Ideas to move in the direction of making FIRST competitions 'fair'

[Jack Jones]

I hate to rain on the "give rookies more time" parade, but some could start a new team each year and use the extra time to build two or three robots and fine tune the rookie drivers. The win at all cost sponsor could continue to drop the third year team, start another, and thereby always field two at a time with a significant advantage. There are always ways to manipulate the system.

IMO, the best way to make things most unfair is to have different rules for different people.

[Gdeaver]

Everyone should play by the same rules. It's not unusual for a rookie team sponsor to drop an intensive effort the first year and then pull back allowing the rookie to do well the first year and then go into the struggling mode. I think First continues to need to support the bottom and cap, limit the top. As for the complaints that First is stifling innovation. I believe that placing cost, material and methods constraints on teams will force teams to innovate more. I don't want First to get to the point where teams start buying the win instead of innovating to win.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Gdeaver

Everyone should play by the same rules. It's not unusual for a rookie team sponsor to drop an intensive effort the first year and then pull back allowing the rookie to do well the first year and then go into the struggling mode. I think First continues to need to support the bottom and cap, limit the top. As for the complaints that First is stifling innovation. I believe that placing cost, material and methods constraints on teams will force teams to innovate more. I don't want First to get to the point where teams start buying the win instead of innovating to win.

How many teams have won nationals by buying their robots from off the shelf parts?

None.

Every team that wins does so by innovating. Im completely unclear on what your issue is.

[KenWittlief]

I see a lot of posts in this thread that dont seem to be addressing the core issue of the FIRST competition itself (in the manner it is structured), not being fair to all teams.

Some people are saying if we try to make rules that will level the playing field, that some teams or mentors will take advantage of them, and find ways around the rules to win (starting new teams each year so they are always rookies....)

the problem isnt that FIRST mentors and sponsors are cheating, that they want to win at all costs, the problem is the way the competition itself is structured is not fair to all teams. If a sponsor wants to bend the rules to win, they can do so now.

Some people are saying if we make FIRST fair (level the playing field) then it will be boreing, there will be no competition. I think the opposite is true. What we have now is like the New York Yankees playing hardball against little league and Tball teams. No matter how hard those 8 year old kids try, they do not have a chance at winning the world series, because the matches are way out of balance. Its very boring to watch an extreemly mismatched contest.

In the world of sailing they have what is called one design boats. Every boat is exactly the same. You are not allowed to customize your boat or to buy special parts for it. At the world finals every team gets a brand new boat. The only difference on the water is the skill and drive of the skipper and his crew. That is what I call a fair and very exciting sporting event. The races are usually very close and dramatic.

I dont think we can change FIRST so that every team is only matched against other teams that are exactly the same, with any sort of measureable parameters, but we could find ways to ensure the 'little league' teams are not playing against the major leaguers, and that the 12 foot Sunfish sailboats not racing against the 80 foot America's Cup yatchs.

[thefro526]

One of the major flaws of first may be US. I come from a relatively large team 40+ members and we have very little funding But the problem is not how much money you have it is your mentality. As a freshmen i always heard "they didn't build the robot, They have a Huge budget" It begins to rube off after a while. First isn't fair but thats what makes it fun the unfairness allows for further innovations. And the teams that lose the previous year just want to come back and kick butt the next. I can say that because thats how i feel after coming in dead last in our division at nationals I want to do better. But remember this tell your new members that it doesn't matter how much money you have it's how you think. If you think you'll win then you may win; If you think you'll lose than you will lose...

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

Some people are saying if we make FIRST fair (level the playing field) then it will be boreing, there will be no competition. I think the opposite is true. What we have now is like the New York Yankees playing hardball against little league and Tball teams. No matter how hard those 8 year old kids try, they do not have a chance at winning the world series, because the matches are way out of balance. Its very boring to watch an extreemly mismatched contest.

I'm trying to figure out how, 2006 Curie Division Champ, 1139 equates to the New York Yankees. They had a RELIABLE DRIVE BASE , INNOVATIVE system to keep balls from jamming and an INNOVATIVE launcher .

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I'm trying to figure out how, 2006 Curie Division Champ, 1139 equates to the New York Yankees. They had a RELIABLE DRIVE BASE , INNOVATIVE system to keep balls from jamming and an INNOVATIVE launcher .

Earlier in this thread I went a little bit off-topic and forgot to express my own opinion on ideas to make FIRST competitions 'fair'.

My opinion is: FIRST should (1) re-write a rule when attempts to apply it have demonstrated that it doesn't work, and (2) keep improving the kit of parts by deleting parts that don't work well and adding parts that do. No quantum leaps are required. Just an ongoing process of continuous improvement.

Sean is correct above; the present FIRST rules actually encourage, and certainly do not frustrate, teams that are capable of innovating -- even if they are not funded like the New York Yankees.

Sean's dad was correct in expressing a similar opinion a couple of years ago.

[Stuart]

For Inspiration Recognition of Science and Technology.

if you were to change the rules to limit teams and make a more even playing field, you would destroy the inspiration part.

FIRST is not about a robot competition . . there just happens to be one at every FIRST event.