[Mark Sheridan]

I have followed 1114 guidelines for picking a driver. I try to pick students who are mature, good under pressure, deep knowledge of the inner workings of the robot, good communication, and committed to to give everything they got. I also like at least one driver that can program as well. 3309 was very lucky to pull off a practice robot this year. The drivers I picked this year were very determined to practice. They would set up our practice area after school before the mentors even showed up.

I avoid driver trials because I don't think they are a good measure of a drivers potential. A good driver needs to practice and develop over time. One trial won't show me anything. I try to find students who will become good drivers.

I did this also when I was on 766. In 2005 we accidentally did this. I was a high school senior at the time and we pretty much knew who our driver was before the build season. We may have had a drivers trial, but I distinctly remember we chose our driver for his contributions during the season, his knowledge of the game, and his cool under pressure. It was a good choice because it was 766's best season ever. The 2006-2007 driver was picked under similar circumstances.

However in 2008, pressure from students and parents forced a return of the driver trials. This lead to a student who "won" who was un-coachable, panicky and unfocused. I think the current method was reestablished in 766 on the 2010 season which also was the toughest driver selection i ever was part of. I had two really good students who wanted the be the drivetrain operator. I wound up using a race to act as a tie breaker but I still feel bad that I had to make that difficult choice.

I hope for 3309 in the fall to use an off season event and a practice chassis to see who has potential. I already have a short list of potential students who I think can be on the drive team. If we ever start up a vex team or two, the selection pool should be very intreasting.