Driver Selection: A Discussion

[sgreco]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

I don't mean that literally any action a driver can do should be unable to break the robot, though that's obviously ideal. But a robot isn't something that should require constant thought to its safety to drive.

It's funny that you mention Breakaway, because that seems like the best example. Barring deploying the hanger and intentionally tipping, how exactly could you break a good robot that year? If your robot could be damaged by anything other than an unusual circumstance like getting chain caught in your wheels, it simply was not robust.

Seriously, do you guys really tell drivers to "go easy on the robot"? That's just prolonging a failure that WILL happen.

I have to agree on this.

There's no such thing as a driver who is too aggressive, but there is such thing as a robot that's robustness isn't adequate to compete at a high level.

(There is a difference being aggressive and reckless; neither is bad, but recklessness can be bad if it's a result of having no control over the robot. This still shouldn't break a robot, but if the driver has no control they shouldn't be driving for a variety of other reasons).