New NZ Driver Practice Method

haha, never saw that before
and are we talking about the ball or barrel? (or both?)
ill have to try it again on monday too check that out in person

Well it looks like both to me from the angle given… But the barrel looks pretty definitely outside, it’s just the ball which is a bit hard to tell from the picture :stuck_out_tongue:

Yeah I forgot that they have to be fully within the outer edge of the goal when below the top plane. Probably won’t need to use that knowledge very often, but good to know. However, I would say based on that, that both bottom barrels are not scored.

We had a very interesting thing that reminded us of this practice the goal was full but had a spot for the doubler so naturally we scored it, and it ended up half out of the goal (so it can be legally descored) but instead of descoring it, they tried to negate it attempting to balance the negator (in the normal barrel orientation) on the sideways doubler, while it was impressive it slipped off about 3 seconds after the match was over.

Rule in the manual under scoring:

If you put a meeter stick and run it around the edge of the outer ring with that scoring configuration you can see that you are inside of the outer ring though it is very, very close.

I don’t know how judges will rule on it though… It might be worth asking on the official threads.

just checked it out yesterday, the balls are WITHIN the outer ring of the goal
but the barrels however, stick out!
this made me think of how a normal match is scored!
here is a typical filled up goal:
however, TWO barrels under the top plane is “technically” not scored because they are out of the outer goal ring (the blue one and the red one)

i wonder if the refs at competitions will really be that picky…
(i think the intent of the rule is to not shove objects beside goals and have them “scored” by being within the inner ring)

and last of all, another REAL or FAKE pic!

Real, or at least possible, we’ve seen the aforementioned Justin do similar before :stuck_out_tongue:

correct! :smiley:

side note: the white barrel is not technically “scored” o.O

we should ask about this because i have never seen a ref care about this (or its just such a small rule, people look past it)
i guess if its “in” then its scored :stuck_out_tongue:
(unless you do something like goal jamming, THEN they would look closer)

this is something different, but its soo cool! ^.^
(we took off the front fold out panel (plastered with sponsor ads) so you can count properly :P)
so, Real or Fake??

this is not the robot in our teaser thread, this is the 1 week robot that we will use this weekend

And I had such high hopes on the one in the background, too.

I can certainly see what you mean about the commonplace “efficient” design. I think there’s going to be three “levels” of robot this year.

  1. Double belt bots and clawbots.
  2. NZ designs
  3. Unique bots.

We’re trying not to think that way because it all really depends on how a team builds their robot. Once I saw a double tank tread bot that was pretty much as efficient as any other robot out there.

The funny part is our super secret robot is off screen by about 4 ft to the right.

I suppose you’re right. 2438’s conveyor pickup was insanely fast, among others. I guess it matters more on driver skill and team experience.

So if something like that were to happen would you get two bonuses because it looks like there on the same level

I’d doubt it, mainly for common sense’s sake.

No, this is incorrect. There is only ever one bonus point per goal. If they really are so close that it can’t be feasibly measured which one is lower (not the case here) then it would just be up to the scorer to call it.

no, the two bottom barrels are technically “not scored” because they are outside the outer ring
only the balls and the top single barrel are scored

If they can’t be “feasibly measured” then surely no bonus point would be awarded? It seems unfair to me that the scorer just gets to decide at random who gets the point, I’ve seen quite a number of matches that are decided by one point…

The manual doesn’t really deal with practicalities like this with regard to scoring, It pretty much just says the bonus point goes to the bottom scored object in the goal. The referee’s guide doesn’t deal with what to do if you can’t work out whether things are scored or not either, so my take on it is that the scorers just have to try to the best of their ability. There’s no allowance anywhere for a bonus point not to be awarded if you aren’t sure to whom it should go, so the scorers don’t really have that as an option. I do agree though that would probably be sensible if they did.

Of course, it’s quite likely that you can’t actually get two objects in a circular goal side-by-side like that without having one of them sticking out through the bars far enough to not be scored (like the ones in Murdomeek’s picture). If this is the case then the only time this would come up is when two objects of different colours are both balanced on top of the goal. This would actually be possible quite easily with 11.5" goals; maybe someone should do it sometime just to cause a headache for some tournament organisers trying to decide which of two barrels on the rim of an 11.5" goal is lower :p.

Darn, I wish I’d read that before the scrimmage today.
On a similar note, i loved the use of the spare field perimeter to see if the barrel was scored or not.

On the forum topic, despite not a huge number of objects, I took this today as a fairly classic example of the effortless balancing that Justin does in a match, which this game was made to emulate (He made no special effort at balancing this - somehow with him, it just happens)

It was the only straight and longer than 30" thing we had… :stuck_out_tongue: