YMTC: Per the CURRENT RULES how will FIRST score the STJB's?

[Tristan Lall]

I hate this particular situation, because it exposes an area where the rules are very, very ambiguous. (I won't touch rulemakers' intent for now....)

Originally Posted by Rules, Section 4

A TETRA is STACKED when it is placed on top of a GOAL or on top of another STACKED TETRA.

Exclusive or, or inclusive or? If exclusive, then you can't be supported on more than one object; if inclusive, you can, as in the top red tetra illustrated.

Originally Posted by Rules, Section 4

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.

Is this the definition of "properly seated", or is this a necessary but insufficent part of the stacking condition? Furthermore, does "structure" refer to a single object, or collection of objects. I'd tend to say that it refers to the collection, but since a tetra or goal is itself a structure, it is ambiguous.

Originally Posted by Rules, Section 4

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.

Again, is this a definition, or a part of a definition, or just descriptive language? It is apparent that the tetras shown are not "precariously positioned" (which would seem to require a substantial risk of collapse, over and above a regular stack), but yet, depending on the interpretation of "properly seated", such tetras may or may not be considered stacked.

Originally Posted by Rules, Section 4

A TETRA is not considered STACKED if it is touching a ROBOT of the same alliance.

I'm not too concerned about this part, now that the "when is the tetra part of a robot" question has been cleared up. (As in, a robot-held tetra touches the stack; per <QA1852>, it's not part of the robot at the end of the match, since the HP loading sequence has ended.)

Remember: lawyering and engineering are the same, in that in both, you've got to understand the definitions of the issues which you confront. Precise rules make both groups happy.