[Mr. Van]

So, what happens when the rules change? In mid season?

For me, I believe the issue became most obvious this year with the 3" ball penetration rule.

Many teams that designed high chassis robots to go over the bump had difficulty keeping balls out from under them. Instead of having to make a choice based on their design (penalties vs. bump traversing) these teams found their problem solved - by a rule change. (In most of these cases, a bar could have been placed below the chassis that would keep a ball from going under the robot, but it would have prevented bump traversing.)

The update (after week 1) made it completely legal to DRIVE OVER A BALL. In fact, many teams that had worked (to varying degrees of success) at keeping balls from going under their robots removed any devices that were designed to do this at subsequent regionals.

Essentially teams that managed to successfully overcome the challenge of going over the bump without allowing balls to go under their robot found that their efforts were wasted. In fact, their design may now be at a disadvantage because they can't simply drive over a ball that may be in their way preventing a maneuver.

There were solutions to the bump vs. 3" problem with the rules as written and many teams did develop and execute these solutions. Why would FIRST seem to say "this problem is too hard, so we're going to remove it from the challenge"?

So, because so many teams ignored a rule (or were unsuccessful in following it) FIRST said it was going to modify the rule.

This issue is of course complicated by selective enforcement of rules at events.

-Mr. Van
Robodox