Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DeepWater
What about competition classes? I have felt for a long time now that the divide between the "have" and "have not" teams and the rookie and veteran teams is getting wider and wider. I see more and more use of sophisticated equipment like CNC and water jet machines which really increases that gap. It is really getting harder and harder for the little teams to be competitive. This one reason I really love the kitbot chassis and transmissions and drop in wheels from IFI and all of the wonderful products AndyMark markets specifically toward teams that may not have the resources to build their own. With the increase in popularity of FRC (well over 1000 teams this year) maybe it is time to start thinking of breaking up the FRC competitions into classes. Why not have a separate beginner/rookie only class, an advanced/veteran & rookie (if they want to) class, and then maybe even an "unlimited"/open class where either can compete together and some of the restrictive/penalty/materials (but not safety) rule don't apply? Or maybe an amateur vs. open sort of classes like in other sports? You can compete in the amateur class until you have reached some measure of success (i.e. competed for 3 years, or won a Regional, Chairman's Award, etc.).
|
That's an interesting thought that I think merits further consideration. Unfortunately there are many here who will insist that this program is NOT about the competition and that any effort to balance or classify the participants is useless. I am one that feels that "the competition" is very much needed in FIRST, if for no other reason than to draw in more "outsiders". The competition is the carrot for many of us, and it is certainly the more (and possibly only) exciting part of FIRST for those not directly participating.
While I do understand and agree that the larger goal of FIRST is to inspire sutdents to recognize their potential for a rewarding science/technical/engineering career, the action and the
"more exciting parts of FIRST" are required to keep us growing and attracting new schools, communities and corporations (they want people to see those logos on the robots).
Getting back on topic, and regarding R17, I feel strongly that the rules should be as simple as possible while accomplishing the
important goals of FIRST (Basically, give us the extra "fix-it-window" time or don't, but don't be so picky about how or when it is used). The GDC and rules committee should avoid long, drawn out, complicated rules for trivial issues (and I DO feel they have done an outstanding job this year overall).
Mentors and other volunteers in all areas are also desperately needed if FIRST is to continue growing and thriving. And the more difficult and frustrating you make the experience for them (us), the more difficult it will be to find and retain good people to do this work.