build season needs to be longer.

[PowerfulKitty]

Originally Posted by nuggetsyl

IMO we could just announce the game and never do the bag and tag part of it.

THIS

It would eliminate the issue of people cheating by building while the robot is supposed to be bagged. It would also negate the benefit that well funded teams get by building a practice bot.

If they were to change the length of the season, I would want it to be shorter. ~4 weeks or so. Robot in 3 Days kinda shows that. (Yes I understand those people are very experienced and have good resources etc.)

I also don't think you even need pneumatic tires. We are using VexPro 8" traction tires.

[Jon Stratis]

Making the build season longer doesn't really change anything. Parts will still sell out the first weekend, and then take another 2-3 weeks (or more) to come in, and those teams that managed to get their order in early will still have an advantage over those who did not. In fact, their advantage would be even bigger, as they would have even longer with a completed robot to test and practice.

When we do things right, my team doesn't really even need the full 6 weeks to build - we spend the last week testing and practicing.

The fact that there are constrained component quantities means that teams need to innovate, not complain. Instead of looking at specific part shortages as problems, look for alternatives. Find a different way to tackle the challenge. Thats the best part about engineering - there is no one "right" solution to a challenge!

[Joe Ross]

Cause a shortage of pneumatic wheels by posting that everyone should be getting pneumatic wheels
Post that the build season needs to be longer because pneumatic wheels sold out
????
Profit!

[gblake]

When the Challenge part of FRC was dreamed up, the challenge was purposefully (paraphrased) "a time too short, a weight budget too small, a power budget too stingy, a size budget too tight, a ...."

With that in mind, it makes sense that a build season that is long enough for steady, but not all-consuming, focused effort by a group of rookies to produce a kitbot plus a custom feature or two is exactly what the program intends to give you.

The program explicitly doesn't exist for teams to build, tweak, hone, redesign, etc. their multiple superbots 24x7 from kickoff until Einstein. Some teams might choose to get as close to that situation as they can, but the FRC program doesn't exist to cause or encourage it.

Remember there is often a big difference between what you want, and what you need.

A small team can build a successful robot in 3-7 days, especially if they plan in advance to do it, and they practice/prepare.

FRC has a 44-day build season. Embrace it, and be proud of what you can accomplish during it (without losing perspective)!

Blake

[sonichammer7476]

Guys. No. I have to agree with that one guy, I would say that 95% of teams have the ability to buy parts locally, whenever they want. 6 weeks is staying, at least for a while. And the idea of a no bag and tag is ridiculous. Who would sign up for any earlier competitions? Hardly any teams would pass up an opportunity to have 5 extra weeks of building and perfecting. The cons of changing how it is now far outweigh the pros.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by gblake

FRC has a 44-day build season. Embrace it, and be proud of what you can accomplish during it (without losing perspective)!

Pretty sure a lot of top-ranked teams would disagree with you on this. Also a lot of mentor family members. My wife, in particular, laughs every time I claim FRC has a 6-week build season.

[mrnoble]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

My wife, in particular, laughs every time I claim FRC has a 6-week build season.

Mine stopped laughing about that a couple years ago.

[PayneTrain]

Dumping bag and tag isn't going to have a chance to happen until the last few parts of the continental US finally roll over to districts. Once we pass a threshold of 2/3 of FRC teams being in the district system format, a lot of switches can probably get flipped.

Think about this, if time extension is such a concern, why not mandate in a district system you have to attend at least one competition before week 4?

Very tangential, but if two champs is such a concern to you, why not realign the season so you fold in district championships in to championships that cover whole super regions or zones of the country?

I think for a small selection of core values and concepts that defined FRC at its inception should remain evergreen, but it's tough to convince me ship day is one of those core concepts if its being bypassed by close to 1000 teams this year.

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

Pretty sure a lot of top-ranked teams would disagree with you on this. Also a lot of mentor family members. My wife, in particular, laughs every time I claim FRC has a 6-week build season.

And I'm pretty sure that you mean that many teams that do well on-the-field choose to work beyond the 44 days in various legal ways.

I know working on the Withholding Allowance parts is in addition to the 44 days.
I know that time spent during competitions, is in addition to the 44 days.
I know that legal prep/practice before kickoff is more than the 44 days.
I know that off-season events is more than the 44 days.

I also know that many of the members of the teams that do well on the field are able to do that without letting the rest of their lives get out-of-kilter.

However, none of that changes two things.
A) The reason(s) the program currently presents all teams with the challenge(s) it does, and
B) Investing time into building and operating an uber-bot is by no means the only dimension of being a top-ranked FRC team. Many teams that build uber-bots are good at many other aspects of FRC (and vice-versa), but building uber-bots is not the same thing as succeeding at FRC.

My thesis was and is that each time someone wishes for a longer build season, it's worth pausing for a minute to ask if what they are wishing for is really necessary for succeeding at FRC. In my experience, the answer is usually an easy, "No."

[ToddF]

Originally Posted by jman4747

This concept gets lost to people so much and I don't get it. If there was no bag-n-tag you could spend the same amount of hours working but over a larger time period. You can afford to have fewer meetings per week over a longer time and pace your build in a way that best suits your team.

For elite teams, the "six week build season" does not exist. They work on their designs right up until championship. Building a practice bot and designing mechanisms that can be swapped out before competitions allows for continuous evolution of your robot mechanisms throughout the competition season.

[philso]

Originally Posted by ToddF

For elite teams, the "six week build season" does not exist. They work on their designs right up until championship. Building a practice bot and designing mechanisms that can be swapped out before competitions allows for continuous evolution of your robot mechanisms throughout the competition season.

It might be worth noting that many of the elite teams also "develop technologies" for use in some upcoming season during the off-season time. When it comes time to apply those technologies during the build season, they can do it much faster.

[ToddF]

Originally Posted by philso

It might be worth noting that many of the elite teams also "develop technologies" for use in some upcoming season during the off-season time. When it comes time to apply those technologies during the build season, they can do it much faster.

Amen!

Here's a presentation I gave at the 2012 Hampton Roads FRC Summit on exactly this concept. Doing drive train development during the summer rather than during build season marked a turning point in the competitiveness of our team. It's the only way we can compete with the teams out there with high levels of fabrication resources.

[John Retkowski]

Originally Posted by PowerfulKitty

THIS
THIS

It would eliminate the issue of people cheating by building while the robot is supposed to be bagged. It would also negate the benefit that well funded teams get by building a practice bot.

I've seen this particular point brought up multiple times before, and I just wanted to put an end to something that isn't logically sound or valid.

To show this, I'm going to paraphrase the same reasons you give in terms of students taking a test.

"We should allow students to use their textbooks while taking tests. It would eliminate the issue of people cheating by sneaking glances at their books while they're supposed to be closed. It would also negate the benefit that well prepared students get by studying before hand."

The rules are set up for a reason, people may not like them, but everyone has the same length of time from kickoff to championships. What each team does with that time is up to them.

[philso]

Another way of looking at it is that a teams accumulated knowledge and their collective imagination might be their greatest resource, greater than having access to money, materials or fabrication equipment.

Though they don't explicitly state it, ToddF and John Retowski's last posts would seem to indicate that one's imagination is like a muscle. The more one exercises it when one does not need it, the stronger it is when one does need it.

Oh yeah, rules are rules. Every competition has some constraints that one has to work within, even the "unlimited" ones. Why not make each match 2 1/2 hours long so that alliances can score more points? As long as the same rules apply to all the participants, it is fair. Yes, some teams have access to more resources, etc. What about some of the participants themselves? We have several team members who are are naturally "gifted" and have "extreme intuition about all things mechanical and electrical". They have "the Knack" and have an "unfair advantage" when asked to do things like designing and building robots. Not all teams will have members with the Knack. Should team members like them be banned?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dx6HojLBsnw

[evanperryg]

Originally Posted by John Retkowski

"We should allow students to use their textbooks while taking tests. It would eliminate the issue of people cheating by sneaking glances at their books while they're supposed to be closed. It would also negate the benefit that well prepared students get by studying before hand."

Thank you for putting this into perspective. The idea that we should stop people from breaking a rule by getting rid of the rule is counterintuitive and outright ridiculous. Here's some things you can do to make sure you can make a good robot, with the current constraints:

• Get your team together early in the fall. Train newbies. Participate in FTC, VEX, or an informal competition to get people acclimated to the competition setting. If FTC/VEX isn't an option. reach out to local teams about setting up a local competition.
• Design something over the summer, before the new members come in. Giving the veterans a bigger design challenge before training season comes around will refine their skills for the coming season.
• If you don't have money, find it. Postage for 30 letters to local businesses isn't going to drain your budget. Make a presentation, ask to bring your robot to their workplace (seriously, do this, it works), and talk about sponsorships.
• Be smart about your purchases. We decided that, with the cost of tank tread, we weren't going to order it unless we knew we were absolutely going to need it, so we didn't order it.
• Even if you can't afford to build a practice robot, which is understandable, make sure you have a kitbot to throw things on. A powertrain with one bumper isn't nearly as helpful as a full practice bot, but it still can help with designing withholding mechanisms.
• Decide what you need quickly, and order it immediately.

Build season is 6 weeks. The time you have to make your robot great is unlimited.