[archiver]

Posted by Gui Cavalcanti at 04/27/2001 8:35 PM EST


Student on team #422, Mech Tech, from Governor's School (GSGIS) and Verizon.


In Reply to: Back to Defense for a minute.
Posted by Andy Grady on 04/27/2001 8:11 PM EST:



I'd like to add to your statements if I may... (even though they were VERY well said; these are directed to the "Defense, A Fancy Word for Poor Ability post, not to Andy's)

Defense (and any other "easy" jobs) should not be frowned upon. Also, the teams that made defensive robots (especially in 2000) might not have had a $30,000+ budget, a team of engineers that you couldn't count on two hands, and all the genius that their portion of the state could provide. In 2000, the Catch-22s (now my Mech Techs) tried to pull off a miracle. They got a portion of some old chemistry lab at VCU to share with 3 other teams, and all of 10 of us pulled so many all-nighters to make a robot work. With no experience and all of 2 engineers, the Catch-22s pulled together a bunch of spare parts, drilled holes in all of them, and worked on that robot until it was scheduled for it's first match (and then some). We only had a $15,000 budget. We got into finals because we could play defense and not offense (because our offense consisted of loading 5 or 6 balls then getting away), but we did it.

So what if it was poor ability? Not everyone has top-grade engineers, five machine shops, and a massive budget that puts robotics programs in place for all the schools in the surrounding area. If you give rookie teams easier jobs, they get more experience because they build on what they learn.

What happens if next year your robot breaks down completely and that's all you can play? Would you consider it be poor ability and bad effort?

-Gui Cavalcanti
Team 422, Mech Techs
Richmond, Virginia

PS: As with Andy's post, I apologize if I have offended anyone. They are only my opinions from what I have experienced.