Q&A

If i made a CAD model of a concept robot that is made up of sample mechanisms. And sell it to teams for inspiration to help them see what a concept could look like, would this be allowed.

In <GG1>, Drive Team must remain in their Drive Station.

Does the "their" mean they own team's?

Could the Loader go to teammate's Drive Station to Load Bean Bag?

For example, the red team's Loader go to the left Drive Station and the blue team's Loader go to the right Drive Station.

<GG10>

If a bean bag gets stuck on a robot and they have no way of removing it, can they reset the robot to remove the bean bag?

<GG11>According to <GG11>, a team may participate in a competition with only one or two students. However, Appendix E states that a team must consist of at least three students.

Does this mean that at least three students are required to register a team, but only one or two students may attend and participate in an actual competition?

I would appreciate clarification on how these two rules should be interpreted.

From the Definition of Major Violation: Multiple Minor Violations within a Match or Tournament may escalate to a Major Violation at the Head Referee’s discretion or as specified in a rule. Minor Violations carry over into Finals Matches unless otherwise specified within a rule.

I think that generally we would think that the third minor makes it a major. But a number would help with consistency.

GG12 Appendix D Notes: 2. If a Team receives three Minor Violations within the same event, all future GG12 Violations at that event will be considered Major Violations and Disqualifications.

Would the Third count as the Major Violation, or the Fourth? Is it only minor violations of GG12 that count here?

Per the official appeal procedures, only playing Drive Team Members in the Driver Station may appeal a Head Referee's ruling. In a cooperative game like VEX IQ, alliances will naturally never appeal an error that results in over-scoring or extra points.

However, missing or over-counting even one high-value scoring element creates a 12- to 16-point swing. In a typical ~300 point match, this error significantly alters total ranking averages and compromises tournament ranking fairness for all non-playing teams.

Since photo/video reviews are prohibited and non-playing teams cannot initiate an appeal in the Driver Station, how should teams use the proper "chain of command" to address inconsistent scoring standards that inflate tournament rankings? Can a non-playing Drive Team politely discuss these general scoring inconsistencies with the Head Referee between matches?

<R12>

I do not see the 3x20 plate listed as either a legal or illegal part, I believe they were part of the rapid relay field parts.

According to <R14i>, food-safe lubricants (grease, oils, or other lubricants) may be used on Robots.

A Team member consumed french fries at a restaurant that uses canola oil (a vegetable oil) and subsequently touched the gears of their Robot without washing their hands.

Is vegetable oil / canola oil considered a food-safe lubricant that is permitted under <R14i>?

Additionally, the Robot Summary section lists “Grease, oil, graphite, or other lubricants or plastic additives” as illegal parts.

Does this incidental contact with vegetable oil render the Robot illegal?

Game Manual ver. 1.1 - Conflict between R14 (may be used) and R17 (illegal modification).

R14 sub-section i - "Food-safe lubricants (grease, oils, or other lubricants) may be used on Robots, provided they are used in moderation and cannot contaminate the Field, other Robots, Field Elements, and/or Scoring Objects."

R17 - "Examples of illegal modifications include, but are not limited to, bending, cutting, sanding, gluing, lubricating, taping, and melting"

Game Manual ver. 1.1 R7

I question if this year's hero bot Flop is legal.

R7 references emergency stopping situations and states "Keep the power button accessible. The on/off button on the VEX IQ Robot Brain must be accessible without moving or lifting the Robot"

If a team sets motor stopping to "hold" and there is a safety issue, I would find it difficult to get my fingers into this robot's middle to press the "X" without first moving the arm.

I'm looking for clarity on how to enforce this rule during inspections, and ensure it is enforced consistently between events/regions. At face value, an unmodified hero bot Flop should not pass inspection. If the ruling is that an unmodified Flop should pass, then please provide guidance on tolerances to be applied to other designs. (Many 180-bots at Worlds last year had brains that were similarly inaccessible but were allowed to compete. In our area we failed them at inspection due to violating this rule.)

<S1>

Teams with catapults have demonstrated that with enough force, beanbags can be pushed into the gaps between the vertical and horizontal PET sheets of the pyramid goals and result in beanbags falling into the structure. Would these beanbags be considered scored, and/or would S1 violations be applied if this is a recurring action done by the team?

Question: We are assembling our 2026-2027 VIQRC Level Up field and noticed a thin plastic film on the Level 3 game field elements. We believe this is protective packing material from manufacturing. Could you please confirm if this film is expected to be removed during assembly, and that removing it does not violate any field modification rules?

TY

If the vertical projection of a Bean Bag falls within the area of the VEX IQ parts that form the border of the Floor Goal, but it only touches (or does not touch) the side of those parts and makes no contact at all with the top surface, should this Bean Bag be scored?

<SC4>

We had several instances where a single bean bag would be on the L1 goal leaning on the side of the L2 goal and part of the bean bag was above the L2 platform leaning over a bit. It always seemed like there was some likely contact with the gray of the level 2 goal, so we would often credit the team with the higher goal. However, the contact was always minimal. Should teams be given the benefit of the doubt in this scenario?

Point b of <SG1> states that a Robot must begin the Match:

Positioned within one of the starting positions shown in Figure SG-1.

There appears to be no other rules defining the starting position of a Robot (other than the subpoints of b defining which starting location belongs to which Robot). Figure SG-1 displays two yellow boxes on the Field indicating the starting positions of the Robots. However, these yellow boxes are approximately 18" long, while point a of <SG1> states that a Robot may begin the Match up to 20" long. Additionally, the caption of Figure SG-1 states that the Robots in the figure are shown in legal starting positions, However, the Robots shown in the Figure are extending outside of the yellow boxes.

Could the GDC please clarify the following questions regarding the starting position of a Robot:

1. Is it legal for a Robot to begin the Match extending over the top of the Field Perimeter?
2. Is it legal for a Robot to begin the Match extending outside of the Field?
3. Is it legal for a Robot to begin the Match contacting the top of the Field Perimeter?
4. Is it legal for a Robot to begin the Match extending outside of the yellow box into the rest of the Field (i.e. over the sides of the yellow box bordered by the black lines)?
5. Is it legal for a Robot to begin the Match contacting the Floor outside of the yellow box?
6. Is it legal for a Robot to begin the Match contacting Field Elements (other than the Floor and Field Perimeter), and/or other Scoring Objects than its Preload?

In Figure SG-1, here is a yellow highlighted box for each team to show the start position, does the robot need to in this yellow box totally, or it can break this box as long as it meets size limit?

Hello, I would like to request clarification on rule <SG1>, specifically clauses b.i and b.ii, regarding Robot starting positions.

The current Game Manual states: "b. Positioned within one of the starting positions shown in Figure SG-1. [...] i. For Teamwork Challenge Matches, the Team listed as Team 1 (printed Match list), listed as red Team (events.vex.com), or listed first (VEXvia) must place their Robot in the starting position that shares a wall with the blue Pyramid Goal. ii. For Teamwork Challenge Matches, the Team listed as Team 2 (printed Match list), listed as blue Team (events.vex.com), or listed second (VEXvia) must place their Robot in the starting position that shares a wall with the red Pyramid Goal."

According to the text, Team 1 (Red) must start next to the Blue Pyramid Goal, and Team 2 (Blue) must start next to the Red Pyramid Goal.

However, in the official game reveal video and at early season events (such as recent regional competitions in China), the starting positions are set up as the exact opposite of what is described in the manual.

Because the starting positions drastically impact autonomous routing and early-match strategy, could you please clarify which setup is officially correct?

Does the line "Teams must be prepared to demonstrate that their Robot does not exceed the maximum size constraint of 11” x 24” at any point" mean that if the robot is able to extend past 24" (even if the students don't use it this way), the robot will not pass inspection? <SG2>

Secondly, if the students design a swing arm which technically could make the robot longer that 24", but they program it to extend only when in an upright position and not in a horizontal position, limiting the extension when the arm is horizontal to 24" maximum (i..e the restraint on the mechanism is due to the software), how will inspection view this? Should it pass?

There are multiple vague scenarios as follows:

Scenario 8:

Bean Bag D is partially stacked on Bean Bag C and is in contact with the L2 PET sheet.

Bean Bag C is stacked on top of Bean Bag B (a blue Bean Bag), which is stacked on top of Bean Bag A. Bean Bag A is in contact with the L1 PET sheet. All four Bean Bags meet all criteria listed in <SC4>.

What is the scoring status of Bean Bag A, Bean Bag B, Bean Bag C, and Bean Bag D?

Scenario 9:

Similar to Scenario 8, except Bean Bag A is a blue Bean Bag and Bean Bag B is a red Bean Bag. All four Bean Bags meet all criteria listed in <SC4>.

What is the scoring status of Bean Bag A, Bean Bag B, Bean Bag C, and Bean Bag D?

Scenario 10:

The PET sheet is flexible. Bean Bag A is stuck inside the Goal and is contacting the horizontal PET sheet that defines the L1 Goal.

What is the scoring status of Bean Bag A?

Scenario 11:

Bean Bag D is resting on the L2 PET sheet and is slightly contacting Bean Bag C.

Bean Bag C is stacked on top of Bean Bag B, which is stacked on top of Bean Bag A. Bean Bag A is in contact with the L1 PET sheet. All four Bean Bags meet all criteria listed in <SC4>.

What is the scoring status of Bean Bag A, Bean Bag B, Bean Bag C, and Bean Bag D?

Furthermore, if Bean Bag D is gradually pushed toward Bean Bag C while still slightly contacting the L2 PET sheet — at what point does the scoring status of Bean Bag D change?

If the Bean Bag rests against the Field Perimeter after being loaded, but does not exceed the outer edge of the Perimeter, is this loading operation valid?

QA3177 only say IQ pieces.

Game Manual ver. 1.1 Rule SG5

I appreciate the clarification for what happens to the preload of an absent team in a Teamwork Match. The line reads: "If a Robot is not present for a Teamwork Match, its Preload should be placed in that Team’s Load Zone."

Question: who should be the one determining where in the Load Zone this should be and what orientation? The Head Ref? The alliance team that did show up?

Or a standard position as defined for the event (or standard for all events via the game manual.)

Or random drop (similar to the Full Volume supply zone)

<SG6>

1. At the start of the match, the robot approaches the Pyramid Goal while already possessing one Bean Bag. During this process, it contacts a Bean Bag on the floor, causing it to end up in the position shown in the photo. Would this be considered a violation of the Possession and Plowing rules?

2. If a Bean Bag is lying on the floor as shown in the photo, and the robot drives over it several times while already possessing another Bean Bag , would this be considered a violation of the Possession and Plowing rules?

(https://events.vex.com/storage/markdown/uploads/GChobugKxr1juVGyCEsylEVwSJUBzMjMknpjII7r.jpg)

<SG7> The definition of Load Zone states:

“A segment of the Floor on a short end of the Field. Each Load Zone is bordered by the inside of the Field Perimeter and the inside edges of the VEX IQ pieces connected to the Floor.”

Under SG7, a Bean Bag may be Loaded through the Load Zone if it meets the listed requirements, including being placed in contact with the Floor and remaining in contact with the Floor after it is released by the Loader until contacted by a Robot.

We would like clarification on how to judge whether a Bean Bag has been legally placed “in the Load Zone.”

If a Loader places a Bean Bag so that it is touching the Floor within the Load Zone, but the Bean Bag is also touching one of the VEX IQ pieces connected to the Floor that forms the border of the Load Zone, is this a legal Load?

Or, because the Load Zone is defined as a segment of the Floor bordered by the inside edges of those VEX IQ pieces, must the Bean Bag be fully contained within the Load Zone boundaries and not be touching or crossing onto the border pieces?

In other words, for a Bean Bag to be legally Loaded under SG7, is it sufficient that it is placed in contact with the Floor within the Load Zone, or must the entire Bean Bag be fully inside the Load Zone boundary as defined by the inside edges of the Field Perimeter and VEX IQ pieces connected to the Floor?

If the Bean Bag is touching both the Floor inside the Load Zone and a bordering VEX IQ piece, should this be considered an improper Load that must be retrieved and reintroduced under SG7-f?

According to the attached photo, is it legal to place a Bean Bag upright against the Field Wall in the Loading Zone? The Bean Bag remains entirely within the Loading Zone, does not extend into the area above the Loading Zone, and does not exceed the height of the Field Wall. Is this legal?

<T6>[<T6>]

To enable faster Field reset, would it be legal for an Event Partner to use coloured pins to identify starting positions for each bean bag?