Slashdot Mirror


Kiro, the Foosball Robot

JasonFleischer writes "Although the official line from the RoboCup competition is that robots should be ready to challenge humans on the soccer field by the year 2050, we don't have to wait that long to see man-machine competition in the bar. Researchers in Germany have developed a table football (foosball, table soccer, whatever) robot. The human challenger(s) take the red team, while the machine works the blue side, using an overhead video camera to see what's happening on the table. The conference paper shows that while the machine generally wins against the normal bar-amatuer it has no chance against a human grandmaster. But these kinds of things are always improving, after all look how big a deal the man-machine chess competition turned out to be. So perhaps the current table football world champions should be watching their backs."

162 comments

  1. Awful Idea by Bame+Flait · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This will be fun for about ten minutes, until the machine is either impossible, or laughably easy (more likely) to beat.

    People in bars want games they can play socially, with other people. The people who would really be in to something like this would stay home tweaking their Debian installation and picking at their hemorrhoids.

    1. Re:Awful Idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

      People play games in bars? I thought bars were for drinking.. serious drinking!

    2. Re:Awful Idea by Hellkitty · · Score: 5, Interesting
      Roger that. One of my biggest hobbies is playing bar games. But you are right - I don't play foosball for the opportunity to beat a machine. I do it because it is something fun to do with friends when you may or may not be intoxicated.

      Chess is a thinking game. The idea of a machine being able to out think or out strategize a human fosters competition, so that's where the excitement in that lies. Foosball is simply hand eye coordination. I have no doubts that a machine will eventually be able to out manuever me in hitting a ball with a little plastic man on a rod. It his hardly the technical coup of a computer beating one of the best chess players in the world.

    3. Re:Awful Idea by ebh · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think it would be pretty much impossible to make a tournament-level competitive player this way.

      50FPS is way too slow to react to even a simple three-man push shot. Humans generally can't see the ball when it's done well; they have to build up the skill to Just Know where the ball's going to go. It would be very easy to put some tiny variation into the shot that would completely throw off an AI.

      Plus, the AI only models the field and the playing figures, so it can't respond to poker-style cues a human opponent might give off, like a slight pretensioning of the forearm, that would indicate when the shot would be attempted.

      It would be amazing for practice drills though, both offensive and defensive.

    4. Re:Awful Idea by brendotroy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This will be fun for about ten minutes, until the machine is either impossible, or laughably easy (more likely) to beat.

      (sarcasm)
      Right, that's why Golden Tee and a host of other bar - arcade games have been such a failure. (/sarcasm)

      Golden Tee type games offer 2-player/1-at-a-time gameplay and are still hugely popular. This would let you and your mate (the only one who came out to the pub with you that night) to play a rousing game of foosball together against the "computer" at a skill level you chose.

      I'm not saying we're going to see coin-op Kiros anytime soon, but the idea is not so preposterous.

      My $.02

    5. Re:Awful Idea by davidhan · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hey once one of the amusement table manufacturers sees this, I think they'd jump on the chance to develop a commercial version. Now that dotcoms aren't around anymore to put tables in their employee lounges, they probably need more revenue sources. It be coming sooner than you think. Give Kiro some smack talking ability and it'd be a hit. "Puny human, my Z-80 grandmother is faster than you!"

    6. Re:Awful Idea by oddjob · · Score: 1

      The framerate isn't much of a problem. Optimize your code or wait for faster equipment to come along and you can raise that pretty quickly. A harder problem is dealing with the spin on the ball, which would be difficult for the camera to pick up. A faster frame rate would mitigate this somewhat. As the framerate goes up, the AI's defence will improve. The hard part is improving its offence. Getting it to use bank-shots, spin, controlled passing... that where all the interesting stuff happens.

    7. Re:Awful Idea by travdaddy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think this is actually a good idea, whether it is a competitive player or not. Even though table soccer is a far cry from real soccer, this "experiment" will truly show whether computers will be ready for the soccer field with Robocup in 50 years. Unlike chess, here you will have physical elements the AI must deal with, like the handles not moving as smoothly as they should, or the field getting uneven, and the ball getting dents in it, etc., just like the physical imperfections AI would deal with on the soccer field, or any other physical field for an AI system. But, for these same reasons, I would agree that if anyone is planning to push a robot to beat a foosball champion in the near future or put them in bars expecting little maintenence, it's an awful idea.

      --
      Adidas To Bring Back Sneakernet
    8. Re:Awful Idea by cruppel · · Score: 1

      my TI-86 plays foosball???

    9. Re:Awful Idea by Tom7 · · Score: 1

      Sure, but on the same token, a machine that can do the three variations of the snake lightning fast and with near perfect accuracy and NO poker cues is going to score almost 2/3 of the time he gets the ball to his three bar. I agree that 50fps is a little low, but I don't think it's unreasonable that this machine could beat good players with some more work...

      Anyway, I want one of these for practice. ;)

    10. Re:Awful Idea by Tom7 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      > Chess is a thinking game. The idea of a machine being able to out think or out strategize a human fosters competition, so
      > that's where the excitement in that lies.

      Sure, but you can write a chess player in a day because the inputs and outputs are so well defined. Following the ball, actuating the rods, planning shots -- those are all really hard things to do and they're not an issue in computer chess at all!

    11. Re:Awful Idea by the_ghost226 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Part of the reason IBM was able to create a program that beat a human was the fact that human chess masters prepare for a particular opponent (they study styles, weaknesses, etc), IBM never made any of this info on their program available, but did prep their machine to play a particular master.

    12. Re:Awful Idea by micromoog · · Score: 1
      So the computer's defense would be weak . . . but what about the offense? Imagine the machine passing the ball up the rows, and finishing with a perfect pull shot before the human even has time to switch rods.

      Not to mention the random variation the machine could put into its shots, with no visual cues, combined with virtually limitless speed. It could be unstoppable.

    13. Re:Awful Idea by buzy+buzy · · Score: 1

      Spin may be easy to solve. If you have a high enough frame capture and place ^ symbols on the ball a computer should be able to take into account spin. Doing this with a neural net might be cool too.

      --
      If you get modded down for a first post... What do you get for a last post?
    14. Re:Awful Idea by oddjob · · Score: 1

      In saying solving spin is hard, I'm assuming they are not allowed to mark the ball. Putting marks on the ball would make handling spin easier for human players, too.

    15. Re:Awful Idea by Guilly · · Score: 1

      Chess is a thinking game

      Chess is all about thinking about more plays than your opponent while thinking about the good ones first, if possible. A computer is really suited for this task and can explore graphs way faster than humans can, which makes them really good at chess. Of course, you need good heuristics to guide your search, in order to find good moves quickly.

      The AI required for a machine to understand the current state of the game from sensor inputs is really hard to build, and making that machine learn from its mistakes is even more of a challenge. Learning the physics and coordination required to move the ball around with the plastic men also requires quite a bit of black magic.

    16. Re:Awful Idea by Thinkit3 · · Score: 1

      Wow thanks, woulda modded up if I could. I'm a transhumanist, but there's something to be said for having limitations when survival isn't at stake.

      --
      -Libertarian secular transhumanist
    17. Re:Awful Idea by mlheur · · Score: 1

      naw, bars are for socializing
      serious drinking happens at home.
      tweaking debian happens at home too.
      I'd play the robot while seriously drunk at home that way we're both as concious of our surroundings as the other.

    18. Re:Awful Idea by pthisis · · Score: 1

      a machine that can do the three variations of the snake lightning fast and with near perfect accuracy and NO poker cues is going to score almost 2/3 of the time he gets the ball

      Make that 1/3 of the time (if he's shooting a random option each time, just park on 2 of the options; if not, just move randomly on the 3 holes). 5 options off the snake (short and long push and pull, plus straight) would get it to 60% which is about what a good human shooter shoots in tournament play.

      As it stands now it's pretty inept, I could slaughter it and I'm a rookie on tour.

      Sumner

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
  2. Great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...someone else to kick my ass at that game.

  3. Bah! by TopShelf · · Score: 4, Funny

    Until this thing starts talking smack while racking up the goals, I'm not impressed...

    --
    Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    1. Re:Bah! by malfunct · · Score: 1

      They could always loop the Duke 3d dialog track in the background :)

      --

      "You can now flame me, I am full of love,"

    2. Re:Bah! by br0ck · · Score: 1

      It's been done.. sort of. Deep Fritz heckled Kramnik with authentic Shakespearean verse during game 6 of their series and this is said to be the reason he lost. There's a full transcript if you scroll down.

    3. Re:Bah! by FinalCut · · Score: 1

      I hear that - smack is half the fun of foosball - the other is letting other people pay for your evening entertainment :O)

    4. Re:Bah! by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Wow, talking trash when playing foosball is one thing, but if anybody tries to taunt me while playing chess, human or machine, I'd throw the entire board at him!

      --
      No sig for the moment.
  4. What's the World Coming To? by Davak · · Score: 4, Funny

    What is the world coming to when...

    "foosball" and "grandmaster" is used in the same paragraph.

    Of course, I didn't realize that "table football world champions" actually existed either. Isn't that decided by the last drunken game... "And thhhiss is for the cchampionship ooffff thheee wwwwwooorrllldddd."

    Davak

    1. Re:What's the World Coming To? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      whatever. f()ck 0ff. your just a sorry excuse cause you always get beat

    2. Re:What's the World Coming To? by bigbadbuccidaddy · · Score: 0

      Don't diss Rob, I met him once and he was very nice.

    3. Re:What's the World Coming To? by mcmonkey · · Score: 1

      If that bothers you, you certainly don't want to read about the 2002 International Rock Paper Scissors Championships Official Results.

      They even have rules and play-by-play box scores in case you missed any of the action.

    4. Re:What's the World Coming To? by SandsOfEarth · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you ever get a chance to see a serious foosball tournament with high level players, go and prepare to be amazed. The difference between ordinary recreational foosball and hard-core tournament winners is like the difference between shooting a piece of wadded up paper into the garbage can from across the room and the NBA.

    5. Re:What's the World Coming To? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The germans are unbelievable at table fussball.
      I have witnessed two pissed up germans play one another in a game involving headers and volleys and all sorts of trick shots.

  5. I can't tell from the article... by MeanE · · Score: 5, Interesting

    but does the computer have full control over all the umm (forgive my foosball knowledge) "handles" at all time. I mean part of the game is having to let go and grab the next one. Kind of an unfair advantage if the computer does not have to do so.

    1. Re:I can't tell from the article... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well in doubles foosball each partner has control over 2 of the 4 rods, so there is no letting go and switching. The humans that he is beating are doubles teams, so no unfairness there.

      Although there something to be said for the unfair level of coordinating passing you could get if you had four arms...

    2. Re:I can't tell from the article... by TigerTime · · Score: 1

      Who said the machine had physical attributes like a human? It probably has 1 "arm" for each "handle" (6-8?). Although they probably made it so that only 2 handles move at any one time.

    3. Re:I can't tell from the article... by uberdave · · Score: 1

      Well, for doubles, they should run two instances of the AI, one for each pair of handles, with no communication between the two instances. Otherwise, you're facing a single intelligence

    4. Re:I can't tell from the article... by daeley · · Score: 4, Funny

      but does the computer have full control over all the umm (forgive my foosball knowledge) "handles" at all time. I mean part of the game is having to let go and grab the next one. Kind of an unfair advantage if the computer does not have to do so.

      Actually, I wanna know if we can still grab onto the far end of our opponents' handles. "Compute this, you metal monstrosity!" :)

      --
      I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
    5. Re:I can't tell from the article... by Aumaden · · Score: 1
      Actually, I wanna know if we can still grab onto the far end of our opponents' handles. "Compute this, you metal monstrosity!" :)

      I'm not playing until the machine gets pissed off when it spills its drink.

      Hmm, you'll probably need to crank down the computers reactions as the night wears on to put the player and the machine on even footing.

      Maybe an integrated breathalyzer to check how far gone is the player?

      -- Aumaden

  6. Yeah? by superdan2k · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'll be impressed when they have a robot/AI that can play ping-pong. If you look at the plane the ball travels in, foosball is pretty two-dimensional...not entirely, I'll grant you, but I'm making a generalization. If you can create a robot that can deal with three dimensions, and can build strategies to play a good game of ping-pong, then I'll be impressed.

    --
    blog |
    1. Re:Yeah? by md81544 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure I saw a robotic table tennis (ping pong) player on TV recently. Damn impressive. Anyone else see it, or was I dreaming?

    2. Re:Yeah? by who+what+why · · Score: 1
      Ooooh, no-one ever thought of that!

      the miracles of google!

    3. Re:Yeah? by uberdave · · Score: 1

      Those are not ping pong playing robots. They are ball servers, just like the machine you have in a batting cage, but for ping pong. They are used for practice, not for playing.

    4. Re:Yeah? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I created one, but it uses a non-regulation size paddle ;-)

    5. Re:Yeah? by spongman · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I'd say that the ball dynamics in foosball are much more complex than that of ping-pong. Yeah, there's another dimension to consider in ping-pong but in general there's no ball control, the ball comes towards you, makes contact with the bat (which has its own trajectory) and almost instantaneouly leaves in another direction. Pretty simple physics.

      In foosball, not only does each player have 11 (or 13) 'bats', but the men have 4 sides and corners which can all be used effectively. More importantly, the ball can be stopped and can remain in constant contact with the man while it moves. Without this ability the machine has no chance at a decent passing game and definitely no shot - ie, no game.

  7. Now if this thing could chug a beer.... by icemax · · Score: 1

    ....and sink a shot at the same time, I'd be impressed.

    --


    __________
    Love conquers all... except CANCER
    1. Re:Now if this thing could chug a beer.... by Jaywalk · · Score: 1
      Good idea. Hook the thing up to a bio-fuel cell to convert the alcohol to the electricity that runs the thing. Loser buys the beer, so -- as the night wears on -- the machine becomes more efficient and the human less so.

      Anyone want to go a few rounds with Bender?

      --
      ===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====
  8. "normal bar amateur" by Photon01 · · Score: 1, Funny
    "the machine generally wins against the normal bar-amatuer"

    But how much has this normal bar-amatuer had to drink?

    1. Re:"normal bar amateur" by ergonal · · Score: 3, Funny

      You just gave me a really horrible image of some drunken guy in bed waking up next to a... foosball playing machine. Shame on you. :/

    2. Re:"normal bar amateur" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And now we know why Momma says that that there Fooseball is the Devil!

      "I don't want you playin no Fooseball Bobby Boucher"!

      [Waterboy]

  9. Man by mondoterrifico · · Score: 5, Funny

    The fact that there is a human grandmaster of foosball somehow makes my life seem less meaningless. :)

    1. Re:Man by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's OK, you can calm down. The link points to the subbuteo grandmaster, which isn't the same game as table-football (or foosball or whatever). So you can just keep practising.

    2. Re:Man by pthisis · · Score: 1

      The subbuteo link they give is a completely different game from table soccer or foosball.

      But Frederico Collignon, who they did mention in the article, is the world champion on _many_ different kinds of tables--including the Tornado tables most prevalent in the United States, the slow-ball/pin Jupiter and Bonzini tables used in his native Belgium and France, and the fast-ball Garlando tables popular in Italy and Austria.

      He made in the neighborhood of $50,000 last year in winnings at major tournaments--but like a lot of pool players his major money most likely comes from playing money games outside of tournaments. And he probably made at least $25,000 at smaller regional tournaments.

      Sumner

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
  10. finally! by zephc · · Score: 1

    someone who can dethrone Leif Garrett!

    --
    "I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
  11. No, not in a pub!!!! by POds · · Score: 5, Funny

    Bringing computers into pubs? No, No i tells ya. I work with computers all week. Theres a few things i like doing at the friday happy hour with my work mates. Thats, getting cheap or free beers and playing pool.

    This thing doesnt bellong in a pub. It belongs in a pinball palar... Or whatever you call those things...

    Computers in pubs? pfffffffft... why dont i just start bringing beer to work?

    Actualy, i make a good point, why dont i? :/

    My point is the pub is my one place to ungeekatise myself... bringing a computer to a pub might have the oposite effect.

    --


    Giving IE users a taste of their own medicine since 2005 - http://pods.-is-a-geek.net/
    1. Re:No, not in a pub!!!! by Bull999999 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Computers in pubs? pfffffffft... why dont i just start bringing beer to work?"

      I would not be suprised if they replace the bartenders with robots in the future, and bar sluts with sexbots...

      Hummm Sexbots.....

      --
      1f u c4n r34d th1s u r34lly n33d t0 g37 l41d
    2. Re:No, not in a pub!!!! by gantzm · · Score: 2, Funny

      Oh man, who has to clean the Sexbots at the end of the night?

      --


      Excessive forking causes un-wanted children.
    3. Re:No, not in a pub!!!! by Hagakure · · Score: 1

      The Sexbots would be programmed to clean each other at the end of the night. This would, of course, earn them extra cash.. at least from spectators.

      --


      If this is Heaven I'm bailin out! I cant tolerate this ol tin-tub, so fulla trash and rats...
    4. Re:No, not in a pub!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you ever wondered how much the average sexbot cleaner makes per hour? I don't know if you noticed, but cum leaves streaks if you don't clean it right away.

    5. Re:No, not in a pub!!!! by kmonty · · Score: 1

      Hah... actually, a recent visit to an expo held in the Good Hope Centre, Cape Town, showed an electronic tot machine that automatically pours your drink. Wanna beer? Visit Dockside, South Africa - there are beer vending machines all over the place. That's really not such a far off idea, especially in crowded clubs n pubs.

      --
      "Diplomacy --- the art of saying "Nice doggie" 'til you can find a stick." Wynn Catlin
    6. Re:No, not in a pub!!!! by ldzpn23 · · Score: 1

      although i find this idea to be quite absurd - just wait until the first drunk opponent gets pissed off, talks smack to the computer, and kicks the shit out it, resulting in a defective foosball table that would of been useful while drinking with your friends, at least the robot isn't drinking for me. now that would be a problem!

      let's leave the pubs for the humans and the beer!

  12. Oh crap.... by cybermace5 · · Score: 3, Funny

    I hope the robot isn't smart enough to jam the handle at maximum speed toward an opponent, when the opponent is positioned...uhm...a little too close.

    Ah, the college days of Extreme Foosball. And misinterpreting what exactly 'foos'-ing a ball is.

    --
    ...
    1. Re:Oh crap.... by cybermace5 · · Score: 1

      OK, 217.22.144.195, it's not funny to SMS me with "LOL OMG KTHX BYE."

      Well, maybe it is.

      --
      ...
  13. Score another one for the geeks! by bethanie · · Score: 1

    Here's another invention that's sure to further the cause of humanity! Kudos!

    ....Bethanie....

  14. When it can play� by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    ...while metabolizing a six-pack then we can talk about a fair fight.

    1. Re:When it can play� by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      six-pack? Your not a Canadian drinker, thats for sure! We warm up with six-packs!

  15. immediate improvement by ih8apple · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Rather than using a camera to read the table, if the table were built with sensors in each of the guys (to indicate state/current position/speed of current rotation) and a sensor in the ball (or positional sensors around the edges that could read the location of the ball), I believe that the software would win now, without any improvements. (Maybe we could put a GPS device in the ball!)

    My guess is that the majority of the work that the computer has to do now is to figure out, from the video feed, where things stand before reacting. If the state were easier to read, the machine's reactions would easily outdo any human, champion or otherwise.

    1. Re:immediate improvement by Anime_Fan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      (Maybe we could put a GPS device in the ball!)

      As much as it might be true that it'll have a better win/lose ratio with sensors, GPS is not the way to go. I mean... A foosball table isn't all that big, and what will the computer do when he thinks the ball is actually 5 metres outside of the "arena"? GPS is a no-go.

    2. Re:immediate improvement by ih8apple · · Score: 1

      yeah, but we could triangulate relative to a fixed sensor whose location is known or use multiple satelites and get better accuracy or we could use that new european system...there are ways around the government's intentional bad data.

    3. Re:immediate improvement by phriedom · · Score: 1

      Changing the ball in some way so that a robo-player could know where it is without a vision system certainly WOULD simplify the problem. However, if you do that, you are no longer playing foosball. You have changed the design problem to accomodate the solution and failed to address the real goal of making a foosball robot. Now OTOH, if you can design a system to sense where the ball is that doesn't use vision and doesn't alter the ball or significantly alter the table, well that would be pretty cool too. But I think part of the reason to build a foosball robot is as a development platform and/or demonstration for vision systems, so the design problem is difficult on purpose.

      --
      Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
    4. Re:immediate improvement by pthisis · · Score: 1

      if the table were built with sensors in each of the guys (to indicate state/current position/speed of current rotation) and a sensor in the ball (or positional sensors around the edges that could read the location of the ball), I believe that the software would win now, without any improvements.

      Judging from the video, no way. It'd need _much_ better reaction time (faster motion of the rods) and some concept of how to block brush and chip passes (and shots). I also doubt the current software would even try to block an aerial even with GPS in it.

      The players in the videos are using the same stupid "whack the ball" strategy as the computer and they're managing to score on it sometimes--put it up against a real player and there's no way it'd compete right now.

      That said, give it perfect knowledge of the ball's location and fast enough reaction and motion times and it'll block anything. But they'd have to be a hell of a lot faster than they are now to have any hope of blocking even a rookie-level tournament player's shot (let alone pass).

      Sumner

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
  16. Bets it by Timesprout · · Score: 1, Funny

    piss easy to win if you yank a few wires when the ref is not looking

    --
    Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
    What truth?
    There is no dupe
  17. Foosball can be played at a much higher level... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One of the main strategies is to perfect a shot that can be executed faster than humans can react to it. (i.e. stop the ball with your offensive 3 man rod and then wait and then slide the ball and shot it somewhere else along that rod). But what happens when the computer it watching it, if video is fast enough and the ai sees what you are doing then it might be able to block things that humans would never be able to stop. On the flip side the robotic arms could execute the same shot 100% of the time, but I don't think that the overhead camera would give it enough information. There would also need to be sensors in the motors that move the rods because that feedback is important.

  18. Just teach Aibo to fetch the paper by AwesomeJT · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'll be happy when they teach AIBO to fetch the morning paper or autogrowl at bad people. I wonder if they'll get to a point were I can download new "programs" for the robot -- like in The Matrix -- download a martial arts foosball playing AIBO program. Now that would rock.

    --
    SPAM solution made easy: 1 spammer, 5 cords of rope, 5 hourses, and fireworks. Be creative.
  19. Missing the point by tomcio.s · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I think everyone so far has missed as to why exactly this is such a big deal.
    It is not important what game the robot mastered. What is important is the fact that the robot is capable of on the fly visual/apendage (arm) coordination.
    That means we have technology that will allow for application of this in other areas (think retrieval robots for disaster zones, etc.)
    That is what makes this story so exciting.

  20. First computers take our jobs - and now this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The dot com era has truly come to an end when the Foosball games rise up against their former masters.
    What's next? Those fancy Aeron chairs will bite our asses?

  21. All I can think of after reading this article..... by Ride-My-Rocket · · Score: 1
  22. hmm.. by Shutup+Now · · Score: 0

    This could help linux. if people at bars just play against computer's they'll drink less, thus giving the beer companys less money. Beer company's with less money cant spend it on expensive OS's like WIndows so they will be forced to use Linux. I love people who do something "usless" when in actually has benifits for us all...

    1. Re:hmm.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if people at bars just play against computer's they'll drink less, thus giving the beer companys less money.

      ITYM "bar's" :-)

  23. Robots on the soccer feild!!!?!!?! by MongooseCN · · Score: 1

    Look at this and them imagine the red guy as the T1000 terminator. Do you *really* want to play soccer with him?

  24. Guess I can't use the phrase... by cabra771 · · Score: 1

    I'll get to as soon as someone makes a robot that can play foosball...HAHAHHAHAHAHAAHA

    Now I'll have to change it to:
    I'll get to it as soon as someone makes a robot that can kick my ass on a regular basis playing foosball (minus laughter afterwards).

    --

    -my other sig is your mom
  25. Table football champions? by JimPooley · · Score: 1, Funny

    I was momentarily surprised by this, until I remembered a TV show that was on Yorkshire Television in the 70s, in which fast bowler Freddie Trueman introduced groups of people playing pub games.
    Table football, shove ha'penny, skittles, and Nine Men's Morris.

    This wasn't tucked away in the afternoon or late at night. There was no afternoon or very late at night TV in those days. This was on around 7PM in the evening...

    The horror! The horror!

    Ah well. At least table football champions get out more than online gamers...

    --

    "Information wants to be paid"
  26. IT IS A RESEARCH PROJECT by suntse · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It is a research project. They're doing it to see if they can do it. Creating a robot that cn play foosball is obviously an interesting technical challenge in a lot of ways. The researchers will learn a lot in the process.

    1. Re:IT IS A RESEARCH PROJECT by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Uh-huh. I'm sure they spent a lot of time down at the pub conducting much research. :^P

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  27. cool robot of the week by Stanza · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else go to NASA's cool robot of the week to see if it was listed? Why isn't it?

  28. You mean there's a grand master by rickthewizkid · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... of table- soccer? You mean, that game with the little spinny men on bars, right?

    That's sad. Very sad.

    Oh well, to each his own

    Just my Insert-two-quarters-for-one-credit's worth
    -RickTheWizKid

  29. seems simple to me... by trix_e · · Score: 5, Funny

    hmmm... if I were wanting to create the ultimate computer foosball player, I'd just have the machine rotate all the handles at about 12000 rpm, sliding them back and forth at a 100 cycles per second.

    The first time the human opponent catches the ball off the forehead at 1200 fps... FORFIET! The machine wins again.

    but that's just me...

    --
    No man is an island, but Gary is a city in Indiana.
    1. Re:seems simple to me... by davidhan · · Score: 1

      eh, spinning the handles was illegal under our house rules. We only let chicks get away with it.

    2. Re:seems simple to me... by RPI+Geek · · Score: 1

      ditto, because it damages the table, sounds bad, and it just plain cheap (yeah, that's a good strategy sometimes - like when you're really drunk).

      --

      - "Nobody came out that night, not one was ever seen. But Old Man Stauf is waiting there, crazy sick and mean!"
    3. Re:seems simple to me... by travdaddy · · Score: 1

      Spinning the rods is also illegal under ANY tournament rules. Not only does it damage the table and rods, but it's bad strategy as well.

      --
      Adidas To Bring Back Sneakernet
  30. Bobby Boucher by miracle69 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Foosball is of the DEVIL!

    --
    Linux - Because Mommy taught me to Share.
  31. training by lpret · · Score: 1

    on their website, they say its a good way to practice -- for all those grand masters out there. Because you can focus on a single shot or whatever. But I could see it popping up in arcades...

    --
    This is my digital signature. 10011011001
  32. Foosball History by emo+boy · · Score: 0

    "Today foosball also plays a role in social rehabilitation, being a part of the recreational programs offered by many state and federal correctional institutions."

    Every office should have a foosball table. Challenge your bastard boss to a game if you're pissed at him. Both of you will come out of it sweating and realizing that maybe you are not so different after all. Besides...there's nothing quite like yelling at your opponent because the plastic ball got stuck under one of your players feet.

  33. I thought we already had Foosball Robots by errxn · · Score: 1, Funny

    Normally, they are known by the term "frat boys".

    --
    In Soviet Russia, Chuck Norris will still kick your ass.
  34. drawing a line in the sand by DailyGrind · · Score: 4, Funny

    I was OK with robots taking away factory work

    I am OK with robots taking away bar games

    But when they start drinking beer on my behalf I draw the line!

    --
    You will have to pry my proprietary software $$$ from my cold dead hands!
  35. Re:Foosball? by krystal_blade · · Score: 2, Funny

    What the hell is that? Is that something like the little table soccer games with the bars going through the little players?

    Not Quite.

    Foosball started as an ancient ritual by germanic tribes when the rights over one cow or a beehive were contested.

    In the original version of the game, according to archaeologists, the clay built mini humans were called "foos" (leading one to beleive that the ancient germanic tribes somehow had access to ebonics literature) and had two holes in them.

    A stick was mounted through the "foo" and the other hole (the deeper of the two) was packed chock full of bullshit (Or honey, depending on what they were arguing over). The two people then effectively duelled until the "foo" or foos were shattered. This would continue a total of 6 times, while in front of both tribal elders.

    The winner was the guy with the most shit from an exploded foo on him, and got to walk away with the prize.

    In the event of a tie, the two people would then just fight over the item. But, if the tribal elders wound up with more shit on them than the arguing people, the item being argued over was offered up to the gods as a sacrifice, along with any remaining foos.

    The game evolved throughout the centuries to include a borded, fenced in table (to prevent normal citizens from being splattered) and eventually, the populace grew so skilled that multiple foos were used at once within the box.

    So there you have it. A lot of bullshit.

    krystal_blade... (you know that was funny)

    --
    It will be easy to motivate our fellow man; there is hardly anything people treasure more than not being annihilated.
  36. It's amazing that... by emo+boy · · Score: 0

    a movie about a foosball player got a better rating than BioDome. Thank you for reminding me why I watch TBS SuperStation all weekend.

  37. Oh, come now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I beat you by a good 5 minuets to this quote, so you just stop whoreing for Karma ;-)

  38. It's not supposed to start this way by Zygote-IC- · · Score: 5, Funny

    I don't think this is the way it's supposed to go. I haven't seen Terminator 3 yet, but I'm pretty sure Skynet doesn't begin with a withering attack on humanity's carefully-crafted illusion that foosball is anything other than spinning the handles as quickly as you can and screaming, "BOOOYAH! IN YOUR FACE!"

  39. I've had a robotic foosball player for years... by Bowie+J.+Poag · · Score: 1



    I impaled one of my sister's Barbie dolls on the business end of a power drill when I was 9. Where's my patent?

    --
    Bowie J. Poag

  40. Two dimensional? by tgd · · Score: 2, Funny

    You clearly have never seen me play. Eyes, heads, jockers... its all fair game when I'm on the table... can't block my shot if you're busy protecting your eyes or family jewels!

  41. But does it "spin"? by Rick.C · · Score: 2, Insightful
    "Winners never spin and spinners never win."

    Words to live by, my friends.

    --
    You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
    "Math in a song is good."-Linford
  42. Another step in AI by Greenmonkey2021 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think that they are just trying to utilize current AI technology to further expand it. AI in chess often consisted of analyzing every possible move. Foosball while not as intellectual has much more freedom of movement, relative to chess. Also, the AI has to react with fast reflexes as opposed to the long periods of thinking a chess computer can do. I think Foosball could be used to help advance AI. It has unique challenges but is still constrained enough to prevent the problem from being too big. FYI, there were a group of students in my university that also designed an AI foosball table for a fourth year project. They used sensors on the floor instead of a camera.

    --
    Green Monkey san
  43. Foosball? by chrisbtoo · · Score: 1

    So that's what foosball is. Heard the name quite a lot on US TV programmes and films we get over here, but never realised what it was.

    Is the name derived from the German "Fussball"?

    --
    Registering accounts later than some other chrisb since 1997
  44. Its hard to imagine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... especially after yesterdays champions league final, how would a robot deal with unorthodox players like Milan's Genarro Gattusso, awkward players like like Nesta who thrive on assaulting opponents on the field of play. I mean, did u see his foul on del piero? that was criminal. He almost took the guy's eye out.

    Forza Juve

    1. Re:Its hard to imagine by Redmega · · Score: 1

      come on! he hardly touched the fag.

  45. machine emotional cues? by Heisenbug · · Score: 1

    But then, the human won't be able to read the machine's cues either, so it's a fair fight as far as that goes. Unless we added some type of pulsing red light to show the machine's emotional state ...

    "I can't let you make that three-man push shot, Dave."

  46. Re:Foosball? by MonkeyBoyo · · Score: 2, Funny

    The winner was the guy with the most shit from an exploded foo on him, and got to walk away with the prize.

    So, the moral is: "If the foo shits, wear it".

  47. No way. by vitaflo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having played foosball my entire life, I doubt they can make something to beat anyone of real skill anytime soon. When you get really good at the game, it's not about seeing the shot to block it, because you rarely see it (if you're good enough) because it's so fast. No, you're going on anticipation, of what the player may do. It becomes a sort of guessing game at that point.

    This is where the stragegy in foosball really comes in. They key is to have a bunch of various shots you can use but that all "look" the same on set up, so the player has no idea where you're going to go with the shot. If they guess wrong, you score. Of course, this takes a lot of skill to do well (and just as much skill on defense to defend).

    Because the robot is using a camera, and because the action is so fast, I can't imagine it stopping a good push shot, or even a good pop or bank shot for that matter. Similarly, I can't see it setting up good shots that a human couldn't pick out everytime. Though I think it would be easier to teach a robot offense, than defense.

    1. Re:No way. by oddjob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Actually, I think defense would be much easier to teach the robot than offense. A human player has to anticipate the shot, because their reaction time is limited. The robot's reaction time is only limited by the technology used. If 50fps isn't fast enough, optimize your code, get faster hardware, and bump it up to 100fps. Repeat as needed. To become good at offense, the robot needs ball control, which is much more than the simple blocking/hitting that this one does. It also needs to avoid becomming predictable.

    2. Re: No way. by dave_mcmillen · · Score: 1

      A human player has to anticipate the shot, because their reaction time is limited. The robot's reaction time is only limited by the technology used. If 50fps isn't fast enough, optimize your code, get faster hardware, and bump it up to 100fps.

      I really hope "fps" means "fooses per second", here. If not, it really should.

      (Please, for the love of Buddha, do not respond telling me what "fps" actually stands for. Go lie down until the impulse goes away.)

    3. Re:No way. by AttillaTheNun · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just by watching some of the video clips, it occurred to me that, while it's true the computer would be at a disadvantage on defense, it's strength is in it's ability to pick up the ball as it rebounds off a player or wall and quickly convert it into a shot. I imagine even a pro would have a difficult time with this. Imagine as the technology progresses, the computer's offense and defense would merge somewhat as it would be able to pick up the opponent's shots and passes and stuff them right back into your net before you have a chance to realize you even lost possession, sort of like slamming a fastball right out of the park.

    4. Re: No way. by oddjob · · Score: 1

      So close to lunch time, I'd prefer "fries per second". Though, since foosball is the most exercise I'm likely to get today, I should probably have a salad instead.

    5. Re:No way. by einer · · Score: 1

      Well, I can see a computer being able to block a shot. Just depends on how much force you're willing to allow it to expend in order to catch up to the ball. What I can't see a computer being able to do, is block a brush pass. It would have to know the rotational velocity of the ball before it hit the wall based on the speed of your brush *and* it's guess about the amount of downforce you used when you brushed it. So, not only would it have to track the ball, it would have to resolve the finer details and make a decision. This is also assuming that the brusher doesn't run for a hole at the last second either (which is standard practice). The game is won and lost on the 5-bar. I won't be worried about getting beat by a computer for a while.

      It would also be interesting to see how well a computer could defend a snake shot, since there is almost no way you could catch up to a shot that fast. The standard defense for the snake is to simply keep the defenders in constant motion and hope the shot deflects back into your 5-bar.

      One thing computers aren't, is creative, and it's one thing good foosball players must be to win consistently. Bank shots, curve shots, toe kicks, kick pulls, push kicks, snakes, euro-snakes, straight pulls, five bars and tic-tacs are all standards fare most players aresenals.

      There is ALWAYS a hole. The foosball men are spaced so that this is true. You cannot defend every square inch of the goal, all the time. It's why I can beat people who are much better than me if I get streaky. It's also why I can lose to a girl who does nothing but spin the five bar. :)

    6. Re:No way. by ponxx · · Score: 1

      I think it won't be difficult to build a good offensive robot. It won't be pretty or strategic but effective:

      1) increase framerate of video capture to a rate such that you can block any shot from the next row

      2) beef up the motors etc to be able to react to any shot from the next row

      3) whenever the opponent shoots, whack the ball in a random forward direction...

      I reckon the game would be so confusing and fast that no human player would stand a chance. Plus, if you can't score you can't win.. machines don't get tired and make no mistakes.

      Ponxx

    7. Re:No way. by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      If the computer can tell what you're doing with YOUR players (and not just track the ball and its own movements), then it could conceivably learn how to do what you do.
      You curve/bank/spin shots? Nice, but after the 10th such shot, don't be surprised if the computer starts to do it too. And since it can think faster than it can act, it won't have the human foible of actually having to practice something before using it.
      All in all, I have to say this is infinitely cooler than soft-dart computers that just give themselves a score for you to compete with.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    8. Re:No way. by oddjob · · Score: 1

      That wouldn't really be a good offensive robot, just a good defensive one that wins with endurance. A good offensive robot would be one that scores on a higher percentage of its shots. To really make a more interesting problem, you could include performance limits in the rules. For example, you could set limits on how many frames per second the machine can see, how fast it can move its players, etc. Then you would need a better strategy than "hit and pray" to win.

    9. Re:No way. by oddjob · · Score: 1

      An AI player that could learn from its oponents would be pretty cool. It would also be far more sophisticated than the one described in the article. Designing an AI that can learn offense this way would be much harder than designing one that works on simple rules, which was my point. An effective defense, on the other hand, can be based on one simple rule: stop the ball.

    10. Re:No way. by Mal-2 · · Score: 1
      It's a bit more complex than that (ask any goalie -- it's about positioning and cutting down angles so you don't HAVE to make spectacular saves, and also about not giving up easily returned rebounds), but yes, a lot of it can be taught as a method. These ideas have already been quantified and expressed in terms of probabilities, so having a computer decide which method to use should not be difficult.

      Having it react to a player's tendencies would be a much more interesting task, but not inconceivable -- for example it might say "I did this five times and he beat me twice, maybe I should try something else" and pick something else close on the probability charts. After a while it might even remember that if a player is good at beating defense A, he's not likely to be so good against defense B.

      Now if they port this to table hockey, which seems reasonable, I'd be interested in buying one. But computerized AIR hockey would be off the hook! Magnets in the table could allow a computer to position its paddle without motors. Also this would require the tracking of just three objects, rather than (I believe) 8 bars and a ball.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    11. Re:No way. by pthisis · · Score: 1

      The standard defense for the snake is to simply keep the defenders in constant motion and hope the shot deflects back into your 5-bar.

      You must lose a lot if you use that defense against humans. It's probably the best bet against a machine that doesn't try to read the defense (shoots random holes) but a good goalie is going to use a lot of baits and stints against a human opponent.

      Watch Louis Cartwright (2001 Worlds finals tape is a good one to get) or Bobby Diaz sometime--their shuffle is decidely not random, it's designed to force the opposing forward into a particular hole.

      Frederico even races effectively against a lot of shooters.

      Sumner

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
    12. Re:No way. by einer · · Score: 1

      You must lose a lot if you use that defense against humans. It's probably the best bet against a machine that doesn't try to read the defense (shoots random holes) but a good goalie is going to use a lot of baits and stints against a human opponent.

      I do alright.

      As for baiting and defense, I'm sorry, but very few defenders can block an effective snake shot even 1/3 of the time. This may be a difference in our experiences playing, but I've yet to see a defender able to consistently stop a snake, especially if the shooter is capable of a euro-angled type shot. It could be that the quality of competition in Nebraska doesn't match that of wherever you're at. I couldn't tell you.

      The best defense against a good snake shot, is a better five bar.

    13. Re:No way. by pthisis · · Score: 1

      As for baiting and defense, I'm sorry, but very few defenders can block an effective snake shot even 1/3 of the time.

      I've played several pro-masters including Terry Moore (first person to win a national event shooting the snake and the #2 ranked player in the world) and Billy Pappas (who not only shoots cutbacks but can walk the ball around the goal face like a euro).

      Probably 2 of the more effective snakes in the world (Terry's is one of the top 5 for sure), but neither of them scored better than 50% on me. Pappas shot around 30%, me and a rookie forward took him and another pro-master, Mike Yore (reigning Open Singles champion in the US) to game 5 in a best-of-5 at NC States despite being completely dominated on the 5-bar.

      When they're real hot and reading the defense well they'll score around 60-70% but that's not the norm--the trick is to make it a mental game and let your defense dictate to them which holes to shoot, but keep it random enough that they can't read it well.

      I'm not saying it's easy--I think I block the snake just about as well as anyone in this area (we have no local pro-masters), though I'm far from the best goalie around given holes in other parts of my game--but if you dedicate yourself to trying to learn how to block it then you can shift the odds pretty substantially.

      You're still not going to brick someone consistently but if you look at the teams that win the major tournaments they always have bad-ass goalies--that's why Todd Loffredo switched to goal after all. Moving the opponent from a 65% shooting percentage down to 45% can give your team the possessions it needs to turn a loss into a win.

      That said, I still got beat because...
      The best defense against a good snake shot, is a better five bar. ...Terry Moore has one of the best 5-bars in the world (offensive _and_ defensive) and Billy Pappas's was more than adequate to tool on us.

      Sumner

      --
      rage, rage against the dying of the light
  48. Well, by fcb · · Score: 1

    from what I can tell, if they actually programmed the bot to constantly cycle its goaly back and forth fast enough, it would beat any competetor. That's a fact.

  49. Re:Foosball? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That was pretty frickin' funny, dude. You gave back the two minutes the parent poster took away.

  50. The link is to Subbuteo champions, not FOOSBALL. by Assmasher · · Score: 1

    Table football is not Foosball in Europe, it is a game played with miniatures, called Subbuteo.

    --
    Loading...
  51. I invented the Foosball robot. by Rai · · Score: 1

    Researchers in Germany are the devil!

    (Sorry, couldn't resist.)

  52. It's quite good. by tequesta · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've played this thing last February at the Hannover industry fair. I'm by no means a tournament-level player, but I'm not crap either, so I think I can judge this thing's playing power. It's not very good at planning shots (in fact, it's crap at that ;-)), but it's amazingly fast. Better reactions than I have ever seen in a human. And keep in mind, this was a year ago. They use motion prediction to increase the frame rate, so that isn't the limit.

    I do think that they can make a tournament-level player out of this thing. Which isn't the motivation, of course, but give them two or three years.

  53. Unbeatable by MonkeyBoyo · · Score: 1

    But nobody can beat this guy. (1.7M wmv file)

  54. Foosball is a game of skill by reg106 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No really, I'm serious. This robot's playing style is more akin to what we call "whackball." Better foosball players remain in contact with the ball a lot longer, "palming" the ball with the face of the man to do quick changes in direction, fakes, and more. There's some video available here on the right side of the page.

    Of course, there have been robots interacting with dynamic environments in similar ways for a long time, such as juggling and running. It's a big jump to go to the next level, which requires chaining together sequences of difficult actions, such as palming the ball, passing, and shooting. But I think foosball is a great place to explore such dynamical interaction and action composition, and I'm jealous that they beat me to building a table.

  55. Tip of the day by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To improve your chances... cover the camera.

  56. In related news... by Azathoth!EDC · · Score: 1

    ... a table hockey version is also reported to be "in the works."

  57. Drunken Bar Sex by chia_monkey · · Score: 1

    As long as the computers don't take over our needs for drunken bar sex. When I get served by a robot, play video poker, lose to a foosball machine, and then turned down by a machine, I'll be just fine. Now if only I could find my old copy of Mac Foxes. Now THAT was a game...

    --

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
  58. Duh! by HopeUnknown · · Score: 1
    If you can create a robot...to play a good game of ping-pong, then I'll be impressed.

    We've had these for decades! http://www.pong-story.com/intro.htm

  59. A bad idea by aliens · · Score: 1

    Haven't any of you nerds watched the Animatrix? Have we learned nothing?

    And a robot vs human in soccer by 2050 is laughable. Yeah maybe there'll be one that can play against a human age 2.

    --
    -- taking over the world, we are.
  60. Achtung! by jargoone · · Score: 1

    Is there a german word for "slashdotted"?

  61. unfortunate acronym by mattsucks · · Score: 2, Funny

    from current world table football champions:

    With millions of players and competitions being held worldwide, in 1993, Frenchman Laurent Garnier decided to create an independent world-governing association, now known as the Federation of International Sports Table Football (FISTF).

  62. /, effect by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting



    Total 13,233
    Average Per Day 4
    Average Visit Length 1:44
    Last Hour 1,311
    Today 8,038
    This Week 31

    coincidence anyone? i think not

  63. Defense? Who needs it by AttillaTheNun · · Score: 1

    Imagine if this thing got fast enough - you wouldn't be able to get the ball past your back men. The computer would simply redirect your attempts right back into your net. All it needs then is some good smack talking to put you in your rightful place.

  64. Yeah! by alexo · · Score: 1
    I'll be impressed when they have a robot/AI that can play ping-pong. If you look at the plane the ball travels in, foosball is pretty two-dimensional...not entirely, I'll grant you, but I'm making a generalization. If you can create a robot that can deal with three dimensions, and can build strategies to play a good game of ping-pong, then I'll be impressed.
    Russell Anderson's doctoral work at the University of Pennsylvania (1986) was a robotic ping-pong player that wins against human beings.

    You can buy his book (or check it out at you local library).
    1. Re:Yeah! by superdan2k · · Score: 1

      Well, hot damn! I'll have to read up on that. As it stands, nothing gets added to my knowledge base without seeing it on Slashdot first.

      --
      blog |
  65. Grandmasters, Masters, Pros and MONEY! by Elk_Moose · · Score: 2, Informative

    For all of you out there that don't think you can do anything with foosball except drink and talk trash, check out the money you can win at regional, national and international tourneys. VIFA and USTSA

  66. I took the Red Team! by Lispy · · Score: 2, Funny

    So THATS how it all started. Red Team, Blue Team. Humans versus Machines...we are all doomed!
    Or maybe I should unplug from the matrix hype once in awhile.

  67. How to be a playa by evilninja · · Score: 3, Informative
    I've seen a lot of arguments against this machine in this small thread, but the prominent two seem to be A) foosball doesn't require strategy (like chess) and B) it will be easy to beat.

    As an avid foosball player, I first want to refute the "lack of strategy" argument for foosball. I play frequently with Tom Spear and Robbie Mares, two of the greatest foosball players in the world. (I don't know about elsewhere in the world, but in America they are known as "Pro Masters," not "grandmasters.") Either one of those guys will tell you that foosball is like a game of chess on speed. The amount of skill you posess for the game will only take you so far. At a certain point, the game becomes almost entirely mental.

    Players reach a skill level where they can, physically, do whatever they want to do with the ball. For a pass or a shot, they choose their hole before they even start to move the ball. Trying to defend the pass or the shot is a matter of being able to predict your opponent's maneuver; if you try to play a straightforward defense and watch to see where they're going, then race them to the opening...you'll lose every time.

    That said, I think that a machine could be a very worthy competitor. With a fine-tuned history-based decision-making algorithm for baiting and blocking shots, I'm sure it could play great defense if it's fast enough. As far as offense, I'm sure the machine could hit all sorts of angles and speed shots with deadly precision. It will just take time to teach it how to play.

    If you're at all interested in more foosball stuff, check out the Valley International Foosball Association and the United States Table Soccer Association. If you like to play, you should check out some local tournaments. For Colorado, we've got our own site and you might have one for your area, too. Speaking on behalf of tournament players everywhere, we'd love for you to come play our tournaments.

  68. Re:Foosball can be played at a much higher level.. by spongman · · Score: 1

    Yeah, first of all the robot would need to be able to control the ball. I don't think this Kiro can do that.

  69. You think you guess better than a computer? by Kelmenson · · Score: 1
    I would be mighty surprised if all the computers program did was put the goalie in front of where the ball is... I'm sure they coded in prediction of push and pull shots.

    You yourself admit that defensing good shots comes from reading whats shots are possible from the identical starting positions, and then guessing which one the opponent is going to shoot. That really doesn't sound beyond a computer to me.

    You also say that it would be easier to teach a robot offense, but can't imagine it setting up a shot? I would imagine that the computer could have better ball control than a person. Once the computer gets the ball on their 3-man, I'd think it could (eventually) get to the point where it scores every time. It could perfectly see every hole, and each time it hits the ball it would get the exact intended angle.

    Sure, I imagine today's first edition is highly beatable, but that would be due to the slowish visual processing and incomplete AI implementation. If the computer side of this would get the budget that Chess has had, in 5 years the computer would destroy.

    1. Re:You think you guess better than a computer? by vitaflo · · Score: 1

      You yourself admit that defensing good shots comes from reading whats shots are possible from the identical starting positions, and then guessing which one the opponent is going to shoot. That really doesn't sound beyond a computer to me.

      Perhaps, but my question is a matter of reaction time. "all possible shots" also includes *not* shooting, faking, etc. These open up holes. I think it's easier because once you figure out how the robot reacts to certain shots (or non shots) you can guess more easily when and where openings will be. The player on offense always has the advantage because they're the ones starting the shot, the robot then has to react, and I just don't see it reacting quick enough (yet) to a skilled player. This isn't chess where the computer gets time to think through possible options. Once a good player has had time w/ the robot, it could probably weave its way through easily.

      You also say that it would be easier to teach a robot offense, but can't imagine it setting up a shot? I would imagine that the computer could have better ball control than a person. Once the computer gets the ball on their 3-man, I'd think it could (eventually) get to the point where it scores every time. It could perfectly see every hole, and each time it hits the ball it would get the exact intended angle.

      While I agree that it could pull off shots easier than normal humans could, I'm skeptical that it may not "give away" the next shot before it shoots it. Just beause it might be able to hit a double bank from 3-man in every time, doesn't mean it can't be defended if the defense knows it's coming. This is how a lot of people play defense. The offensive player can sometimes give away the shot by their stance, movement, arm or hand tightening, etc, before the shot (having a good "card face" on offense helps you tremendously). For a robot to pull off shots perfectly every time means they go through the same motions everytime, which if picked up by the defense prior to shot, means it's easily defended. They key, like I said previously is for the programmers to make a bunch of different shots "look" identical to throw off the defense for the score.

      I'm not saying it can't happen one day, but just not today (or anytime soon). The game is just too fast for computers to handle it all right now is all I'm saying.

  70. German Gears? by frostfreek · · Score: 1

    The little animation is nice, but...
    I don't know about in Germany, but here in Canada, two meshed gears spin in opposite directions!

  71. What about the payola? by Mal-2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    How do you make the robot buy you a beer when you win? If you lose, what do you buy it -- a can of WD-40?

    --
    How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
  72. Star Wars finally makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "We don't serve your kind here"

    Finally!! The reason star wars pub owners hate robots!!

  73. But can he play like this! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Checkout
    http://www.bonziniusa.com/video/BonziniL ive.avi

  74. Too Late. by Cyno01 · · Score: 1

    I havn't been to a pub in a few years that didn't have one of these on the corner of the bar. (sorry i couldn't find a picture but you probably know what i'm talking about)

    --
    "Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
  75. Distract it with a potato chip! by Myrke · · Score: 1

    Or a pretzel, or even a bottle cap. Maybe the computer will think there are many different soccer balls on the playing field and start kicking madly. Perhaps in the confusion you'd be able to zip the ball around it's fenzied kickers. Worth a try... And without the opposing human to see what you're doing, who's to stop you putting beer bottles on either side of your goalie? Impossible scoring technique, ha-HA!

  76. The robots may beat me at foosball... by halepark · · Score: 1

    but I'll always be able to out-drink any machine!

  77. complexity by phriedom · · Score: 1

    I have to take issue with:"the ball comes towards you, makes contact with the bat (which has its own trajectory) and almost instantaneouly leaves in another direction. Pretty simple physics."

    The "almost" in "almost instantaneously" is what allows a player to impart a great deal of spin on the ball. I'm just an adequate player but my family kill-shot doesn't just have a lot of top-spin, it has enough side spin to curve about 5 inches in the air, jump sideways when it hits the table, and bounce from the opponent's paddle (should they get the block in place) at around 30 degrees off of true when that spinning inertia resolves on their paddle. Yes, even the aerodynamics is just physics, and math IS what computers are all about, but I would opine that it is anything but simple. I don't think any computer vision system is going to be able to be able to read that spin in the near future. You have to play the player, not just the ball.

    But I read your point that ping-pong and foosball are as different as apples and oranges because in foosball one gets to strike the ball multiple times and/or remain in contact with it, and it is a good point.

    --
    Don't moderate flamebait as Troll. Know the difference or you will be Meta-moderated.
  78. Oh great by Kiro · · Score: 2, Funny

    I will now forever be remembered as a robot. thanks a bunch!

  79. Re:Foosball can be played at a much higher tsarkon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i think the kiro could be able to do it if you dumped the code you put there for it to go after men's penises so that you may experience erticism by proxy vicariously through the robot.

  80. in soviet russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the foosball plays YOU