Look at the Big Picture

[JohnBoucher]

The big picture is that FIRST is a program to promote engineering and technology as career choices for high school students.

Think back to when you were starting out on a team. Remember the excitement you felt. Do you have that excitement on your team now? This is about getting students thinking and interested in career choices, about changing the way we collaborate with others.

Is this is going on now? Do you see that excitement?

Try running a team. You need to keep everyone happy. You need to attract talent onto the team and you need to keep your older students excited. Have an honest talk with your team leaders about what they have to do and why they do it. Ask them what their big picture is. Share with them what your big picture is. Is everyone on the same page?

Let's get the excitement back. How do we do that?

[Alex Cormier]

Originally Posted by JohnBoucher

The big picture is that FIRST is a program to promote engineering and technology as career choices for high school students.

Think back to when you were starting out on a team. Remember the excitement you felt. Do you have that excitement on your team now? This is about getting students thinking and interested in career choices, about changing the way we collaborate with others.

Is this is going on now? Do you see that excitement?

Try running a team. You need to keep everyone happy. You need to attract talent onto the team and you need to keep your older students excited. Have an honest talk with your team leaders about what they have to do and why they do it. Ask them what their big picture is. Share with them what your big picture is. Is everyone on the same page?

Let's get the excitement back. How do we do that?

There was a huge problem with those factors this year amongst a few teams here in Rochester. I heard from several teams that the kids were not as excited and willing as previous years. This is not from just one team with a lot of money, but form a team with little money, a team with a lot of mentors, and such. I can't nail it to one specific reason why so many teams didn't have the push like previous years, but it's different. Maybe we need some changes next year?

[thefro526]

I think Sean's post was made at the perfect time.

I feel that this year has more complaining then any other that I can remember (G22 from '08 does not count ). I was surprised at all of the complaining about various rules this year. Of course every game is going to have the rule that every one hates (G22 from '08) but this year people complained about everything.

Yes, the bumper rules are strict - Yes, it'd be nice to be able to leave the starting envelope - Yes, it'd be nice to carry in our batteries and plug them in the instant we get in our pits, but so what? Rules are rules. There's no point in complaining about things you can't change, and if you feel like you can change them then complain to the right people.

Remember, CD is not an official source of Info from FIRST. Anything said here is not official and anything said here probably won't reach the people it needs to reach. So if you want to change something talk to the people in power, don't clutter up this site with pointless complaining.

And I think John and Alex are on to something. For some reason students just aren't as excited about this year as they were before. I don't know what it is but there just seems to be some underlying negativity in the air lately. I know on my team we have gone through a radical change in the last few months and that may be where some of it stems from but it seems to be FIRST wide...

(And I know I'm not perfect, I have been know to complain about a rule or three.)

[pitzoid]

I'll throw in some change

I've been involved in robot competitions for more than 15 years. ASME, ANS, AUVSI, FIRST, BattleBots, RobotWars, Robotica and my own production BotBash. Concerns about rules are always the same when you get a bunch of intelligent people who are so passionate about being involved.

FIRST FRC in particular has elevated blood pressure having to do with this because of the sheer quantity of people involved. Everyone has an opinion.

When I first saw the <G14> rule a few months back, I knew it would be the lightening rod this year and really didn't have a high opinion of it, as I thought "why punish the teams who are "good"". But after I settled down about it, I just realized "ITS A GAME RULE", it adds to the challenge. Game rules are usually derived from something that one person did that was of enough concern that it was felt a rule should be made for one reason or another, or it could be something someone responsible just wants to try to see if it reaches a desired effect. I mean just like building engineering prototypes, no one can guarantee new ideas will work unless something is tried. Rules that may seem like they make no sense, do have reason. It just might not be wise to disseminate the reason as with highly passionate people it might cause more grief then letting them wonder why. GDC isn’t dumb.

What the GDC has to do every year in this regard is an incredible feat, and to tell the truth, I think they do a very good job given the overall circumstances. Fact is you will NEVER make everyone happy, you just do the best you can and then paint the bulls-eye on your chest, it’ll always be the same because people don’t change.

I just wish they’d get rid of the “no celebration rule” in the NFL, I like the dances……

[gorrilla]

I personaly dont mind the rules that much, it just makes it more of a challenge for me

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

But as will all things, experiences may vary. Perhaps you have competitions that you are in that have outstanding rules, and if so, please share with the rest of us.

To answer this question: the Vex Robotics Competition. I think they are as good as FIRST's GDC, as a rule, but that's no surprise given who is at IFI (Jason Morrella, Karthik, JVN, etc.)

The battery ruling strikes me as odd, and I'm not fond of the cutesy names given to some of the game elements of this year's FRC game, but I wouldn't pillory a group that has the long-term track history of the game design committee. In my book, the GDC is one of the great treasures of FIRST.

Perhaps it's time to eliminate the traditions of the "build season" and shipping the robot in a sealed crate. I left FRC a couple of years ago to build a team focused on FTC, and now on the Vex Robotics Competition. Without the pressure of the build season and its attending hoo-haw, the students on our team are able to spend more time trying ideas, doing spiral design, and generally refining their machines.

This thread is about "how should we respond to elements in the game rules that some people don't like" and not one about comparing different robot programs, so I don't want to go there. I am suggesting that the six-week build and ship adds what might be an unnecessary level of rules and hassle. Just saying...

[rees2001]

I have pretty much sat back & just listened/read the gripes all season. Most of the time I would just think to myself, if they read the rules more carefully or checked the FIRST forums they would realize their design is not legal. The problem is many teams took their questions here, to the CD community. I have also not felt the need to post because I have no problems with ANY of the rules.

I think this is where our big deal is made. People that have problems bring them here & make their voices heard, over & over again. People that don’t have a problem don’t need to speak up. If we don’t speak up the people that complain think everybody feels the same as them because that is all they read/hear. I think it was about time some of us stood up & said that we don’t have a problem with the rules. I applaud you for staring this thread to stand up and say that the GDC is doing a fine job.

After a little digestion, I don’t think every rule makes complete sense but I can live with all of them. Let’s take the effort we are putting into pointing out the problems & find a way to make our collective regional competitions the best they can be.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

This thread is about "how should we respond to elements in the game rules that some people don't like" and not one about comparing different robot programs, so I don't want to go there. I am suggesting that the six-week build and ship adds what might be an unnecessary level of rules and hassle. Just saying...

As more and more talented students graduate and move into promising careers and mentors become interested in started new ventures, it seems to me that FIRST is moving along its intended path of getting the folks out there in the fields of science, technology, and math. There may come a time when the robotics field is saturated with competitions that are run by folks who have their own vision or a vision modeled after the different FIRST programs but modified to fit their goals. Year after year teams return, mentors return, and new students join teams or form teams for the FRC program. It is natural for folks who have been around for a few years to have a deeper understanding of how the program runs and how to run a team well. Those folks will have opinions, ideas, thoughts to contribute to the program that they think will help run it more smoothly and more efficiently. There are opportunities and ways to contribute their suggestions without publicly criticizing the GDC in such rude and ugly ways. ChiefDelphi is a generous contribution of FRC 47, Chief Delphi, that requires a lot of work, money, and effort on the part of the team and its devoted members. I think sometimes we forget that generosity and misuse it in ways that detract from the reasons we've joined the FIRST program in the first place.

There are lots of options for robotics competitions. I hope some day that there are lots of options for helping humanity and our beautiful planet, making use of the skills and knowledge obtained while going to school acquiring degrees in the areas that so desperately need attention and committed dedication. The competitions are a vehicle that can carry the passion deeper into the global needs. Sometimes I wonder if we forget that along the way as well.

[BHS_STopping]

I do agree with you Sean on pretty much all levels. Being a part of FIRST, our team has had its fair share of unexpected and generally dissatisfying moments (very few of which were caused directly by FIRST itself). However, I like to look at those moments as tests of our drive and continued effort even in the face of, dare I say, failure. There are some lessons which FIRST try to teach us, but are ones that we have to learn for ourselves--that it's okay to lose, that sometimes life throws things your way which you can not get rid of but will have to learn to deal with eventually. Perhaps all of this silly ruling stuff is just another hidden message on FIRST's agenda... One can only hope!

Also, just one other thing, perhaps it would be better for you to just quote the text from the post you referred to, rather than the post itself? I know you don't want to put anybody on the spot, and I can't help but think that the original poster might feel that way.

[artdutra04]

It's good to have threads like this to remind us of what's really important, of the big picture.

I've seen and heard things from both sides of the aisle; as both a student and eventual mentor, but also what happens behind the scenes. Sometimes students and mentors take their concerns way too far. Other times, FIRST makes decisions that the general community decides is not in their best interest. So how do we fix this? What about many teams perceiving this year as not as much fun as previous years? How do we fix this as well?

While it may not seem that way, these two issues go hand in hand. I really say my favorite games - the ones which seemed the most fun - were the ones back in the day. Before they added mandatory bumpers and anti-wedge rules and [several dozen other rules] and had games like FIRST Frenzy, which IMHO was probably the pinnacle of an awesome FRC game. Back then, teams seemed so much more willing to accept creativity as creativity and not as "lawyering the rules", and FIRST seemed to admit their mistakes better (such as extending the build season by two days in 2004).

Now it all seems too strict and regimented nowadays, and that anytime you try thinking creatively outside of the box you are deemed to be "lawyering the rules". So all this pent up creativity gets thrust into the smallest openings in the rules possible, and rulings are made which gets everyone angry about people "lawyering the rules". It's a viscous cycle.

If we really want to see a really fun year, everyone - both teams and the GDC - need to lighten up. From the GDC: give teams an insane game like 2004 with tons of options and variety, and lighten up the rules a little bit. Like eliminate mandatory bumpers* - if a team decides not to use them and their frame gets bent into a banana, then it's their fault for not using bumpers or not building a strong enough frame. Then explicitly write in the rules that the GDC is placing a higher level of trust and responsibility on teams; and that if they make choices which end up negatively affecting their performance they do so at their own risk. One great example of this was finally relaxing the tape rule this year. (I'll be using the rule to put a piece of duct tape over a mounting hole for an optional second FP motor in a unibody gearbox to keep grease from flying out ).

From teams: don't [non-constructively] criticize FIRST, and for the sake of creativity and imagination STOP yelling at people for lawyering the rules if they want to think outside of the box. Don't take everything so seriously and learn to laugh things off. If the GDC does relax the rules a bit, be really creative again!

This won't be easy, but the only way this will work is if both sides agree to this. Once there is a good level of trust built up again between teams and the GDC, we hopefully won't see as many firestorms in the future. ;-)


* I have to admit, I'm not a big fan of [over]-simplifying the game or making it "easier" for rookies to compete. Look at the what many consider to be the best teams in FIRST nowadays; they were rookies once. And it was definitely a lot harder back then to even make a robot drive. But somehow, they not only began to survive, they really thrived.

So rather than over simplify the game, increase the resources available for them. Suppliers like AndyMark are a great way to do this. Another great way is to have FIRST communicate with large sponsors in a specific region, and get that large company to set up a regional grant program, to which area teams who are in need of resources can apply to. This was done this season in Connecticut by Northeast Utilities. Or maybe get a company like Sears or Home Depot or Lowe's to donate a $250 gift card to all teams, so that the rookie or lower resource teams can finally buy that drill press or band saw they've been eying for years.

If teams perceive that FIRST is really looking out for them, and that FIRST is really trying to help them, they'll be much more willing to overlook or accept unfavorable rulings for what they are.

[David Brinza]

Perhaps some of the frustrations being expressed in regarding the battery ruling are due to the belief that the GDC is acting in a completely arbitrary manner. I haven't seen any posts trying to provide rationale for effectively penalizing teams for transporting batteries to events with the connectors attached. So, consider this:

If you shipped batteries in your crate with Anderson connectors attached, you are violating the shipping requirements (See Section 4.2.2). Batteries are to be shipped in the original packaging with foam covering the battery terminals to protect from shorting. This is a regulatory matter for safe transportation of dangerous goods - not something that the GDC created just to hassle teams. Anderson connectors clearly cannot be installed on the batteries and meet this requirement. If you transport batteries via air, they must be packed as specified in Section 4.2.2 (original packing materials, terminals protected, etc.).

Teams that properly ship batteries in their crate will need to re-attach the connectors at the event. Should teams who carry-in batteries to the event be allowed the advantage of having the connectors already in place? Just a thought...

If FIRST does not rescind this ruling (or make exceptions for batteries), there will be a lot of grumbling at the events. I don't like that there will be additional work to do on Thursday, but our team will comply. I worry that enforcement of this ruling will present more challenges to inspectors and other event personnel. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that the level of enforcement will vary from event-to-event, which will cause even more frustration. Oh well...