2013 Lessons Learned: The Negative

[Marc S.]

Here's my quick list:

- More wildcard teams, it would be awesome if slots spilled back to previous regionals, at SVR 4 of the six teams in the finals were already going to champs.

- Show opening ceremonies on field screens; there were thousands of people who didn't get to see it because they were trying to save seats for their scouts, let alone be there to scout the first match of the day.

- More matches at champs; someone mentioned adding another day, 5th division, or less teams at champs (my least favorite).

- Music is TOO LOUD! I'm waiting for the day when a safety inspector walks up to the dj and tells them the volume level is unsafe. When it's hard to hear the person next to you, who is yelling, it's too loud. Every competition I have been to has had this problem, apparently FIRST wants us to be deaf engineers.

- Webcasts are pretty bad, if the camera just focused on the field, not individual robots (or people in the stands....), during matches, then it would be easier to tell what's actually going on.

- Einstien had a lot of dead time; maybe FIRST could play FTC matches inbetween FRC matches or give out more awards, with a much faster turn around. I think drag racing is a good example of a sport to emulate in this regards. Also, can we please not have dance breaks, once a song starts it just slows down everything.

[Grim Tuesday]

Speaking of safety, the level of safety theater in FIRST is ridiculous. FIRST needs to tell the judges and safety advisors judging the UL safety award that it isn't about being visibly safe, it's about being actually safe. An escort yelling 'robot', escorting me to my pit does not make anything safer. Posters above the urinals does not make anything safer. What teams do these days to try and win the safety award is just silly and I think FIRST needs to make a statement about it and be clear that they are looking for teams that are truly safe.

[Oblarg]

Originally Posted by Marc S.

- More matches at champs; someone mentioned adding another day, 5th division, or less teams at champs (my least favorite).

Now those two first ideas I can certainly get behind - anyone have any input on their feasibility re: FIRST's resources?

[Michael Hill]

Originally Posted by Oblarg

Now those two first ideas I can certainly get behind - anyone have any input on their feasibility re: FIRST's resources?

Well...Einstein isn't being used most of the time. It's just a field that sits there and does nothing. Keep the same amount of teams and make a 5th division that plays on the Einstein field. Just change the name to something different until all divisions are done, then change the name to Einstein.

Sure, the tournament structure might be messed up with 5 teams instead of 4, but there are smart people at FIRST, so I think they could come up with something.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Michael Hill

Well...Einstein isn't being used most of the time. It's just a field that sits there and does nothing. Keep the same amount of teams and make a 5th division that plays on the Einstein field. Just change the name to something different until all divisions are done, then change the name to Einstein.

Sure, the tournament structure might be messed up with 5 teams instead of 4, but there are smart people at FIRST, so I think they could come up with something.

Just do a round robin like Vex Worlds does.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by Michael Hill

Well...Einstein isn't being used most of the time. It's just a field that sits there and does nothing. Keep the same amount of teams and make a 5th division that plays on the Einstein field. Just change the name to something different until all divisions are done, then change the name to Einstein.

Sure, the tournament structure might be messed up with 5 teams instead of 4, but there are smart people at FIRST, so I think they could come up with something.

The FLL teams play on Einstein earlier in the week.

[SarahBeth]

Chairman's Award Process: As a student who's been involved I know it can be a daunting process preparing and submitting for it, and this is on a team that's had experiences in preparing this. Talking to numerous teams submitting for the first time, you can tell it's a confusing process for them. While the submission guidelines are clear (and I'll give props for that) we need some way to help make the process, especially for first timers, a little less scary. Also a little clarification or transparency on the judging process would be awesome

I agree with this, completely. We submitted for the first time this year and it was very very overwhelming and it took reading the manual many times to figure out exactly what we were going to be judged on, and trying to figure out what the presentation judges were looking for - and even THEN I missed the fact that there's another release that needs to be signed for your DVD to be shown if you win, which is IN the manual but kinda buried.

Some clarification would have been so helpful throughout the process. Thankfully, we were able to talk to some teams who had done it before and they were happy to help us out - and it was an excellent experience all around for our kids. Now having done it once, doing it again hopefully won't be that daunting and we won't be rehearsing our presentation at 11pm the night before in the hotel lobby. (I swear, my students wanted to kill me for the fact I made them do it in front of people)

[Carolyn_Grace]

Originally Posted by SarahBeth

I agree with this, completely. We submitted for the first time this year and it was very very overwhelming and it took reading the manual many times to figure out exactly what we were going to be judged on, and trying to figure out what the presentation judges were looking for - and even THEN I missed the fact that there's another release that needs to be signed for your DVD to be shown if you win, which is IN the manual but kinda buried.

Some clarification would have been so helpful throughout the process. Thankfully, we were able to talk to some teams who had done it before and they were happy to help us out - and it was an excellent experience all around for our kids. Now having done it once, doing it again hopefully won't be that daunting and we won't be rehearsing our presentation at 11pm the night before in the hotel lobby. (I swear, my students wanted to kill me for the fact I made them do it in front of people)

I love the Chairman's Award, but I definitely think that it needs to be revamped. When FIRST announced some changes with Awards this year, I was uber excited to see what they had improved for CA, and sadly it was not enough.

The award needs to be more accessible for teams, and teams who submit need more consistent feedback and recognition in some way.

I think that the video should either be judged or taken out completely.

I believe you should be able to submit CA at every district/regional that you compete with your robot at, but only be allowed to win at one event.

Overall: the fact that the Chairman's Award exists at all is outstanding, and I commend FIRST for recognizing teams in this way.

[Andy A.]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

Speaking of safety, the level of safety theater in FIRST is ridiculous. FIRST needs to tell the judges and safety advisors judging the UL safety award that it isn't about being visibly safe, it's about being actually safe. An escort yelling 'robot', escorting me to my pit does not make anything safer. Posters above the urinals does not make anything safer. What teams do these days to try and win the safety award is just silly and I think FIRST needs to make a statement about it and be clear that they are looking for teams that are truly safe.

I lost count of the number of 'safety' reminders that piled up in our pit. Some were literally a index card size bit of paper with 4 or 5 bulleted of the most vague and unhelpful safety 'reminders' and 'tips' you could imagine. 'Wear safety glasses in the pit'. 'Lift with your legs'. 'Be safe'.

I get that it's all coming from a good place, but a sheet of paper reminding me to wear my safety glasses in the pits doesn't really mean or do anything at all. It's just more clutter and theater. It all just ends up in the trash.

I guess I'd also like to see teams putting less effort into winning a safety award, and more effort in just being safe. My own experience looking at the teams who do win the award is that the judges tend to understand this, and are awarding it to teams that simply have a safe program and an ingrained culture of safety.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Carolyn_Grace

I love the Chairman's Award, but I definitely think that it needs to be revamped. When FIRST announced some changes with Awards this year, I was uber excited to see what they had improved for CA, and sadly it was not enough.

The award needs to be more accessible for teams, and teams who submit need more consistent feedback and recognition in some way.

I think that the video should either be judged or taken out completely.

I believe you should be able to submit CA at every district/regional that you compete with your robot at, but only be allowed to win at one event.

Overall: the fact that the Chairman's Award exists at all is outstanding, and I commend FIRST for recognizing teams in this way.

It needs to be more visible at the events.
MSC was the only event that gave teams booths to show what they are about. At other event the only time the general public even know the award exist at ll is on Saturday afternoon at the end of the awards ceremony.
It's treated more like a golden ticket than a creed to live by.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

It needs to be more visible at the events.
MSC and MAR was were the only events that gave teams booths to show what they are about. At other event the only time the general public even know the award exist at ll is on Saturday afternoon at the end of the awards ceremony.
It's treated more like a golden ticket than a creed to live by.

Fixed that.

This is a very cool concept. My only worry would be implementation--if it were mandatory for all submitters (not winners already, like those at MSC and MAR) to make a booth, would we see fewer teams try? We're already talking about the difficulty and complexity of submitting. If there was a way to keep or raise participation rates though, booths would be really great.

[Carolyn_Grace]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

It needs to be more visible at the events.
MSC was the only event that gave teams booths to show what they are about. At other event the only time the general public even know the award exist at ll is on Saturday afternoon at the end of the awards ceremony.
It's treated more like a golden ticket than a creed to live by.

For the record, it is a little easier to do this at MSC because we already have 11 winners from the District system. We're planning on doing something similar at the Indiana State Championship on May 18th.

Possible solution: other official FIRST competitions could offer a booth to the previous three year's winners to showcase what they've accomplished.
The downfall of this is that it would give them a more visible showcase to judges, which could be inferred as an unfair advantage for winning this award.

[jee7s]

This might be a bit of a sidetrack, but...

Originally Posted by Andy A.

I get that it's all coming from a good place, but a sheet of paper reminding me to wear my safety glasses in the pits doesn't really mean or do anything at all. It's just more clutter and theater. It all just ends up in the trash.

Worse than that are the teams that create unsafe conditions in the interest of "safety" (a la the safety theater mentioned earlier). There's one team (that I have a great deal of respect for and shall remain nameless) that I see regularly at events I attend that love to tape their laminated safety reminders to the floor. Sometimes this is at the entry to the pits with a big laminated print saying "Safety Glasses Required" and occasionally other reminders on the floor throughout the pit.

The problem is that laminated paper is REALLY slippery, especially if it gets wet. I've seen kids slip on these and take a faceplant or twisted ankle in the name of "Safety."

To their credit, this team has gotten a bit more thoughtful about their deployment of these reminders (either on their own or through some Safety Advisors), and now the situation is at least less dangerous.

Also, at the FRC level: Has anyone ever pondered the wisdom of wearing gloves while "working" on the robot? That's in the official safety manual the last time I checked (which is admittedly a while ago). Personally, I NEVER wear gloves while working on the robot. I've seen too many gloves get dragged into mechanisms or caught up in the robot that I'm sufficiently worried about losing a finger. Wear gloves while lifting, sure. But, while working on it? That just seems like too much of a risk should something turn on. I would much rather get a blood blister than have my hand pulled into a drivetrain by accident.

[RoboMom]

Originally Posted by Carolyn_Grace

Possible solution: other official FIRST competitions could offer a booth to the previous three year's winners to showcase what they've accomplished.
The downfall of this is that it would give them a more visible showcase to judges, which could be inferred as an unfair advantage for winning this award.

[I wish this response wasn't in the Negative thread...]

Not if you have the "booth" on Thursday only.
For the past few years, off and on, we've tried a low key concept at the Chesapeake.
Team Showcase. Team gets a table (usually in the pits) for one hour. Sign up ahead of the event. Agenda is passed out and announced every hour. They can feature anything about their team/outreach/technical.

It needs some tweaking, but I generally think it is a good concept. I originally developed the concept to deal with all the special requests coming in (some from teams competing for RCA) to showcase their team - giveaways, time on field to present a special award, requests for a special space or booth to promote something. All worthwhile ventures - I was just trying to level the field.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by jee7s

Also, at the FRC level: Has anyone ever pondered the wisdom of wearing gloves while "working" on the robot? That's in the official safety manual the last time I checked (which is admittedly a while ago). Personally, I NEVER wear gloves while working on the robot. I've seen too many gloves get dragged into mechanisms or caught up in the robot that I'm sufficiently worried about losing a finger. Wear gloves while lifting, sure. But, while working on it? That just seems like too much of a risk should something turn on. I would much rather get a blood blister than have my hand pulled into a drivetrain by accident.

I've probably had a safety advisor tell me to wear gloves against OSHA regs at least one every other event. I need to start carrying around that manual. It's ridiculous. Thankfully we've been clear with our team and they know better, but I'm really worried about teams that don't. Condoning theater is one (bad) thing, but mandating gloves in unsafe situations, snagging people's carts so their robots drop, making people run to the front of their cart*...Something has to change with the green shirts. Now. Most of them are quite good, but the bad ones are creating a dangerous culture.


*I literally had an SA tell one of my drivers to run (yes, "run") around our cart in the crowded pit so they could get to the front and yell "ROBOT!" We already had a driver in front of us kindly asking people to move, and it had worked well for several hundred feet.