Can you remove caps from the poles once they've been scored?


VEX COMPETITON TURNING POINT: Can you remove OTHER TEAM’S caps from the poles once they’ve been scored (high scored) (put through the pole)?


Yes, as long as they stay in the field.


As per <SG8>,

It is only against the rules to knock it off the stand, if you can do so without threatening to have it fall out of the field you’ll be fine.


@Wiredcat Robotics That sounds crazy! So if they’ve already racked up like 5 caps on the pole if I wait till the end and lift them all out… do they still have the points because they had originally scored them or not?


@TitanRey15 you would be better to flip them over so your alliance gets the points. Simply removing them means that no alliance receives points. And, yes, you can remove them as long as you do not break rule <SG8> (like knocking them off).


As has been the case for as long as I can remember, the score is only counted at the end of the match. So if you remove them just before the end of the match, they do not count as scored by your opponent.


@536Mentor @Hudsonville Robotics That “sounds” like cheating (although not against the rules), all that hard work could just be taken out of the pole and a massive loss of points (as in less points scored) for the opposing team compared to the already scored points by my team! I feel immoral with this tactic… can I get a confirmation from official VEX perhaps… where can i get that?


It is just a simple case of descoring and rescoring, which is normal.

You can descore your opponents’ caps as well. It is a fair game.

Besides, there are only 6 posts to play with. All the robots will run out of things to do if descoring is not allowed.


There is nothing immoral about it nor is it cheating. Over the years, many VEX games have allowed de-scoring of game objects, it is part of the game and part of the game strategy. The general rule for the Game Manual is that if it is not specifically stated that you can not do it, then you can. As the season progresses, specific interpretations of the rules will be updated in the official Q&A. The Official Q&A has been changed for this year so that only mentors/coaches can post questions. If you want your questions answered officially oyou need to have your coach/mentor post them on the Q&A. The Game Manual for Turning Point does NOT say that you can not remove your opponents’ caps from the poles, therefore you can as long as you do not let them leave the field (as there is a rule against that).


Don’t feel that way! Normally I wouldn’t tell someone how to feel, but you seem to misunderstand the game. Look at the game’s very name: Turning Point. The whole idea is to keep flipping things. That’s what is done with the flags. It’s also what is done with the caps. In this sense it’s like Starstruck. In Starstruck, do you feel bad for removing points the opponents earned by picking up stars/pillows and throwing them to the other side?


You can knock caps off. It’s even expected that teams will knock them off. You can inadvertently knock them out of the field without penalty. However, you can’t repeatedly cause game objects to leave the field of play without penalty. Here’s what <SG8> says:

So you can’t knock them out of the field of play “intentionally or strategically”. You can knock the off into the field of play to descore them.


While this is great advice and a very good analogy, @TitanRey15 joined the forum 10 months ago. This is likely the first time he’s seen a game where descoring was a major part of how the game is played. I’m guessing that’s why descoring seems “un-VEXy” to him.

Some VEX game observations:
In general, there are two classes of VEX gameplay with regard to descoring. If descoring is allowed, there will be very few game objects, and overall a very low total score. When descoring is not allowed, there will be many scoring objects, and a very restrictive set of rules limiting possession and hoarding. And total game scores will, in general, be higher.

The goal of either of those two paths in the game design decision tree is to keep the game moving all the way to the end, with each alliance having some way to contribute and change the score.

This game has few objects, so it’s built around descoring and rescoring. It has so few scoring objects that they have a possession rule as well. Games with rescorable objects are cheaper to produce and easier and faster to ship and transport, and faster to reset between matches.


Nothing But Net :wink:
That year was the first year we hosted a competition, and boy, did we did not know we needed as many field resetters as we did


Waiting until the very end and then rapidly de-scoring will be much, much harder than it might sound at first thought. The opposing robots will do everything they can to prevent your team from de-scoring and/or they will be busy scoring other objects, too. Also, mobility on the field will be made challenging by the existence of the platforms, so whizzing from one side of the field to the other to de-score will likely take more time than you seem to be thinking.


IF you want an official confirmation from the VEX GDC (Game Design Committee), you can ask it in the Turning Point Official QnA On Robot Events (you’ll need to be on a registered team, try asking a mentor/teacher):


The way caps are shaped you can only hang one per post
Cap Interacting with Pole.PNG


I agree. With Starstruck waiting to the end could be viable because once things were on your side the other team couldn’t stop you from picking them up. With Turning Point, if you wait until the end to flip things, the other alliance can just play defense to cut down on how much you can get to to flip, and you’ll never flip enough.


I agree as well, the swing from descoring and rescoring a post-cap is too much to wait until the end to do it.


Good advice on where to take official questions. But I believe this is the kind of question they’re trying to keep off of the official Q&A this year. There isn’t any possibility that descoring and rescoring is against the rules, (it’s clearly the point of the game) so it doesn’t seem to need any clarification.