View Single Post
  #59   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-01-2010, 10:39
martin417's Avatar
martin417 martin417 is offline
Opinionated old goat
AKA: Martin Wilson
no team
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Buford, GA
Posts: 720
martin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Suction as a method for possessing balls

Quote:
Originally Posted by moultonmg View Post
I believe that most of what everyone is saying is going against the rule. Under the definition of possession it says

"A Ball shall be considered in possession if, as the robot moves or changes orientation ( e.g. backs up or spins in place), the ball remains in approximately the same position relative to the robot."

If you use suction then when you back up or spin the ball would come with you, which is the same position relative to the robot. Therefore I think the suction idea is out altogether. Unless you plan on sucking it up and then never moving.
Yes, by using suction you would be possessing the ball. How does this violate any rule? Just because there is a definition of an action, it does not imply that that action is illegal, in fact, if you read rule <G43> you will see that possession is defined as a legal action, if you are only doing it to one ball.
__________________
Former Mentor Team 1771
Former mentor Team 4509
Reply With Quote