Game Definitions

[Raj]

Do the statements in these posts (#4-8) explaining the definition of "possession of a rolling goal" also exactly and directly apply to the definition of "possession of a baton"?

No. Posts #4-8 apply only to the possession of the rolling goal. Post #3 specifically applies to possession of a baton.

[Professor Proton]

Do you know when the new update comes out?

A: Revision 2 of the Game Manual is available here: http://www.usfirst.org/ftc/game

[Professor Proton]

Thanks. What we're really asking is ... what are the differences (if any) between the DEFINITIONS of possession of a rolling goal and possession of a baton?

Thanks for your patience with all the questions!

The definitions of "Possession of a Rolling Goal" and "Possession of a Baton" in the Game Manual (Rev2) are identical except for the substitution of "Baton" for "Rolling Goal."

[Wil Wheaton]

Okay ... let me try again.

You stated in post #7 that the test for possession of a rolling goal is "is there a way to pull either the robot or the goal, without lifting either, that cause them to come away from each other freely."

Is the following statement then true? "The test for possession of a baton is if there a way to pull either the robot or the baton, without lifting either, that cause them to come away from each other freely."

Yes. Your description of a "pulling test" would be sufficient to test for possession of a baton.

[Raj]

Ruling #7 above uses the term "freely" and ruling #9 uses the term "cleanly" when describing how the robot and moving goal are pulled away. Can you confirm that so long as the robot and rolling goal can be pulled away from each other, with or without friction between them that the goal is not possessed?

A: Yes, it is confirmed.

[Wil Wheaton]

If a robot, has possession of a baton through the use of a grasping device and tries to place the baton in a rolling goal, would breaking the plane defined by the top circular face of the 2" or 4" PVC cylinder with the baton still in possession mean that the robot is now in possession of the rolling goal? You would not be able to separate the robot from the rolling goal without either lifting the robot or releasing, (relinquishing possession of), the baton.

As long as the robot grasping the Baton does not use it to pull/push the Rolling Goal and releases it to finish the scoring activity, the robot would not be in possession of the Rolling Goal. Be aware that the referees will make the call about possible possession at the time, based on their judgment of the actual situation.

[Wil Wheaton]

Does the "push" or "pull" mentioned in the above statement [in Post #5] have to be in a straight line? If not, can it include a dog leg or other sharp bend?

It is not possible for us to rule on every possible form of possession. The test described in earlier posts is one method for assessing possession.

The final determination of possession will be made by the referees at the field, based on the situation at the time the call is made.

[Wil Wheaton]

According to post #14, a sufficient test for "possession" of a baton is that "if there [is] a way to pull either the robot or the baton, without lifting either, that cause[s] them to come away from each other freely" the baton is not possessed. According to post #15, "freely" does not mean without friction.

Thus, if a robot inserts a flat horizontal manipulator into a baton dispenser from the front and lifts the batons in the dispenser upward while keeping them horizonatal, lifted batons still within the dispenser are not possessed.

Is this correct?

In general, it is not possible to rule on all possible game-play strategies. The referees will make a judgment call based on the situation at the time.

[Raj]

<Changed in the form of a question> Can a robot lift the 15 batons from the bottom of a dispenser up and not be in violation of the possession rule?

A: Yes, as long as no other rules are violated. However, should more than 5 batons land in or on the robot that is lifting the batons from the bottom, then a violation of <SG5> occurs for every baton over 5.

[Professor Proton]

We would like to see clarification on the answers to #19 and #14 here. If we imagine a robot that is completely flat on the top, and there are batons sitting on that surface, would those be possessed? According to #14, if the batons could be pulled away without being lifted (i.e. slid across the flat surface until they fell off one side), they would not be possessed. But according to #19, if they are "on the robot", they are possessed.

Thanks so much!

The Batons described in the post are Possessed by the robot because they satisfy the definition of Possession in the Game Manual. The Batons will remain in approximately the same position relative to the robot as the robot moves.

The intent of the Game Design Committee is to prevent robots from transporting more than five Batons. In other words, we don't want "dump truck" robots. It is also our intent NOT to penalize teams for incidental contact with Batons or for pushing Batons that are located on the foam mats, Cliffs, Mountain, or Bridges.