Q&A

<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?

<T6> states (emphasis mine):

Fields may be repaired at the Event Partner’s discretion. All competition Fields at an event must be set up in accordance with the specifications in Appendix A and/or other applicable Sections. Minor aesthetic customizations or repairs are permitted, provided that they do not impact gameplay (see <T4>).

An example of a permissible modification to the Field listed in the rule is:

Using non-VEX electrical tape to add required lines to the Field

Would substituing the red and blue tape lines that define the Load Zones with white tape lines be a permissible modification to the Field?

<T6> states “Assembling a VEX Portable Competition Field Perimeter without including the securing straps” is prohibited.

The Vex portable field straps are like the figurative sock in wash that goes missing. Either one or both straps are not where they should be at the start of the next competition. Unless one has a supply of spare straps, an EP is scrambling to find someone with spare straps or run a competition out of compliance with the rules.

As an alternative, I use ratcheting tie down straps, specifically https://www.homedepot.com/p/Husky-15-ft-x-1-in-Ratchet-Tie-Down-Strap-with-S-Hook-FH0867/31299449. I found that these are easier to install and provide better wall support than the Vex portable field velcro straps.

My question is simple, may event partners use the same (or similar) tie down straps as a solution? If yes, is the solution temporary or it permissible to always use it?

<SC5><G1><SC5>I have a problem with the goal templates, this is the 4 parts of the center goal in yellow, the two red and the two blue templates. In the 11 sets we got the holes punched into the goal templates is the same size as the head of the pins that are supposed to retain them.

This hole size mismatch lets the edge of the template to pop up and become above the surface.

My easy fix it to take thin double sided tape - like https://www.amazon.com/Amazon-Basics-Refillable-Permanent-Translucence/dp/B07VYK11V1/fosterworld

and stick the edges down to the field. It doesn't seem noticeable. the thickness of the tape seems to be under a mm.

Is this legal? If not, what is the path forward? I'm happy to RMA 11 fields worth of templates to RECF for replacement. (Since VEX doesn't offer field replacement parts).

Thanks!

<T7>

At a recent event, we were told that using a mechanical level was illegal or against the rules. After reviewing the rules and the official Q&A, I have not been able to find any such rule.

Is there any clarification on whether a device may be used to determine if a field is within the allowed parameters?

<T5> <T5> describes the allowable variances in the field. For the goals, the only mention is a 1 inch variance in height. The goals this year are only attached to a metal plate that is not anchored to anything else, only held in place by the foam tiles. They have a large amount of sway during game play, more than 1 inch. Teams are learning to compensate for this dynamic variance throughout game play.

Typically during the World competition, Vex chooses to anchor the field elements directly to the wood on the field platform. This will eliminate nearly all of the sway, causing a big change in game play for all teams. Will this be considered when planning the setup for Worlds? Or do teams qualified to Worlds need to consider this and find a way to mimic it for their practices leading up to the World event?

<RSC3><T6>

I have a potential participant this year that has color blindness and has expressed hesitation about joining this year due to this limitation. Would it be possible for us to use sharpie or light colored paint patterns to help him better be able to differentiate the different color in pins during competitions?

<G8>

I have a team asking if there are any restrictions on what alignment aids they could use during pre-match setup. G8 references that pre-match alignment tools are allowed. In the past I have seen tools made from vex pieces, but this group is wanting to use more traditional tools like squares or levels to understand field conditions and robot placement. As long as T6 is followed and pre-match set up is done promptly would this be allowed?

<G1>, <G3>, <R3>, <T5>, <T6>, Code of Conduct

If a team notices a problem with another team’s robot, which would likely cause that team to fail a ‘spot inspection’, do they have an obligation to report that information in a timely manner? Or could they wait until it is strategically advantageous to do so?

Example: During qualification matches, Team A noticed that Team B’s robot brain placement probably should not have passed inspection. Fixing the problem would have taken considerable time. Rather than approaching Team B and letting them know so they could fix their robot proactively, or informing the Head Referee directly, Team A waited until they were about to face Team B in a semi-final elimination match before pointing out the problem to the Head Referee.

Should Team B be allowed to play their match since they’ve played through all the qualification matches and it’s at the Head Referee’s discretion whether to conduct spot inspections? Or should their robot be removed from the field per R3, T5 & T6. Has Team A violated G1, G3, or the Code of Conduct?

In the following scenarios a qualification match is scheduled to start and the head referee is ready. Both blue teams have robots on the field and are ready to go. Red 1 is ready and Red 2 arrives in the driver station:

1. While the 3 2 1 countdown before the match is going on
2. During autonomous
3. After autonomous ends but before driver control starts
4. After driver control starts but before the end of the match

In which of the following scenarios will Red 2:

a) Be considered a no show per <T5>?

b) Be allowed to place their robot on the field and participate in the match, considering <T6> and <G9>?

Does the answer change if a drive team member is in the drive station before the countdown starts, but the robot arrives at a later point?

Thanks Matthew and Zach :)

Relevant Sources: <T5> Be at your match on time. If no member of a Team is present in the Driver Station at the start of a Match, that Team is considered a “no show” and will receive zero (0) points. The other Team in the Alliance will still play and receive points for the Match.

<T6> Robots at the field must be ready to play. If a Team brings their Robot to the Field, it must be prepared to play (i.e., batteries charged, sized within the starting size constraint, etc.) Robots must be placed on the field promptly. Repeated failure to do so could result in a Violation of <G1> and/or removal of the Robot from the current Match at the Head Referee’s discretion.

Disablement – A penalty applied to a Team for a rule Violation. During Disablement, a Team is no longer allowed to operate their Robot, and the Drivers will be asked to place their Controller on the ground. A Disablement is not the same as a Disqualification.

Head Ref Unit 6 Quiz Question: What is the minimum requirement for a Team to get a score for a Match? Form Correct Answer: At least one member of the Team must be present in the Driver Station Incorrect Answers:
The Team’s Robot must be in the Driver Station or on the Field The Team’s Robot must move during the Match At least one point must be Scored by the Team’s Robot during the Match

We had a rule opinion dispute as a tournament recently between the three Head Ref-certified individuals that were present regarding whether a team MUST place and leave their robot on the field for a match, specifically when the robot is nonfunctional.

Two of us felt that having a broken robot on the field was NOT a rule requirement and MAY be placed on the field, but may also be kept off the field, assuming it is not part of a strategy. Doing so would allow that team to keep the robot off the field as a potential obstacle/entanglement for the functioning robot.

The other Head Ref certified individual stated they and another ref, who worked for REC, had encountered the same issue at a prior event, and the REC representative stated that the nonfunctioning robot MUST be placed on the field and would be considered to have disabled status if it was not functioning by the time the match began, which gave the ref discretion to disable the nonfunctioning team and force them to place their controller down for the match.

From the first perspective, and according to the Unit 6 quiz, the only requirement for the team to receive an alliance score is simply to be present in the Driver's Station on time. The team need not place their nonfunctional robot on the field, and they have committed no violation to be subject to disablement. According to the incorrect answers in the Quiz, the teams robot need not be in the Driver Station or the Field, move during the match, or score a point. This would seem to coincide with the reading of T5.

Alternatively, T6 seems to suggest that if the robot is present, it MUST be placed on the field and not being ready to play would be a violation of T6 by bringing a nonfunctional robot to the field. Assuming this is a rule violation, then Disablement could be applied, and with the controller on the ground, the robot isn't going to move and thus remains on the field during the match.

So is the intent here in the Rules that a nonfunctional robot never be brought to the field, or else the kids are forced to place their nonfunctioning robot on the field? That seems like an odd conflict, as otherwise the Manual-suggested common sense would allow the kids to try their best to repair their robots even up to the point of stepping into the Driver Station for a match, just as we allow them to attempt to repair their robots midmatch.

Thank you for the clarification