In that Q&A it also says that “all Field Elements, including the Platforms, have an expected tolerance of +/- 1.0 inches.”
Does this meant that the platforms can legally be 2 inches closer to the blue side than the red side?
Since the guides for field assembly show the platforms being closer to blue by 1 inch, it would make sense that a 1 inch deviation from this official platform position would be allowed.
I can also post the Q & A as an EP. In my events I’m going to set up the field as perfectly as possible according to the field specs. That’s how I roll. Speculate schulamate!!!
Think what @Mark Finley is trying to establish is that during any competitions, the teams will need to be prepared that the platform can be up to 2” further for the blue. Teams will need to be able to adapt to it for their autonomous.
I’m not sure what the OP question is getting at. But I wouldn’t say it was legal to set up the field and deliberately place the platform two inches closer to the blue side. What tolerance is, is you design to the specs (for example, platform is one inch closer to the blue side) accepting that there could be an error of up to +/- 1 inch. I say this because one could deliberately set up the platform to be 2 inches closer to the platform and, due to tolerance and errors, be outside of the +/- 1 inch tolerance and, hence be out of spec. Or, by doing that, could cause something else to be out of spec. That being said, you always build and design to spec to guarantee you are wiithin tolerance. If you build to spec and the platform happens to be two inches closer to the blue side, that’s legal. If you deliberately modify the set up to place the platform two inches closer to the blue side, that is not legal. Of course, this is my opinion, and as Lacsap states, you could post an official ruling. However, in the professional world, i believe what i state to be true: always build to spec. If you are given a design, do not modify it.
Don’t think anyone is saying anything about setting up the field intentional with 2” advantage to the red.
Just simple uncertainty involved here. According to plan, it is already 1” off, and if the maximum uncertainty is included, then there is a potential that it could be 2” off.
No one is accusing the EPs for not following the plan.
Edit: but going by uncertainty, then there is always a possibility that it end up less than 1” off as well.
I think you are misinterpreting the Q&A response. The offset is part of the game design. Field setups will have the offset - do not try to undo it. Above that, you can have ±1" variance occurring due to materials shifting.
My advice to teams is to have a blue alliance and red alliance configuration (which you should have any way) that will account for where the objects are.
I wasn’t questioning anyone’s intregrity. I took this as a purely hypothetical example and stated up front I didn’t know where the OP was coming from. So I covered a couple of scenarios - one scenario where it would be legal and one scenario where it would not be legal. I don’t think it is as straightforward as saying it is always legal because it depends on how it happened. Plus, I have seen questions on here where people are trying to find out just how far they can push rules. Was not questioning intent or integrity. Honestly, didn’t even look closely enough to see that the OP was en EP. Actuallly, when I come to the forum through my andriod device, that type of info is unavailable.
The +/- 1inch tolrenace is not new. It has been in the manual every year since I’ve participated in Vex. Presumably, teams design for this tolerance each year.
No… i didnt misinterpret.
My point is exactly what you have mentioned.
The design is already 1" off centered (and yes, not supposed to change that).
And with the tolerance or uncertainty of +/- 1" , then it is not wrong to expect the worst case scenario of the platform 2" nearer towards the red.