[dtk]

Many people have already expounded on the educational benefits to the teams who employ practice robots. Also the concerns of less funded teams who don't want to give away any more ground to the big budget teams is also valid. Perhaps there's another solution and it's one we have already tried.

Very few, if any, people will argue that being able to utilize a practice robot during the entire competition season (March/April) does not improve the performance and overall quality of a robot. It is inevitable that given extra time software will improve, mechanical issues will be solved, and drivers will become better able to control the machine. Thus if everyone had a practice robot the quality of robots attending competitions would be higher than it currently is. If no one gets any extra practice time it is likely the overall quality would decline. Whether it would be a large change is immaterial the point is simply that more time with robots leads to a higher level of competition.

Now for a question. Is it more inspiring, not only to current team members but to everyone watching and judging the program, to have robots that are well driven, break down less often, and can do what they are designed to do or, instead, to have more than a few robots who fail to even drive successfully in a match? Please don't take this to mean that I think a poor performing robot does not inspire those who worked on it, but, rather, that to many people, especially those who have not already been through the program it will certainly be more inspiring when the level of play is high.

To me a solution that brings up the level of the competition is infinitely preferable to one that is likely to bring it down. So, since some teams are unable to build a second robot to practice with why not let everyone have access to their primary robot. This is akin to some years ago when a repair/retest/practice period was included after each regional. Sure there are still problems, and many details that would need to be addressed. But, allowing teams a few days with their robot after each competition does some to level the playing field while giving everyone a chance to improve on their robot.

The major concern that FIRST seems to have with this solution is that it in essence lengthens the "build" phase of the season. This in turn increases the stress on the mentors and students who may then feel compelled to increase their time commitment. However there is no reason that every team MUST utilize any additional time with the primary robot. The fact of the matter is right now the teams that want the extra time and have the resources to get it are already lengthening the build season and many of them find it to also increase the benefits of the program. All adding access to primary robots would do is to allow other teams that wish to do the same, but lack the finances to also get this opportunity. Those who wish to abstain as they are doing now would still be free to do so. It's just that the option would be available to everyone.

As far as leveling the playing field goes. It is impossible to make the argument that a highly resourced veteran team would not be able to make more improvements or get better practice (VIA a full practice field) in this time period than a low budget rookie. So the "Have" teams will most assuredly still have an advantage, but the point is they have it anyway. The benefit of allowing access to the primary robot is small to a team that already learns 99% of what they were going to by using a practice robot. However the benefit to a team with no practice robot can be huge. Therefore despite being a rule which will continue inequity among teams it will reduce the gap and, as removing the gap is impossible, reducing it is the next best thing.

-Daniel Kimura