Junkyard Challenge B

[mrcadman]

There's going to be at least a dozen 60.99 scores, even if they use an audio device for scoring, which they SHOULD.
It will be interesting to see how they justify the tiebreaking decisions. Is one teams creative use of electronics or code more innovative than another teams use of craftsmanship or mechanics? What about artwork or themes? The slide show had indicated that set-up time would be a tiebreaker, but that never made it to the rules. I can see a Mission-Possible freak reward any team that used a marble, a software enthusiast reward unique code, and a robotics junkie reward good mechanics.
I don't suppose they'd be willing to have a 12 way tie for 1st place would they?
Most of the scoring issues could be solved by using audio or video for scoring. There is a youtube vid showing a nice cheap easy method for this. High speed video would be more accurate, but more expensive and perhaps labor intensive. Changing the scoring time out a few decimals, to say 10,000th place at least might be helpful as well.

[brobo]

There's going to be at least a dozen 60.99 scores, even if they use an audio device for scoring, which they SHOULD.
It will be interesting to see how they justify the tiebreaking decisions. Is one teams creative use of electronics or code more innovative than another teams use of craftsmanship or mechanics? What about artwork or themes? The slide show had indicated that set-up time would be a tiebreaker, but that never made it to the rules.

Yes, I was wondering about that too. It would probably be too hard to mesure.
But my understanding (tell me if I'm wrong) of the tie breakers is:
1. Least penalty points
2. Closest time up to 60 seconds, to the hundreth of a second
3. Largest variety in designs (based on the proctor's opinion)
Right? It seems as though the last could be used as a means of cheating, but what are the odds that someone will have to use that as a tie breaker?

[mrcadman]

There will be a dozen teams in the 3rd tiebreaker category, maybe 6 if they use sound or video. Then it's the whim of the Proctor and however they decide what "variety" means.
And has anybody considered how long the word GO is? It's forever! Do they start timing at the beginning of go? during? after the word is said?
What probably started out as a neato rube-goldberg device graduated to a micro-time event without a solid foundation from start to finish. And the winner ends up being the most entertaining one, subject to some vague definition, little more than a game of chance, not exactly science.
Oh well, it will be what it will be and we're going to be happy about it.

[StampingKid]

If there is such an uncertainty as to how long "go" is then there should not be so many teams at 60.99. There though will be many teams with perfect scores but if you try to program to 60.99 you may miss out on task completion and tripping the East trap within 60 whole seconds points as 61.00 is not 60.99 and just try to start and stop a timer within .00 seconds. And it's more likely that there will be a greater delay in reaction times than an acceleration and that is as applied to the ball dropper as well the timers. So is your event supervisor a track athlete with lightning fast reaction times or a volunteer who might be distracted by someone coming in the room just at 60 seocnds?--who knows, so you cannot really program with any certainty-- it is just chance. The event is fun but luck is going to be the determining factor after you get to 60 seconds. And here is a question is programming more than 60.00 seconds violating the spirit of the rules to give the programming team an unfair advantage over the rube goldberg mechanical teams? Clearly 60.00 seconds would not as that is what is needed to get maximum points but I don't know about more. I think the intent of the scoring based upon whole seconds is to allow for the uncertaintly of reaction times and not to allow the programmers an advantage over the mechanical teams. And it would not be unreasonable for the judge to ask to see your code.

[wlsguy]

There's going to be at least a dozen 60.99 scores, even if they use an audio device for scoring, which they SHOULD.

Check the video that shows how the electronic timing is done.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmU-_o_-uOE

Basically it places the timing variance in each team's ability to drop the ball at the start of the "go" noise.
It does, however, insure that teams willbe very unlikely to receive the same time (because it is measured to .001 seconds).

So, once the method is decided, practice your ball dropping skills...

[brobo]

I think that everyone here is making a mountain out of a molehill- the odds of 2, neverless three- will get the exact same time. The word "go", realisticly, isn't long enough to cause enough variation. There are all ready way to many variables- the team's reaction, the proctor's reaction, and everything else. Even with electronics, the odds of getting your device to run exactly 60.999 seconds consitently is so astronomical that its not worth worring about. Who here, coach, proctor, or student, has actually seen more than one or two teams get 60.99 seconds? Even if you see one, which is by itself pretty amazing, the odds of another are pretty low. Sure, at nats there may be many micro-processors, but still...

My points being:
By the time you factor in the human error, the word "Go" really doesn't matter
By the time you factor in the human error, the odds of each time being the same is astronomical
By the time you factor in the above, the third tie breaker isn't going to be used to much.

What probably started out as a neato rube-goldberg device... is still just that.

[bobalfred8]

The most important thing to bring to the competition (in my opinion) is duck tape.

[new horizon]

i find masking tape to be better, IMO, because it gives enough adhesive strength but isn't a complete pain to rip off.

[twiggy_7]

my regionals was an absolute mess!!! we were the only team with the right goggles and half the teams taped their mousetraps 2 the floor and they didnt get DQ's or docked!!!!!!!

[new horizon]

everyone's regionals are a mess. for most building events, the judges don't know the rules at all, they just got the rules the day of and don't do anything about rules.
at our regional there was a junkyard with string where one mousetrap would trip the others, and the team couldn't hit their center mousetrap, so the judges kept letting them try again, it took them 4 tries. =/

and those same judges threatened to DQ us because we made small adjustments before the run (totally legal by the rules). Honestly you'll see lots of judges that don't know what they're doing. if it goes so badly you can complain and show them the place in the rules and they might let you off.