Rule about being in the key

We know that if you are in the key no other robot can interfere with you but we wanted to know if it means just any part of your robot or the whole robot has to be in the key

Robots may not touch an opponent Robot in **contact **with its Key, Alley, or Bridge.
Violation: Foul; Technical-Foul for purposeful, consequential contact.

Emphasis mine.

Were aware of that, but is it while your ENTIRE robot is in the key, or just some part?

It says “contact” with the key so as long as the bot is touching the key they are protected from being hit.

Any part of the bot.

I could see refs calling it if the shooting robot is over the key but a wheel/appendage is not physically touching the ground inside the key. You may want a clarification from a ref or might be covered in drivers’ meeting.

Brandon, by the letter of the rule, while some part of your robot is touching the key, you are protected from contact from your opponents.

There isn’t really any grey area on this one - touch the key with a wheel, a bridge manip, an appendage, a ziptie, etc, and you’re protected.


IMO, if the GDC intended for this rule to be interpreted this way, they would’ve said something like: "
Robots may not touch an opponent Robot breaking the vertical plane defined by the edges of it’s Key, Alley, or Bridge." That’s just my interpretation based on how the GDC seems to write rules, though as you may know, they can change over night.

This rule is pretty much identical to a rule from Triple Play. You had to physically touch the protected area then, so you’re going to have to physically touch the protected area now. I recommend a few zipties hanging down from the edges of your robot. If the refs see something like that on your robot then they’ll start assuming you’re in contact with the key once the edge of your robot goes over it.

As Kevin mentioned, zip-ties! Or anything else “dangling” beneath your robot’s corners to help ensure contact.

Better hope they can’t reverse direction and end up outside your frame perimeter-you’ll have more than one appendage deployed :rolleyes:

so a good strategy is to hang out by the key and then bump into an opponent’s robot as they go by. they get the penalty–easy way to score some points.

See, that’s why you inset them a little and trim them to barely long enough to touch the floor. And then assume the refs give you the benefit of the doubt that they’re touching. If I have spare time at regionals, I’m probably going to wander around with a bag of zipties and flush cutters and make everyone’s lives easier and less stressful.

Also, you forgot that if they extend below the bottom of your wheels at any moment, they’re the new bottom of your robot and your bumpers might suddenly be out of the bumper zone.

cough

[G28]Robots may not touch an opponent Robot in contact with its Key, Alley, or Bridge.
Violation: Foul; Technical-Foul for purposeful, consequential contact.
[G44] Generally, a rule violation by an Alliance that was directly caused by actions of the opposing Alliance will not be penalized. Rule [G28] is an exception to this rule.
[G45] Strategies exploiting Rule [G44] are not in the spirit of the FRC and are not allowed.
Violation: Technical-Foul and Red Card
More like an easy way to score some red cards, amirite?

Yeah, if you do this, they’re going to red card you on about the third or fourth “accidental” bump. And the second bump in subsequent matches.

Thanksbro. The kids were wondering and apparently couldn’t find it in the manual, and I usually leave my account open for them, so that was them haha.

Thanks everyone!

Just remember, there are many defensive strategies that they can still do. They can block your shots. They can obscure your camera’s vision. They can generate noise that interferes with your sensors (though there may be other rules against this, I’m just not sure). They can block your drivers vision as to where the robot actually is. And so on…

Pretty sure this wouldn’t be legal.

[R08]
Robot parts shall not be made from hazardous materials, be unsafe, cause an unsafe condition, or interfere with the operation of other Robots.
B. Speakers, sirens, air horns, or other audio devices that generate sound at a level sufficient to be a distraction

The other things you mentioned are up for debate though, may get called for the same violation considering it says “interfere with the operation of other Robots.” One could say if you build a robot that is a giant wall to block the view of the operators you could have a “part” that “interferes” with the “operation” of that robot. But, like I said, its debatable.

It’s debatable how G44/G45 will be enforced. Personally, I would think that simply bumping an opponent as it goes by is legitimate, and would call a penalty on the opponent; I think that’s what G44 was meant for, and that G45 should only apply to strategies such as pushing an opponent across the field to a G28 zone. But I’m not a referee (again… :() so who knows…

It’s a strategy meant to get points from someone else’s [G28]. Or rather, a strategy where they put themselves in a position where you could inflict a [G28]. If you’re bumping them sort of like an indication that “I’m here, and you’re too close”, and you only do it once or twice a match, you’re probably OK, IMO. If you’re doing it 5, 6, 7 times, especially if you’re being aggressive about it, then you should expect to be T-fouled and carded.

Think about it like if you’re playing Ultimate, and you think someone’s too close to you while you have the Frisbee. So you swing your arm out to the appropriate distance, and if it hits them, they have to back up. But if you did that too often, you’re holding up the game…

If they choose to do so (call it that way), it would be equivalent to saying that no robot may enter the opponents side of the field. I guarantee you that our tread noise will interfere with their sonar sensors. If their camera is set low enough, then our robot’s sides will interfere with their cameras. And so on…

I don’t think that’s how they’ll call it.

The calls on interfering with another robot’s operation are typically on systems that are built for the express purpose of stopping another robot from functioning properly. So your tread noise interfering with sonar would be fine, though I find that claim doubtful. Building an omni-directional ultrasonic pulse emitter with no receivers would be a problem. Having a wall bot because that’s how your robot is built is fine. Having a wall bot with a retro-reflective square on it to confuse an opponent’s camera would be a problem.