Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?

[Joe Matt]

Read this dabate from NYT:


The action on the playing field was strikingly different at the BattleBots IQ tournament, held for the first time in March in a cavernous soundstage at Universal Studios in Orlando. In the center of the soundstage, framed on three sides by bleachers, was a large plexiglass cube in which the matches took place. Saws popping up from the floor and heavy hammers hanging at the corners of the cube were controlled by students trying to damage the opposing team's robots. But the pit area was similar to those of First competitions: teams freely shared tools, spare parts and advice.

Among those who helped start the BattleBots IQ program are Nola Garcia, who still runs a Miami-based First team, and Michael Bastoni, a teacher from Plymouth North High School in Massachusetts who formerly took part in First and now fields teams for BattleBots IQ. Alex Slocum, an M.I.T. professor who studied under Dr. Flowers and works down the hall from him, helped write the robot-building guidelines.

In one confrontation, a robot built by students from Hauppauge High School on Long Island got caught under one of the hammers and endured a series of nasty whacks, one of which immobilized it, ending the match. Afterward, a man swept the metal shavings from the ring, and team members in blue coveralls and hard hats carried their robot into the pit area, where they analyzed what had happened. After removing its dented skin, they discovered the problem: a disconnected battery.

Some teams, like the one from Hauppauge, competed this year in both First and BattleBots IQ. Others at the BattleBots tournament were new to robotics competitions altogether, like the four schools from the Pueblo School District in Colorado, one of which fielded Tetanus, a menacing robot with a rusty blade that spun at 1500 rpm. A few schools had shifted from First to BattleBots IQ, citing the lower cost of taking part (a registration fee of $100 per team, plus whatever the team decides to spend on robot materials), the simpler game rules and the possibility of winding up on television or even having their robot transformed into a toy. (BattleBots has a licensing deal with Hasbro and says it will share toy and television royalties with schools that take part. First emphasizes the $1.2 million in scholarships that it will hand out this season.)

Can the two programs co-exist peacefully, bringing robotics competitions to a larger number of schools?

Dr. Flowers said that he believed that the educational merits of participating in First and in BattleBots IQ could "be quite equivalent" but that he worried about the safety issues raised by BattleBots. "If I were a principal, would I want students building something overtly dangerous?" he said. "It just scares me. And I'd be disappointed if it turns out that we need destruction for something to be interesting."

Mr. Bastoni said that the BattleBots IQ program enforced rigorous safety rules. "There is room for diversity," he said, noting that the Olympic Games include aggressive sports like boxing and hockey along with diving and figure skating.

Still, sniping between the two groups occasionally flares up. Mr. Roski of BattleBots has said that engineers, not students, do too much of the work on First robots; Mr. Kamen has argued that civilization does not advance by one group's demolishing the achievements of another, but rather by building something superior.

Odd as it may seem, the initial peace overtures seem to be coming from the organizers of Battlebots IQ.

"Kids love First and they love BattleBots," Ms. Garcia said. "They're two different engineering exercises. If I like chocolate ice cream, I can like vanilla, too."


So, is Battlebots IQ a serious threat to the moral and other positions FIRST has and FIRST itself? Or is it a half harted attempt to pre-umpt FIRST and will die along with Battlebots in the next few years?

IMHO, Battlebots IQ won't survive. It is too violent to be addapted outside of the US (except mabey in the UK). Plus, they currently hold rounds in Universal, so that's a death bed too. Plus, when was the last time you watched WB instead of ESPN or ABC which FIRST has.

Note: Note Dean's rebuttle to that FIRST relies to much on engineers.

[Joe Johnson]

I don't really like the choices for the poll.

The question is "Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?" But the choices for votes don't give me the answer I want to check.

My answer is YES Battlebots IQ (and its Daddy, Battlebots) is a HUGE threat to FIRST's success.

FIRST has ALWAYS been about changing the culture. For me, TV has got to be a big factor in bringing about that change. To the extent that Battlebots is draining off TV coverage that FIRST should be getting, it is a big threat to FIRST's long term goals.

Joe J.

[UCGL_Guy]

I've only recently seen Battlebots and have not viewed this IQ show. In my opionion the FIRST competitions are much more exciting to view. There is more strategy and a lot more functionality to the machines. As a threat to FIRST I do not believe the two "program" can be compared the have diverging views and goals. Would I support a program that promotes destruction? No too much of that already, I think we are all ready for something that highlights the good values in America.

My opinion - for what it is worth

[Natchez]

Give me more tools; I’ll use the ones that are most useful for the job.

Our job is to build future engineers because our country needs them. It just so happens that FIRST is the best tool in our toolbox right now but there is a lot of room left. If BattleBots IQ becomes a useful tool to do our job, then we should use it. BattleBots IQ might be the very thing that we need to convince some schools to give us their students so we can build them into America’s future scientists & engineers.

Currently, the best tools in my toolbox are FIRST & BEST (Boosting Engineering, Science, & Technology) for the high schools, LEGO League & Botball for the middle schools, and LEGO Spectrum system kits for the elementary schools. Although I consider FIRST the best high school spring competition and the best tool in the ole toolbox, I can definitely see using a BattleBots IQ tool for schools that can’t afford FIRST.

Considering the enormous amounts of bright and intelligent students that we are not harvesting because they just happen to live in rural Mississippi or any other poor part of the country and cannot afford FIRST, we must find or make tools that will harvest these students. If BattleBots IQ is that tool, then we must use it. By far, the best tool that we've had in the past few years has been the NASA sponsorships (all of the Mississippi schools have been started by NASA sponsorships ... and have done great things in their communities).

With all that said, my vote is that they can coexist as long as both sides stick to gracious professionalism. Can FIRST crush BattleBots IQ like a cheap aluminum coke can with a few choice remarks by a few influential people? YEP! Can BattleBots IQ put on a "FIRST costs too much" campaign and bring it to its knees? YEP! I just hope neither goes that route.

Take care,
Lucien

Something to ponder: You're in the finals at Nationals and the 1/4" bolts that hold your wheels onto your base are loose and all you brought to the stage was a pair of pliers and a screw driver, do you tighten the bolt with the less-than-perfect-tool-for-the-job pair of pliers or do you just let your wheels fall off because the perfect tool for the job, your trusty ole 7/16" open ended wrench, was back in the pits?

[Joe Matt]

Brandon, if you are reading this, can you change the poll options? Thanks.

Put:

Yes, serious threat
Yes, but not that big
No, but keep an eye out
No, don't pay attention to them

[BSMFIRST]

First of all, this is a loaded question...I've come to expect this bias on the forum though.

Second of all, the biggest threat to FIRST is FIRST itself. Just read this line from the article:

"At the First regional competition at the New Haven Coliseum, the crowd's energy level rivaled that of a homecoming football game. But to the uninitiated, what transpired on the field was as opaque as a livestock auction. "

Dan

[Patrick Wang]

I often find myself saying this point over and over again, but I feel that it is an important aspect that is often overlooked.

Being a part of a FIRST team is not just about building a robot.

Sure both programs offer an equal opportunity to learn and get excited about science and technology. Both can spark an interest in a student to do some research on his or her own time, and learn something.

However, part of the FIRST enviroment, and something that was also listed in the FIRST distributed team charter was something different.

I paraphrase,

"To build a team THEN build a robot"

What you learn from building an organization, especially a lasting strong organization cannot be quantified by any means.

So much goes into building a solid organization, it takes the efforts of more than simply a couple students in a garage building a robot.

Perhaps the high cost of entry into a FIRST robotics competition says something about EVERY team that participates in FIRST.

As Dean would say, Just MAKING it to a FIRST robotics regional, makes your team a winner.

There is a great deal of truth in this saying.

Imagine having to raise at least $5000 for entry, getting the help of local engineers and ultimately making sacrifices and working together, making compromises, the whole process is something to marvel over.

When your organization has grown into the community, and makes a difference in the lives of many, THAT is something to be proud of.

FIRST rewards that team with the chairman's award.

But every team in the FIRST competition should be proud of themselves for what they have accomplished.

Realize that only a small percentage of the nation would have the opportunities presented to student to grow not only academically, but also as people.

The worlds need more people like those who participate in FIRST.

That, I like to think is the distinction between a FIRST robotics team and Battlebots IQ team. (limited to only 5 members 4 students 1 adult).

Ultimately, it's not about learning to build a robot. It's about what you do AFTER FIRST. What are you going to contribute to the world?

I say this over and over, and I'll probably be saying this for every generation to come.

What you learn and experience in building your team and organization, and dealing with the people you meet. (often many great people) will far outlast any robot you build.

[Mr. Van]

It seems we don't like to admit this, but FIRST is already losing (has lost?) to Battlebots.

Whenever I speak to someone about building robots with my students without mentioning FIRST beforehand (and often when I have mentioned FIRST) they ask, "You mean like Battlebots?"

Many, many, many more people know about Battlebots than FIRST. The rules are simple, the "game" is simple. People like to see flying parts, sparks, something fighting for its survival, etc. Just like people like(d) to see gladiators and bear baiting (and bull fighting and kickboxing and WWF...).

There are far more kids out there who want to build a battlebot than want to join a FIRST team. For one thing, far more know about BattleBots (and similar TV programs) than FIRST. For another, adolesents (especially males) are driven in our society to be violently competitive.

All of this makes FIRST's job really, really hard. (And some would say that much more important.)

In the end, I will say this. I used to like BattleBots. I liked the demonstrations of driving skill, design, strategy, etc. Now, I am bored with it. The game is the same every time. Rather boring. Perhaps this is the advantage FIRST can exploit. Come back next time and check out the NEW GAME!

Just some thoughts.

-Mr. Van

[Perseus]

Nola Garcia: "I wish I was Dean"

Alex Slocum: " I am the next woddie"



a cheap imitation

[Andrew Rudolph]

FIRST is by far a better competition than battle bots, we can all see that. FIRST not only lets you build a robot, but you can also make animations, have sprit teams, design graphics....

At battlebots IQ you see none of these things, and in fact thier robots arent very technical. In the finals there were 2 wedges squaring off. I highly doubt that in a first robot all you will see is a drive train. You wont see technologically advaced machines like thw wildstang robot out there. Infact i doubt that most of the robots were even programmed past the default program. There werent any interesting control systems. And after walking around in the pits i could say that there are basically no sensors on any of the robots. So one could say they are just R/C Vehicles on steriods.

In the article it talks about the first team who competed in BBIQ and how after being pulverized it was KOed. What they dont talk about is that they had come back from being basically pulverized into a big piece of bent alumninum 2 times and came back. If you looked at thier robot it was basically a FIRST robot with armour. It was made from T slot extrusions and Wheelchair wheels. Of all of the robots they took the biggest beating. Now why did i tell you all of this? Because they used what they learned in FIRST made the mos basic first robot and they did amazinly well. So our robots are tough and complex at the same time.


I went to battlebots IQ in orlando and the atmosphere is almost an inverse of waht it is like at our competition. The crowd just sits there and watches. There were a few kids from Combbat there and anyone that has seen them at a compettion knows they have some of the best spirit. I dont think they had a team there, but when YMCA came on they all got up and did one of thier coordinated dances. And the crowd was stuned they all sat there as they danced and took pictures like it was a show. Now for us at a FIRST competiton we see crazy things like that all day long.

I think that BBIQ is good because it educates people on building basic robots and inspires some kids to go into engineering. But FIRST is by far the superior competiton, and even if battle bots has more appeal to the average joe. but FIRST competitors are FAR from the average, we learn so much from this competition and we have so much fun that any educator can see that FIRST is better. Most of the BBIQ robots dont have the quality of sponsors liek we have, so the corperations that are out there see that FIRST is better too. And i dont care if i dont go on TV cause i will build a robot anyway.



Andrew

[Digo]

Mr Van, I don't think FIRST "lost" anything.

You say Battlebots is winning because people know more about them than about us.

FIRST IS NOT A TV SHOW!

People like to watch those fake wrestling too, and it doesn't mean that's nice.

Although I know about a veteran FIRST team that went to battlebots, I don't believe they will find the same spirit there, the same targets, the same visions of what is happening.

It's wrong talking about a "FIRST vs. Battlebots" competition. I believe these are pretty different things and shouldn't be compared.

[ComBBAT_Albrot]

Andrew,
Yeah, we know what you mean. I personally didn't attend the competition (I'm not really a BB fan, and I had a busy day anyway), but I heard all the YMCA and snakeriding stories. It struck me as business as usual, until they started talking about how everyone stared at them like they were crazy, but nobody joined in.
FIRST may not end up as widely known as Battlebots, but that doesn't say much. I guess we'll just end up like diehard fans of a really good band that doesn't get the exposure they deserve.
Battlebots is to FIRST as N*Sync is to The Velvet Teen (http://www.thevelvetteen.com)

Unfortunately, by its very nature, the mission to change society requires widespread attention. I think it would help if we could get better media coverage (for instance, getting ESPN to air us again or have a team that specifically pays attention to local news crews and prevents them from calling us "Robot Wars" or "Battling Bots" or anything like that)

[Not2B]

Remember good ol' Beta Max (am I that old?)

Beta Max was a much better product than VHS for all your recording needs. But VHS became more popular.

Let's say FIRST is better than BBIQ. That doesn't mean it will do better in the long run.

I worry that the game is too confusing to anybody who didn't spend 6 weeks of their life on it.
I worry that it is too expensive.
I worry that it isn't as well known, although it's been around more than 3 times as long.

Then again, ask the students I work for, and they would say I worry too much anyway.

Brian

[Greg McCoy]

I agree with Digo on this one. It seems to me that FIRST and Battlebots are totally different things. Battlebots was made to build machines to go beat each other around for fun. It's cool (at least for a while). FIRST was made to inspire students about engineering and technology in general. Battlebots will probably never compare to the amount of learning that is in FIRST.

Even if more people know about Battlebots and the like, I don't think FIRST has lost anything.


Originally posted by Not2B
Let's say FIRST is better than BBIQ. That doesn't mean it will do better in the long run.
Another Example: Microsoft :)

My $0.03

[fftwizard]

In all honestly, I don't think that there is really a threat to anything here. Sure, both programs have different goals and are using robotics in order to accomplish it. FIRST is for futhering engineering education and to show what students are really capable of; battlebots is merely for entertainment of the masses. I don't think either threatens the other.

FIRST is great program, but television audiances aren't ready for it. I mean look at what battlebots has become compared to what it used to be back in the day before when you had to actually order it on pay per view. The quality of the fights has dropped significantly since its airing on comedy central. This is the complete opposite of FIRST which in my opinion is doing better than ever. Battlebots is forced to accomedate audiances to get ratings while FIRST does not. Therefore there are no outside influences really trying to change what FIRST is trying to do.
My Two Cents.

[BSMFIRST]

Guys, this is the first BattleBots IQ competition EVER. If you want to compare it to FIRST, compare it to the '92 competition with 28 teams in a gym..or better yet don't compare them at all.

What you're totally missing about BattleBots and BattleBots IQ is that you have the freedom to make any robot you'd like. You have the freedom to do as much or little learning as you'd like; the same can be said of FIRST. Woodie even said it himself, "the educational merits of participating in First and in BattleBots IQ could 'be quite equivalent'."

And the fact is, the BBIQ team that I coached had an awesome time. This was the first robot (thing, RC car, *whatever*) that they had ever built and I could see in them that same new-found confidence that I felt after my first year in FIRST.

Dan

[Mr.B]

Like a moth to a flame…..better yet…from Don Quixote… “….march into hell for a heavenly cause”


Consider this….

Why would anyone want to deny some kids the thrill, excitement and empowerment that they worked so hard to enjoy and obviously got from the BB IQ competition this past May?

I was in that little Gymnasium in Manchester NH back when FIRST was a contest between lightweight bot’s with only 35 teams and a handful of students….brave kids willing to try something new and exciting….before it became a mainstream success.

I saw the same excitement there as I did 7 years later in the BBIQ pits…I saw passion and engagement and a celebration of the empowerment that comes to those who work hard to bring an idea, their idea, to life….I witnessed the awesome courage required to display the 3 dimensional physical embodiment of their idea, and risk probable failure in doing so…Courage, hard work and excitement….risk taking, knowing and doing…sharing, helping and celebrating…no game, no contest and certainly no person or group of people have a monopoly on those things…These are available for all to enjoy in ways they choose…..it is the freedom exercised by FIRST competitors, BBIQ competitors and all other competitors in the wide diversity of venues available to them….Or are there those who would waste their time arguing that Baseball is better for the country than Lacrosse?

Tilting at windmills.

We should be teaching students not to make assumptions….in engineering as well as in life.

Folks like Dan (BSMFIRST) or Lucien (Natchez) demonstrate open mindedness about BB and FIRST and the hundreds of other engineering competitions to choose from.…

This speaks volumes about them as people and as gracious professionals. Dan and Lucien and others like them have an open mind because they work hard to keep their minds open.

Sounds simple enough right?

Not so.

Keeping an open mind takes a lot of effort. Open minded people serve as good examples. We would all do well to pay particular attention to them. We should all practice keeping an open analytical mind about the things we DO and THINK about.

The practice of adopting, believing in, or voicing strong opinions about ideas or methods of which we have no empirical data is frowned upon in science and engineering… and it is the fuel that feeds the fires of hatred and ignorance in this already troubled world….


The common message of ALL engineering competitions, and there are hundreds, and hundreds more coming yearly, is simply this: Think the problem out before you act on it.

Accomplished scientists and engineers test theories and hypotheses.

When engineers think hard, develop mechanical concepts and then test them…they are defining themselves as professionals. Your family physician has taken promises to “Do no harm”…your mentoring engineer promises to.. “Make no assumptions”.

I’d like to refer everyone who bothers to read this thread to a very exciting and illuminating, engineering website.

http://www-me.mit.edu/Research/DesManResearch.htm

This site contains the course notes for the MIT Design and Manufacturing I , ME course. These notes were authored by Professor Alex Slocum…Alex runs the MIT 2.007 course…a course that was conceived by Woodie and served as the inspiration not only for FIRST, but for the process of learning engineering by DOING engineering at hundreds of universities worldwide.

If you are a teacher, then please, take the time to read the megabytes of wisdom offered in these notes! If you are a student of engineering design…then you would be unwise to miss this opportunity. If you are a practicing technical professional then you’ll enjoy Alex’s POV.

One of the key underlying points Alex makes is that good design is “Deterministic Design”. Deterministic Design is an engineering creation process founded on the scientific method. A principle stating that you cannot know something to be true unless you perform the experiment that validates the assumption. He terms these experiments BLE’s or bench level experiments…but the point remains constant, good robust designs come from ideas that have been tested …..not from assumptions.

Alex’s philosophy inspired the creation of a BattleBots IQ educational website, www.bbiq.com

BB and FIRST are experiments…..(refer to all of the above) If you haven’t done the experiments…you don’t have the data. Once you have the data…the conclusions you reach are all yours….

I try to offer points and counter points, not to champion one experiment over the other, but rather to keep the river of ideas flowing…and to break down the “Beaver Dams” of opinion and assumption.

Good and bad are subjective concepts with regard to robots. …but facts are worth pursuing in the quest for any objective…

Here is some data gleaned from experiments my students and I have performed.

1.) All BattleBots are not catastrophically damaged during a BattleBots event….in fact most are not catastrophically damaged during an event…and they go home happy and no worse for the experience. We are currently building our 3rd and 4th BB. Intelligent designers insure their robots have “Mouth guards, shoulder pads and Locktite on their nuts.” These machines are built to score points and to absorb mechanical energy…remember, it is often necessary to win up to 8 matches in order to claim the silver nut.
2.) All robots break during competition. That’s why we have machine shops and spare parts at the FIRST competition sites and in the BBIQ Pits.
3.) FIRST is about Inspiration and Recognition, and that is a good thing. FIRST and BBIQ are different “Experiments”.
4.) BattleBots IQ is about education. BBIQ is a student centered program that recognizes the benefits of learning through active participation and recognizes the educational benefits of failure. BBIQ teachers and engineering mentors sign a registration form attesting to the fact that the BBIQ robots were wholly designed and built by students….not by teachers or mentors…as I’ve pointed out, this does not make BBIQ better or worse than FIRST, It’s just a different experiment. It’s like shop class used to be…but these are not bird houses! (Although I love building bird houses)
5.) As an educator responsible for the emotional and social well being of the students under my charge, I see no difference in the “Crowds” at either event…I’ve seen good and bad sportsmanship all my life…the “Bell Curves” remain constant…my son and his friends are in my class, and on our BBIQ engineering team!.
6.) And finally, hatred and ignorance are born and cultivated by people, not by sumo robot programs, soccer playing robot programs, BattleBots or FIRST or any other engineering program designed to celebrate designing, thinking or being like an engineer.

We should all visit again 10 years from now…FIRST, BB and the many versions of mechanized competition that will follow will be markedly different. They will all evolve to meet the needs and expectations of the participants. They will all improve, and the levels of sophistication will be extraordinary. Witness the birth of home computing in the late 70’s and early 80’s…I still have a Trash 80….anyone have a Sinclair? Look at basketball, first played in Worcester Massachusetts with 11 players on a team and no dribbling….

In closing I am willing to risk the following statements in an effort to counter the bias and deconstruction of communication I am witnessing on this and other forums….and to “Raise the bar…of gracious professionalism”…

There is nothing to FEAR about FIRST or BBIQ…fear is born of ignorance. These are mechanized competitions that allow portals for a wide variety of learning and doing engineering activities for a wide audience of students. There is room, even a necessity for a wider diversity of mechanized competitions.

We need MORE venues like FIRST or BBIQ….not less. We need people to celebrate and embrace and to create the widening concept of mechanized sports, We do not need folks willing to force (unfavorable) comparisons or fabricate facts. And we decidedly do not need people actively polarizing issues and aggravating each others sensibilities with poorly worded “Polls” or posts that only serve to support the growing bias towards robot games that are not like nor intended to be like FIRST.

The things we like or choose to do, should not be defined as the “Best Thing” by making something else the “Bad Thing”…..This is important for kids to understand, and adults should not use assumptions and opinions to appeal to the loyalty of children…This is true of fans on both sides of this fence.

I love what both of these programs, as well as many other engineering programs, are doing for schools and education in this country…and I love showing my students that they can exercise choice, do the experiments, and then decide for themselves.

Good luck to all of you who are attending the FIRST nationals! Play, break, win or loose…enjoy what all of these programs are really about…enjoy thinking, being gracious in victory and defeat, and remember…you learn as much from failures (or more) than you do from success!

Be gracious professionals in everything you do…on and off the robot playing field!

Mr.B

[Andy Baker]

Mr. B

It's good to hear from you. You are still an inspiration to many of us. Keep up the good work.

I totally agree with your opinion that BBIQ and FIRST can co-exist and thrive.

Kudos to you and the other BBIQ folks who are putting on a successful program. For me, I'll stick with FIRST... but I will also applaud those who want to "play" a different way.

Andy B.

[Mike Soukup]

Excellent post Mr B. It's good to see a well thought out & positive post in a BB thread instead of people putting down something they have little first hand knowledge of.

I have never seen BB in person, only the dramatized show on CC, but I hear that the pits are much like FIRST: friendly teams willing to share and help their fellow competitors. I refuse to put down a program I have no real knowledge of.

Continue to stop by the board and offer your wonderful insight. It's a refreshing departure from the BB vs FIRST bickering.

Something to think about: how gracious is it to tear down another person in order to build yourself up?

Mike

[Frank]

To Mr. B, Nola, Lucien, and others – I agree with Mr. B that being open minded is important and crucial. However, just because some people do not feel BB and BBIQ are positive programs, I think it is unfair to brand them as close minded. It is possible they have weighed the pros & cons of each program and have just come to a different, non biased conclusion as you have. For some in this thread, it is virtually impossible to argue an unbiased and fair comparison of FIRST to BB or BBIQ, as they are employed/paid by BB and BBIQ, just as the arguments of FIRST employees would be equally biased – it is only natural when looking at a debate to get “defensive” and “defend” the program you are associated with and maybe over look some of it’s problems.

Please excuse the length of this post: We have read all the arguments in favor/against each program and a group of us have spent a lot of time/thought trying to combine all our thoughts into this one reply (adults – thanks for the proof reading and helping us put some ideas in a more sophisticated tone) :) ….

We are starting a robotics program/team at our school next year. We researched BOTH programs in great detail, have watched videos/TV of both competitions, and have interviewed participants of BOTH programs – and we feel that both competitions have positive aspects. Let us share with you how/why our school has deemed one program to be of much higher value than the other:

In all the arguments about the two programs, we have concluded that a few things are true about each program:

BOTH FIRST and BB/BBIQ encourage and promote science, technology, and engineering.

BOTH FIRST and BB/BBIQ provide great, exciting, and fun competitions that celebrate what the students/teams have built.

We have also found a few criticisms of each program to be slanted/unfair/inaccurate:

Size constraints:
Some have criticized FIRST for not having a National Competition open to ALL. We called BBIQ, and they told us that there would be a cap for their National Event if hundreds of participants ever enter (but they only got in the mid 40’s). BBIQ will also limit the size of their events, just as FIRST does. This is not the fault of EITHER program – it is just logistics and reality.
We have concluded both are the same/equal in this category.

Student/engineer involvement:
FIRST students DO participate and build the robots just as much as BB students. Do some teams have the engineers do a majority of the work, yes. Do some engineers do most of the work on FIRST teams AND BB teams, yes. Is it up to each team to decide how much design/build/machining work the students do? Yes. So the argument that one program includes the students more is worthless in our judgment, as it is up to each team to decide (and in each competition our team would go up against robots built almost entirely by engineers – which we don’t mind and consider a challenge). We don’t want the students to do this alone – that is what a science fair is. We want to learn concepts and designs which we don’t currently have the education & experience to do – hopefully we can do this hand in hand with real engineers who will build a robot with us and hopefully we will learn things from the engineers and they will learn things from us.
We have concluded both are the same/equal in this category.

Cost of each program:
“BBIQ is cheaper than FIRST” – untrue. The guise of only costing $100 appears nice. But we have called and spoke to numerous teams in each competition. Once BBIQ teams include the cost of the control system, motors, speed controllers, and other things which come with the FIRST registration fee – the cost is similar. BBIQ teams told us their budgets JUST on the robots (without travel) were 5-10k. FIRST is actually cheaper than BBIQ because we can compete in a regional event and don’t have to travel to another part of the country to compete – so it is actually 5-10k LESS for us to participate in. Plus, FIRST gives us the OPTION of ALSO qualifying for and raising the funds for a National Competition – our choice if we qualify.
We have concluded both are the same/equal in this category if we compete in the National Championship, but that FIRST is cheaper if we compete in one event.

Money/incentive/rewards:
BBIQ promotes the possibility of being on TV and/or getting royalties if our robots are made into toys. This is cool, and a point for BBIQ. FIRST promotes over 2 million dollars of scholarships available to students on FIRST teams. This is cool and a point for FIRST. We have also concluded that the money carrot dangled by BBIQ is dependent on their ratings and sponsors (which will not be around once the ratings go down since BB’s is a for profit endeavor 1st while FIRST is a non-profit “for the kids” endeavor 1st) while the scholarships offered by FIRST are more likely to continue to exist and in fact increase each year.
We have concluded both are almost the same/equal in this category - slight advantage to BB in terms of getting on TV and slight advantage to FIRST in terms of financial rewards (scholarships are more important/valuable than money payoffs, and are more likely to be around for years to come as they are dependent on ratings).

And last, as concluded by our administration (principal) after looking at both of our proposals – which program promotes the right values and sends the right message:

Both programs require the students to learn science & technology skills, however the end product/message of the two programs are different. The end product is displayed at the competition. The FIRST competition displays alliances, teamwork, good sportsmanship, rules, and excitement - but in a competitive sports “team” model where the teams are encouraged to outperform/out score the other alliance. She decided that FIRST encourages kids to “raise the bar” and “challenges the team to improve upon the designs/ideas/advancements made by other teams”. She decided that the BB and BBIQ competitions display “one on one” combat where the only “guaranteed” way to be victorious is to destroy/disable/hurt/kill your opponent. She feels BB and BBIQ promote the “solution to the problem is violence – hurt/disable/kill your opponent to be victorius” while FIRST promotes the “solution to the problem is teamwork, raising the bar, and doing better than your opponent without having to hurt/disable/destroy them”. She said that while the first 90% of both programs (FIRST and BBIQ) are similar and promote/encourage science, technology, and engineering – the last 10%, the product displayed to the public at the competitions and on TV sends a different message.
In sports terms:
the finished product for FIRST comes across as the Olympics – celebrates training, raising the bar, good sportsmanship, and positive values.
The finished product of BB and BBIQ comes across as the WWF, a %%%%/rooster fight, or a pit bull fight – and celebrates winning by disabling/hurting/killing your opponent. She says as a principal, she would be fired and liable for supporting/condoning students participating in a %%%%/rooster fight or pit bull fight and that if you put roosters or pit bulls in a Battlebots arena instead of robots – that is EXACLTY what the competition is (except that it is combined with the Texas Chainsaw Massacre, where a third party controls chain saws which also try to kill the combatants – would be like a referee in sports being able to randomly hit the participants with a hammer or chainsaw).
Our school concluded (and our students agree after looking at both programs with what we consider an “open minded, researched, and informed” analysis) that FIRST is a positive program for our school to participate in which also promotes the right values and message to our students.
We have concluded that FIRST is clearly a better option and program for our students in this category.

We hope this came across as an “open minded” analysis of each program and pointed out the many similarities between the two. We have spent many months considering both programs. Basically – both programs are very equal except that BB and BBIQ have “kill saws” and encourage us to find a way to disable/destroy/or kill our opponent. As students, we see enough one on one “disagreements” at school solved after school or during lunch by fighting and trying to hurt the other person to be the “winner”. FIRST seems to hold more positive values and is more challenging (more engineering tasks to conquer each year + the game changes each year which we find much more appealing). If BB and BBIQ changed their competition to have “civil/sportsmanship” rules, encourage solutions not based on violence, and changed the game each year - our school and especially us students would love to participate in it. But until then, we will opt for FIRST – just our conclusion, and everyone has the right to analyze each program and decide whatever they want. Both programs can co-exist, just as Olympic Wrestling and the WWF co-exist – they just promote different skills, different values, and get different media coverage. As much as they want to promote the similar positive aspects BB/BBIQ provide when compared to FIRST - we don’t think BB/BBIQ supporters can deny that their end product (competition) sends a message of “violence as the solution to a problem” while FIRST does the opposite. Again, sorry for the length, we just thought what we felt is an “open minded” analysis of the debate might hold some value to some people. Maybe not.

Thanks for having a forum everyone can post their views - it has helped us as we start our team.

Frank and team 000 until a few months from now. (we'll be watching the National on NASA TV!!!! - Good luck everyone)

[mpking]

I think that the fact that Mr. Bastioni is one of the founding fathers of the BBIQ program speaks for the fact that this program will have a major impact on the nation at large.

I've met Mr. Bastoni several times, (We still miss the Rumble at the Rock, is BBIQ having one?) and he is definatly a huge inspriation to those who are around him.

Nice to see your still around Mr. B, I'll tell Moe you said hi.

[Mr.B]

Frank,

You made a great choice!

And I am keenly aware that you do not need my approval to validate your choice...but I'd like the opportunity to share a possibly worthy point. So please forgive me.

You and the community of learners at your school "Did the math" necessary to make the right choices for your program...and that is the simple message for all of us.

What you did Frank is the very embodiment of "Deterministic Design" as outlined in the lecture notes from the MIT Design Manufacturing Course...a course started by Woodie...a course that served as the model for FIRST...and a host of other engineering programs ...and is currently managed by Prof. Alexander Slocum at MIT...

Read the notes from this course Frank...You'll love it!

http://pergatory.mit.edu/2.007/lectures/lectures.html


Of course you have an open mind...and better yet, your using it to make important decisions....open minded people do not necessarily arrive at the same conclusions...good grief no...History provides us with great stories of intensely debated philosophies, scientific conclusions and ideologies...and it is this rich and passionate debate that births ideas based on evidence and research....an incremental and iterative process of getting closer and closer to what is true...to what works best...given the design parameters. A process based on rsearch and knowledge, not on opinion and emotion.

After all...can you honestly say with any certainty which FIRST bot is THE BEST in any given season? Or which BattleBot is the best..I think not. The "Best Bot" is simply indeterminate math...the answer changes every time you do the problem...that is the fun of it...

The 2.007 lecture notes begins with a quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson...

"
Enthusiasm is one of the most powerful engines of success. When you do a thing, do it with all your might. Put your whole soul into it. Stamp it with your own personality. Be active, be energetic, be enthusiastic and faithful and you will accomplish your object. Nothing great was ever achieved without
enthusiasm".....

Your enthusiasm shows in the effort you put into making your decision...your Principal's enthusiasm shows in the effort she put into working with you and your team to arrive at the conclusion that FIRST was the best program choice for your school....and undoubtedly it is....

Our school administrators, our teachers and our students "Did the Math" also...and simply came up with a different conclusion..just like we all come up with different robot designs given the same universe of parts and game objectives...

It's OK to think different Frank...in fact it's a good thing!

I only ask that people consider that the functional requirements, and thus the "Math" is different for every school, or youth organization looking to involve itself in technological programming.

FIRST is a great program, and certainly the best program for your school needs...but the needs or requirements or logistics of school based programs are mutable...they change.

This is why it is important that there are choices for others to make...what fun would it be if there were only GM cars to choose from...good products (I own one)...but Hummers are cool too, and how about Hondas? or the nearly 25 other major auto manufacturers on this planet?

Choices are a good thing...

Our team was blessed with many great engineering mentors, parents and administrators...and of course...students! We were, and we remain passionate about what we are doing...we worked hard, and still work hard to support FIRST in many ways...and we work equally hard to support BBIQ....

Your choice is a great one Frank...and so is ours...let's celebrate our good fortune...lets toast to all our successes...let's wish each other the very best in what we choose to do....

And let's do it with all the passion and enthusiasm we can possibly generate....and lets hope we are all successful...these are simply robot games Frank....just games....the important things are you and me and all the other fine people who play them....

I salute you Frank...you are decidedly "Open minded"...and you have the soul of a truth seeker. You will be succesful in whatever you choose to do.

Long live all engineering competitions that result in the development of a sense of community among the participants and foster a love for learning, knowing and doing things that teachers, mentors, administrators, parents and students can get passionate about...and there are hundreds that do this!


Frank...I'll pose this "Loaded" question for you to research...

Has there ever been a person who could claim both a FIRST and a BattleBots National Championship Title? and who would that be?

The point I would hope to illustrate here is that these competitions are not mutually exclusive...One does not in any way negate the other....They do not threaten eachother...they actually improve one another...my school administrators took pride in our having participated in both. They looked at the passion of the kids...and we managed the rest.

Our administrators do the the "Math" differently too. They recognize that the true danger lies in the shop tools we use to build the Robots. The shop tools we use are far more dangerous than any FIRST bot or BattleBot our students designed or built. We see little difference between the robot games we play, and the Hollywood animitronic engineers who work insanely hard to design and build intricate and electronically sophisticated models that they then destroy making movies. But, hey, that's just out POV, and we don't expect that anyone else has to share it...but they do...just like many (16000) people share your teams POV...and that is a good thing.

It's OK for each of us to do the math and arrive at different answers....and we can support eachothers conclusions completely, even though our conclusions are different!

Yeah diversity.

Good luck next year!

Mr.B

[Joe Matt]

Wow, this is great. I never though such though out ideas will be here, thanks Mr. B and Frank!

There are three camps that are here/you can choose from; bias to FIRST, bias to BB and/or BBIQ, un-bias. Althoug everyone is bias to a degree, I think this post is the epitimy of what FIRS and BBIQ is about, meeting challanges and taking them head on.

Thanks and hope to see you at the Nats (PS Frank, look for Sparky 3.0!)

[BSMFIRST]

Has there ever been a person who could claim both a FIRST and a BattleBots National Championship Title? and who would that be?

It's funny you should ask that Mr B. Yes, there has been! Carlo Bertochini coached the '95 FIRST champion bot as well as his own mega-successful bot Biohazard.

All in all though, great posts though. I am so happy to see a coherent discussion about this topic; we're getting somewhere now.

Dan

[Matt Attallah]

I think Battlebots will become big when robot technology can be reached to everyone, including in low-income homes. Look at wrestling, that is a huge violent sport, and look how big it has become. When RC controllers, micro-chips&processors, etc... come down, i do think eveyone will be out for robots like battle bots. Hey, it's in human nature, when, for the most part, BIG things happen, they usually are violent, and everyone wants to know what happened...

[SharkBite]

i dont know if you guys read the new york times article last week, but they were comparing FIRST to the high school battlebats competition..... now we all know FIRST is better but they have so much media access, and the draw of the agressive quality

[vortex]

Warning - Long post (2/3 the maximum post length :))

Hi everyone. I'm new (I just found this place looking for Isaac32 system information), I thought I'd chime in here.

To let you know where I'mcoming from - I haven't competed in FIRST. I never will, as I'm now in college. However, I would have, if my school had it available - however, it wasn't; I'm not sure if people hadn't heard of it, or if people didn't want to pay for it.

On the other side of things, I have competed at Battlebots, twice in fact. The first was with the bot Vortex during Season 3, May 2001, where we lost our first fight; the second was with Kobotsu at BBIQ a few weeks ago,where we went away 2-2. Vortex was built almost entirely with my own money - I put about $2,000 into it. Kobostu was more of a team effort, so I ended up paying about $1,500 of that (about half the cost of the bot, not including the Nicad batteries we reused from Vortex).

Both competitions have their difficulties -

One is that the students don't always do all the work - None of you can say with a straght face that every FIRST bot was built by the students on the team; Neither can I argue that every BBIQ bot was built by the students.

FIRST is expensive - There is no way, with what I paid to have a competative BBIQ bot, that I could build anything remotely competative for FIRST. I've heard of pelnty of FIRST bots costing over $30,000; I challenge you to find a BBIQ bot that cost half that; In the $3-$5,000 range is average, and there have been many junkyard bots build for under $1000; I'd be willing to wager that the average FIRST bot costs more then $5,000. BBIQ bots tended to be somewhat simplistic, with as few mechanisms as possible and often running the default Isaac code (though I take great pride in being the programmer on the team that won the "Best use of the IFI system" special award). These facts are not unrelated. If I had as much money as some of the FIRST teams have, you'd better believe I'd have put more stuff in there; Actually, I'm putting some systems in my next bot that haven't ever been seen in Battlebots before involving intelligent power handling and system power consumption balencing, and I'm doing it out of pocket - I spent this morning putting stuff up on ebay to be able to afford it.

Related is that the two events focus on different kinds of engineering. FIRST focuses on building complex mechanisms to accomplish odd and varied tasks; BBIQ focuses on making mechanisms capable of surviving extreme situations. I've learned a lot about making stuff that doesn't break, partially by seeing what happened to my bot in a couple of whopping hits. I got to see first-hand what made the design weak, and what made it strong. Both knowledge of what makes things strong and knowledge of what makes complex things work is necessary for a good engineer; There is no point in making something that performs a task that constantly breaks, and no point in making something that'll survive WWIII if it doesn't do anything.

So, now you can probably see my point - both are valuable. They are both valuable for different reasons, and they aren't directly comparable - Closer then apples and oranges, but it's not a totally inacurate analogy. I just wish everyone who's just spouting nonsense about how one event is so much better then the other would get off their high horse and take a look at how everything really is, and how it relates to real life - There is almost never one solution, one clear-cut way to do something; There are multiple avenues of success, each of which has it's own advantages and disadvantages.




Now that I've made my point, I'm just going to address a few things that have been posted:

That, I like to think is the distinction between a FIRST robotics team and Battlebots IQ team. (limited to only 5 members 4 students 1 adult).

Actually, there were some teams that numbered over 20 individuals; However, there wasn't room in the pit (BB pits tend to be crowded). so only thatmany were allowed in the pits at one time. The teams were issued special pit cards that allowed the cards to be rotated through the team members so that everyone got to come in at some point.


At battlebots IQ you see none of these things, and in fact thier robots arent very technical. In the finals there were 2 wedges squaring off. I highly doubt that in a first robot all you will see is a drive train. You wont see technologically advaced machines like thw wildstang robot out there.

There are technical innovations, they just aren't seen in the same way. In a FIRST competition, many of the innovations are external - special systems that allow the robot to perform special operations, often in cool or unique ways. The same happens at Battlebots - there are many cool and unique robots Unfortuately, the concept of KISS applies - many innovations break easily, and you don't see those unless you attend an event - only surviveable things make it to the televised rounds of the competition. Also, many of the innovations are of a different sort - New ways of joining materials, new structures, new kinds of robots.

There are a couple additional issues at work here - FIRST is much less freeform, so you have things meant to do similar things pitted against each other; It's easy to compare them. With battlebots, it's about as freeform as you can get - play within the ruleset, and you can do anything you want. Also, there's a matter of shear number - there's not as many Battlebots as there are FIRST robots. Statistically, you'll get more cool things, just because there's more things to pick them out of.



And to anyone who says BBIQ teams didn't show teamwork and good sportsmanship, they apparently haven't ever been in the pits at a BB event. Before my second fight, I spent 6 hours trying to fix my bot AND helping my next opponant fix theirs; They did likewise. We were both suffering from a similar failure, and both teams worked together to solve it, and then we both helped another team that later suffered the same problem. Everyone shared tools, expertise, workers, materials, knowledge. Except for the occasional bad egg (so rare it sparks massive debate whenever it does happen), BB events show nearly perfect sportsmanship (which unfortunately doesn't get on the show, since Comedy Central doesn't want to show it, conflict brings more money. As a side note, many BB builders don't like CC much due to the way they handle the show).

[I was going to address more statements, but seeing how I'd probably excede the post length limit, as well as my own patience given how long I've been typing, I think I'll stop now :))

So, there you have it. Feel free to respond however you wish - I'll probably be back later tonight or tomorrow evening, I'll answer any questions anybody has (within what I know, of course).


Matt Hockenheimer
matt@team-vortex.net
Co-captain, Programmer, Designer
Team Vortex
http://www.team-vortex.net (Presently badly out of date :))

[mpking]

Originally posted by vortex
Everyone shared tools, expertise, workers, materials, knowledge. Except for the occasional bad egg (so rare it sparks massive debate whenever it does happen), BB events show nearly perfect sportsmanship (which unfortunately doesn't get on the show, since Comedy Central doesn't want to show it, conflict brings more money. As a side note, many BB builders don't like CC much due to the way they handle the show).Matt Hockenheimer
matt@team-vortex.net
Co-captain, Programmer, Designer
Team Vortex
http://www.team-vortex.net (Presently badly out of date :))

Matt,

I'm not really surprised, both in the fact that people are great sportmans and that a large contingent dislikes the way the show is presented.

If you watch the interviews with the contestentans they ususally are complementing the robot that just destoryed theirs.

[SharkBite]

i disagree vortex.... just because you dont have a lot of money doesnt mean that you cant build a competent FIRST robot
it is true that some teams spend incredible amounts of money on thier robots...... but many dont

i guess the thing i dont like about battle bots is that the competition is so one sided...... its destroy or be destroyed.. it seems like there is little strategy (at least compared to FIRST).... i mean, just go check out the discussion in one of the other threads about ball bots and goal bots, its long and passionate, and nobody can be wrong or right

a man from my town built a battlebot, clambot ......... and while they won the competition, it never got aired because it wasnt glamorous..... see that dissapoints me too, because comedy central just shows the robots that bring the ratings

[Jason Morrella]

To clarify a few things:

1. The cost of the two programs...
BB IQ has ONE event in ONE city in the country - which means if your school is not from that city, it will cost anywhere from 10-40k to participate. I have spoken to a few teams who competed in BBIQ, and they all had to spend between 20-40k to build the robot and travel (air,hotel,food). However, FIRST has 17 (over 20 next year) events in the country - meaning it costs those schools MUCH less too participate in one FIRST event than BB IQ. The majority of teams I know of in California participate in FIRST with a budget below or around 10k. So the cost of FIRST is MUCH LESS than that of BB IQ for thousands of schools throughout the country located close to FIRST regionals. But if schools are close to FIRST and BB IQ, the costs are probably very similar, depending on the budget goals of the teams.

2. Teams with big budgets...
I have spoke to many BB's teams who have spent 25-50k on their robots. When FIRST began, maybe most teams were corporate based with big budgets - but that is not the norm anymore, as the majority of the close to 700 teams are successful with budgets in the 10k range. Plus, many of the "big" budget teams in FIRST actually spend a great deal of their resources on mentoring, workshops, off season competitions, community outreach, and other wonderful things which give back & help other schools, students, kids - and that part of the budget doesn't go to their "robot" at all. It's a great thing those teams do, and something which makes FIRST unlike ANY other high school program. The "big budgets" of many FIRST teams actually help other teams in their area. Do some teams have big budgets in both programs - yes. Do many teams have small budgets in both programs - yes.

3. FIRST has shown for years (to the chagrin of many) that it will choose to control the message it sends to kids and control the values it wants to promote, knowing that not giving up control of the game, message to kids, and values of the program to Television costs it money and exposure. BB & BBIQ choose not to make that same sacrifice - nothing wrong with that, just two different paths. Educators, engineers, and all people in FIRST and I'm sure many in BB IQ are all for getting kids into science, math, technology, and engineering. They just disagree a bit on the social responsibility to not promote/glamorize violence. Can FIRST or BB's find a way to make the game a TV draw (ratings) without selling out and giving into the way CC sells robotics (sex/violence)? That is the challenge I would like to see either/both programs tackle.

I wish people understood there is no competition between BBIQ and FIRST. The only thing about BBIQ which many educators and people who support FIRST object to is the end product, not what leads up to it. If BB IQ ever changed it's game so that it didn't promote violence, make violence the solution to problem (the way to victory), make violence sexy/fun, and so on - then there would be no debate - it would just be another great program and option for schools to participate in. But until it adopts a message and values which are acceptable to be promoted in a school atmosphere, then people will continue to debate if it should be in schools.

Some have said "I still don't fully agree w/ your assertion that fighting robots is worse than full contact sports". This is a valid question. So here is my answer:

It's how you win. That's it, that simple. I don't mind fighting robots, I consider FIRST robots to be fighting - just have rules. Teach kids there are rules, just like in real life. That you can compete, but you can't hurt/kill. Contact sports still have points, strategy, rules, and sportsmanship. Show kids that you win by doing better than your opponent without needing to kill/hurt/or disable them. That's the difference, at least to me.

I have heard BB IQ supporters defend criticism by pointing out that high schools have wrestling teams. That is true - wrestling is a competitive sport with rules much like FIRST: train hard, try to be strong, fast, agile, powerful, smart, etc... but if you break rules such as bite, break an arm, poke a person in the eye, or try to cut the other wrestlers head off with a chain saw then YOU are the loser. BB IQ would be the equivalent of a school starting a WWF wrestling team - all the pre event training would hold value - but once competing, if the other competitor happens to be faster, stronger, bigger, smarter, more agile than you - then don't worry about training harder to come back better, you can still win if you just hit them over the head with a chair, bite them, poke them in the eye, or hey, just push them into a "kill saw". Any principal in the country would be fired instantly for supporting or promoting a WWF team to their students - and rightfully so.

I have no problem with the WWF or BB's as entertainment shows on TV (I'd be lying if I said I didn't watch them on occasion or find them interesting). But what I find entertaining or fun outside of school really doesn't matter in the classroom - as a teacher I would be wrong to show/promote a WWF match in class. BB IQ has some good aspects similar to FIRST (kids building a robot, learning skills, challenging themselves, etc...), and I applaud those. But as long as violence is the end product, then the means to the ends don't justify it being a high school supported program.

But it's not an issue of competition - if/when BB IQ decides to promote a game without violence being the way to victory, I, and I think many, would support it just like we support FIRST. We aren't in a business here (at least FIRST isn't) and the two programs aren't in competition, we are all in this to help kids and send them the right messages. I have met a number of the top people associated with BB IQ. They are greatly respected by many in the FIRST community, and it is much deserved respect. No one does or should question the intentions of those people, there is no definitive right or wrong. There is just a difference of opinion about where the line should be drawn when it comes to promoting/glamorizing violence to kids. In the wonderful, intelligent, and respectful exchange between Frank and Mr. B, I obviously agree that every school should do what is best for their kids. It's no secret that I would feel Frank, his team, and his school made the right decision. (Frank, look forward to meeting you and seeing your team at the 2003 regional). But I appreciate the views of everyone on this thread and think/hope it has raised some good questions, plus maybe cleared up some mistaken assumptions about both programs.

I speak only for myself here and no one else, just my humble opinion. (I know, another long post...I apologize...but at least I post less than I did last year) :)

JM

[Patrick Wang]

After posting on this thread and reading the direction in which it was going, I honestly stopped checking up on it.

Just out of curiosity, I checking again on this thread, and found it very thought provoking, how could so many people have so many views so passionately over the same issue?

I took a step back and realized, what FIRST has meant to me, is what I have made out of it. My expieriences do not neccessarily reflect those of others.

Being in the organization I have participated in, a primarily student-run organization and facing the unique hardships that our team has had has really made me feel good about this program.

I suppose each of these programs are a venue for engineers, mentors and students to spend their time and effort for and with.

What comes out of each of these programs greatly relies on what YOU as a person make out of it. It can be as little or as life changing as you want it to be.

I can say that I am a FIRST-o-holic, but at the same time I enjoy watching battlebots as a show.

That is my stance, that is what I think because that is what I make of it.

I hope many others can see it this way, and understand how others feel of the programs respectively.

There is no universal good and bad. But I know what's good for me.

[vortex]

a man from my town built a battlebot, clambot ......... and while they won the competition, it never got aired because it wasnt glamorous..... see that dissapoints me too, because comedy central just shows the robots that bring the ratings

If it had won the competition, it would have been aired - one thing CC does is air every finals match no matter what happened. He might have won a fight... but it takes winning two or three to even start getting recorded.


BB IQ has ONE event in ONE city in the country - which means if your school is not from that city, it will cost anywhere from 10-40k to participate

I guess it's an issue of motivation - My team kept costs down by driving 17 hours straight to get there. Combined with 3K for the bot, I think we spent a total of 5k for the event.

Also, didn't FIRST only have one event in one city it's first time? I believe BB is going to regionals in the near future, so it will make this point moot.

Another point is that Battlebots are a bit more reusable - The first year of competition costs more, then most teams rebuild with parts they already have. FIRST is different every year, so they bots have to be totally rebuilt from scratch.


I have spoke to many BB's teams who have spent 25-50k on their robots.

For regular Battlebots, yeah, I'd expect that. I can pretty confidently say no BBIQ bot cost that much, though. If one did, they wasted some serious cash, as it didn't show up in the bot.


Can FIRST or BB's find a way to make the game a TV draw (ratings) without selling out and giving into the way CC sells robotics (sex/violence)? That is the challenge I would like to see either/both programs tackle.

BBIQ hasen't actually been on TV yet. Only regular BB has, and as I said, many BB builders disagree with how CC treats the show; That's just CC, not the competition itself.


I have heard BB IQ supporters defend criticism by pointing out that high schools have wrestling teams. That is true - wrestling is a competitive sport with rules much like FIRST: train hard, try to be strong, fast, agile, powerful, smart, etc... but if you break rules such as bite, break an arm, poke a person in the eye, or try to cut the other wrestlers head off with a chain saw then YOU are the loser. BB IQ would be the equivalent of a school starting a WWF wrestling team - all the pre event training would hold value - but once competing, if the other competitor happens to be faster, stronger, bigger, smarter, more agile than you - then don't worry about training harder to come back better, you can still win if you just hit them over the head with a chair, bite them, poke them in the eye, or hey, just push them into a "kill saw". Any principal in the country would be fired instantly for supporting or promoting a WWF team to their students - and rightfully so.

Umm, most of that stuff is highly against wrestling rules. BB bots operate within the confines of the rule sets. It's a totally different thing.

Overall, I find it pretty hard to believe that BB encourages real life violence, as many rabid FIRST supporters seem to say. This comes from the voice of experience, I've been heavily involved with Battlebots for years and haven't seen that as an issue at any point in time. And if you aren't saying it causes RL violence... then what's the problem?



Now, I'm going to be up front about something here. I really do think FIRST is a better program for some schools. I also think BBIQ is a better program for others. And most of all, I think that any school that can should do both - They are different challenges, require different ways of thinking, and both are educational in a different way.

[mpking]

Hey, before things get out of hand, I wanted to say I respect your opinions, and I like what you have to say.

Thanks for continuing to post.

[PsychoPhil]

Hi everybody!

I think FIRST will live longer than Battlebots although Battlebots has its own TV-show every week and you only hear occasionly from FIRST on TV.

FIRST has every year a new game with new rules that make it a challenge to build this new robot that is able to achive the game challenge really well while Battlebots will always be "Destroy their robot and you win".

FISRT has more complex games that allow millions of different strategies and all robots are different from each other while you find certain types of robots again and again at Battlebots!

So long, Philip

[SharkBite]

well i dont know how accurate my information is..... i just know that they won the competition and they were complaining about not being on television and trying to spice up the robot for next time........ maybe they got aired once and expected more or something, i dont know, they just thought it was dissapointing that they didnt get much credit for winning because they had no spice

[Norm M.]

Might I suggest that there are many possibilities beyond the 'A: You must either be my friend and not like her! or B: If you are her friend, you aren't my friend' approach that I see many people eager to embrace.

In the engineering business, we see many instances where people will put their head in the sand and ignore other opportunities. This is sometimes called the 'not invented here' syndrome.

Up in the physics room, there are several boxes of FIRST parts that are left over from the last three competitions that our high school has been involved with. There are enough parts there to build two or three more robots. The control system can be rotated amongst them, and we can, of course, find additional motors, wheels, etc.

I found that some of the kids on our FIRST team got very fired up to turn some shafts in the metal shop, or to wire the robot, or to write the programming code. Something about building a fun project rather than doing it because it is homework. Turn these kids loose with a bit of guidance, and you have a recipe for experiential learning. They will have a blast building, even if the robot is never taken to a competition.

There are small regional competitions springing up all over the country. There will be opportunities for participation without the cost of flying to Orlando or to San Francisco. Of course, if you choose to go to the big show, then you have to get there. No different than traveling for any other event. If the theater group wants to go to NYC, it costs money. If the cheerleaders want to go to a national competition, it costs money.

I have been to FIRST, and I have been to Battlebots. The safety inspection at Battlebots is much tougher than what we saw at FIRST. I have seen good competitors, and so-so competitors at both events. In many ways, I was disappointed by a number of the mentors at FIRST who had the same mentality as some of the parents in the stands at a high school football game. But in general, I would take the pit areas at FIRST or BB over a high school game any day.

I hope BB continues to grow in popularity and commercial success. When I show our Battlebots to students, it gives me a chance to talk about technical skills, problem solving, and project planning.

'When horse is dead, dismount!'

I need to get back to wiring the robots. They get shipped next week!

Regards-
Norm

[dets002]

My two cents:

Battlebots IQ may recieve more attention (though I don't think it will be able to eclipse regular battle bots), I think recruiting corporate sponsors would be easier for First teams because:
1) The risk that your investment would be destroyed in a humiliating failure (like from a disconected battery) would sour sponsors.
2) Sponsors who want the Battle Bots-type publicity would probably choose to go for the Battle Bots and not the IQ competition (think Major league v. minor leagues, where the attention goes to the pros, while the minors attract modest local attention only).

First was remain the first high school robotics competition and that distinction may serve it well. When schools look at creating a new robotics team, they have the more academic, friendly, "gracious professionalism" of First versus the 'Crush, kill, destroy' mentality of Battle Bots. So, do I worry about First, no, do I worry about new teams being drawn to the dark side, a little.

But I do feel that Battle Bots IQ is an ersatz attempt to duplicat the First success, as is best evidenced by their choosing to hold the competition in Universal Studios, Orlando, rather than someplace else (for the first competition, too!). The second First national was held in my high school gym. To see the deep down character of each competition, we would be well served to look at their beginnings and compare where they started and how far they each got in twelve years.

[mtaman02]

Originally posted by PsychoPhil
Hi everybody!

I think FIRST will live longer than Battlebots although Battlebots has its own TV-show every week and you only hear occasionly from FIRST on TV.

FIRST has every year a new game with new rules that make it a challenge to build this new robot that is able to achive the game challenge really well while Battlebots will always be "Destroy their robot and you win".

FISRT has more complex games that allow millions of different strategies and all robots are different from each other while you find certain types of robots again and again at Battlebots!

So long, Philip

i agree.

[Adam Y.]

Originally posted by Matt Attallah
I think Battlebots will become big when robot technology can be reached to everyone, including in low-income homes. Look at wrestling, that is a huge violent sport, and look how big it has become. When RC controllers, micro-chips&processors, etc... come down, i do think eveyone will be out for robots like battle bots. Hey, it's in human nature, when, for the most part, BIG things happen, they usually are violent, and everyone wants to know what happened...
Just a little sidenote but wrestling is on the verge of dying out. They are scrambling for ratings. Personally for me I've learned more about gear ratios, motors, and batteries by studying for building a battlebot than building a first robot. In my opinion it's lack of regulations(actually its a lot of rules) like not using the same battery makes it much more challenging and much more of an learning experience. First is older than battlebots by 3 or 4 years I think which makes it hard to believe that it will die out. Also you guys make the arguement that battlebots is one event in one area well your wrong. There are little events poping all over the united states and you don't have to travel very far to get to one. Just name a state. Battlebots may not have been picked up by comedy central(and thank you lord) for the sixth season but don't count it out. If any of you actually visit the battlebots forums and I know that some of you guys do they really don't like Carmen or the wrestling feel Comedy Central gives it.

[Nathan Pell]

I wonder if anyone that originally posted is still on here, but I thought I would chime in on this.

I am a teacher that has lead a FIRST team for three years now, and this school year we introduced BBIQ to three sections of an introductory engineering course. I really liked the fact that BBIQ fit so well into a school day, and FIRST was prefect for after-school. I would agree that anyone who sees a Battlebot match will "ooh and ahh" over it. I just think it is natural instinct think sparks and flying metal looks cool. I am all about getting kids to use their math and science skills to do something, and I think BBIQ has a better edge over FIRST for a class in school.

The biggest problem I had with BBIQ is that our school did and does not have the shop facility to build a robot. With our FIRST team, we partnered up with a machine shop and they did all of the milling and intricate work. The students then took that "part" from them and did all the rest with our basic hand tools and drills. BBIQ is supposed to be about kids doing all of the work, and that is what I really wanted to do; we just were not able to do all of the welding, milling, and turning that is required.

I also really liked the fact that BBIQ has a written curriculum ready for use. It is really nice; I have used it for a while year now, and I really like it.

In the end, I think both are great. As Nola, the founder of BBIQ says, you can like two different things. I think they both have their merit.

Nathan Pell

[servo175]

It seems as though a lot of people on this thread although having an open mind about the two different competitions still feel that there is actually a difference. They both, game rules aside, follow the same basic principles.

1.) gracious professionalism, in the pits
2.) inspiring and exciting people about engineering

It would be selfish to view BBIQ as something negative or a threat when they are in effect creating the same exciting environment for students to learn in. FIRST doesn't need to be the only organization that attempts to do this.

I think people should only view it as positive, although its definitely different than what most FIRST veterans are used to. It can only do good in the long run.

As for BBIQ getting more television and media coverage that FIRST it really is a shame people don't understand more about the program and what it tries to accomplish but even if they were able to see it on t.v. they would in no way be able to create the same opinion or feeling for the program as they would being involved in a team and seeing what its like to devote months of you life during the year to your team or FIRST.

[Lil' Lavery]

IQ has existed for a few years now, and hasnt seriously jeopordized FIRST. The largest problem some people find wiht FIRST is that you build a new robot every year. with Battlebots, you can keep the same one around for quite some time. I actually prefer a new game and a new robot each year, but some feel differently. The two programs approach the problem of inspiring high schoolers into the fields of match, science, engineering, and robotics from opposite ends of the spectrum. Battlebots IQ is trying to be entertaining and appealing to the youth. But upon the almost complete downfall of its big brother Battebots, it seriously jeopordized its ability to do that. FIRST is approaching more from a business and education standpoint. FIRST tries harder to build skills needed in the real world (alliance partners and communication for instance).
The biggest threat IQ poses is if it gets more publicity and starts to create a rebirth of Battlebots and robot fighting. It woud instantly become more popular. But FIRST has its own weapon now, the FIRST VEX challenge, which could be used to counter-act that.
But the two programs can co-exist. Because BBIQ has no formal build season and the game stays almost constant, a team can build a bot for both if it had the funding and desire. You could build a BBIQ bot in the summer/fall and a FIRST bot in the winter. The only problem is that the two competitions happen around the same time of year (which seems heavily to suggest BBIQ is trying to compete with FIRST).

edit: Plus BB the show no longer exists, there goes BBIQ's biggest publicity

[Adam Y.]

But FIRST has its own weapon now, the FIRST VEX challenge, which could be used to counter-act that.
Actually Battlebots IQ was first to come out with a competition similar to the First Vex challenge.:) The only problem is that no one knew about it and the kits are three times more expensive.

[XCJP]

I think that there are two reasons that Battlebots IQ won't triumph over FIRST. One, Battlebots IQ offers a far greater chance of destroying your robot in a blink of an eye (although some may like that). And second it doesn't offer the same type of evolution that FIRST does Battlebots IQ is simply a KILL KILL KILL type of game. Although I do think it would be fun to participate in an organization like Battlebots IQ, FIRST is definitely more appealing

[babbish]

I firmly believe if FIRST received as much TV time as battlebots, it would be more popular and recieve MUCH more respect than it's destructive 'rivals'.

Racing is to FIRST as demolition derbies are to battlebots. I don't know about you, but demolition derbies are hard to find on TV nowadays...

Although demolition derbies are fun to watch, when cars have a purpose (as robots do in first) it sure is a LOT more prestigious.

[Greg Perkins]

BBIQ has been around since 2002. The reason your probably havent heard much about it is because BattleBots (inc) had a downfall with comedycentral and lost all of it publicity. BBIQ isnt what you think, Yes it is combat bots...but it give highschoolers that other option if they dont want to build their bots in a huge team (ie FIRST). The expression is good here....Dont knock it until you try it.

[IMDWalrus]

If this has already been discussed, I apologize; it's a long topic, and I could have very well overlooked concepts or posts while I was reading it.

I think Battlebots will become big when robot technology can be reached to everyone, including in low-income homes. Look at wrestling, that is a huge violent sport, and look how big it has become. When RC controllers, micro-chips&processors, etc... come down, i do think eveyone will be out for robots like battle bots. Hey, it's in human nature, when, for the most part, BIG things happen, they usually are violent, and everyone wants to know what happened...
It's worth pointing out - again - that the VEX kits will probably hit that level of affordability far before the BBIQ equivalent. Unless their marketing strategy is like Apple's, where a product is announced days or weeks before ship instead of months in advance, the VEX kits will definitely beat them to the market.

I probably shouldn't be voicing an opinion on BBIQ; I know next to nothing about the program. In this thread, however, people have mentioned that BBIQ doesn't require a new robot every year. I can see that leading to teams either using one design year after year or using one robot and patching it up as needed. The level of learning involved there pales in comparison to what FIRST demands every year.

I know that that's not how every team would operate, and that Woodie's quote about education being as much or as little as you want is spot on. Still, I think that BBIQ might achieve its goals more readily if they could find a way to ensure that the students are getting some kind of learning experience out of it, something beyond how to repair or rebuild.

[Denman]

it will definately not be a success here thats for sure. we have had "Robot Wars" for 7 or 8 years or so and it has moved from the bbc (Publicly funded broadcaster, biggest in uk) to channel 5, which is never watched because it has nothign good on. It was good for the first year or so but then it just died down after a few series. After about 3 years, one or 2 teams had unbeatable robots... was just no good. It was muich better when they did stuff like obstacle courses, and tasks a la First. As such First will survive and grow.We just have to spread the word and keep everyone interested.

[Nathan Pell]

I've got to chime in here again. Now that I have actually been to a BBIQ competition (Championships are going on right now in Orlando at Universal Studios) I have to say my opinion has greatly changed.

I DON'T agree that FIRST bots are "better" or more creative than a Battle bot. With FIRST you are playing against a set of rules, and in BBIQ you are playing against someone else's brain. You have no idea what they are going to do. For example, I watched a match where the driver of an incredible robot "faked" our the other team by slowing down his weapon. They thought it was not working and they came out of the safe spot. As soon as they did, he took them out. BBIQ is just as creative, but you don't see it. All of the cool stuff is inside the robots. There are teams that had figured out awesome ways to weld and attach things that we would never do in FIRST. I watched matches for almost an entire day, and I never say a robot that was "killed" at all. Most of the matches were king of boring because the bots could not drive straight or their drivers needed a lot more practice.

I still LOVE FIRST and will never leave it, as I really like how its gets kids working with engineers, and has a lot of other concepts to it. However, If I wanted to get a student to learn science and math I would put in them in Battlebots before I would FIRST. If you ask a FIRST student what about the calculations made on their bot, or what the torque is of their arm, they can give you all of the equations and all of the physics that go with it. I know on my FIRST team we don't have time to go over all of that in six weeks. Most of the kids on our team know about how our robot was put together, but could not pick out a motor our of a catalog based on what we wanted the robot could do. Nor could they pick a battery, or design the pneumatic circuit. All o that is given to you by FIRST. Please don't get me wrong, I love FIRST, and love working with sponsors and other teams.

The executives of BBIQ say they do three things: Train teachers, teach students, and run events. They are SOLELY in this for the education. They want to change the way science and math is taught today.

I understand there are those who think BBIQ is all bad, and I guess they will stay that way -but I would love to see a day when there was not "jealousy" over who has more publicity than the other. There are a lot of things about BBIQ that I thought could change. Their pits for example are just a bunch of tables in a big row inside of a sound stage. It is very difficult to see as the walls are all black. Robot parts seemed to just mesh with other team's parts. Most of the robots were on the floor as that was the only place to put them. There is not very much room for spectators to watch, and the matches seem to run slow.

To sum everything up - BBIQ and FIRST are both great programs, and I see plenty of room for both of them to exits. One of the biggest factors why I like BBIQ is that it is only $500 to enter the competition - so you can enter a lot of teams for a small amount. I teach BBIQ in my engineering course, and we do FIRST as an extra-curricular activity after school. Most of the kids in BBIQ are also on our FIRST team and they love both sports.

[Crash&Burn]

None of this should matter, to truly compare the two, you must go back to the grass roots...

1)They both started with a man and a plan.

2)Battlebots and FIRST-bots are made with love and care by dedicated engineers in hopes of raising their intellectual level to a higher standard.

Sure, battlebots may have a certain violent intention for robots, but don't underestimate the power of inspiration.

Some Joe Smoe watching battlebots might feel so inclined to get up, read a book about engineering, and maybe go out a make a bot.

whatever it is, it sure is contagious...

[Specialagentjim]

To anyone who has not attended a battlebots competition but has expressed negative opinion of them: Please, do some more research and data gathering before forming an opinion.

I attended the BattleBotsIQ competition this past weekend along with Nathan Pell. While he got a good view of real match play, I stayed in the pits most of the day. Seeing what happens in those pits is truly amazing, watching teams of students come back to a heap of robot covered in battery base from a battery explosion, and work straight through for hours to get it back up and running. Last year, we recieved an award from RUSH, the "Never say Die" award. Our efforts last year when we won that award pale in comparison to what a standard battlebot team endures to make sure they can compete in the next match.

These students are not just motivated and and excited about engineering, but they truly learn it too. FIRST and BBIQ are not competition for each other, they're different elements. In FIRST, we all did the torque calculations and the force vectors for how high you can hold a tetra and how much power you need to get out of the kit motors. In BBIQ, you try and figure out how to maximize power and minimize damage. When was the last time a team did an elastic or inelastic collision calculation for transferring momenteum from one robot to another? In BBIQ, I started doing it in my head to figure out who would win each match and by what strategy. When was the last time a FIRST team did a real material analysis to determine if Chromoly steel or titanium was more effiecent for their purpose? In BBIQ, material selection is a huge problem and is a real world engineering problem that most teams in FIRST never deal with (how many robots are NOT an Alumnium frame in FIRST?).

Personally, I love them both.

[robotrob]

I have been doing FIRST and Combat robotics for over 5 years. I am now in an Alumni position where I can help out teams and know the Southern NH area has first but not so much on the combat side. I was wondering if there were any teams in the area who would also like to try the Battlebots IQ 15lb competition and report back what they think about it. I think both programs deserve recognition and suport. Anyone who wants to try to add this challenge to their curriculum can have their advisor contact me at robmasek@gmail.com

Thanks Rob

[mechanicalbrain]

"Kids love First and they love BattleBots," Ms. Garcia said. "They're two different engineering exercises. If I like chocolate ice cream, I can like vanilla, too."
Are we vanilla?

[Alex Cormier]

I have been doing FIRST and Combat robotics for over 5 years. I am now in an Alumni position where I can help out teams and know the Southern NH area has first but not so much on the combat side. I was wondering if there were any teams in the area who would also like to try the Battlebots IQ 15lb competition and report back what they think about it. I think both programs deserve recognition and suport. Anyone who wants to try to add this challenge to their curriculum can have their advisor contact me at robmasek@gmail.com

Thanks Rob
I was around the Rochester Robotics Rampage where they had the IQ there. It looked really fun and i wished they had it when i was in HS. but the only thing is, if ya make one think this - "you can never over design". The winner was of a Battle Bots Middleweight which came in second place because their front weapon broke earlier. so if ya do it, think big and creative enough to get wins. good luck and mostly have fun!

[CJO]

First of all to reply to the comment that "money isn't really as important in FIRST . . . 10k is plenty," that is absolutely false. Sure, you can enter with 10k, but the winning teams spend a lot more. Even though the bot itself may be within the (rather notinal) price cap, the price of machining equipment, facilities, etc really add up, and it is very unlikely that one wil excell at FIRST without the facilites that huge quantities of money represent.

For two years our team was a "Oh they did so well with so little" losing team, but our third year, we did objectively well with a lot of many, yet we had the same people, the same "inspiration" we had all along.

~~~

As to the detractors from the spirit of battlebots. I suppose that you advocate that Iliad and The Odyssey are not read anymore because they "promote violance.?" Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet should be banned because they provide a bad moral example?

I think that many of those who criticize BB for violence, and especially for the attention it recieves fall prey to the same vice which many, many politicians fall for. What it comes down to is that the people who are "behind" FIRST have an idea for what they would like our culture to be. They are convinced that it is our ultimate culture -- the road to utopia, if you will. In fact, they are so convinced of the virtue of their position that it is the only concievable thing for others to believe. In fact, it is so good, that if people will not believe by themselves -- if they select another path -- then they must be forced to believe for their own good. Jason Morella may recall a conversation to this effect in which I (and a couple others) contended that FIRST would be willing to force the beauty of its ideals on others, even be it a suspension of free will.

Thus, Battle Bots threatens FIRST because it presents a different concept. One in which the individual is valued above the system; personal creativity above the "good of the team;" the ability to survive the unknown above the ability to survive in a carefully structured environment.

Not that there are not some very, very excellent things about FIRST, indeed, even though I have had some terrible FIRST eperiences, I still encourage FIRST at every opportunity. Still, the BB concepts address some of FIRST's weak points (just as FIRST addresses some of its), which is why some feel so threatened.

~~~

I suppose I can afford to be honest, it has already earned me negative reputation, so, go ahead, be big, ding my reputation.

~ Christopher

[ahecht]

Seriously, this thread has been around for 3.5 years now, and it's still the same bickering it was back then. Isn't it time to close the thread and send it to the archives where it belongs?

And what is a "half thought up cheep copy"?

[Chaos204]

Before we discuss who is better we need to figure out why we participate in First...
FIRST has by far more educational and technological benefits than any battlebot or robotwar competition will ever have.

For instance
The robots that work in tragedy's like 9/11 and in earthquakes are products of intellectual thinkers like us who are given a task and need to figure out a way to complete that task in the most efficient way possible.
We design manipulators and drive systems that when our generation truly becomes (and we are close) the engineers of tomorrow we will look back at our days in FIRST and say something like "I remember in the 2007 First competition we needed to do something just like this"
Thats what we are doing here, preparing for future problems that we may encounter in the world of problem solving.

BUT...
FIRST is also meant to draw students to the world of engineering.
We are hooked already but to bring in new blood we need to keep the games exciting. And face it a game where we are penalized for bumping too hard is not exciting to the amateur observer. We find it exciting because we know what went into making the bots and solving the problem.

That why Battle bots will be successful, students will chose explosions and sparks flying over FIRST

To get back the new students we need to find a happy medium where the games are exciting the the amateur eye and still continue to be as mentally challenging as we enjoy

i didn't realize the thread was so old when i wrote this but the points are still valid

[Doug G]

First of all to reply to the comment that "money isn't really as important in FIRST . . . 10k is plenty," that is absolutely false. Sure, you can enter with 10k, but the winning teams spend a lot more. Even though the bot itself may be within the (rather notinal) price cap, the price of machining equipment, facilities, etc really add up, and it is very unlikely that one wil excell at FIRST without the facilites that huge quantities of money represent.

For two years our team was a "Oh they did so well with so little" losing team, but our third year, we did objectively well with a lot of many, yet we had the same people, the same "inspiration" we had all along.


I agree, which is why the # of FIRST teams is reaching a plateu. FIRST is simply costing too much and is the number one reason why many teams stop and don't enter in the first place. I think the investment is worth it, but it's just unfortunate reality. Also, its easier for a team with resources and/or parents with resources to meet the costs than teams from lower income and/or more rural areas. Jesuit is a private school where I believe the parents have a higher education level and higher socio-economic status than the average high school. And thus we've seen them grow to be a great team - in all respects from robot to outreach, made possible partly because of the increased resources they have. Glasser and I have spoke before about this issue.
~~~

I think that many of those who criticize BB for violence, and especially for the attention it recieves fall prey to the same vice which many, many politicians fall for. What it comes down to is that the people who are "behind" FIRST have an idea for what they would like our culture to be. They are convinced that it is our ultimate culture -- the road to utopia, if you will. In fact, they are so convinced of the virtue of their position that it is the only concievable thing for others to believe. In fact, it is so good, that if people will not believe by themselves -- if they select another path -- then they must be forced to believe for their own good. Jason Morella may recall a conversation to this effect in which I (and a couple others) contended that FIRST would be willing to force the beauty of its ideals on others, even be it a suspension of free will.

Thus, Battle Bots threatens FIRST because it presents a different concept. One in which the individual is valued above the system; personal creativity above the "good of the team;" the ability to survive the unknown above the ability to survive in a carefully structured environment.

Not that there are not some very, very excellent things about FIRST, indeed, even though I have had some terrible FIRST eperiences, I still encourage FIRST at every opportunity. Still, the BB concepts address some of FIRST's weak points (just as FIRST addresses some of its), which is why some feel so threatened.


FIRST wishing to maintain such tight control over their concept, will unfortunately keep them out of 90% of the schools. Perhaps some day they will realize that to fulfill their vision, they will need to release some of their control. Why can't there be small county level competitions held at a high school or Community college (no A/V, no huge overhead costs)? Then winners can advance to a regional or national event. Maybe the game can be released at the end of summer to allow for smaller competitions (that cost maybe $300-$500)? Have the kit of parts vastly reduced to reduce cost - get the entry fee down to $1000-$2000. Something must radically change in the next five years in order for FIRST to grow.

I see it almost like the MAC vs PC debate. In one hand you have a wonderful product that works extremely well, but most people don't use it and its expensive because Apple maintains tight control over it; and on the other you have an OK product that works most of the time, everyone uses it, and its a lot cheaper. Both are effective products, but the cost of PC's and their lack of any one body maintaining control keeps the PC at most of our fingertips.

I know it's an old thread, but some of us still conteplate this issue each year about this time, so get over it :)

[Andrew Blair]

Honestly, you get out what you put in. If I do a whole bunch of calc., in first or bbiq, I learn. If not, I'm building a random tank in either competition. Personally though, autonomous does add a lot to first that bbiq lacks.

[CJO]

In regards to Doug's post,

Another way in which FIRST isolates itself is by the strick isolation of the ability to run competitions. As many of you know, most scrimmages are held using hand built toggles, because they refuse to give pin-out information for the RC which would allow competitions to take place outside of FIRST. Thus the IFI RC controller is "just" another robot controller, instead of a system which people can use for competition

[Doug G]

Actually I think the IFI system is great, but why do we need bags of springs, wheelchair wheels, and at least 1/2 of the other stuff in the kit. I know, someone will say it was donated and such, I say forget the whole kit except the control system and it's associate electronics. Looking around at the competition last year, most teams didn't even use the kit frame, I know we didn't. The only team it benefited were the first or second year rookies. Why not let us figure what motors are best - put a limit on them or their rated wattage or something - I'd just like to see the whole enchilada changed a bit to encourage growth and reduced cost. I'm really considering other options if funding doesn't come through this year - the BBIQ, MATE program, BotBall, Rocket Challenge, etc... There now seems like a lot of other programs to inspire students to pursue science and engineering and are a lot cheaper. I grant you, nothing beats the experience of FIRST, but there ARE other options that can fulfill the same mission. Hence the point of this thread.

[JVGazeley]

They tried Battlebots here but it never got near to our own Robot Wars series, which ran for 7 seasons (although nothings been heard of it since 2003).

I cannot see either of the 2 FRC teams from the UK jumping ship to a Battlebots spin off...

I suppose it's like FIRST and Techno Games (UK equivelant of Battlebots I.Q. from what I can gather, albeit less violent). Techno Games was popular here, but most teams were younger than FIRST teams from what I'm aware of...

[Denman]

I suppose it's like FIRST and Techno Games (UK equivelant of Battlebots I.Q. from what I can gather, albeit less violent). Techno Games was popular here, but most teams were younger than FIRST teams from what I'm aware of...Yes, techno games was about making robots to do athletic skills, such as rope climbing, shot put, even relay racing

[Alan Anderson]

...Looking around at the competition last year, most teams didn't even use the kit frame, I know we didn't. The only team it benefited were the first or second year rookies....The TechnoKats used the kit chassis (and gearboxes) to make a quick software development drivebase at the beginning of the build season. It directly benefited us, a 14-year veteran team. We also indirectly benefit from those rookie teams having well-built and working drivebases. It helps raise the level of performance across the board, making for a better competitive environment.

I think having a consistent set of basic building blocks is one of the important differences between FIRST and something like BattleBots. Sure, most experienced teams can do well without having things handed to them in a box, but that fosters elitism and makes it harder for newcomers.

[ChrisH]

The TechnoKats used the kit chassis (and gearboxes) to make a quick software development drivebase at the beginning of the build season. It directly benefited us, a 14-year veteran team. We also indirectly benefit from those rookie teams having well-built and working drivebases. It helps raise the level of performance across the board, making for a better competitive environment.

I think having a consistent set of basic building blocks is one of the important differences between FIRST and something like BattleBots. Sure, most experienced teams can do well without having things handed to them in a box, but that fosters elitism and makes it harder for newcomers.

The BeachBots used our KitBot chassis to test out a Mechanum drive. It was fun to drive but had trouble holding ground so we dropped it. In the absence of the kit chassis we would have had to make a decision much earlier as to which drive we would use. Due to fabrication difficulties, we didn't make the final decision until Week 5 of build. This would not have been possible and we wouldn't have even attempted the Mechanum drive without KitBot.

Our drivetrain used the stock gearbox and sprockets. We only changed the wheel and added a couple of sets of sprockets for six wheel drive. For the game it was the right thing to do. Next year will probably be different.

[patTeam241]

I have a couple thoughts about the BBIQ/FIRST discussion, but first a quick note. I participated on my high school's FIRST team for four years, and will someday get involved again, so I am somewhat biased towards FIRST. However, I can see strengths in both.

However, FIRST has one thing that BBIQ doesn't seem to offer. BBIQ seems to be nothing more than an extension of an engineering class where the goal is to build a robot. FIRST's goal is different. Every year Dean speaks of how the goal of FIRST isn't to build a robot, but instead to learn teamwork, leadership, business and engineering skills. While the robot and competition are a major focus, FIRST also recognizes the other aspects. The best example is in the true 'champion'. From everything I've read, the 'champion' of BBIQ is the team that does the best. The top prize in FIRST is for something different. The Chairmans Award goes to the team that contributes the most, in the local community, to FIRST, and to other teams. They also give awards for other things, teams with great websites, great animations, and great spirits. While these teams may not have great engineering skills (although they may) they have taken the opportunity to accel at other skills.

My second point is on the biggest complaint heard of FIRST, it's cost. Yes, $6000 to register, and more to build a robot is a challenge, however, that's part of what FIRST is. In the real world, most companies fail in their first year. Money is always a challenge, and FIRST emphasizes that wether intentional or not. It inspires a team to work hard on the business side of the challenge. With regards to BBIQ, the situation doesn't seem to be much different. Many posters report bills of $10,000+, although this may have changed as more competions seem to have popped up.

Just my 2 cents.

Pat

[Doug G]

My second point is on the biggest complaint heard of FIRST, it's cost. Yes, $6000 to register, and more to build a robot is a challenge, however, that's part of what FIRST is. In the real world, most companies fail in their first year. Money is always a challenge, and FIRST emphasizes that wether intentional or not. It inspires a team to work hard on the business side of the challenge. With regards to BBIQ, the situation doesn't seem to be much different. Many posters report bills of $10,000+, although this may have changed as more competions seem to have popped up.

Just my 2 cents.

Pat

Pat, the cost of FIRST is definitely the biggest complaint I hear all the time as well - and yes it does challenge teams to be have sound business structure. But getting new teams started, is tough, since they don't realize what FIRST is all about until you participate in it. We've made presentations to schools and they really like what we show them, but they just can't get past the initial cost. So in the end, it'll keep FIRST out of those schools that lack resources (inner city, low socioeconomics, etc..) so the great technology divide will continue to grow.

The one thing that really seemed to make a difference to many teams were the NASA grants - they're usually for 2 years (if applied for each year). Once a team were in FIRST for a couple of years, then they got it - they realize how to build it up like a business venture. That's what helped us our first few years.

The TechnoKats used the kit chassis (and gearboxes) to make a quick software development drivebase at the beginning of the build season. It directly benefited us, a 14-year veteran team. We also indirectly benefit from those rookie teams having well-built and working drivebases. It helps raise the level of performance across the board, making for a better competitive environment.

I think having a consistent set of basic building blocks is one of the important differences between FIRST and something like BattleBots. Sure, most experienced teams can do well without having things handed to them in a box, but that fosters elitism and makes it harder for newcomers.

We too used the kit chassis for prototyping - but not on real bot. I guess what I'm sying is it would be nice for FIRST to find a way to get the entry cost down so that more teams would start up. Three years ago FIRST tried a slightly different kit for Rookie teams and veteran teams. I believe that veteran teams didn't receive a pump and battery charger whereas new teams and 2nd year teams did. Perhaps they could something similar to that?

Maybe a question that could be asked is, would veteran teams be willing to receive less kit parts than rookie teams if it means lower the entry fees? Or would veteran teams be willing to subsidize part of the cost of rookie teams (assuming it's a perfect world and nobody abuses this)? Rookie teams cost = $4000, Veteran Teams = $6500?

I'm just throwing out ideas that probably have been discussed to death elsewhere in the forums.

[patTeam241]

First, sorry I know this isn't what the forum started about, but it gave me an idea.

I like the idea that the older team help subsidize new teams, but I had another idea of my own. How many teams have signifigant amounts of cash left over at the start of the season? I know my team never did, but I would guess some teams probably do. What if any team that could afford it was asked to donate $500, $1000, or whatever they could to a Rookie Fund, which would then be disbursed between rookie teams who need it. This seems like a great form of gp.

[Evil Robotics]

While I cut My Robotics teeth in Battlebots, I now spend more time with FIRST. I was drawn in by TV coverage of Robot Wars, Robotica and Battlebots. The main reason I now do more FIRST robots is that there is less travel expense. However I still have a garage full of Battlebots ranging in size from 1 lb to 220 lb.

One thing I really like about Battlebots is you can pick any components of your choice that meet the rules. This can lessen the part price if your a dumpster diver or a flea market king.

There are many ways to have fun and battle bots too can be done in a fun safe manner.

Kill or be Killed,

[skimoose]

We've all been through it. You spend one hour extolling the virtues of FIRST, and then you get the question from a potential school system. "How much does it cost?" :eek: There is a solution to the "sticker shock" that we face when trying to start a new FIRST team in a school system new to the concept of FIRST. That is quite simply Vex. If you haven't given the Vex system a serious look, you should immediately!

A vex team is looking at $200 to register with FIRST, $300 to register for a regional, and perhaps $1000 to purchase two starter kits, programming modules, and extra components. Add in $500 for uniforms and other supplies and your in the FIRST game for $2000... :cool: A much easier sell than starting a FRC team. A team can compete in FVC for a few years, being exposed to FRC, and start making sponsor contacts in the community. Once the school system sees the benefits of FIRST and the team has had a chance to understand the business side of FIRST sponsorships in successful FRC, they can begin forming that FRC team and they'll have a better chance of having a sustainable program. Even if they don't ever start a FRC team, they're still competing in a FIRST program. Get out there and help start a FVC team, it's more likely to grow into a new FRC team.

Also, if you haven't considered using Vex within your FRC program, check out the white paper in the team building section "Low Cost Robotics: Using Vex in FRC". While this isn't a step by step how-to white paper (those will be coming later), it shows the potential for using Vex to help keep costs down in FRC. We are certainly one of those teams that barely gets by with our funding. Finding ways to save money and still having some of the luxuries of well funded teams, like practice fields and practice robots, is always desirable too.

[Andy Grady]

This age old arguement has always been somewhat of a itch in my side. You have two excelent programs which inspire, teach, and celebrate science and technology. On both sides you have wonderful mentors and students competing together in a gracious way. People try to make the arguement that Battlebots is not safe, when in fact it is very safe when you use proper barriers. Dean Kamen says that civilization can't advance through a group's demolition of anothers work. I say most of the robots get dismantled anyway...why not have fun while doing it? I don't buy into the whole political aspect that FIRST tries to portray into its games over the past few years. "Hey lets all be friends and hold hands while we work together to save our planet!" Don't get me wrong, I love alliances...I think it adds a dynamic element that is unmatched. I have a problem with trying to push the idea that somehow competition is bad. I think that any Red Sox or Yankees fan could tell you that competition breeds success and respect. If I am competing with you, I will strive to make a better product than you, you will strive to make a better product than me, and before ya know it...that product is pretty darn good because we keep trying to one up each other. And as for the respect issue, let me go back to the Red Sox, Yankees analogy. As an avid Sox fan, I am passionate about my distaste for the Yankees. I love to watch them lose...but at the same time, without them my team is nothing. I have respect for them because of the level they take my team on. Competition breeds respect, and maybe we need a little more of that in this world.

Back to Battlebots...i stick by my usual stance. If it gets kids interested in Science and Technology...who cares if it is a threat to FIRST. Each entity has its own positives and negatives. FIRST is more game strategic and diverse, while Battlebots focuses heavily on the concept of design and redesign due to the game never changing while keeping exciting by quenching our natural thirst for destruction. This gives the average competition robots fan variety in choice.

I hope Battlebots IQ succeeds. I would love to go to an event if they ever had one within reach. I love FIRST too and I prefer FIRST because of the diverse games and strategy involved...but there is room for co-exsistance.

Have fun,
Andy Grady

[BuddyB309]

When ever i tell people that i am on a robotics team and what i do people eyes allways light up and say "Like battle bots! Can i join?" Then i tell them
"No. not like battle bots FIRST is a friendly competition based on useing knowlege and enginering skills to overcome obsticals."
Then they say, "Oh.......thats boring and geeky."
But then I try to explian it to them that this is the funnist thing i have ever done in my life and Dean Camin founded it.
Then they say, "Whos Dean Camin? Whats a Segway? You're weird and you're waisting my time. Now im going to miss battle bots on TV."

(I know I misspelled a couple of things Spell Check is not working for me right now)

[teamtestbot]

"...FIRST is a friendly competition based on useing knowlege and enginering skills to overcome obsticals."

There's your problem. Don't explain it to people like that - tell them "sure :rolleyes: "

We got a few people on the team this way(rookie team). Those few people grabbed their friends, and we now have around 11 or 12 people. They have attended meetings regularly even after the "revelation", so it should work out this year...

[phrontist]

FIRST is the cadillac of this sort of pedagogical paradigm. It costs more because we get nicer things to play with. A lot of things in FIRST are a bit of a luxury. Could the same goal be accomplish with some trimming? Yes. Is that desirable?

I have no idea.

[teamtestbot]

I also do not see where the enjoyment lies in contrasting the two programs. Seems to me they both accomplish roughly the same thing: get people interested in engineering and technology, and let them have fun while doing so.

[skimoose]

When asked, "You mean like battle Bots?" The best come back line I've come up with so far is: "No, we're the NASCAR of robotics!" I used that line during a radio interview last year at the UTC Regionals and the DJs seemed to instantly understand that concept. :D

Let's face it, it takes engineering excellence to succeed in NASCAR. The driver helps, but a well engineered vehicle will make the worst driver competitive. Also, as far as people not understanding a FIRST game when they see a competition, people want to see action. Our games provide action. Even NASCAR wouldn't have that big of a following if it weren't for crashes and driver conflicts. A clean race for the casual viewer is about as exciting as watching paint dry. :rolleyes: