|
Rules should only be included if they achieve
something useful.
The size limit should be scrapped because we all
know that big mice are not competitive.
The wall contact rule should be scrapped because it
is not measurable or enforceable, nor could a maze be built to the
specification. All the old hands know the toughest maze is the one with
two pins in the bottom of each wall segment and this would easily outlast even
the roughest mouse. I don't think we should have a rule just because we
keep building weedy mazes.
If you don't like mice using the walls for
deceleration purposes then insert that it is not allowed and that the judges
will disqualify anyone they suspect of using the walls in this way. I
think it would be obvious and the whole point of Judges is for them to make
judgements!
On a less serious note, much as I drool over Dave
Ottens mice, the most entertaining mice are the ones that damage the maze!
And I don't think I have ever known one to be disqualified for doing
it!!
Nick
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, October 27, 2004 9:31
AM
Subject: Re: The Rules - What I was
Looking For
Hi
Everyone,
Sorry
Nick, It was not my intention to discourage your entries. To quote my earlier
posting: "I prefer something along the lines of "the micromouse must fit in a
box 25cm square" to avoid arguments about mice like Michael Shumouser that has
one horizontal distance of more than 25cm." The point being that a 25cm box
has a diagonal of over 35cm and Michael Shumouser should fit. As "no-one
complained", I put in this relaxation of the
rules!
I
don't want people "not to comment on the rules". The whole point is that
everyone should comment to try and get a
consensus.
The
problem with wall contact is that some mice, currently wall-followers but
possibly maze solvers in the future, use the walls for braking purposes. The
apparent limit on performance is how hard you hit the wall. This then comes
down to the judges deciding, on the day, whether the fastest mouse might cause
damage to the maze. The only realistic test on the current rules is to run it
on the particular maze and see what happens. Smashing a maze to determine if
it is strong enough on the day of the competition doesn't seem to be the best
way of resolving the issue. I am looking for an objective test that can be
carried out by the competitor before the competition. As long as this test
allows moderate wall contact, such as Sterling Mouse or my own DOT, there is
no problem and mouse builders can use wall braking up to the known
limit.
I
agree that the rule set should encourage entry rather than discourage it. By
having a well-specified problem, mouse builders are more likely to succeed. I
have seen mice turn up for competition incapable of dealing with the real maze
for many different reasons. Usually they do not come back the next year. I
would prefer it if the problem was not caused by the rules not specifying the
problem
well.
Regards,
Duncan
At
21:26 26/10/04, you wrote:
I have
been trying not to comment on the rules but my jaw is starting to ache from
gritting my teeth!
The first
rule should be that the Judges will encourage all mice to be displayed and
run on the maze at least once regardless of their size or
ability.
The maze should be as
strong as possible so that errant mice have some chance of showing their
ability. Mice should only be removed from the maze if the judges think
they will actually damage the maze to the detriment of other
competitors.
Sterling Mouse
sensors run on the top of the walls. Loose walls fall over and need to
be replaced before Sterling gets back to them. There may not be time
or they may be difficult to reach.
Michael Shumouser is probably too big to fit in a 25cm box. I
protest! I also think it is faulty logic to include rules "because
no-one has complained". Surely rules should only be included if there
is a good reason? Compatibility is faulty logic. If you drop the
rule then all the mice in the world (including mine) can be run in the UK,
including Japanese mice. The rule simply excludes some mice from
running in the UK and discourages some new
competitors.
The rules should be
written to encourage people to have a go, not exclude people from
trying.
I may be getting
paranoid, but it seems to me the rules are being designed to stop my mice
getting to the middle - assuming they are allowed on to the maze in the
first place!
I know when I am
not wanted. How many other potential competitors feel the
same?
Nick
|