewer mistakes with more defined rules. In my previous post I gave a very possible event that can happen that will make no sense when ruled. How would you rule it?

I agree with Lavery when he says we shouldn’t act like lawyers. But the way the rule is written it is black and white – you must be touching. BUt the way the rule is inforced they have said is grey " don’t attract attention to yourself". So what is one to do. The rules clearly says you shouldn’t, the rulemakers almost say it’s ok. Not all refs will act the same. If anything they need to relook at the rule and define it more clearly one way or another. Because I know the whole forum will be up in arms if one regional busts everyone for it… and another doesn’t… or if both happen at the same regional… It just needs to be more definate, that’s all

I think you miss the point of the analogy. It doesn’t matter if you have your entire body covering the base; you aren’t safe unless you’re actually touching it. The loading zone is designed as a safety zone so that robots don’t injure nearby field attendants and human players. The standardized way to ensure that a robot is actually in the zone is to make sure that something is touching the zone. The reason it must be part of the base or drive train is to fulfill the requirement of <G12> that the loading zone not be used as a perpetual safety zone, much as a baseball player cannot attach a string to second base, and then waltz over to third. If your body is touching the base, you’re safe. If not, you’re free game. The baseball analogy is quite pertinent.

I think my friend says it better than I do

StealingShrimp (10:05:24 PM): “Imagine in baseball if the runner just had to be over the base to be safe?”
StealingShrimp (10:05:31 PM): that is First’s new statement
XXXXXXXX (10:05:46 PM): thats completely different
XXXXXXXX (10:05:49 PM): Humans are all the same
XXXXXXXX (10:06:01 PM): so its a level playing field

therefor I ask you… how does being on the zone protect the field attendednts anymore than being over the zone… how does tying zipties to your robot protect the field attendednts… I don’t believe I’m missing the point, but maybe there is something I and some other individuals aren’t seeing

blink I don’t even know how to respond to that.

It doesn’t. However, they need a concrete rule so that reffing isn’t as subjective. We have a tetra stand that extends maybe 18" from the front of our robot. Could we hang that over the loading zone, and have that count? What if we had a 10’ structure cantilevered out there? Maybe we could put our arm in the 3D space above the triangle. Would that count? Since 1/11/05, FIRST has removed all question of what is counted as “in the loading zone”: you must be touching, the part that touches has to be either part of your 28x38 base, or part of the drive train, and the refs have to be able to see what is touching. At competition, there should be NO question as to whether or not a team is in the loading zone.

The problem i have with the rule is the absolute heavy-handed arbitration with which the rule was administered. It was as if they recognized a gray area in the rules, and instead of it being decided on a case-by-case basis by the refs, which would have its own set of inconsistencies, they quickly released a rule, AFTER ship, that has very different implications for different sized robots.

Edit: I didn’t realize it had to be part of the drivetrain/chassis. This makes my point even stronger.

Personally, I think it would’ve been much more appropriate to simply leave the situation to the refs to decide. This rule is… poorly planned.

the “xxxx” that collmando removed from the conversation is me.

Let me explain. I knew that he understood so i didn’t articulate it very well in the conversation.

The baseball analogy doesn’t fit, because in sports the only “device” you have on the playing field is a human. Now of course there is a measure of natural variation in the human species, but it is MUCH less than the variation in the size and shapes of robots. Since the variation in humans is so low, pretty much any rule you make is going to affect everyone the same way, and therefore be a fair rule, more or less.

When your players are robots which run the gamut in terms of length, width, height, drivetrain, grasping mechanisms, etc, a rule such as the one that they’ve passed will affect the different robots in wildly different ways.

That was my point, anyway.

as it is, i think this rule would’ve been fine if it had been released a reasonable amount of time BEFORE ship… But this late in the game is definitely NOT the time to be changing the rules so significantly.

I never suggested that having an arm over the surface would put you in…
when the comeptition came out… I assumed this along with many others… you should be at the zone… covering the zone … not teathered to the zone… i

–quote jgannon --The loading zone is designed as a safety zone so that robots don’t injure nearby field attendants and human players.

Originally Posted by Collmandoman
therefor I ask you… how does being on the zone protect the field attendednts anymore than being over the zone… how does tying zipties to your robot protect the field attendednts… I don’t believe I’m missing the point, but maybe there is something I and some other individuals aren’t seeing

Originally posted by Jgannon
It doesn’t.


I completly agree with you about attachign the string analogy to the loading zone. ones drivebase makes more sense for their method of play – and safety

but with all that you said… none of it followed my argument… why must we touch it? Sure FIRST says we have to… but why? (if it’s not for safety, and it’s not being used for a perpetual safety zone[which it isn’t]-- if the drivetrain is overlapping)

if you were to use the long configuration of the kit bot drivetrain… there is a possibility that you can touch the wall and not the zone… now can you tell me that is fair… .
I mean honestly… is this not registering with other people? YOU CAN BE TOTALLY UP TO THE WALL ABOUT TO GRAB A TETRA AND NOT BE IN THE LOADING ZONE.

Simple solution… refs must look always to see if you are touching… or install a pressure pad… or change the rule to you projection onto the surface makes you in the loading zone DEFINE THE RULE MORE CLEARLY, explain how it will ALWAYS be ruled –

the pressure pad wouldn’t help if you were a wide bot, as you said. If there’s no contact, there’s no pressure.

the only way i see that it makes sense is to have it be somewhat subjective, at this point. If the rule was instated at or soon after kickoff, then teams could’ve accounted for it. But now, if there’s a problem with it, too bad, we’re at a disadvantage at no fault of our own… which i think is the very definition of “unfair.”

I’ve asked this in a couple of different threads, and I don’t yet fully understand. What rule has changed after 1/11/05?

none. pardon my misaprehension, i did think it was a recent rule change. But regardless, even though it was a rule change a while ago, when did any of us find out about it?

The decision was posted on 1/11/05. Important changes are in the team updates that are sent out twice a week. The updates also encourage teams to keep up on the Q&A, since it contains information that the manual missed. The ruling was widely distributed before anyone started building a robot.

From the other thread about this topic:


This may seem like a weird justification, but then how did WE not know about it? We have two or three members that are pretty active on chief delphi (or used to be before some bannage occured), we have a mentor who checks the site all the time, etc. Did we just not pick up on it?

With all this being true… the rule was strengthened only recently to include more ambiguity and confusion amoung teams… Most assumed as LAVERY has said don’t acty like LAWYERS… realize what the rule wants and agree with it…
ok… so there is a triangle… you need to touch it? no make it obvious you are within it and grab a tetra… that’s what it means to say… it is just as safe… it’s not cheating… and not touching the zone doesn’t affect my score/other teams score in any way
We know what the rule is intended to mean… why is it soooo imperative that we touch the zone… it doesn’t promote safety… or break rules… or give an unfair advantage… if you fcan say anything… it would be UNGP to give a penatly for being over the zone and not touching it… because we know the spirit of the rule…
so… if somebody can explain why… do so
don’t say “first says so that’s why” there is a reason to every other rule in that manual… think about this before you respond and say… just live with it it’s what they say

boldest statement of the day… I don’t think Lavery intended for it to be like this – because it doesn’t follow logic – maybe that will get him to give his 2cents :slight_smile: