YMTC: Bluabot "Descores" Red Tetra

[Natchez]

Originally Posted by dlavery

Not sure why this one is even a question.

In order to breathe some new life into this YMTC, I'll try to throw in a knuckler.

If Bluabot knocked the red tetra off with 3 seconds, it would obviously be a scored red tetra and Redalliance's goal. An obvious violation of

<G18> ... If an alliance ROBOT removes any STACKED TETRA of the opposing alliance, the TETRA will be SCORED (3 points) and the opposing alliance automatically OWNS the GOAL for the remainder of the match regardless of what color TETRAS are on the goal. ...

Therefore, REMOVE is the key word here.

AND if Bluabot just tilted the red tetra with 3 seconds such that the tetra is not scored (not properly seated) and is still supported by the goal and lower tetras, it would probably count because Bluabot DESCORED the tetra. (I may be very wrong about this)

Since DESCORED is not in the rules, then you must rely on REMOVE from <G18> to explain why you give Redalliance credit.

NOW, WHAT IF when Bluabot hit Redabot, the top tetra fell to the ground; wouldn't you say that Bluabot's actions REMOVED the tetra, thereby making it necessary to give Redalliance credit.

SIMILARLY, since in the original YMTC, it was Bluabot's actions that DESCORED the red tetra, would you not consider this REMOVING the tetra thus resulting in the red tetra counting as a score.

I say the red tetra counts ... just because Dave said it didn't and he is probably fast asleep by now ... I hope

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Natchez

NOW, WHAT IF when Bluabot hit Redabot, the top tetra fell to the ground; wouldn't you say that Bluabot's actions REMOVED the tetra, thereby making it necessary to give Redalliance credit.

SIMILARLY, since in the original YMTC, it was Bluabot's actions that DESCORED the red tetra, would you not consider this REMOVING the tetra thus resulting in the red tetra counting as a score.

I say the red tetra counts ... just because Dave said it didn't and he is probably fast asleep by now ... I hope

I don't think this changes anything. The update specifically says that blue is only considered the descorer if red is rammed, and knocks blue tetras off.

It doesn't say a single word about a cascading chain of events causing the red tetra to fall off.

Unless blue was physically touching the red tetra and knocked it off, it doesn't make a single bit of difference--red was the one that actually did knock it off.

While it may be logical to assume that this is true, the rules do not say a single word about it, and therefore we have to go by the definition of "STACKED"

[dlavery]

Once again, Cory is right.

(nope, I'm not asleep!)

-dave

[Kelly322]

Originally Posted by Cory

I don't think this changes anything. The update specifically says that blue is only considered the descorer if red is rammed, and knocks blue tetras off.

Hmmm. On more than one occasion we were determined to have "descored" the other alliance even though we were pushed into the stacked tetras (while ourselves trying to score). There are at least two matches we were involved in that were called that way, one at each of the two regionals we attended. From what I have seen, if your robot causes a tetra of the other team to be descored, it does not matter if it was an "unassisted descoring" or if you were pushed into the stack by a member of the opposing alliance. Fair call? Questionable. Consistently called? Yes. Just my observations.

See ya'll in the ATL!!

[Goldeye]

My vote: The tetra doesn't count. But I'd probably be lacking somewhat in congratulations. Winning through a loophole like this is simply wrong.
As much as I hate to say it, there's almost nothing to argue against bluateam winning. We all know that it IS wrong...but the rules don't cover it. The best available argument is under good ol' G25, claiming that bluabot may have forced redabot to become entangled with a field structure through this clearly improper game play, but it'd be quite a stretch to contend that G25 refers to entanglement with field structures.

On a side note, if there were a blue tetra on the goal, and

Winning like this is not proper gameplay. As has been stated, driving your opponents robot with yours isn't what Triple Play is about. There should be a rule to cover this. We do not want to see teams doing it at the championship.

Proposed Rule <G18> (New text bolded)
<G18> ROBOTS can remove or displace TETRAS CONTAINED in a goal, but cannot remove the opposing alliance’s STACKED TETRAS. If an alliance ROBOT removes any STACKED TETRA of the opposing alliance, the TETRA will be SCORED (3 points) and the opposing alliance automatically OWNS the GOAL for the remainder of the match regardless of what color TETRAS are on the goal. There is no penalty for removing a TETRA that is precariously positioned on a GOAL or TETRA, but not fully STACKED. In the case that a STACKED TETRA is removed from the GOAL by a ROBOT being pushed by a ROBOT of the opposing alliance, the pushed ROBOT will not be penalized for removing the TETRA. Any removed TETRAS will be treated as though removed by the pushing ROBOT, and 10-point penalties assigned as appropriate.
I admit, "pushed robot" is not the greatest term.

Yes, this rule further endangers the strategy of the teams that try to win by controlling these robots. Who said that's a bad thing? Team Update #18 would be happy with it, at the least.