Rule 3.i

[hippo9]

For question 1 Here’s an example to clear things up. The ball is moving at a very high velocity in the air and is nearing the edge of the 60 x 60. So I flip the track on its side to recieve the ball and curl it around the edge to change direction. Would the flipped track be counted as a wall or a track?

Based on this it wouldn't count as a gap, unless it already landed and traveled straight for 5cm

So if it traveled straight on the flipped track for 5cm would it count as a gap?

If it is the same direction as the jump, then yes. Otherwise, no.

[knightmoves]

Based on this it wouldn't count as a gap, unless it already landed and traveled straight for 5cm

So if it traveled straight on the flipped track for 5cm would it count as a gap?

If it is the same direction as the jump, then yes. Otherwise, no.

Which it wouldn't do on a "flipped" track. If BenZuzu's track is banked it's because the ball is turning the corner, so it's not traveling 5cm "in the direction of the jump". Also note that the ball has to travel 5cm after landing. If it lands 2cm in to your catching track, you'd better have at least 7cm of track in a roughly straight line there.

[BenZuzu37]

So if it traveled straight on the flipped track for 5cm would it count as a gap?

If it is the same direction as the jump, then yes. Otherwise, no.

Which it wouldn't do on a "flipped" track. If BenZuzu's track is banked it's because the ball is turning the corner, so it's not traveling 5cm "in the direction of the jump". Also note that the ball has to travel 5cm after landing. If it lands 2cm in to your catching track, you'd better have at least 7cm of track in a roughly straight line there.

Ok but if it is 10-20 degrees off does it count?

[hippo9]

If it is the same direction as the jump, then yes. Otherwise, no.

Which it wouldn't do on a "flipped" track. If BenZuzu's track is banked it's because the ball is turning the corner, so it's not traveling 5cm "in the direction of the jump". Also note that the ball has to travel 5cm after landing. If it lands 2cm in to your catching track, you'd better have at least 7cm of track in a roughly straight line there.

Ok but if it is 10-20 degrees off does it count?

If what you mean is that the landing track is not the exact same direction as the path of the marble in the air, then I would think no, but an ES could rule differently, but I wouldn't risk it.

[BenZuzu37]

Ok that clears things up. Thank you all for your help.

[Crtomir]

Which it wouldn't do on a "flipped" track. If BenZuzu's track is banked it's because the ball is turning the corner, so it's not traveling 5cm "in the direction of the jump". Also note that the ball has to travel 5cm after landing. If it lands 2cm in to your catching track, you'd better have at least 7cm of track in a roughly straight line there.

Ok but if it is 10-20 degrees off does it count?

If what you mean is that the landing track is not the exact same direction as the path of the marble in the air, then I would think no, but an ES could rule differently, but I wouldn't risk it.

Okay, but how exact does it need to be? I mean, no one has a landing track that is EXACTLY the same horizontal direction as the take-off track. So how many degrees would be acceptable? Plus, the ruled don't say the same "horizontal direction". It says the same "direction". There is no FAQ or rules clarification on this, so it's left up to the individual event supervisor's interpretation which can vary considerably from competition to competition.

Consider a different case where the receiving track does have the same horizontal direction as the launching track, but is shaped like a widened "U" so that the ball will go down and then back up again quickly to be launched on a second jump. The whole "U"-shaped track is more than 5cm, but the ball may not land at the same point on the "U"-shaped receiving track every time. Ball is clearly not bouncing off a surface to count as a jump and the ball is traveling at least 5cm on the receiving track, but the receiving track is just bent down then up to do another launch. I would think this is within the spirit of the rules (no bouncing off walls), but some event supervisor might say it is illegal according to the rules because they are applying an overly strict interpretation of rule 3.i.

Or consider a different case where the receiving track is basically a wide track (like a tray). The tray may be roughly aligned in the same horizontal direction as the launching track, but the ball is free to roll any direction after it lands on the tray. Clearly, this also is in the spirit of the rules, but some event supervisor might say the ball doesn't travel in the same direction. And what if the ball rolls 3.5 cm on the tray, hits the side wall of the tray, but then continues to roll along the tray. See. They might say the ball hit a wall, but in reality, the wall is the side wall of the receiving track (the tray) and the ball is just staying within the receiving track (tray). There are no rules as to what is the maximum width a track can be. A ball rolling down a wide flat board is still a track.

My point is that there are a lot of potential cases which I'm sure students will come up with that are well within the spirit of the rules, but may be questioned by some event supervisor who hasn't given as much thought to rule 3.i as you all have. Because this year's rules heavily favor the jumps over anything else, I wish the rules would have been more exact.

[hippo9]

Ok but if it is 10-20 degrees off does it count?

If what you mean is that the landing track is not the exact same direction as the path of the marble in the air, then I would think no, but an ES could rule differently, but I wouldn't risk it.

Okay, but how exact does it need to be? I mean, no one has a landing track that is EXACTLY the same horizontal direction as the take-off track. So how many degrees would be acceptable? Plus, the ruled don't say the same "horizontal direction". It says the same "direction". There is no FAQ or rules clarification on this, so it's left up to the individual event supervisor's interpretation which can vary considerably from competition to competition.

Consider a different case where the receiving track does have the same horizontal direction as the launching track, but is shaped like a widened "U" so that the ball will go down and then back up again quickly to be launched on a second jump. The whole "U"-shaped track is more than 5cm, but the ball may not land at the same point on the "U"-shaped receiving track every time. Ball is clearly not bouncing off a surface to count as a jump and the ball is traveling at least 5cm on the receiving track, but the receiving track is just bent down then up to do another launch. I would think this is within the spirit of the rules (no bouncing off walls), but some event supervisor might say it is illegal according to the rules because they are applying an overly strict interpretation of rule 3.i.

Or consider a different case where the receiving track is basically a wide track (like a tray). The tray may be roughly aligned in the same horizontal direction as the launching track, but the ball is free to roll any direction after it lands on the tray. Clearly, this also is in the spirit of the rules, but some event supervisor might say the ball doesn't travel in the same direction. And what if the ball rolls 3.5 cm on the tray, hits the side wall of the tray, but then continues to roll along the tray. See. They might say the ball hit a wall, but in reality, the wall is the side wall of the receiving track (the tray) and the ball is just staying within the receiving track (tray). There are no rules as to what is the maximum width a track can be. A ball rolling down a wide flat board is still a track.

My point is that there are a lot of potential cases which I'm sure students will come up with that are well within the spirit of the rules, but may be questioned by some event supervisor who hasn't given as much thought to rule 3.i as you all have. Because this year's rules heavily favor the jumps over anything else, I wish the rules would have been more exact.

Well, I think as long as it visibly looks like the same direction it should be fine, and as far as the tray scenario, that's still where it is pretty ambiguous, but I think that it should be legal.