The meaning behind the game.......

[archiver]

Posted by Ryan Matheson at 04/09/2001 10:42 PM EST


Student on team #343, Metal-In-Motion, from Fred P. Hamilton Career Center.



In my opinion (which I ain't saying is right or wrong), I believe this year's competition was developed in hopes of teaching a diverse group of teams to work as one combined team in order to accomplish the goal of achieving maximum points. Some of ya'll might be saying , DUH!, but I will elaborate on this. For example, in the work force, people have to combine their skills and techniques in order to successfully complete a job at hand. If one of the members is not capable of completing his/her end of the bargain, serious consequences could arise. By working as a team and helping each other out, the possibilities of success are endless. But if something does happen and things start to fall apart, one must not condemn or point a finger at anyone. I bring this up because I see some postings that wish that Dean would have developed a game of offense and defense. And I admit, their is competition in this world among companies that sell the same products. But I believe FIRST also wants to exhibit teamwork in the work place, therefore bringing about a change in the game this year. I restate that this is only my opinion. Tell me what ya'll think was the reason behind this year's game.

[archiver]

Posted by Libby Ritchie at 04/09/2001 11:31 PM EST


Coach on team #393, Full Metal Jackets, from Morristown Jr/Sr High School and NASA/KIPT, Inc..


In Reply to: The meaning behind the game.......
Posted by Ryan Matheson on 04/09/2001 10:42 PM EST:



I agree with you in that there were some valuable lessons to be learned from this year's game. And I have to admit that I enjoyed the game a little more once we got to the competition. However, I tend to get nervous at the thought of Dean taking out the two-on-two aspect of the game in the future. I understand the violence aspect that he talked about, but at the same time, as a past coach who loves pure competition, I want the offense/defense aspect back at some point. Once some of these teams figured out how to score big, that's all there was to it. There was no stopping those teams and all you could do was hope to be on their team to boost your own scores. I understand what FIRST is trying to teach the kids, but I think there is much to be learned from having a defense involved as well.

[archiver]

Posted by Justin Hirt at 04/10/2001 2:34 PM EST


Student on team #116, Epsilon Delta, from Herndon High School and NASA Headquarters.


In Reply to: Re: The meaning behind the game.......
Posted by Libby Ritchie on 04/09/2001 11:31 PM EST:



There were two meanings behind this year's game: #1) Dean Kamen is very, very anti-Battlebots and feels that it is very harmful to society. He wanted to prove to the world that you don't need violence in competition, that working together as a team is just as exciting. #2) To screw over Chief Delphi and other engineer run teams. They tried to create a game where you don't have to have a engineer built robot to win

[archiver]

Posted by Matt Leese at 04/10/2001 4:05 PM EST


Other on team #73, Tigerbolt, from Edison Technical HS and Alstom & Fiber Technologies & RIT.


In Reply to: Re: The meaning behind the game.......
Posted by Justin Hirt on 04/10/2001 2:34 PM EST:



: #2) To screw over Chief Delphi and other engineer
: run teams. They tried to create a game where you
: don't have to have a engineer built robot to win

Ok, I take offense to this. First of all, I don't know of any teams run completely by engineers. You know why? Because it'd be pointless to do so. Because the whole point of FIRST is to encourage engineering and having students sit and watch doesn't accomplish that. What you might have wanted to say is teams that have more money but that isn't true either. Money has very little to do with designing a good robot it just ends up that the programs with the most involved people have the most money -- not vice-versa. Second, FIRST is agnostic to who does the construction and designing. They're more interested in encouraging science, math, and engineering. However, it is the general consensus (as far as I can tell) that the best way to go about it is to have engineers working with students on the robot. Neither students working alone nor engineers working alone. And I bet that there's a fair chance you would've thought my team's robot was engineer built. Well, guess what, it was almost completely built by students (the rest being done by teachers). We had zero engineers. It just happens that our students happen to be excellent machinists. I'm sorry for ranting but that comment just set me off.

Matt

[archiver]

Posted by Anne Bergeron at 04/10/2001 6:11 PM EST


Coach on team #608, Prowling Panthers, from Georgia Institute of Technology and Georgia Tech/NASA/UTC/Ford/Ike Murray.


In Reply to: Re: The meaning behind the game.......
Posted by Matt Leese on 04/10/2001 4:05 PM EST:



: : #2) To screw over Chief Delphi and other engineer
: : run teams. They tried to create a game where you
: : don't have to have a engineer built robot to win


I agree that this comment should not have been pointed at a specific team or said the way it was said but it is very true. I personally know of several teams where the students do nothing but sit by and watch (if even that) as their robots are built. One of the sponsors on my old team from when I was in high school would have done exactly that if the seniors had not forced their way in and I know that he has done that since I left. I know the message of FIRST is that the students are supposed to be learning from this but a lot of engineers either just love building robots too much to let go or are too competitive to. Next time you go to a competition, go around and talk to the students, you'll find that a there are more teams out there that are like that then you think.

Just thought I would let you know that the comment was not totally out of place (just pointed at the wrong teams)

[archiver]

Posted by Joe Johnson at 04/10/2001 8:56 PM EST


Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.


In Reply to: Re: The meaning behind the game.......
Posted by Anne Bergeron on 04/10/2001 6:11 PM EST:



While I am quite sure that Dean and Woodie have no
interest in "screwing over" Chief Delphi or any other
so called "engineer run" team, there is some truth in
what you say.

FIRST is trying to live with a very wide dynamic range
of teams in terms of engineering support and general
robot building resources.

In his public comments as well as in his private
conversations, Dean has often indicated that he
believes it is important to the long term health of
FIRST that all teams believe they have a shot at doing
well, from the Chief Delphi type teams to the "3
students in Dad's Garage" type teams (you know who you
are ;-)

To this end, I believe that,yes, Dean is trying to
"screw over Chief Delphi" By this I mean that he is
trying to design a game that allows a large range of
teams to feel like they have a shot at competing.

I disagree with the tone that implied that Dean and
FIRST have a grudge against "engineer run" teams but as
I say, there is at least a kernel of truth in the ideas
expressed.

Joe J.

[archiver]

Posted by Chris Hibner at 04/12/2001 5:14 PM EST


Coach on team #308, Walled Lake Monster, from Walled Lake Schools and TRW Automotive Electronics.


In Reply to: Re: The meaning behind the game.......
Posted by Justin Hirt on 04/10/2001 2:34 PM EST:



(or "~= bad" for MATLAB buffs)

But seriously...

Teams run by engineers is not a bad thing. In fact, it was the original intention of FIRST. The package that we got from FIRST when we started our team 5 years ago stated that students should get a feel for the engineering process by observing and working with engineers. The students should learn what engineering is about from the engineers. If the students do all of the work, how are they supposed to learn about the engineering process, or what engineers do?

Student run teams can be good - don't get me wrong. However, wrong lessons can also be learned. One thing that can be learned is that engineering is not necessary, since a robot can be hacked. I think the original intent of FIRST is to show how engineers use the tools of math and science to design a great robot. Hacking a robot isn't nearly as inspirational, nor does it show the benefit of math and science.

The original intent of FIRST is to show that engineers can be looked up to like kids look up to athletes. They want the engineers to be role models for the students. No engineers == no role models.

Overall, I think a good balance needs to be found which maximizes the students' interest, involvement, and inspiration -- all are important.

[archiver]

Posted by Chris Hibner at 04/11/2001 10:05 AM EST


Coach on team #308, Walled Lake Monster, from Walled Lake Schools and TRW Automotive Electronics.


In Reply to: The meaning behind the game.......
Posted by Ryan Matheson on 04/09/2001 10:42 PM EST:



I think that all of the opinions expressed below are learned within each team before the robot is shipped to the competition. I don't think we need the game to do the same thing.

-Chris

: In my opinion (which I ain't saying is right or wrong), I believe this year's competition was developed in hopes of teaching a diverse group of teams to work as one combined team in order to accomplish the goal of achieving maximum points. Some of ya'll might be saying , DUH!, but I will elaborate on this. For example, in the work force, people have to combine their skills and techniques in order to successfully complete a job at hand. If one of the members is not capable of completing his/her end of the bargain, serious consequences could arise. By working as a team and helping each other out, the possibilities of success are endless. But if something does happen and things start to fall apart, one must not condemn or point a finger at anyone. I bring this up because I see some postings that wish that Dean would have developed a game of offense and defense. And I admit, their is competition in this world among companies that sell the same products. But I believe FIRST also wants to exhibit teamwork in the work place, therefore bringing about a change in the game this year. I restate that this is only my opinion. Tell me what ya'll think was the reason behind this year's game.