Is Bag and Tag Necessary?

[Nemo]

It's not strictly an advantage to compete in later weeks in a no-bag season. You have more time to build the robot, but so does everybody else. You get softer competition in earlier weeks, so you can win with less.

This is already true to a lesser extent.

Also, that's how it functions in FTC. It's actually kind of strategically interesting to decide what to shoot for according to when you compete, and when you plan to compete after that. I haven't found it to be an issue apart from the fact that the season gets LONG. The need for a break is the only compelling argument I've seen in favor of keeping the bag and tag deadline.

[lscime]

Success is iterative and progress is incremental

There have already been quite a few posts that sum up my thoughts on why I think that having stop-build day is important, but I wanted to comment on the classic refrain of "some (maybe a lot) of teams have more resources than us so we can't do X like they can."

Are there teams with way more resources than you? That's a YES for most teams. Is it true that the team with more resources can do more things and is more likely to be successful*? YEP. But that team over there (you know the one I'm talking about, the one that always wins in your region and probably has half-a-dozen practice robots that can fly and shoot 30 discs/second ) had, at some point, as many (maybe a little more, maybe a little less) resources as you have now.

They didn't get there overnight. They made a concerted, year-round effort to constantly challenge and improve themselves, incrementally year after year. I will use our pit area as an example because it is illustrative and perhaps less blood-pressure-raising than the usual discussion of robots.

In 2008 we had:
-A robot cart that had wheels. Kinda...

In 2009 we had:
-A very nice and painted robot cart that definitely had wheels.

In 2010 we had:
-A very nice and painted robot cart that definitely had wheels.
-3 very nice tool carts.

In 2011 and 2012 we had:
-A very nice and painted robot cart that definitely had wheels.
-3 very nice tool carts.
-A small Community Outreach display.

In 2013 we will have:
-A very nice and painted robot cart that definitely had wheels.
-3 very nice tool carts.
-A sweet battery charging cart.
-A complete pit area with integrated displays, signs, shelving, and general awesomeness

We started in 2008 with no engineering support, no support from the BOE (we actually got penalized for missing school to go to our first competition), 11 kids, 4 mentors, and not much more than a NASA grant. Now we have engineering mentors and companies, FANTASTIC support from the BOE (THANK YOU for the soon-to-be practice facility ), 36 kids, almost as many mentors, and a budget exceeding $40,000. We didn't get here overnight, nor did any other team. Our journey toward getting an identical practice robot "fully" functional 2 weeks before bag day was just as incremental as our journey toward having an awesome pit. We aren't in the best geographic or demographic location for running a robotics team (something we are working on) but we also aren't in the worst. It will take some teams more time to get to same point as us, some teams less. Some teams will be able to go further than us, some not quite as far. But EVERY team can improve. EVERY team can work year-round to build up the funding, the spare parts, the team-experience necessary to build a practice robot (or something that can suit their needs just as well) but it won't come easy and it won't come fast. Just always keep in mind that every team started from somewhere.

Apologies for the long post,
-Luke

*I'm defining "success" here to refer to robot performance, awards, etc. for the purposes of this post. My personal definition of "success" has much more to do with inspiring your students and your community and I think in that sense every team is already "successful" just by participating in FIRST.

[2544HCRC]

I go round and round about this. We don't have a practice bot. We are finally in a place this year where we might be able to afford a 2nd CRio for next year. We have enough extra parts to build at least a 2nd drive bot.

I have to agree with other posters. As a Mentor and teacher I'm tired. We have about 20 students and I am the official mentor and at every meeting beginning to end. I have other adult help but they come and go. I always think I'm going to get other work done but don't. I have to have days off to get caught up and I'm terribly behind now. It will take another week to get caught up on the correcting alone.

By the end of week six, I'm sick of looking at the robot enough that stuffing it in a bag is rather cathartic...

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by Wing

For your argument, I'd really like to point you over to (the now defunct) team 1771. Team 1771 has always operated on a very low budget, often having to build their robots on plywood.

1771's 2008 robot is definitely one of the coolest robots I've ever seen. I'd also like to add that wood is also a great building material for FRC. It is strong and reasonably lightweight when used correctly, and has a long history of successful uses in plenty of other structures. If you go back and look 1771 also used really quality stuff, so its not like their budget forced them to buy the junk they sell at Home Depot. Wood don't get no respect!

On topic:

I think the strongest argument for the defined build season is Parkinson's Law: "Work expands so as to fill the time available for it's completion." If there was no build season we would all be frantically working on our robots until 4AM on Thursday, and then everyone would be overtired and cranky and nobody would have any fun at the competition. If nobody is having fun, chances are pretty good no one is getting inspired either.

[Grim Tuesday]

Originally Posted by Steve W

I believe that if a team contacts FIRST, gives reason and follows direction that FIRST does allow a team to do a demo then rebag. I have seen the bag and tag forms that show it happening.

I seem to remember a certain Hawaii team that showed up to a regional with Dean Kamen's signature on their bag and tag form since he came to visit before their event.

For our team the 6 week build, then bag and tag is much like building a race car and going straight to the Daytona 500. We have generally tested our systems and mostly finished the bot, but are in no manner ready to compete. Who would it hurt if there was was a practice/debugging period following the 6 weeks up to the first regional. Minor debugging and programming could occur durring this period as well as driving and practice. The parameters of such a period could be easily defined and the honor system would apply, just like bag/tag.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

I think to summarize what Akash and Lil Lavery are saying, in the current system, Stop Build Day is the end of the design process for good/mediocore teams and a definite design freeze for even the very best.

That's not what I was saying. Please do not attempt to put words in my mouth.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

That's not what I was saying. Please do not attempt to put words in my mouth.

Same actually, no offense.

[F22Rapture]

Originally Posted by Wing

For your argument, I'd really like to point you over to (the now defunct) team 1771.

1771 was disbanded?

They were a pretty awesome team. Here's their robot from last year:

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/27736599/FR...s/IMG_0571.JPG

[Squillo]

I have been thinking about this since the OP. I think that a MUCH longer build season would serve the purpose and mission of FIRST best of all, while also eliminating a lot of the "unfairness" AND making things more sane and reasonable for all participants.

What if they announced the game in May (or September)? But, unlike VEX, did not have any official competitions until the 6-week competition period, as now?

Here are some of the advantages I see:
- Teams could have time to really carefully analyze and design their robots; do more math, physics and design work. Instead of having to rush that into an insanely short time span.

- Teams could probably attract many more students, including some who are not already 'nerds' but might want to TRY or EXPLORE STEM (we actually have a lot of those students, and we pride ourselves on introducing them to engineering and programming, and inspiring some to continue in those fields), but simply aren't willing to devote their 'entire life' to it for a 6 or 12 week period. Students who also want to play sports, do plays, have a social life, work on their studies or art or whatever. They - and the rest of us - could 'do robotics' just 2 or 3 days a week, and still make a meaningful contribution.

- Ditto for mentors who just don't have the concentrated time available but would still like to help 1 or 2 days/week, or who might have a vacation or funeral or something else scheduled, or arise, during a shorter build season. Or teachers who might happen to have a shorter build season come during finals, or when there are other school obligations.

- There would be time to actually TEACH the newer students things, and then have them practice their skills and build the robot. We find that often, because of the time crunch, the more experienced students and mentors end up doing things, with the newer students just watching, except for the occasional "drill this hole" or "cut this slot". Wiring, especially, tends to be done under a huge rush, so it's not possible for very many students to actually get a substantial amount of hands-on training.

- Same for the analysis/design process. It has to be done in a week or two, so the students who can only come a day or two every week don't get to participate much.

- We would not get as STRESSED, SICK, and otherwise fried. We could pace ourselves and do a MUCH better job educating and motivating the students, build better robots, and have a higher level of competition (without quite so many 'dead on the field' or uncompleted robots, don't you think?).

- It would even out the "unfairness" for teams who compete in week 1 vs week 6. STOP BUILD could be right before the first competition, WITHOUT any 'withholding' or any work at all on the robot after stop build. It could be a HARD 'stop build'. The only advantage later competitors would have would be having watched some matches.

- It would also even out the "unfairness" for teams who have to ship their robot to compete, vs. driving to competitions (as compared to having no 'stop build' at all, as was proposed). EVERYONE would stop at the same time, whether you are in Australia (Hi, 3132!!) or just down the road from your competition venue. Ditto for teams that have to have all sorts of materials shipped in.

- It would allow teams much more flexibility in how they structure their program, how they allocate their time (design for 6 months and build in 3? Design for a month, build for 4, then test and practice for 4? the variations are endless...). It would be more like the real world. I can't think of a situation where a machine this complex has to be designed, built, programmed, tested, and shipped in 6 weeks.

- It would help small teams, who don't have the manpower to have separate sub-teams just for building the field elements, preparing the Chairman's Award submission, building, wiring and programming. Of course, there will always be some inherent inequalities, but this would give the rookies, teams with limited resources, etc. at least a chance.

- It would keep kids engaged in and excited about STEM all year round.

WHAT IS THE DOWNSIDE???? Seriously, why hasn't this been considered?

C.

[DonRotolo]

Without parsing all of the posts so far, I'll just say this:

We built 3 robots this year, and we're just hoping we can get the one in the bag to actually work. Well, getting ANY of them to work would be an accomplishment...

[dodar]

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

Without parsing all of the posts so far, I'll just say this:

We built 3 robots this year, and we're just hoping we can get the one in the bag to actually work. Well, getting ANY of them to work would be an accomplishment...

Did you guys build with another team? If not, why the 2 practice bots?

[Alan Anderson]

The TechnoKats built three robots too. One was the kit chassis, and was never intended as more than a programming/prototyping testbed. The second one was the "first draft" with lots of rough edges, and was always meant to be the practice 'bot.

The third one is in the bag. It incorporates a lot of lessons learned while building and tweaking the draft version, actually meets the size rules, and is a lot prettier. (It also somehow ended up a lot heavier than expected--perhaps the industrial strength steel hinges on the lexan wheel guard added at the last minute have something to do with that.)

[dtengineering]

My relationship with ship day was always a rather unhealthy love/hate soap opera, but looking back after a few years away from a team, I think the six week build period is a valuable part of the FRC experience.

There are few things we do that are so pure and simple as "build a machine in six weeks: GO!" I think the intensity and pressure is a very valuable character-building experience for students and teachers alike.

And with only three adult mentors, we managed to find a way to build "clone bots" about half the time.

We also learned to not try to "out-awesome" the big guns, but to build a simple, reliable machine that looked good and could do one thing well. After all, you get to play WITH the superstars almost as often as you play against them.

The ultimate expression of that approach was 4334's explanation of their decision to build a feeder bot last year. They knew they'd be competing against the likes of 1114 and 2056, so worked from a strategy of "if you can't beat them, join them". Join them they did and came perhaps just a networking glitch away from a world championship.

Anyway, learning to embrace ship day is all part of the FRC experience. Work with it, and design within your resources... if you aren't happy with your resources, then that's something to work on in the off season.

Jason

[Grim Tuesday]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

That's not what I was saying. Please do not attempt to put words in my mouth.

Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi

Same actually, no offense.

Please accept my apologies, I did not intend to offend. I should have said "after reading Lavery's and Akash's post, I think." Again, I'm really sorry. I would edit/delete my post but Chief Delphi has that pesky limit on shutting down the edit button.

I maintain my position though. For the very best teams, bag day is the point where no major design changes can be made (except for Pink). The design is, within reason, "locked in" but subject to any numbers of tweaks and improvements.

To a team on the level of my team, bag day is when the design process has to end as we have no practice bot and as I described in an earlier post, limited resources post-season. Would making one bring us to a new level? Yes. Can we make one? Maybe. Hopefully next year we will take on that challenge.