Some really good examples are given. It looks like FIRST is discouraging a defensive strategy some, making offense more important. Yeah!
Everyone should go read them.
i can’t get to it, i get this error, could someone please post a alternative link to it
**Multiple Choices**
The document name you requested (/2005comp/Updates/Team_Update_04.pdf) could not be found on this server. However, we found documents with names similar to the one you requested. Available documents:
i have gotten reports of many people getting a 300 error: Multiple choices. The problem is your computer isnt refreshing the page and your going to cache. If you clear your internet cache and temp files you should be fine and able to see the update. Or in the adobe reader i think you can just enter the web address into the open path and it will launch it.
That’s pretty useful. Thanks. It does seem that they’re discouraging defense this time around. A thirty point penalty? So, if you interfere with the loading of a three-point tetra, then you automatically lose? That just doesn’t seem right. :mad:
It really is part of the challenge. Teams have to make sure that their robots are nimble enough and that their drivers are trained enough so that they don’t accidentally get a 30 point penalty.
Just pretend the opponent’s loading zones are lava (at least when your opponent is loading in them).
30 points… three rows… 10 tetras… wow. I guess the point is STAY AWAY from opponents loading zones. I think with 6 'bots on the field, this might be a real issue. What about this situation:
BLUE01 has just capped a goal on the red side of the field. BLUE01 now heads back to its side of the field. As BLUE01 drives down the side of the field, RED01 heads for its loading zone. Contact is made and BLUE01 is in the red loading zone (or pushed into the red loading zone).
From what I understand, blue would receive a 30-point penalty.
How will referees determine if contact was incidental? How will they tell if you were intending to block access to a zone or simply couldn’t get out of the way?
How difficult and how much of a risk will it be to travel to the far side of the field?
I could understand the rule and guidelines if the penalty was 10 points, but I believe a 30-point penalty will be just about impossible to overcome - especially if you weren’t intending to block a loading zone at all.
I’ll throw in a little more detail i got from FIRST at kickoff about why such a steep penalty. They are discouraging incidents in the loading zones partially due to it being a personal hazard. At all the Loading Zones, human player or ‘automated’, there will be people right there while the robots are interacting potentially ‘outside’ of the field. If a robot has a tetra in their grip on a 6’ arm and is hit on the side and winds up hitting the human player or field reset crew member whos loading the automated zone, it can be a very dangerous situation. This should also be pointed out, a 30 point penalty can sway a whole match easily. So its as easy as if a robot is headed to or is in the loading zone, keep away from them, by doing this you will keep all the people around the field safe and keep yourself from being penalized.
This should be one of the rules where we dont ask how will the refs call it if its intentional or not. Thus should be a rule that is taken very seriously and hopefully followed strictly by all teams.
More specifically, stay away from robots in their loading zone who have not yet acquired their tetras. It is imperative that teams do this to ensure the safety of the human players/field attendants. However, once they’ve obtained a tetra, the human player has returned to his pad (if applicable), and the team wishes to leave their zone, you don’t HAVE to let them do so:
Example 6
Robot “RED01” is in the red alliance loading zone, is already loaded with a tetra, and is waiting for a path to clear to the center goal before moving in to the rest of the field. Robot “BLUE01” approaches the loading zone, and blocks RED01’s attempts to leave the loading zone and score on the center goal. The robots come into contact several times while BLUE01 blocks RED01. No penalty is assessed to either alliance, provided BLUE01 acts within the limitations of <G21> that prohibit pinning for more than 10 seconds. RED01 is not retrieving a tetra, so no violation of <G15> has occurred.
So as FIRST currently has defined it, the situation outlined in Example 6 is a valid defensive option for teams. However, I agree with Mike, you better be dang sure humans are safely out of the picture before employing it. If your robot contacts an opposing robot in their LZ that’s disabled because their human player hasn’t yet returned to his/her pad, you deserve every bit of that 30-point penalty.
That just doesn’t seem right. :mad: