G28 + G11 seems broken

[Kevin Sevcik]

G28- During the final twenty (20) seconds of TELEOP, ROBOTS in their COURTYARD may not contact an opponent ROBOT.
Violation: The contacted ROBOT is considered to have SCALED an open side of the TOWER at the end of the MATCH.
Blue box: Teams are encouraged to consider rule G11 when developing their
strategies, such as attempting to draw violations of this rule.

G11 Strategies aimed solely at forcing the opposing ALLIANCE to violate a rule are not in the spirit of FIRST Robotics Competition and not allowed. Rule violations forced in this manner will not result in an assignment of a penalty to the targeted ALLIANCE.
Violation: FOUL. If egregious or repeated, YELLOW CARD

As currently written, what's to prevent me from blocking a capture/challenge/scaling by parking sideways in front of a segment of my BATTEN with my hands off the sticks? If you hit me, you're trying to draw a G28, and you get a foul instead. I'm guessing they'll need to re-write G28 to, unfortunately, add some causality in there. Or maybe add impeding BATTEN access in the last 20 seconds to the impeding match flow rule. Unless they want to go meta and declare the blocking team broke G11 by trying to draw a G11 of G28. Which seems like too much interpretation to put on a ref in the last 20 of a match.

[GaryVoshol]

We'll have to see if this comes up in Q&A or in ref training. But until then, this is my opinion.

The defending robot (in it's own COURTYARD) cannot contact a robot from the other alliance. But there is nothing that says the attacking robot cannot initiate contact. So if you are not driving your robot in your COURTYARD, the other robot can attempt to push you out of the way. I would not interpret that to be attempting to draw a foul.

[Redo91]

The intent of the rule seems to be to keep the situation above from happening. Basically, when that 20 second mark hits, you need to be doing everything you can to be getting away from the opponents in your courtyard.

And at any rate, why are you not headed to the BATTEN on the other side of the field?

[ATannahill]

Originally Posted by Redo91

The intent of the rule seems to be to keep the situation above from happening. Basically, when that 20 second mark hits, you need to be doing everything you can to be getting away from the opponents in your courtyard.

And at any rate, why are you not headed to the BATTEN on the other side of the field?

No reason to head there if the tower is not weakened.

I think you are being too generous with the term contact. Remember it is a one way verb. If my robot is not allowed to contact yours, that doesn't mean I will get a foul if your robot contacts mine.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by Redo91

The intent of the rule seems to be to keep the situation above from happening. Basically, when that 20 second mark hits, you need to be doing everything you can to be getting away from the opponents in your courtyard.

Nope. If RED is minding its business in the RED courtyard in the last 20 (for whatever reason), and BLUE drives into RED, BLUE should get a G11, because it's trying to create a G28 foul that otherwise wouldn't have occurred.

Gary's interpretation is one possible fix, but I'd want it spelled out in the rule or a Q&A, because right now G28 only specifies contact, with no clear mention whatsoever of who initiates it. Yes, you can read "contact" as being an intentional action, but you can also read it more like "comes in contact with" something that happens with no respect to intention.
Example: If I poke you with my finger, I contact you with my finger. But you also contact me through my finger.

So I think it's something to bring up in Q&A and have clarified and addressed.

[Redo91]

Originally Posted by rtfgnow

No reason to head there if the tower is not weakened.

I think you are being too generous with the term contact. Remember it is a one way verb. If my robot is not allowed to contact yours, that doesn't mean I will get a foul if your robot contacts mine.

There are two reasons to head to the TOWER even if it is still standing! From 3.3.1, there are 5 points for a CHALLENGE and 15 points for a SCALE! Now, there won't be any CAPTURE points, though.


My google definition says contact it is a noun, with the definition reading as "the state or condition of physical touching".

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

Nope. If RED is minding its business in the RED courtyard in the last 20 (for whatever reason), and BLUE drives into RED, BLUE should get a G11, because it's trying to create a G28 foul that otherwise wouldn't have occurred.

Gary's interpretation is one possible fix, but I'd want it spelled out in the rule or a Q&A, because right now G28 only specifies contact, with no clear mention whatsoever of who initiates it. Yes, you can read "contact" as being an intentional action, but you can also read it more like "comes in contact with" something that happens with no respect to intention.
Example: If I poke you with my finger, I contact you with my finger. But you also contact me through my finger.

So I think it's something to bring up in Q&A and have clarified and addressed.

Definitely a question for Q&A.

[ATannahill]

If contact is a noun than G28 is not a proper sentence.

Originally Posted by G28

During the final twenty (20) seconds of TELEOP, ROBOTS in their COURTYARD may not contact an opponent ROBOT.

[orangeandblack5]

Originally Posted by rtfgnow

If contact is a noun than G28 is not a proper sentence.

Contact is a noun, and you are correct in saying that G28 is not a proper sentence. It should read "come into contact with".

Originally Posted by Oblarg

Yes, this is a judgment call by the refs, but I don't think it's a difficult one to make and am not worried at all about it.

As much as I agree with this sentiment, it should still be officially be cleared up. Less mess later on.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by orangeandblack5

Contact is a noun, and you are correct in saying that G28 is not a proper sentence. It should read "come into contact with".

Originally Posted by Meriam-Webster

contact
intransitive verb
: to make contact
transitive verb
1
: to bring into contact
2
a : to enter or be in contact with : join
b : to get in communication with <contact your local dealer>

And there's the two meanings that are relevant to how G28 gets ruled.

Also defense makes perfect sense if the defending alliance is already not going to get a CAPTURE and wants to deny a CAPTURE to the opponents. Or if the defending robot can't cross DEFENSE and can't even CHALLENGE, then denying even a CHALLENGE would be a net benefit.

[jee7s]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

And there's the two meanings that are relevant to how G28 gets ruled.

Also defense makes perfect sense if the defending alliance is already not going to get a CAPTURE and wants to deny a CAPTURE to the opponents. Or if the defending robot can't cross DEFENSE and can't even CHALLENGE, then denying even a CHALLENGE would be a net benefit.

Speaking as your friendly Defense expert, I'll say clearing this up is VERY important. The rule now can be read to allow a robot to park in front of their tower, take their hands off the controls, and not incur the penalty. If GDC intends this to mean that you cannot impede the movement of a robot to the tower in the courtyard in the last 20 seconds, then they should say that.

Clarity is important on rules. Anyone remember that q&a last year that really restriced helping other teams under material usage rules? Anyone remember the debates about how to reasonably interpret that? I do. And I also remember GDC clearing it up a few days later with relatively few changes to wording.

Doesn't usually take much to make the intent clear.

[howdosheeplamp]

If I'm understanding this correctly - at this point there's nothing to prevent a red bot in the red courtyard in the last 20 seconds, running into a bunch of blue robots and give them all G11 violations? Seems like a tough call to make - figuring out whether Red is fishing for G11 or Blue is fishing for G28.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by howdosheeplamp

If I'm understanding this correctly - at this point there's nothing to prevent a red bot in the red courtyard in the last 20 seconds, running into a bunch of blue robots and give them all G11 violations? Seems like a tough call to make - figuring out whether Red is fishing for G11 or Blue is fishing for G28.

Your situation would be pretty obviously g28 on red, since blue doesn't sound like it's forcing red to get a g28. G11 pretty clearly requires intent to force a foul on blue's part for g11 to trigger. G11 would be if blue goes out of its way to run into a fleeing red robot. The grey area is if red is stationary but clearly in blue's way.

Also I can see lots of reasons for doing this. Skeptically if you're not going to get capture or scaling points even with the defending bot, then preventing a scale or capture is a net gain.

[Kris Verdeyen]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

Nope. If RED is minding its business in the RED courtyard in the last 20 (for whatever reason), and BLUE drives into RED, BLUE should get a G11, because it's trying to create a G28 foul that otherwise wouldn't have occurred.
d.

If you're parked in front of the batten, and I'm trying to get to it, my strategy is aimed at getting to the batten, not at drawing the foul.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by Kris Verdeyen

If you're parked in front of the batten, and I'm trying to get to it, my strategy is aimed at getting to the batten, not at drawing the foul.

This is a valid point. I think you guys might have some experience arguing valid points with refs without q&a backup, though.

Certainly the "correct" answer here is either no foul or foul on the parked defending robot. I'd just like the gdc to agree with this interpretation on the record.

[EricH]

I'd add in the Secret Passage contact rules to this.


Just for grins, does G11 seem familiar to the 2011 rule with a similar subject? The one that had to be revised to death?