|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Quote:
BTW, Now I really want to see a monkey drive a robot!!!! |
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Quote:
Quote:
If someone wants to drive the robot in competition they are going to have to not only be skilled as a driver, but competent in many other areas of the team. They don't need to be lead designer, or the team captain, but they need to show some desire to work in other aspects of the team. The way I view a spot on the drive team is as something that needs to be earned in more than one way. As I said you need to show enthusiasm for the team, the work you put into the team and the work your teammates put in. Show me that you not only are a skilled robot driver, but you're a skilled robot mechanic, skilled programmer, skilled team liaison or skilled team leader. Thats the kind of driver I want driving our team's robot. Quote:
I think I agree with the point you are trying to make, I just disagree with how you are making it. Many of your scenarios you just proposed can be easily solved by the one statement you made towards the end of your post that I quoted above. It may be personal preference, but I don't like trying to prove points with hypothetical scenarios. Playing the "what if" game is dangerous and often can be a tool used to rob a brainstorming session of merit, or keep good ideas from seeing the light of day. Like I said above, I think I agree with your approach to driver selection. Meaning, I think you believe there should be some combination of driver that best suits a team not just a purely dedicated student vs. a purely talented student. I just dont think that the argument of who is best come match 3 of the finals at XX regional with a broken XX and no timeouts is how you should argue for one or the other. As for 125, our approach is nothing extremely different than from what other teams have stated already. We do our best to ensure that every student who is interested has a fair shot at becoming a driver. However, actions always speak louder than words, so staying that extra hour one night, or helping out a new student on the team may go a lot further than some students think. Good mentors are constantly evaluating their students and their team to make sure everyone is becoming the best FIRST participant they can be. -Brando Last edited by Brandon Holley : 27-06-2011 at 09:41. |
|
#3
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Brandon, that's true. However!
If I have a student who knows nothing about how the robot functions, just that it functions, but can drive well, and a student that knows how the robot functions, but doesn't have any driving experience even in practice (the proposed situation), they aren't nearly as interchangeable as they would be if the driver one knows even diagnostic functioning (i.e., "Pit Crew! This is happening, and it feels like it's in this place) and the other student knows some driving and has a few minutes of practice. Hence the reason for the scenarios: To point out a few places where it's not desirable to be too specialized, or to only have one person as driver. It's something not a lot of teams really think about. But I've been on a team where at least a couple of those has happened--driver incapacitated, finals fix--and it's good to keep a backup plan in the back of your mind for X scenario (fill in your own X). |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Just wanting to point this out as the discussion grows:
A member that knows the robot inside and out will already be a much better driver than he/she was before. |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
From what I've seen over the years being the Drive Team Lead for 2228 is that dedication to the team and involvement is a must, skill is third to and understanding of the rules and game strategy. Skill is relative in my mind and meaningless more than that, skill can be taught and skilled drivers are just those that are more experienced. Whether it be more experienced from previous games or just more experience with the current robot.
By giving a driver more time driving the robot is the best.....only way for a driver to really obtain skill. And on that note when you are having drivers practice it is not the best thing to do to, to just have them run drills. Especially when first getting acquainted with the robot. When first "introducing" driving to a new recruit what I would do is explain the controls and then have them go forward, back, turn left, turn right (taking only 30 seconds to do this) and then say "okay now just mess around with it for 5 minutes and then give me a call." Give drivers time to explore what can be done with the robot, not what we think it can do. Also on another not when you are having them go forward back etc. etc. make sure when they push the joystick forward is when the robot goes forward. When I was first on the drive team (as the turret operator on our 2009 robot) our driver spent 2 weeks driving the robot backwards and for some reason never spoke up about it, it is a simple fix and leads to needless confusion. Now once they've gotten acquainted with the robot, then start running different drills of what you want them to do. And as a drive coach you have one very important mission during competition and that is to not lose your voice. Barking commands at drivers like go forward...no wait back up....go for that ball........reverse roller...etc. etc. etc. is the worst possible way to have your team operate. Your drivers are smart and they can think for themselves, guide them through what you're doing and teach them judgement. This way you won't have to tell them what to do on the field. You can go into the game with a plan, they will carry out and adjust, then you can just look at the overall field and score as it advances and point out different things they might not have noticed. This is the approach I took with our drive team this year and it worked amazingly compared to the previous years barking, which was a horrific nerve racking experience I would never like to repeat. One last little thing I would like to add to how to train drivers (I know this isn't what you asked, but I'm reminiscing) is that you need to try and balance what people are there observing practice. This is because I find that the hardest thing about trying to implement this new judgement oriented approach to driving was that, when I stopped barking other people started. And this is natural because the team is trying to help. People will sit there and say don't open the claw.......lift the arm.....stop.....now forward.......good......open. and this is an impulse many people have when watching the robot, but it doesn't let the drivers use their own judgement. Plus it allows them to rely on outside eyes, people looking from angles not available to them when they're driving. So what I would suggest is to do a quick showcase of the robot doing non-sense, drive around, move actuators, etc. Then get everyone out and lock yourself in behind closed doors and shut blinds so that you can do the real practice and learning. Also this helps build up the drive team comradery, when you guys (or girls) are just there by yourselves working as a single unit. Okay sorry about that, but back to your question, how to select drivers, what's important? A drivers dedication ensures they will be there when they're needed. Another thing is I want my drivers to have a knowledge of all aspects of the robot programming, electrical, and mechanical. So that when things go wrong on the field they can properly analyze, diagnose, and fix the situation. This year during one of our last matches the right drive chain snapped and just by looking at how we moved we were able to figure out what was wrong, explain it to our alliance, and specify we can not travel, but we can pivot, meaning that we could still possibly line up our minibot from our current location. Other things that are essential for a driver, co driver, human player, and for the coach (especially for the coach) is everyone of those people must have sat down and read all of the rules in the game section (minimum). Actually I would prefer they read every section beginning to end from the introduction of what FIRST is to the tournament section (or whatever the last section is) twice, taking time to reflect on what they have read and what situations they pertain to. If you get to competition and you don't know the rules........what are you doing there? So to summarize: -Skill = driving time with the robot (anyone can drive they just need time) -Dedication is a must -Insight and knowledge is what makes great drivers -Know the robot, Love the robot, Be the robot (not a robot) -Teach your drivers judgement -Also something not yet noted make sure your drive team is a team, people need to get along and drivers are the ambassadors of the team, everyone sees them and they represent the team. Make sure you pick good people to do that Hope that some of this helps and again I'm sorry for the rant in the middle, good luck, have fun! |
|
#6
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
The biggest thing that's overlooked when selecting your drivers, is that they will be representing your team at any given competition. Yes, Skill is very important. Yes, strategy is very important. Knowledge of the game, maturity, listening to your coach, etc. are all important, but you must remember that these kids are the ones that most everyone will see-- the ones that the judges will most likely see and/or talk to, the ones that the other teams will most likely associate with, etc.
If the kids that you select are fantastic drivers, know what to do, but have an awful attitude, and aren't graciously professional, the other teams will talk about them negatively. Popular to contrary belief, Robotics is not free from teenager actions such as Gossip and spreading negativity. Obviously, you want your team to be known as a nice team and a helpful team. Now, I'm most certainly NOT saying that drivers are the only influence on how "kind" and GP a team is--many factors determine that. But at a competition, they will stand out the most out of anyone. In short, many factors, such as skill and knowledge of the game affect driver choice. But one of the most overlooked factors is how do these team members represent your team. Hope this helps. -duke |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Quote:
And one of the things that I believe is that a driver should not be that cocky. If literature has taught me anything, it's that hubris can take down anyone. And I believe that it applies to drivers. I understand that drivers should walk the fine line between "listening to" and "just knowing" what to do, but if a driver thinks they don't need a coach, I don't want them touching the controls. That attitude tells me that they can't work with others and they believe that their opinion is best. Yes, this also requires that a team has an optimal drive coach, but we're talking about an ideal world. However, I do understand that you mean to say you don't need the mundane instructions "go straight, turn left, pick up tube". So you're point isn't just going over my head. SIDE NOTE: Those who say the best driver shouldn't need a coach, I disagree. In my mind, your three driving positions -sans human player- should focus thusly: -Robot Base (or "Primary Driver") should only be aware of where the wheels are taking the robot. Their attention should only be on the components they control, and the immediate surroundings of said components. - Manipulator (or "Auxillery" or "Secondary" Driver) should only be focusing on their manipulator in relation to the robot/game pieces etc at all times. They should only be aware of actions pertaining to what they control. The secondary and primary shouldn't be able to tell you much (if any) of the match outside of actions pertaining to their controllers. - The Drive Coach should be aware of the entire match. They need to know everything else that is going on so that the Primary and Secondary can focus solely on the components they control. The drive coach shouldn't look at the robot; the drivers already have that covered. All three should communicate what they know so that the others can adjust accordingly. The drive coach should be able to give a report on what happened in the match, the drivers should not. Quote:
Quote:
As Dean always says "You get what you celebrate". I understand the kid put in the hours and was dedicated (thus celebrating hard work), but you're also telling your students that longevity isn't important. If all of the older kids aren't giving it the time, then give the kid the sticks... But if you have dedicated students who are older but with reasonably less skill, I would argue the veteran students should get it. They've invested a lot of their time into the program and team and should get some sort of reward for it (the satisfaction of a job well done doesn't always cut it). But I get torn, because this is a competition, not just a show. And you want the best people out there. At the same time, we're dealing with people and we have to treat them like such. Last edited by Katie_UPS : 23-06-2011 at 06:04. |
|
#8
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Just to reply to the original question, I think you need a reasonable amount of dedication to the team to drive. Our team has had kids at driver tryouts that don't know that our robot isn't really a tank. However, they'll drive like it is and can damage the machine.
|
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Quote:
|
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Quote:
The argument of putting the student who knows more about the system but is the worse driver in the driver position to me is a poor choice. I would rather educate my better drivers on ALL areas of the robot and put the knowledgeable student in the human player position as long as he does his job well there. |
|
#11
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Quote:
The problem is there are usually reasons students are in the categories you listed. Usually its because the student who knows more about the system is more involved with the team/robot. I say usually, because based on my experience that is the case, this is obviously not universal. This is why I feel you need to have a fine balance of dedication, skill, knowledge etc. to be an effective driver. -Brando |
|
#12
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Quote:
|
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Quote:
It's funny that you mention Breakaway, because that seems like the best example. Barring deploying the hanger and intentionally tipping, how exactly could you break a good robot that year? If your robot could be damaged by anything other than an unusual circumstance like getting chain caught in your wheels, it simply was not robust. Seriously, do you guys really tell drivers to "go easy on the robot"? That's just prolonging a failure that WILL happen. |
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Quote:
There's no such thing as a driver who is too aggressive, but there is such thing as a robot that's robustness isn't adequate to compete at a high level. (There is a difference being aggressive and reckless; neither is bad, but recklessness can be bad if it's a result of having no control over the robot. This still shouldn't break a robot, but if the driver has no control they shouldn't be driving for a variety of other reasons). Last edited by sgreco : 28-06-2011 at 16:42. |
|
#15
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Driver Selection: A Discussion
Quote:
'A robot can always be fixed - but a match can never be replayed'. Ever since then I've designed, built, driven and coached with that in mind. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|