Robotics Education & Competition Foundation
Inspirando estudiantes, un robot a la vez.

The official VEX V5 Robotics Competition Question & Answer system has closed for this season. If your team is planning to attend the 2025 VEX Robotics World Championship, you may submit game and event-related questions to the 2025 VEX Robotics World Championship Driver's Meeting Question Collection Form, which is available at this link: https://forms.gle/VpoRH5GmhktejJ8R8.

Official Q&A: VEX V5 Robotics Competition 2024-2025: High Stakes

Usage Guidelines All Questions

2304: Even further clarification on SG6


Eric Sandvig
16-Nov-2024

<SG6>

In https://www.robotevents.com/V5RC/2024-2025/QA/2151 the question dealt with a mobile goal being moved into the a scoring position while being plowed, with the moving robot possessing a mobile goal. Here is my question, mobile goal 1 is already scored with all red rings. A red robot bring a second mobile goal, mobile goal 2, into the scoring area to make it easier to defend both. During this interaction mobile goal 1 is moved, but remains the scored mobile goal in that corner. Would this be a major violation? Thank you very much for your time.

Yes, the scenario you describe would be a Major Violation of <SG6>. Plowing one or more Mobile Goals while in Possession of a Mobile Goal is a Major Violation, including interactions that happen in Corners.

I have questions on two points from this Q&A answer.

First; in this scenario, mobile goal 1 is moved, but it does not say how. Your answer refers to "plowing" which is defined in the game manual as:

A Robot / Scoring Object status. A Robot is considered to be Plowing a Scoring Object if the Robot is intentionally moving it in a preferred direction with a flat or convex face of the Robot or with another Scoring Object.

If mobile goal 1 is simply bumped to the side when mobile goal 2 is placed, is that still a violation, since the robot is not "plowing" the mobile goal, but rather the goal is moved incidentally as the robot drives through?

What about interactions outside the corners, for example a team is carrying a goal, and bumps another goal such that the second goal goes to the side of the robot, and not in the direction of travel? This contact would be incidental, and they are not moving the goal in a "preferred direction", but instead knocking it out of their way.

If the above is considered a violation, what about a situation where a team is possessing a goal, turns, and in the process of turning, bumps another goal, say with a corner. Again, this contact would be incidental and uncontrolled.

If the above scenarios are violations, is it the intent that ALL contact with a mobile goal while already in possession of a mobile goal is a violation, regardless of context?

Second; in your answer, you state that "Plowing one or more Mobile Goals while in Possession of a Mobile Goal is a Major Violation". Do you mean to say that ANY incident where there is an SG6 violation with mobile goals is automatically a major violation and DQ? Or only interactions that fall under the criteria outlined in the violation notes; e.g. match affecting or an intentional/egregious violation by the winning alliance.

This issue came up at a tournament I was reffing this weekend, so I would appreciate some clarification. Thanks

Answered by committee
21-Nov-2024

If a scenario involves minor, incidental contact with Mobile Goal 1, that likely wouldn't be considered Plowing.

If Mobile Goal 1 is just barely placed in a Corner and a Robot possessing Mobile Goal 2 drives into that Corner and pushes Mobile Goal 1 all the way back into the Corner (making it easier to defend), the Robot has intentionally Plowed Mobile Goal 1 while possessing Mobile Goal 2. That would be a violation of <SG6>, and a Disqualification if the Robot's Alliance wins the Match.

The final determination of whether a specific Mobile Goal has been Plowed/manipulated or simply bumped into will require some level of judgment from the Head Referee.