Cheesecake: How far is too far?

[Jared Russell]

We should probably take the discussion of build season length to its own thread. As is tradition this time of year.

[Ben Martin]

Originally Posted by The Lucas

A short anecdote: At an early competition, this year a team started installing using their own can burglar arms late in competition (prior to that they had kept them off so they wouldn't get in the way). Many people approached me (an RI) and the rest of the inspection crew about the that team changing their robot without getting reinspected. We told them that yes they did get weighed with those arms and it wasn't really a problem. However, now I think about those countless people that noticed the change but didn't ask a RI for clarification. Are they suspicious that the team was breaking the rules? In absence of any simple tools to gather better info, are they saying things that damage that team's reputation behind their back when that team followed proper procedure? They probably have similar questions about the RIs.

I remember thinking it was weird when we were asked to reinspect in the middle of playoffs after we had just reinspected 2 hours prior and hadn't changed anything.

As we've improved, we know that we must endure extra scrutiny, and our recent improvement increases the likelihood that we will be negatively judged for every action we take. Early this year, I made some mistakes in alliance negotiations by being a little forceful and had to tone down my insistence a little. I know not every team has the 'do what it takes to win' (while keeping your GP) paradigm as we do, and us partaking in actions like giving cheesecake hasn't sat well with some others and occasionally builds a negative perception, regardless of how the recipient team feels about it. I remember having negative perceptions of teams back when I was in high school -- 'that team's robot was totally built by mentors because they win all the time', etc, and being jealous of teams for doing particularly well -- and now we fight back that same perception locally. It's been an interesting shift. We're not going to try any less hard to win (if anything, we're going to continue to try even harder), but our awareness of others' perception has been heightened.

[Doug G]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

This year incentivized it more than previous years, but now that the cat's out of the bag it could really get out of hand.

Typically 3rd picks at many regions aren't that capable, so providing them a mechanism can be very overpowered.

Yep, for those that keep up with this community (and the elite teams do), the cat is definitely out of the bag (and scratching up my nice furniture!) We built 3 robots this year (a prototype style robot during weeks 1-3, and two competition ready robots). Looking back, that prototype robot could have been just as competitive as the lower half of teams at many competitions. Maybe next year we bag that robot also and bring it to competition for our 3rd alliance member. I know this is a bit extreme... but it is just a matter of time if the rules stay as is.

Originally Posted by waialua359

The old argument to not extending the build season was not to burnout mentors.
To me, that no longer holds valid.
The intensity of the program is now almost 4 months, if you expect to be competitive at the level of the elite teams that consistently make Einstein, generally speaking.

I'm having a really tough time meeting the demands of the FRC season... The season is 4 months... Students grades suffer also during these times, especially those taking several AP classes. One of my students (currently on track to be valedictorian) told me how she has gotten used to watching her grades fall while at competitions...

I Kind of miss those 6 week build seasons!

[FrankJ]

So when the robot inspectors & teams help rookie teams get their robot inspected & on the field... Is that Cheesecaking or Teaching a team to fish?

[billbo911]

Looking back at what turned out to be a fantastic and tasty piece of Cheesecake, or should I say "Cheesey-poof-cake", from last year, Cheesy Vision, you can easily see that FIRST can put rules in place to stop certain aspects of Cheesecakeing. Granted, the Poofs shared that Cheesecake with every team worldwide that wanted it. This year the rule explicitly stopped that specific flavor of cheesecake from being baked up.

As much as I support teams helping out alliance partners and non-alliance partners to be competitive, I honestly believe there should be some constraints on the practice. Canburglers are 2015's Cheesy Vision. Both were well within the rules for their time period, thus I fully agree with their specific use and application. Should that type of "cheesecake" be allowed in the future? As long as it is withing the rules governing that year's game, absolutely!
Just don't get used to the rules that allow them. Cheesey Vision was ruled against, Canburglers MAY be next.

[ArtemusMaximus]

What is the "Cheesecake"?

[FrankJ]

Cheesy Vision is a great example of a team using GP to level the playing field. Also it was completely up a team to incorporate it in their system or not. GDC didn't really make it or the concept of releasing useful software against the rules. They just defined autonomous to really be autonomous. You would be free to use cheesy vision for teleop mode.

[FrankJ]

Originally Posted by ArtemusMaximus

What is the "Cheesecake"?

Cheesecake or Cheesecake

[billbo911]

Originally Posted by FrankJ

Cheesy Vision is a great example of a team using GP to level the playing field. Also it was completely up a team to incorporate it in their system or not. GDC didn't really make it or the concept of releasing useful software against the rules. They just defined autonomous to really be autonomous. You would be free to use cheesy vision for teleop mode.

True, that is a better interpretation.

[Foster]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

I'm fine with teams giving out as much sugar and eggs and cream cheese as they want, and even helping a receiving team to bake it into a wheel of delicious dessert. But I've reached a position where I think giving an entire homemade cheesecake is something that should be discouraged.

I agree with this position. Some of my most memorable events were when teams showed up after the six week build with something that really wasn't going work or in a few cases even roll. A number of the 3 digit teams arrived with people, worked with the "to be cheesecaked team" worked out a plan. They would then search all the teams "allowances" in the pit area, and in a few hours help build a robot. I'd like to see some way for this to continue.

But I don't want to see teams "find a box" and rip it down to install full items. I think Alan's line of help you get parts and assemble, but it's not a bolt on thing. I think the COTS line may be good, but will a point get reached that VexPro makes the "VexProBurglar" (tm)?

But the concept of going to an event, seeing something cool and adding it in should always be there.

Originally Posted by waialua359

I miss the 6 week build season.
FRC is looking more and more like the VEX challenge. If that's the case, I hope FIRST makes some changes in the near future, so that I can eat right, sleep right, and not put my personal life on hold for 2 months not including the competitions we attend.

*cough*FTC*cough*

But to be fair one of the things I like about VEX is the design/build/compete/get crushed/redesign//build/compete/get crushed/redesign ... cycle. It's the way the world works (cough*iPhone6*cough) but it's a shame that designs will converge to just a few dozen. If you saw the VEX Worlds, there were lots of variations, but lots of similar designs.

While it's a little out of context: Newton: If I have seen further it is by standing on the shoulders of giants. We do that all the time, RI3D, VexPro / AM / etc COTS parts, years of cycle engineering drive trains, etc.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Doug G

I'm having a really tough time meeting the demands of the FRC season... The season is 4 months... Students grades suffer also during these times, especially those taking several AP classes. One of my students (currently on track to be valedictorian) told me how she has gotten used to watching her grades fall while at competitions...

I Kind of miss those 6 week build seasons!

Thats very unfortunate and it has happened to my 5 year driver as well.
He was valedictorian all through high school until the end of 3rd quarter when he got two B's. It ends our streak of 7 straight years of having a valedictorian from
our program, not being able to get #8.

[Bertman]

I personally think the build season is a very large strain on the students, mentors , and coaches. It is very difficult to keep kids focused on school when the build season keeps expanding blob-like. A six week build season was much easier to recover academically from and getting and keeping mentors would be easier if we could clearly define the time commitment to new and potential mentors. I think the FIRST widows would appreciate it also. Of course this barely touches the time frame used in FTC

[The Lucas]

Originally Posted by AGPapa

Interestingly enough, a team tried this in the past.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=65363

In 2008 1519 has two different configurations (which, together, weighed inside the 120lb limit, so no need for re-inspection). It was designed so the control system could be taken out of one config and put into another. They were ruled illegal as the rules state that "Each registered FIRST Robotics Competition team can enter ONE (1) ROBOT into the 2008 FIRST Robotics Competition" and the inspectors considered each configuration a separate robot.

It is like you read my mind, I was thinking of the perils of Speed Racer when I was posting this. The rules have changed significantly since then. With the new Q&A it would seem you could have a 120lb Fezzik and get reinpected as Speed Racer as needed instead of inspecting them together and changing the power pathways (which was part of the 2 Robot ruling issue). 900 went from swerve drive arm bot to kit drive harpoon bot with a reinspection, and could possibly change back with a reinspect.
I only had experience with one team that used the frequent reinspect Q&A. They had different parts for landfill and human player stacking that they couldn't get them combined under the weight limit so they got reinspected when they changed. Personally, I wanted to switch out one canburglar arm for a stage can swatter to speed up a staked tote set auto (essentially mutually exclusive auto tasks). The Q&A happened during the season, so teams only had the Withholding Allowance weight limit to make fabricated parts for different config. I wonder what teams will do if this is still the ruling before Bag Day next year (essentially unlimited weight for different configs).

[FIMAlumni]

Well this poll didn't do what I thought would happen. I thought at least 50% of people would converge on a single answer. Instead we find that FRC is very divided on this. It will be very interesting to see what/if the GDC does about this.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Foster

If you saw the VEX Worlds, there were lots of variations, but lots of similar designs.

Actually, I did get a chance to see it.
As a coach in the HS World Finals matches.
"oh so close."