Soooo just some thoughts

[smurfgirl]

Originally Posted by benhulett

The only other thing that has bothered me the past two years has been the ranking system. A team could have the best engineered bot in the entire game, but be matched up with other robots that impede their ability to score points and be last in rank. A team could have a not so up to par bot but rely on their partners to give them an awesome rank. At first I thought well everybody must be thinking the same thing I am, the ranking system really doesn't determine how well your bot really does. Your performance as a whole is basically decided upon by your team mates. This is a random selection, so it's hard to counter it. But it turns out from my view (@ annapolis) that every team doesn't see this. The top 8 teams were given the choice of alliances, and only 2 bots outside of the top 24 were selected. I saw much better bots than some of those inside the top 24 that were impeded by team performance but were outstanding performers. So I thought that maybe the bots should be graded on their individual points, assists, and team wins. That way you wouldn't have such a ridiculous drop in rank if your team loses.

So this is the second time today my computer has lost a long post just as I was about to post it... not too happy about that.

Like Eric H mentioned, I'm not even going to touch on the mentor-built robots thing. It's a pretty complicated discussion, and I think I have more insight into the other point anyway.

I don't have much of a problem with the ranking system, because it's not at all crucial to the FIRST experience. In the long run, you don't remember your ranking points, you remember the lessons and friendships from when you were on a robotics team in high school.

Furthermore, even at the competitions, most people don't weight ranking points that heavily. Experience and attitude are huge, as well as robot performance. Scouters should be (and mostly are) looking at the way robots interact with their partners, what they can do, and how well/fast they can do it. Ranking score isn't always an accurate reflection of this, but alliance partner selection often is. Alliance captains select teams which complement their abilities, not just teams who are ranked highly. I do have some stories to share from our team's history which follow this trend, if you're interested.

[daf]

First off on mentor built vs. student built bots, I am all for student built. As far as which way is more inspiring...who cares... this is a high school competition, and should be left to the students (if students want to be inspired by watching someone do work, then go somewhere else). Don't get me wrong, we need the mentors to lead us and help us out etc etc; without them the experience wouldn't be half of what it is. But when I look at some teams where the students don't even touch the bot, it's unfair to the students on that particular team, other teams that compete against them, and also teams where the students really do build a super robot and everyone just assumes that the mentors did it. Now people can just jump to the conclusion that every robot that is good is mentor built. All I'm saying is that I think the mentor built bots ruin the competition for everyone.

Next off is the ranking system. I think it's fine. Yes the qualification matches have luck of the draw involved, but if your not in the top eight, then you can be chosen by another team. This is why they don't just take the top 24 teams of the ranking sheets. If you really are underrated due to an unfortunate draw, then get your team name out there and hopefully someone will choose you.

[Joe G.]

Originally Posted by daf

As far as which way is more inspiring...who cares... this is a high school competition, and should be left to the students.

If you look at the Dave Lavery lines pointed to earlier in this thread, you will see that this is exactly what FIRST isn't. Don't get me wrong, I still think that students should play a crucial role, but as Dave said "it isn't a high school science fair." FIRST is, first and foremost, about inspiring its students in science and technology. How individual teams do that is up to them. I, and most other people, have opinions on this, sometimes strong, but it is not, and never will, be written firmly down in the rules.