Go to Post You can't observe things that aren't seen or reported. - Andrew Schreiber [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 19:30
Justin's Avatar
Justin Justin is offline
Never Forget FIRST 1992-2000
no team
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 288
Justin has a brilliant futureJustin has a brilliant futureJustin has a brilliant futureJustin has a brilliant futureJustin has a brilliant futureJustin has a brilliant futureJustin has a brilliant futureJustin has a brilliant futureJustin has a brilliant futureJustin has a brilliant futureJustin has a brilliant future
Send a message via AIM to Justin
2003 Game Flawed....

In my view this year's game is fundamentally flawed in several ways which need to be corrected. As I see it the most egregious of these flaws are the finals. The finals are setup in a manner that rips the control of their own destiny from teams. There should never be a situation which makes it impossible to win. There for we need to move back to best 2 out of 3 for the finals. This way if I come out and loose I still have a fighting chance....the current system barely gives me a chance at all. In addition I would like the see the abolishment of the losers score times the cumulative age of the team divided by pi scoring formulas. Raw score for the entire game qualifying rounds, finals, the whole bit. It is time that FIRST teams demand that FIRST games not be designed in the interest of Dean Kamen proving a point to the world. Also I would like to see a little of the focus shift back to the game. After all this is at some level about a robotics competition, at least it was at one point. Now it seems that all I need to do to win an award is have a good business or 7 year plan. What happened to awards like best offensive play or best defensive play? These awards have been abolished as the focus of FIRST shifts away from the game. Again more Dean Philosophy 101, he is so desperate now to avoid even the appearance that we are in some way competitive. News flash the business world is cut throat, I'm not suggesting we have to be, but I am suggesting that we can be competitive we can use defense and raw scores without sacrificing the mission of FIRST. I submit that if game design continues down its current path next year we will not need a robotics competition. Kickoff could be something to the effect of "design a really nice business plan that will make the Segway profitable."

"FIRST Purists UNITE!!!"

-Justin
__________________
Rookie Year: 1996 (Hexagon Havoc)
Robots: Hexcalibur (96), Blue Dragon (97), El-e-Vador (98), Astrobot 2000 (99), Last Chance (2000)
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 19:55
DarkRedDragon's Avatar
DarkRedDragon DarkRedDragon is offline
Registered User
#0341 (Miss Daisy, and dang proud of it!)
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Im from Blue bell, but the team officaily is from ambler
Posts: 133
DarkRedDragon is an unknown quantity at this point
Send a message via ICQ to DarkRedDragon Send a message via AIM to DarkRedDragon
my team won the business plan, i helped write it and i sold it to the judges. I agree with you in some points, but you have to remember that engineering also needs some one to sell the design that the engineer makes. All FIRST is doing is offering more competition and more things that teams can do, they are only finding new talent that will help them in the future.
__________________
The air is what I yern for, infinite space and yet infinite restrictions. To master the sky is to break out of the mold and to break the rules!
Have you ever looked to the sky on a perfectly clear night, and see that we are only a spec of dust in this great universe?
1) Team 341 Galileo division champions
2) Team 341 won the Entrepreneurship award (I had a big part in that)
3)Had one great time!
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 20:02
Yan Wang's Avatar
Yan Wang Yan Wang is offline
Ithaca is Gorges
AKA: John Wayne
FRC #0639 (Code Red Robotics)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 1,910
Yan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud ofYan Wang has much to be proud of
Send a message via ICQ to Yan Wang Send a message via AIM to Yan Wang Send a message via MSN to Yan Wang Send a message via Yahoo to Yan Wang
I think two changes would've made the game a bit better.

A) Getting on top is worth less.

B) Stacking gets you points in addition to being a multiplier in an exponential format or some sort.

With more stackers, it'd be easier to win.
__________________
Code Red Robotics Team 639 Alumnus | www.team639.org
<Patrician|Away> what does your robot do, sam
<bovril> it collects data about the surrounding environment, then discards it and drives into walls
Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 20:14
Ryan Foley Ryan Foley is offline
Registered User
FRC #5687 (The Outliers)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: ME
Posts: 447
Ryan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond reputeRyan Foley has a reputation beyond repute
yes justin, I agree with what you said

the scoring for finals this year was horrible, 2 out of 3 is better, and easier for spectators to understand.

go with raw scores for QPs. it is simpler to understand.

the games could be better. The last 2 years the game has seemed promising in the beginning, but at competitions it turned out into the same thing every match. The amount of competition is going down, to far.

The whole part about FIRST giving each team a list of what matches they are in and who their alliance partner and opponents are for the match is a bad idea in my opinion. They should have done it like they did in 2001. they gave you a list that looked like the following
MATCHES 1, 2, 3
Team 1
Team 2
team 3
team 4
team 5
team 6
team 7
team 8
team 9
team 10
team 11
team 12

They would tell you who you alliance partners were when you were called to the staging area. It made things interesting. It was more challenging, an didnt emphasize so much on the whole scouting thing. It gave a good challenge of being able to work somethin out for a strategy in a very short time.

They need to design a game that guarantees a different match every time. 2003 turned out to be whoever knocked the pyramid over first would win. It was boring.
__________________
Ryan

FRC #5687: The Outliers [2015-?]
FRC #1995: Fatal Error [2007-2009]
FRC #350: Timberlane Robotics [2001-2004]

FRC/FLL volunteer since 2005
Reply With Quote
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 20:17
Spikey's Avatar
Spikey Spikey is offline
Its NOT a Camera
AKA: College Advisor
FRC #0293 (SPIKE)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: A tiny spec in New Jersey
Posts: 225
Spikey is just really niceSpikey is just really niceSpikey is just really niceSpikey is just really nice
Lack of rule enforcement

What really miffed me was the lack of enforcement of certain rules in the game. The tipping rule was very rarely enforced and when it was it was not properly used. Poor Buzz got DQed while one team went around tipping bots and no penalties were issued. Many teams were going around bragging of how many bots they tipped over, none of these teams got penalties. Enforce the rules!!!

I did like the ramp points ot gave my team a chance to make a difference despite haveing to replace our drive train. We were the only bot I saw in Galieo that stuck to the ramp evry time and stayed there despite many repeated attacks. We got on the ramp in 6 out of 7 of our matches and stayed on every single time!!
Even at Rutgers Team 25 could not push us off, and we all know how fast they could ram!!
Look at this pic for proof! (Not 25 but a good example)
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	dsc00673.jpg
Views:	592
Size:	88.2 KB
ID:	1267  
__________________
It's not a bug it's a feature!
"No, you may not drill holes in the air tanks to lighten them." -FIRST Q&A Repsonse to a question about lightening air tanks.
I'm the Not a Camera Kid at the New Jersey Regional But Not This Year, I am at Syracuse University Class of 2009
Uncrowned Champions of the 2005 Philadelphia Regional
SPIKE X NJ Xerox Creativity Award. Chesapeake Regional CHAMPIONS, and Motorola Quality Award
2006 Semi-Finalist at NJ Regional & Semi-Finalist at Chesapeake Regional, winners of the 2006 Xerox Creativity Award, and Judges Award
"Looks like SPIKE is doing its Batman thing again, that team looked like it was going to score, but SPIKE was not going to allow that to happen" -Play by play call at the Chesapeake Regional
Reply With Quote
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 20:19
Koci Koci is offline
Registered User
#0624 (CRyptonite)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Katy, TX
Posts: 62
Koci is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
It is time that FIRST teams demand that FIRST games not be designed in the interest of Dean Kamen proving a point to the world. Also I would like to see a little of the focus shift back to the game. After all this is at some level about a robotics competition, at least it was at one point. Now it seems that all I need to do to win an award is have a good business or 7 year plan. What happened to awards like best offensive play or best defensive play? These awards have been abolished as the focus of FIRST shifts away from the game.
I don't know about you, but I think it is MUCH more important what people gather from the experience, and the impact it has upon all of the people in attendance than who wins and who loses a match. I don't think the focus ever was on the game, and never should be.

Quote:
There should never be a situation which makes it impossible to win.
Maybe so, maybe not. You can play the first match in such a manner that if you lose, you still can come back. All that matters is that you play the game with the correct strategy, inherent to any game. Just because the scoring system is not traditional does not mean it is flawed.

Quote:
I think two changes would've made the game a bit better.

A) Getting on top is worth less.

B) Stacking gets you points in addition to being a multiplier in an exponential format or some sort.

With more stackers, it'd be easier to win.
First of all, it would never be easier to win. The same number of teams will win and the same number of teams will lose regardless of the scoring system. Second, if all you care about is winning, design a robot that does just that: win. We all have the same rules, and the same number of teams win at the end, no matter what the rules are.


Too many people complain about the rules, but it just seems to me that whatever the rules are, you must be able to conform to it. The rules are ALWAYS fair because we all play by the SAME rules.
__________________
2001 Highest Ranking Rookie at Lone Star Regional
2002 Imagery Award at Lone Star Regional
2003 Delphi's Driving Tomorrow's Technology Award at Arizona Regional
2003 Delphi's Driving Tomorrow's Technology Award at Lone Star Regional
Reply With Quote
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 20:29
EIROBOTICS86's Avatar
EIROBOTICS86 EIROBOTICS86 is offline
Registered User
#0311 (Red Jammers)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: East Islip NY
Posts: 139
EIROBOTICS86 can only hope to improve
Send a message via AIM to EIROBOTICS86
the elimination points suck
Reply With Quote
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 20:54
sevisehda's Avatar
sevisehda sevisehda is offline
Registered User
#0666
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The South
Posts: 215
sevisehda is an unknown quantity at this point
Send a message via AIM to sevisehda
I see 1 problem with this years competition. Too many people complaining about one of the most amazing opportunities they will ever have. When I was in High School I saw plenty of things I saw that were wrong about FIRST. But in comparison to all the fun I had and the opportunities FIRST gave me thos minor problems didn't seem to matter. If you think there are huge problems with FIRST then simply don't sign up for the team. If you have an issue send an email to someone who can do something at FIRST. Complaining about things on a 3rd party forum is going to change much if anything.

FIRST does everything for a reason. The reason finals were dropped from best out of 3 to highest total because there were complaints that finals lasted too long and teams didn't playe nough matches. Every match takes time and by getting rid of a third of the finals they figured they could allow teams to play more matches in qualifying. I agree the best of 3 was better. It was possible to come back this year, if you played the game smart. FIRST probobly saw that the new system didn't work after the first week of regionals but for fairness they stuck with it. More likely than not it will back to best of 3 next year.

Making comments about how the hill should be worth none and the stacks should be worth more to help stackers. FIRST gave everyone the same game. Many teams did not recognize how hard it would be to consistently stack. There were a few teams who realized stacking would be nearly impossible and decided not to stack. I heard comments on CD all season about how high people would stack but noone stacked above what a human could play. The game was about protecting stacks and moving crates not making stacks.

Every year FIRST gives us a new game and a new competition. They try new things each year sometimes they work well other times there flops. 2001 wasn't a success so they dropped the 4vs0 system. I assume the same thing will happen to the Highest total score finals as well. But there are successes like 2vs2 and 3 team alliances for finals. I could point out flaws in each years game but those flaws are rarely repeated because FIRST learns form there mistakes as we all do.
Reply With Quote
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 21:30
Ben Mitchell Ben Mitchell is offline
Registered User
no team
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Bridgewater, NJ
Posts: 566
Ben Mitchell has a reputation beyond reputeBen Mitchell has a reputation beyond reputeBen Mitchell has a reputation beyond reputeBen Mitchell has a reputation beyond reputeBen Mitchell has a reputation beyond reputeBen Mitchell has a reputation beyond reputeBen Mitchell has a reputation beyond reputeBen Mitchell has a reputation beyond reputeBen Mitchell has a reputation beyond reputeBen Mitchell has a reputation beyond reputeBen Mitchell has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2003 Game Flawed....

Quote:
Originally posted by Justin
In my view this year's game is fundamentally flawed in several ways which need to be corrected. As I see it the most egregious of these flaws are the finals. The finals are setup in a manner that rips the control of their own destiny from teams. There should never be a situation which makes it impossible to win. There for we need to move back to best 2 out of 3 for the finals. This way if I come out and loose I still have a fighting chance....the current system barely gives me a chance at all. In addition I would like the see the abolishment of the losers score times the cumulative age of the team divided by pi scoring formulas. Raw score for the entire game qualifying rounds, finals, the whole bit. It is time that FIRST teams demand that FIRST games not be designed in the interest of Dean Kamen proving a point to the world. Also I would like to see a little of the focus shift back to the game. After all this is at some level about a robotics competition, at least it was at one point. Now it seems that all I need to do to win an award is have a good business or 7 year plan. What happened to awards like best offensive play or best defensive play? These awards have been abolished as the focus of FIRST shifts away from the game. Again more Dean Philosophy 101, he is so desperate now to avoid even the appearance that we are in some way competitive. News flash the business world is cut throat, I'm not suggesting we have to be, but I am suggesting that we can be competitive we can use defense and raw scores without sacrificing the mission of FIRST. I submit that if game design continues down its current path next year we will not need a robotics competition. Kickoff could be something to the effect of "design a really nice business plan that will make the Segway profitable."

"FIRST Purists UNITE!!!"

-Justin

Right on.
__________________
Benjamin Mitchell

Vex Robotics Competition team advisor (4 high school teams)
Reply With Quote
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 21:44
jburstein jburstein is offline
Registered User
#0008
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Palo Alto
Posts: 21
jburstein is an unknown quantity at this point
They use such horribly complex scoring systems to give the rookies a fighting chance. My guess is that in order to retain teams they want the rookies not to get trounced over and over, so they design the scoring systems to be fairly random.

For instance the LA regional; a team that was broken for every single one of their matches(and when they finally fixed things only functioned poorly) was ranked 4th at the end of the day friday, and through good part of saturday. I think they still wound up in the top 8, though i'm not sure.

On the other hand our robot was functioning very well, and we were dominant in all but one of our matches on friday. At the end i go and check out our ranking, and i'm very surprised not to see us in the first screen (the top 10 or so). So i wait a bit, thinking we must be at least 15th, 15 comes around, and we're not there. I had to wait until the high 30's to see my team number come up.

that's what the "the losers score times the cumulative age of the team divided by pi scoring formulas" are about; giving even the teams who don't do so well a chance to be high ranked. I think this year they over did it because:
A) a robot which was just a box that drove could be competitive in this year's game, and
B)the + 2x loser's score made having a match where no one was dominant very high scoring.

It was to the point where my teammates were jokingly considering dropping our robot off a tall building to break it some, because it might get better while broken.

To finish out this novel of a post I have to say that it is very frustrating for those of us who have built great robots to be outscored by lesser bots, but even so you can understand why FIRST may want to keep it that way
Reply With Quote
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 21:47
Madison's Avatar
Madison Madison is offline
Dancing through life...
FRC #0488 (Xbot)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 5,244
Madison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond reputeMadison has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally posted by sevisehda
If you think there are huge problems with FIRST then simply don't sign up for the team. If you have an issue send an email to someone who can do something at FIRST. Complaining about things on a 3rd party forum is going to change much if anything.
If there's any message at all that FIRST consistantly sends out to its participants, it's that we should all take an active, participatory role in changing the things that have problems.

It seems silly to think that it's okay to make an active, vocal effort at changing culture, but FIRST is immune to that same effort.
__________________
--Madison--

...down at the Ozdust!

Like a grand and miraculous spaceship, our planet has sailed through the universe of time. And for a brief moment, we have been among its many passengers.
Reply With Quote
  #12   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 21:50
Marc P. Marc P. is offline
I fix stuff.
AKA: βetamarc
no team
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Watertown, CT
Posts: 997
Marc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Marc P.
Re: Lack of rule enforcement

Quote:
Originally posted by Spikey
What really miffed me was the lack of enforcement of certain rules in the game. The tipping rule was very rarely enforced and when it was it was not properly used. Poor Buzz got DQed while one team went around tipping bots and no penalties were issued. Many teams were going around bragging of how many bots they tipped over, none of these teams got penalties. Enforce the rules!!!

I did like the ramp points ot gave my team a chance to make a difference despite haveing to replace our drive train. We were the only bot I saw in Galieo that stuck to the ramp evry time and stayed there despite many repeated attacks. We got on the ramp in 6 out of 7 of our matches and stayed on every single time!!
Even at Rutgers Team 25 could not push us off, and we all know how fast they could ram!!
Look at this pic for proof! (Not 25 but a good example)

Flipping was a touchy subject. Obviously as in the picture you posted, both bots are on the ramp. Now, since it is a "king of the hill" competition, there's bound to be pushing and shoving. Add in an incline/ramp, and an obscure center of gravity, and you get a pretty ugly looking soup. Generally speaking, if a robot flips due to head to head bashing, no penalty is called. However, if one robot is stationary, another rams into it, resulting in the tipping of the stationary bot, a penalty should be called. If two bots are in head to head bashing, and one has a pneumatic/mechanical "ramp", they are safe so long as they don't actuate it. Once an action is used while in contact that results in the flipping of another bot, it becomes intentional. If the action is NOT used, and the other bot flips, it's non intentional.

At least, this is how we tried to run it on Curie. If anyone has any other questions about flipping, PM me, and I'll answer what I can.
Reply With Quote
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 21:52
OneAngryDaisy OneAngryDaisy is offline
not on CD enough...
no team
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Rochester, NY
Posts: 785
OneAngryDaisy is a glorious beacon of lightOneAngryDaisy is a glorious beacon of lightOneAngryDaisy is a glorious beacon of lightOneAngryDaisy is a glorious beacon of lightOneAngryDaisy is a glorious beacon of lightOneAngryDaisy is a glorious beacon of light
Re: Lack of rule enforcement

Quote:
Originally posted by Spikey
What really miffed me was the lack of enforcement of certain rules in the game. The tipping rule was very rarely enforced and when it was it was not properly used. Poor Buzz got DQed while one team went around tipping bots and no penalties were issued. Many teams were going around bragging of how many bots they tipped over, none of these teams got penalties. Enforce the rules!!!


Yeah our alliance was DQ'd in the semis against Truck Town when both Buzz and T3 were stuck up against eachother. Buzz just happened to have wheels and had a advantage over T3, who was protecting a stack.. Either one could've been DQ'd-- And by the way, T3 did not even flip over.

And then in the elimination finals 111 flipped us with their wedge- and they weren't DQ'd.. We have a very low COG and they rammed us after flipping us, causing a 10-tooth sprocket to shear. Thus, we couldn't self-right ourselves for the first time this year.. I still have to commend them on their awesome bot..

Last edited by OneAngryDaisy : 13-04-2003 at 21:56.
Reply With Quote
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 22:06
A. Snodgrass A. Snodgrass is offline
Registered User
AKA: Ashlee Snodgrass
no team
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Hawai'i
Posts: 196
A. Snodgrass is a splendid one to beholdA. Snodgrass is a splendid one to beholdA. Snodgrass is a splendid one to beholdA. Snodgrass is a splendid one to beholdA. Snodgrass is a splendid one to beholdA. Snodgrass is a splendid one to beholdA. Snodgrass is a splendid one to behold
A lot of experiments were done this year in the way the competition was done. One was how teams were inspected, and there were others, including active use of the message board system. A lot of problems that I saw this year develop came from conflicts over interpretation and the message board. However, I didnt see as many flaws as expected with the GAME. No game is perfect, and it is difficult for FIRST that the game changes every year. That means they cant set out rules to follow year in year out which specifically address problems which dont pertain to safety issues.

The game wasnt impossible to win in the elimination rounds, even if you did lose the first match. If you did well in the second match, and did better then the other team did in the first match, then it was still very possible to advance. I also liked the way the scoring went this year, although justin frankly you misrepresented it. It was two times the opponents score plus your own. This way you gained credit for the points that you gained, but you also gained points for what your opponent did if you won.

Also an opportunity for LEARNING still occured in this game. The business plan award for example. This might seem useless to you but I can see how the reasoning behind that award could be very valid. It encourages teams to structure how they are run more like a business would be run, and possibly help them be more efficient during the build season. If FIRST was just about building the robot...what would separate it from other competitions? The point behind this competition is to inspire the students who participate in it. Also it is to give students who are interested in science and technology something to do that they can look back on, and give them something that allows them to work as a team. Where did this game fail at giving them that opportunity?

Maybe this years game wasnt perfect, but if you REALLY have an objection instead of venting in here, bring it up at the team forum in a reasonable manner. Try to think of the reasons why the game was created the way it was. This years game wasn't targeted at marketing the segway, and I find it sad that you thought it was. FIRST was never totally about the game. The game is the end result but it isnt the whole point behind the competition. When you forget that....it makes it difficult to have as much fun as you could otherwise.
__________________
Ashlee Snodgrass
Hawai'i Regional Planning Committee and Alumni of Team 360 (2000 and 2001)
Reply With Quote
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-04-2003, 22:26
Rurouni Rurouni is offline
Homeless Clarkson Student
#0229 (Division By Zero)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Potsdam
Posts: 39
Rurouni is on a distinguished road
Send a message via AIM to Rurouni
Quote:
Originally posted by sevisehda
I see 1 problem with this years competition. Too many people complaining about one of the most amazing opportunities they will ever have. When I was in High School I saw plenty of things I saw that were wrong about FIRST. But in comparison to all the fun I had and the opportunities FIRST gave me those minor problems didn't seem to matter. If you think there are huge problems with FIRST then simply don't sign up for the team. If you have an issue send an email to someone who can do something at FIRST. Complaining about things on a 3rd party forum is going to change much if anything.
I couldn't agree more with you. FIRST has never been about this year's game vs that year's game. It is about inspiring young people into the ideas of engineering, science and technology. The competition is merely a way to focus it. For more than ten years, that has been the goal of FIRST, to inspire high school children into going into complex fields of engineering, mathematics, science, etc. This can be seen by the numbers of scholarships given out by engineering schools to those who participate in FIRST. I mean come on, 13 and a half million plus dollars in scholarships is amazing, for anything! FIRST will continue to do what they have been doing since inception, because it is accomplishing its goal. Many people who do participate in this program go on to become engineers, programmers, scientists and other important fields for the future. I'm glad FIRST has done so well in doing so.

As for this year's game, I don't think the full-potential of the game was used, thats all. I loved the concepts of this game more than previous competitions. We probably will never see the full-potential of this game utilized, but I can honestly say that this was a good game, if you knew where to look. I have discussed this in depth with numerous people, and I do accept that if the ramp was worth only like 5 or ten points per bot, there would have been a drastic change in some robot designs and strategies. But overall this was a great year for FIRST.
__________________
There are those with ideas that can change the society we live in. Ideas that can build a better tomorrow for tomorrow's youth and society. And there are those who chase after small woodland creatures for amusement.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2002 game prediction contest!!! Ken Leung Rumor Mill 41 31-12-2007 18:18
Cal Game 2003 date decided... Who is interested? Ken Leung Off-Season Events 15 02-06-2003 06:48
in response to the 2003 game suspicion Sachiel7 Rumor Mill 5 02-02-2003 22:47
Ok, so YOU design the 2003 game... dlavery General Forum 157 07-01-2003 23:55
About 2003 Game!!! Wetzel Rumor Mill 12 27-08-2002 16:24


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:56.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi