YMTC: Bluabot sits on Redabot

[jonathan lall]

Regarding the pinning rule, not only does it explicitly apply only to the carpet, but it is specifically designed to stop powerful robots from having too much of an advantage over weak ones (or else it would lead to some pretty defensive strategies). It's also a carry-over from old games and therefore it's reasonable to say it isn't designed to take hanging into account. FIRST has also said otherwise.

Originally Posted by Winged Globe

As the rules are written, Redabot cannot classify as hanging because it does not meet the second point (it *is* touching the platform). This renders the first point (directly supported by the horizontal bar) moot, because the definition of supported says the robot would not be hanging if the supporting object was removed, and Redabot never met the second point of hanging. Hence, Bluabot doesn't come into account. The supported clause is circular and a bit confusing, but touching the platform is clearly not allowed to be hanging.

Bluabot is hanging because it is not touching the ground, it would remain hanging with Redabot removed (not supported by Redabot), and it would not remain hanging (off the ground) with the horizontal bar removed.

Zing. That's the right reasoning according to the rules; the rules are very clear to give a structured and ordered approach to determining whether or not a robot is hanging. If those conditions are met, you can get into the "if this were removed" (ITWR) business.

Originally Posted by Winged Globe

I asked this very question at UTC New England. The ruling was that if the Bluabot was removed and the Redabot was hanging then Redabot scores. Aidan was the Head Ref.

I believe this is in error; clearly Bluabot is not supporting anything (quite the opposite in fact), and therefore ITWR does not apply. If you doubt, refer to the rules given in Winged Globe's post.