Do you think this counts? I and few other people that saw us do this in practice today think it does. It is supported by the the leg, but on the back side.
This exact same thing happened at Wisconsin on Saturday. IIRC they counted it for points then.
As the guy who programmed the robot that did that (on accident, yay open loops), I can corroborate that they counted it. However I’m not sure if it should at it is also being supported by the back pole and not solely by the peg. Maybe it will be in the team update this week?
EDIT: See first 15 seconds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dm3B73K-xlo
The tube isn’t supported by the back pole - if it were removed, the tube would still be scored.
If that counts and your arm is capable it may be a viable strategy to purposely score the ubertube like that. It would be easier to place a tube on the same peg if the ubertube.
Watch the video – with the netting there as well, it makes the tube protrude a bit more. At least in our situation the drivers had more trouble because the netting pushed the tube out a bit.
This happened in Waterford last weekend and did not count - at least as far as I could tell. I wonder which is the correct interpretation.
Does anyone else think it might be easier to lay/align a tube over the top of the pole instead of putting/aligning the tube on the top peg sticking out of the side? After observing matches the past couple of weeks, it seems like it can be difficult to release the ubertube and get it to stay on the top peg. Putting it over the top of the pole would relieve some teams of the finesse or claw design required to release a tube and getting it to stay in place.
All of this, of course, assumes that you can reach high enough in the first place.
At the WI regional they did count it.
But if you weaken your claw design, then tele-op won’t be successful if it’s only for autonomus.