YMTC: Bluabot Pushes Red Vision Tetra

[Natchez]

You Make The Call (YMTC) is a series of situations where you are the official and make the call. Please reference specific rules when applicable. The results of YMTC are not official and are for educational purposes only.

With 15 seconds remaining in the rubber match of the Magnolia finals, Redalliance is losing by 2 points when Redabot is the 3rd Redalliance 'bot in the end zone resulting in a 10 point score and an 8 point Redalliance lead. With no hope for Bluabot to score a tetra nor for all 3 Blualliance robots to go "home", Bluabot pushes a nearby red vision tetra toward Redalliance's end zone. With time running out, Bluabot manages to push the vision tetra against Redabot with the other side of the vision tetra touching the carpet outside the end zone.

Based on the 2005 Game Rules, YOU MAKE THE CALL!

[bhweezer]

In a different scenario ..
The last ten seconds of a match bluabot is pushing redabot, while redabot is trying to cap a tetra. The match ends and redabots arm is still in contact with the capped red tetra. The judges would not count the red tetra and would consider it an extension of redabot.

I think the judges should count the red vision tetra as an extension of redabot. Blue alliance wins.

[Goldeye]

Redalliance gets their 10 point bonus.

The revlevant rule:

Originally Posted by 2005 Game Rules, Section 4-The Game

<C03> All three ROBOTS of the same alliance in their designated END ZONE at the conclusion of a match is worth 10 points to the alliance. A ROBOT is not considered in the END ZONE if it is touching the field outside the defined END ZONE border. The tapeline designating the END ZONE border is considered “in” the END ZONE.

The definition of a robot:

Originally Posted by 2005 Game Rules, Section 4-The Game

ROBOT – Anything (which has passed inspection) that a team places on the field prior to the start of a match.

The team didn't put the tetra on the field, did they?


Of course...it really isn't this straight foward, is it? All this stuff about tetras being part of the robot. I'd choose to believe that it's only true regarding a human player touching the tetra. But my preferred precedent here is that of a robot starting with a tetra.

Originally Posted by 2005 Game Rules, Section 4-The Game

<G04> At the discretion of the alliance, one (and only one) TETRA may be in the possession of one ROBOT in each alliance at the beginning of the match. The TETRA must be completely SUPPORTED by the ROBOT, not in contact with either the floor or any field element, and the ROBOT – including any MECHANISMS designed to hold the TETRA – must still satisfy the volume starting constraints specified in <G01>.

And it certainly is true that the tetra itself may extend beyond the dimensions of the robot. The robot in this case doesn't include the tetra, why would it in any case?
Why, when loading a tetra of course! Touching a tetra already on the robot is a violation of <S07> for touching your robot. Notice, this is a safety rule. Touching a tetra already on the bot is a bit of a safety concern. Aside from that, though, is there any other reason?

[Goldeye]

Originally Posted by bhweezer

In a different scenario ..
The last ten seconds of a match bluabot is pushing redabot, while redabot is trying to cap a tetra. The match ends and redabots arm is still in contact with the capped red tetra. The judges would not count the red tetra and would consider it an extension of redabot.

Incorrect. The tetra is not scored because it doesn't satisfy the definition of stacked.

Originally Posted by 2005 Game Rules, Section 4 - The Game

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.

Which is why robots must back away for a tetra to be scored.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Goldeye

Incorrect. The tetra is not scored because it doesn't satisfy the definition of stacked.


Which is why robots must back away for a tetra to be scored.

bhweezer said that the judges (refs) would not count the tetra as it is considered part of the robot. (Or did you notice that when you quoted him?)

[Goldeye]

Originally Posted by EricH

bhweezer said that the judges (refs) would not count the tetra as it is considered part of the robot. (Or did you notice that when you quoted him?)

I was explaining why the precedent for end of game goal contact doesn't correspond to this situation.

[Rombus]

Well, in one match at buckeye, we had every bot across the line, but one of them had brought a tetra into the end zone. From our viewpoint, it was no longer touching the tetra, it just had its manipulator inside with no contact, We didn't get the points because the judges thought it was touching. So while this situation isn't very GP, blue wins

[Nate Edwards]

We had a sort of related problem at Portland, the pacific northwest regional semis. We lost by 2 points 39-37 in the third match, our alliance partner pulled their 3rd alliance partner out of the endzone wiht about 1 second left and they were no longer in the endzone but still touching the robot on our alliances robot. I never got clarification on exactly what the ruling was but it was definatly a close match like the one described above.

[AmyPrib]

Originally Posted by Natchez

With 15 seconds remaining in the rubber match of the Magnolia finals, Redalliance is losing by 2 points when Redabot is the 3rd Redalliance 'bot in the end zone resulting in a 10 point score and an 8 point Redalliance lead. With no hope for Bluabot to score a tetra nor for all 3 Blualliance robots to go "home", Bluabot pushes a nearby red vision tetra toward Redalliance's end zone. With time running out, Bluabot manages to push the vision tetra against Redabot with the other side of the vision tetra touching the carpet outside the end zone.

I would say they get the 10pt bonus for being in the endzone. I do not see anywhere in the rules that a tetra is considered part of their robot in this situation or in any other debatable situation like this. I would say this is a crappy way to lose the points if you were sitting there at the end and the opponent could do that to negate your bonus. As a matter of fact, hopefully this will be cleared up very soon by FIRST with an answer to the following Q/A...

ID: 1852 Section: 4.3.3 Status: Unanswered Date Posted: 4/6/2005
Q: Please identify ANY and ALL cases in which a TETRA is considered and extension of a Robot. Is it ONLY during the HP loading function, or are there other situations this applies?

And also ID1849 and 1851 which ask more specific questions. Hopefully the answer comes back as per the existing rules, that a tetra is only part of a robot in the case of the (HP) loading station (I'm pretty sure that's the only case right now).

The situation below me is an interesting one. I think if the robot would clearly be in the endzone if the tetra were removed, then it should count. However - let's say the robots arm is resting on top of a tetra outside the endzone. If they remove that tetra, the arm most likely falls down and hits the floor, therefore making it outside the endzone. Do the refs remove the tetra to see if that happens? I would say they should, as now it's not a matter of just touching a tetra outside (which should be fine), but now it's being supported in a manner where they shouldn't be considered in the zone.

[Kevin Kolodziej]

As has been discussed, the only time a tetra is considered part of a robot is when it is being loaded from the human player. If the robot is holding a tetra and that tetra is touching a stacked tetra (of same color), the stacked tetra still counts because the robot is not directly touching it. As long as no part of the robot is touching the carpet outside the endzone, it is in the endzone, whether or not it is touching anything outside the endzone.

Now if the blue team managed to get the tetra under the red bot so that the red bot is supported by the tetra, which is touching outside the endzone, that is a different story - one that I would say does NOT give the red alliance three bots in the endzone. I suppose one could argue that if the tetra were removed, however, that the red bot would fall into the zone and still be counted. Hmmm...that is a situation that would be a tough call (unless I am completely forgetting about something in the rules!).

Kev

[Steve W]

The tetra is not an extntion of the robot period. Red wins.

[JWhiskers]

During one of our qualification matches at Detroit, the other alliance had all three of their robots behind the line. But one of them was holding a tetra that was touching outside the line. They did not get their 10 points because of that tetra.
If the rules are followed to the letter I believe that the red alliance would lose their ten points

[Goldeye]

Originally Posted by JWhiskers

During one of our qualification matches at Detroit, the other alliance had all three of their robots behind the line. But one of them was holding a tetra that was touching outside the line. They did not get their 10 points because of that tetra.
If the rules are followed to the letter I believe that the red alliance would lose their ten points

I like the idea that a tetra which has been loaded onto the robot is considered an extension of it, especially when the mechanism holding it would fall out of the line. That is, a tetra loaded at a loading station, or lifted intentionally off the ground, is a part of the bot as long as it remains on the bot. Would be nice.

Edit: That'd only be in terms of a any contact the bot makes, though. If the bot is controlling it, then why should it be allowed to make any contact the bot can't. Still, on this idea, you could say the tetra you're trying to score as time runs out is touching the one under it, therefore disqualifying both :/ Another reason contact after it is scored and backed away from shouldn't descore a stacked tetra.

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by Natchez

With 15 seconds remaining in the rubber match of the Magnolia finals, Redalliance is losing by 2 points when Redabot is the 3rd Redalliance 'bot in the end zone resulting in a 10 point score and an 8 point Redalliance lead. With no hope for Bluabot to score a tetra nor for all 3 Blualliance robots to go "home", Bluabot pushes a nearby red vision tetra toward Redalliance's end zone. With time running out, Bluabot manages to push the vision tetra against Redabot with the other side of the vision tetra touching the carpet outside the end zone.

Not sure why this one .... (Lucien can fill in the rest)

With the exception of when the robot is interacting with the Human Player in the Loading Zone, a tetra loaded on a robot is not considered an extension of the robot (the one exception is for safety reasons). Having a red tetra touching the Redabot does not negate the fact that Redabot is behind the End Zone line. Redabot is legal, Redateam gets the 10 point bonus, Redalliance wins!

The one difficulty with this problem is that in order to satisfy the YMTC requirements (i.e. cite specific supporting clauses from the 2005 Rules to support your argument), we would have to find a rule that specifically says that an attached tetra is considered part of the robot (or not considered, if we want to prove the negative) at any other time. I do not believe that any such rule exists. At best, we must work within the definition of "Robot" provided in Sectino 4.2.1 of the rules, "ROBOT – Anything (which has passed inspection) that a team places on the field prior to the start of a match." That definition does not include any mention of a tetra. Therefore, the game must operate under the interpretation of "robot" as not including a tetra placed on the robot. That is probably as close as we can get to making this a complete YMTC response.

Originally Posted by JWhiskers

During one of our qualification matches at Detroit, the other alliance had all three of their robots behind the line. But one of them was holding a tetra that was touching outside the line. They did not get their 10 points because of that tetra.

If it was actually called this way (and I was not there, so I cannot attest that this is actually what happened), then the call was incorrect.

-dave

[Cory]

Originally Posted by dlavery

With the exception of when the robot is interacting with the Human Player in the Loading Zone, a tetra loaded on a robot is not considered an extension of the robot (the one exception is for safety reasons).

Dave, wouldn't the same be true if a robot is holding a tetra, approaches an autoloader, and subsequently knocks the tetra off the loader before entering the zone?