Battlebots I.Q.- A serious threat to FIRST or a half thought up cheep copy?

[Greg Perkins]

BBIQ has been around since 2002. The reason your probably havent heard much about it is because BattleBots (inc) had a downfall with comedycentral and lost all of it publicity. BBIQ isnt what you think, Yes it is combat bots...but it give highschoolers that other option if they dont want to build their bots in a huge team (ie FIRST). The expression is good here....Dont knock it until you try it.

[IMDWalrus]

If this has already been discussed, I apologize; it's a long topic, and I could have very well overlooked concepts or posts while I was reading it.

Originally Posted by Matt Attallah

I think Battlebots will become big when robot technology can be reached to everyone, including in low-income homes. Look at wrestling, that is a huge violent sport, and look how big it has become. When RC controllers, micro-chips&processors, etc... come down, i do think eveyone will be out for robots like battle bots. Hey, it's in human nature, when, for the most part, BIG things happen, they usually are violent, and everyone wants to know what happened...

It's worth pointing out - again - that the VEX kits will probably hit that level of affordability far before the BBIQ equivalent. Unless their marketing strategy is like Apple's, where a product is announced days or weeks before ship instead of months in advance, the VEX kits will definitely beat them to the market.

I probably shouldn't be voicing an opinion on BBIQ; I know next to nothing about the program. In this thread, however, people have mentioned that BBIQ doesn't require a new robot every year. I can see that leading to teams either using one design year after year or using one robot and patching it up as needed. The level of learning involved there pales in comparison to what FIRST demands every year.

I know that that's not how every team would operate, and that Woodie's quote about education being as much or as little as you want is spot on. Still, I think that BBIQ might achieve its goals more readily if they could find a way to ensure that the students are getting some kind of learning experience out of it, something beyond how to repair or rebuild.

[Denman]

it will definately not be a success here thats for sure. we have had "Robot Wars" for 7 or 8 years or so and it has moved from the bbc (Publicly funded broadcaster, biggest in uk) to channel 5, which is never watched because it has nothign good on. It was good for the first year or so but then it just died down after a few series. After about 3 years, one or 2 teams had unbeatable robots... was just no good. It was muich better when they did stuff like obstacle courses, and tasks a la First. As such First will survive and grow.We just have to spread the word and keep everyone interested.

[Nathan Pell]

I've got to chime in here again. Now that I have actually been to a BBIQ competition (Championships are going on right now in Orlando at Universal Studios) I have to say my opinion has greatly changed.

I DON'T agree that FIRST bots are "better" or more creative than a Battle bot. With FIRST you are playing against a set of rules, and in BBIQ you are playing against someone else's brain. You have no idea what they are going to do. For example, I watched a match where the driver of an incredible robot "faked" our the other team by slowing down his weapon. They thought it was not working and they came out of the safe spot. As soon as they did, he took them out. BBIQ is just as creative, but you don't see it. All of the cool stuff is inside the robots. There are teams that had figured out awesome ways to weld and attach things that we would never do in FIRST. I watched matches for almost an entire day, and I never say a robot that was "killed" at all. Most of the matches were king of boring because the bots could not drive straight or their drivers needed a lot more practice.

I still LOVE FIRST and will never leave it, as I really like how its gets kids working with engineers, and has a lot of other concepts to it. However, If I wanted to get a student to learn science and math I would put in them in Battlebots before I would FIRST. If you ask a FIRST student what about the calculations made on their bot, or what the torque is of their arm, they can give you all of the equations and all of the physics that go with it. I know on my FIRST team we don't have time to go over all of that in six weeks. Most of the kids on our team know about how our robot was put together, but could not pick out a motor our of a catalog based on what we wanted the robot could do. Nor could they pick a battery, or design the pneumatic circuit. All o that is given to you by FIRST. Please don't get me wrong, I love FIRST, and love working with sponsors and other teams.

The executives of BBIQ say they do three things: Train teachers, teach students, and run events. They are SOLELY in this for the education. They want to change the way science and math is taught today.

I understand there are those who think BBIQ is all bad, and I guess they will stay that way -but I would love to see a day when there was not "jealousy" over who has more publicity than the other. There are a lot of things about BBIQ that I thought could change. Their pits for example are just a bunch of tables in a big row inside of a sound stage. It is very difficult to see as the walls are all black. Robot parts seemed to just mesh with other team's parts. Most of the robots were on the floor as that was the only place to put them. There is not very much room for spectators to watch, and the matches seem to run slow.

To sum everything up - BBIQ and FIRST are both great programs, and I see plenty of room for both of them to exits. One of the biggest factors why I like BBIQ is that it is only $500 to enter the competition - so you can enter a lot of teams for a small amount. I teach BBIQ in my engineering course, and we do FIRST as an extra-curricular activity after school. Most of the kids in BBIQ are also on our FIRST team and they love both sports.

[Crash&Burn]

None of this should matter, to truly compare the two, you must go back to the grass roots...

1)They both started with a man and a plan.

2)Battlebots and FIRST-bots are made with love and care by dedicated engineers in hopes of raising their intellectual level to a higher standard.

Sure, battlebots may have a certain violent intention for robots, but don't underestimate the power of inspiration.

Some Joe Smoe watching battlebots might feel so inclined to get up, read a book about engineering, and maybe go out a make a bot.

whatever it is, it sure is contagious...

[Specialagentjim]

To anyone who has not attended a battlebots competition but has expressed negative opinion of them: Please, do some more research and data gathering before forming an opinion.

I attended the BattleBotsIQ competition this past weekend along with Nathan Pell. While he got a good view of real match play, I stayed in the pits most of the day. Seeing what happens in those pits is truly amazing, watching teams of students come back to a heap of robot covered in battery base from a battery explosion, and work straight through for hours to get it back up and running. Last year, we recieved an award from RUSH, the "Never say Die" award. Our efforts last year when we won that award pale in comparison to what a standard battlebot team endures to make sure they can compete in the next match.

These students are not just motivated and and excited about engineering, but they truly learn it too. FIRST and BBIQ are not competition for each other, they're different elements. In FIRST, we all did the torque calculations and the force vectors for how high you can hold a tetra and how much power you need to get out of the kit motors. In BBIQ, you try and figure out how to maximize power and minimize damage. When was the last time a team did an elastic or inelastic collision calculation for transferring momenteum from one robot to another? In BBIQ, I started doing it in my head to figure out who would win each match and by what strategy. When was the last time a FIRST team did a real material analysis to determine if Chromoly steel or titanium was more effiecent for their purpose? In BBIQ, material selection is a huge problem and is a real world engineering problem that most teams in FIRST never deal with (how many robots are NOT an Alumnium frame in FIRST?).

Personally, I love them both.

[robotrob]

I have been doing FIRST and Combat robotics for over 5 years. I am now in an Alumni position where I can help out teams and know the Southern NH area has first but not so much on the combat side. I was wondering if there were any teams in the area who would also like to try the Battlebots IQ 15lb competition and report back what they think about it. I think both programs deserve recognition and suport. Anyone who wants to try to add this challenge to their curriculum can have their advisor contact me at robmasek@gmail.com

Thanks Rob

[mechanicalbrain]

Originally Posted by JosephM

"Kids love First and they love BattleBots," Ms. Garcia said. "They're two different engineering exercises. If I like chocolate ice cream, I can like vanilla, too."

Are we vanilla?

[Alex Cormier]

Originally Posted by robotrob

I have been doing FIRST and Combat robotics for over 5 years. I am now in an Alumni position where I can help out teams and know the Southern NH area has first but not so much on the combat side. I was wondering if there were any teams in the area who would also like to try the Battlebots IQ 15lb competition and report back what they think about it. I think both programs deserve recognition and suport. Anyone who wants to try to add this challenge to their curriculum can have their advisor contact me at robmasek@gmail.com

Thanks Rob

I was around the Rochester Robotics Rampage where they had the IQ there. It looked really fun and i wished they had it when i was in HS. but the only thing is, if ya make one think this - "you can never over design". The winner was of a Battle Bots Middleweight which came in second place because their front weapon broke earlier. so if ya do it, think big and creative enough to get wins. good luck and mostly have fun!

[CJO]

First of all to reply to the comment that "money isn't really as important in FIRST . . . 10k is plenty," that is absolutely false. Sure, you can enter with 10k, but the winning teams spend a lot more. Even though the bot itself may be within the (rather notinal) price cap, the price of machining equipment, facilities, etc really add up, and it is very unlikely that one wil excell at FIRST without the facilites that huge quantities of money represent.

For two years our team was a "Oh they did so well with so little" losing team, but our third year, we did objectively well with a lot of many, yet we had the same people, the same "inspiration" we had all along.

~~~

As to the detractors from the spirit of battlebots. I suppose that you advocate that Iliad and The Odyssey are not read anymore because they "promote violance.?" Hamlet and Romeo and Juliet should be banned because they provide a bad moral example?

I think that many of those who criticize BB for violence, and especially for the attention it recieves fall prey to the same vice which many, many politicians fall for. What it comes down to is that the people who are "behind" FIRST have an idea for what they would like our culture to be. They are convinced that it is our ultimate culture -- the road to utopia, if you will. In fact, they are so convinced of the virtue of their position that it is the only concievable thing for others to believe. In fact, it is so good, that if people will not believe by themselves -- if they select another path -- then they must be forced to believe for their own good. Jason Morella may recall a conversation to this effect in which I (and a couple others) contended that FIRST would be willing to force the beauty of its ideals on others, even be it a suspension of free will.

Thus, Battle Bots threatens FIRST because it presents a different concept. One in which the individual is valued above the system; personal creativity above the "good of the team;" the ability to survive the unknown above the ability to survive in a carefully structured environment.

Not that there are not some very, very excellent things about FIRST, indeed, even though I have had some terrible FIRST eperiences, I still encourage FIRST at every opportunity. Still, the BB concepts address some of FIRST's weak points (just as FIRST addresses some of its), which is why some feel so threatened.

~~~

I suppose I can afford to be honest, it has already earned me negative reputation, so, go ahead, be big, ding my reputation.

~ Christopher

[ahecht]

Seriously, this thread has been around for 3.5 years now, and it's still the same bickering it was back then. Isn't it time to close the thread and send it to the archives where it belongs?

And what is a "half thought up cheep copy"?

[Chaos204]

Before we discuss who is better we need to figure out why we participate in First...
FIRST has by far more educational and technological benefits than any battlebot or robotwar competition will ever have.

For instance
The robots that work in tragedy's like 9/11 and in earthquakes are products of intellectual thinkers like us who are given a task and need to figure out a way to complete that task in the most efficient way possible.
We design manipulators and drive systems that when our generation truly becomes (and we are close) the engineers of tomorrow we will look back at our days in FIRST and say something like "I remember in the 2007 First competition we needed to do something just like this"
Thats what we are doing here, preparing for future problems that we may encounter in the world of problem solving.

BUT...
FIRST is also meant to draw students to the world of engineering.
We are hooked already but to bring in new blood we need to keep the games exciting. And face it a game where we are penalized for bumping too hard is not exciting to the amateur observer. We find it exciting because we know what went into making the bots and solving the problem.

That why Battle bots will be successful, students will chose explosions and sparks flying over FIRST

To get back the new students we need to find a happy medium where the games are exciting the the amateur eye and still continue to be as mentally challenging as we enjoy

i didn't realize the thread was so old when i wrote this but the points are still valid

[Doug G]

Originally Posted by CJO

First of all to reply to the comment that "money isn't really as important in FIRST . . . 10k is plenty," that is absolutely false. Sure, you can enter with 10k, but the winning teams spend a lot more. Even though the bot itself may be within the (rather notinal) price cap, the price of machining equipment, facilities, etc really add up, and it is very unlikely that one wil excell at FIRST without the facilites that huge quantities of money represent.

For two years our team was a "Oh they did so well with so little" losing team, but our third year, we did objectively well with a lot of many, yet we had the same people, the same "inspiration" we had all along.

I agree, which is why the # of FIRST teams is reaching a plateu. FIRST is simply costing too much and is the number one reason why many teams stop and don't enter in the first place. I think the investment is worth it, but it's just unfortunate reality. Also, its easier for a team with resources and/or parents with resources to meet the costs than teams from lower income and/or more rural areas. Jesuit is a private school where I believe the parents have a higher education level and higher socio-economic status than the average high school. And thus we've seen them grow to be a great team - in all respects from robot to outreach, made possible partly because of the increased resources they have. Glasser and I have spoke before about this issue.
~~~

Originally Posted by CJO

I think that many of those who criticize BB for violence, and especially for the attention it recieves fall prey to the same vice which many, many politicians fall for. What it comes down to is that the people who are "behind" FIRST have an idea for what they would like our culture to be. They are convinced that it is our ultimate culture -- the road to utopia, if you will. In fact, they are so convinced of the virtue of their position that it is the only concievable thing for others to believe. In fact, it is so good, that if people will not believe by themselves -- if they select another path -- then they must be forced to believe for their own good. Jason Morella may recall a conversation to this effect in which I (and a couple others) contended that FIRST would be willing to force the beauty of its ideals on others, even be it a suspension of free will.

Thus, Battle Bots threatens FIRST because it presents a different concept. One in which the individual is valued above the system; personal creativity above the "good of the team;" the ability to survive the unknown above the ability to survive in a carefully structured environment.

Not that there are not some very, very excellent things about FIRST, indeed, even though I have had some terrible FIRST eperiences, I still encourage FIRST at every opportunity. Still, the BB concepts address some of FIRST's weak points (just as FIRST addresses some of its), which is why some feel so threatened.

FIRST wishing to maintain such tight control over their concept, will unfortunately keep them out of 90% of the schools. Perhaps some day they will realize that to fulfill their vision, they will need to release some of their control. Why can't there be small county level competitions held at a high school or Community college (no A/V, no huge overhead costs)? Then winners can advance to a regional or national event. Maybe the game can be released at the end of summer to allow for smaller competitions (that cost maybe $300-$500)? Have the kit of parts vastly reduced to reduce cost - get the entry fee down to $1000-$2000. Something must radically change in the next five years in order for FIRST to grow.

I see it almost like the MAC vs PC debate. In one hand you have a wonderful product that works extremely well, but most people don't use it and its expensive because Apple maintains tight control over it; and on the other you have an OK product that works most of the time, everyone uses it, and its a lot cheaper. Both are effective products, but the cost of PC's and their lack of any one body maintaining control keeps the PC at most of our fingertips.

I know it's an old thread, but some of us still conteplate this issue each year about this time, so get over it

[Andrew Blair]

Honestly, you get out what you put in. If I do a whole bunch of calc., in first or bbiq, I learn. If not, I'm building a random tank in either competition. Personally though, autonomous does add a lot to first that bbiq lacks.

[CJO]

In regards to Doug's post,

Another way in which FIRST isolates itself is by the strick isolation of the ability to run competitions. As many of you know, most scrimmages are held using hand built toggles, because they refuse to give pin-out information for the RC which would allow competitions to take place outside of FIRST. Thus the IFI RC controller is "just" another robot controller, instead of a system which people can use for competition