RobotEvents.com
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

2483: <G16> Further Clarification/Expansion on Post 2432: : An avenue of escape for <G16>

Peter Erbland (Event Partner)
30-Jan-2025

<G16>

Trapping - Limiting the movement of an opponent Robot to a small or confined area of the Field, approximately the size of one foam field tile or less, without an avenue for escape. Note that if a Robot is not attempting to escape, it is not considered Trapped.

Post 2432 asked about holding and the GDC responded to it citing a specific scenario. I would like to see an expansion to that answer to cover different scenarios. The original scenario is: a blue robot holding a mobile goal in a corner, the red robot is blocking retreat in one direction and a second mobile goal is blocking retreat in a second direction (below on left)

img

The specific response from the GDC was "Our answer will assume that the blue Robot is attempting to remove a Mobile Goal filled with blue Rings from a Negative Corner." Based on that, the red robot is holding. You add "Our answer only applies in that specific scenario, and Head Referees must use their judgment and the context of the Match to determine whether this logic applies in any other scenario."

In almost every scenario we have encountered, a robot is defending a mobile goal with its colored rings in the positive corner (blue robot with blue rings, red robot with red rings). We have been ruling that if the blue robot is defending a mobile goal with blue rings on it in the positive corner, it is not trying to escape and red cannot be holding. Blue has a clear avenue of escape if it released the mobile goal, but is guarding the mobile goal. It is the defensive robot in that scenario. Is this a correct interpretation?

But what if it is the exact same scenario as the diagram but the blue robot is trying to remove a mobile goal filled with red rings from the positive corner? (below on right)

img

Would that make blue the offensive robot and red the defensive robot and this would be red holding blue? If not, would it matter if red dropped the mobile goal to specifically force blue to drop the red mobile goal to escape? Or is this an effective strategy using the possession limits to force the other robot to release the scored mobile goal?

Thank you for your response

G16  
Answered by committee
6-Feb-2025

Generally speaking, in a scenario when multiple Robots are playing defensively (like both scenarios in your question), any Robot that isn't directly interacting with a Ring or Mobile Goal should be considered "more defensive" and given "less benefit of the doubt."

Because the red Robot in both of your scenarios does not have Rings or a Mobile Goal, it is playing "more defensively" than the blue Robot, which is actively interacting with a Mobile Goal.

In your first scenario, because BLUE1 is not trying to escape there is no Holding/Trapping.

In your second scenario, we'd generally consider this Holding/Trapping, but the final determination must be made by the Head Referee within the larger context of the Match and considering all contributing factors (like which Alliance put the Mobile Goal in that position).