1. 8 weeks ago

    blatwell

    Dec 25 Event Partner Indianapolis 621A

    Please see the video linked below at the 8:37:05-8:37-09 marks. In this situation, the blue alliance team had placed a mobile goal with a stack of 5 cones into the 20 point zone. In the process of placing those cones, some of them came un-nested. The blue alliance robot then reached in and pulled the stack of un-nested cones into a nested position. Would this be a violation of SG9?

    I have no skin in the game as I just happened to see this on youtube but it would be good to know as the season goes forward. In this case, it would have been match affecting as the blue alliance won by 1 point.

    SG9 specifically refers to Possession of multiple Cones. The definition of Possession is as follows:

    Possessing – A Robot is considered to be Possessing a Cone if it is carrying, holding, or controlling the movement of a Cone in the Robot. Pushing/plowing Cones is not considered Possession, however using concave portions of your Robot to control the movement of Cones is considered Possession.

    The robot in question did not appear be carrying or holding the Cone that it pushed into place. Pushing Cones is not considered Possession per the verbiage above. The relevant referee training video includes more examples of "controlling the movement of Cones in the Robot", for reference.

    Thus, the action displayed in the video would not be a violation of SG9.

  2. 5 weeks ago

    VEX GDC

    Jan 12 Administrator Answer Greenville, TX

    SG9 specifically refers to Possession of multiple Cones. The definition of Possession is as follows:

    Possessing – A Robot is considered to be Possessing a Cone if it is carrying, holding, or controlling the movement of a Cone in the Robot. Pushing/plowing Cones is not considered Possession, however using concave portions of your Robot to control the movement of Cones is considered Possession.

    The robot in question did not appear be carrying or holding the Cone that it pushed into place. Pushing Cones is not considered Possession per the verbiage above. The relevant referee training video includes more examples of "controlling the movement of Cones in the Robot", for reference.

    Thus, the action displayed in the video would not be a violation of SG9.

 

or Sign Up to reply!