Quitting FRC for Vex?

[TDav540]

Originally Posted by s_forbes

Sure they did; back when all of the parts were Vex, it was a pretty great kit!

The Vex robotics competition is amazing for how little it costs to compete. Whenever someone asks how to get their kids involved in robotics at a school with no team, Vex is usually my first suggestion.

There are lots of other robotics competitions out there as well that are just as fun as FIRST, but not as large of a budget drain. FRC is expensive.

Looking at a lot of these posts, there seem to be four reasons teams leave FIRST and/or join VEX:

1. FTC's kit isn't very good
2. FTC's (and FRC's) curriculum for teachers is nonexistent
3. FRC is too resource-intensive (space, time, money, etc.), and
4. The team(s) doesn't have enough student participation, teacher/mentor support to do FRC, and the VEX platform is easier to manage

I also wouldn't be surprised if current FRC teams are leaving for VEX because the switch to 2Champs conflicts with VEX worlds, though this a (generally) much smaller factor.

How do we continue to grow the FIRST program? I think FIRST organizers and the community need to realize large changes and additions are needed to the FTC to make it comparable to VEX. They need the curriculum, they need a better kit, they need to be better organized, and, most importantly, they need an identity in the FIRST landscape. To do this, more money, emphasis, thought, and time needs to be invested in that program from a development level.

FIRST could easily ignore that problem and simply keep the program as it is. That would be a significant oversight and a travesty, but it's the easiest path. Partnering with VEX, rather than trying to compete with it, would also be a good idea, if at all possible.

In terms of FRC, the problems are less massive but still crucial. The program needs to become cheaper. I'll be honest, I'm not sure how you do that, other than just getting more sponsorship or lowering the flashiness of the events (not an issue IMO), but they need to find a way to change the $5k number to $4k, $3k, or lower. Otherwise, the cost will continue to push teams out the door rather than welcome them in.

Additionally, FRC needs to take the same approach VEX does with teachers: combine it with a curriculum that can be taught in the classroom. There are ways to do this, and it needs to happen soon.

It would also be a good idea for FIRST to support/start AndyMark/VEX-type operations or shipping warehouses in Europe and Asia, to help improve the costs and operations for international teams. The increased expenses for international teams is hindering that growth heavily.

Overall, I think Greying Jay said it well:

Originally Posted by GreyingJay

The programs give different experiences to the students. I heard someone once say that "FRC is not about robotics. FRC is a life experience that involves robotics". And when I look back on what FRC is doing for the students I work with, I think that "learning to build/program robots" is actually pretty low on the list. Our students are learning more about how to outreach and connect with the community, how to work on teams, how to work on imbalanced teams, how to work under pressure, how to communicate an idea, how to manage their time, how large projects are structured and how each person fits into that. It's much more like how the real world operates.

But VEX still has enough other benefits that it's changing the robotics landscape, much more than FIRST. Slowly, but more quickly by the day, FRC is losing it's place as the pinnacle of high school robotics to VEX. If we and the people who lead FIRST want FRC to stay at the highest level, then we have to make some critical changes.

[GreyingJay]

Hey, thanks for the shout-out.

Originally Posted by TDav540

But VEX still has enough other benefits that it's changing the robotics landscape, much more than FIRST. Slowly, but more quickly by the day, FRC is losing it's place as the pinnacle of high school robotics to VEX. If we and the people who lead FIRST want FRC to stay at the highest level, then we have to make some critical changes.

If it was possible to make FRC competitions cheaper, and increase the build season period from 6 weeks to something longer, it would lower the entry barrier for all those schools/groups who can't stomach the two largest factors about FRC - namely, how much it costs (and how much sponsorship/fundraising is needed) and how insanely busy it gets from January to April just to field a working robot.

(Our parent feedback from this year was essentially - "holy cow we didn't realize just how much Billy was going to be in for - it was worth it in the end but holy cow!")

I recognize it may not BE possible. It would definitely change the competition landscape. The calendar logistics aside, a longer build season would allow the rookies to actually get a robot done but then the 1114's and 254's of the world would have that much more time to build something amazing. It could lower the entry barrier but widen the competition gap, forcing the rookies to work that much harder anyway just to keep up.

In the end, I think there's definitely a place for both programs.

[TDav540]

Originally Posted by GreyingJay

I recognize it may not BE possible. It would definitely change the competition landscape. The calendar logistics aside, a longer build season would allow the rookies to actually get a robot done but then the 1114's and 254's of the world would have that much more time to build something amazing. It could lower the entry barrier but widen the competition gap, forcing the rookies to work that much harder anyway just to keep up.

In the end, I think there's definitely a place for both programs.

There definitely is the space for both. As Blake said, 95% of roboteers aren't in either program. We've still got a large space to grow.

The "extend build season/no more bag day" argument has been talked about so much that

If we want to start that discussion, there are plenty of other threads to do it. Let's try to avoid derailing this one.

[jman4747]

Originally Posted by TDav540

The "extend build season/no more bag day" argument has been talked about so much that

If we want to start that discussion, there are plenty of other threads to do it. Let's try to avoid derailing this one.

It is a distinct difference between the two programs, and mentor involvement and cost to teams are directly affected by this.

I also think that FRC is the technological pinnacle of high school robotics no one I've ever shown this to, especially an engineer, expects to find high school students doing anything this advanced. Like the comment one of our new mentors gave at the end of the season was: "this was more complex than my final project from college."

Another question for everyone: What do you think the purpose of FRC is other than what could be accomplished by another program? What does or could FRC do better than anything else?

PS I'm asking out of pure curiosity. I am completely invested in FRC and would only quit if it ceased to exist.

[Foster]

Originally Posted by jman4747

I also think that FRC is the technological pinnacle of high school robotics no one I've ever shown this to, especially an engineer, expects to find high school students doing anything this advanced. Like the comment one of our new mentors gave at the end of the season was: "this was more complex than my final project from college."

I agree with this, FRC robots are just amazing. There are some other programs like the Underwater competition that build some pretty amazing robots also.

I give the nod to FRC doing best is the complex tasks with a 120lb robot. This game brought out a lot of serious engineering to keep robots together for 2:30. The leap in vision from last year to this year was pretty amazing, I'd love to see next years game have a component that could be helped again by advanced vision systems.

I'd like to see FTC/VEX be allowed to use some of the smaller cameras as a off board vision system: Open MV programmed in Python

[gblake]

As an exercise, what are some specific reasons why you would want to keep your FRC program? Why do you do FRC given the alternatives?

This line of reasoning continues to perplex me.
In VRC (and other programs), students are explicitly expected or encouraged to work with mentors to do:

• Video,
• Web Design,
• CAD,
• CAM,
• Machining,
• Welding,
• Journalism,
• Rapid Prototyping,
• Public Speaking,
• etc.

Where is the notion that they aren't supposed to do these things, or aren't rewarded if they do these things, coming from?

And, even if the program didn't encourage all of those activities (and more), why-o-why would anyone who wanted to do them feel that the program(s) in any way discouraged them from doing it?

It is possible in FRC to 100% avoid/ignore all of the activities in that list. It is possible in VRC (and other programs) to 100% embrace & enjoy all of those activities.

In my mind, FRC holds your hand (and pulls you) a bit more; while VRC opens the door (and invites you to walk through).

There is a difference, but nothing stops a group from using either program as a springboard and "going" as far as they like.

In some ways, because you can build, modify, and operate several simple VEX robots for the price of one FRC robot, experimenting with VEX robots opens more doors (cooperative behaviors, intramural contests, etc.) than experimenting with highly specialized FRC robots can open.

On the other hand, because FRC bots are bigger, they can enable some valuable real-world experiments and demos/attractions that a pure VRC bot (built from the VEX EDR parts used in VRC) can't.

Blake

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by EmileH

The legendary Team 40 had VRC programs from 2004 on, but stopped their FRC program after 2010. They continue to participate in Vex.

VRC didn't exist in 2004. There was a pilot event at the 2005 FIRST Championship event, and a pilot season in 2005-06. What is now the VEX EDR system was at first a RadioShack exclusive, released sometime after the 2005 pilot event and before the next season.

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

VRC didn't exist in 2004. There was a pilot event at the 2005 FIRST Championship event, and a pilot season in 2005-06. What is now the VEX EDR system was at first a RadioShack exclusive, released sometime after the 2005 pilot event and before the next season.

The edubot kit (which I'm pretty certain was the "protoype" of vex) was available in 2004, and maybe sooner.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by IndySam

I hate the Vex vs FRC talk. We do both and both are great programs and we will continue to do both. I personally prefer doing FRC.

But the biggest difference between the two are that Vex and Rec Foundation understands who their customers are. FIRST hasn't a clue.

This sums it up perfectly.
Except, I would add that FIRST does have clues, but unwilling in certain areas where they could provide additional support for teams.
The fact that FIRST isnt as scalable as VEX compounds the situation.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by Fusion_Clint

With the FTC change over to android and java this year, it was a real steep learning curve for my new to robotics kids. I am considering starting a VRC team next year for my new kids with zero robotics experience. The plus to VRC is a legit curriculum to help. The minus, is that designing is really limiting, i.e. you can build anything you want as long as you buy the parts from VEX.

Credits

[FTC5110]

Originally Posted by Foster

I'd like to see FTC/VEX be allowed to use some of the smaller cameras as a off board vision system: Open MV programmed in Python

Got that in FTC. The phones have cameras and some teams were using them this season. Come to the light side, we too have cookies and a lot of scope for new stuff next season.

[rlance]

Are there grants available with the Vex program like there are with FRC? If not, then for our team I'm not sure that Vex wouldn't cost more.

[jman4747]

Originally Posted by Gregor

Credits

Mark off "eliminate bag day"

[Christopher149]

Originally Posted by TDav540

most importantly, they [FTC] need an identity in the FIRST landscape.

I haven't seen anyone in this thread mention it, but in Michigan, that identity for FTC is "middle school".

[ARampantBrian]

I think there are many things that VEX and FRC get right individually. I did both in high school and continue to mentor in FRC currently.

VRC is much better for many schools/organizations. As has been mentioned before, VRC is much cheaper for teams, and definitely doesn't have the same scare factor that FRC does in both time and money. From experience, VRC competitions are also much easier to manage and run than FRC competitions are. It is much easier for schools, students, and mentors to jump in and do well in VRC because VEX's building equipment is a lot more simple to put together for someone without experience than FRC is.

However, VRC just doesn't have the same wow factor in my opinion. Something that makes FRC the spectacle it is is the arena factor of the competition. FRC has much more of the sport feeling to it than VRC does, which feels much more like a hobbyist competition to me than FRC does. I think the six-week challenge for FRC teams makes it much more of an interesting challenge than VRC is, and in FRC you get much more difference in design than VRC due to the time teams have to work on the robot.

I know, personally, I would not want to continue in VRC because as a mentor, I just do not enjoy the competitions and challenge as much as I do the FRC challenge. Something about the six week build time and the size of the competitions just makes the time needed to compete well more worth it than what I experienced as a student in VRC.

Overall, I think the problem with FRC is that it is not easy to jump into as VRC is. Although I personally prefer FRC, I would suggest VRC as a robotics competition for a new school/team. I think if FRC wants to continue to grow and wants to continue to be more available, both funds and the learning curve to FRC needs to be addressed if it still wants to be the main high school robotics competition.