[EvanG]

It is disappointing to me that you are likely implying that my old team 177, and their alliance were intentionally designed and built to ram and destroy. If this is what you truly think, you put to waste the 6 hard weeks they spent at the same time you did, to develop a sturdy machine that accomplished the game's goals how they felt the game would be played.

It is safe to say that every team out there put their all into accomplishing this game. 177 has for years been revamping their drive train to the point where if you ask around, it is something we're known for. This year, we put a ball collector and 3-point shooter on top of that to what I would like to believe are stunning results. Our students are taught from the start about building rigid designs because many years in the past we had a similar learning experience to what you guys have had when we took a brutal hit and spent our short times out just trying to fix a gear or piece that took hours in the shop to put together. I clearly hope that you learn from this in the future as we have and potentially incorporate it into your design rather than downplay the significance of other team designs.

It is immature to not have expected robot on robot interaction to be at its peak this year. From the very beginning, FIRST has pointed out they wanted to add a more sporty feel to the games and they have been slowly year after year. This year they even went so far as to say robots were going to be hitting robots, and that it was highly recommendable that you build bumpers. The rules even specify, "AIM HIGH is a highly interactive game," and "If two ROBOTs choose not to use bumpers, and they contact such that simultaneous contact occurs both in and out of the BUMPER ZONE, then this contact is considered within the BUMPER ZONE." As far as I recall, in previous years, this much freedom and encouragement to develop and use bumpers was not seen.

That's not to say that your teams did not develop stunning robots. To say the least they were fantastic in design and build. But a lack of bumpers clearly brought your frame to the test. Rather than having any robot to robot blows dissipated through a bumper and then through a larger piece of your frame, a blow without a bumper would clearly pressurize parts of a frame and as sturdy as metal is... look at cars that take hits from the side.

Overall, I would like to assume that you take FIRST as a learning experience and a worldly design class rather than a disappointment. Not everything is beauty, not everything is strength. Every robot must clearly find the right middle line where human interaction with that bot ultimately achieves the game's design. Which leads me to add human drivers not being behind the wheel of the robot, instead being a ways away must be able to dance with their robot and assume it will take the brunt of the weight they can inflict upon it. Therefore, it must take the brunt of pressure inflicted.

It was an honor to see my old team play against you, and you guys put up a great opposition that kept me on the edge of my seat for the entire length of the matches. It was great to see you play in your QP matches and I knew from the start you guys would be going far in eliminations. Best of luck in the future with all your endeavors and competitions.

Sorry for the lengthy post, sadly, I've noticed that many teams are starting to take the same assumption about FIRST. Hopefully, it covers all the bases on this arguement.