"Attaching" to the vertical pole.
 

From the Q&A site:

Section: 4.3 Status: Answered Date Answered: 1/16/2004
Q: Would a robot receive the 50 points if, by design, it would be leaning on (but not supported by) the vertical bar?
A: Please read the many other answers on this topic but... yes as long as you are not in violation of HANGING or SUPPORTED.

vs.

Section: 7.6 Status: Answered Date Answered: 1/16/2004
Q: If a robot is SUPPORTED only by the horizontal bar, but is stabilized by being in contact with a vertical bar, is it attached to the bar? No mechanism grips the vertical bar, and the robot would still hang if the vertical bar was "removed."
A: Yes.

My interpretation of these two answers is that they are directly contradictory with one another. Could someone else, if they disagree with me, help for me to see how they're not contradictory and to clarify their meaning and intent.

I realize, of course, that the answers are not official, but I'm interested in reading about others' interpretation of these two answers and how to reconcile my perceptions about their contradictions.

Thanks.

Re: "Attaching" to the vertical pole.
 

I think it's clear. The first question is asking whether or not robots may have accidental contact with the vertical pole while hanging (which is OK). The second asks if leaning on the vertical pole to prevent swinging is ok, and it is (in my interpretation). I think what the person was asking was whether or not the robot could hang by pulling themselves up adjacent to the vertical pole so that the pole would help to prevent some swinging while going up.

But that's just what I think.

Re: "Attaching" to the vertical pole.
 

The interpretation of this answer depends on which bar is refered to when the person asks "is it attached to the bar". Proper grammar would mean it refers to the last thing which would be the vertical bar, which is why you beleive that that the answers are contridictory. However, when I read it the first time (the first few times, actually), I read it to refer to the horizontal bar. If the person answering the question read it this way to, you would have a non-contradictory answer (and the one FIRST intended).

Re: "Attaching" to the vertical pole.
 

Sounds like wishful thinking. ;)

Re: "Attaching" to the vertical pole.
 

There was also this, so I think it is allowable...

Section: 4.3 Date$@#Answered: 1/16/2004
Q:
Would a robot receive the 50 points if, by design, it would be leaning on (but not supported by) the vertical bar?

A:
Please read the many other answers on this topic but... yes as long as you are not in violation of HANGING or SUPPORTED.

Re: "Attaching" to the vertical pole.
 

They are asking the same thing, just diffrently worded.

If we are hagning from the h-bar, is it ok if we interact with the v-bar? It is 50 points if the v-bar is removed and they are still hanging.

Wetzel

Re: "Attaching" to the vertical pole.
 

So yes, if you are leaning on the vertical bar and require that to stay hanging, then you are not supported by the h-bar alone.

Nor are you allowed to climb the v-bars.



Wetzel

Re: "Attaching" to the vertical pole.
 

The difficulty is that "attaching" to the vertical bars isn't prohibited solely with respect to being considered as HANGING or SUPPORTED, but that it's prohibited entirely.

So, really, whether or not you're considered HANGING or SUPPORTED at the end of a match based on your interactions with the vertical bar is irrelevant as all such interaction, potentially, is illegal irrespective of when it occurs.

Re: "Attaching" to the vertical pole.
 

You are not allowed to attach to the side of the field, but you are allowed to drive up against it. I see the same here. You are allowed to touch and be next to it, but not attach to it.


Wetzel

Re: "Attaching" to the vertical pole.
 

[quote=Wetzel]So yes, if you are leaning on the vertical bar and require that to stay hanging, then you are not supported by the h-bar alone.

But, if you are completely supported by the horizontal bar, and only leaning against the vertical bar, so that if the vertical bar were removed you would swing in a bit (like a pendulum) but still be high enough off the platform, then why wouldn't you be considered hanging?

Re: "Attaching" to the vertical pole.
 

[quote=Jason Rudolph]Thats what I thought I said. If you require the vertical bar to stay hanging, then you would fall if it was removed. If you fall if it was removed, then you don't count as hanging. If you just oscillate easier if it wasn't there, then you count.

Wetzel