2026 RCJ OnStage - DRAFT Rules & Scoresheets Released

RoboCupJunior OnStage
1

Dear OnStage Community,

Over the past years, we have received valuable feedback from participants, mentors, and judges regarding competition rules and scoring criteria. After thorough discussion and careful consideration of input from all aspects, the RCJ OnStage Committee has made significant changes to ensure greater clarity and fairness in judging.

These changes have come about after much discussion between our committee members, judges and experienced mentors and volunteers, to help shape these changes. Please read the updated rules and scoresheets carefully and we welcome the opportunity to hear from the OnStage community. Feel free to comment, suggest, and give feedback by replying this forum post.

Released documents available here:
Rules [HTML]: DRAFT_OnStage2026_Rules.html
Rules [PDF]: DRAFT_OnStage2026_Rules.pdf
Scoresheets: DRAFT_OnStage2026_Scoresheets.pdf

Key Changes:

1. Interview Section - NEW Live Demonstration Requirement
The interview scoring criteria has been restructured with new categories. Teams are now required to perform a Live Demonstration during the judging interview. This allows judges to clearly observe each chosen feature in action. We recognize that technical issues or viewing angles sometimes prevent judges from fully appreciating your feature’s capabilities during performance rounds. The Live Demonstration ensures your hard work is properly evaluated. Teams also have up to 25 minutes of the interview judging.

2. Scoring Structure Update
All judging sections now use a 100-point scale before applying the standard percentage weights (Technical Demonstration Video (15%), Technical Poster (15%), Technical Interview (30%), OnStage Performance (40%)). Sustainability Scoring has been moved to a bonus point, worth up to 10 additional points above the main 100-point score. Teams may present sustainability concepts in any format, and judges will consider your efforts across all sections when awarding bonus points. Check the scoresheets for more details.

3. Rule Clarifications
Most rule changes involve minor adjustments to improve clarity. If anything remains unclear after reading the updated rules, we are happy to hear from you.

4. AI usage
Teams have to consider and clarify any use of AI. If AI is used, how is AI involved in any part of the project development?

5. Supplementary Documents Coming Soon
We understand that the rules cannot cover everything. The committee is preparing supplementary documents to provide examples and clarification on common questions, such as “What is innovative?” and " How to create a good technical demonstration video and technical description poster?" Stay tuned for these updates.

We look forward to hearing from you and seeing all teams at the 2026 competition!

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! :christmas_tree::fireworks:

Thundluck Sereevoravitgul
RCJ OnStage Committee Chair 2026 (on behalf of RCJ OnStage Committee)

6 Likes
2

Dear OnStage Committee,

My name is Luis Gabriel Saenz from Mexico and I competed in Robocup 2023 in France. Every year, I closely follow the updates and changes to the OnStage rules and scoresheets, as this category has always been one of my favorites and one that I deeply admire.

This year, I was truly impressed by the changes that were introduced. Not necessarily because the rules are stricter or the scoring more demanding, but because of the evolution they represent. In particular, I really appreciated the new rubric for the Technical Interview, which I consider a fundamental part of the category and personally one of my favorite moments as a competitor.

The decision to include a live demonstration during the interview adds tremendous value. In previous years, the technical demonstration was done on stage and limited to around five minutes. From my experience as a competitor, presenting all the robot’s features and functionalities in that short time was challenging, but absolutely worth it. Now, by allocating more time to the interview and formally integrating this live demonstration, it clearly shows how the category has evolved and matured.

Year after year, robots in this category have demonstrated an extremely impressive and highly challenging level of development. This constant growth is one of the main reasons why I have always loved OnStage. Honestly, I see this category increasingly close to becoming a Home Primary category in the future.

I also really liked the changes to the scoring system, especially how decimals and calculations now work. Starting from a base score of 100 and then applying multipliers makes the process much clearer and more consistent. From my experience as a regional judge in past years, this approach would significantly reduce discrepancies, as previously each judge could interpret and apply scoring slightly differently.

I would like to highlight again how much I enjoyed the new Technical Interview rubric. However, there is one specific point I would like to respectfully share as constructive feedback. In the Technical Skills section, several aspects are now grouped under a single criterion, such as “Understanding the system and how hardware works.” In previous years, these were more clearly divided into areas like Programming, Electromechanical Systems, and Sensors and Communication Systems.

From my perspective, combining all of these into one single point could unintentionally affect teams. While I fully agree that every team member should have a basic understanding of the entire system, it is also important to recognize that teams naturally have defined roles—such as programmer, mechanical designer, CAD designer, PCB designer, or electronics specialist. Addressing all these areas in one criterion, especially within a limited interview time, might make it difficult for teams to clearly and thoroughly explain each aspect. Additionally, the inclusion of robot–robot and human–robot interactions within the same point further increases the complexity.

Perhaps this section could be made slightly more specific or subdivided again, or clarified in a way that allows teams to demonstrate depth in their roles while still showing overall system understanding.

Aside from this point, I truly loved the new rules and the updated scoring system. Congratulations to the committee for such a great and meaningful update. This category continues to rise in level every year, and its evolution is inspiring to see.

Thank you very much for your hard work and dedication to OnStage.

Kind regards,
Luis Saenz
Mexico

3 Likes
3

Thank you, Luis, for your comments and suggestion! I am not on the committee this year but as the extended member of the committee, we spent hours discussing and clarifying the rules and scoresheets. So, your comments mean a lot to me as well as all the members who contributed to the revisions.

Your suggestion will be discussed and we could improve the scoresheets. Teams’ feedback and suggestions will make the rules and rubrics much better than they currently are. The ones that are published are still drafts. We cannot make extensive changes. However, there are still time for improvements :slight_smile:

We trully appreciate you spending time to share your feedback!

Cheers Amy

4

Dear Thundluck,
I have a few questions that I posted at Clarification - 2026 RCJ OnStage rules . I am new to the forum. Maybe I should have posted it here instead. Please have a look at the thread and provide feedback at your best. Thank you.
Maddie.

1 Like