Hi Max
I think you have miss understood the point there is no rule, nor has there been any rule about adjusting legs.
The point if you read the post carefully, is to prove the rule about minimum of two degrees of freedom in the walking mechanism.
There are two rules so far to comply for walkers.
1/ the robot must be only supported on it's moving legs.
2/ the mechanism must have at least 2 degrees of freedom.
Supported on legs easy to prove
2 degrees of freedom ????????? how to prove your robot dose this!!!
That's were the adjustment idea comes from if you can separate up/down with forward/backward If you have separated the two you have proved there are two. You have proved the 2 degrees of freedom.
This way you are not dictating motors, cranks, actuators, or any other hardware just functionality.
Hope this clears this up.

Mechadon another fantastic machine. I LOVE this machine but the cruel facts are. that it completely bombed as a combat robot. I think it just about managed half way across the arena before it was completely trashed!!!!!

The gimble type mechanism has the possibility of being able to cope with all 6 degrees of freedom. It is just not likely to survive 30 seconds in a combat environment. to show you what I mean the lifting forks on Cherub HW were 8mm armor plate, the first event they got bent!!

Thanks for all the comments I believe we are making progress.

Craig