More Trapping Clarification

In the manual, trapping is considered to have occurred if a robot “has restricted an opposing Robot into a small, confined area of the field, approximately the size of one foam field tile or less, and has not provided an avenue for escape.” An example of an indirect trap is being unable to escape from the corner of the field.

I wanted to ask for your evaluation of the following situation:
A blue robot is positioned along one of the walls. A red robot continuously pushes against the blue robot, though it is not pinning the blue robot (not touching the wall).
There is an avenue for escape, but whenever the blue robot tries to move in a certain direction, the red robot proceeds to push it in the opposite direction. As a result of this interaction, the blue robot is unable to leave its current position.

Would this be considered trapping?
I just wanted to clarify the above situation since it has occurred though I haven’t found an official answer on the forum.

Thank you in advanced!

Trapping IS defined as preventing a robot from exiting its current location. Trapping is NOT defined as preventing a robot from entering a location. If the red robot simply defends its position from the blue robot, and blue could simply drive a different direction, this is not trapping.

Even if red pursued blue’s escape to continue to hinder its efforts, that would not be trapping UNTIL the red robot actively prevents the blue robot from escaping its current position in every direction.

From the Game Manual

Although the letter of the rule is that trapping implies confining an opposing robot to a “small” area of the field, if , for example, a robot is fast enough to prevent an opposing robot from navigating out into the field by constricting it to moving back and forth along a wall, as a referee, I would look at the spirit of the rule and possibly at least warn the “trapping” robot.

Got it, thank you!!

Honestly… i wouldn’t see it as trapping.
Notice - there is an avenue of escape… just that it might not be in the direction that the blue robot prefers.

I will see it as the blue robot just got to out maneuver the red.

In the referee training videos though, when a robot is trapped in a corner, there is also an avenue for escape and the robot in the corner is just unable “to out maneuver” the robot trapping it.

If it is in a small corner… and has no avenue for escape.
from your description, looks like the robot has the entire side of the field to run.

Edit: it doesn’t make sense to penalise the red robot, it gives the feeling that it is being penalised for having a more mobile and faster robot?

There were so many of this incident in worlds, I really didn’t see those robots being called for trapping,

I agree one should not be penalized for building better robots :slight_smile:

Here is the definition of trapping:

To me it is the act of confining a robot to a small area definition, one tile, which stands out. So, if I have quantum speed robot and I outmaneuver you to keep you within one square tile, I would think it meets the active restriction to a small defined space criteria. It could warrant a <G14> warning.

I hope to see the day when vex allows students to build quantum speed robots.

The ones I’ve seen in videos is that the robot that looks like its being trapped is still able to move around more than one square tile. In that case, the robot is just unable to go where it wants. Here’s a previous discussion on that type of situation.

However, if a blue robot constantly attempts to get out of a one tile area but is not able to because a red robot is able to and is actively guarding the perimeter of the area, it can be considered trapping (regardless of whether the robots are in contact or not).

Think the 62 situation is not the same as you have described in the original post.
And if I recalled correctly, it was ruled legal for the robot to push 62 around… the only possible infringement was entanglement (if there was anything that was latched or hooked on).

For the situation that you have mentioned in the original post, it sounds like the blue robot has more than one tile to move around, and if the blue robot can get out of the one tile in one way (it may not be in the direction that the blue robot wants), then it is not trapped.

And believe me, I had teams that were blocked in this manner many times, they just got to spin out of the situation in the other way and took the longer route. No infringement was called so far.

But of course, as mentioned by @lacsap , if the red robot manages to move around and block the blue from leaving that one tile, then yes, it is a trap.

Alright, thank you for all your help everyone :smiley: