Boomilever B/C

[Vstorm34]

Is there a rule against a Boomilever being tiered due to it being over 45cm?????? I received a tier for this yet as I review the construction parameters there is no such rule! Only Section 3 Subsection C states "The Boomilever must support the Loading Assembly (5.b.) at the loading point which must be between 40 cm and 45 cm from the testing wall (4.Part II.e.ii.)." but my Boomilever was in compliance with this rule! Am I missing something!! Please help!

As far as I am aware there is no such rule that prohibits that.

[sciolyperson1]

Is there a rule against a Boomilever being tiered due to it being over 45cm?????? I received a tier for this yet as I review the construction parameters there is no such rule! Only Section 3 Subsection C states "The Boomilever must support the Loading Assembly (5.b.) at the loading point which must be between 40 cm and 45 cm from the testing wall (4.Part II.e.ii.)." but my Boomilever was in compliance with this rule! Am I missing something!! Please help!

If it's over 45cm, then its not betwen 40 and 45, so yes, you can get tiered.

[TheChiScientist]

Is there a rule against a Boomilever being tiered due to it being over 45cm?????? I received a tier for this yet as I review the construction parameters there is no such rule! Only Section 3 Subsection C states "The Boomilever must support the Loading Assembly (5.b.) at the loading point which must be between 40 cm and 45 cm from the testing wall (4.Part II.e.ii.)." but my Boomilever was in compliance with this rule! Am I missing something!! Please help!

If it's over 45cm, then its not betwen 40 and 45, so yes, you can get tiered.

My construction was set up so that my boom was 46cm long but I placed my cross wood where the loading block would rest at exactly 40cm-45cm! It's not made with the traditional wood placement at exactly the end of the boomilever. Thus a tier should not occur! Correct??

[MadCow2357]

Is there a rule against a Boomilever being tiered due to it being over 45cm?????? I received a tier for this yet as I review the construction parameters there is no such rule! Only Section 3 Subsection C states "The Boomilever must support the Loading Assembly (5.b.) at the loading point which must be between 40 cm and 45 cm from the testing wall (4.Part II.e.ii.)." but my Boomilever was in compliance with this rule! Am I missing something!! Please help!

No such rule, what in the world happened?

[Carrot]

Is there a rule against a Boomilever being tiered due to it being over 45cm?????? I received a tier for this yet as I review the construction parameters there is no such rule! Only Section 3 Subsection C states "The Boomilever must support the Loading Assembly (5.b.) at the loading point which must be between 40 cm and 45 cm from the testing wall (4.Part II.e.ii.)." but my Boomilever was in compliance with this rule! Am I missing something!! Please help!

Pretty sure that as long as the center of the loading block is within 40 to 45cm you should be good. If your boomi goes over 45cm but has the center of loading block within the range, you should not get tiered.

[TheChiScientist]

Is there a rule against a Boomilever being tiered due to it being over 45cm?????? I received a tier for this yet as I review the construction parameters there is no such rule! Only Section 3 Subsection C states "The Boomilever must support the Loading Assembly (5.b.) at the loading point which must be between 40 cm and 45 cm from the testing wall (4.Part II.e.ii.)." but my Boomilever was in compliance with this rule! Am I missing something!! Please help!

No such rule, what in the world happened?

Pretty sure that as long as the center of the loading block is within 40 to 45cm you should be good. If your boomi goes over 45cm but has the center of loading block within the range, you should not get tiered.

Upon further investigation and review by me, my partner, and other people that compete in Boomilever we have determined that UChicago has misinterpreted Section 3 Subsection C of the Boomilever rules and prematurely declared my Boomilever tiered! Furthermore, the UChicago ES failed to notify me that my Boomilever was within a "construction violation", thus I was unable to arbitrate and correct their improper tier... There WILL be an arbitration as multiple injustices were made to the competitors (me and my partner) and no opportunity was given for clarification or arbitration. This is not cool...

[Unome]

Is there a rule against a Boomilever being tiered due to it being over 45cm?????? I received a tier for this yet as I review the construction parameters there is no such rule! Only Section 3 Subsection C states "The Boomilever must support the Loading Assembly (5.b.) at the loading point which must be between 40 cm and 45 cm from the testing wall (4.Part II.e.ii.)." but my Boomilever was in compliance with this rule! Am I missing something!! Please help!

No such rule, what in the world happened?

Pretty sure that as long as the center of the loading block is within 40 to 45cm you should be good. If your boomi goes over 45cm but has the center of loading block within the range, you should not get tiered.

Upon further investigation and review by me, my partner, and other people that compete in Boomilever we have determined that UChicago has misinterpreted Section 3 Subsection C of the Boomilever rules and prematurely declared my Boomilever tiered! Furthermore, the UChicago ES failed to notify me that my Boomilever was within a "construction violation", thus I was unable to arbitrate and correct their improper tier... There WILL be an arbitration as multiple injustices were made to the competitors (me and my partner) and no opportunity was given for clarification or arbitration. This is not cool...

Chances of an arbitration post-competition are near-zero. This is something that you would have needed to identify and appeal during your device testing - refer to rule 4.j.

[TheChiScientist]

No such rule, what in the world happened?

Pretty sure that as long as the center of the loading block is within 40 to 45cm you should be good. If your boomi goes over 45cm but has the center of loading block within the range, you should not get tiered.

Upon further investigation and review by me, my partner, and other people that compete in Boomilever we have determined that UChicago has misinterpreted Section 3 Subsection C of the Boomilever rules and prematurely declared my Boomilever tiered! Furthermore, the UChicago ES failed to notify me that my Boomilever was within a "construction violation", thus I was unable to arbitrate and correct their improper tier... There WILL be an arbitration as multiple injustices were made to the competitors (me and my partner) and no opportunity was given for clarification or arbitration. This is not cool...

Chances of an arbitration post-competition are near-zero. This is something that you would have needed to identify and appeal during your device testing - refer to rule 4.j.

At the least, we are notifying UChicago of their error seeing how they are hosting a Div B. invitational and they need to correct it. Even if they don't process the arbitration...

[PM2017]

Upon further investigation and review by me, my partner, and other people that compete in Boomilever we have determined that UChicago has misinterpreted Section 3 Subsection C of the Boomilever rules and prematurely declared my Boomilever tiered! Furthermore, the UChicago ES failed to notify me that my Boomilever was within a "construction violation", thus I was unable to arbitrate and correct their improper tier... There WILL be an arbitration as multiple injustices were made to the competitors (me and my partner) and no opportunity was given for clarification or arbitration. This is not cool...

Chances of an arbitration post-competition are near-zero. This is something that you would have needed to identify and appeal during your device testing - refer to rule 4.j.

At the least, we are notifying UChicago of their error seeing how they are hosting a Div B. invitational and they need to correct it. Even if they don't process the arbitration...

Not to downplay your disappointment (I know it sucks when an ES makes a mistake), but you need to chill out. Remember that these proctors are doing this for us competitors, and not for themselves. If they make a mistake, I know it's infuriating, but as someone who has made tests to run events, I also know that while ESes (usually) try their hardest, mistakes happen.

[TheChiScientist]

Chances of an arbitration post-competition are near-zero. This is something that you would have needed to identify and appeal during your device testing - refer to rule 4.j.

At the least, we are notifying UChicago of their error seeing how they are hosting a Div B. invitational and they need to correct it. Even if they don't process the arbitration...

Not to downplay your disappointment (I know it sucks when an ES makes a mistake), but you need to chill out. Remember that these proctors are doing this for us competitors, and not for themselves. If they make a mistake, I know it's infuriating, but as someone who has made tests to run events, I also know that while ESes (usually) try their hardest, mistakes happen.

My main issue is that UChicago is notorious for following the rules to the dot. Which is what happened last year and no errors came from it. Yet while I understand mistakes can be made this one had so many oversights on my run. Other teams with similar circumstances did not run into these errors and in the end, I was the only one affected by this issue... Nevertheless, I just don't want anyone else to be affected by this oversight as it tanked me over 20 places.