Team 217 - Thunderchickens

[Tom Line]

I can certainly understand where the jealousy comes from regarding 217, 148, etc. The resources (monetarily and sponsorship wise) they have access to are the envy of many small companies, much less a FIRST robotics team. It can be very easy to get disheartened when you have to compete against those teams year in and year out, see their incredible robots, and (usually) lose to them.

That's where it comes back around to the mentors to remind you: you aren't team 217, you aren't team 148. You are your own team and you need to use your own yardstick to measure with.

I'll admit that we go into every competition eyeing those folks, knowing that they'll probably be the ones to beat. That highlights even more just how good they really are, because I bet almost every other team is looking at them the same way.

Improve yourself. Try not to tear others down.

[Mike Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Karthik

The Thunderchickens are one of the best run teams in all of FIRST. They arguably have one of the most intelligent student groups of any team in FIRST. (The "ringers" as we've dubbed them) Each year they astonish me with what they accomplish and have probably done more to inspire my methods of mentoring on 1114 than any other team in FIRST. So yeah.

I would like to argue that point. By no means am I going to call their students unintelligent, but I believe that how well a team doesn't necessarily have a direct correlation to the intelligence of the students. Yes a team that does have smart kids is going to do better than with students who are lacking that feat, but if a student from another team was put in a position with as many educational resources (sponsors and mentors who know their stuff) as a thunder chicken student I am 100% confident they would still do well.

For example Team 397 has never won a regional, but that doesn't mean our students aren't as smart. Our students just realize that we must build within our limitations and since there are only 5 of them this year we physically could not put together a thunder chicken machine even if we put every day all day into it. We came up with all sorts of strategies and designs that we see being used, but because of our financial and labor limitations we know we couldn't do it.

I agree the thunder chicken students are smart, but I think that there are many less privileged FIRST students who are smart, and it saddens me that they don't all get the recognition that students like those on the thunder chickens do.

I would also like to comment on one of Baby Cakes comments:
"The driver on the team when asked if he was excited at the cass tech district said " not really, i know we are going to win it"."

I sincerely hope that this is not true, because if it is I am actually disturbed and offended. There is a fine line between pride and arrogance, and I'm sure the mentors of team 217 know how to deal with such issues because that is a terrible reflection of an excellent team. I will leave it at that.

[harleywhite]

Originally Posted by babycakes

Its completely the opposite of what FIRST is about.

I'm pretty sure FIRST isn't about trash talking teams, but that doesn't seem to bother you too much.

I don't really know what you thought would be accomplished by coming on CD and making statements like the ones you made. It is really unbelievably ridiculous and childish.

[kylelanman]

This is not directed at any team in particular just something that I heard from a spectator at the WI regional while walking to launch.

"It is a lot like pine wood derby, you can tell which ones the kids built"

After a quick at robot rules I do not see thing that specifically says the parts are suppose to be built by the team. The only thing I see is that the price even if donated has to be accounted for in the BOM.

I would say you can ask anyone that has seen one of 2481's robots is it student built? They would say yes. It is rather obvious. The robot is almost always made from angle aluminum stock and bolted or welded together if time allows. It shows cosmetically but it gives the student a much bigger feeling of accomplishment when the team goes as far as it did this year or last. Trying to build a robot with out the latest and greatest tools and by ourselves that is able to out compete the sponsor built ones is what drives our team to work as hard as we do during the build season. So as far as we are concerned if teams want to have there sponsor build parts or all of there robot and ship it to them then it is there prerogative. It simply gives the teams that build there own bot a bigger feeling of accomplishment in the end.

Edit: I did not read the beginning of this thread. I just came in on the end talking about sponsor built robots. I'm in no way saying that 217 did not build there own robot. I have no clue. I'm just stating my opinion about sponsor built robots.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by ICanCountTo19

I would like to argue that point. By no means am I going to call their students unintelligent, but I believe that how well a team doesn't necessarily have a direct correlation to the intelligence of the students. Yes a team that does have smart kids is going to do better than with students who are lacking that feat, but if a student from another team was put in a position with as many educational resources (sponsors and mentors who know their stuff) as a thunder chicken student I am 100% confident they would still do well.

...

I agree the thunder chicken students are smart, but I think that there are many less privileged FIRST students who are smart, and it saddens me that they don't all get the recognition that students like those on the thunder chickens do.

Michael,

I agree that there are thousands of team with thousands of very intelligent students. My post was based on my first hand interactions with the Thunderchicken students since 2006 as opposed to any success they have had on the field. Each year I meet a more than a handful of them who dazzle me with their intellect. I normally wouldn't have pointed something out like this, but in light of the implications of the original poster I felt that someone needed to point out the outstanding abilities of these students, despite of claims/implications to the contrary.

It would be great if we could recognize every student in this program, but thankfully not every team needs their reputation boosted a bit after being tossed baseless insults in a public forum like 217 was tonight.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by fuzzy1718

It is a smart thing to do posting anonymously, their team doesn't get harmed and neither do they. And for those who think it is dishonorable and a sneaky stab in the back, what would you do? Put the reputation of your team on the line or post anonymously? Those who will retort back to my post with the "if you don't have something nice to say, then don't say it" remark: if this thread really burned your shorts would you sit back and let it go on?

It is not a smart thing to do-it's cowardly.

If you're going to slander a team you deserve for everyone to know who you are and what team you're from. You deserve to bear the consequences that result. If said person had posted publicly one of their mentors would probably be taking them to task right now for embarrassing themselves and their team. Maybe then this person would learn a lesson that they clearly haven't learned yet.

[Mike Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Karthik

Michael,

I agree that there are thousands of team with thousands of very intelligent students. My post was based on my first hand interactions with the Thunderchicken students since 2006 as opposed to any success they have had on the field. Each year I meet a more than a handful of them who dazzle me with their intellect. I normally wouldn't have pointed something out like this, but in light of the implications of the original poster I felt that someone needed to point out the outstanding abilities of these students, despite of claims/implications to the contrary.

It would be great if we could recognize every student in this program, but thankfully not every team needs their reputation boosted a bit after being tossed baseless insults in a public forum like 217 was tonight.

That makes more sense now, I completely understand your defense of these students, the thunder chicken students do get bashed every year as do yours. Must get old having to point it out every year to anonymous posters though...

[HashemReza]

I unfortunately forgot to do so beforehand, so let me take the time now to applaud the drive, dedication, and intelligence of every team member of 1114, 217, and the other IFI teams who spent many hours perfecting their robot. Furthermore, I would like to thank the mentors for each of those teams, as it is by those same qualities that you have shaped such successful 'dynasties'. I look forward to playing Breakaway with all of you at Championship, and continuing to learn from you all in years of mentoring to come.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by ICanCountTo19

That makes more sense now, I completely understand your defense of these students, the thunder chicken students do get bashed every year as do yours. Must get old having to point it out every year to anonymous posters though...

[comic relief]
I'm telling you guys,

everyone's just jealous of the cowboy and chicken motifs, not the robots. [/comic relief]

But really, can there be a part in CD registration that requires a team number or team name please?

...Or any other ideas to prevent idiotic & arrogant posters from making false accounts?

[IBdrummer]

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

But really, can there be a part in CD registration that requires a team number or team name please?

...Or any other ideas to prevent idiotic & arrogant posters from making false accounts?

I'm not so sure that would solve the problem because they'd probably just make up a team or use some other teams number/name.

Is there anyway the posts or accounts can be deleted though? I can't see how that post has done any good or done anything other than anger members and take away from the original thread's intentions.

[Eric O]

Originally Posted by Arefin Bari

The comment against Thunderchickens makes me sick to the stomach. Their team is still one of the reasons why I am still involved with FIRST no matter how much my parents or my gf are against it just because it takes so much out of me.

They are even breaking up families and relationships! These Thunderchickens sound pretty awful!

-Anonymous

PS: I look at the dominant teams in this program and they have two things, intelligence and dedication. Both of them together produce the teams/robots that they do. Without the same level of both it makes it harder and harder to compete. The good news, it’s possible to get there! In fact, people from many of these teams tell you how to do it. They give presentations on how they do it at the Championship (and other venues). Don't get mad, learn, and get even.

[thefro526]

I have a friend on 217 and she pointed me towards this thread and was very offended.

It seems that year after year someone comes out and bashes some well known and successful team for not building their own robot, assembling a robot from parts, blah blah blah. What's people seem to forget though, is that when you bash a team on a Public Forum like this, members of the team can see it. While some stand up and will correct you, many just sit back and get hurt because they feel too biased to counter argue.

So to the Anonymous poster who came out and bashed 217, get to know people on the team and then come back on here and make claims about robots being built however - and when you come back, please use a real name.

Also, I'd suggest that any of the Mentors or Team Leaders out there try to talk to their students about good teams and good robots and try to get rid of the animosity that students seem to have towards these elite team. At one point in time (2006) I would go to competitions as an impressionable Freshman and see good robots with my older teammates. They would instantly say, "You know who built that robot, not the kids" and things of the sort. As I got older, and learned about what building robots takes (I was on the other side of those comments once or twice) I grew out of that school of thought. Now I try to make sure that no student on 816 has that mindset. Sometimes, it seems that students (especially those on student run teams) seem to forget that students their own age can build exceptional robots.

[JackG]

I don't think anybody (except maybe thefro526) really understood why people like babycakes had a bone to pick with the Chickens. It's easy to dismiss him as a jealous, lazy brat, but I bet there's more to it than that. Imagine, you're a 16 year old student on your school's team. You and your team put in hours after school, and you end up with a so-so robot relative to the other teams. Then you look over at the guys in green who win multiple regionals a year and resentment starts to build. "Hey, isn't this a fair competition? Me and my friend designed our robot, but they had professional engineers design theirs! My shaky hands and I milled our parts out, while lasers cut our theirs!" It's as if your sandlot team showed up to play and faced off with the New York Yankees. You'd feel at least a little betrayed by what you thought was a balanced playing field.

Like many of you have pointed out, there's nothing in the rules that says the students have to do the work. There's nothing that says everybody will have the same resources. But many students on lesser teams don't realize that. Without understanding those facts, the whole system seems to be a sham competition. Those who have been around for a while realize that unless they're on a dynasty team, they probably won't have much chance of playing on Einstein. But let’s face it, it took us all some time before we realized that. Some people have not reached that realization, and we need to gently help them reach it.

I know people who are much less interested in the MLB (relative to other sports) because of the lack of salary caps. Some people just don’t like the idea that not everybody starts from the same footing, and find the game much less fun for that reason. While in FIRST it makes complete sense to leave the game without a salary/resource cap, so to speak, not everyone will like the resulting system. One way of looking at the original post was that babycakes was simply one of those people and was pointing out his/her reasons. (Disclaimer: the first post, however, was highly undiplomatic and came off as a crude attack. babycakes did deserve to be flamed for that. Not for the message, but for the tone should the blame have come. Also, babycakes' second post indicated that he/she didn't understand FIRST very well, and that post was also worthy of criticism.)



While I’m on a roll defending unpopular viewpoints, I’ll say that babycakes made the right call by posting anonymously. He/she was arguing a point, and the point’s validity did not depend on the person making it. If you can refute the point, then do so. But knowing the person’s identity does not further the discussion of that point. It simply gives you ammo to launch tangent discussions. In other words, posting anonymously dodges ad hominem arguments (although, laughably, many respected members of this community found ways to make these ad-hominem attacks regardless.) Besides, babycakes chose to post anonymously because he/she anticipated that this reaction would occur. Whatever fallout resulting from the anonymity is better than newfound ill-will generated by attaching a team number to a controversial post.

So, ChiefDelphi, I’m defending anonymity outright. Let’s remember how many of the greatest writers have used pseudonyms for their work at some point. Why? Because good points do not need a name behind them to be good points, and an argument is an argument is an argument whether it springs from the keyboard of Justice Roberts or the lowliest student. Recall the line from V for Vendetta “Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea, Mr. Creedy, and ideas are bulletproof.”

EDIT: Grammar, punctuation, etc.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by JackG

While I’m on a roll defending unpopular viewpoints, I’ll say that babycakes made the right call by posting anonymously. He/she was arguing a point, and the point’s validity did not depend on the person making it. If you can refute the point, then do so. But knowing the person’s identity does not further the discussion of that point. It simply gives you ammo to launch tangent discussions

There's a stark difference between arguing a point ("maybe students should have to fabricate robots" or something like that) and calling a large body of individuals unenthusiastic slackers who don't deserve to win trophies because they sent CAD files to Texas. FAHA has been used to allow people to argue viewpoints anonymously before, if people want an avenue to do so. But I don't see "arguing a point" as a catch all safety net for lobbing pot shots at teams.

What if that was your team? What if I made an anonymous account and called you an ungracious jerk who should have to give back all the trophies you've ever won? I'm sure you'd be happy then.

Thanks for not making your post anonymously

[IKE]

Originally Posted by kylelanman

"It is a lot like pine wood derby, you can tell which ones the kids built"

I tend to disagree on this point. Just last year, a team I have competed with and against for 6 years told me that they always like competition because the kids finally get to work on the machine. I was floored as by looking at it, I had assumed all of those years that the kids built that one. This mentor assumed that our machine was "pro-built", so I had him come up close and see what's under the vinyl. There are a ton of teams that I thought were professionally built that it turns out, just use a lot of CNC and automation. Kids do the CAD and design, a machine shop runs the Waterjet/CNC... cut out the parts, and the kids bolt it together.

We have been a team that the kids do 90+% of the fabrication, but I am begining to question what is more important: Teaching a kid how to wink a hole so that the bolts go through, or using automated fabrication and teaching them better design skills?

So can you tell by looking "which ones the kids built"? After 6 years, 2 teams, and helping dozens of other team at competitions, I learned that I can't tell which ones the kids built vs. Adults. Ironically I thought I could my first 2 years in the program. Differentiating facts from assumptions is one of the most important things anyone can learn.

P.S. For what it is worth, I swung by a 217 practice and was thoroughly impressed the kids were working on and practicing with their practice robot essentially on their own. Yes they were supervised, but it was the kids making repairs, running the drills (actual plays like a real sport), and were really functioning on their own. It sure didn't look like it was the first time either.