I like:
Take a test on who knows the game the best
See who can control the robot the best
Older the wiser(Seniors that do all the rest)
Students that participate the most
Thanks!
-T-ton
search please, there are several threads on this
In our tryouts this year, we had everyone who wanted to drive/control/be human player or coach take a written test that was 4 pages long… average score was in the 70s due to the fact that if you didn’t know the rules, you were screwed. After that, the drivers picked a controller they worked well with and had to complete a course with a series of objectives in under 5 minutes. It was not expected that everyone or anyone could finish this difficult course, but it was based on how well you did compared to everyone else and how well you communicate, how well you attempted it, and how many obstacles you hit. Then the panel of college students (not parents or teachers) chose drivers based on test score, driving performance, participation, and seniority.
Drivers, we need drivers!
lol… well mostly its just who can show up committed the most… with experience being a big factor… and basically if you deserve it your there, with years left in high school, probably being a factor
Our team this year is trying simon sez, the thought behind this is that anybody can drive a robot good with enough practice, and if the driver can listen to mentor and other team it is all for the better.
Drivers should be chosen based on skill, devotion to the team, and experience. I don’t really like the idea of having a written test on the rules because it usually ends up being the smart “study-type” people who scores higher. The driver needs to have a good grasp of the general rules, but as for specifics, that’s why you have 3 other people in the driver’s place helping him/her.
our team has tryouts. The engineers set up a course made out of metal tubing related to the certain year’s competition. everytime you hit something it ads 5 seconds to your time. the first round usually consists of an older robot. we run the course and take the time and the penalties, after that, there is usually a break in the times. The engineers pick a qualifiing time and those advance to the next level. the next level is usuallly last years robot, with that one we run the same course but this time the two times are added together and we pick the top 3 drivers.
*Originally posted by FernandoG *
**our team has tryouts. The engineers set up a course made out of metal tubing related to the certain year’s competition. everytime you hit something it ads 5 seconds to your time. the first round usually consists of an older robot. we run the course and take the time and the penalties, after that, there is usually a break in the times. The engineers pick a qualifiing time and those advance to the next level. the next level is usuallly last years robot, with that one we run the same course but this time the two times are added together and we pick the top 3 drivers. **
If you have tryouts, do all the members have the same opportunity to drive the robot before it? What about people who have driven the robot before, wouldn’t they have an advantage over another person who hasn’t driven it but has the potential to be the best driver if he/has got some practice? Just a few things to keep in mind because we ran into a problem similar to that.
Well, we were going to administer a written test, then do a little obstacle course, involving the ramp. It could have been a little biased, as our programmer did nearly all of the driving to calibrate controls, and test autonomous and such, with a few other people getting a few minutes here and there.
I say were because the drivers test was delayed due to a fried motor, and running design changes that changed how the bot handled completely, so we never got around to trying again.
One of the major factors this year was Attendance. You had to make at least 75% of the meetings of the teams you signed up for. This was to prevent a phenomena known as “miracle schedule”. “Miracle Schedule” is when somebody’s schedule is so full that they can’t make a single meeting for 5 weeks (All really good excuses, of course), and then it “miraculously” clears for the last week so that they can come in, try out, then drive. We didn’t appreciate that at all, so we drew up a set of rules that accounted for that.
-S cubed
Being a programmer does help your chances for being a driver. Though after a week of “could you run over to the controls and hit this button for me? I want to test something” most of the people who come regularly know 90% of the controls. Of course, I can just change them all again. 
The most dedicated people is a good way of deciding who gets to drive. The most dedicated ones know the most about the abilities and limitations of the robot.
Seniority is kindof related to most dedicated. Those who know more about how the robot works tend to be better drivers.
In my experience, driver practices never work, especially with large obstacle courses. Robot performance is constantly changing with low batteries and hot motors that affect the robot a lot and happen often. You can try and hook up a better battery with 60 amp fuses on the motors, but I’d worry about damaging the robot.
And though it may be unfair, using drivers from previous years is a good way to go, unless you found out from their driving that year that they aren’t good. Why bother training someone new when you know you have someone who can already drive well.
Another factor that can’t really be determined until the actual competition is the drivers’ ability to operate under pressure, especially if the drivers have to perform a task by themselves, in front of thousands of people, with three alliance partners whose scores depend entirely on what you do in just 10 seconds (2001).
I don’t like written tests either. Sure you need to have a way of cutting down the number of people who want to drive before you actually get them on the controls, but I think it would be better to base that on dedication to the team than on the test. Just take the top 10 most dedicated or something and say only those people can tryout.
On our team anybody who is more than a first year member can drive if they want to. Then the team will pick the top driving team and they will be in the Finals. This isn’t really a problem because we only have like 10 people eligible (14 students total on our team) and some don’t want to drive so we have about 3 teams of drivers. We pick the drivers this way because:
-
The mentors on our team used to just pick 2 drivers and they were the same 2 students every year and when they graduated no one had a clue on how to drive.
-
When we only had one team of drivers, the main driver got the stomach flu at a regional once so no one could fill his place because no one had any pratice.
-
Since the drivers were always the same some people were on the team for 4 or 5 years and never got to drive even though they reallly wanted to.
I’d say the Chief Delphi driver selection process followed the following formula:
(All the above) - (Whoever wants to) - (Older the wiser) +
(Wiser the wiser) + (backbone, grit, guts, intestinal fortitude)
CD has three seniors and one freshman. To CD’s credit, all have worn the button in regional competitions. The result is a drive team that is as deep as it is wide.
157 has people drive in the off season so they can get use to whats it like up on stage. Then when the season comes around, we send a set a drivers to a regional and who ever does better finishes the season.
My “new” team, Team 1062 had only three students who were seriously involved in the robot build, and they took turns driving at our one regional.
My old team, TechnoKats, conducts tests for driving skill which we try to design to simulate what will go on in real matches to the extent possible. Written tests of the rules are also given. We try to come up with the best two or three drivers/operators/human players and rotate them in the early qualifying rounds at the first regional the team competes in. We have normally tried to pick a “best” person for each position by the time the alliance selection begins. This is often difficult. There are a few unofficial tie breakers in the process, including level of contrubution to the team, general attitude, willingness to accept coaching, seniority on the team, etc. A few times we have had an obvious “best” person to be driver or operator, but usually the decision has not been so easy. The final decisions on driver/operator selection are done by the adult coaches on the team, but I suspect that in nearly all cases, the students would agree with the decisions.