Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH
(I'm reasonably sure Tristan will be along shortly to dispute with one of us, or the GDC, or both.)
|
Of course.
My take on it is that the statement in 2.2.5 is a complete definition of "balanced". The only things that the referee has to determine are the angle (within 5° from the horizontal), and whether every robot touching it is fully supported by the bridge.
When determining whether a robot is fully supported, the load path comes into play—but only to the extent that all loads derived from the bridge's and robots' weights go through the bridge before acting on the surroundings. (The ball, ball ramp, barrier, etc. are all parts of the surroundings, because they're neither bridge nor robot.)
So if the ball got there without a violation of [G14], and the angle and support requirements were met, I think this was a legitimate balance that should have received 2 CP.