[Peter Matteson]

Originally Posted by jvriezen

1) Two Red bots travel side by side with a Red ball 'sandwiched' between them (maybe in co-designed mechanisms or just between gapped bumpers) and travel from one zone to the next. If either bot were to have not been there, the ball would have fallen away. Two ASSISTS?

2) One bot is carrying the ball from one zone to another, and briefly opens its claw which would normally let the ball fall out, but a partner bot has an appendage (or side wall of bot) there preventing it from falling out. The claw re-closes to grab the ball. Two ASSISTS?

3) One bot is carrying the ball from one zone to another, and does not release its 'grip' on the ball, but a partner bot presses on the ball with an appendage (or bumper or any robot part) Two ASSISTS?

4) One bot has the ball in a cradle such that a sudden acceleration would cause the ball to be lost (no 'grip', just a ball carry that relies on gravity). A partner bot presses against the ball in the cradle. Again, the cradle bot has visited two zones. Two ASSISTS ?

1). I have no clue how that will be ruled if anyone pulls it off. I think the correct answer is no alliance will likely pull it off so the question is moot.

2-4) None of these would be possesion by both robots. To any casual obsever and by the other definitions the first robot never relinquishes control of the ball. You will not win an arguement like this with the referees because they will be calling obvious control for posession.