What makes FRC a sport?

[AustinLoPiccolo]

I was talking with a friend about sports today and when I brought up how FRC is a sport, he disagreed. He explained that because we aren't required to be athletic and endure physical punishement like in lacrosse, football, soccer and other physical enduring sports that you can't say FRC is a sport. This argument is coming from someone who has never experienced the FRC and FIRST environment. I want to know from you what makes FRC and/or FIRST a sport.

[EricLeifermann]

I would say FIRST is more of a sport of the mind than an actual sport. I have been very active in both physical sports(soccer, football, basketball, etc.) and sports of the mind(FIRST, poker, chess, etc.).

While I love FIRST it doesn't compare to a physical sport in the type of adrenaline you get when competing. Now I'm not saying you/I don't get pumped up and excited and nervous and all that comes with competing but its not the same as working up a sweat and knocking down a game winning 3 pointer or something like that.

FIRST is a sport its just a different form of a sport.

[EricH]

If poker is a sport (look, it's shown on both ESPN and FSN), then robotics, where you lift weights (robot parts) and carry them, and where you throw things to try to hit targets, is a sport.

Or, to put it another way: It's a sport where you build your own athlete.

[kws4000]

FRC is a sport of the mind. I have been in Cross-Country & Track and it is also more of a sport of the mind, but just as much of the body. You need the head to keep going, the body will naturally go along.

Same as in FIRST. You need to stay up for a week to finish programming, that takes a toll on the body. A sore body results in a sore mind. You need guts to keep moving foward.

Sports test the strong, weed out those who can't hack the stress. It also forces you to see your limits. As a student programmer in 2010, I couldn't bear to watch our bot perform because I put a lot of blood, sweat, and tears into it, and I didn't want to see it die. Last year, as a senior, I programmed the entire bot with little assisstance. But I could not drive worth a whit. Similar to football, you dedicate tasks: tackle, ball throwing, ball catching.

FIRST is the most glorious test of the mind. Anyone can run a marathon or get a slam-dunk. It takes guts to admit you are a nerd that enjoys six weeks off non-stop stress, and actually thrives on it.

[kws4000]

If poker is a sport (look, it's shown on both ESPN and FSN)


Or, to put it another way: It's a sport where you build your own athlete.

First Statement = SERIOUSLY?

Second statement = QUOTABLE!

[EricH]

First Statement = SERIOUSLY?Yes, seriously. Two sports networks show poker games. There might be more I'm not aware of.

Oh, and I forgot: WAYYY back in the day, ESPN showed the FIRST Robotics Competition Nationals. Back in the 90's, or so I hear.

[Taylor]

This. (http://www.atomicrobotics.com/2011/08/considered-sport/)

[Jon Stratis]

Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition Defines Sport as:

1. an individual or group activity pursued for exercise or pleasure, often involving the testing of physical capabilities and taking the form of a competitive game such as football, tennis, etc


Lets break it down piece by piece:
an individual or group activity I don't think anyone will argue this.
pursued for exercise or pleasure I don't know about your team, but our team has fun, and derives pleasure from seeing the robot compete.
often involving the testing of physical capabilities and taking the form of a competitive game The basic structure of FIRST competitions is a competitive game. Further, it is a test of physical capabilities - of the robot, not the student.

It's a question of how you define the competitor in the activity. If your friend has any doubts that your robot is a fierce competitor that requires all the athleticism and endurance he thinks of in sports, first show him a video of a hard-hitting match. Then tell him he can stand in for one of the robots, and you'll have paramedics standing by to reattach his severed limbs when he's done :p

[Chris is me]

It's a competitive game. While it should be treated like a sport, sports are simple competitive games that rely on pushing humans to their physical limits instead of mental limits. FIRST games are complex and rely on design and intellectual capability much more than the average sport.

[Brandon Holley]

It's a competitive game. While it should be treated like a sport, sports are simple competitive games that rely on pushing humans to their physical limits instead of mental limits. FIRST games are complex and rely on design and intellectual capability much more than the average sport.

I get the the point you are trying to make, but I don't fully agree with it. Some sports are extremely physically oriented, and require very little intellect. However, other sports require quite a bit of intellect to really excel. Obviously, the physical portion tends to come first, but there tends to be quite a bit of intellectual challenge when you get to the level where everyone you are playing is of the same physical stature.

-Brando

[SenorZ]

If there is a game, and you sweat, it's a sport.

I know I sweated A LOT last season!

[AdamHeard]

Does it matter if it is or is not considered a sport?

[PAR_WIG1350]

Does it matter if it is or is not considered a sport?

No, but the title of the thread doesn't seem to ask if it is or not. I believe one is to assume that it is and list reasons why it is, or, in other words, what similarities exist between FIRST and (other) sports.

[Duke461]

The problem with this question is that there are many different definitions of sport. Older definitions consider a sport to be a "game involving physical excercise". Others define it as a "Physical activity that is governed by a set of rules or customs and often engaged in competitively". Neither of these definitions support robotics, due to its lack of physical activity. Yes, it has SOME physical exertion, lifting a robot, using the shear, etc., but in no way is this elongated and physically challenging in a way that it can't be accomplished successfully by most people. In addition to this, there is no human physical exertion whatsoever DURING the match (maybe minus the human player). Thus, by these definitions, robotics is not a sport.

However, there are looser definitons, ones that basically state a sport is some kind of leisure activity. Obviously, robotics would fit into this. However, many other "sports" would then fit in to this which wouldn't be considered sports. Examples would include sewing competitions, poker, and sure, for kicks, we'll throw in underwater basket weaving . Through this, we can see that this is too loose of a definition, and thus, robotics should still not be considered a sport.

Third, my reference is Sports Law, a course at Cornell University. In their class overview, it states, "The concept of amateur sports includes a range of activities from an individual casual weekend athlete to high school athletics to extensively organized intercollegiate or international competitions. Athletic activities are often organized and managed by individual groups that establish rules for eligibility and competition, and courts are often unwilling to interfere with the actions of these groups as long as their rules are reasonably applied". The international competition part could be used to support FIRST and robotics, however, while not specifically stated, it still seems to be implying physical exertion, due to the previous clauses mentioning athletes.

Finally, while Wikipedia isnt the MOST trustworthy, their opening paragraph puts it nicely:

"A Sport is all forms of physical activity which, through casual or organised participation, aim to use, maintain or improve physical fitness and provide entertainment to participants. Sport may be competitive, where a winner or winners can be identified by objective means, and may require a degree of skill, especially at higher levels. Hundreds of sports exist, including those for a single participant, through to those with hundreds of simultaneous participants, either in teams or competing as individuals. Some non-physical activities, such as board games and card games are sometimes referred to as sports, but a sport is generally recognised as being based in physical athleticism."

---------------------------

To conclude, essentially all definitons of sport imply some kind of physical exertion, and i've shown that robotics does not have physical exertion DURING the competition. I suppose one could argue the 6 weeks is part of the competition; however, physical exertion is not consistent, repetitive, and/or uniform throughout the build team. Even the definitions that don't include physical exertion are simply too broad and would consider too many activitites that we dont consider to be a sport, a sport.

As much as i love robotics, and sports, robotics is NOT a sport.

-Duke

P.S. To Adam's question, i don't care too much. But, debates are fun, the OP wants to know, and im bored. :cool:

[staplemonx]

JJ's definition of a sport

team based = check
more that 2 players per side
physical contact between players = check
low to moderate level of scoring = check
(hockey and soccer low scoring, foot ball moderate, basketball high level of scoring)
players and coaches can get penalties = check
Play on the field is fluid = check
Requires skill, practice and luck to win = check

PS i do not think that baseball is a sport. no penalties and not fluid. Tennis is not a sport, no physical contact. Cross country not a sport, no scoring just measurements (time, distance, etc).

[Tristan Lall]

JJ's definition of a sportYou're the only one that defines sport like this.

Does it matter if it is or is not considered a sport?It doesn't especially matter to me personally, but we have to consider what other people think about it. For instance, it might matter whether or not it qualifies as a sport according to a school's funding criteria or extracurricular activity policy.

[Basel A]

I would personally argue FRC is not a sport because the primary objective of a sports competition is either (a) entertainment or (b) to see who is best at the sport. The goal of FRC is neither. We do FRC to inspire and to be inspired.

Sports are self-absorbed and have no meaning outside themselves. FRC has greater aspirations and influences.

[mathking]

JJ's definition of a sport

Cross country not a sport, no scoring just measurements (time, distance, etc).

Cross country is scored, not measured, to determine the winner.

[staplemonx]

Here are a few more items that can be used in this discussion

http://www.atomicrobotics.com/2011/08/considered-sport/

http://www.atomicrobotics.com/2011/10/cost-kid/

http://www.atomicrobotics.com/2011/09/cheerleaders-don%e2%80%99t-cheer-sporting-events/

[Peyton Yeung]

While I love FIRST it doesn't compare to a physical sport in the type of adrenaline you get when competing. Now I'm not saying you/I don't get pumped up and excited and nervous and all that comes with competing but its not the same as working up a sweat and knocking down a game winning 3 pointer or something like that.

FIRST is a sport its just a different form of a sport.

Um I'm a driver and when I compete in high intensity matches and my hands start shaking I think that's the adrenaline kicking in. This is especially true when you score the winning piece or block the best bot.

[Laaba 80]

PS i do not think that baseball is a sport. no penalties and not fluid.

I completely disagree, baseball is no less fluid than football. While baseball doesnt explicitly call things "penalties" it has its fair share. Hitting a batter with a pitch is directly comparable to a kickoff going out of bounds in football, which is called a "penalty". Also, umpires can call a balk on a pitcher. You could even consider walking a batter a penalty.

Back on topic, this is mainly semantics, but I dont think that FRC is a sport, it is the organization behind the sport. I think that Logomotion, Breakaway, etc are all individual sports. This is like calling the NFL a sport, when the sport is actually football. I see no reason why an individual seasons game should not be considered a sport.

[PAR_WIG1350]

We are trying to find an absolute, "correct" definition of "sport", but in doing so we are dooming ourselves to failure. The concept of sports was fabricated by humans, and thus only exists in our own minds. the moniker "sport" carries false wight.

To say that something is a sport triggers certain responses in the brain. To make a reference to computers, "sport" is like a class. when something is declared to be a sport, it inherits some features from the "sport" class. Does every subclass or instance of sport need to use every feature? No, it doesn't. Furthermore, other objects and classes that are unrelated to the "sport" class can have the same features and functions as the sports class.

At a certain point, it simply becomes easier to make an object an instance of the "sport" class rather than creating a separate class. If the required features are included in the "sport" class already, it makes more sense to use the "sport" class since it avoids reinventing the proverbial wheel.

Our brains do much the same thing when we look at things in life. If something is called a sport, the brain will give it certain attributes associated with sports. Similarly, if something shares enough characteristics with a sport, the brain will associate it with sports.

This brings us neatly back to the beginning; a sport is simply as loose set of fabricated characteristics that is different from person to person which one can choose to apply to different activities as they see fit. Whether something is or isn't a sport has nothing to do with its value or the lessons it can teach. It is simply a tag we place on things to identify them more easily based on our personal idea of what that tag means. The correct answer is truly a personal matter.

[torihoelscher]

FRC is a sport because it uses your mind. Your mind is getting a workout, it doesnt entirely have to be a physical type of activity. Its strategy, thats what makes it a sport because without strategy in baseball, football, golf, cross country, and etc there would be no way to win the game. I think its a sport because like other sports you cheer and get adrenaline running through you and we do compete. Heck, when I write software my hands shake with adrenaline. :)

Robotics is a sport no if, ands, or buts about it.

:)

[EricLeifermann]

Um I'm a driver and when I compete in high intensity matches and my hands start shaking I think that's the adrenaline kicking in. This is especially true when you score the winning piece or block the best bot.

Yes I agree, when I was a driver there was lots of adrenaline but it wasn't the same type of adrenaline that I get when I play physicals sports. Hence my "it isn't the same type of adrenaline" comment.

[Andrew Lawrence]

Um I'm a driver and when I compete in high intensity matches and my hands start shaking I think that's the adrenaline kicking in. This is especially true when you score the winning piece or block the best bot.

Agreed. When you're up there, especially in the last few matches, things can get pretty intense. Not intense like a physical sport. Intense in your mind. Things go on in there that you can only experience in a heated match of FRC.

[Duke461]

I wrote a hefty essay above and no one's commented about it. :(
Thoughts? Questions? Comments? Remarks? Jokes? C'mon people :]

EDIT: Oh, three other things:
Commoner's definitions should not be applicable (no offense)
Adrenaline Rushes are not exactly physical exertion.
The correct answer is truly a personal matter.

While maybe on a very philosophical level this is true, as tristan lall pointed out, "For instance, it might matter whether or not it qualifies as a sport according to a school's funding criteria or extracurricular activity policy." Thus, an absolute definition should be a part of this discussion.

[ThaineP]

Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition Defines Sport as:



Evidently, the dictionary is wrong. I would define a "sport" as a leisure activity that involves some amount of skill (drawing a little from the archaic version of the word), and FIRST definitely <bias> takes more skill than some other sports. </bias>

My $0.02

[JamesBrown]

Sports are self-absorbed and have no meaning outside themselves. FRC has greater aspirations and influences.

This is baseless and completely inaccurate, as some one who played sports growing up, continues to play a sport at a high level and coaches and has coached youth through college programs I can assure you that sports have influenced many more kids than programs like FIRST have. Any one who thinks that the primary impact of sports on 99% of its participants has anything to do with on field results never has coached or been coached effectively.

JJ's definition of a sport

team based = check
more that 2 players per side
physical contact between players = check
low to moderate level of scoring = check
(hockey and soccer low scoring, foot ball moderate, basketball high level of scoring)
players and coaches can get penalties = check
Play on the field is fluid = check
Requires skill, practice and luck to win = check

PS i do not think that baseball is a sport. no penalties and not fluid. Tennis is not a sport, no physical contact. Cross country not a sport, no scoring just measurements (time, distance, etc).

Evidently, the dictionary is wrong. I would define a "sport" as a leisure activity that involves some amount of skill (drawing a little from the archaic version of the word), and FIRST definitely <bias> takes more skill than some other sports. </bias>

My $0.02

You can't change the definition of sport then argue that because of your definition something is a sport, that is clearly crazy way to present a point. Sport is a word in the English language that is well defined, let’s stick to it. Both of your definitions clearly do not include things that are well established as sports and include things that are not.

I would say FIRST is more of a sport of the mind than an actual sport. I have been very active in both physical sports(soccer, football, basketball, etc.) and sports of the mind(FIRST, poker, chess, etc.).

While I love FIRST it doesn't compare to a physical sport in the type of adrenaline you get when competing. Now I'm not saying you/I don't get pumped up and excited and nervous and all that comes with competing but its not the same as working up a sweat and knocking down a game winning 3 pointer or something like that.

FIRST is a sport its just a different form of a sport.

Sports by definition require physical exertion. What you are calling sports of the mind are games or competitions. While sports can also frequently be considered games or competitions they are not the same thing.

If poker is a sport (look, it's shown on both ESPN and FSN), then robotics, where you lift weights (robot parts) and carry them, and where you throw things to try to hit targets, is a sport.

Or, to put it another way: It's a sport where you build your own athlete.

I am assuming you aren't serious but in case you were or other people thought you were something being on a Sports Network does not in its self qualify it as being a sport, nor does something not being on a sports network disqualify it.

FRC is a sport of the mind. I have been in Cross-Country & Track and it is also more of a sport of the mind, but just as much of the body. You need the head to keep going, the body will naturally go along.


Sports are by definition physical (see every dictionary definition quoted so far. Sports also require a huge amount of mental strength, regardless of the sport. In a game like football, rugby or basketball, the mental aspect of strategy is obvious. What isn't obvious is the mental aspect of execution, both in sport like football and in sports like XC, Swimming, and Weightlifting. I can tell you (and I know a few other mentors on here have lifted competitively) that even something that should allow you to be as dumb as lifting a weight can be incredibly mentally draining, lose focus for an instant and there is no way to succeed.


I see no reason why an individual seasons game should not be considered a sport.

It is important to remember the differences between games and sports, in this case the lack of physical exertion is certainly one of them.

FRC is a sport because it uses your mind. Your mind is getting a workout, it doesn’t entirely have to be a physical type of activity. Its strategy, thats what makes it a sport because without strategy in baseball, football, golf, cross country, and etc there would be no way to win the game. I think its a sport because like other sports you cheer and get adrenaline running through you and we do compete. Heck, when I write software my hands shake with adrenaline. :)

Robotics is a sport no if, ands, or buts about it.

:)

There are plenty of ifs ands and buts about it. Strategy is without a doubt important to sports but it is not what makes it a sport. Physical effort and/or exertion are by definition part of what makes something a sport.

[Andrew Lawrence]

Adrenaline Rushes are not exactly physical exertion.

But you've got to admit, it's fun!

[Taylor]

I wrote a hefty essay above and no one's commented about it. :(
Thoughts? Questions? Comments? Remarks? Jokes? C'mon people :]

"The varsity Sport for the Mind," FRC combines the excitement of sport with the rigors of science and technology.
It is a sport where participants play with and learn from the pros
Teams are formed in the fall. The annual FIRST Robotics Competition Kickoff in early January starts the six-week “build” season. Competitions take place in March and April. The FIRST Robotics Competition Regional events are typically held in university arenas. They involve 40 to 70 teams cheered by thousands of fans over three days. A championship event caps the season. Referees oversee the competition. Judges evaluate teams and present awards for design, technology, sportsmanship, and commitment to FIRST. The Chairman’s Award is the highest honor at FIRST and recognizes a team that exemplifies the values of FIRST.

When the organization defines itself as a sport, that's all the definition we need.

[Alan Anderson]

Is NASCAR racing a sport? How about horse racing?

[Taylor]

Is NASCAR racing a sport?

Didn't we resolve that in 2008?

[JamesCH95]

Whoever thinks that FRC is not physically demanding has not done it before. There are few times I sleep so soundly as I do after an FRC build season and regional.

I imagine these are the same people who don't think racing (cars) is a sport. I've had to be pulled out a car by my teammates because I was so exhausted at the end of an endurance stint.

I say this being a collegiate athlete in soccer, volleyball, and ultimate frisbee, as well as an FRC driver and race car driver, and alpine ski racing in HS. All of these are sports in their own right, all are physically demanding (especially if you take them seriously), all are mentally demanding, all are highly competitive. All require a focused strategy, focus, control, creativity, and a dash of luck.

These are all sports in my opinion, having competed in them at highly demanding levels.

[Siri]

Is NASCAR racing a sport? How about horse racing?Without arguing the definition of "sport", have you ever tried jumping or flat racing a horse (certainly steeple-chasing)? I haven't done it in years, and I can't say I enjoyed it much, but I can tell you it requires some serious physical fitness. Not at my basketball or soccer levels, but there's honest physical exertion going on here. You feel it in the morning.

I have no experience with NASCAR racing, but from a physics standpoint I'd wonder if they don't need some solid aerobic conditioning.

[JamesBrown]

Is NASCAR racing a sport? How about horse racing?

I don't know enough about NASCAR to make a judgment, horse racing is certainly a sport, high level jockeys are extremely well conditioned athletes.

[JamesBrown]

Whoever thinks that FRC is not physically demanding has not done it before. There are few times I sleep so soundly as I do after an FRC build season and regional.

There is a huge differense between something being tiring and some thing requiring "physical exertion" as the definition of sport states. I don't argue at all that build season and competitions where you down, however it is not because I am physically exerting my self.

[JamesCH95]

Is NASCAR racing a sport?

It requires significant physical fitness to maintain brain function, let alone lightning-fast reflexes, in sustained 3g turns for several hours at a time (not to say they drivers experience 3gs for the entirety of the race, just during the long turns). Add onto that a giant weight strapped to your head (helmet) and steering effort and you've got a very physically demanding activity.

There is a huge differense between something being tiring and some thing requiring "physical exertion" as the definition of sport states. I don't argue at all that build season and competitions where you down, however it is not because I am physically exerting my self.

I mean this as an honest question: have you ever been a student driver?

I thought that being a driver was physically demanding. It certainly got my heart rate up and exercised my circulatory system. Picking up and moving the robot over and over is quite an exercise, although arguably a side-effect of FRC and not directly part of the competition.

[EricH]

I am assuming you aren't serious but in case you were or other people thought you were something being on a Sports Network does not in its self qualify it as being a sport, nor does something not being on a sports network disqualify it.
But what it DOES mean is that someone thinks that it qualifies as a sport. Someone who makes the programming decisions for that network/channel. You're right, I fail to understand how poker is a sport... but someone higher-up on both the named networks thinks it counts as one for whatever reason. Poker's physical exertion? Well, how much work does it take to put cards on the table?

[mathking]

Sports by definition require physical exertion.
This really depends on the definition you use for sport. In looking at a total of 16 definitions from the 4 dictionaries in my office, 14 mention physical activity but only 3 mention exertion.

The thing is, what is a sport is NOT really well defined. Most of us take an "I know it when I see it" approach. It is in fact really difficult to write a definition of sport that includes everything that a lot of people assume are sports and excludes what a lot of people think are not sports. Is golf a sport? How about competitive shooting? Both require physical activity, but not really exertion. (This reminds me of a cartoon my dad had on his office wall for the better part of two decades: A pair of golfers, with the title "Existential Golf" and the tag line "It is a sport, therefor we are athletes.")

As for the sports bashing. Again folks, why? If you think that big time college and professional sports have a negative influence on our society, that's one thing. Bashing sports in general as useless is another. I will tell you that I coach robotics, cross-country and track & field now (and have coached a variety of other sports) and most of the benefits I see from one I see from the others: learning the value of hard work, seeing the benefits of hard work, learning how to work in a team, learning to take personal responsibility for your actions, understanding the importance of getting your work in the classroom done and done well. Perhaps the most important lesson is learning to seek intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivation.

[JamesBrown]

I mean this as an honest question: have you ever been a student driver?

I thought that being a driver was physically demanding. It certainly got my heart rate up and exercised my circulatory system. Picking up and moving the robot over and over is quite an exercise, although arguably a side-effect of FRC and not directly part of the competition.

Yes, I have driven and coached.

Calling picking up ~1/2 of a 140lb robot and moving it <50ft maybe 50 times over the course of a couple of days is really pushing the definition of "quite an exercise" I think that you are really stretching here.

But what it DOES mean is that someone thinks that it qualifies as a sport. Someone who makes the programming decisions for that network/channel. You're right, I fail to understand how poker is a sport... but someone higher-up on both the named networks thinks it counts as one for whatever reason. Poker's physical exertion? Well, how much work does it take to put cards on the table?

No, it means that some one thought that they could sell advertising by playing it on their network. There are no FCC guidelies stating that something on a sports network must be a sport. If the network's target demographic will watch it then the network will put it on.

This really depends on the definition you use for sport. In looking at a total of 16 definitions from the 4 dictionaries in my office, 14 mention physical activity but only 3 mention exertion.



How many of these refer to what we are actually talking about? The english language is inherently complicated but I think we could knock out a bunch of those definitions pretty quickly.

[JamesCH95]

Yes, I have driven and coached.

Calling picking up ~1/2 of a 140lb robot and moving it <50ft maybe 50 times over the course of a couple of days is really pushing the definition of "quite an exercise" I think that you are really stretching here.

You're right, that is not a large amount of exercise. It was a bad expression to use.

It is, however, still physical exertion. It may not be a lot of exertion, but it is still expending energy.

[Laaba 80]

It is important to remember the differences between games and sports, in this case the lack of physical exertion is certainly one of them.

It is true that humans have no physical exertion during the game, but the robots are clearly physically exerting themselves. The robots are the athletes.

[JamesBrown]

It is true that humans have no physical exertion during the game, but the robots are clearly physically exerting themselves. The robots are the athletes.

Robots are not athletes. An athlete by definition is a person, our robots are equipment for playing a game, they are no closer to being athletes than a race car, a bike, or a pair of running shoes.

[JamesCH95]

It is true that humans have no physical exertion during the game, but the robots are clearly physically exerting themselves. The robots are the athletes.

I think that people are exerting energy during a match. Pushing a joystick or a button requires a force applied over a distance (energy) and therefore the driver is physically exerting energy. It may not be much, but it is greater than zero.

[Chris is me]

I think that people are exerting energy during a match. Pushing a joystick or a button requires a force applied over a distance (energy) and therefore the driver is physically exerting energy. It may not be much, but it is greater than zero.

That defines any game as a sport. Is there no distinction? I thought sport was a subset of game.

[sgreco]

I don't think FRC is a sport. A sport is an athletic activity, and FRC is certainly not that. There's been a lot debate about this in the past and people argue adamantly that FRC is sport as if it is some form of insult for FRC not to be classified as such. FRC is no better or worse being considered a sport as opposed to not being considered a sport, it's just different. People seem to think it's better to call it a sport; I think it doesn't make a difference, FRC is the same great program either way.

[JamesBrown]

I think that people are exerting energy during a match. Pushing a joystick or a button requires a force applied over a distance (energy) and therefore the driver is physically exerting energy. It may not be much, but it is greater than zero.

Seriously, I figured we had until january before we started lawyering things again.

[Laaba 80]

Robots are not athletes. An athlete by definition is a person, our robots are equipment for playing a game, they are no closer to being athletes than a race car, a bike, or a pair of running shoes.

An athlete is a person by definition, but this definition was created far before robots were capable of being "athletes". In breakaway, the robot must move, possess the ball, shoot the ball, pass the ball, etc all on its own power. The same things a human soccer "athlete" must do. Race cars and bikes are both for the sole purpose of transporting the person in the sport, they dont also need to interact with a ball, or whatever other game piece. I guess we can agree to disagree.

[JamesCH95]

That defines any game as a sport. Is there no distinction? I thought sport was a subset of game.

Hehe... you're right.

On the subject: a local high school awards varsity letters to the debate team. By their definition thinking and talking is a sport.

Where is the line drawn? Or is this is really a "I know it when I see it" definition?

[JamesBrown]

An athlete is a person by definition, but this definition was created far before robots were capable of being "athletes". In breakaway, the robot must move, possess the ball, shoot the ball, pass the ball, etc all on its own power. The same things a human soccer "athlete" must do. Race cars and bikes are both for the sole purpose of transporting the person in the sport, they dont also need to interact with a ball, or whatever other game piece. I guess we can agree to disagree.

Put an FRC robot on a field by itself, no human driving it, what will it do? Robots are still not capable of being athletes, the most sophisticated robots in the world are capable of playing games with varying degrees of success, FRC robots are not even capable of that. Without a human driver there were no robots in breakaway that could be considered athletes, they are really just machines. We are decades away from anything close to a machine that can reason and function well enough to force us to examine our definition of an athlete.

[JamesBrown]

Hehe... you're right.

On the subject: a local high school awards varsity letters to the debate team. By their definition thinking and talking is a sport.

Where is the line drawn? Or is this is really a "I know it when I see it" definition?

There are also schools that award letters for Robotics.

There is nothing that says Varsity letters must be given to sports teams. Varsity recognition is commonly given to the top team as an acknowledgement that they are the ones who officially represent that school in competition. Most commonly this looks at sports but certainly the definition could be extended to any athletic or academic team.

Just because someone (or some group) thinks it is a sport doesn't mean it is a sport (Fallacy of Appeal to Authority as your varsity debaters would tell you). I would be willing to bet that whoever wrote the justification to give Varsity letters to those students didn't use the arguement "It is a sport because talking, gesturing and writing all expend energy, therefore there is physical exertion, therefore it is a sport".

[JamesCH95]

There are also schools that award letters for Robotics.

There is nothing that says Varsity letters must be given to sports teams. Varsity recognition is commonly given to the top team as an acknowledgement that they are the ones who officially represent that school in competition. Most commonly this looks at sports but certainly the definition could be extended to any athletic or academic team.

Just because someone (or some group) thinks it is a sport doesn't mean it is a sport (Fallacy of Appeal to Authority as your varsity debaters would tell you). I would be willing to bet that whoever wrote the justification to give Varsity letters to those students didn't use the arguement "It is a sport because talking, gesturing and writing all expend energy, therefore there is physical exertion, therefore it is a sport".

Now who's lawyering... :rolleyes:

I'm kidding, don't worry.

I looked up the definition of a varsity letter, and it is awarded for excellence in school activities. My assumption that it was awarded to sports teams was incorrect.

I like your terms "athletic team" and "academic team." Do only athletic teams participate in sports or can academic teams participate in sports? Can there be some overlap? Maybe we need a Venn diagram...

I like mathking's example of precision shooting. I assume there is no significant stamina or endurance required, but it is considered an Olympic sport. FRC demands fine motor control and precise machine operation similar to shooting that other games do not (I'm looking at you Chris_is_me). Does the demand of good hand-eye coordination and fine motor skill qualify FRC as a sport? Does the fact that this machine exists in reality, rather than virtually (I'm thinking of video games here) make it a sport?

[Basel A]

This is baseless and completely inaccurate, as some one who played sports growing up, continues to play a sport at a high level and coaches and has coached youth through college programs I can assure you that sports have influenced many more kids than programs like FIRST have. Any one who thinks that the primary impact of sports on 99% of its participants has anything to do with on field results never has coached or been coached effectively.

I never had any doubt that this is true up to high school sports, but didn't believe in the positive outside effects of sports in college. However, I did some reading and it seems college-level student athletes have better academic experiences than I thought (outside of "revenue sports:" football and basketball).

While there's no doubt that collegiate athletics takes time away from academics and evidence that suggests it causes lower GPAs, most student-athletes believed that their athletic experience would aid them in post-college life and that's enough for me. The most relevant articles are cited below.

Kerr, G., & Miller, P. S. (2002). The athletic, academic and social experiences of intercollegiate student-athletes. Journal of Sport Behavior, 25.4, 346.

Potuto, J. R., & O'Hanlon, J. (2007). National Study of Student-athletes regarding their experiences as college students. College Student Journal, 41.4, 947.

Maloney, M. T., & McCormick, R. E. (1993). An Examination of the Role That Intercollegiate Athletic Participation Plays in Academic Achievement: Athletes' Feats in the Classroom. The Journal of Human Resources, 28.3, 555-570.

P.S. The distinction between revenue and non-revenue sports is important. Revenue sports are likely about just that: making money. Another study suggested athletic success brings more and better high-schooler applications to universities, and it's likely that this refers to the most publicised athletic successes: those of revenue sports. Non-revenue sports, however, are neither making lots of money nor bringing attention. They could have the primary goal of development of which you speak.

P.P.S. Did I do too much research?

[JaneYoung]

It can only be a sport if the brain power is a result of the mind's jungle gym of opportunistic uses when strengthening the goals of thinking outside the box and achieving those goals determined, short term and long term.

Yeah, run-on sentence. (That's going the distance... :) )

Jane

[mathking]

How many of these refer to what we are actually talking about? The english language is inherently complicated but I think we could knock out a bunch of those definitions pretty quickly.

I was actually only counting the definitions that pertained to what we are talking about. My point is not that robotics is a sport, or that it isn't. (I tend to come down on the "isn't" side, but don't think the distinction is that important.) My point is that it is very hard to come up with a definition of sport that includes and excludes everything one thinks should be included or excluded. I have actually used writing a definition of sport to include and exclude certain activities as an exercise in class when teaching about the difficulty you can run into when writing specifications.

To illustrate my point, take the number one Dictionary.com definition:
"an athletic activity requiring skill or physical prowess and often of a competitive nature, as racing, baseball, tennis, golf, bowling, wrestling, boxing, hunting, fishing, etc."
OK, if you extend "athletic activity" to include hunting and fishing, I think you can make a pretty good argument that operating a robot (and often being a human player) as is done in FRC competition fits the definition.

One of the natural tendencies at this point is to move more toward one of the OED definitions: "an activity involving physical exertion and skill in which an individual or team competes against another or others for entertainment" and to argue that say fishing doesn't require much real physical exertion. But a lot of people in this camp argue that something like NASCAR is not a sport, but race car driving involves a lot of physical exertion, more than a lot of activities which seem safely in the "sport" camp.

I loved the discussion in my class last year on this topic. It really engaged my students' critical thinking and argumentation skills.

I think my biggest argument against FRC being a sport is that only a handful of members of the team actually do any of the physical things to operate the robot (or fling the game elements) in competition. On the other hand, I still consider the football players who only practice and never get in a game to be athletes. And at least one person in this thread doesn't believe that one of the sports I coach and played in both HS and college (cross country) is a sport.

[Thundrio]

I have been hearing a lot about the definition of a sport lately, and it's an interesting topic.

For anybody interested in going deeper into this topic, there are some very interesting discussions happening about this topic but applied to Starcraft 2 (thread is at http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=288621), and I guess e-sports in general. For anybody who doesn't know, the real times strategy game Starcraft 2 is a growing e-sport (electronic sport) that has many professional players and tournaments with $50,000+ prize pools.

Personally I think in the most literal sense of the term FRC is not a sport, rather it is a competition (along with Starcraft). But it's an incredibly complicated topic that would take a while to cover thoroughly (I wish I hadn't already done my Senior research paper ~-~)

[Sconrad]

Put an FRC robot on a field by itself, no human driving it, what will it do? Robots are still not capable of being athletes, the most sophisticated robots in the world are capable of playing games with varying degrees of success, FRC robots are not even capable of that. Without a human driver there were no robots in breakaway that could be considered athletes, they are really just machines. We are decades away from anything close to a machine that can reason and function well enough to force us to examine our definition of an athlete.

Umm, that sounds an awful lot like autonomous...

Yes, I realize that a 15 second autonomous is far from complete artificial intelligence. That aside, I tend to agree with you that the robots are not athletes. Also, I'm not sure I see the point of arguing too much over whether or not FIRST is a sport, even on a financial level. I am a member of my school's marching band, and while we are not considered a sport, a lot of money goes into the program. It isn't close to the budget of the football team, but honestly, comparing a club's budget to a football team is never a good idea. If you compare the budget of a swimming team, which seems to fit all of the definitions of sports that have been posted so far, to a football team, the swimming team is going to come up way short almost without exception.

FIRST markets itself as a sport because many concepts often associated with sports, lots of extracurricular hours, exciting spectator events, and the development of talents within the athlete/student, to list a couple, are part of FIRST. Currently, most people categorize extracurricular activities as clubs or sports. To call FIRST a club does it a gross injustice, as the vast majority of clubs fail to provide the excitement and motivation that FIRST provides. While FIRST is not necessarily the epitome of a sport, sport is definitely a better classification of FIRST than club. In reality, FIRST falls into an interesting niche that cannot really be classified definitively as a sport or as a club. IMHO, this has a lot to do with the fact that FIRST seeks to emulate and expose students to the professional world, using the excitement of a sporting event as a cover for this purpose.

As a side note, I think you guys are focusing way too much on student drivers. The position of student driver is rarely held by anywhere close to the majority of students on the team. I don't think I saw any posts mentioning either the scouting or the spectator aspect. While these are not part of most dictionary definitions, they are a key part of the connotation of what is a sport.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents

[LemmingBot]

I think its a sport in the same way horse racing is a sport.
. Several humans are committed in making one champion horse/robot
. Victory depends on how well the driver/jockey can play off their bot's/horse's strengths.
. Extremely long registration names

[gegozi]

Oh, and I forgot: WAYYY back in the day, ESPN showed the FIRST Robotics Competition Nationals. Back in the 90's, or so I hear.

1996. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8N6lnle1fc

I wish ESPN would do this in more recent years.

EDIT: We should petition ESPN to do this.

[MikLast]

1996. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8N6lnle1fc

I wish ESPN would do this in more recent years.

EDIT: We should petition ESPN to do this.

There are much better channels with wider audiences now. lets think bigger.

[Hgree56]

I saw this post start to get more activity.

At my high school, our team has pushed for us to be considered a sport like the soccer teams, football team, or swim team. We considered these three teams to be our most hard working teams here. We compared ourselves to all three teams in multiple ways but my personal favorite was over all time each student spends for that sport during a 6 week period (6 weeks=goals).

The boy's soccer team (which I was a member of) had 3 to 5 practices a week plus games. We estimated roughly 12 to 14 hours spent with the soccer team. Football was around 16 to 18. Swim was about 25 hours a week.
Our schedule had our robotics students spending close to 21 hours a week over 6 weeks with the team.

After presenting this to our school's Principle, he got some of the "clubs" to now be considered "Sports of the Mind." Robotics led the way. Speech, Science Olympiad, and Spell Bowl are now all also Sports of the Mind here.

We aren't a sport, but we aren't a club. We're a team that builds robots and competes against other schools across our state and the world. That's all that matters to us.

[Drakxii]

It's a team based athletic* competition so it's a sport in my mind.

*Human players, transporting the bot and fixing/building the bot.

[Jon Stratis]

There are much better channels with wider audiences now. lets think bigger.

I somewhat agree with this... The problem with getting airtime is looking at what that channel is NOT playing during that time as a result. Channels With wider audiences would probably see too much of FIRST as a ratings hit against their normal programming. The nice thing about ESPN in late April is that there isn't too much going on - March Madness is over, Baseball hasn't started yet, football is a distant dream, hockey is finished. It makes for some available airtime.

However, with the inclusion of Disney Imagineering helping with the game design this year, I could see a broadcast happening on Disney affiliates, and there are a lot of them! How cool would it be to have:

FLL Jr on the Disney Junior or ABC Kids channel
FLL on the Disney Channel
FTC on ABC Family
FRC on ABC or ESPN

All channels owned by Disney... And all with target audiences in the same age range our programs target. Building a close relationship with Disney could let us take over the airwaves for a day or two during champs! I'd love to see it happen, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Paul Copioli]

Some of you have asked, "why does it matter?".

While it doesn't matter to me as I participate in both traditional sports (swimming & golf) and robotics (FRC and VEX IQ as a coach), it does matter to some State organizations.

In Texas, for example, UIL has two distinct classifications: UIL Athletics and UIL Academics. FRC is currently considered an Academic UIL activity and not a sport, as some may think.

Some of us believe it should be part of UIL Athletics, but the State disagreed.

This is but one example. There could be more.

[pmangels17]

There are much better channels with wider audiences now. lets think bigger.

I have no actual idea of what ESPN's motives were to broadcast Nationals (yes, Nationals) back in the day, but I'd wager it has to do with:
1. ESPN still trying to solidify its position as a major network contender
2. ESPN trying to expand to a variety of programming
3. Disney owning ESPN, and showing a massive event at EPCOT (a Disney Theme Park), as a way to promote themselves as well as FIRST


We should push for more TV coverage for FIRST, that is not an unrealistic goal. However, we need to somehow make it as marketable and profitable for companies as possible to show us on TV in order for that to happen. Battlebots proved that a show about violent robots can hold people's attention for weeks at a time, we should be able to keep the public excited for all of Championship Weekend. As long as the GDC keeps churning out games that are exciting to watch, challenging to design for and play, and easy to follow (games like Rebound Rumble and Ultimate Ascent), these goals are within reach. I think the medieval theming and Team Standards this year will help tie everything in together for more people as well, which is another step towards marketability.

[pmangels17]

I should add also that if we can get FIRST to be on TV, that might go a long way towards convincing schools that FRC is indeed a sport, or at least something worth as much investment and promotion as sports get, which I think is the main reason we want FRC to be seen as a sport in the first place.

[JoshWilson]

FRC is a sport, because we put in just as much time and energy, if not more, than everyone else, plus it's exciting to watch and participate in.
I think it would be great if we could get FRC on public television. It would help convince more schools to have teams, would let more people become interested in it, and would promote STEM, which is one of FIRST's goals.
People liked Battlebots, and if the GDC continues to make games exciting and interesting, I think it could really attract an audience. Just as long as there isn't any more games like recycle rush, because that wasn't to exciting.

The only problem I see however,is deciding which events to show, unless they do it by region.

Also, shoutout to gegozi for re-awaking the thread

[marshall]

I was talking with a friend about sports today and when I brought up how FRC is a sport, he disagreed. He explained that because we aren't required to be athletic and endure physical punishement like in lacrosse, football, soccer and other physical enduring sports that you can't say FRC is a sport. This argument is coming from someone who has never experienced the FRC and FIRST environment. I want to know from you what makes FRC and/or FIRST a sport.

To say that all those who play sports must be "athletic and endure physical punishement" completely dismisses the role of teamwork that is so fundamental in most sports, particularly ours. It is also denigrating to the role of coaches, strategists, and engineers.

It takes teams of engineers to make bikes out of carbon fiber for The Tour de France. The best teams have customized equipment that has spent many hours in wind tunnels at great expense and if anyone doesn't think those engineers didn't put blood, sweat, and tears into their work then they've never laid up carbon fiber.

How about the time spent engineering Football helmets so they can absorb impact and the players don't crush their spines? How about the never-ending playbooks that are meticulously crafted by coaches for soccer and hockey teams? Think these don't matter in sport and that a team is entirely dependent on just the players to carry them? Think again. Championship winning teams combine all elements into an all-inclusive package.

There is also a link between mental stress and physical health. Ask any FRC drive team that has played in eliminations/playoffs about the link between the two. It is very real. Being hyped up on adrenaline is one thing but knowing how to control your actions while in that zone is a whole different ball game. Formula 1 and NASCAR drivers put themselves through physical training regimens that rival those of triathlon athletes (and some of them even compete in those too!). FRC drive teams would not be amiss in having their drivers healthy and fit as well and there are teams that do this.

My personal heroes of sport aren't the guys most likely to be captured on film and in the media stories written about the events. They are the coaches, the strategists, the engineers behind the scenes making sure that every piece is lined up to perfection and that the players know their parts and are so well rehearsed that the act of competition, despite being special in every way, is just another day at the office.

[JoshWilson]

To say that all those who play sports must be "athletic and endure physical punishement" completely dismisses the role of teamwork that is so fundamental in most sports, particularly ours. It is also denigrating to the role of coaches, strategists, and engineers.

It takes teams of engineers to make bikes out of carbon fiber for The Tour de France. The best teams have customized equipment that has spent many hours in wind tunnels at great expense and if anyone doesn't think those engineers didn't put blood, sweat, and tears into their work then they've never laid up carbon fiber.

How about the time spent engineering Football helmets so they can absorb impact and the players don't crush their spines? How about the never-ending playbooks that are meticulously crafted by coaches for soccer and hockey teams? Think these don't matter in sport and that a team is entirely dependent on just the players to carry them? Think again. Championship winning teams combine all elements into an all-inclusive package.

There is also a link between mental stress and physical health. Ask any FRC drive team that has played in eliminations/playoffs about the link between the two. It is very real. Being hyped up on adrenaline is one thing but knowing how to control your actions while in that zone is a whole different ball game. Formula 1 and NASCAR drivers put themselves through physical training regimens that rival those of triathlon athletes (and some of them even compete in those too!). FRC drive teams would not be amiss in having their drivers healthy and fit as well and there are teams that do this.

My personal heroes of sport aren't the guys most likely to be captured on film and in the media stories written about the events. They are the coaches, the strategists, the engineers behind the scenes making sure that every piece is lined up to perfection and that the players know their parts and are so well rehearsed that the act of competition, despite being special in every way, is just another day at the office.

Now THAT is what I call a good argument!

[T3_1565]

My personal heroes of sport aren't the guys most likely to be captured on film and in the media stories written about the events. They are the coaches, the strategists, the engineers behind the scenes making sure that every piece is lined up to perfection and that the players know their parts and are so well rehearsed that the act of competition, despite being special in every way, is just another day at the office.

As a long time coach for Martial Arts and someone who takes all of my studies and techniques for coaching and apply them to FRC students as well as fighters, I appreciate this post greatly.

[logank013]

I personally don't consider robotics a sport. I do think that FRC is very borderline to a sport but most members on a team can not be considered athletes.

I have one problem that I can't see past when considering robotics a sport. When you look at this definition brought up in an earlier post, I totally agree with everything he said when breaking down the definition.

Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition Defines Sport as:


Lets break it down piece by piece:
an individual or group activity I don't think anyone will argue this.
pursued for exercise or pleasure I don't know about your team, but our team has fun, and derives pleasure from seeing the robot compete.
often involving the testing of physical capabilities and taking the form of a competitive game The basic structure of FIRST competitions is a competitive game. Further, it is a test of physical capabilities - of the robot, not the student.

It's a question of how you define the competitor in the activity. If your friend has any doubts that your robot is a fierce competitor that requires all the athleticism and endurance he thinks of in sports, first show him a video of a hard-hitting match. Then tell him he can stand in for one of the robots, and you'll have paramedics standing by to reattach his severed limbs when he's done :p

But there is something drastically missing when thinking like this. When I compare robotics to football, they are so super similar. Let me break it down. In Football, You have a set of rules that tend to change in some sort of way from year to year. Essentially, you have a team of coaches and general managers who are trying to figure out what they can do to their team to figure out how to play the game the best. They scout out players and see who they can pick up or see who they can draft to make their team great. Each player has some set of abilities that gets them noticed and that is how the general manager chooses who they want. Then, their team is pretty much set in stone and they can make little tweeks to their team throughout the season to try to get the perfect team for playoffs.

Now let's look at FRC. You see, we are like the coaches. We get the game manual or the set of rules that we have to follow and we have to break them down to see what abilities our robots need in order to make our robot great. Don't you see now that each little part of our robot is like a player in the game of football. Then, we have scouts. The scouts jobs are to look out for robots who have certain abilities that they need in order to make the alliance great. Each robot that is drafted is made up of several different little players. One robot may be the offense. The second robot may be the defense. The third robot may be the special robot or the special teams robot.

So now the real question comes down to this. Would you ever think that the general manager is playing the game of football? Of course not! He isn't on the field during those 60 minutes of regulation. Now of course, he does impact the team. So do the coaches. They impact the team which is why they are so important to the game of football. That is why they get payed a similar salary as football players. Do you understand what I'm saying? We are the coaches, managers, and scouts of a football team. Our robot is the team. As the general managers of our robot, we choose what we want our robot to do but once we design and build it (Just like actual football coaches and GMs do!), our team or our robot does all the work. The only "athletes" I'd consider in FRC are those on the drive team. They work with the robot and they have to have split second analysis's to make a decision. Those 3 or 4 student are the ones they deserve the title of a sport. Those 3 or 4 are the ones that should be getting the sport letter in high school. Should the coaches of our sports team get sport letters? No! that's why they don't. So if most of the robotics team are coaches and general managers, why should we expect to get sports letters?

My Final analysis is that FRC is built very much like a sport. Most of the arguments brought up about FRC being a sport is the fact that many team member want to be considered athletes. Are we athletes? Should we be getting the same letter on our jackets as Football players? I say no to both of those. I think that robotics has 3 or 4 athletes per team. Those 3 or 4 people are those who are the drive team. The rest of us in FRC are like the Coaches, General Managers, and Scouts of NFL teams. With that said, we are a structured club. Not to be considered athletes of a sport. We are super important to FRC but once our robots are deigned, our robots are the ones who actually play the sport. Our pit team is like the doctors and medical staff in the locker room. Our Scouting team is the set of scouts and GM who are trying to figure out who to draft to make our team better. Our Drive team members are a mixture of the Coaches, Coordinators, and football players who are the ones who make the tough calls and last second decisions when playing. That is my analysis of comparing robotics to football.

The real question that should be asked isn't "Is FRC a sport?". It should be "Do you consider yourself an athlete?" and I think anyone who isn't on the drive team isn't really an athlete when at a robotics event. Opinion's? Thanks

[Zaque]

I would say FIRST is more of a sport of the mind than an actual sport. I have been very active in both physical sports(soccer, football, basketball, etc.) and sports of the mind(FIRST, poker, chess, etc.).

While I love FIRST it doesn't compare to a physical sport in the type of adrenaline you get when competing. Now I'm not saying you/I don't get pumped up and excited and nervous and all that comes with competing but its not the same as working up a sweat and knocking down a game winning 3 pointer or something like that.

FIRST is a sport its just a different form of a sport.

Have you ever been behind the glass? Not to be rude, just asking to try and understand your perspective. Every time I go behind the glass, I get more of an adrenaline rush than from anything I have ever done on my high school sports teams. Especially in the eliminations, when the outcome can effect the rest of your season, it really kicks in. Scoring the game-winning point (or missing it by this much) is worth even more to me than anything from a "traditional" sport, even if I don't work up a sweat.

[bobjones227]

The real question that should be asked isn't "Is FRC a sport?". It should be "Do you consider yourself an athlete?" and I think anyone who isn't on the drive team isn't really an athlete when at a robotics event. Opinion's? Thanks

As a pit scouter and match strategy person, I view FRC as being a sport. There's more to a sport than the players/athletes (Drive Team). People in the stands are often taking data on competing teams, I'm going to other teams and making a strategy for the upcoming matches, and the pit crew helps repair the robot. Everyone is part of the team. I know the definition may not specifically state something like FRC as a "sport", but it definitely requires a great deal of teamwork and dedication, much like any other sport.

I hope this didn't come off as overly aggressive.

[matthewdenny]

If you are among the large group of people that consider motorsports to be sports, then robotics is very similar.

Both involve a group of people that build a machine that is driven by someone in their group in a competition against others.

In both cases both the design and manufacturing of your machine are critical as well as the gameday driving. The only difference I see is that we dont drive our machines while sitting in them, and that seems to be not significant.

[logank013]

As a pit scouter and match strategy person, I view FRC as being a sport. There's more to a sport than the players/athletes (Drive Team). People in the stands are often taking data on competing teams, I'm going to other teams and making a strategy for the upcoming matches, and the pit crew helps repair the robot. Everyone is part of the team. I know the definition may not specifically state something like FRC as a "sport", but it definitely requires a great deal of teamwork and dedication, much like any other sport.

I hope this didn't come off as overly aggressive.

It wasn't aggressive. So do you consider yourself an athlete. I can accept if people call FRC a sport, but I won't consider anyone besides the drive team as athletes. And I'm in a similar situation to you as I'm basically the team's Head strategist.

[cmrnpizzo14]

copying what I said in another post.....


Woo! My time to shine!

About me: I am currently a division one rower at a highly competitive university (top 5 in the US), studying mechanical engineering and computer science. I rowed all through high school while being on my school's FRC team. I was founding member of the FRC team, eventual captain and would like to consider myself one of the most dedicated people we had. I was also the captain of my rowing team.

I'll use a couple different standards of comparison here, I'll try my best to compare these without too much bias either way!

TIME:

Personally, my rowing team took more time in high school. I know that our FRC team did not meet as much as other teams. We only met Tuesday/Thursday for 3 hours each and then Saturday 9-5. Obviously during the end of the season it stepped up and we met more but generally my rowing team would practice 2.5 hours a day for 6 days a week.
Additionally, rowing was in season during the fall and the spring with offseason training in the winter while FRC only had regular meetings during winter and throughout our competition season.

EFFORT:

This one is pretty equivalent. I would say that rowing is much much more physically demanding while it requires very little mentally. Obviously robotics is the exact opposite here. I think that designing a system for the bot versus training towards a goal time isn't a very fair comparison here. One is a very long term goal that requires months of effort while another is a very short term but pretty stressful process. This one I can't confidently compare.

ATMOSPHERE:

To clarify here, this is just how the team feels. This one is definitely different. I think that both teams are close. I had best friends on both of my teams in high school. I would have to say that my rowing team as a whole might have been a little bit closer but that would just have come from spending more time together. Additionally, the sports team bond is actually kind of close to what is depicted in movies. You all share in the misery of training and losing and the euphoria of winning. At times this feels stronger than that on an FRC team because training is putting yourself through quite a bit of physical pain where as the design process is (in my opinion) still pretty fun regardless of the outcome! I think that I would have to sum up my relationship with my FRC teammates as being slightly more on the professional side where as I might have actually been closer with my rowing friends.

Summary: I would say about equal in all things except time! This will vary team to team but in my experience my sport took more time.



EDIT: Looking at the post that started this discussion again... you're high school swim team practices 25 hours a week?? That seems a little exaggerated to me. Also the reason that practices aren't longer is it physically is not beneficial past a point. What good is a football team that can't walk onto the field because they have beat themselves up too much in practice. Even weight training before Junior or Senior year of high school can be very detrimental to an athlete. No one has ever injured themselves by thinking too much about their robot.

[GeeTwo]

Louisiana is the "Sportsman's Paradise" - says so on our license plates. So hunting and fishing are sports, to some at least. Opening a few dictionaries and web sites and trawling through the previous posts, it seems that an activity being a sport includes some number of the following attributes (which ones vary by individual, of course). Personally, I think that any list that does not include baseball and tennis is right out, but some people insist on full body contact. Much like PAR_WIG1350 posted four years ago (#22), I understand "sport" to be like "jazz" - I can't define it, but I know it when I see it. This list is not necessarily complete, but I tried to think of all I've read and seen:


Competition

Teams
Interaction between the competitors
Requires a combination of skill, practice, and luck
Formal rules

Athleticism

Physical activity
Extreme physical exertion
Physical fatigue
Contact

Full Body Contact
Possibility of Injury

Dedication "above and beyond"

Strategy

"Game Plans"
"Adjustments"
"Fluid Strategies" - the possibility for new strategies to displace the tried-and-true
Taking calculated/considered risks

Spectators (who are not competitors or family/friends, especially if revenue is generated)
Sportsmanship (grace in competition, victory, and defeat)
Motivation: Pursued for pleasure or exercise



The bottom line is that unless you decide that a "sport" includes one (or more) of these attributes:


Extreme physical exertion of a human as opposed to a "built athlete" (and in some cases this is in question, esp. with the HP)
Contact/Full Body Contact of humans
Spectators (paying, or at least who are not competing, nor their family and friends)

FRC qualifies. I haven't crunched the numbers, but I'll bet a steak dinner that a majority of Olympic events (both winter and summer) fail at least three of these tests (first entry that disproves this only).

[bobjones227]

It wasn't aggressive. So do you consider yourself an athlete. I can accept if people call FRC a sport, but I won't consider anyone besides the drive team as athletes. And I'm in a similar situation to you as I'm basically the team's Head strategist.
I don't consider myself as an athlete in the physical way. Team members really aren't "athletes" if we're only regarding the physical side of sports. But many teams do put in the dedication that many athletes put into their own sport. I do agree that the drive team should definitely be thought of as athletes, as they do a great deal before and during competitions, especially when matches are close together. The other team members are what I consider the supporters of the team, as they provide many key roles, whether they cheer in the stands or repair the robot down in the pits. Even the people in the stands are taking data on all the matches that go on. But yes, I would not go as far as to call all people in FRC "athletes." I can see why some people would do to the competition of the games and teamwork required, but that's the only real qualifications that FRC has, unless I'm not seeing any more that are out there.

[bobjones227]

copying what I said in another post.....


I would say that rowing is much much more physically demanding while it requires very little mentally.

I myself row, and I personally find that you have to be mentally strong to keep rowing during a race or hard workout. It takes a lot to push yourself to your full potential, even after you've rowed 1500m, and you're arms feel like jelly, and your legs ache. It just takes mental strength to completely zone in on the race, and to continue pushing yourself, in my opinion.

[Sperkowsky]

I should keep a drive doc with standard responses for these recurring threads.

[cmrnpizzo14]

I myself row, and I personally find that you have to be mentally strong to keep rowing during a race or hard workout. It takes a lot to push yourself to your full potential, even after you've rowed 1500m, and you're arms feel like jelly, and your legs ache. It just takes mental strength to completely zone in on the race, and to continue pushing yourself, in my opinion.

I think of it as being a different type of mental exertion. I consider the mental exertion in rowing to be more of an exercise in "how little can you think?" or "how much can you ignore what's happening around you?" where as FIRST is much more of a standard mental exertion where you are trying to create things within your mind.

[T3_1565]

I think of it as being a different type of mental exertion. I consider the mental exertion in rowing to be more of an exercise in "how little can you think?" or "how much can you ignore what's happening around you?" where as FIRST is much more of a standard mental exertion where you are trying to create things within your mind.

pushing past physical limitations through mental exertion I would argue is much more difficult then your saying it is. Its very hard to overcome your bodie's instincts. Takes a lot of practice.

That being said, Creative exertion is just as difficult. They are just two different sides of the same coin. Both equally taxing on your mind when pushing your limits.

[cmrnpizzo14]

pushing past physical limitations through mental exertion I would argue is much more difficult then your saying it is. Its very hard to overcome your bodie's instincts. Takes a lot of practice.

That being said, Creative exertion is just as difficult. They are just two different sides of the same coin. Both equally taxing on your mind when pushing your limits.

Having done a lot of both, it just seems different. With pushing past physical limitations, the key is to never let yourself slip up and allow yourself to quit. Once you do that, it's almost impossible to push past that point again. With design, it's the same struggle of never letting yourself get pigeon-holed or too attached to your idea at any stage. If you can't separate yourself from your idea, then you will never look at it honestly and logically during evaluations.

[T3_1565]

Having done a lot of both, it just seems different. With pushing past physical limitations, the key is to never let yourself slip up and allow yourself to quit. Once you do that, it's almost impossible to push past that point again. With design, it's the same struggle of never letting yourself get pigeon-holed or too attached to your idea at any stage. If you can't separate yourself from your idea, then you will never look at it honestly and logically during evaluations.

Absolutely, that's what I mean by two sides of the same coin. They are different. But both are equally difficult. :)