Is FIRST Like BattleBots?

FIRST General Forum
1

This is the most frequently asked question at outreach events, fundraisers, and when you’re trying to woo a potential sponsor. The short answer is an emphatic YES!

I know it sounds like asking if boxing is like tennis. For those of us in the FIRST Family, we can quickly see all the differences. We need to look at this question from the perspective of person asking it. They are probably a fan of BattleBots.

Like it or not, BattleBots has a huge following. They have fans. We have parents, mentors, and volunteers, but not a group outside of the community who will sit down on a Saturday in March and watch a live stream. They have a TV show, merchandising, and toys for kids. Imagine what our sport could be like if we could get even some of the BattleBots fans to check out our competition on a live stream? Better yet, they can attend a live competition and watch in person.

When you get this question, say yes. More than likely the person asking the question is familiar with only one robot sport. They are comparing BattleBots to football, and really we have more in common with BattleBots than we do with football.

Start your answer focusing on the similarities between the two competitions. Here is a list of similarities that I’ve come up with. If you see other similarities, use them.

  • Similarities between BattleBots and FIRST Robotics Competition (FRC)
    • Remotely Controlled
    • Over 70 lb robots (FRC)
    • Corporate Sponsorships
    • Big budgets (FRC $20K robot)
    • Head-to-head competition
    • Rugged play action at FRC level
    • Multiple Classes of competition (FLL, FTC, FRC)
    • Team statistics to track
    • Hand made
    • Battery Powered
    • Requires machining skills
    • Requires wiring skills
    • Accessible to everyone
    • Custom Design
    • Fundraising, Marketing, Branding, and other aspects of a mini business

If the person who asked the question is starting to lose interest, recommend that they take some time to watch a few FIRST matches either in person or through the available live streams. Then thank them for their interest.

If the person who asked the question is intrigued and wants to learn more, you can transition by highlighting that there are similarities and differences between all sports. To the casual observer football and rugby can look very similar. To the players and fans, there are several key differences between the two sports.

There are several differences between BattleBots and FIRST. You don’t need to cover all of these. Find a few that a new spectator will pick up on when watching a few matches. If the person has stuck around this long, they will quickly learn the differences from watching matches. Here is a short list of some of the differences that I like about FIRST.

  • Key Differences between BattleBots and FIRST
    • Three Robot Alliance
    • Autonomous
    • Limited Build Schedule
    • More opportunities to watch live competitions
    • More ways to get involved and join a team
    • New Challenge each year
    • Student Led, Professional Mentors
    • Scholarship Opportunities
    • Workforce Development

Make sure you give them a way to follow your team (e.g., your team’s website or YouTube channel). Give them a way to watch matches so they can make up their own mind about the two sports.

If someone hasn’t seen the sport before, they are not going to spend three full days at a Regional. They won’t even spend one full day at a Regional. I always tell folks that the event goes all day long, but Matches are just 3 minutes long. Ask them if they can find 15 minutes during one of the days of the event to check it out. Admission is free and they will get access to the pits where they can talk with the teams and get an up close look at the robots.

Stopping in for 15 minutes while running errands is something most people can do. You and I know that if someone comes for 15 minutes, they will probably stay for two hours. We just need a way to get them in the door. Telling a fan of BattleBots about how different our sport is from theirs is a huge turn off.

42 Likes
2

There are a few of us in FIRST…old, grey bearded types, who got our start in combat robotics. We get together quietly at events and talk about the Old Times. I understand and actually support the official stance of FIRST which is a organizational furrowed brow and mild shake of the head regards Battlebots and such. But still…

Our team evolved out of a DIY 3 pound combat robotics program run on a shoestring budget at the middle school. I found a class list from 2019 yesterday. Looking up and down it I saw about a dozen current 5826 members including three of our five students in leadership roles.

The degree of enthusiastic cooperation was the same in those pits as at any FRC event.

We’ll be at Duluth in March. And as always I will make an effort to seek out one of my friends from the Elder Days. I hold up my hand to stop the excited chattering of kids on a grand adventure and say:

“Be still. For you are in the presence of Greatness. This harmless looking codger is Steve Schmidt a man who once built successful combat robots under a price limit of one dollar a pound. None of us are Worthy, but attend and hear his Wisdom…”

7 Likes
3

“When he was seventeen, he and four friends were driving when they were hit head-on by another vehicle that was traveling at about 100 miles per hour. The collision killed two people in Flowers’ vehicle and one in the other. The event ingrained his self-described ‘genetic opposition to violence’ and his ‘fierce, vocal loathing of any spectacle that involves crashing pieces of machinery into each other with deliberate force.’”

from “Woodie Flowers”, Wikipedia

This is a very standard description of a higher-level robotics competition.

There are also the extreme philosophical differences between FRC and BattleBots. The point of BattleBots is to be destructive, the point of FRC is to be constructive. I always try really hard to maintain that no, no it is not.

13 Likes
4

You can put a spin on anything, and if you’re good at it you may get some people in the door. But usually when people ask me if it’s like BattleBots, they specifically want to know if the robots fight. As in, if I go to a competition, will I get to see metal carnage and spinning blades and robots destroying each other in a blaze of fiery glory? If I join a team, is all my hard work going to get wrecked by another team’s bot?

2 Likes
5

The simplest analogy for the core differences I’ve found is that FRC is to Battlebots as football is to wrestling. Both are high-contact, but in FRC it’s a team of bots going for the endzone/scoring objective while countering defense. In Battlebots and wrestling it’s two individuals going for knockout/disablement.

15 Likes
6

When one starts explaining the similarities and differences between FRC and BattleBots in any sort of detail, we generally lose the person.

The correct answer is: “Yes! They’re very similar, but in FIRST, the teams compete to see who can perform challenges the best, rather than break each other. Come watch!” Any more detail, and they’re gone.

It irks me when I hear people respond angrily with “ugh everyone asks that” or “not at all.” You just had someone who was able to relate the thing you’re doing to something they know from their own life. They’ve got one foot in the door, and you should try to bring them in all the way, not shut the door in their face.

40 Likes
7

Could not agree more, this is my go-to when people ask me this question. Additionally, I like to make the point, “If you like BattleBots, you’d probably like FRC/FTC/FLL” to get them to check it out.

Another related question I sometimes get from people is “Is BattleBots the professional league of FRC?”. To that I say, “HECK NO!” Going pro in any FIRST competition is to pursue a career in STEM, project management, graphic design, or whatever it is you’re passionate in!

2 Likes
8

I think you missed an important “key” difference:

Battlebots: deliberate destruction of opposing robots encouraged
FRC: deliberate destruction of opposing robots prohibited

6 Likes
9

The sports analogy I might use instead is FRC is like HS or college basketball (particularly when played 3-on-3), while Battlebots is like professional boxing.

  • HS Basketball: Play as a team, work together to score points, maximum points win. You’re competing for bragging rights.
  • Pro Boxing: Directly attack the opponent to beat them down until they are knocked out. You’re competing for money.

Yes, the basketball analogy falls down because you’re always playing with different teammates, but no analogy is perfect. Sports analogies don’t capture coopertition.

13 Likes
10

I get your point but I dont really see how FIRST relates to a very “physical” robotics program such as battlebots. I’d argue FRC is more complicated than battlebots, considering that highschool students are tasked with multiple different game elements and gameplay options.

As opposed to battlebots…
spinny piece of metal go brrrr

They are both in the idea of robotics but FIRST has something that battlebots doesn’t: cooperitition. The idea that you compete against and with other teams is not widely thought about in many sports. FIRST isn’t prioritizing around defense and ripping robots apart as well.

The ideals of both of these programs are incredibly different.

3 Likes
11

This is important to you and me, but not to a casual observer on the street who finally sees STEM as a spectator sport and wants to see more. Why discourage that, getting into this discussion? If they see the similarities, they’ll come in and take a closer look, and I’m certain they’ll discover the key differences in time.

3 Likes
12

Complicated can mean different things. I think top FRC bots have more degrees of freedom for certain, but you’ll see a lot more “true engineering” in BattleBots in form of material choices, FEA, battle hardening electrical systems, ect. Meanwhile, you’ll find graduate level control theory in FRC that you really don’t see in BattleBots.

I’ve seen FRC people be annoyed by the constant BattleBots comparisons. I’d challenge that feeling and instead use it as a jumping off point to sell them on the merits of FRC. BattleBots has done wonders for bringing robots into the mainstream. Lean into that.

14 Likes
13

I do see that BattleBots has done alot for bringing STEM sports into the light. Maybe I’m a little frustrated to their comparison but this is a very very valid point. I’d like for STEM sports to be recognized more but in a multitude of ways. It’s like how there is many different forms of ball games such as baseball, basketball, and soccer. It would be awesome to see a variety, but we all start somewhere and that somewhere was with BattleBots.

FIRST has specific control systems that are tailored for the sport specifically. Now that I think about that, BattleBots has a lot of considerable factors to build sustainable and effective robots that can complete a task, which is not so different and I may think it’s just my own self that realizes I didn’t think hard enough about the question:

What makes them similar, not what makes them different.

1 Like
14

Another important point to make is the cultural history of BattleBots and FRC. When FIRST was nascent, BattleBots was a goofy show on Comedy Central, played up for carnage and characters and mostly missing any real value beyond entertaining college kids late at night. The current conception of BattleBots is much sleeker, more well-produced, and legitimate.
This isn’t to say the teams and people involved weren’t doing great work, but the public product left a lot to be desired in the late 1990s.

5 Likes
15

It’s not even closed.

Battlebot to me is just like cavemen style you just beat each other up with whoever has the biggest/baddest club. It is a ‘I win, you lose’ on winner only mentality. That is its core concept.

FRC/FTC/FLL core concept is about inspiring the next generation to be better thinker who knows how to work co-competitively. Yes, when we compete, we compete as hard as the rules allows it. But as soon as we get off the field, we will help each other out so each team can have the best robot ready for their next round. ← how many of us has first hand witness this at almost every single event???

To me, in order of critical importance of the FIRST programs -

  1. Co-competition (Gracious Professionalism) - you win, I win, everyone can be winner if we are willing to work hard, compete honestly, help one another and most importantly, learn from our mistakes and failures.
  2. Engineering Skills/Ideas/Interest (this might be why the program was started)

Battlebot got nothing near this at all. The only commonality really are safety glasses and some similar engineering principles in solving certain real life problems.

16

As someone who actively competes on Battlebots and mentors in FIRST, I can confidently say they are not only completely different, but that Battlebots are not robots. They are remote control cars with zero autonomy (with a few exceptions) and are specifically a form of entertainment. Even the matchups are staged with the intent to make great TV.
There may be similarities between FRC and some other forms of combat robotics, but not Battlebots.
The only thing a bit similar is the culture of teams helping each other get on the field and ready to compete.

Edited to clarify the matchups (not the outcomes) are what’s staged in BB

3 Likes
17

I don’t agree with this take at all. I’ve been to a few combat robot events (not Battlebots, but some with Battlebots competitors) and the atmosphere was positive and encouraging. There were a LOT of FIRST people involved, including people who work for FIRST vendors who were there having some fun. Lots of young, smart, kids, too, all competing together.

It’s a different thing, yes, but please don’t paint with a broad brush based on impressions from TV.

10 Likes
18

I think your focusing a little to much on the differences and not focusing on the similarities. BattleBots as @jaredhk has stated was a link to STEM on a sport level, its something that people find interesting and thats super important. After thinking about this I do realize there are alot of similarities but they are just built off of different concepts. Its still important to recognize their importance to how they effect outside programs like FRC /FTC and even VEX.

This is the angle that makes robotics relevant, so why dont we atleast show that its related in a different way?

19

Only in reference to Battlebots, at least the version that is shown on the TV. Majority of ppl probably has little to no other interactions with other battle-competition type of robots.

I’m just saying as how I would normally explain when a new student or parent or something else come up and ask me. Too often when a new student ask, do I get to beat up the other robot, I tell them that’s not the kind of competition that we are in. Our robot focus on solving specific problems which usually requires strategy and working with alliance teammates working well together.

As I paraphrase Dean, there’s only 1 world champion, but every team/student can become winner. Robot is only an excuse to get the students into STEM.

20

When people ask me if FRC is like Battlebots, the simplest answer I give is…FRC is for high school (and younger) students, Battlebots are adults (professionals) participating.

4 Likes