I have never been to a competition before the Arizona regional, and the interaction between robots was pretty much what I expected to see. Aim High is as much a wrestling match as it is a ball game…
I understand robots being tipped over the ram but that wasn’t the case. When a team is consistently pushing over non tippy robots in non tippy situations something is wrong there. That team is perfectly aware of what they are doing and they refuse to tone down their pushing/shoving/ramming.
I’m going to play Devil’s Advocate here for a moment. When an allaince is playing defense the robots that they are controlling are on the opposite end of the field, and as such they can’t always see what’s happening…especially if they have 5 other robots running around the field blocking their line of sight.
So granted some tipping may look a little suspicious, but in actuality the driver might not know they have another team wobbly on the ramp. And it would foolish for a driver to stop playing defense because they can’t see 100% of what’s happening. They owe it to their teammates, their allaince partners, and most importantly themselves to go out on the field and give it their all. If that means that they have to play hard defense in order to win, that’s what they’re going to do.
But if it was being pushed over constantly, in the flat of the field, wouldn’t it be a tippy design? A pure defense bot at Buckeye was 2nd seed as of Friday and ended up 9th overall after selections.
First i feel for you. I felt great about our robot this year, Atlanta would be nice, but i was just hoping to get into the playoffs. At buckeye we were hit with hardware problem after hardware problem that ended up making us have no auto mode and no camera aiming. But our drive team did a kickbutt job, and even with all the problems we ended the day with a 5-6-0, sitting in 25th spot and with what we felt was an impressive show of our robots abilities, great defense and a good shooter, even if we were getting pushed around a bit.
We didn’t get picked during alliance selection. i couldn’t believe it, since we played well, just had some problematic alliances. 2 lower seed teams got picked over us. Was i disappointed? Yes, i went back down to the pit and just looked at our robot wondering what we had missed. I wanted so badly to get out there one more time just so the rest of the team could go out there to the sideline and cheer there heart out one more time.
But this is the nature of FIRST, In games like this defenses is key. Will team 1278 ever build a pure defense bot? i sure hope not, because there is no fun in that. Half the fun in first is taking the hardest goal of the game and trying your hardest to do it. But FIRST is not about having every team build a robot capable of the hardest task, and defense will always play a key role.
the proof of a design is in its performance. If you push a robot by its bumper zone, and it tips over, then it IS a tippy robot.
if the other teams had arms that came out and pushed above the bumper zone, then they are breaking the rules.
If a team pushes a robot and it keeps tipping over, what is the logical conclusion? That robot should be allowed to sit infront of the goal and shoot all day long, untouched?
or that team should find a way to stop its bot from tipping over so much (modify the robot)?
This is part of the ‘paying your dues’ that I was talking about. You had a notion of how the game would be played this year, and its a bit rougher on the field than you expected.
The refs did not call any fouls, therefore what you saw IS the game this year.
now its up to you: will you modify your understanding of how the game is be played (this year and in the following years), or will you hang onto your previous notions of how you think the game should have been played, and in the process conclude that FIRST is screwed up?
I can understand well the highs and the lows of competition, just as you describe them, Chris27. I am the parent mentor of a team. I think all teams go through the process you describe at one time or another. Our team has been through a couple of rough years in transition from one major sponsor to another. Many teams are in the same boat. We played in our one and only compeition this year and we didn’t make it to the finals, BUT we were winners. After our major sponsor pulled out on September 23 we had no money. Most of our team quit, but the 3 remaining players worked their buns off fundraising and with the gracious help of other teams and some nice people, we were able to register. 2 weeks into the build season is when we found an engineer and simultaneously got a check that allowed us to buy parts. Our kids worked hard, too. They were there every day after school. There was only 3 or 4 kids and the engineer, but they did it. They built a robot and I am proud to say that our kids did all the work. Our engineer took their design and he did alot of the cutting and machining, but our kids designed the robot and they put it together and tested it. It might not have been the best or the most pleasing to the eye, but they got it done and they competed well. They really came together as a team, supporting each other and they placed in the top 20 of the 63 robots in our regional. The scoring was messed up for the first 14 matches of our regional and that messed everyone up, but the point it that we made it there, we learned a ton, and we overcame adversity through sheer tenacity and by the gracious professionalism of other teams that helped us along the way. I am so proud of our kids and I hope they are, too. That is what FIRST is all about. Disappointment is a part of it, but overcoming that moment of regret and seeing pride in all you’ve accomplished will help you to look forward to next year with excitement and anticipation. I would encourage you to try another regional. If for no other reason, than to get to meet other teams and people and see a new place. Good Luck!
If I can get a hold on some of the video we took I will post it. It should reveal more about the intentions of the opposing team. And btw you can tip over any robot no matter how well it is designed.
I’m gonna have to argue with you there…especially now since there’s a rule (forgive me, I forget the rule number) where all sides of a robot MUST be within 10 degrees of vertical. So this year it’s essentially a flat face pushing against a flat face. Unlike in years past where teams used wedges for defense (although some teams used them for offense) they would sit there and score with no worries about being pushed due to the fact that if another team tried to push them they would ride up on the wedge.
I digress, at NJ the most dominant team, IMO, was 25. if I remember correctly I only saw them twice (and I saw every match since I was Game Announcer) the two times they tipped were from getting caught on a ball going up the ramp, and going forward on the ramp and going backward very quickly which tipped them over.
They were being shoved around ALL REGIONAL LONG, and no robot was able to tip them. Add to that that they had one of the lowest shooters in the game, and they managed to come away as #1 seed and eventual Regional Champions is just a testament to the design of their robot, and their ability to adapt.
Hey 1625. I havent read the whole thread but you guys had an awesome bot. We really wanted to be on your alliance for finals but we were picked one team ahead of you. I was dissappointed that you guys didnt make it to the finals because we were really looking forward to your excellant competition.
Our shooting mechanism had serious issues, but our robot didn’t. Despite the fact that it was nearly 60 inches tall, we never tipped over in competition. The reason we didn’t is that we intentionally sacrificed some functionality (big hopper for one) to achieve a really low center of gravity. Our superstructure is narrow. Motors are mounted below where they are needed and drive belts and chains go up to the mechanism they are powering. We had an average 6WD drivetrain, but our CG was about two inches above the top of our wheels. We could cruise up and down the ramp at nearly any angle, and didn’t worry about tipping. Everything on the robot was influenced by making weight and keeping CG low.
We ended up being a strong defensive force even though we intended to be a top shooter. The only thing separating good defenders from poor ones is the drivetrain and chassis. In the matches I saw, nearly all of the robots that tipped over had top-heavy designs. Most would tip themselves over just driving up the ramp at anything other than an optimal angle. Those of you who feel like you were tipped over unfairly can usually look at your design for the reason.
I understand where chris27 is coming from. I agree that defense is a big part of the first game and I understand that you need build a robust robot, However some of the defense I saw was a little rediculus. And I am pretty sure that it was not what FIRST had in mind. Our robot was forced up our opponents ramp by two of the opposing alliances robots. Our robot was being pushed striat up the ramp while our robot was at a 45 degree angle to the ramp. Our robot doesnt go up the ramp like that. When we got to our robot after the match the aluminum mount for the caster had been bent so badly that it wasnt touching the ground anymore, by about half an inch. 
I agree that there should be defense and robots hitting, but I think that some of it gets out of hand and it is clear when it does.
That is an amazing achievement. After putting so much work into a robot you want to see it go as far as it goes. I would have like to have been beaten by robots that were superior to ours at nationals so that we could have learned so much more about what makes a winning bot and areas that we could improve. (It would be nice to win nationals too but thats hoping for way to much ;)) My dissapointment comes because our stop was so sudden and the great memories we have had this year had to end with such screwed over feeling
I have read the posts, and have come to the conclusion that we are all basing our posts on “not-so-thought-out” reasons.
By saying “that’s not what FIRST wanted”, you are, in essence, putting words
into their mouths. FIRST designed the game so that it has a defensive, an offensive, and a free for all period. There are equal amount of times for defense and offense. If FIRST Hadn’t wanted robots that could push other robots sideways, then they wouldn’t have made the game like they did.
As was said before, there are Two strategies that a team could take:
The “We score 100 points with our shooter and that beats the other teams 99”,
And the “We score 10 points with our ball dumper, and that beats the other teams Zero because we didn’t let them score.”
Just because teams (Ours included) chose the latter, doesn’t mean that they aren’t following the spirit of FIRST. They built their robot to play the game how they thought would work best.
The winners at Pitt Had TWO pushers and ONE shooter, meaning that the Pushers’ game strategy works just as well as the shooters’. This in itself proves that Both strategies work for the game this year, and because they both work… they are both EXACTLY what FIRST wanted.
P.S. I grouped Dumpers in with pushers… just for this post, I swear 
The “We score 100 points with our shooter and that beats the other teams 99”,
This requires a lot more innovation, time, and effort. Anyone can build a pusher, but it requires inovation to score.
Heck you given all the instructions and parts to build a pusher. Where is the fun/skill in that?
actually, the winners at Pitt had one dumper one pusher and one shooter,
and unfortunately our alliance that also had one dumper, one shooter, and one pusher was not given the chance to play them in the finals, due to many questionable cuircumstances.
As the mentor and coach of 909, the team that picked 1625 as well as 1451, I can understand the frustration on the part of Chris. There was a definite change in the play of the game during the final three rounds than either of our teams (909/1625) had experienced in the previous day and a half. During these matches our robot sustained more “dings” than during 12 qualifying rounds. I wish I had taken before and after pictures. Much of this was due to the structure of the opposing alliance. They were all short robots that did not shoot particularly well. Their only chance of winning was to harass 909 & 1625 and they did once heck of a job. Previously we had been able to spin off of one defending robot in order to free our robot up for a shot. While we were able to spin off a defender a couple of times we were only met by another. The third match between the two alliances proved this as the strategy was for 1451 to guard the right side and for 909 to guard the left to allow 1625 to get off their shots. It just didn’t work. Hopefully in the next few days we will get these matches up on our website. After reviewing them I can’t complain about the game play. It was rough, but every hit was consistent with what was being allowed.
1625: You all had an excellent scoring machine and I was very impressed with your robot.
1451: Your drivers did a great job of trying to get 909 & 1625 open.
939: Great defense and nice job of getting free to score points.
1208: Your autonomous scoring never let us play the game we wanted to.
650: You played us the closest of any team there. I’m surprised we won our previous two encounters. Your aggressiveness was hard to overcome and with your alliance partners it was just too much.
You ARE beginning to be borderline offensive… We went to Pittsburgh with a shooter on our robot and a base that pushed any team at the regional sideways. We decided to take the shooter off because defense worked WAY better for us.
There is JUST AS MUCH fun/skill put into my and everybody else’s’ robot as there is in yours.
You are not given all the instructions to build an Exceptional base; you are given all the parts/instructions to build an acceptable base. We built an Exceptional base, and we are TRULY PROUD OF IT. Just because other teams accomplished more than yours did (for whatever reason), doesn’t mean that you have to be bitter to the point of insult to EVERY other team in FIRST.
Most people on my team have 110+ hours put into our robot, and I believe that we tried just as hard as you did to make a winning one, so don’t go saying that nobody tried as hard as you.
Some others thought otherwise, so I’m opening this again as I said I would.
Chris, just because your robot lost doesn’t mean that it was a bad robot. I haven’t seen it play. But as everyone else has said, FIRST did design the game to have defense, a lot of it. They tried to make it so that teams could do multiple things. The winning teams of almost every regional so far were made up of robots with different strategys that shooting coupled with shooters. Furthermore, to me, it sounds as tho your team failed, like many others, to put on bumpers. Bumpers are extremely valuble pieces of hardware. Teams with them are definatly the least prone to damage. Therefore, take this to heart. Your robot was beaten by a team that had recognized your threat and neutralized it. AIM HIGH is a fun, exciting game. However, could you imagine it without robots d-ing eachother up, pushing it around. It wouldn’t be too much fun for anyone.
To respond to these comments, I must say that you are bordering on crossing the line. To say that you were never able to test it in the conditions it was designed for and that you were focused on Atlanta before winning shows disrespect for the other teams at your regional, all of whom spent the same amout of time that you did. Your robot was designed for AIM HIGH. Your robot played AIM HIGH. Therefore, the conditions it was designed for were validated.
I hate to take anything away from any of the teams that attend the StL regional, but it is generally one of the weaker regionals. Founded on rookie teams in 2002. Generally dominated by the Baxter Bomb Squad (16). A rookie team has a really good chance at winning that regional. I don’t know where this post is going… so I should probably end it right now. I didn’t read this entire thread either. I have a short attention span.