Cheesecake robot. How far is too far?

[Lil' Lavery]

Nuwanda, the "situation on Curie" last year was initiated by team 900, not 1114. They approached 1114 with the idea. There's already extensive discussion of that situation in other threads. No reason to rehash that here.

Originally Posted by bobby5150

While that could be circumvented by having the receiving team involved in the production, 5.5.2 states that:



Now if the one robot entered is significantly modified instead of replaced, that would likely satisfy this.

Discussions of cheesecaking in general have already occurred in multiple threads, almost all of which happened within the past year. This thread was brought up for the specific purpose of discussing an entire robot being given to an alliance partner to replace their robot.

[GreyingJay]

Originally Posted by Nuwanda

The situation on Curie with 1114 last year was difficult to watch.

That was a very interesting example because in that case clearly 900 was willing to do it, and there was a lot of notoriety over this particular case, but I think it backfired on them in the end. There were a number of matches where only two robots came out to play. Presumably 900 was busy being cheesecaked at the time. The alliance ended up losing a semifinal by only a few points. Had a third robot been out stacking, even if they had only managed to stack a few totes, I believe that would have been enough to up the average alliance score high enough that they would have won.

And we never got to see the harpoons in action

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

What about the inspiration of the teams not picked? The other alliances? The spectators?

The impact of actions such as this shouldn't be solely evaluated based on the team receiving the "cheesecake."

Would you rather I don't inspire that team?

[The other Gabe]

Originally Posted by cj3958

Clearly someone wasn't at champs last year... Or wasn't paying attention to 1114's pit...

actually, we were beaten in finals on our field by that alliance.

the harpoon situation was a combined effort, built in team 900's pit (so of course I wasnt paying attention to 1114's pit, the stuff was happening in 900's!), and agreed upon before they were picked. I'm not saying it's something I entirely supported (I mean, the harpoons were damned cool, so I liked that bit), but that was something in which the team that was cheesecaked was totally cool with it and not surprised by their robot being completely replaced.

[marshall]

Originally Posted by GreyingJay

That was a very interesting example because in that case clearly 900 was willing to do it, and there was a lot of notoriety over this particular case, but I think it backfired on them in the end. There were a number of matches where only two robots came out to play. Presumably 900 was busy being cheesecaked at the time. The alliance ended up losing a semifinal by only a few points. Had a third robot been out stacking, even if they had only managed to stack a few totes, I believe that would have been enough to up the average alliance score high enough that they would have won.

And we never got to see the harpoons in action

Sorry to correct but 1923 was the third robot (1114 and 148 being the first two) and they were out playing. The loss on Einstein had little to do with our (900's) cheesecaking.

[BenBernard]

What bothers me about this thread is how far from "gracious professionalism" some writers seem willing to stray in their pursuit of "winning at all costs."

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

Ethics and rules aside...

ain't nobody got time for that.

RI3D at the competition?

[GreyingJay]

Originally Posted by marshall

Sorry to correct but 1923 was the third robot (1114 and 148 being the first two) and they were out playing. The loss on Einstein had little to do with our (900's) cheesecaking.

Ah, thank you for the clarification.

Still never got to see those harpoons

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Would you rather I don't inspire that team?

I would rather you consider the totality of the actions, rather than just the impacts on one team. I already posted similar thoughts on this back in April, during the previous round of cheesecake debate.
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...1&postcount=87

[mentos54]

Also, consider what this does to the receiving team's reputation, both inside and outside the team.
I mention this because last year, my current team's robot was cheesecaked with a major mechanism by a powerhouse team. We went on to win the event with them.
However, the members of my team who talk about winning that competition have found themselves shamed by new members because "they didn't build the robot that won, they borrowed it". I honestly believe that major cheesecaking is almost never beneficial in the long run, and your resources would be better spent finding a team which is close to what you need and helping them perfect their bot. If your needed partner is nothing close to what any of forty teams have, you're strategizing wrong.

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I have interpreted this line (and others like it) to implicitly mean "we've been cheesecaked, we liked it, therefor it MUST be good and ALL teams should like it." Can you tell me if I have interpreted that incorrectly? If so, can you clarify what you mean by it?

Originally Posted by marshall

I meant that I had derailed the thread slightly and was trying to put the train back on track but you can take my post however you'd like to.

The salt is palpable.

Honestly I think we should spend more time combining different controversial topics into SUPER Controversial topics, such as:
- If we ended bag and tag, would teams cheesecake more or less?
- Is student-built cheesecake better or worse than mentor-built cheesecake?
- Can a team competing in one World Championship cheesecake a team in a second World Championship?
- Can a mentor who mentors both the cheesecaking team and the cheesecaked team replace the student coach on the cheesecaked team?
- If you yell "Cheesecake" while transporting the cheesecaked robot through the pits, does it make the pits safer and/or the cheesecake better?
- Can teams later cheesecake the cheesecaked robot at the district championship, and again at Nationals?

#WeBrokeTheGame?

[CJ_Elliott]

Originally Posted by pfreivald

It is for this that the word "no" was invented.

"Hi, new partners! We selected you so that we can strip off your upper mechanical and add this stuff that we made!"
"No."
"...but we'll probably win if we do that!"
"No."
"...but that's the whole reason why we selected you!"
"Then you should have gotten us on-board with that before selecting us."
"Sorry, our bad. But you're okay with this so we can win, right?"
"No."

I like this. From what I have seen, if a team doesn't want to do something then they will say no and it probably wont happen. In all actuality I find it more frustrating to see people say that it's not gracious professionalism to use cheesecake. If the two teams agree on it then it is a decision that is made by both teams and nothing says anything about the choosing alliance member forcing the picked alliance member to put something on their robot, which would be entirely against what FIRST wants.

[MaGiC_PiKaChU]

Originally Posted by mentos54

Also, consider what this does to the receiving team's reputation, both inside and outside the team.
I mention this because last year, my current team's robot was cheesecaked with a major mechanism by a powerhouse team. We went on to win the event with them.
However, the members of my team who talk about winning that competition have found themselves shamed by new members because "they didn't build the robot that won, they borrowed it". I honestly believe that major cheesecaking is almost never beneficial in the long run, and your resources would be better spent finding a team which is close to what you need and helping them perfect their bot. If your needed partner is nothing close to what any of forty teams have, you're strategizing wrong.

if I see a robot that fits the idea and is available, we'd be more than happy to pick them.
my point is, if I see a single robot worldwide that fits our idea, i'm eating my team shirt.

[marshall]

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

The salt is palpable.

LOL!

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

Honestly I think we should spend more time combining different controversial topics into SUPER Controversial topics, such as:
- If we ended bag and tag, would teams cheesecake more or less?
- Is student-built cheesecake better or worse than mentor-built cheesecake?
- Can a team competing in one World Championship cheesecake a team in a second World Championship?
- Can a mentor who mentors both the cheesecaking team and the cheesecaked team replace the student coach on the cheesecaked team?
- If you yell "Cheesecake" while transporting the cheesecaked robot through the pits, does it make the pits safer and/or the cheesecake better?
- Can teams later cheesecake the cheesecaked robot at the district championship, and again at Nationals?

#WeBrokeTheGame?

These are all very important questions. Honestly, yelling cheesecake in the pits thought might get you a flock of hungry engineers surrounding you.

[Cam_Team 2619]

I would rather not be picked for eliminations than have to compete with another teams robot and scrap ours. I would be so saddened to say "Look, here is the blue banner that we won with another teams robot". Cheesecaking makes me sad, but this is just wrong on a new level.