GP? I think not.

[gblake]

Folks,

Whether the original author realized it or not, making a point about students vs mentors in the pits (and extrapolating backwards from that point into the build season) was the core of the original comment. Let's please temporarily forget that the author muddied up the water by extrapolating forward from the pit situation to winning/losing on the field.

With that in mind, would someone please explain to me which of the two possibilities I list below describes the "better" FIRST scenario.

• Option 1) Mentors draw on experience to do X; and students learn by watching and asking questions.
• Option 2) Mentors teach students how to do X; students do X with support and guidance from mentors.

If you choose option 2 (and I predict most of us will), and then if you reread the post that started this thread; I'm curious if, in the process, you become more sympathetic to that original author's feelings about pits where mentors appear to be doing most, if not all of the work.

For the life of me I can't think of one good reason why the mentors shouldn't bust their humps teaching (through mentoring) a teams' students as much as the students can/will absorb before/during a build season and tournaments; and then, at the tournament continue to support the students, but let them hold the reins.

Notice that I didn't say doing something else is bad. I did attempt to express that I can't think of any reason why intentionally striving to do something else is better (please remember option 1 and 2 above).

Blake
PS: If someone wants to point out a significantly different third option, I'm listening. Don't let me fall into the trap of viewing this through the lens of a false dichotomy.