Quote:
Originally Posted by iRobot_
I agree this game is exciting to watch in eliminations, but I think the worst aspect of this game is this whole tether nonsense. Teams who struggled in their first event were able to add a ramp with some string, and all the sudden the robot can now put up stacks consistently. While I am happy the robot can now succeed at what it was meant to do, I think it moves away from one of the core aspects on FIRST, ingenuity. Teams can spend about 4 minutes designing a ramp instead of trying to fix the robot they originally built. FIRST should have mandated at least a motorized component on any part of a robot attached by a tether to help combat the abuse of the rule.
|
I would say adapting to a rule that allows for your team to go from ineffective to highly effective requires a high amount of ingenuity. Plenty of teams have attempted ramps and failed with them. Others have succeeded and I commend them for it. I know exactly where you are coming from though. If I'm an audience member who is viewing a FIRST match for the first time, and I'm watching a robot with a string tied to it I'm asking myself how that is considered 1 robot? It won't make sense to me. This confusing element makes it more difficult to explain the game to people outside of FIRST. It isn't an issue where you point fingers at the teams. It's an issue where you question the rule which makes it an allowable practice. This rule is obviously the lack of frame perimeter restrictions. Besides confusing ramps, this rule has also generated some of the most innovative and inspiring robots I've seen in FIRST. Just rewatch Batman and Robin, or check out 1987's amazing robot. It's a rule that has obvious benifits and pitfalls. To repeat though, a team doesn't have any less ingenuity just because they build a tethered ramp.