Lat’s say that you’re on the Blue Alliance and there’s 20 seconds left in the game. You need a red triangle to complete a logo for 36 points on your top row. There’s one lying in the opponents safe lane right next to your scoring rack.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v682/46auto/Forum%20Posts/tr.jpg
Do you grab the tube, take a 3 point penalty and score the 36 points?
Is this considered part of the game, or is any strategy that knowingly accepts a penalty considered “not GP” in FIRST?
Are you guarenteed to get the tube in on time if you grab it, but not if you don’t?
Is your alliance partner coming with one for you to use?
If you answered yes then no, I would say go for it. 
You obviously get more points than you lose, so why not?
Ohhh how diabolical
Its how would I say very Bill Bellicheck
In the spirit of FIRST and as the coach for my team I would avoid such a thing out of principle. Would never command my team to do something I knew to be illegal. I would rather win straight up and if I couldnt well then.
It is a very intresting hypothetical however. I could see where this is a very plausable scenerio.
Now I feel bad for saying “go for it”… 
Keep in mind that it is only worth 36 points if you have 3 ubertubes in the top row on the same grid (which is very impractical), and even without that piece, you still would have 12 of those points. Of course, even without any ubertubes, that last piece would give you 12 more points than you had before. If you were already losing and taking the penalty was your only way to win the match, then it would be worth it (neglecting any Gracious Professionalism considerations).
This is sorta like fouling an opponent in basketball during the last minute. Your opponent gets a few more points, but you still increase your chances of winning the game.
I would consider it more “strategical” than “unsportsmanlike” as long as the foul isn’t severe. You aren’t damaging or destroying an opponent’s robot, just stealing one of their game pieces (which isn’t really “theirs” according to the rules).
Dont feel bad. Everyone want to win despite what everyone claims. The competition the prospect of winning is what makes FIRST so exciting. However I have found that you sometimes learn more about yourself when you loss and when you win straight up fair and square it is that much sweeter.
It’s an opportunity cost. Penalties that don’t lead to yellow and red cards are simply costs to be factored in and are part of the game. It will cost you 3 points to have the opportunity to score 12 if it completes an Uber tube free logo on the top row. (3 points for the triangle and an additional 9 for doubling the row.) I don’t see how there is anything un-GP about it. It’s certainly much nicer than hitting some one with a weak gripper so hard in the middle of the field that they drop their tube, and then stealing it from them. :eek: That too however is just part of the game.
For me Gracious Professionalism is about helping other teams make their ideas work. We do everything we can to help other teams program, or lend them parts from our pit. On the field we play to win.
In a word, yes.
The point of the game is to hang as many logo pieces on the scoring grid as possible during the match (reference: The Manual, section 1.5). The objective is NOT necessarily to completely avoid getting any penalties ever.
Every rule has an associated penalty which asks you to assess the cost-vs-reward trade offs. A penalty is a consequence associated with an action taken during a game that has a “price” that is commensurate with the severity of the infraction. It is not a solid “never do this or we will condemn you to an eternity of ridicule” prohibition against the action. Sometimes the trade-off will work out such that the penalty associated with an action is outweighed by the net positive result associated with the action. In such cases, it is perfectly reasonable to take the penalty and the net positive result, and move on.
-dave
.
So, if we lose a match in which we hung more logo pieces because the other alliance won the minibot race, I can complain and say “but, part of the GDC said the point of the game was to hang as many logo pieces and didn’t say anything about outscoring your opponent…” 
He said the goal was to hang as many as possible, but he never said that you would win. So your complaints would be falling on deaf ears.
I am not part of the GDC.
Besides, The Manual says it (see Section 1.5), not me.
.
My bad on the GDC.
I not sure I agree that the Manual says the point is to hang as many logo pieces possible, but to maximize points their alliance’s score by placing logo pieces. Its a very minor difference…
When did that happen!?!?!
And, at least in the qualifying rounds, the object is also to get spotted by other teams. For example, a team with a great defense might not have a high enough w/l ratio to be an alliance head, but still be recruited heavily. For example, my team got yellowcarded :ahh: in qualification for “egrarious robot conduct” and we were one of the top picks for finals. Again, taking a penalty can HELP you if it makes other teams notice you. (Just for the record, the second robot we tipped was unintentional.)
Dave, I agree with you analysis of the situation, but one thing would keep me from getting the tube without speaking to the head ref first:
<T06> The Head Referee may assign a YELLOW CARD as a warning of egregious ROBOT or TEAM member behavior at the ARENA. A YELLOW CARD will be indicated by the Head Referee standing in front of the TEAM’S PLAYER STATION and holding a yellow card in the air after the completion of the MATCH. In the first MATCH that a TEAM receives a YELLOW CARD, it acts as a warning.
Would knowingly getting a penalty to gain an advantage during the match be classified as egregious?
I probably wouldn’t pick a team playing penalty-worthy defense consistently.
What is the “GP” difference between intentionally violating your opponents’ safe zone to retrieve a game piece, and intentionally violating your opponents’ safe zone to bump a robot that was trying to hang a critical, logo-completing game piece? How much more “egregious” is one than the other?
BTW, as I interpret <G32> as of Update 4, it would be legal to pick up a tube that was lying partially in the safe zone, as long as your robot didn’t break the plane and you were quick about it.
We only did this once, our robot tipped over 2 really top-heavy ones. just saying that it emphasized our traction, not that they picked us for our ability to tip others over. And we were by far the best defender.
When he posted on CD, at the very latest.
Remember, anything Dave (or Aidan, or any other known GDC associate) says that is not via an official channel (Manual, Update, Bill’s Blog, Q&A, etc.) is not an official GDC saying. So when he said that, he was perfectly correct in doing so.
I also remember that he wasn’t introduced with the GDC at the Kickoff. There are a number of reasons that could be, though, and the most likely is he’d already been introduced once.
I thought that since it had him and then “or any other known GDC associate” meant he was one. I guess thats why I’m confused on this matter as well.
Dave: I think I’m not the only one curious about the details of the parting, but I believe you’ve had your reasons for keeping it private.
Let’s all just let the man have his peace(now let us have ours when hint season comes around).
Hopefully that will stop this from becoming a 3 page discussion.