Drawbridge Technique: Legal or not?

[Ubiquity]

Just wondering if anyone has built the team version draw bridge, what springs did you use? The ones we have (Home Depot screen door 16") aren't strong enough to shut the bridge after it goes down.

[Ubiquity]

Also, What if one robot drives through and holds a defense open for another robot(s), sort of like tag-team wrestling? How could this not be legit? Robots working together to accomplish goals seem to be in the spirit of FIRST.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Ubiquity

Just wondering if anyone has built the team version draw bridge, what springs did you use? The ones we have (Home Depot screen door 16") aren't strong enough to shut the bridge after it goes down.

We use water-filled 1-gallon orange juice jugs attached via rope to the drawbridge through a pulley. It takes slightly more force to lower it, but it has generally worked for us.

[wlaroche]

Originally Posted by EricH

Here's my thoughts on it (with my ref hat--NOT my judge hat, this isn't their job--on):

As seen in the video, if I saw it happen, the robot would meet the definition of Crossing, assuming it were in the Neutral Zone completely when it broke contact.

However, there are 5 other robots on the field that could get in the way of seeing it or command attention for something else--say, applying a hit on somebody ELSE while they're trying to cross a Defense. So that's a bit of an "If".

Your best chance to get credit is to alert the refs during practice matches that "hey, we like to use this method to Cross the Group C Defenses, can you check it?" Trust me, as a ref, we LOVE it when teams ask us whether they're doing something per the rules during practice, because if they aren't, they can correct it, and if they're borderline (like some of the faster HPs last year) we get a chance to see what we need to be watching for and help the team adjust to get the result they want.

Please remember the only answer that matters is what comes from the GDC. Threads on CD cannot be used to debate any ruling on the field.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by wlaroche

Please remember the only answer that matters is what comes from the GDC. Threads on CD cannot be used to debate any ruling on the field.

Generally true. Yet I've seen Eric post elsewhere that he does ref, and I've also seen the Q&A rule that demonstration to a ref before a match is definitely helpful in convincing the refs of something that may not be obvious. I think a specific Q&A for this year surrounding this issue would allow this scenario to play out.

Yet I think the bigger issue is whether or not the refs missed it. There are plenty of opportunities to not see something because attention-requiring action is happening elsewhere on the field. As a Week 1 referee myself, I fully expect to have to worry about this particular strategy as well. Regardless of Q&A, I would much rather a team tell me to look for something specific than to be left guessing.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by JesseK

Generally true. Yet I've seen Eric post elsewhere that he does ref, and I've also seen the Q&A rule that demonstration to a ref before a match is definitely helpful in convincing the refs of something that may not be obvious. I think a specific Q&A for this year surrounding this issue would allow this scenario to play out.

You mean like 765. Which, answered, invokes 505.

And, just to be clear: I am signed up as a ref. For two events. (I could do three, but the third one I prefer to avoid reffing whenever possible.)