This was not meaningless nor momentary… It was strategic, and a strategic violation of the rule is a red card. Might be silly, but that’s the rule.
That… is horrifying…
I’m surprised that you’d get a card for that, seeing as it is clearly accidental and not strategic…
Looks like escalation to a red card was intended to be given with relation to power cube play…but…interpretation is fun.
G05.
Don’t overextend yourself. ROBOTS may not extend more than 16 in (41 cm). beyond their FRAME PERIMETER (see Figure 8-1). This rule doesn’t apply to a ROBOT fully within its PLATFORM ZONE during the ENDGAME.
Violation: FOUL. If strategic, (e.g. expansion results in scoring a POWER CUBE), RED CARD.
I’ve been staring at that GIF for 5 minutes and I still don’t see what everyone is referring to. The fact that the red robots tip sideways and “out”?
“e.g.” is not all inclusive. 870 was red carded for the same thing at LI2 for far less of an extension. It was strategic in that it allowed for their partner to climb in a far easier manner.
They drove outside the platform zone while hooked onto the bar, thus extending more than the 16 inch allowance.
One of the robots is attached to the rung via a hook and spooled-out cable. Their drive chassis partially exits the platform zone. Thus they are extended more than 16" beyond the frame perimeter while not fully contained within the platform zone.
I see the actual foul now, I thought the other robot tipped over and crashed outside of the zone. But no, there was 870(?) parked about half-way out of the zone. That is considerably more flagrant than the violations that earned red cards at NEDCMP.
the gif posted was 7226. in li2, 870 was red carded for the same thing.
I couldn’t see it from the gif either, so I looked up the match.
It’s more obvious if you watch the whole endgame period.
This is for elimination rounds.
- Auto must get scale and switch. Can not start out behind.
- The 12 cubes between the switch become very important. Short cycle time.
- Play some defense, trap robots using their portal. Extend their cycle time.
- Not how fast you are with cubes, it is where you place them and when.
- Scale bots need to get into a rhythm.
- Must have the ability to climb with a partner.
- The alliance needs to determine what team works what zone. Own that zone!
- Scoring levitate with 100 seconds or 4 seconds count the same. Not timing sensitive.
- NO DROPPED CUBES- touch it own it.
- Trust your partners ( Not in Quals)
This I have seen to be some of the most frustrating losses. So much time is lost due to dropped cubes.
Thank you for your kind comments on my “bad rectal-cranial inversion.” I’m sure the students you mentor look upon that highly, great example!
I’d wager your comment is arguably more “ungracious, unprofessional.”
The metric I used was cubes scored by the loosing alliance in the first finals match at DCMP (if there are divisions, division vs. division playoffs’ first match was considered the "first finals match) For non-district regions (in “contention”) the number of cubes scored by the loosing alliance in the first finals match of all regional matches were considered.
DISTRICTS:
Ontario: ONCMP F1:
Cubes in scale by loosing alliance: 12
**New England: **NECMP F1
Cubes in scale by loosing alliance: 11
**Indiana: **INCMP F1
Cubes in scale by loosing alliance: 11
**Michigan: ***
MSC F1
Cubes in scale by loosing alliance: 3
MSC F2
Cubes in scale by loosing alliance: 8
**for Michigan I have included F1 and F2, a significantly lower number of cubes were scored in the scale by the loosing alliance in F1. *
REGIONALS:
Arizona North: AZFL F1
Cubes in scale by loosing alliance: 2
Central Valley Regional CAFR F1
Cubes in scale by loosing alliance: 6
Silicon Valley Regional CASJ F1
Cubes in scale by loosing alliance: 7
Colorado Regional CODE F1
Cubes in scale by loosing alliance: 10
Now, why do I consider this metric meaningful, and some limitations of it:
I find it useful because it shows competitiveness at the top level, (how many cubes do we need to score in the scale to win) it is a measure of the capabilities of the “second best alliance” in playoffs, and how capable it is.
This metric fails if teams abandon the scale for other objectives. It makes the assumption that the strategy for teams includes trying to out-scale the other alliance. This seemed like the plan to me in the matches listed here, however, if someone from behind the glass in these matches can comment on specific strategy, that would be great.
I’ve added McMaster (Week 6) data to address concerns related to week 7 vs. week 6 competition.
McMaster University Event ONHAM F1
Cubes in scale by loosing alliance: 12
Ontario does have the highest 3 Cube Scale auto concentration among teams for any given region, as commonly agreed - in fact double that of any other region… Now I agree that these “3 Cube Scale autos” are somewhat subjective, but I’m sure most people can agree with me here.
Ontario has grown so much in the past couple years. The combination of 4917 and 3683 taking down the perennial powerhouses of 2056 and 1241 at Waterloo shows that. The ONCMP finalist alliance of 5406 and 4917 are not your perennial powerhouses, and both of these teams are 5 years old, or younger.
JamesCH95, if you disagree with me here, you are more than welcome to count cubes with me at Championships, us folk with “bad rectal-cranial inversion” might be awful at such tasks.
A 1-cube difference is about 13 inches, not “miles.” 
My goal was to show that while Ontario is superior in the aforementioned metric, it also has the strongest concentration of 3 cube scale auto teams, (as in more than double other regions) all of which we can call “highly competitive,” reflecting the strength of our growing top tier.
Absolutely!
Once an Alliance gets in the lead for their Switch and the Scale, a defensive strategy can help avoid the “Pile Power Cubes on the Scale” race…
Gaining control of the opposing Alliance’s Switch adds to the aggravation and opposing force dilution. I think we will see some of the best and some of the worst shine in this aspect of the matches.
If teams go into the “Pile Power Cubes on the Scale” mode, orchestration between Alliance robots is definitely primordial…
I don’t think we will see very many 3 robot climbs at Champs. I think everyone has understood the importance of achieving the Levitate, climbing with 2 robots, leaving a robot to wreack havock in the opposing Alliance to the very end of the game.
Yes. Zone assignments will be critical, with good communications during the match to adapt to the situation (for example, moving the Switch/Vault robot to the opponent’s Switch/Vault zone to play interference of take/maintain ownership of the opposing Switch).
No, as long as Levitate is used in time for the endgame climb.
This will make or break an Alliance in all matches. Same thing with cube delivery. A cube that drops from the scale, or even worst, takes down another cube as it falls off the Scale will be a match killer.
Crossing the Auto Run goal line will be critical to gain the Auto points, and the RP in quals. This should not be an issue in Quals, even with Rookie teams which should have their Auto Run code figured out for Champs.
Second, everyone must stick to the strategy and not try to “steal the show” from other Alliance members. But, no one will not be surprised if some teams pull that stunt off strategically in Quals.
Similarly, each robot has to execute flawessly during endgame.
The “miles” difference is in the quality of the mid and bottom tier. Over 50% of teams in Ontario are at DCMP. Roughly 30% of Ontario teams make eliminations at DCMP. Compare that to just over 10% of teams making elims at DCMP in NE and 20% making elims at MSC. By all means Ontario DCMP elims should be the most watered down DCMP ever but it’s not. Seriously just watch it, we have rookie teams with consistent multi cube autos who don’t even make elims.
If you consider the size of our district it’s obvious that the** average** team in Ontario is better than the average team anywhere else.
I’m really looking forward to the “Battle of the Scale Auto Run” at Champs!!!
If an Alliance can’t reliably place 3 cubes on the Scale during Auto Run, they will be severely handicaped, IMHO.
It doens’t only depend on the amount of cubes placed. Where the cubes are placed, position, and time also matter.
I remember when we were this cocky in Michigan… Mostly because it was Saturday…
In all seriousness, you guys have a lot to be proud of. Ontario has a rich history of teams that have been very strong for many many years.
What I learned:
Its important to try to have at least 1 more cube on the scale than your opponent for most of the match, but I think that is the same lesson as most events I have been to. What was interesting is the multitudes of ways that objective was achieved.
Ontario people need to chill! We have a lot to be proud of, but let’s see how Detroit goes before we make any comparisons against other regions. Then we can have some real, head-to-head data.
On topic, we learned that defence is almost required out of the third bot. I don’t think you will see an Einstein alliance with a third bot that is scoring > 50% of the time.