GP? I think not.

[Depreciation]

Im glad im atleast seeing some form of agreement here, I really did not create this thread to just complain and look down on these teams. I created it because I really would like to just make my opinion known and hopefully make a difference. I understand that I dont know the details of how each team is run. I just hope that every mentor and student of every team is doing whatever they can to make sure they are running they're team as fairly as possible. So if you are one of these teams that repeatedly do well year after year, please just take a second look at how your team is run, and if you are absolutely sure it is being run as fairly as possible and you continue to succeed as before, then I sincerely congratulate you.

edit: so essentially im just saying that I feel there is a good amount of people that feel this way and everyone should be aware and try not to be one of the teams that anyone feels this way about.

[MrForbes]

I don't know why anyone would want to skin a cat, but I hear there's more than one way to do it.

One thing I really enjoy about FIRST is all the different ways that different teams work, and succeed! I love talking to students and mentors of the have-not teams, as well as the have-alot teams, and all those in between.

It really doesn't seem to matter how you do it...just keep up the good work....

[waialua359]

I think you must be a great person, who is feeling frustrated. Again, the tough road is rising to the challenge, which is much tougher and easier said than done.
In our 9 years of existence, we are and will still be chasing the Poofs.

Prime example: When we were scouting as the 3 seed, a humble Hawaii rookie team came to our pit, looking to do a sales pitch on selecting their team. Instead, we honestly told them about a set of teams that we were looking at, which were other fellow Hawaii members and a California team.
I never felt so bad, after the disappointed look on their faces.
I promised myself to make sure we help them next year, if they will let us, not by making a better robot, as we are not the experts. But instead, share how we have improved over the years and to collaborate more with them.
They were a genuinely nice team diagonal to our pit.

That's what FIRST is all about!

Wait til you see us in Atlanta. I got my top ten list of things to do.
Its visiting the top ten teams that I am just in awe of that I havent seen yet.

[Lavapicker]

Glenn, you are too good and are a great example of what is good about FIRST and what mentors can be! Knowing the person you are, this will embarrass you but I have to say you are so deserving of the Chairmans Award in Honolulu as witnessed by your attitude toward that rookie team. You are amazing! I've known you for awhile now but I keep hearing stories like this about you. Keep up the good work! Thanks for showing us the way! See you folks in Atlanta...I hope we get to team up again

[65_Xero_Huskie]

Reading this thread, I have become extremely upset.
If you look at our teams record, we have real good engineers, and usually put up a decent robot.
HOWEVER.
In the past 3 years, we have only won 1 award. YES, 1 award.
On our team we have 15 students. These 15 students are expected to put together a robot. A chairmans. A woodie flowers. And do PR.
This is a very hard endeavor which i applaud our kids for doing. Our team was a world champion (Thanks to 111 and 469), and we have very little to show for it afterwards.
The fact that you are comparing teams who have students who are eager to learn, Sponsors who are willing to put out the money, and Engineers/mentors who are willing to put in the time, to not being Gracious and that they should be ashamed of themselves..How dare you?
This really upsets me, For giving kids who want to learn and want to have a fun experience while in high school, you find it wrong? Many teams have a hard time, yes, its true. But its not about the WIN, or about the GLORY, its about the way you run your team.
Our team always cheers for the teams who are likely to win (217,1114) Heck, we even cheer for our cross town rival 47, BUT, we are not spiteful to those teams. We want to see the fun experienced and being able to do that does not involve winning.
Compare it to a sports team. The Detroit lions have sucked for the past 20 years, And even though they don't win, people still like them and cheer for them.
Just take this into consideration.\

*edit* After taking time to read what was going on, ive decided that people can have their opinions. However, i still think it is wrong to complain about success of others.

Originally Posted by Depreciation

And as far as anonymous accounts not being allowed goes. I could tell you who I was, but it really wouldnt make a difference.

Oh, but it makes a HUGE difference when there's a face to a complaint. If I created an account to bring up an issue, it would be given a lot less weight than if I had brought it up myself.

Now here's my opinion on this:

I came from a 110% student run team. Want to know where that got me? Kicked off because of a stupid argument. It was stupid on BOTH sides. Here's why: We're high schoolers. We haven't had enough experience to get things right, and our cycle time is too quick to allow true systemic learning. WE MAKE MISTAKES. We haven't been here long enough to get it right the first time. So here's why the programs that are "unfairly" run by mentors are FAR superior: Longevity and consistency. When a team is "mentor run," it will be similar each year. This means a reliable, accurate, and more professional learning environment is present.

Also, if you let a student teach themselves, and teach other students, you end up with products like me: An inspired, ready to learn kid with some basic tools, all built on bad habits and unprofessional methods. If you want to learn how the real world operates, you learn from THE REAL WORLD. You get REAL engineers, REAL programmers, and REAL mentors to come in, and show you how it's done. Once you've got that idea, you're ready to move on and get into the world.

So what do we get when we have all students running a team and competing? A bunch of young hoodlums who know barely anything about how the world works trying to interact and change the world. If you want to make change, you have to know what you're trying to change.

I'm not going to harass you about your points; it's been done enough. However, I am going to say this: Start trading PM's with prominent mentors of those "all mentor" teams, and get a feel for how they work. I might as well throw a few names of programs I respect out there: PM these folks, I'm sure they'd be glad to answer questions. Try Cory, from 254, as a starter. I used to share the same opinion that you had. But then I actually SPOKE to the people on the team, and realized what they had going on, and I was floored. It's an awesome program.

Good luck with the issue at hand, and keep enjoying FIRST! You can only be a student in it for so long....

[FoleyEngineer]

I can understand where Mr. Anonymous is coming from. I felt that way my first year watching our team, and at our first competition when I saw well over 100 people from one of the mega-teams come down to receive an award for something or other I was flabbergasted! I remember seeing around 40 adult males (all of whom I assumed were engineers of course), and I was really jealous! Our team consisted of maybe 10 students, an engineer, a machinist at a few parent volunteers. We were majorly "outclassed" and our robot didn't appear to belong on the same field with them. Then when we heard what kind of funding they had and saw their tricked out trailers we realized how far behind we really were.

However... just like the posters on here have said, we visited those teams and looked at their drivetrains and wiring and control systems and we learned of some great new ways to improve. We also found that almost every team we talked to was more than willing to help us and explain how to do what they did. That sure sounds like Gracious Professionalism to me! And, if those top-tier teams are gracious, then what are you complaining about?

It's not like they won't open up the hood and they hide what's inside so that they can be assured of beating you again next year. It's more like they bring you in, answer all your questions, help you program, and leave you ready to build a robot twice as good the next year!

Well, the following year, we really improved - by listening and learning. Our team grew by maybe 5 students and more participation from some adults (though still only a couple engineers), and we not only went to the championship, but we went 9 and 0 in the qualifiers getting to be first in our division - eventually finishing as Newton finalists. The next couple years, we won Curie and numerous off-season events and various judges awards and sort of made it to "the next tier" of teams. We're still small - under 20 students (including all the part-timers) and our robot is still 90% student built, but we've matured and learned a TON in the past few years to become more competitive. We've also been thrilled to help out other teams who are just starting out and making the same mistakes (read KOP wheels?) that we originally made. Also, I've seen that strategy and driving ability also really help separate teams with similar bots. That's something that any team can learn. Heck, just watch all the Internet rebroadcasts of this year's events and you can learn a ton.

Bottom line is that it doesn't take a boatload of engineers to build a truly competitive robot, but instead, requires that you do your homework, read this forum like crazy, ask lots of questions, and build smart. Oh, and luck doesn't hurt either!

[Brandon Holley]

The original post has been attacked enough so I'll leave that be, however consider another real world scenario of anythign...

Companies, the millions that exist out there, all start from the same place. Sure some of them might buy smaller companies to make themselves bigger and more talented, but how is this that different from FIRST ?

Team 125 for example used to consist of over 100 team members, and we actually managed to win a national championship (yes they were still called nationals back then) in 2001. Since then the team has gone from huge, enthusiastic team, to a handful of kids, back up to a solid amount of people. There were some ok robots inbetween 2001 and 2007, and there were some bad ones.

Teams that are able to go out EVERY SINGLE YEAR and win intrigue me so much. I always wonder how they are able to pick a design that stands above the rest every year.

Winning a competition isn't everything, but some people find that it is a lot. It is a physical representation of your success, as opposed to the success everyone gets just for participating and learning. Don't you, when you do win sometime, want to say you beat the best, and you were the best team out there on that particular day?

Winning is awesome, but the cliche is there for a reason...learning, and these experiences, are what make FIRST different, and what make FIRST for everybody.

[Pat Arnold]

Although many have disputed the concerns Depreciation raised when he started this thread, I believe the views he expresses are not uncommon. Heck, I felt similar frustration in my early FRC experiences. It's not unlike the love/hate relationship NASCAR fans have felt toward Jeff Gordan.

I'm human & want recognition for the tremendous effort my team invests each year. I get cranky when stronger, well known teams with seemingly endless resources (machining, design, mentors, $, whatever) win awards repeatedly, are universally known & respected and are not from my area of the country (thus winning limited trophies away from "the locals" who can't afford to travel & try again for a win at other regionals).

It may seem a bit pollyanna, but I've become a better person, stronger competitor/mentor & lost that bitter feeling when I finally realized...That's life, which is inherently unfair...now what am I going to do about it?

Suggestions given here such as getting to know members of the powerhouse teams, reading the white papers they share, learning what makes them so successful really work! Sure, they have resources you don't, but they also have problems that smaller, newer or less structured teams don't face.

Now I look for ways to emulate aspects of these teams. Meeting members has let me see behind the curtain & the great Wizard was really some tremendously hard working folks. I still want recognition for my team, but now I understand better how to help our students achieve it. By the way, I still get a huge sense of satisfaction when we can outplay their robots!

[dsmoker]

I have strong feelings on this topic and can speak from experience. For the past 5 years, my husband (an engineer) and I (a lawyer; I don't touch the robot!!) have been mentoring a small inner-city team. For 2 of those years (2006 and 2007) my husband was the only engineering mentor. We also have a very limited budget, and our team is comparatively small (about 20-30 kids). Yet in those two years, we were a regional finalist and regional winner. We also received the team spirit award and traveled to Atlanta for the first time, where we finished 15th in our division and were selected as a quarterfinalst.

How did we accomplish this with far less mentors and money than the "powerhouse" teams? As one earlier poster suggested, we strategized. We realized our limitations and worked within them, building a robot that did a subset of the game functions well, instead of doing them all poorly. Last year, for example, we hung a grand total of 1TUBE (and did that in autonomous in a practice round in Atlanta -- you should have seen the kids go nuts over that one). We were a defensive ramp bot (and a darn good one, not to brag). So there is a way to succeed.

As for mentors building the bot, I do know from talking to our students that they look around and often see mentors doing the work. It makes them appreciate all the more the opportunities for building and desiging that they have on our team. That being said, all their work is done under the guidance and supervision of our engineers (yes, we have a couple more this year, thank goodness). To me, that is the perfect blend of mentors and students, and it works well for our team. I know my husband was far more relaxed in the pits this year because he felt he had a drive team who really knew what they were doing and could handle most problems on their own.

Finally, in terms of GP, the "powerhouse" teams we have met along the way have been, for the most part, nothing but graciously professional to us, helping us to reach the achievements we have. Cyber Knights shipping our tools to Atlanta for us, Gaelhawks loaning us two mentors, Eagles giving us advice and a scouting program, Uberbots giving us valuable tips . . . I could go on. I don't resent or envy them for being strong teams; I hope we can continue to learn from them and someday join their ranks.

[E. Wood]

In this thread, and many other (Im more of a reader than a poster) I have noticed people are always talking about what FIRST is about and putting in thier own opinions. The truth is visit the first website. The mission statement is right there along with a quote from Dean Kamen. Ill post them below (i hate links).

"Our mission is to inspire young people to be science and technology leaders, by engaging them in exciting mentor-based programs that build science, engineering and technology skills, that inspire innovation, and that foster well-rounded life capabilities including self-confidence, communication and leadership."
---FIRST website

"To transform our culture by creating a world where science and technology are celebrated and where young people dream of becoming science and technology heroes."
----Dean Kamen


And now to address what this thread is about. I come from a team where the team is just not the students. Its everyone. Mentors, students, parents, college student mentors, board of eduaction members, sponsors and the list goes on an on and on. Everyone involved is important to the teams success. Winning or losing on the field has nothing to do with this success. The fact that a group of people from all different walks of life came together to accept the challenge makes a team successful by itself. Saying a team is mostly mentor run, and im sure my team has been accussed of this, just is not fair. Maybe it looks that way, but maybe the students have asked the mentors to do something for them. Maybe the students think they have more important things to do than work on the robot. Just ask the students on the team what they think and youll get your answer.

And as far as team being good year after year after year. This is going to happen no matter what you do. So watch these team, study them, and strive to be like them. This is what 1629 did and it works.

[DanTod97]

im getting the feeling of a "if you cant beat em, join em" attitude here, I disagree completely.

That attitude is just denying that change is an acceptable answer. As ive stated before, even though people seem to be ignoring it, I only created this thread to remind people this is a high school competetion and to request everyone just be aware of that and to be extra careful to make sure there team is run as a highschool team. No attack on any teams at all, I have nothing but love for FIRST and all of its teams, but that doesnt mean I think they are all perfect, unless they beleive they are, and I hope no team does. Just the fact that so many other threads like this exist enforces my feeling that this is an existing problem people choose to ignore and just join them instead.

Im going to stop repeating myself and hopefully be done with this topic, I think ive made my opinions clear and can only hope they will do some good.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by DanTod97

That attitude is just denying that change is an acceptable answer. As ive stated before, even though people seem to be ignoring it, I only created this thread to remind people this is a high school competetion and to request everyone just be aware of that and to be extra careful to make sure there team is run as a highschool team.

This is where I point you to the comments of Dave Lavery, over here. There is no requirement for it to be a high school team. FRC is targeted at the high-school level, granted, but there is no requirement for it to be a high-school team. What of the Girl Scout teams, like the Space Cookies out in California? What of the 4-H teams, like Team THRUST and Exploding Bacon? What of the teams that happen to spend more of their time working with elementary and middle schoolers than actually building their own robot? What about teams like 1114, who've run corporate team-building activities for folks far older than the students of the team and done a great job of bringing that group together? If you're keeping it focused on high school students, zoom out a little bit and enjoy some of the scenery you're cropping out of the frame.

FIRST has aimed its goal at changing the culture. At no point has it said how teams are supposed to go about it.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by DanTod97

im getting the feeling of a "if you cant beat em, join em" attitude here, I disagree completely.

That attitude is just denying that change is an acceptable answer. As ive stated before, even though people seem to be ignoring it, I only created this thread to remind people this is a high school competetion and to request everyone just be aware of that and to be extra careful to make sure there team is run as a highschool team. No attack on any teams at all, I have nothing but love for FIRST and all of its teams, but that doesnt mean I think they are all perfect, unless they beleive they are, and I hope no team does. Just the fact that so many other threads like this exist enforces my feeling that this is an existing problem people choose to ignore and just join them instead.

Im going to stop repeating myself and hopefully be done with this topic, I think ive made my opinions clear and can only hope they will do some good.

You're forgetting one small detail. FIRST has never said that teams should be run as a high school team.

In fact, they celebrate teams that are run as a business through the Entrepreneurship award. They celebrate engineers through the Engineering Inspiration award, and they celebrate mentors and engineers through the Woodie Flowers Award.

To me it is insulting to hear someone say so convincingly and so self righteously that the way other teams (my own included) are doing things is wrong, against the principles of FIRST, hurting the kids, and just plain unfair.

When FIRST becomes about being a high school science fair, maybe you'll be right. But the reason FIRST is great is because of the way it is. If you didn't have all these amazing engineers that FIRST students (heck, and mentors) look up to like Andy Baker, Paul Copioli, Raul Olivera, Dave Lavery, Al Skiekerkiewicz, Ken Patton, Dan Green, and countless others, where would this program be?

Some could contend having an all student team is just as "wrong" as having a mentor dominated team, but who cares?

The real point here is you have a team. Everything else is gravy. Whatever you choose to do with it from that point on is awesome, as long as the kids are getting inspired; and there's no way you can tell me the kids on the powerhouse teams who everyone thinks are engineer built (and often are surprisingly different than they may appear from the outside looking in after you get to know them) aren't being inspired.

How is that not a good thing?

[DanTod97]

I understand FIRST encompasses many things, but I am speaking more specifically of the competition itself, which is why I say even though I see this problem with it, I still love FIRST as a whole. I have not heard one reason why teams cant do all these wonderful things for the students, while still being fair competitively.