Human Player: Past, Present and Future

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Justin

Okay I voted for that option but I should mention that that really wasn't a limited human player. If you think the human player was limited in 2003...then you should try 1996 on for size...they were seat belted in to their station and had to throw the ball over a 4' high PVC structure in order to return it to the field. Frankly I've always been against the human player. This used to be around robots once upon a time folks!! It used to be that your robot couldn't be considered a quality robot unless it could actually perform it's functions on the field. There was a time way back when you couldn't win an award for your autonomous program if it didn't work. One of the reasons for the human player was to get more athletes involved in FIRST...someone provide me with actual evidence it has accomplished that goal. What has the addition of the human player done? Like it or not it started us down the slippery slope that lead to the significantly diminished role of the robot, engineering, design, and quality (both of the robot's construction and play on the field) in FIRST that we now have. It seems today that as long as you have a good plan and robot on paper that is what is most important...never mind whether the robot ever plays in a single match. As long as you have a good business plan you are set, who cares if that business makes any money right??

Some of your points are similar to mine, but I dont agree with you to the extreme you say. A HP is an essential part of the game, it raises the competitive level of the game and the teams. Many teams would acquire several penalties a game, or not be able to score at all if it werent for the HP. Even in a game designed not to include a HP you would still see a much greater seperation between the teams in terms of competitive level. The HP allows some teams which lack the funding, support, machine tools, or ability to construct amazing robots to at least win a few matches, or be somewhat competative on the playing field.
Sure, 2004's HP was a bit excessive, and sure the robot's quality decreased some. But the competitive level increased. You saw far less blow-out matches last year than this year (which has a lower HP involvement).
And even with that extreme HP role, there were still several amazing machines. Look at the works of art that many teams created. And those teams typically would end up winning the competitions, or come very close.