YMTC: Bluabot "Descores" Red Tetra

[Jack Jones]

Originally Posted by dlavery

Not sure why this one is even a question.

Cory has it right. When Redabot comes in contact with the red tetra, and maintains contact after the end of the match, the tetra no longer satisfies the definition of SCORED. Thus, it is no longer counted in the Redateam score, and Redateam loses the match and finals.

Update #18 does not apply, for two reasons. The specific question adressed in Update #18 has to do with a situation where Redabot would remove a blue tetra from a goal, which is not the situation here. Also, the update has to do with the specifics of a tetra that is removed from a stack (and therefore, the ownership of the goal may be assigned to the other alliance for the remainder of the match). This example YMTC has to do with an end-of-game contact situation, which is different.

The batter is still set, waiting for the fastball...

-dave

Wow, Dave! I find it incredible that you’d take this position. It seems to me that, for scoring purposes, causing a robot to touch it’s own tetra and causing the tetra to be knocked off the stack is a distinction without a difference.

Originally Posted by Yeam_Update#18

Revised answer 3/29/2005: No. In this case the pushing robot will be considered the de-scoring robot. In cases where there is a pushing robot and a scoring robot, but the causation is not clear, the pushing robot will still be considered the de-scoring robot. In cases where there is no obvious pushing robot, for example when two robots are trying to stack tetras simultaneously, the robot that is contacting the de-scored tetras will be considered the de-scoring robot.

Originally Posted by dlavery

When Redabot comes in contact with the red tetra, and maintains contact after the end of the match, the tetra no longer satisfies the definition of SCORED.

(Definition?) De-scored: When a tetra no longer satisfies the definition of SCORED

Originally Posted by Yeam_Update#18

Why are we making this change?
From its conception, Triple Play was envisioned as an offensive game, where all of
the robots are loading and stacking lots of tetras. Based on the experience to date at
the regionals, it has become clear that the previous answer to Q&A 1824, while being
easier to referee, encourages a robot to ram an opponent while it is scoring. By
changing the answer to #1824, we hope to discourage robots from playing aggressive
defense and return Triple Play to primarily an offensive game.

Originally Posted by dlavery - Re: YMTC: Redateam Uncrates Redabot on Wednesday

The answer is right there (and please, let's not even get in to any discussions about "they said not to set up 'pit booth displays' but I am going to set up 'pit shelves' which are different, so that is OK..." - the intent here is obvious to even the most casual, moderately intelligent, observer). Uncrate your robot. Plug in your batteries. Leave the area.

Which is it? Are we going to follow the spirit of the rules; or are we going to lawyer-up and pick nits?

"Bluabot bumps Redabot forcing them into the center goal stack at the end of the match." The key words here, in my opinion, are "bump" and "force". When we put them together, we find the cause. More yet, we see that the intent was to turn a ligitimate offensive win into a defensive victory with an act of agression, which is exactly what update #18 intends to discourage.