www.robowars.org

RoboWars Australia Forum Index -> Rules, Safety, Administration

Judging Discussions 2007
Goto page 1, 2  Next

Post new topic   Reply to topic
  Author    Thread
Rotwang
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1589
Location: Vic


 Reply with quote  

Sounds like your looking for a grudge match there. How come virtually everyone I have fought wants to argue that they should of won. Evil or Very Mad

Post Sun Jan 07, 2007 10:06 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
Daniel
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 2729
Location: Gold Coast


 Reply with quote  

"Damage" - In the video we took of the fight between Stealth and Inspector General you can here Mel say "Look at the damage IG is doing to Stealth" and then one of the judges say "Yeah, that's what I'm looking for. It doesn't matter how many time he flips him because it won't count"


"Aggression" - Yeah, that was Bane vs Marauder. The Queenslanders didn't understand how spinning on the spot gave Bane all the aggression points. If Marauder just sat back and didn't attack then neither robot would be moving toward each other. Isn't moving toward the other robot in order to hit them count as aggression. Marauder was the only robot moving forward to attack so the aggression points seemed backward to us. Andrew is just afraid that if he sits back so neither robot is attacking then the Victorian judges will still give all the aggression to Bane again.

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 8:45 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
DumHed
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 29 Jun 2004
Posts: 1219
Location: Sydney


 Reply with quote  

Don't forget that with Stealth vs IG, it was a bit like how you describe Bane vs Marauder.
The only damage IG did was while spinning on the spot upside down.
If I hadn't driven into IG for more flipping, Stealth wouldn't have gotten more damage (but it wouldn't have been very fun!)

Damage also needs to be treated differently depending on the armour.
My armour was soft, thin, and very obvious when it was touched. It got beaten up a lot, but nothing mechanical was damaged, which was the idea.
_________________
The Engine Whisperer - fixer of things

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 9:04 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website MSN Messenger ICQ Number
Knightrous
Site Admin


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 8511
Location: NSW


 Reply with quote  

Offset will fix those pussy "Spin On The Spot" spinners.... Cool He's so low he justs drives under the thwackers and pushes them around or stops them from spinning Laughing Schmackhed does the same, but not as effective...

But more on topic. If a robot is driving [attacking] into a spinning on the spot [defending] spinner/thwack, attempting to stop it or push/deflect it into the wall, I see that as aggression for the attacking bot, not the one defending itself by going into a gyro death spin Rolling Eyes

Damage side of it, unless the SOTS spinner/thwack is doing considerable damage (scratches not included, think big bends and holes) it shouldn't gain any "damage" points.

WRT the Marauder VS Bane fight, the only way I think Bane could have scored any real points in that battle was the fact that Marauder broke it's own flipper, which goes against it. But Marauder definately had more control and aggression then Bane.... (Spinning on the spot isn't aggressive neither is it controlling...)

Oh... this is a build thread isn't it Laughing

**Puts on flame suit**
_________________
https://www.halfdonethings.com/

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 9:28 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
Rotwang
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1589
Location: Vic


 Reply with quote  

There are no secrets about the Judging, Damage is very carefully quantified, an invertible bot that is flipped but suffers no physical damage or loss of mobility apart from being airborne for a fraction of a second rates as trivial damage. Both Bane and IG2 were invertible, with Bane it made no difference which way up he was, he was specifically built to fight Stealth. Soft thin-skinned air armoured bots like Stealth and Ballistic are the ones that get a raw deal from the Judging as dents and punctures that do nothing to effect the bot count as minor damage. Partial loss of weapon function as in Marauder loosing its bungie, bent pivot bolt bent arm or whatever happened in the Bane Marauder fight rates as significant and that is what lost him the fight in a close split judge’s decision. Danny told me later he voted for Marauder. As far as fighting a horizontal thwack if he is spinning just wait for him to stop, yes you stand to get an aggression point if you charge but chances are that you will suffer more damage than its worth. Once Marauder stoped it was Bane hitting him so who deserves the aggression points then?

Heres an example of some modified judging-guidelines document that ours will be based on from Steel Conflict in the USA.

STEEL CONFLICT - TOURNAMENT JUDGING GUIDELINES
1. Tournament Judges

A panel of judges will determine the winner of matches in which time expires before one
combatant is defeated as defined in the Tournament Rules and Procedures. The number
of judges on the panel shall be an odd number to eliminate the possibility of ties.
Judges' decisions are final.

1.1. Qualifications
Judges must be completely familiar with the Official Rules governing the tournament.
Judges must be familiar with the scoring system and Judging Guidelines as defined here.
Judges must be reasonably conversant with combat robot design and construction.

1.1.1. Responsibilities
Each judge shall officiate in a given robotic combat Tournament with complete impartiality
and fairness, respecting and abiding by the rules that govern that tournament, in the true
spirit of sportsmanship.
Each judge is responsible for keeping track of the Combatants during the course of the
match. Many Combatants look similar, it is the responsibility of each judge to keep them
straight and award points correctly.
Each judge is expected to take careful note of existing damage when Combatants enter
the arena. Existing damage must not be counted against a Combatant in the event of a
judges' decision.
Judges must watch the entire match and award points accordingly. Judges are allowed
(and encouraged) to take notes during a match to assist in scoring.

1.1.2. Judge Foreman
One member of the judges panel will be designated the Judge Foreman. The Judge
Foreman will ensure that all other judges are conforming to the guidelines as set forth
herein. The Judge Foreman may or may not participate in scoring judges decisions,
depending on the number of judges available.
The Judge Foreman will ensure that all Combatants conform to the tournament rules.
Warnings and instructions from the Judge Foreman will be issued to the Combatants
verbally during the matches. Should a Combatant fail to comply, the Judge Foreman will
stop the match and the violating Combatant shall be deemed the loser.
The Judge Foreman will determine the point at which a knockout countdown is to begin
based on the strict interpretation of the rules. When a 10 second countdown is warranted
by the Judge Foreman, the non-responsive Combatant will be notified and the countdown
will begin. The arena announcer will start the countdown at 10 and count down to 0.
If the non-responsive robot has not displayed sufficient translational movement as described in
the rules, the Combatant will be declared the loser.

1.1.3. Conduct
Judges will clearly identify themselves as such.
Judges will not consult with each other or the audience while watching or scoring a
match.

2. Judges' Decisions: Scoring
When a match does not end in the elimination of one of the Combatants as defined by the
Tournament Rules and Procedures the winner shall be determined by a Judges'
Decision. In a Judges' Decision the points awarded to the Combatants by the panel of
judges are totaled and the winner with the majority of points is declared the winner.

2.1. Point Scoring System
Points are awarded in 4 categories:
· Damage
· Aggression
· Control
· Style

All points must be awarded - each judge will determine how many points to award each
Combatant in each category, according to the Judging Guidelines (see below).

2.2. Judging Guidelines
2.2.1. Scoring Aggression
Aggression scoring will be based on the relative amount of time each robot spends
attacking the other.
Attacks do not have to be successful to count for aggression points, but a distinction will
be made between chasing a fleeing opponent and randomly crashing around the arena.
Points will not be awarded for aggression if a robot is completely uncontrollable or unable
to do more than turn in place, even if it is trying to attack.
Sitting still and waiting for your opponent to drive into your weapon does not count for
aggression points, even if it is an amazingly destructive weapon.

Awarding Aggression Points
o A Combatant who attacks a full-body spinner (e.g. intentionally drives
within the perimeter of the spinning weapon) is automatically considered
the aggressor and awarded a 3-2 score in the case where both robots
consistently attack, or both robots consistently avoid each other.
Note: a Combatant is considered a "full body spinner" if the robot cannot be attacked
without moving within the perimeter of the spinning weapon.

2.2.2. Scoring Damage
Judges should be knowledgeable about how different materials are damaged. Some
materials such as Titanium will send off bright sparks when hit but are still very strong and
may be largely undamaged. Other materials such as Aluminum will not send off bright
sparks when hit. Judges should not be influenced by things like sparks, but rather how
deep or incapacitating a "wound" is.

Judges should be knowledgeable about the different materials used in Bot construction
and how damage to these materials can reduce a Bots functionality. Judges should not to
be unduly influenced by highly visual damage that doesnt affect a Combatant's
functionality effectiveness or defensibility. For example, a gash in a Combatants armor
may be very visible but only minimally reduce the armor's functionality.

Judges should look for damage that may not be visually striking but affects the
functionality of a Combatant. For example:
· a small bend in a lifting arm or spinner weapon may dramatically affect its
functionality by preventing it from having its full range of motion
· bent armor or skirts can prevent the Combatant from resting squarely on the floor,
reducing the effectiveness of the drive train
· A wobbly wheel indicates that it is bent and will not get as much traction.
· Cuts or holes through armor may mean there is more damage inside.
Damage suffered to robots can be grouped into the following classifications:

Trivial
· Flip over (or being propelled onto bumper, ramp, or other obstacle) causing no
loss of mobility or loss of weapon functionality.
· Direct impacts which do not leave a visible dent or scratch.
· Sparks resulting from strike of opponent's weapon
· Being lifted in the air with no damage and no lasting loss of traction.

Cosmetic
· Visible scratches to armor.
· Non-penetrating cut or dent or slight bending of armor or exposed frame.
· Removal of non-structural, non-functional cosmetic pieces (dolls, foliage, foam, or
"ablative" armor).
· Damage to wheel, spinning blade, or other exposed moving part not resulting in
loss of functionality or mobility.

Minor
Flip over (or being propelled onto bumper or other obstacle) causing some loss of mobility
or control or making it impossible to use a weapon.
· Intermittent smoke not associated with noticeable power drop.
· Penetrating dent or small hole.
· Removal of most or all of a wheel, or saw blade, spike, tooth, or other weapon
component, which does not result in a loss of functionality or mobility.
· Slightly warped frame not resulting in loss of mobility or weapon function.

Significant:
· Continuous smoke, or smoke associated with partial loss of power of drive or
weapons.
· Torn, ripped, or badly warped armor or large hole punched in armor.
· Damage or removal of wheels resulting in impaired mobility
· damage to rotary weapon resulting in loss of weapon speed or severe vibration
· damage to arm, hammer, or other moving part resulting in partial loss of weapon
functionality.
· Visibly bent or warped frame.
· Major: Smoke and visible fire.
· Armor section completely removed exposing interior components.
· Removal of wheels, spinning blade, saw, hammer, or lifting arm, or other

major
component resulting in total loss of weapon functionality or mobility.
· Frame warping causing partial loss of mobility or complete loss of functionality of
weapon system.
· Internal components (batteries, speed controller, radio, motor) broken free from
mounts and resting or dragging on the arena floor.
· Significant leak of hydraulic fluid.
· Obvious leaks of pneumatic gases.

Massive
· Armor shell completely torn off frame.
· Major subassemblies torn free from frame.
· Loss of structural integrity - major frame or armor sections dragging or resting on
floor.
· Total loss of power.

Post-Match Inspection
Judges may request the combatants to demonstrate operability of their robots drive train
and/or weapon following the end of the match, before the arena doors are opened.
Judges may inspect the Combatants robot after a match to determine how best to award
damage points. The judges will not handle the Combatants robot. The driver or a
designated team member will handle the Combatants robot. A member of the opponent's
team may be present during any such inspection.

Damage self-inflicted by a robot's own systems and not directly or indirectly caused by
contact with the other robot or an active arena hazard will not be counted for scoring
purposes.

---- END OF Steel Conflict Guidelines ----

Add to these our additional categories of

** Control ***
---------------

Control

Each robot is awarded a point in the Control category based on its demonstration of control of itself, its opponent, and the match. Length of time during which control is demonstrated, and the degree to which control is demonstrated, shall both be taken into account in the final determination of which robot showed superior control and is to be awarded the control point.

The degrees of possible control examples are...

Helpless. The robot is unable to demonstrate control, is barely mobile, or moves randomly or intermittently.

Occasional control. The robot may achieve a few shoves or wedge lifts on the opponent, or brings its weapon to bear a few times. It may dodge or escape a few of its opponent’s attacks. It shows some control of its position relative to its opponent. It often has to correct its aim while driving.

Adequate control. The robot achieves several attempted attacks, and some effective attacks. It avoids some of the opponent’s attacks. it only occasionally has to correct its driving aim

Good control. The robot executes many attempted attacks or several effective attacks. It dodges or escapes regularly. It generally drives to its target without correcting its aim. It can often compensate for its opponent’s motion.

Excellent control. The robot executes many quality attacks. It rarely misses its target. It dodges or escapes regularly and recovers quickly. It is rarely out of position relative to its opponent.

Transcendent control. The robot attacks at will and can stay on its opponent. It dodges most blows or escapes almost all attempts to lift, pin, or grapple. It rarely misses and does not need to stop to take aim or correct aim.

and the ever-controversial

*** Style ***
-------------

This is the curly one. Style can mean totally different things to different people, and in this circumstance, this is exactly as it should be. What we would like this category of points to indicate is how "cool" the judge (and hopefuly the audience) thought the robot was in its battling.

Style can incorporate an effective strategy, where an obviously outpowered bot reliably executes a manever designed to lessen the impacts of the other bot. It can incorporate using a tactic that is particular effective against that particular style of opponenet (high-siding a wedge for example, or keeping a spinner rammed into the wall to prevent it from spinning up)

In most cases style could be as simple as a team having a bot that "looks cool", whether through innovative mechanical engineering, or a novel themed paint job. More typically, style points would be given to the bot that shows the greater level of creativity, engineering, uniqueness, articulation, or motion. a raw-steel box on wheels would not be likely to win many style points.

the style category can be summed up in one word.. Mechadon. an unquestionably stylish, cool robot, that nonetheless didnot do very well in its fights. everyone remembers and loves it simply because it looks and moves so damn cool.

This is what style is supposed to encourage. If someoe chooses to front an arena full of wedges, lifters, bar-spinners, flippers and other "conventional" desgns, with a bot that defies description, then they will quite likely get the style points. Think WarHead,

Quite often, "Stylish" robots sacrifice some "effectiveness" in order to look cool. Cosmetic additions use weight, and experimental designs are hard to stick with with when going up against a well-proven wedge or rammer. By awarding a point for style, we hope to encourage people to work around these limitations and build something that will cause spectators to keep coming back for more..

---

One of the best recent examples of "Style" that I can recall, was Pinscher's jaws grabbing onto Arachnophobia in mid-spin with magnificent timing. You can hear the crowd roar its approval in the video's, which highlights what the "Style" point is all about to me. something indefineable that nevertheless is "cool".

Remember style is a *tiebreaker* point - so looking cool and having a snazzy paintjob will not win you a match if you perform poorly in the other areas, but it may help to swing a close match one way or another.

OK, thats enough for a mega-post to start the brow-beating. If anyone has any suggestions, improvments, or criticisms.. go for it.



This is the old Mentorn system



In the arena the robots face each other in a timed fight to the death. If within the allotted time one of the robots becomes immobilised, the other robot will be declared the winner. If neither of the robots have been immobilised our panel of expert judges will declare the winner on a points system using four judging criteria as follows:
1. DAMAGE. (Weight of 4) 1-5 points x 4 = Score for Damage.
2. AGGRESSION. (Weight of 3) 1-5 points x 3 = Score for Aggression.
3. CONTROL. (Weight of 2) 1-5 points x 2 = Score for Control.
4. STYLE. (Weight of 1) 1-5 points x 1 = Score for Style.
The winner will be the robot who has scored the highest number of points if there has been no clear winners. This scoring system gives a fair and unbiased chance for every robot- irrespective of size, weight or power- to win!

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 9:35 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
Knightrous
Site Admin


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 8511
Location: NSW


 Reply with quote  

That's a nice judging system their Gary, this hasn't been posted before has it?


quote:

1.1. Qualifications
Judges must be completely familiar with the Official Rules governing the tournament.
Judges must be familiar with the scoring system and Judging Guidelines as defined here.
Judges must be reasonably conversant with combat robot design and construction.



The hardest part with that is that the builders are the only people that fit into these qualifications. Just small idea, but maybe we should have a builder from each state (VIC, NSW & QLD) as the judges for each match. I'm sure there is at least 1 builder from each state at any given time not working or preparing their bot for the next match.

This would ensure our judges are qualified enough to judge accurately with minimal bias by having one person from each state (No one can whinge that the judges are biased to one state etc etc).

Just an idea.
_________________
https://www.halfdonethings.com/

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:15 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
Daniel
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 30 Aug 2005
Posts: 2729
Location: Gold Coast


 Reply with quote  

All the Queenslands like Marauder/Devastator in the same way all the NSWer's like Jolt. We all get grumbly when we see our states favorite get knocked out by a judges decission. Just in our case the video reply didn't prove us wrong. But it didn't prove us right either.

Andrew just thinks that he can easily beat all the robots going to the event (well maybe not Eleanor, thats a bit iffy), so the only thing left to worry about is the only other way this robot lost a fight, which was the judges decission we are biased to.

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:24 am 
 View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Rotwang
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1589
Location: Vic


 Reply with quote  

July 18 2004

http://robowars.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=97


Yes Aaron this has been posted before.

Damage is damage; it doesn’t matter if it is self-inflicted or opponents action!


Danny is a builder and EO, Tim’s dad is X military and the camera guy has been watching the fights for a long time, I think they qualify.


Stealth was given the win against IG. A good example of control, aggression and style points combining to beat damage.

Yes IG’s spin move is a premeditated defensive manuver. No one claimed any different.

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:42 am 
 View user's profile Send private message
Rotwang
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1589
Location: Vic


 Reply with quote  

quote:
Originally posted by TDT:
That's a nice judging system their Gary, this hasn't been posted before has it?


quote:

1.1. Qualifications
Judges must be completely familiar with the Official Rules governing the tournament.
Judges must be familiar with the scoring system and Judging Guidelines as defined here.
Judges must be reasonably conversant with combat robot design and construction.



The hardest part with that is that the builders are the only people that fit into these qualifications. Just small idea, but maybe we should have a builder from each state (VIC, NSW & QLD) as the judges for each match. I'm sure there is at least 1 builder from each state at any given time not working or preparing their bot for the next match.

This would ensure our judges are qualified enough to judge accurately with minimal bias by having one person from each state (No one can whinge that the judges are biased to one state etc etc).

Just an idea.


Brett has printed copies of the Judging guidelines that are given to the Judges on the day. This is the way things have been done. Continual reference to Bias is very insulting; if it were true how did NSW win the last 3 Robowars run events.
Evil or Very Mad

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:22 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
Knightrous
Site Admin


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 8511
Location: NSW


 Reply with quote  

I didn't accuse anyone of being biased, I just explained that with a judge from each state, that no one could made comments about bias judging, which would offend people.

Take a chill pill Gary, I wasn't saying there has been or will be any bias, it was just to eliminate the "possibility" of such an occurance. Kinda like putting a seat belt on when you get into a car, you might not crash, but it's a precaution.


Brett, can you wave a magic wand and shift all these judging posts into the judging thread please, I think we've cluttered the Devastator thread enough Laughing
_________________
https://www.halfdonethings.com/

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:33 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
Rotwang
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1589
Location: Vic


 Reply with quote  

quote:
Originally posted by TDT:
I didn't accuse anyone of being biased, I just explained that with a judge from each state, that no one could made comments about bias judging, which would offend people.

Take a chill pill Gary, I wasn't saying there has been or will be any bias, it was just to eliminate the "possibility" of such an occurance. Kinda like putting a seat belt on when you get into a car, you might not crash, but it's a precaution.


Brett, can you wave a magic wand and shift all these judging posts into the judging thread please, I think we've cluttered the Devastator thread enough Laughing


A random scramble to find judges through the day, having to go from a fight to trying to judge a fight with the adrenalin still pumping, getting distracted from prepping your bot or thinking about your next fight to judge a fight, being in a normal sleep deprived caffeine overdosed big event state and having to put up with an argumentative competitor who thinks he should of won. Doesn’t sound like a good idea to me. Personally I would prefer the same 3 judges all event ones that aren’t involved with competing bots.

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:38 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
Knightrous
Site Admin


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 8511
Location: NSW


 Reply with quote  

As I said, it was just a suggestion. You make valid points though, chasing judges up is a hassle to EO's and builders.
_________________
https://www.halfdonethings.com/

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:43 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
Rotwang
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 1589
Location: Vic


 Reply with quote  

How many builders have ever travelled to an interstate event without a bot?

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:51 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
Knightrous
Site Admin


Joined: 15 Jun 2004
Posts: 8511
Location: NSW


 Reply with quote  

Ajax ?
_________________
https://www.halfdonethings.com/

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 4:57 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
Philip
Experienced Roboteer


Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 3842
Location: Queensland near Brisbane


 Reply with quote  

quote:
Originally posted by Rotwang:
Partial loss of weapon function as in Marauder loosing its bungie, bent pivot bolt bent arm or whatever happened in the Bane Marauder fight rates as significant and that is what lost him the fight in a close split judge’s decision. Danny told me later he voted for Marauder. As far as fighting a horizontal thwack if he is spinning just wait for him to stop, yes you stand to get an aggression point if you charge but chances are that you will suffer more damage than its worth. Once Marauder stoped it was Bane hitting him so who deserves the aggression points then?

Awarding Aggression Points
o A Combatant who attacks a full-body spinner (e.g. intentionally drives
within the perimeter of the spinning weapon) is automatically considered
the aggressor and awarded a 3-2 score in the case where both robots
consistently attack, or both robots consistently avoid each other.
Note: a Combatant is considered a "full body spinner" if the robot cannot be attacked without moving within the perimeter of the spinning weapon.
I read the scores on the judges desk. They ruled that Marauder lost overwhelmingly on aggression. This appears to me to be at odds with the guidelines above. I did not question the judges on the fact as I believe that would be poor form to confront or question a judge at an event.

Marauder's pivot did not bent during the fight with Bane. The pivot bent while flipping the drum full of axles. The weapon was working right until the end. Some may recall that Marauder flipped the drum into the wall after the three minutes was up. Marauder received no significant damage from Bane.
_________________
So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems

Post Mon Jan 08, 2007 5:19 pm 
 View user's profile Send private message
  Display posts from previous:      

Forum Jump:
Jump to:  

Post new topic   Reply to topic
Page 1 of 2

Goto page 1, 2  Next

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

 

Last Thread | Next Thread  >
Powered by phpBB: © 2001 phpBB Group
millenniumFalcon Template By Vereor.