I can see this causing issues in qualifications if you somehow end up with multiple 30-point inside climbers on the same alliance. During elims however, you could remedy this by going with an outside climber (or two, or three) and (maybe) an inside climber. My team is planning on going up the outside to avoid conflict with other robots. I’m sure we will see the 3-robot 30-point climb at some point this year.
“Outside climbers” don’t automatically rectify the issue he’s talking about. His point is that if you’re dangling from a horizontal bar, then a large chunk of your robot is occupying a rather limited space inside of the pyramid. This is irrelevant of whether you climbed on the inside or the outside of the pyramid.
Sorry about not being specific, I meant a robot that climbs up the corner or other outside part in a way that doesn’t leave a large portion of the robot hanging inside.
Even I have not ascended the ultimate echelon of FIRST, after being on CD for WWWWWWWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYY too long (too many hours spent, I have only actually been looking at CD since 2011) , I have a good notion of who Car Nack is. (Reading the spotlighted posts is a great way to delve deep into CD history).
On another note, I could totally see a late divisional qualification or an Einstein, and definitely an IRI match, where this happens. MSC and MAR Championships are other great places where we can expect to see this. I do not doubt that there will be a 6 bot climb, but the question is, how late in the season will this be?
I would agree with this prediction, but not in the way most have taken it - <G30> could be the cause of this! If you have an overly aggressive defender, who tries to stop the members of an alliance from climbing, it could result in each member of the alliance being awarded the 30 pts. without actually having them make the full climb.
… Silly mobile devices, it cut out “G30” from my response!
Just out of curiosity, did this ever happen? I know it never happened in a match, but I was hoping to have it happen in a practice match or an offseason or something.
It hasn’t happened this year and I doubt it will. The most our team participated in was a double 30 point hang with 236 in a practice match on Archimedes. Also did a double 20 with 1831 at Pine Tree (5 more seconds and it would have been a double 30) and in a match at IRI 1334 hung for 30 and we got stuck on level 2.
I would like to remind you of a fact previously mentioned in this thread. The prestigious Car Nack did not say that each of the three robots on an alliance would achieve a level 3 climb, he said each robot would score 30 climb points. Each robot (team) on an alliance scores 30 points when just one robot gets a level 3 climb.
By my interpretaion of Car Nack’s 13-3 prediction, it was correctly predicted.
You don’t even have to go that far, Arkansas match 82 had 90 climb points awarded to 1421, 456, and 1939. See http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1258657&postcount=42
I stand informed. Thanks!
There is a difference between scoring 90 climbing points and receiving 90 climbing points through fouls. If a blue robot comes along and interferes with all 3 red robots preventing them from hanging giving red 90 climbing points it is completely different then three robots hanging for 30 points which was a challenging scenario a lot of people wondered if it would happen or was even possible. One is pretty easy to accomplish (but very illegal) and the other is extremely challenging.
Myself and possibly Jay included see this as three level 3 climbs which hasn’t happened yet.
Technically a robot fouling all three climbs grants each robot as scoring “all three robots on an alliance (scoring) 30 climbing points,” which makes Car Nack correct on a technicality, which I believe was the intent.
On another note: I believe Car Nack was 4/4 this year.