Does <R14> preclude you from practicing after the Fix-it Window

[Marc P.]

Originally Posted by Mike Martus

I do however stand behind my point regarding students learning from making an additional robot of any kind to drive and practice repairs. Skills are only learned through practice.

As Jon said, this is more of a mercy rule than anything else, to encourage teams to take a step back from the machines for a moment and ponder what has happened and what's been learned over the previous 6 weeks. My feeling is the rule was designed to prevent work done on actual competition pieces and parts, and it does not apply to any sort of non-FIRST related robotics. If a team is building a robot to do other things non-FIRST for experimentation and learning, I'm pretty sure the FIRST rule wouldn't apply (as the robot itself is not a part of the FIRST program). There's just as much to learn with that sort of robot than a FIRST practice robot.

On very often heard complaint is that students do not repair their own robots in the pits. In many cases it is because they do not have or have never been taught the skills to do so.

Any students actively involved in the building of the robot should have a pretty good idea of how to repair the robot should anything fail. If a student is taught during the 6 weeks how to assemble and disassemble pieces of the robot, they'll have no problems doing it in the pit at competition. I just don't see how an extra 48 hours post-shipping or post-regional would be any more beneficial toward teaching repairs than the 6 weeks of actual build time.

[Raul]

I have to agree with Mike and Joe on this one and disagree with my good friend Andy. Andy, your team can choose to put down everything if you like. I know that our students continue to get inspired as much and learn more during our practice sessions than they do during the incredible rush to finish a robot for shipment.

Just think of it this way - if we do not give the students more opportunities to work with the robot it gives them more opportunities to go watch TV, play video games, watch the NBA, football and get influenced by those rather than get more inspiration from FIRST. I know what you are thinking - but we have a huge team and only so many can work on the other aspects of FIRST (fund raising, etc.).
And yes, I may be wrong, that may also be my selfish view.

Raul

[Kris Verdeyen]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

Amen Brother Martus. I didn't think they could do worse than last year's spare parts rule, which I likened to some kind of religious mindset - I.E. The FIRST Commandments:

Remember the Sabbath by keeping it holy. Six weeks you shall labor and do all your work, but the days until the first event and those between are the Sabbath to the FIRST. On them you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your engineer or engineerette, nor your Bridgeport, nor the teacher within your gates. For six weeks the righteous moved the heavens and the earth. Therefore, the FIRST blessed the Sabbath and made it holy.

Appears that now it's gone all the way to fanaticism?

You're being facetious, but why not? What is wrong about limiting this madness to six weeks? High school football teams are limited as to what they can do when, i.e., you can lift weights and work out all summer, but you can't have an actual practice until so many days before the season starts. The reason rules like that are in place is so that those coaches who are most willing to take up every minute of their players' lives don't have as much of an advantage over those who are unwilling to.

The concept of a "Sabbath" might be based in religion, but it's not there arbitrarily - people really do need time to rest. You absolutely need time to stop focusing on work, and (literally or figuratively) smell the roses (unless you happen to be a florist, then just figuratively). Extended periods of highly stressful activity (like FIRST) take their toll on our physical, mental, and spiritual health, on our family, on every aspect of our lives. It makes sense that the time period that we do this should not be unduly extended, and that those who would extend it for themselves and for their students should not gain a huge advantage over those would rather take a breath.

We need well-rounded future engineers, and that's what FIRST is promoting with this rule.

[Kris Verdeyen]

ID: 1026 Section: 5.3.3 Status: Unanswered Date Posted: 1/10/2005
Q: Does <R14>, particularly "the team must put down their tools", preclude teams from using their tools to build, repair, and/or modify a practice robot between the Fix-it Window and competition? Simply, can teams "practice" after the FIW?

It's day three of Q/A 1026 watch. Emotions are tense here at FIRST HQ as the Question 1026 Answer Determination Committee meets for the third day of deliberations. What will the answer be? When will it come? The entire FIRST community waits with bated breath. Or maybe not - maybe they just get started on their robot.

[Greg Ross]

Originally Posted by Kris Verdeyen

The entire FIRST community waits with baited breath.

bated. (Unless you mean we're smelling a little fishy. )

[Kris Verdeyen]

Are there questions that the Q/A folks will simply refuse to answer? I didn't pay much attention to the Q/A board last year, so I don't know if we ended the season up with questions still in the queue, other than those that were previously answered, or explained thourougly in the rules, or stupid.

I hate to say this, but the more that FIRST drags its feet answering this one, the more the rule looks deliberately vague. It appears as though it was written specifically so that FIRST could test the waters on the issue of practice robots while leaving themselves an "out" once the season comes.

Look at it this way:
If they wanted, absolutely, for us to not make practice robots, they could have said, "It is illegal for a team to practice the game with a robot in the time between ship and their regional."

If, on the other hand, they had not wanted us to work on the actual competition robot between ship and the regional, well, then no rule change would have been needed at all. That's always been the case.

The only reason for FIRST to have included this rule, and worded it the way they did is as a compromise. The rules committee had both pro- and anti- practice robot factions who couldn't agree on one of the above versions, and this muddy middle of a rule is what resulted. Now that their indecision has been pointed out, they don't want to anger either side by issuing a ruling, so they're staying mum. I can't say I blame them.

[Natchez]

Originally Posted by Natchez

Since we, team 118, are interpreting "the team must put down their tools" to mean put our tools down after the Fix-it Window (FIW) and until the competition instead of put our tools down after the FIW then pick them right back up to build another robot and because most of you believe that it is perfectly legal, I have submitted it to the Q&A System.

Thanks for the valuable input ... we're probably wrong,
Lucien

WE'RE WRONG!

Q: Does <R14>, particularly "the team must put down their tools", preclude teams from using their tools to build, repair, and/or modify a practice robot between the Fix-it Window and competition? Simply, can teams "practice" after the FIW?

A: Teams can practice after the Fix-It window but anything you work on cannot be brought to the competition if it violates any rules.

Personally, I am very disappointed in this ruling. I believe that FIRST turned into lawyers for a day to come up with this ruling.

When reading these Rules, please use technical common sense (engineering thinking) rather than a lawyer’s interpretation. Try to understand the reasoning behind a rule.

Honestly, I thought when we posted the question to the Q&A system, it was just a formality to verify that practicing was illegal. Now that "the team must put down their tools" does NOT mean that the team has to put down their tools, the question must be asked what "cease all software development" means. Does it mean that we can change variables to make the motors run in the right direction? Does it mean that we can do as much development on our practice robot as we desire as long as we key-punch the code in when we get to our regional? Does it mean that we can't touch a tool ... I mean a keyboard? Yes, we don't think that we can touch a keyboard after the FIW but we were wrong before and are probably wrong again.

Also, I will start a new thread discussing the pros and cons of practicing after the ship date. It WILL be some interesting conversation and look forward to understanding both sides.

Very, very disappointed,
Lucien

[Jack Jones]

Well, here it is, a little over six weeks since the last post on this topic. Could it be that all the confusion about this rule has been cleared up, and I missed the seeing it in the updates? Or, could it be that the rule is so totally bizarre that we’ve decided not to talk about it?

I don’t know about the rest of you, but we spent the week following the fix-it window finishing our practice robot. We’ve spent the time since that practicing and upgrading. Err, at least planning upgrades, to include prototyping.

How they think that the rule encourages us to take a break is beyond me. We would have loved to have taken the two days off after shipping, but instead we had to scramble making & assembling replacement parts for just about everything we suspected had a snowball’s chance of breaking.

The rules state, “…teams may bring SPARE, REPLACEMENT and UPGRADE PARTS and COTS items to the competitions (within the limits specified in Rules <R23> and <R24>).”; but it also states “During the ’FIX-IT WINDOW’ … Teams may manufacture SPARE and REPLACEMENT PARTS for their robot at their home facility. Fabrication of UPGRADE PARTS is not permitted during this period.” So where is it they expect us to come up with those UPGRADE PARTS we’re allowed to bring?

If they intended to level the playing field with this rule, then they have missed completely. It used to be that teams who went to many regionals had greater opportunity to work on their robot than those who only went to one. Now it is that teams who go to many regionals have more fix-it windows that those who don’t.

Finally, the rules state, “following the last Regional Event a team attends (i.e. prior to attending the FIRST Championship): Teams may manufacture SPARE, REPLACEMENT and UPGRADE PARTS for their robot at their home facility (not at the competition site).” Imagine that your team has just won a regional or one of the other three awards that newly qualify them for the Nats. You suddenly realize that, in addition to raising the money and making the arrangements, you have two days to design, fab, build, and perfect all those UPGRADES that others who pre-qualified have had months to plan. How is that fair???

[bhweezer]

What about the majority of FIRST teams that don't have the funds and materials to build a second robot? It doesn't make it fair for the teams that do to have the extra practice driving and whatnot. I don't think there would be a problem building a second robot, as long as it doesn't have anything to do with this year competition.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by bhweezer

What about the majority of FIRST teams that don't have the funds and materials to build a second robot? It doesn't make it fair for the teams that do to have the extra practice driving and whatnot.

Dean's said it many a time--FIRST isn't necessarily fair. And, for better or for worse, this extends to the realm of practice robots.

The main problem I see with trying to block practice bots is how FIRST could a) write a rule with any amount of teeth, and b) enforcing it. How do you regulate things that a team does that are done outside of the build and competitions? I'm not sure it's possible without somehow blocking a legitimate thing (such as someone that wants to start prototyping for 2006).

If anyone wants to take a crack at writing such a rule, I'd be very interested to see the result.

[Beth Sweet]

Originally Posted by bhweezer

What about the majority of FIRST teams that don't have the funds and materials to build a second robot? It doesn't make it fair for the teams that do to have the extra practice driving and whatnot. I don't think there would be a problem building a second robot, as long as it doesn't have anything to do with this year competition.

When you go out into the work world, what if you don't work for the company that has the most money? What if your company can't afford to do things that other companies can? If I've heard it said once, I've heard it a thousand times, FIRST is trying to prepare you for the real world. Sometimes you're on top, sometimes you're not. FIRST on the other hand, gives every team equal opportunity. Every team can fundraise enough money for an extra robot. If your team doesn't have that kind of money and says it's not fair, then maybe some extra fundraising would put you on a playing field that you feel is more level.

[bhweezer]

We host and facilitate the largest and most profitable student run fundraiser in the southeast. Our corporate funding covers our registration fees and thats about it. All 32 members go to regionals and nationals for free and in most cases GET money to cover food and other necessities. Fund raising isn't necessary for us to build a second robot.

Why can't we use our resources to build a second robot on something NOT related to this years competition? If we want kids to learn more then why not use spare parts from previous years to build the ultimate robot for past competitions.

[eugenebrooks]

Originally Posted by bhweezer

Why can't we use our resources to build a second robot on something NOT related to this years competition? If we want kids to learn more then why not use spare parts from previous years to build the ultimate robot for past competitions.

You are not precluded from building a second robot, either a practice robot that is identical to your competition robot, or one unrelated to your competition robot, and using it for practice after the fix it window. Any ambiguity in the rules has been adequately clarified in the Q+A on the FIRST web site. The restrictions are placed on the parts you can bring and use on your competition robot (those machined during the build period, or during the fix-it window, and limited to 25 pounds), and the means by which you can update the RC code on your competition robot (with your fingers after the pits open).

Some teams neither need nor want any mercy...

[craigbutcher]

At the last regional while talking to kids from various teams it seemed clear to me that more than one or two teams were not following the development rules. It looks like there has been a lot of fabrication, testing, and assembly going on outside of the window. Two kids told me they thought the rules allowed them to fabricate entire new assemblies and bring them in so they could bolt onto the robot and go, another thought it was OK if you disassembled the assemblies and just reassembled them on the practice day. One thought you had to use only store bought parts but you could practice fabricating assemblies and were OK so long as you did all the actual work on Thursday.

Our understanding was you can't even cut a piece of tubing to length for the robot between matches--all you were allowed to do was cut it so it would fit in your car. In fact, you weren't even supposed to work on code. Could you order a custom fabbed part from an external source? Probably not. But it was clear that a number of kids thought lots of things were all right.

Maybe my understanding was too stringent. Am I really upset? I don't think so, really. Even though as a rookie team we certainly could have used the extra time for design and testing and learning, it wasn't the fixit window that kept us from winning a regional! The robots from the experienced teams really were terrific!

The kids I talked to from other teams didn't act as though they thought they were breaking any rules. They were clearly committed to First principles and were in it for the game. And it makes no sense to knowingly cheat anyway. What does it mean to win a tennis match if all your own shots are "in" ?

I am, though, a little disappointed. Could it really be that there is so much confusion about what is allowed?