[Mr. Lim]

Originally Posted by sgreco

If in fact a robot had bolt head extending out of the frame perimeter, but inside the bumper zone, then when the bumpers were removed and the robot were pushed against a wall, the bolt head would hit the wall and not the frame perimeter, which would make this note not make sense.

I think the note was a good example in illustrating the general application of the FRAME PERIMETER, which was its original intent. It's not as good in illustrating the protruding bolt head exclusion, which was added later in a Team Update(?).

The note clarification does make more sense if you interpret that the protruding bolt heads in the bumper zone "simply disappear" because they are excluded from the FRAME PERIMETER. By magically pretending the excluded bolt heads no longer exist, your FRAME PERIMETER should be the first thing to touch a wall.

(That also means any protruding bolt heads above or below the bumper zone will cause a problem - they are NOT excluded, and still have to be taken into account in the example)

Kind of a weird assumption, and I've already shown in this thread that making assumptions is generally a bad idea. However if you do this, the scenario seems to better the reflect the actual rules as written.