Competition and Jealousy

[JamesCH95]

In my mind there are two types of teams playing first:

1) The power-house win-win-win teams that have great resources at their disposal and very effective management.

2) The teams that just like making robots and competing for the sake of making a robot and competing with it, and maybe having an upset win here or there to make things interesting.

To be honest the most fun and enjoyable teams that I've ever been on (Robotics, Soccer, Volleyball, Ski Racing, Formula SAE, etc) always played because it was fun and we enjoyed it. There was always some team with way more resources, better equipment, more practice, better skis, or a faster car, it might just be me, but I love simply competing, regardless of the outcome. I find it very satisfying to give something 100% of my effort.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by Cory

I don't see how that's any different from FIRST. The powerhouse teams are powerhouses because of a desire to win. FIRST is not all about winning, or the competition, but winning is a lot more inspiring than losing is.

Oh, I completely agree. I was just responding to the quote by the OP: "Most athletes that I know of are not in it to win it." I do think the powerhouse teams do play to win and the desire to win a certainly a good thing. Of course, if taken too far (such as winning at all costs by cheating), the desire can have negitive impacts. I do not think we are at that stage, yet.

[buildmaster5000]

My team has had limited success winning (we qualified for elims our rooke year, 2008), but the goal of FIRST to me is far broader than that. Sure, winning would be nice, but it requires sacrifices. If I am under extreme pressure (more that there already is to build a robot in 6 weeks) to win, it takes away the fun to a degree. I enjoy being able to laugh and joke with my team mates, even at the competition. If we ship a working robot and do ok at the competition, we feel accomplished.

Winning would be nice, but the goal of this whole crazy project is to learn and spread the influence of technology. As long as I learn and have fun, I feel like FIRST has done its job. If I win in compeition, thats icing on the cake. Granted my team does not have all the resources 1114 or 267 have, but we do what we can with what we have, and it adds to the challenge.

Interesting side note: we won the Engieneering Excellence Award and no one from our team was left at the competition to accept it. We dont put a lot of emphasis on trophies, but building skills, memories and friends.

[MasterRobot]

Powerhouse teams also are very good inspiration for smaller teams with less resources. Teams watch and see robots that make their own look primitive at times, but it gives teams something to work towards. We may not have the financial resources, but seeing what resources can get your makes us want to find new sponsors. My team now, is far from being a powerhouse team, but we constantly look to what the powerhouse teams do as inspiration to make our team as effective and useful we can be with the resources we have. They make FRC interesting by showing what students together with mentors can achieve at their best, and give a good example of what teams should strive for.

[sgreco]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

I think maybe that is the reason that FIRST hasn't been more successful; So many of us, it seems, are in it for the wrong reasons.

I wouldn't say entering a competition to win is the wrong reason to enter.

All in all I do agree with your post, but I would prefer not to downplay the importance of the competitive aspect.

The competition is really fun, despite all the fun and I've had in other aspects, the competition was the my enlightening moment where I decided FIRST was really something I wanted to do, which resulted in my aspirations to become a mechanical engineer. If my team wasn't going all out to win in 2007, the competition would not have been have as fun or inspiring.

FIRST's primary purpose is to Inspire and the competitive aspect plays an integral role in this. If people want to be competitive and do what they can to win, let them do it without others complaining.

Going back to how I agree with most of your post...It's important that the values and goals of FIRST are not lost in the desire to win, but I feel like this certainly is not the case at this point. If it becomes the case further down the road, I'll be more than happy to skeptically look at over competition, but for right now, I see no problems.

Considering the expence of FIRST it's amazing its as successful as it is today...but it's not random, there's a reason...It's because most of the things FIRST has done they've done right. I wouldn't look skeptically upon lack of success even compared to potential. Consider all of the people FIRST has affected. In my opinion, that's nothing but success.

I agree very much about people giving up, or not giving up though. Honestly my team has been getting competitively worse, our best years were 2007 and 2008, but our team has contiued to grow, we've worked hard and have a bigger effect on the community and inspired more people. You don't have to win to inspire, which is where I agree with you, but the competition is really important and really fun (as described above).

[Ian Curtis]

Why would you name your organization US FIRST if you didn't intend to win a competition of some sort?

While the United States Foundation for Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology has clearly changed over the past 21 years, I think competition is a perfectly healthy and rather important component of the program. It's unfortunate that some of the teams that really get it get dragged through the mud annually, but I perennial champions in any sport get the same sort of treatment. If Lance Armstrong didn't have 7 yellow jerseys, would he be accused of using steroids? If Micheal Phelps didn't win 8 gold medals, would he be accused of steroid use? If the New England Patriots didn't keep winning Superbowl titles in the early 2000s, would they be accused of all sorts of rule breaking? Aren't the Yankees disliked because they've won the World Series too many times?

I think it unfortunately comes with being an elite athlete, engineer, FIRST team, etc. People don't like to lose, but whining is a whole lot easier than training harder, studying more, or spending your off-season prototyping.

[Jack Jones]

I am from Michigan, home of the Lions. For anyone who doesn't know about it the Lions stink. I don't mean rotten eggs I mean like students on a 14 hr bus ride to Atlanta with broken AC stench. You don't hear them complaining about how some team (I don't know football) wins all the time. In fact, you hear them have the attitude of, "We are going to keep trying." You know, I bet they know they can't win the Superbowl right now but I bet that doesn't affect how they play or train. I bet they watch what other teams do and try to emulate it. I bet they don't sit around on the football forums griping about how the Packers (know nothing about football!) only win because have more money or because they have more people. Why the heck do I see that in FIRST?

I don’t think the Lions situation is at all similar to that of an aspiring FIRST team. Their regular season does not entail being paired at random with two other football teams. Their playoffs do not consist of three wild card teams going up against two conference winners and a lesser team of their choice. They never see the Viking fans wearing cheese hats way early in the season to drive home the foregone conclusion that together the Vikings and Packers will dominate the NFC North.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

I don’t think the Lions situation is at all similar to that of an aspiring FIRST team. Their regular season does not entail being paired at random with two other football teams. Their playoffs do not consist of three wild card teams going up against two conference winners and a lesser team of their choice. They never see the Viking fans wearing cheese hats way early in the season to drive home the foregone conclusion that together the Vikings and Packers will dominate the NFC North.

Oh come on now, as much as I like Detroit in hockey, there's no way I can support the Lions. Lol but ok fine maybe NFL analogies don't always work with FRC, I'll give you that much.

.
Red Wings <3

[Mike Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

I don’t think the Lions situation is at all similar to that of an aspiring FIRST team. Their regular season does not entail being paired at random with two other football teams. Their playoffs do not consist of three wild card teams going up against two conference winners and a lesser team of their choice. They never see the Viking fans wearing cheese hats way early in the season to drive home the foregone conclusion that together the Vikings and Packers will dominate the NFC North.

You're right. The LIONS are not at all similar to an ASPIRING FIRST team, but this thread was not about the fact that football teams don't cooperate or cheer for each other. Professional sports teams are a good analogy to FIRST because the level of competition is high and there are teams that are very elite and blow everyone else out of the water. But you don't see them whining nearly as much as FIRST teams whine. I have seen some liberal interpretations of Gracious Professionalism this year; I'm not a fan.

[mwtidd]

Originally Posted by EricH

They tried that in 2007. It was almost universally hated.

Thanks for your insight Eric. Coming from NH, and only attending the GSR, I had not realized it was tried, or let alone that this was the case. It definitely makes sense.

Originally Posted by EricH

A better way would be to encourage veterans to adopt rookies and help them learn.

This was sort of what I was hinting at, at competition is one thing, and it wouldn't really have an impact on "competition and jealousy". My thought was more with regards to fixed alliances or "robot teams" I think this would create an interesting dynamic. Imagine 2010 if you worked throughout the season with 2 other teams. Think of how many more suspensions we would have seen. Also coordinated autonomous would be quite a feat, also you would see many more teams with autonomous.

Currently "collaboration" in FIRST is synonymous with identical or mass produced. Imagine if collaboration was more working to accomplish a feat that could not be done individually.

[Jack Jones]

But you don't see them whining nearly as much as FIRST teams whine. I have seen some liberal interpretations of Gracious Professionalism this year; I'm not a fan.

How is whining about whining supposed to be an improvement?

If people have gripes, they should be allowed to air them without being told to shut up and drink their Kool Aid. Whether it is 6v0, the definition of “inside”, frustrations with minor technicalities, powerhouse collaborations, a $1k discount linked to a $2.5k KoP shortfall, or a civil request for transparency, each issue raised has some value – even if only for nothing more than letting off steam.

[RoboMom]

Originally Posted by lineskier

Currently "collaboration" in FIRST is synonymous with identical or mass produced. Imagine if collaboration was more working to accomplish a feat that could not be done individually.

Actually there are lots of people with a different interpretation.

Five years ago a group of teams banded together and called themselves the Baltimore Area Alliance (BAA). They have a mission statement, use of a 501(c)3, a treasurer and a facilitator. Reps meet on a regular basis. They do some joint fundraising. This year they had enough funding to give out grants to teams who applied (including a rookie who was not in the Baltimore area). This year they built a field. They hold a day of workshops in the fall open to any team.

And for the 4th year they are putting on a successful and fun off-season event, the Battle O'Baltimore. http://www.battleobaltimore.com/
Having around 10 teams band together to put on a competition is a great team builder on every level and would be difficult if done by an individual team in this area. They do a fine job.

These teams all compete against each other and build different robots. But they try to share ideas, concerns and resources.

[JaneYoung]

Thanks for chiming in with a different perspective regarding collaboration, Jenny. I was hoping you would.

Jane

[lil'est lavery]

As easy as it is to compare FIRST with most sports, there are a lot of major differences between the two. Although there definitely are people who are involved with FIRST for the wrong reasons, there are also people in modern sports in it for the same wrong reasons and, in my opinion, plenty of people involved with FIRST for all the right reasons. I personally, think that the competition only adds to the challenge and the fun of the game, but I can see how it would take away from the experience for some. As far as athletes being in it because they love the game, as I walk through competitions and look at all the people smiling, cheering, and dancing, I would say we have that too. I certainly love robotics, and I think I can speak for everyone who comes back year after year in saying that they love it too.

[IKE]

Originally Posted by JamesCH95

In my mind there are two types of teams playing first:
.

You really should expand your mind. There are many many many shades of gray between your black and white. Wanting to do well doesn't mean that you can't have fun. Wanting to have fun doesn't mean that you want to do well.
In my mind there are tons of shades of not only black and white, but electric blue, tie-die rainbow, and safety green. While it is important to not allow yourself to fall into the extrememes of competitiveness, it is also important to have a drive to succeed (at whatever your goals are). The two groups you talk about are likely to be a minority with most teams falling somewhere in-between.