Do you think a practice robot is needed to compete?

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by gblake

In this thread and the parallel one, folks keep talking past each other by using different definitions of "compete" and of "competitive".

For all possible definitions of "compete" and "competitive", a practice bot is not a strict requirement.

For all possible definitions of "compete" and "competitive", a practice bot is likely to have a high ROI.

[MrForbes]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

For all possible definitions of "compete" and "competitive", a practice bot is likely to have a high ROI.

Just beware that the Investment might be a big step up from not having a practice bot. Not so much in money, but in time, and mostly in management. Having two robots that are different can be a detriment....it seems to take some teams a few seasons to really be able to take advantage of a practice bot.

[tickspe15]

Our practice robot is a key part of our prototyping process. It allows us to test our designs before building the final product. Over the years we have worked to make the practice robot as similar to the competition robot as possible with varying success. Building a practice robot is as much of an exercise in engineering as it is a competitive advantage for our team.

Since building a practice robot for the first time in 2013 we have become a decent team.

**Written based on experience on 1318**

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by MrForbes

Just beware that the Investment might be a big step up from not having a practice bot. Not so much in money, but in time, and mostly in management. Having two robots that are different can be a detriment....it seems to take some teams a few seasons to really be able to take advantage of a practice bot.

Sure. It is more work, and many aspects of team management are impacted by building a second bot. The Investment part of the ROI might start out being pretty large for the first year or two. But the Return part can likewise be enormous.

If only there was a way to get the same Return without the Investment of building a second robot...

[Chief Hedgehog]

Originally Posted by MrForbes

Just beware that the Investment might be a big step up from not having a practice bot. Not so much in money, but in time, and mostly in management. Having two robots that are different can be a detriment....it seems to take some teams a few seasons to really be able to take advantage of a practice bot.

I agree on this part of management. FRC 4607 started to build a practice bot two years ago, but many of the reasons that we continue with it is because we have a large team - 51 students last year and 68 as of right now (including our HS FTC team).

We have found that the price is really not much more because we initially used the pre2015 components and used it to test and prove/improve our manipulators. We typically competed in a week 5 or 6 event so to keep our fab kids interested and motivated, it was a great tool.

We are by no means a big budget team - and this year may be a bit of a struggle because we have seemed to have lost one of our big sponsors (fingers crossed that we can get them back into the fold). But the second bot is a great way to keep the younger kids engaged in the development process throughout the season. Many of our experienced kids mentor the young'uns after bag and tag and show them the ropes.

Again, the biggest component to all of this is managing the build and the team. Without an ample supply of students and mentors, this effort would not be worth it.

My two cents!