highlights of the Fifth Asia-Pacific Robot Championship

The problem with dumping the wall into your isolation zone is that your isolation robot won’t be able to move. However, I’m thinking of barricading the other alliance in their isolation zone.

Well, their robot wasn’t terribly complex. It was certainly very well engineered and looked complicated on the surface, but it was a relatively simple concept. But certainly an incredible robot and strategy. I can’t wait to see what you come up with.

do you mean movinng the entire stack in front of your opponents gaye?

Forgive typos typed on nook


  1. Both enemy alliance robots drive into isolation zone
  2. Your alliance robots barricade them in, ruled as not pinning by vex q and a
  3. You now have access to ~3/4 of the field, provided one of your alliance can keep them in.
  4. they can’t get their doubler barrel

So what happens if one of your opponents’ robots never goes into the isolation zone during a match?

That is the fatal flaw of this strategy. :smiley:

If you can successfully block your opponents from ever getting to the center 30" goal and your Interaction Zone side’s 11.5" goal, as well as your 30" and 11.5" goals in your Isolation Zone, and also keep them off of their Interaction Zone starting Tile after the 30-second mark to keep them from their Doubler, you have the chance to win every time, as long as the robots are not … “strange”. (By strange I mean being able to reach quite far into your Isolation Zone or crazy things of that nature. ;))

If they score all 22 of their game objects in all 5 goals “easily” available to them, they can get a maximum of 27.

If you then are able to score all 13 of the game objects “easily” available to you, and your Doubler in a “smart” manor, in the 4 goals “guaranteed” available, you can get a “maximum” of 24.

This is assuming that they get the entire stack of game objects in the center of the field, and you don’t retrieve any of them (not yours or theirs), and also that they are able to own both 20" goals. Which means, even if someone were to do this to you, or you were to do this to someone, the robots counteracting the strategy need to make sure that they own both 20" goals in the center, and keep the opponents from retrieving 3 or more of the opponents’ game objects, or 2 or more of their own from the center pyramid/stack.

The way it plays out, most likely the team executing this in a Finals match would be able to own at least one 20" goal, but that is only a 2-point swing. You would still need to retrieve at least 1 game object from the center stack. Assuming that you can do all of that, you can win the game.

Once teams catch on, they might simply park on their Alliance Starting Tile in the Interaction Zone, and wait for the 30 second mark. If you can’t physically push them off of the tile, or somehow keep them from scoring their Doubler, and keep them from passing it to their partner to score, they can still win.


I have to say that I find it hard to believe the video is not in fast forward (at least in the first clips). The easiest way of reaching this conclusion would be to look at the effect gravity takes on the the objects. The objects are falling at too quick of a speed to be on planet Earth and in no fast forward.

The conclusion I shall reach is that this was filmed on Jupiter, where gravity is approximately two and a half times stronger.

Well truly sorry that i forgot to remove that post and there is no edit icon now. yesterday i discussed with my coach about this video and he also said it should have been accelerated. thanks for pointing it out.

No problem, though I don’t think the video was speeded up too much. Regardless, they look quite impressive.

Seems like a thorough analysis, but the above line jumped out;
To implement this strategy, it is not enough to merely occupy their start tile.


I believe he meant literally keeping them off their starting tile. Like preventing them from getting near it.

I thought I had seen something about that on the Forum, and it must have been that thread. Somehow my “careful” search of the Manual didn’t come up with that rule a few weeks ago, so I had thought maybe I was mistaken.

So anyway, thank you for that. But yes, I was referring to keeping them from going near it, not expanding over it. You’d have to make sure that you are not touching it, though? Even if you aren’t occupying the entire tile? That’s what Karthik’s post seem to state, however I don’t really see a rule that justifies anything that he said about that. Only that you aren’t allowed to completely prevent access with your robot. Nothing about what happens if you do.


I guess it will be up to the referees to decipher this ambiguous rule. I’m sure that by worlds this will be much cleared up, but I fear for more regional competitions there will be multiple interpretations of the rule. Can blocking a robot from the other side of the field be considered legal, whereas stationing yourself in the enemy’s starting tile not?

Or it will be clarified long before World Champs. :wink:


Q&A discussion is ongoing regarding pancake and related.
SweetMochi -Team Wassabi had a video example somewhere that I’ll reference in the Q&A when I get a real pointer to it.

Re Jordan’s quote, my interpretation is different, and the “what happens” is in the first sentence. Same quote again:

I don’t see any rules against pancaking a starting tile, ie: you are allowed to do it.
It is just ineffective, because doing a pancake ( > ~50% coverage of tile, per recent Q&A update) creates SG7 allowance for your opponent, so they don’t even have to touch the square, just touch your defending robot.

Here’s the video. It’s Final 1 of the BC Season Opener. At ~6:26 look at the left side of the field (red side) for a situation that seems to model “pancaking”.

8066 (aka Zeus) in the video is a middle school team.
In fact, watch out for them during the world championship… middle school world finalist for 2011… and this season, they are even more awesome…

they are definitely pushing my teams really really hard…

as for the similar design (i won’t call it “same”)… well… let’s face it, there are only that few “common” approaches in lifting up the game elements up to 30".
If you look at their robots closely, you’ll notice a bit of variations here and there. So I wouldn’t call it the “same”. but of course, the approaches are very similar, eg. tread… 6-bars… etc…

how many elements can the 8113 robot hold?