Whats your honest opinion?

[Adam Y.]

For more information on small Fighting robots you can vist

You forgot about autonomous sumo. The nonviolent version of battlebots. All the robots do is go around a push with a lot of creativity involved. Personally I would rather see some competition like Trinity Firefighting where the robots actually complete a real world objective like finding a candle and putting it out.

[Aaron Knight]

Like the post that started this, I will make the disclaimer that my remarks do not necessarily represent our team's collective opinion, but my own.

First off, the idea of BattleBots is ANTITHETICAL to the ideas behind FIRST. Going around a field beating other robots to bits is not Gracious Professionalism as can be defined by anything. There is nothing gracious nor anything professional about bullying around another robot. I saw several robots at nationals that probably should have been called because they were really nothing more than BattleBots.

Secondly, about the media: We've always known that the television market will go after the bad before the good. Hence why you'll see eleven murders and rapes on TV and nothing about someone who just made valedictorian of his/her class. Or for that matter why we see more football than less violent sports: they're only interested, for the most part, in things that will catch the average American's extremely short attention span, or what will sell advertising.

There is no reason for FIRST to change how it operates to pander to the mass market media. On the contrary, they could line up a media sponsor and/or find an efficient method of getting the media from every FIRST team's town to report on progress as it happens in regionals and in national competitions. FIRST is growing, and growing quickly...now's the time to spread the word farther beyond where it goes now.

The point of FIRST is not only to amuse those observing its product but to further educate students and teach them to INNOVATE. Therefore, teams need to understand how to think outside the proverbial box and leave the box-with-wheels prototype. FIRST is not about more of the same, modifying the previous year's, but INNOVATION. I saw a great many robots out at nationals that really were boxes with wheels. There is nothing innovative about a box with wheels at all. Think outside the box and truly find perhaps the deeper reasoning for why FIRST is what it is.

Okay, that's enough ranting for now...

Aaron Knight
Webmaster and Videographer
Team 891 ... Neverending Chaos...
Your lucky number: 3.14159265358979323846....

[Adam Y.]

I saw several robots at nationals that probably should have been called because they were really nothing more than BattleBots.

Adding a wedge to a robot does not make it a battlebot.

[Aaron Knight]

In response to the wedge bit....
When you use a wedge to INTENTIONALLY TIP another robot you have left the world of Gracious Professionalism and entered the realm of BattleBots... intentional damage to another robot, or putting them out of comission is not professional nor is it gracious to anyone other than catering to oneself... not FIRST-like at all.

[Joe Johnson]

In my opinion, FIRST is not sustainable as it is now configured.

I do not believe that the generous supporters of FIRST will continue to support it forever or that FIRST can continue to find new sponsors at the rate needed to support its growth rate and to replace the sponsors it looses.

All realize that FIRST has a very important goal, but I believe that FIRST has been sold to its major supporter as something that will eventually survive on its own.

It is possible that FIRST can change its structure to learn to live without support growing at the same rate as the growth in the number of teams, but I am skeptical that this is a likely way to long term viability.

In my opinion, mass media interest and support is the path that allows for FIRST to continue to survive and grow. This idea is not original to me, listen closely to Dean speeches. Almost all of his public comments make references to this or that company being proud sponsors of this or that athletic competition.

It is my understanding that Dean envisions a day when Delphi, Motorola, GM, Baxter, ... .... and Pepsi, and Coke, and McDonalds, are giving money to FIRST for the same reason they sponsor NASCAR, Olympics or the NCAA Final Four -- Because the eyeball watching the event are worth renting, not because of an altruistic impulse on the part of this or that CEO.

THIS is what I mean when I say that FIRST is running down a razor blade. There is a limit to the altuism of its sponsors -- we need capitalism to take over before the we reach the bottom of the pockets of those generous supporters who write huge checks to FIRST year after year.

This is the vision of FIRST that Dean sold me on at the FIRST kickoff in January 1996. It is still my vision several thousand volunteer hours and 8 FIRST seasons later.

This is why I believe it is important that FIRST get it right... ...and soon.

Joe J.

[Marc P.]

The day FIRST looses sight of it's primary goals in an effort to sustain itself is the day FIRST will loose the respect of it's students. If FIRST needs to "polish up" and resort to savage beatings and destruction to gain ratings and support of the public, what is the purpose of sustaining FIRST, if the messages it is trying to send are blocked by public appeal?

Joe, I don't disagree with you that FIRST needs more support to survive in the future, but I've seen company after company fall due to astronomical growth rates. With a steady trickle of media coverage and students graduating and starting their own teams, FIRST's growth has been steady and relatively constant for the past few years. Aside from that, the supporters FIRST does have, NASA, Disney, Delphi, UTC, Autodesk, etc. support FIRST because it's educational, and prepares students for careers in their respective fields. Pepsi, McDonalds, Coke- look what they do support- NASCAR, various sporting events- huge markets for them and their product. They make more in sales at those events than they invest in the events themselves.

Basically, it's extremely difficult to change a culture while expecting them to support what's changing them. I think the best way to change the world is slowly, one person at a time, as more and more students push all they can for FIRST teams all around the country.

[Ryan Dognaux]

FIRST isn't going anywhere anytime soon (as in leaving). With its current growth rates, of course more money will be needed, meaning more sponsers will be needed, but that's understandable. This is a great competition founded on great ideas and concepts - sponsers aren't going to disregard this due to not having enough media coverage. And if they do, then we don't need em anyways. Graciously Professional companies will continue to sponser - FIRST will remain. At least, this is how I see it... who knows, people can be very cruel.

[Sean]

*To start this off I believe I took my time to step back and form a very honest and true opinion of the format that FIRST follows and the general problems they seem to have. This post does not represent the views of team 151 but of a concerned participant in a competition with issues to resolve*

First off, the idea of Battle Bots is ANTITHETICAL to the ideas behind FIRST. Going around a field beating other robots to bits is not Gracious Professionalism as can be defined by anything.

Theres another issue that Dean Kamen and Woodie both preach. The issue with Gracious professionalism is that is largely a Utopian idea. In the real workforce a company is not going to apply tactics like gracious professionalism. They will do whatever they can to win the contract. The real world does not help there competitor. At the real world level the companies goals are money. The FIRST program has an entirely different goal and thats education. Gracious Professionalism works when the goal of a group is education not when the goal of a group is money. The idea of "gracious professionalism" is mis-phrased and sometimes misused. It should be more of a quote like "Good Sportsmanship" which is an attribute that any competition should support. The real world does not have Gracious Professionalism. But real world competitions do usually have good sportsmanship
Also I'm not saying that FIRST should ditch everything and become a Robot Combat Competition. I'm just saying they should be slightly more lenient on the rules. Doing so because of the path or "commercial robot applications" that Battle bots has created.
If you want to say that FIRST can be self sustaining or that it will grow with out media I have to disagree. It will reach a point where there will be few to no new teams joining. If they don't adapt the program they wont survive. The program as it is can and does only entertain a certain niche. If it does not adapt to be a little more "aggressive" First will be slowly downsized by more adaptive science programs. Programs that allow for a similar experience with a smaller rule set and larger robot capabilities. If the competition fails to "entertain" it will fail to be as large a program as it has the possibility for.

[Aaron Knight]

Originally posted by Sean
Theres another issue that Dean Kamen and Woodie both preach. The issue with Gracious professionalism is that is largely a Utopian idea. In the real workforce a company is not going to apply tactics like gracious professionalism. They will do whatever they can to win the contract. The real world does not help there competitor. At the real world level the companies goals are money. The FIRST program has an entirely different goal and thats education. Gracious Professionalism works when the goal of a group is education not when the goal of a group is money. The idea of "gracious professionalism" is mis-phrased and sometimes misused. It should be more of a quote like "Good Sportsmanship" which is an attribute that any competition should support. The real world does not have Gracious Professionalism. But real world competitions do usually have good sportsmanship

Gracious professionalism is not a utopian idea and it's not a bad one either. On the contrary, it's just a way of saying lets have a good time and learn something rather than lets build something to blast the crap outta someone else's creation. There are instances of gracious professionalism in the real world - and there ought to be more. FIRST is trying to change the world's perceptions, not limit itself to the rest of the world's perceptions.

Also I'm not saying that FIRST should ditch everything and become a Robot Combat Competition. I'm just saying they should be slightly more lenient on the rules. Doing so because of the path or "commercial robot applications" that Battle bots has created.

The rules are in place to protect each team's investments of money into their own programs and to make FIRST competitions fun for ALL involved, not just attacker robots...

If you want to say that FIRST can be self sustaining or that it will grow with out media I have to disagree. It will reach a point where there will be few to no new teams joining. If they don't adapt the program they wont survive. The program as it is can and does only entertain a certain niche. If it does not adapt to be a little more "aggressive" First will be slowly downsized by more adaptive science programs. Programs that allow for a similar experience with a smaller rule set and larger robot capabilities. If the competition fails to "entertain" it will fail to be as large a program as it has the possibility for.

You fail to account for the number of graduating FIRSTers who will go on to expand the program...as the number of programs grows, so then does the number of graduates who have been in FIRST...

FIRST is obviously not being downsized or anything - it grows at a constant rate, nabs new sponsors every year (even in this crappy economy we have right now, FIRST is growing), and FIRST allows for lots of robot capabilities... much more so than BattleBots could because it allows for lots of INNOVATIVE ideas to come out and be tested in a safer environment for experimentation. FIRST as it is serves to entertain the audience and educate it as well....and of course show off what High School Students can do.

Enough ranting and raving on this, if you have questions about what I wrote PM me.

Aaron Knight
Webmaster and Videographer
Team 891
http://first891.topcities.com

[Jared Russell]

Intentionally damaging/destroying robots is never going to play a role in FIRST for the following reasons:

1. Safety: some of these bots (mine included) ARE actually completely student built. We like to say that we did a damned good job, but sticking a radial saw on a classroom robot cannot be considered good practice, never. Also, an enclosed field will not happen; it is too expensive and separates the robots from the spectators - that isn't a good thing.

2. FIRST has enough problems procuring replacement parts as it is. In a game whose objective it is to maim other robots, the repair expenses would be astronomical.

3. If they did it now, everyone would call FIRST BattleBots imitators. And they would be right.

Also, saying that FIRST should be more lax on rules is just nonsensical. If anything, they need to come up with a strict set of rules and ENFORCE them rather than changing them weekly. That whole rotating light affair set my team back for critical days, before finding out at our first regional that it was just fine upside down. Moreover, my team came up with designs that utilized wedges early in the season, but we dismissed them as illegal and immoral. We were ultimately beaten by one - all because of inconsistent rulings and gray areas.

Is that the message we want to send? Every other successful sport has a clearly defined set of rules that are followed. And as it is I consider FIRST much more successful than BattleBots - it has touched far more lives already than BB ever will.

Lastly, gracious professionalism does exist - if you cannot find it in your sponsor or workplace, then find a new one. You hear about the Enrons and Worldcoms in the news every day, but you don't hear about the thousands of honorable, respectable businesses that keep our economy running. Believe me, they exist.

If you want to crash robots, then go get involved with BattleBots and stop complaining about FIRST. If not, stop complaining anyway.

[Redhead Jokes]

Originally posted by Sean
In the real workforce a company is not going to apply tactics like gracious professionalism. They will do whatever they can to win the contract. The real world does not help there competitor. At the real world level the companies goals are money. The idea of "gracious professionalism" is mis-phrased and sometimes misused. It should be more of a quote like "Good Sportsmanship" which is an attribute that any competition should support. The real world does not have Gracious Professionalism.

*wondering how much real world work experience you base that on*

In my experience there were two companies who practiced gracious professionalism - Nordstrom and Oasis Residential in Vegas. Both companies practiced amazing customer service which brought to them the success they deserved acting with gp. Oasis was sold, and the founders started a new business, our team's corporate sponsor rent.com - a win-win for renters and landlords.

In the other company I worked for, there were people in the company who practiced gp, altho perhaps the company as a whole didn't practice it - thus I'm not naming it. My favorite mentor there modeled for me GP.

I don't think gp has the narrow definition you give it. On a personal level imo it means "taking care of yourself" and "caring for the other person" - like giving yourself oxygen on a plane in trouble so you can help the person next to you. On a business level I'd say it's "taking care of business" and caring about customers, employees, environment, world issues...

At the real world level the companies goals are money. The FIRST program has an entirely different goal and thats education.

and our corporate sponsor obviously cares about education.


I think sportsmanship is only one facet of the gp diamond.

[Marc P.]

I agree with Redhead Jokes, and add in this-

FIRST's goal is to inspire students about science and technology... If those students become inspired with the idea of gracious professionalism, they will graduate, become involved with various companies, leaders, employees, etc. They will use the concepts learned throughout their life and apply it to their business practices, whether it be gear ratios, or gracious professionalism. In addition, they will start their own FIRST teams, become mentors, teach what they know, including gracious professionalism to their students, who will graduate, join companies, and the cycle continues. The idea is, if enough students touched by gracious professionalism graduate and become the leaders of major corporations, the world will become a less cut throat place. Again, as with anything, it takes time. The idea is not to conform to todays standards, but change the standards of tomorrow at their source- today's youth.

[Sean]

Deleted By Sean

[George1902]

Originally posted by Johca_Gaorl
And George, are you coming up with this commentary on the fly? If so, we NEED you to do some announcing at events, there's some boring announcing going on, that's another problem, and I know we have good announcers in the community, they just need to step up.

yes, that was all shooting from the hip... thanks for the compliment. i'd love to volunteer at events if i'm ever without a team. announce, ref, inspect, reset fields... i'm all FIRST's if i'm ever team-less.

as for good announcers at events, Andy and Ron did AWESOME at UCF. they were like Madden and Summerall out there. 2 announcers are the way to go if ya ask me.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Sean,
I don't want to beat you up on this issue but I do want you to understand. I agree with Cheryl and many others that "Gracious professionalism" is real world and it takes place everyday around the country and around the world. You may know it better under different names. NASA for one, ASME, Audio Engineering Society, Society of Broadcast Engineers, etc. Think tanks like Deka, in house research and development divisions, any college undergraduate and post graduate program also follow the same principles. Now there is something I will agree with you on and that at the core, these are all education central. If we don't continue to learn from each other, we will never advance as a civilization. You may have seen this in one of my other posts, my goal in life is to not go to sleep any night until I have learned something new that day. For me it is not a suggestion or a new year's resolution. If nothing else is remembered by the students I work with let that simple daily routine be something they carry for the rest of their lives. I know that things look pretty black and white to you now, but real life is rarely that simple. If you keep your mind open, whole new worlds open to you. You have a wonderful experience ahead of you, it is just around the corner, if you close your eyes, it will pass you by.