Cleaning The Fields At Worlds

Hi there!

As many of us know, the field quality can drastically effect robot performance with shooting in Vex Iq Slapshot. Will the fields at worlds be clean/clean as new, or old ones? Also, will we be allowed to clean the fields with clorox, etc? Teams can toil tirelessley trying to optimize a robot, only for it to not work at world championship.



I was wanting the REC to address this for a long time, even sent an email about it. Still no response, hopefully in the season update that is coming up soon I will post the same question and hope it will be anwsered.

1 Like

I don’t know about IQ, but in VRC they use all new brand-new fields and game elements at Worlds.

My guess would be no.


No, you can’t clean the fields at worlds. You really can’t mess with them at all. The fields will be clean and the elements brand new.

Pardon me if this seems rude, but how do you know if they will be new?

It’s the way it has been done the last 5 times we’ve gone. The fields in the overall finals in the Dome usually are also be brand new, never played in before.

I assume this applies to IQ, as well as the divisional fields, right?

This is posted in the iq category so that’s what I’m replying to. VRC is the same way but it’s a much bigger issue for 15 second auton. The tiles have a lot of grip on day 1 that is gone by day 4.

First, you should be aware that rule “T18: Be prepared for minor field variance” should be taken into account. The surface behavior of a given field will certainly come until that.

You should never try to wipe down a field at a competition. Other teams and the referees may interpret this as an attempt to modify the field to your advantage. Requesting (politely) that the EP have the fields wiped down is something you could do, ideally before the tournament starts. If you volunteer to provide the wipes and do the work then you might be met with more success. But also be prepared to be rejected.

It is also a really good idea to inspect the field when you arrive at it. Do a visual inspection of the field and game elements. You should not start handling the game elements yourself without permission from the onfield referee. Again you don’t want to be accused of setting the field to your advantage. A polite conversation with the field referee or head referee pointing out the defect is best. You can volunteer to fix it for them, if they agree, then go for it.

Also, in my experience, the fields at Worlds are in excellent condition and mostly appear to be brand new every year. The practice fields might be reused from previous years, but even those have always appeared in excellent shape.


This would be the case, if the variance was minor. The difference between a new field and a 1 year old field is more than enough to screw up a team, especially in slapshot.

1 Like

This is true, the rec should give teams 30 to 40 seconds while they wait to test their shooter. This will not affect anything because they are running one match at a time. There is no unfair advantage.

And do what if it’s not meeting expectations? Move them to another field? Take more time to scrub down a field that will then slow down the matches? What’s the point (aka specification) at which you say it’s gone over a certain coefficient of friction and that will be the point they get scrubbed?

No; it’s a game. The manual already accounts for this with saying the variance between fields should be expected and designed for, this is not for millions of dollars of ad revenue, nobody (hopefully) is betting on the outcomes. Just no.

I realize it’s competitive, and it’s great to win awards and be named champions and everything, but the goal here is still education, with competitive robotics a way to inspire kids to keep going and trying to improve (because they’re not getting paid for it like an engineer or technologist would be at a job).


Might as well not come to the World Champion Ship if this whole game is luck based.

Surely it is only luck based if your robot design can’t compensate by being able to adjust shooter power?


Yeah, that is a really good point.