CHS Hampton Roads, Finals 2 was just uploaded to YouTube (thanks Triple Helix :D).
In it, our human player scores 2 boulders over position 2’s Ramparts. If timing were slightly better, there probably would have been three over Position 2. In the video, boulders are at the top of the screen from the left side.
Does anyone else have video of this happening with Ramparts or other defenses? It was a surprising thing to be able to do in a live match, and it’s not exactly something the average alliance expects to be a consideration when selecting defenses.
Whenever our drive team was choosing defenses for the opposing alliance to go through, we always kept this possibility in mind. We made sure in all of our matches that the number two slot was occupied by a Cheval de Frise or one of the category C defenses. I don’t remember any matches at Tech Valley in which we could have employed this technique, so other teams must have been looking out for it as well. From watching other events, it seems that a decent number of teams have picked up on this, and it will become an even more rare occurrence as the season goes on.
Nonetheless, an impressive feat to behold. Curving the Boulder isn’t the easiest thing to do. Good job on the technique!
The strategy overall is very tricky for the HP to pull off - if it glances off of a robot then it’s a tech foul. We came very close to one because the HP had to push it out quickly due to the incoming scores - so he didn’t notice 2363’s bot right there. We also told the head ref we would try this strategy in that match so the refs wouldn’t automatically presume the robots were kicking them across.
I also just realized we selected Ramparts for Position 2 that match… whoops…
We do have some video of our human player doing this over the rock wall, moat, ramparts, rough terrain, and even the Cheval. It takes practice but it works well.
At one point he was 3 inches from the goal. Look at the timer around 67 seconds left (match timer not video time) and you can see that boulder coming agonizingly close to the goal:
We discussed the rules about it on this thread as well:
This was a strategy my team (228) planned to implement at our Week 1 competition, and we tried to keep it reasonably quiet, but from the very first matches of the day teams were insisting on putting Category A / C defenses in Position 2 to block this strategy. I assumed that this was a well known strategy throughout FRC considering how instantly ubiquitous this defensive scheme was, but I guess some isolated events lack teams who tried it.
When I first brought this up with my group, they told me it was impossible to do, that you might only see it happening on accident. I’m glad to see that the CD community knows that this is a legitimate strategy and that it should be defended against as so.
The Head Referee at Alamo deemed this action illegal, while referencing the rulings made at previous competitions regarding rolling a boulder under the low bar when it had no fabric.
Or a referee could just make up a rule declaring it illegal. I’m not trying to be sarcastic here - this is a somewhat regular occurrence this year, and I’m not sure why it isn’t being talked about more. Referees made up rules about rolling boulders under the low bar when the fabric is damaged, most notably, but have made up other rules as well at scattered regionals. The game changes from event to event, and there’s always a chance that an “oddball” strategy might just be made illegal on a whim. Refs aren’t doing this maliciously or thoughtlessly; they’re doing it to allow the game to be played a certain way, but it isn’t always predictable. It’s something teams have to be prepared for now, I guess.
G40: A ROBOT may not cause a BOULDER to move from the NEUTRAL ZONE into the opponent’s COURTYARD unless:
A. the ROBOT contacts the BOULDER within OUTER WORKS, and
B. the ROBOT completes its CROSSING (e.g. doesn’t completely back out of the OUTER WORKS into the NEUTRAL ZONE)
Or they could simply change the G40 rule from a ROBOT to an ALLIANCE. One simple word. Basically the robots can still hold open every defense that is not the low far flap from my interpretation. They did not anticipate good bowlers as human players getting the ball over the second and third defenses. I have seen videos where a human player rolled a ball under the low bar fabric on accident as a robot on the opposing alliance passes under it. An opposing alliance’s robot is not clarified in that ruling and they did not get a foul. Honestly if a human player can get their timing down they deserve to get the ball over because it is not like any of that is easy.
Cool - it’s a very tricky strategy that requires good timing, but it’s something to investigate considering most drawbridge CROSSES do not cycle a ball.
