It’s still funny to pit scout rookies and ask them if they brought any sort of cheese cake to the competition.
The confusion is priceless.
I have to say, I’m quite surprised by the findings.
After ~250 responses:
14.62% don’t like Cheesecake at all; 64.82% like Cheesecake; 85.38% are ambivalent or in favor.
45.45% don’t like Carrotcake at all; 33.99% like Carrotcake; 54.54% are ambivalent or in favor.
Some confounding factors I have noticed:
- The FRC community has had 2.5 years to get used to the concept of Cheesecake; for some members, they don’t know a world without it.
- This appears to be the first instance of a complex COTS assembly that seems to be specifically designed for this challenge (an argument could be made for 2014 Toro sticks; I don’t think those had the complexity of the current offering).
- There is some disagreement over what constitutes Carrotcake. Some folks contend items such as a KOP chassis would qualify; others state the KOP chassis was not designed for a particular game, but the general FRC model (2010 kitbase notwithstanding, and while it did feature game-specific adaptations, they were not optimized).
That is why I like the term “pasta”… pasta is usually foundational to a meal, or at least a side (pasta salad?), but always the main course.
Cheesecake is desert (usually… ), and comes after all the other food is finished and you’ve had some time to let it all settle. **
Is the pasta spaghetti-o’s?
Cheesecake is a custard tart.
I’m not really a fan of Cheesecake due to a factor of coercion involved (“we picked you for our alliance, now make these changes so we can win”).
If the Cheesecake was offered to any/all teams at a competition at the start of the competition in order to increase the overall competition level for any teams that feel that the need it would maybe be okay. But waiting until you’re on an alliance together to suggest an improvement to another team’s robot is inherently selfish. Everyone wants to win, but I feel that this takes some of the fun out of the competition.
I wouldn’t feel as good with a competition win knowing that we only won because another team came in and made changes (“improvements”) to our robot.
In terms of Carrot Cake/Pasta/Pasta Cake (that could be a thing, right? I’d eat it). Similar to what gerthworm said, I think it’s okay if they’re components that a company already sells, but they just give us all a reminder. I think it takes away from the competition to have an outside source do the engineering for the team.
I’ve been thinking a great deal about this. This greatly oversimplifies what is happening. What is being sold is a semi working unassembled kit. Kids still need to design around the COTS item, put it together, program it, etc. You don’t just whip out a credit card and magically get a working bot. These parts provide a great deal of opportunity. You’re still going to have to do the work to get things to work but you aren’t starting from scratch or worse, the inability to produce a part.
Many teams (yes us included) have struggled to field a robot for many years. Why? Because the methods to produce many parts were beyond our grasp. We built a linear actuator from scratch, well I did, as a mentor/coach. I stood in a freezing garage on a freezing concrete floor all weekend to produce that part on a manual mill. Ok, I stood in the freezing cold watching my retired machinist father work his magic, but still. The machines to produce it were 100 miles from the team and there was no way to bring students. I would have paid 10x as much for a dart actuator if it had been available. We have become luckier over the years and have developed some partnerships but I am fully aware that we are one lost partner or mentor away from the dark ages again.
We aren’t talking unobtanium level parts here. Under $500 for all of the pieces for a working subsystem is pretty cost effective. One can (and we have) spent way more than that for pieces and parts as we were prototyping. We have also run out of money on numerous occasions and had to “make it work” even though we knew what we were fielding wasn’t good.
Let’s flip the script a litlle bit. Should some advanced manufacturing techniques be made against the rules? Yes, I am all for that fancy laser cut frame, and all those fancy assemblies, but how different is allowing that vs allowing a cots item made the same way. If you are a team where mentors are taking a vacation so they can work full time on the bot, and that mentor is “helping” students design a claw, and then the cam file is generated and cut on the fancy $100k laser cutter that happens to be at the same build location, parts are ordered from McMaster by a mentor, and then students put it together, how is that any different than buying a cots item? How bad does it feel losing to a team with a clear Ferrari level of sophistication because they are fortunate enough to have a really good partner? Now I get that most of us are somewhere between the two extremes. We have limited time, funds, experience, students, mentorship and we are just trying to make it work any way we can. I am all for cots items as solutions. The more the better. This year, a team could put an “Everybot” together or buy the pieces for an elevator and claw, or build something with an actuator. There are currently several solutions available to teams and I for one think it has made FRC just a little more possible and probable for smaller teams.
So here’s my actual opinion.
It doesn’t matter to me whether a place serves cheesecake or pasta or both, provided that if they are serving either, it’s listed on the menu when I arrive. If it’s listed on the menu only after I order, then it’s no good to me. And pasta, in this case, may or may not actually be listed on the menu.
To put it another way… If I order, and spaghetti is not on the menu, and I see that someone else is able to get spaghetti, eyebrows raise, and I start asking questions. If, however, spaghetti is on the menu, and I decide I want gnocchi instead (and it’s on the menu), then there aren’t any questions to be asked.
At this point, I know cheesecake is on the menu, or can be on the menu, it’s just a matter of what flavor. Not so much on the pasta–some types are, some aren’t.
FTFY.
-Brando
In my opinion, manufacturing methods are different than buying some COTS part. Having a fancy laser cutter doesn’t just magically make a part for you, you still have to put the engineering into the design. Granted, once you have the design, it’s easier for you to get accurate parts, but it won’t do the engineering for you. A COTS part is something that someone else has already engineered. Using a COTS part in your own engineering is one thing, but having the part engineered specifically for you/your goal would be the Pasta/Carrot Cake aspect.
So I think the main argument here is a matter of engineering it yourselves versus paying someone else to do the hard work then just slapping it on your bot.
Ah, yes… the harpoons. I watched as the dedicated TEAM of people constructed the racks and the harpoons starting from the moment of load in, until they were ‘attaching’ them to a basic base for Eliminations.
Also watched another Team stand there and watch their robot get completely dismantled by another of the ‘Elite’ Teams, using hammers, screwdrivers as pry bars and whatever other means necessary to remove all of their mechanicals that were not needed, so they could install their own.
Is this what everyone who says they like cheesecake want?
Can you imagine being a third pick, and having the picking team say. ‘We are going to take off all your ‘crap’, because to us it is ‘crap’, and we are going to put a slab of aluminum on your base, to make you a ramp bot… we just need you out there so our #2 can roll up on you and we will get the climb points’…
Maybe cheesecake should be limited to a piece, not the whole thing… a limit of XX amount of pounds, like a hold back allowance, or something?
Just FOOD for thought…
In regards to the harpoons, I can safely say you have no idea what you’re talking about.
If I recall correctly that team you are talking about, Team 900, approached 1114 and asked to be the team to accept their cheesecake. Not only that, but the only part of the process 1114 was directly involved with was helping to integrate the harpoons. Team 900 made a timelapse video of them building the kitbot chassis in their pit.
I have a pretty good idea of what I am talking about, thank you…
1114 and 900 can both say they fine with everything that happened… my only question is, is something like what happened there good for FIRST and the Teams that participate?
Should there be any limit to what can be done?
Lay off.
If you want to accuse two fantastic teams of… I don’t even know what this would be— coercive cheesecaking followed by lying about it for three years? You’d better bring more than anonymous hearsay to the table, especially when there’s a strong amount of evidence to the contrary.
Per the thread’s OP, I’m more in Eric’s boat— I’m cool with it if our arbitrary food metaphors are on the menu before kickoff, but if they’re added after it just seems wrong to me. I should go and think this through a bit more.
No, you really don’t. There have been plenty of cases of cheesecake in FIRST were teams were forced into modifying their robots, but that wasn’t even close to what happened with 1114 and 900. You can believe whatever you want to believe, but facts don’t change.
Moving past your not so subtle accusations and derision, this is an important question. Personally, I’d love to see tighter rules against cheesecake in the future because I think it’s a bit of a weird dynamic. But I’ve yet to see anyone propose a set of rules that still allows for upgrades at an event and doesn’t create unintentional restrictions on teams assisting each other. A discussion on these rules could be written to avoid creating negative side effects would be incredibly valuable.
This is one of my hesitations when it comes to some implementations of cheesecake. Prior to “cheesecake” becoming a buzzword around 2015, helping other FRC teams improve their robot was a long staple of FRC events. The collaboration between teams in the pits is legitimately one of my favorite aspects of FRC. Teams working together to help one another achieve at higher levels is absolutely something that should be celebrated.
However, since the concept of “cheesecaking” has spread, it has taken on a different connotation. Particularly when it comes to specifically cheesecaking elimination alliance partners. As opposed to generally helping other teams over the course of an event, cheesecaking elimination partners is unfortunately a zero-sum event. For every one team selected by a well-resourced alliance captain to be cheesecaked, there’s another team left out of eliminations. This can often come with the implication (regardless of whether or not its true) that they were left out because the other team presented a better “blank slate” to be built upon. We can see this type of logic already in play with the false accounting of the 1114/900 harpoons in this thread. The unfortunate byproduct of one team getting the tremendous experience of working first-hand with an FRC elite team is that other teams are left on the outside looking in, and may often be discouraged that their hard work was passed up.
While I have zero desire for collaboration between teams to go away, I hope we can find a way to ensure that we are minimizing “zero-sum” inspiration and maximizing inspiration that all teams can draw upon.
I never said that 1114 or 900 forced anyone to do anything… But, it has happened in other situations. Re-read my post. I did not say that about the harpoons…
Glad we both agree that some restrictions or limitations could be a good thing…
You know, fine I’ll bite.
Was what happened there good for 1114? Eh, it definitely didn’t take anything away from them, at worst it’s a wash there.
Was it good for 900? Did you know that 2015 was only the second time in 900’s history they QUALIFIED for Championship? So, they got to work hand in hand with a team that is, in addition to being a HoF team, is known for building incredible robots. Notice the wording there, “hand in hand”. Do you think they didn’t learn a thing or two? I see a BUNCH of awards after that in their history, not 100% sure it is related but I’d be willing to bet just on that it had SOME impact.
Furthermore, having spent a fair bit of time interacting with their students and a lot of time giving Marshall grief about harpoons I can safely say the students learned a TON and it WAS a positive experience.
Have you spoken at length to students or mentors on the involved teams? Because I have. If you have a “pretty good idea”… I guess my actual discussion means… idk, your “pretty good idea” needs to be changed to “pretty wrong perception”.
More in the morning… cheesecake before bed just makes one fat…
I did talk to the students, and to Marshal… I was, and still am very impressed with the robot they built and fielded throughout the year. The one they strategized about, fabricated and competed with… their vision tracking was very impressive…
The question remains, should there be some limit to the amount of cheesecaking?