Do you think a practice robot is needed to compete?

[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!

[Bluman56]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

At a lower ny event you could probably win with an Ri3d build. In fact I believe in all of lower ny (around 100 teams) only one team builds a practice robot.

Now if your talking winning svr, or dallas, or waterloo then yes to win you pretty much need a practice robot. Less with dallas because of the time but you get the point.

This year we are making a prototype bot so we will have something to drive around after bag day but, Idk if I would call it a practice bot. If however we have a simple robot we might change stuff up and have a full fledged practice robot. The biggest obstacle is money especially since we will have to buy another kop drive train (missed the opt out period).

Overall no at most events.

There is definitely more than 1 team that builds a practice robot for NYC/LI. More like a handful do, and while I agree that you don't need one to win either regional, it says something about the program when even at such low scoring events such as those, there are teams that still build practice robots. *shrug*

Some people like it, I personally think it creates an uneven playing field.

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by Bluman56

There is definitely more than 1 team that builds a practice robot for NYC/LI. More like a handful do, and while I agree that you don't need one to win either regional, it says something about the program when even at such low scoring events such as those, there are teams that still build practice robots. *shrug*

Some people like it, I personally think it creates an uneven playing field.

Really?

To my knowledge 694 doesn't build one and neither does 2601 arguably the 2 of the highest funded; best teams in nyc. On li I'm pretty sure only 329 builds one which makes sense since they have an 80% practice field.

[jwfoss]

558, starting in 2014, builds at a minimum a second chassis. Given the withholding allowance this allows us the ability to iterate our superstructures while not breaking our bank. As a smaller team with limited resources and funding we are working to expand our abilities but living within our current limits.

[TedG]

The poll answers aren't all inclusive.
As others have mentioned, you don't "need" a practice robot to compete, but I feel it helps if you can pull it off.

We have had practice robots in the past few years that aren't as complete as the competition one, for drive practice and working out programming etc.

There should be a category:
"We build one if we have the time and resources to be better prepared for competition"

We are going to try to build (2) robots this year as complete as possible for better practice and fixing problems as the season progresses.

[DaveL]

We have never built a practice bot.
I like the idea of having separate hardware for the programmers to work on.
What kind of schedule do you follow?

Is the competitive bot finished before the practice bot is started or
do you build a practice bot first to try out the base and some critical design elements and then build the competition bot?

Dave

[techhelpbb]

Originally Posted by TedG

The poll answers aren't all inclusive.
As others have mentioned, you don't "need" a practice robot to compete, but I feel it helps if you can pull it off.

We have had practice robots in the past few years that aren't as complete as the competition one, for drive practice and working out programming etc.

There should be a category:
"We build one if we have the time and resources to be better prepared for competition"

We are going to try to build (2) robots this year as complete as possible for better practice and fixing problems as the season progresses.

Pretty clearly we should add some options to this poll I slammed together.
I don't see a way to change this on this forum. Is there a way?

I was more curious to see if there was a significant majority leaning towards wanting or needing a practice bot and so far there is good reason to look into this further.

[cxcad]

Here's a question. Suppose the 6 see build system is eliminated and replaced with no bag and tag, would the top teams still build a practice bot?

[MichaelBick]

Originally Posted by cxcad

Here's a question. Suppose the 6 see build system is eliminated and replaced with no bag and tag, would the top teams still build a practice bot?

Yes. Some top teams build 3 robots.

[TedG]

Originally Posted by DaveL

We have never built a practice bot.
I like the idea of having separate hardware for the programmers to work on.
What kind of schedule do you follow?

Is the competitive bot finished before the practice bot is started or
do you build a practice bot first to try out the base and some critical design elements and then build the competition bot?

Dave

I can't speak for other teams, and our team is still new at this.
But for us, we start building a prototype "base" as soon as we know what type of drive train and base configuration it will be. This is basically for driving around and putting mock items on to check if things are going to fit or work. And for programming.

And then once we know what we're building for real, we start to build the real one.

For us this year, I suspect we will take the prototype further so there will be (2) robots that function the same way with all stuff on it, one for practice, one for competition.

That's my gut feeling anyway, I'm not 100% involved in those decisions.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by MichaelBick

Yes. Some top teams build 3 robots.

While this is true, I'm not sure much thought should be given to a very very small minority of teams. (If we would consider the situations of a handful of teams, I think we should be considering those who are struggling opposed to already successful teams).

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by MichaelBick

Yes. Some top teams build 3 robots.

I bet you'd have more teams stop building 2 bots than would continue.

[Wayne TenBrink]

We have never built one but we don't rule it out.

The withholding allowance, bag-n-tag, and the district tournament schedule ("out of bag" time) allow a lot of access to the robot and provide much of the benefit that comes from full-time access to a less-than-perfect-fidelity practice bot (which is what most practice bots really are). Going to a 3rd district event (not always possible) also provides a good return on the investment in "practice".

The early results of this survey demonstrate the gap between the "Chief Delphi" crowd and everybody else. What percentage of total teams build a practice bot? Its nowhere close to 80%.

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by Wayne TenBrink

We have never built one but we don't rule it out.

The withholding allowance, bag-n-tag, and the district tournament schedule ("out of bag" time) allow a lot of access to the robot and provide much of the benefit that comes from full-time access to a less-than-perfect-fidelity practice bot (which is what most practice bots really are). Going to a 3rd district event (not always possible) also provides a good return on the investment in "practice".

The early results of this survey demonstrate the gap between the "Chief Delphi" crowd and everybody else. What percentage of total teams build a practice bot? Its nowhere close to 80%.

In non district areas we don't get the benefits of the out of bag time before district events. Having access to our full shop full of tools to fix issues would be much better then on day 1 of regional while there are practice matches going on and all you have is 1-2 carts worth of tools.