Gracious Professionalism VS Competition

[NyCityKId]

I've seen a few threads on CD and the FIRST forum that got me thinking. Lately Ive been wondering how compatible Gracious Professionalism and Competition are. I think some people start to forget that while we are expected to act graciously and professionally, FIRST Robotics Competition is still a competition. For example I saw a post on the first forums about passing a tube back to an opposing alliance member who dropped it. Even though this is extremely sportsman-like I can't help feeling that this is a little backwards. Then there is the fact that the GDC had to update the manual to say that it is against the rules to score on an opposing alliance's scoring grid. These, along with a few other threads which I wont mention for the sake of attention spans, make me wonder whether people are actually taking gracious professionalism too far. So what do you think?

[Chris is me]

I'm pretty sure the post you're referencing is about passing a tube to another alliance partner - not to an opponent.

[wilsonmw04]

Originally Posted by NyCityKId

These, along with a few other threads which I wont mention for the sake of attention spans, make me wonder whether people are actually taking gracious professionalism too far. So what do you think?

How can the world we live in have too many people who act in a gracious or professional manner? That would be a problem I would love to have.

As for the implied statement that competition and GP are incompatible, I will tell you what I tell my students before every event: I want to win, but I want to beat my opponent when they are at their best. Not, because they weren't running as well as they should. If there is something we can do to help our opponent out, we should do everything in our power to help them.How else can we find out how good we are or where we need to personally improve?

[NyCityKId]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

I'm pretty sure the post you're referencing is about passing a tube to another alliance partner - not to an opponent.

There was a thread on passing tubes to alliance partners but then I distinctly remember a post mentioning an opposing alliance robot dropping a tube and the other alliance giving it back to them. I may be wrong and i would rather not directly point out the post but I'm pretty sure...

Originally Posted by wilsonmw04

How can the world we live in have too many people who act in a gracious or professional manner? That would be a problem I would love to have.

As for the implied statement that competition and GP are incompatible, I will tell you what I tell my students before every event: I want to win, but I want to beat my opponent when they are at their best. Not, because they weren't running as well as they should. If there is something we can do to help our opponent out, we should do everything in our power to help them.How else can we find out how good we are or where we need to personally improve?

Please don't misunderstand me. I am all for GP and I wholeheartedly believe in it. If another team is having a problem, I know there isn't a soul on my team who wouldn't jump up to help as best they can, including me. I just think it might be a little to much to directly help an opponent during a match.
To be honest I'm a little conflicted within. Helping an opponent off the field is one thing but to aid them during a match where the whole point is to win (graciously and professionally albeit) seems like one may be taking gracious professionalism too far. I'll put it this way: lets say that a robot on the opposing alliance shuts down because the battery wasn't charged prior to the match. The moment the battery dies, the claw/grabber mechanism goes dead and drops a tube that they would've been able to hang had their battery held out. Would it be in the spirit of gracious professionalism to hang the tube for them (assuming its not against the rules)?

[Hawiian Cadder]

Originally Posted by wilsonmw04

How can the world we live in have too many people who act in a gracious or professional manner? That would be a problem I would love to have.

As for the implied statement that competition and GP are incompatible, I will tell you what I tell my students before every event: I want to win, but I want to beat my opponent when they are at their best. Not, because they weren't running as well as they should. If there is something we can do to help our opponent out, we should do everything in our power to help them.How else can we find out how good we are or where we need to personally improve?

agree 100% the game is not fun without a little competition, i would be glad to give our opponents help off the field, and to some extent not exploit their weakness in strategy or design. better to win for real than because the other team had something stupid happen.

[rsegrest]

First let me state that I agree with the GP off the field and to a large degree on the field as well.

"The moment the battery dies, the claw/grabber mechanism goes dead and drops a tube that they would've been able to hang had their battery held out. Would it be in the spirit of gracious professionalism to hang the tube for them (assuming its not against the rules)?"

Your above quote refers (at least to me) to the 'coopertition' points that they instituted last year or the year before to keep strong alliances from racking up triple digit scores against much weaker alliances and then bragging about it (at least IMO that's why they may have done it). By the same token I don't think you should score points for your opponent to try and earn the 'coopertition' points. I want to see a great match. I don't want to see one team target another to flip their bot just because they can (I have seen it happen).

"I want to win, but I want to beat my opponent when they are at their best. Not, because they weren't running as well as they should. If there is something we can do to help our opponent out, we should do everything in our power to help them.How else can we find out how good we are or where we need to personally improve?"

Ditto totally...

[Andrew Schreiber]

I'm going to give you my two cents on this topic in a pretty simple way. I will help you (and love your help) off the field but when we are across the field from each other you OWE me your best. Don't you dare pull any punches, don't expect me to either. Leave it all on the field and may the best bot win.

[pfreivald]

+1 on the previous post. Competition is a driver for gracious professionalism, and you owe it to your opponent to try your best to spank their little bottoms while on the field of play! (And likewise.)

[dodar]

GP and Competition together is symbiotic. I wanna dominate you during our match but when we get back to the pits, I would try my hardest to make sure that you can overcome our match and dominate the rest of yours.

[StevenB]

My short answer to the question posed is this: No, you shouldn't score a tube for your opponent out of "Gracious Professionalism". That's about like a football team giving their opponents the ball back after a fumble. Personally, that would be an insult.

That said, I think its misguided to consider GP and competition as dueling ideals. Don't forget the second half of GP: Professionalism. Professionalism means we work our hardest, we play our fairest, and think our fastest. We play to win. But although the object of the game is to win, the object of FIRST as a whole has nothing to do with winning: it's about the inspiration and recognition of science and technology.

As others have well said, "Compete with all you've got in front of the curtain, cooperate with all you've got behind it."

[Andrew Y.]

Originally Posted by Hawiian Cadder

agree 100% the game is not fun without a little competition, i would be glad to give our opponents help off the field, and to some extent not exploit their weakness in strategy or design. better to win for real than because the other team had something stupid happen.

im playing devils advocate. exploiting their weakness is strategy... If you don't show them their flaw in design, then how are they to learn it was a flaw?

I honestly think sometimes we get a little TOO GP around FIRST. I agree with the above few posts, spank em on the field...but the pits are not a place for compeition

[NyCityKId]

Originally Posted by StevenB

That said, I think its misguided to consider GP and competition as dueling ideals.

I personally don't think they're dueling ideals and I probably should've given the thread a different name. However, I think there are some people/teams who try to take Gracious Professionalism to a whole other level where its no longer gracious professionalism but some other monstrous thing that ruins the competition aspect of FRC.

I also don't think I like this whole cooperatition points system. While I think cooperatition should be part of the game, giving an incentive isn't the right way to improve it. Just by virtue of being an FIRST Robotics Team you should automatically and without persuasion of any sort, play with cooperatition in mind.

[xSAWxBLADEx]

Originally Posted by Andrew Y.

im playing devils advocate. exploiting their weakness is strategy... If you don't show them their flaw in design, then how are they to learn it was a flaw?

I honestly think sometimes we get a little TOO GP around FIRST.

WOW....THATS HARSH....i would be the first one to say i want a blue banner but im also the first (maybe second) one on chief delphi telling rookie teams (even some vetern teams) there designs wont work and how they could change it....i just think that comment was very unneeded and just totally against every thing Dean Kamen wants for his program of F.I.R.S.T.

[LLogan]

Originally Posted by xSAWxBLADEx

WOW....THATS HARSH....i would be the first one to say i want a blue banner but im also the first (maybe second) one on chief delphi telling rookie teams (even some vetern teams) there designs wont work and how they could change it....i just think that comment was very unneeded and just totally against every thing Dean Kamen wants for his program of F.I.R.S.T.

I'm pretty sure you're taking his quote out of context. Consider a team that doesn't post on Chief Delphi (like 80-90% of FRC teams) and creates a robot with what many would consider a flawed design. There is no way they would know it was a flawed design until the competition, where other teams would exploit the design to its advantage.

E.g. A team only powers two wheels and uses two casters in place of wheels. Your bot has more pushing force than it. In the competition, will you push it around while it's trying to block you? Or will you gingerly avoid trying to "explot" the flaw?

Now, if said team were to make a post on Chief Delphi about its design and/or ask local teams to help with the design, he would almost surely oblige.

Sorry if I am answering for Andrew... but FWIW 2415 is a very GP team from my personal experience.

[ouellet348]

On the whole exposing weakness thing, I personally believe that GP means helping others in the pits, with mentoring, on CD forums etc. But to go easy on them in competition is insulting, no one wants to win when their opponent lets them win. On the field you give it your all, no exceptions, anything less isn't in the spirit of competition. Insulting "weaker" teams by going easy on them isn't in the spirit of GP at all. If you win great, if not, you tried your hardest, and if you do end up crushing a team, you tell them they played hard and fair and that it was a good match. Nothing more, nothing less.