Sharing information - not a good idea?

[rich2202]

Maybe the strategy is: On Day 1 of qualifications, tell scouting teams you will post the information on Day 2.

That way, you get one day of competition with the other teams not knowing. On day 2 interested teams will be able to get the info that may not have been revealed during day 1 of qualifications.

[JoshWilson]

even though you're giving away information, you can ask them the same thing too, which kinda balances things out. Also, withholding information could easily look bad for you and your team's image, but after your first few matches, the team that asked can just watch you, along with everyone else, and get the information anyway.

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

Originally Posted by rich2202

Maybe the strategy is: On Day 1 of qualifications, tell scouting teams you will post the information on Day 2.

That way, you get one day of competition with the other teams not knowing. On day 2 interested teams will be able to get the info that may not have been revealed during day 1 of qualifications.

I wouldn't be opposed to this idea, regarding Outer Works. As a Drive Team, I'm going to want to get my data from their Drive Team and our field scouts anyway.

[Mr. Tatorscout]

Originally Posted by rich2202

Maybe the strategy is: On Day 1 of qualifications, tell scouting teams you will post the information on Day 2.

That way, you get one day of competition with the other teams not knowing. On day 2 interested teams will be able to get the info that may not have been revealed during day 1 of qualifications.

FIRST of all, The problem is when your alliance partners want to work up a strategy in advance, they can't until you are in the queue because you haven't told them anything.
Second, most pit scouting happens on the first day because once competitions start, the scouts are in the stands...so now you're making the record keeper beg kids to go back out and scout that last robot that wouldn't talk to them before.
Third, you run the risk of not being seen as a team player and get black-balled. "Which team was that again? OH, THEM!" How easy a team is to work with is one of the factors in picking an alliance partner.
Fourth, Gracious Professionalism...

[alopex_rex]

This would be more of an issue to think about if anything anyone ever said to pit scouters had any resemblance to the truth.

As another poster put it, it's not that anyone lies to pit scouters, it's just their answers are too unrealistically optimistic to mean much. I'm sure lots of teams will say that, in theory, they can do every defense, and then spend their entire first match stuck on the rocky terrain.

[SteveGPage]

Originally Posted by alopex_rex

This would be more of an issue to think about if anything anyone ever said to pit scouters had any resemblance to the truth.

As another poster put it, it's not that anyone lies to pit scouters, it's just their answers are too unrealistically optimistic to mean much. I'm sure lots of teams will say that, in theory, they can do every defense, and then spend their entire first match stuck on the rocky terrain.

Well said! I have my "new-bees" (rookies) do the pit scouting. I do it so they get used to the idea of talking to other teams, hopefully building some relationships with other teams, and to ask robot specific questions - so they start to learn robot terminology. I had one come back and exclaim, "I know what a CIM looks like!"

From their scouting report, I need a good picture. Also maybe, what type of drivetrain they have. Everything else is usually an overly optimistic analysis of what they think they can do on a perfect day, if the laws of physics are relaxed, and they suddenly learn to optimize their performance. My match scouting is a much better indicator of what they really can do, not what is said in the pits.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by SteveGPage

Well said! I have my "new-bees" (rookies) do the pit scouting. I do it so they get used to the idea of talking to other teams, hopefully building some relationships with other teams, and to ask robot specific questions - so they start to learn robot terminology. I had one come back and exclaim, "I know what a CIM looks like!"

From their scouting report, I need a good picture. Also maybe, what type of drivetrain they have. Everything else is usually an overly optimistic analysis of what they think they can do on a perfect day, if the laws of physics are relaxed, and they suddenly learn to optimize their performance. My match scouting is a much better indicator of what they really can do, not what is said in the pits.

It also helps new students learn to smell BS from a mile away.

As Ian and Tom Line said, pit scouting is pretty useless for anything other than a nice picture and looking at what drive/gearing/motors a team has. My old scouts barely ever even asked questions, other than "can we take a photo?"

[Edxu]

While I'll never claim to be absolutely correct, I believe that it's correct to be honest and as realistic as possible with any scout that shows up at your pit, because it's a good measure of reliability and communication.

(2014 example) If a pit rep or team member tells you that they hit their 2-ball Hot Auto every single match, and scouting data shows that they only hit 1 of 2 balls, and only 30% hot, it shows that either that team member isn't watching matches and is misinformed about their team's performance, denoting lack of communication, or that they want to sway your scouting data a little bit in your favor, which may cause many problems if they don't at least semi-reliably deliver on their claim.

Last year, during the Recycle Rush Championships, I probably told 10-15 teams that we had matches with upfront that we were putting on a new mechanism, and we would either be crippled or of very little scoring use. I noticed that the response was much more positive, and our alliance partners were very gracious in adjusting the strategy to lessen the load on us. On the other hand, one of the most frustrating things that I've had to deal with during FRC is when an alliance partner tells us that they're able to do X task and would like to do it, in order to impress scouts in the stands, and after assuring us of their capability, they miss the shots, possibly costing us the match.

My opinion is that teams should try and be honest about their capabilities at competition.
Also, where's the fun in a game if the opposing alliance doesn't give you hard defenses? There are few better feelings than overcoming targeted defense.

[The other Gabe]

This is really not a good idea, really, especially if you happen to be a team that is going to be picked, instead of picking. as a scouting lead, I did base my choices at least partially off of which teams were honest, friendly, and willing to admit their flaws as well as their strengths (say there's two teams, nearly equal in how they compliment my team's robot, and I'm the 6th seeded robot. I'm gonna pick the team that knows where it is weak, because then we can make a strategy around that).

a team is gonna find out your weaknesses whether you want them to or not. better to be honest, both in the respect of gracious professionalism, and because it makes you look better.

Originally Posted by rich2202

Maybe the strategy is: On Day 1 of qualifications, tell scouting teams you will post the information on Day 2.

That way, you get one day of competition with the other teams not knowing. On day 2 interested teams will be able to get the info that may not have been revealed during day 1 of qualifications.

Pit scouting is also used by strategists to figure out strategies within the team, and they dont really have time to hunt you down before their next match. this would be really annoying.

[blaze8902]

The team I work with has always been far more concerned with facilitating the long term success of the students in the area in a sustainable manner. Our priorities lie in helping everyone we can to achieve their potential.

That said, we care more about helping other teams grow by sharing our designs and resources, and increasing our own success through cooperation with our alliance.

This year we plan on continuing our tradition of maintaining as high a level of transparency as is feasible.

I know many other teams have a different, more competitive, philosophy that differs from our focus on cooperation and provision of resources and information.

To each their own, as long as students are learning and having fun you can approach FIRST however you like, but I believe this year we will maintain transparency.

As a side note, I do find it interesting that our method of pit scouting differs from a few teams who have spoken up in this thread. Rather than newer students, we generally have a mix of students who scout. We like to have mechanically experienced students teach others how to identify a robots capabilities visually, with a focus on asking other teams how their mechanisms work and what design decisions they made. We've found this to be more informative and educational on several fronts.

[Chief Hedgehog]

I really think that Pit-Scouting is more about gaining the general 'feel' of a team. Most of the scouting (at least the best info) comes from scouting teams on the field.

[blaze8902]

Agreed. If anything it's an opportunity to figure out what we're going to look out for in the stands.

Speaking with the students and looking at their robots is more of a learning experience than something used in the match.

That said, definitives like "can it shoot" or "What kind of drive train does it use?" can be answered, while questions like "How well does it say shoot?" is best saved for the stands.

[jajabinx124]

Originally Posted by Chief Hedgehog

I really think that Pit-Scouting is more about gaining the general 'feel' of a team. Most of the scouting (at least the best info) comes from scouting teams on the field.

To me pit scouting is more about getting data that stand scouting can't collect, but yes the "best" or most useful information comes from stand scouting.