[YMTC]: Hurtling Interference YMTC

[IndySam]

Blueabot is a shooter that can hurdle from 5 to 15 feet away from the overpass.

Blueabot enters it's home stretch and Redabot pushes it right on through preventing Blueabot from getting off a shot.

Was Blueabot in the act of hurdling and did Redabot interfere with that act?

[Jeff Rodriguez]

Was Redabot pushing Blueabot before Blueabot entered its home stretch?

[Swampdude]

"HURDLING: The act of completing a HURDLE. To be considered in the process of HURDLING,
the ROBOT must:
 be in its own HOME STRETCH, and
 be in POSSESSION of a TRACKBALL, and
 be moving toward the OVERPASS and/or elevating the TRACKBALL so that the top of the
TRACKBALL is higher than the LANE DIVIDER."

"<G42> Protection While HURDLING – Neither a ROBOT in the process of HURDLING, nor a
TRACKBALL in its POSSESSION, shall be subjected to overt, blatant, or aggressive contact
that interferes with the HURDLING attempt. Each incident will be PENALIZED. Bumping to
signal to pass (see Rule <G38>) a HURDLING ROBOT is permitted if no passing lane is
open (see Rule <G43>). Incidental contact while passing the HURDLING ROBOT or
otherwise engaged in normal game play is permitted.

<G43> IMPEDING With Multiple HURDLERS- If multiple ROBOTS are HURDLING simultaneously
and effectively blocking the width of the TRACK, then opposing ROBOTS may signal to
pass and the HURDLING ROBOT must clear a passing lane within 6 seconds. A PENALTY
will be awarded to the HURDLING ROBOT for each violation."

I'd say that's usually a 10pt penalty.

Although being in the process of hurdling will be subjective to the design of your bot, and the point of process/possession it is in, as well as the refs knowledge of that design. So I think it gets tricky to say whens the sweet spot for defense against a hurdler. For instance, say the launcher hasn't gotten the ball off the floor yet, they're just "herding" it with forks still, so now they can be pushed straight through the home stretch. But if it was in possession and/or it was about to lift that ball to a height above the overpass, then its a penalty. So there's oppotunities for subjective ref error here.

I guess I should clarify possesion here, as it is key to whether you are defendable or not:

"POSSESSION: Controlling the position and movement of a TRACKBALL while the TRACKBALL is
supported or captured by an ALLIANCE shall be considered POSSESSION of the TRACKBALL. A
TRACKBALL shall be considered “supported” by a ROBOT if in the estimation of a reasonably
astute observer the majority of the weight of the TRACKBALL is being borne by the ROBOT. A
TRACKBALL shall be considered “captured” by a ROBOT if, as the ROBOT moves or changes
orientation (e.g. backs up or spins in place), the TRACKBALL remains in approximately the same
position relative to the ROBOT. Both the “supported” and “captured” conditions include the case
where the TRACKBALL is also in contact with the floor."

[dlavery]

If anything, Blueabot will be penalized for potential high-speed ramming if Blueabot and Redabot come in contact. But that aside, since interfering with hurtling does not carry any penalty, there is no issue here. Blueabot just needs to slow down.

-dave


p.s. if you haven't got it yet, there are two messages here: 1) spell-check is your friend, and 2) when discussing the game, using the words and definitions that are provided in the Manual will significantly improve communications.

[Swampdude]

Originally Posted by dlavery

If anything, Blueabot will be penalized for potential high-speed ramming if Blueabot and Redabot come in contact. But that aside, since interfering with hurtling does not carry any penalty, there is no issue here. Blueabot just needs to slow down.

-dave


p.s. if you haven't got it yet, there are two messages here: 1) spell-check is your friend, and 2) when discussing the game, using the words and definitions that are provided in the Manual will significantly improve communications.

Say what? Now I'm all confused....
G42 says "Each incident will be PENALIZED"
if blue was in possession and in the home stretch, how is blue in the wrong?

since interfering with hurtling does not carry any penalty

wuh? Are you messing with me... I can never tell. I'm vulnerable Dave...

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by Swampdude

wuh? Are you messing with me... I can never tell. I'm vulnerable Dave...

Dave woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning, so he's a little grumpy about IndySam misspelling "hurdling".

[ALIBI]

Assuming that Blueabot was in possession of a trackball when it entered its' home stretch and that Blueabot has the ability to Hurdle, the following conditions have been met:

1: In it's home stretch,
2: Be in possession of a trackball,
3: Be moving towards the overpass.

By the definition of HURDLING, Blueabot was in the process of HURDLING.

The intent of <G42> is to protect Blueabot while Hurdling. The protection is for overt, blatant or aggressive contact that interferes with the Hurdling attempt. When Redabot pushes Blueabot completely through its' home stretch, it is being overt, blatant and aggressive, the action of Redabot results in a ten point penalty. Redabot could have incidental contact while passing Blueabot, however, pushing Blueabot through its' home stretch is not incidental contact.

It seems as though when a robot that can Hurdle is in possession of a trackball in its' home stretch, it is pretty much off limits unless you are making incidental contact or bumping to pass per <G38>. However:

There are two questions that come to mind. The first is the requirement that Blueabot be "moving toward the overpass". If Blueabot stops moving just before it launches the trackball, can Redabot then push Blueabot because it is no longer moving toward the overpass? The second is the requirement that Blueabot be elevating the trackball so that the top of the trackball is higher than the Lane Divider. This seems to indicate that Blueabot must keep moving while it is elevating the trackball to at least a height where the top of the trackball is above the Lane Divider to be given protection under <G42>. If Blueabot stops moving before the trackball is elevated so that the top of the trackball is above the Lane Divider, can Redabot then push Blueabot?

The YMTC never gave Blueabot the opportunity to stop moving so the above questions never come into play. Ten Point Penalty on Redabot.

[EricH]

Blueabot satisfies 2 of the three conditions for sure: it is in its own Home Stretch, and it is in possession of a Trackball.

The thing is, this will be context dependent. As in, if Blueabot stopped to hurdle before Redabot hit it, or if Blueabot's launching mechanism is beginning to fire. Those can change the situation. In the former, Blueabot is not protected; in the latter, Blueabot would probably be protected, as it is in the process of elevating the Trackball.

Neither we nor the GDC can call this one; that'll be the ref's decision in each individual match. In this case as stated, there would be a penalty on Redabot, because Blueabot is moving towards the Overpass (admittedly, not exactly willingly, which might change the call).

[JesseK]

If Bluabot can only HERD the ball and never has the intention to ever HURDLE the ball due to lack of design or broken ability, there is no rule that would give me a reason to call this a penalty. However, this is subjective to how the refs will call it.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by JesseK

If Bluabot can only HERD the ball and never has the intention to ever HURDLE the ball due to lack of design or broken ability, there is no rule that would give me a reason to call this a penalty. However, this is subjective to how the refs will call it.

Sometimes refs can't judge intention very well. Blatant intention will almost always be called, however. If Blueabot can only herd at that time, no penalty (not in possession). If they can launch, and they act like they are going to, I'd probably call a penalty on Redabot, but if they aren't even trying, no penalty

Oh, and the decision I made earlier--Reversed; nothing was said about a trackball. Period. They could all be in the other corner. No penalty.

[Rick]

Depends on this is read:

(be moving toward the OVERPASS) and/or (elevating the TRACKBALL so that the top of the TRACKBALL is higher than the LANE DIVIDER).

or it could be this way

(be moving toward the OVERPASS so that the top of the TRACKBALL is higher than the LANE DIVIDER) and/or (elevating the TRACKBALL so that the top of the TRACKBALL is higher than the LANE DIVIDER).

This could be read as the TRACKBALL must be above the lane divider for any valid hurdle attempt. Or only motion is required.

[bduddy]

I would say penalty only if Blueabot has a trackball inside its gripper; otherwise, it is not in the process of hurdling and there is none of this extraordinary protection. If it does have the ball, the push is definitely an overt attempt to interfere with hurdling.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Dave woke up on the wrong side of the bed this morning, so he's a little grumpy about IndySam misspelling "hurdling".

But no one is allowed to be grumpy during Crunch Week.
I know that's a rule I've seen somewhere...

[dlavery]

But no one is allowed to be grumpy during Crunch Week.
I know that's a rule I've seen somewhere...

Hee hee - read the shirt!

[Scott358]

Thoughts on the following defensive strategy being called for hurdling interference??

After a the ball has left a hurdling robot of the type that needs to extend over the overpass... parking behind it and "trapping" it.

This obviously does not stop the first hurdle, but can significantly slow down/stop that robot after the hurdle.

Thoughts?