Who Owns This Goal

We were messing around, putting tetras on two at a time, and they got tangled. This is unlikely to happen during competition, but we need to thank about all the 'angles.'

[663.keith]

red owns the goal if the blue tetra is more than 6 inches away from the vertex.

[Steve W]

Originally Posted by Dr.Bot

We were messing around, putting tetras on two at a time, and they got tangled. This is unlikely to happen during competition, but we need to thank about all the 'angles.'

It probably will as we did the exact same thing while testing.

[Petey]

A check of the definition of "scored" and "stacked" proves that neither the red nor the blue tetras are stacked on the black tetra.

--Petey

[Max Lobovsky]

So then the only way more points could be scored on this goal, or that the goal can change ownership is by removing these two tetras which would now be legal?

[Elgin Clock]

Originally Posted by Max Lobovsky

So then the only way more points could be scored on this goal, or that the goal can change ownership is by removing these two tetras which would now be legal?

Either that, or this is a very effective way to block a tetra goal from being scored upon.

[663.keith]

Originally Posted by Petey

A check of the definition of "scored" and "stacked" proves that neither the red nor the blue tetras are stacked on the black tetra.

--Petey

SCORED - a tetra is scored when it is contained within a goal or stacked on top of a goal

STACKED - a tetra is stacked when it is placed on top of a goal or on top of another stacked tetra. to be considered stacked, the tetra must be properly seated on the subordinate goal or tetra such that all four apex connectors are within six inches of the supporting structure. Due to the goal and tetra geometries, a tetra may occasionally not completely "seat" on the goal or subordinate tetra, and remain precariously positioned on top of the structure. such tetras are not considered stacked. A tetra is not considered stacked if it is touching a robot of the same alliance.

SUPPORTED - if the "supporting object" is removed, the tetra would not remain scored or stacked

According to the stacked definition, the blue tetra is not considered stacked (because all four apexes are not within 6 inches of the goal) and would thus be disregarded . considering that, one only needs to look at the red tetra is comparison to the goal, which would become its supporting object. All four red apexes are within six inches of the goal, and their by, red owns the goal.

[dlavery]

Our team discovered the same configuration potential a few days ago. You can create it easily in the following manner: stack a red tetra on a blue tetra; rotate the assembly 90 degrees so that is it on its "side"; and place the resulting rotated assembly on top of a goal. The configuration shown in Alan's picture will result.

With regard to the interpretation of ownership, I believe that Keith is correct, and for the reasons (and specific rules) that he cited. The blue tetra is invalid. The red tetra is "STACKED," and "OWNS" the goal.

-dave

[DrShadowSML]

I can see that this thread is creating some problems. Maybe I can contact some higher ups and see what they say. I'll reply when I have an answer.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by DrShadowSML

I can see that this thread is creating some problems. Maybe I can contact some higher ups and see what they say. I'll reply when I have an answer.

Steven,
If you look up 1 post, you'll notice "Mr. Lavery" responded.
He's about as high up as you get these days.

If a ruling is necessary (I'm not convinced it is) I'm positive we'll see a response in the Q/A or in a team update.

JV