Will your team behave badly this year?

FIRST General Forum
1

Many of the people posting in this thread are under the impression that there will be a breakdown in the FIRST unwritten code of conduct this year, due to a number of factors:

  1. The rough style of play encouraged by FIRST.
  2. The lack of a three day rebuilding period after regionals,
    and
  3. The requirement that some teams have to win at regionals in order to get to nationals.

Most of the people posting, though, woudn’t dream of doing these things themselves. Would you?

The question I’m asking is: Do you think that YOUR team, not someone else’s, will do the things listed?

  1. Build parts between comps because our robot was damaged by a malevolent team, and we won’t otherwise be able to compete.
  2. Be a malevolent team and attempt to damage other team’s robots through legal or illegal interaction
  3. Refuse to help teams that you could help because they might take your place at nationals.
  4. Follow the rules, and remember the spirit of FIRST.
2

My team will do ABSOLUTELY nothing illegal this year. We will also try our best to help any team in need. I also believe that it is unhealthy (from a team viewpoint) to nonchalantly talk about…

1.) The possible ways to break rules (spare parts between competitions, etc.)
2.) Refusing to help another team in need just because you might think they could “take your place at Nats”

First of all… I’m flabergasted when I see people from teams complaining about not being able to machine parts between Regional events. I have a few questions. Why can’t you machine spare parts in the 6 week build period? My team is a relatively low budget team ($12,000 is an over-estimate), and we are making spare parts. I saw a team’s yearbook page from last year… their budget was $80,000+. I think I’ve asked this before, but I’ll ask it again. Can someone from a team with a budget of over $30,000 tell me what happens with all that money? I just can’t see how any team with that much money couldn’t build spare parts. If anyone should be complaining, it oughta be all of the rookie/low budget teams who either couldn’t afford or didn’t realize that spare parts are going to be necessary with a rule like this. They’re the ones getting screwed by this rule.

Secondly… I sincerely hope no one here is going to refuse to help a team in need of assistance. There is no reward greater than to recieve a “thank you” and know that you helped another team compete. By helping a broken team, you help brighten the experience of that team. Think about how you’d feel if you needed assistance from another team.

I’m kinda tired right now… so I’ll re-read this post tomorrow to see if I came off like a jerk.

But I think that’s my $0.02

3

You don’t come off like a jerk, Bill. My point is that most (if not all) of the teams feel the way that you do, but I have read many posts putting forward the viewpoint that other teams don’t. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt, but I was wondering if I was wrong to do so. So far, the poll agrees with me.

4

Our team has a budget of over $40 thousand but MOST of that money goes travel for the students. I guess our team has a major problem fundraising in that respect. The robot itself only gets about $9000-$10000 which is gone very fast. Time is just as much a factor. We have made spares of everthing we can but it is hard to move a First milling part ahead of a ‘real’ work project

5

$9000 to $10000 for your robot? If we can squeeze $5000 out of the budget for the bot, we’re doing good.

That said. Our team is a definite none of the above. Two years ago (the first really agressive year) I had a rule for the driver. If he broke someones bot due to overagressive play, he had to go and help fix it. I don’t know how the other teams felt, but it was the least we could do. This year, we will do the same.

As far as not helping another team? There is nothing better than helping out a team that has a problem that you have already solved. Or giving/loaning parts that are needed. That’s what this is all about.

See you in the pits.

6

*Originally posted by Warren Boudreau *
**
…

That said. Our team is a definite none of the above. Two years ago (the first really agressive year) I had a rule for the driver. If he broke someones bot due to overagressive play, he had to go and help fix it. I don’t know how the other teams felt, but it was the least we could do. This year, we will do the same.

…
**

I like that. Will mention it to our team captain and see what he thinks. We have a $35,00 or so budget, and most of it goes to travel. We are sending 35 or so students this year to Florida, and it is mostly paid for out of the team budget.
Definatly none of the above for Team 116.

7

Thought I’d wait till a view votes were cast to join in here. To me, what looked like an attempt to show how wrong the worry warts were - has thus far backfired. Between this poll and the other one related to when team swill build parts, they show me that there are indeed about 15-20 % of the teams that are gonna break the rules if it means not competing, and even more disturbing almost 10 % have stated intentions of purposeful decapacitating the opponents. I will ignore the Not gonna help anyone, due to it always being a choice. We help anyone when we can, but do not expect everyone to be able too - for many reasons. I’ll just monitor the results of these 2 polls a bit longer - but to me (although it’s not the end of FIRST) it definately signals rough water ahead. Take care everyone, build strong, and be prepared - but play nice!

8

*Originally posted by Warren Boudreau *
**If he broke someones bot due to overagressive play, he had to go and help fix it.

As far as not helping another team? There is nothing better than helping out a team that has a problem that you have already solved. Or giving/loaning parts that are needed. That’s what this is all about.
**

This is brilliant! This is truly what FIRST is all about.

Originally posted by meaubry
**… an attempt to show how wrong the worry warts were - has thus far backfired… **

It really has - I did not expect to see these kinds of numbers in the second and third bins. The first bin doesn’t really suprise me, at least based upon the previous poll.

Originally posted by meaubry
**
…almost 10 % have stated intentions of purposeful decapacitating the opponents. **

This is what really bothers me. Five individuals who think that destroying another team’s robot is the way to go.

How about a post, guys? Let us know what’s on your mind as you contemplate this strategy. Playing rough is one thing, but purposefully damaging another robot is something else entirely. Please post to let us know that you’re serious, and to give us a chance to convince you otherwise.

9

Here is yet another problem, but its connected to the winning the regional to get to national.

Throwing a match.
I can see being in 8th place with 1 or 2 matches to go.
Seed #1 “really” wants us as a partner. Do we screw over our partner for a match to place 9th?
I can’t answer what we would do (not honestly) until the situation presents itself. I want to believe we would do our best always and not throw a match to further our own carreer. And yet winning is really part of a competition. So pairing with seed #1…

I hope the judges watch the BattleBot mentality VERY closely. That will drive me out of FIRST faster than almost anything else. Allowing deliberate destruction. Gracious Profesionalism goes just so far. A few DQ’s will help this game a lot more than some spirited goal grabbing.

And for teh record we build everything in pairs from teh start. Some parts in threes and fours. So I know we’re good to not cheat on building. But we could pull an all nighter on thursday of the regional if we needed to.

Less than 2 weeks. On the better side of that about 30% left…Hell I’ve driven awful far on 30% of a tank on my bike :slight_smile:

Later all.
Eric Stokely
team 360

10

*Originally posted by EStokely *
**Here is yet another problem, but its connected to the winning the regional to get to national.

Throwing a match.
I can see being in 8th place with 1 or 2 matches to go.
Seed #1 “really” wants us as a partner. Do we screw over our partner for a match to place 9th?
I can’t answer what we would do (not honestly) until the situation presents itself. I want to believe we would do our best always and not throw a match to further our own carreer. And yet winning is really part of a competition. So pairing with seed #1…

I hope the judges watch the BattleBot mentality VERY closely. That will drive me out of FIRST faster than almost anything else. Allowing deliberate destruction. Gracious Profesionalism goes just so far. A few DQ’s will help this game a lot more than some spirited goal grabbing.

And for teh record we build everything in pairs from teh start. Some parts in threes and fours. So I know we’re good to not cheat on building. But we could pull an all nighter on thursday of the regional if we needed to.

Less than 2 weeks. On the better side of that about 30% left…Hell I’ve driven awful far on 30% of a tank on my bike :slight_smile:

Later all.
Eric Stokely
team 360 **

Your posting again? cool

11

Um, if you’re 8th, 1st can pick you. But I understand what you’re saying.

It’s like the teams who get in there and realize there’s no way for them to win, so they get rid of ALL their points to screw over the other team. We had some trouble with that…

12

Adam,

I know in 1999 or 2000 the seeded teams could pick each other, but not last year. My interpretation of the of rules is that the seeded teams (top 8 at the regionals) can NOT pick each other (similar to last year except some were automatically paired together) - which I think is the scruples question Eric was referring to.
If there was an update I missed or if I just misread the alliance picking section, let me know. Glad you brought it up - anyone else now the official rule on this, just so no one is surprised the first week of regionals?
Good luck to everyone in week 5 - here’s to hearing about the first “steps” (running, working robots) of MANY, MANY teams this week.

Jason

13

*Originally posted by Jason Morrella *
**Adam,

I know in 1999 or 2000 the seeded teams could pick each other, but not last year. My interpretation of the of rules is that the seeded teams (top 8 at the regionals) can NOT pick each other (similar to last year except some were automatically paired together) - which I think is the scruples question Eric was referring to.**

In '99, seeded teams could not choose each other, and in 2000 they could. There was a large uproar on CD about the rule change and how there would be too many “super alliances”, with the #1 and #2 seed. This never materialized.

Rule T7 is the one that covers this issue this year. I read it as saying that a top seeded team could choose another top 8.

14

Here is something else to consider. The robot you break this round may be your alliance partner a few rounds later. If you damage an opponent robot in such a way that it can’t be easily fixed soon, if at all, how far do you think you will get playing the game alone. I was told that a few years back this was the rule. FIRST may allow a broken robot to be placed in it’s scoring zone so you get at least 10 points for it. But what keeps it from being bot-knapped? Answer…NOTHING!
So keep this in the back of your mind when you go charging at, or grabbing, another bot.

throws $.02 into kitty

Wayne Doenges

15

*Originally posted by EStokely *
Throwing a match.
I can see being in 8th place with 1 or 2 matches to go.
Seed #1 “really” wants us as a partner. Do we screw over our partner for a match to place 9th?

We were in this unique position last year at nationals. Friday seeding had gone poorly, we were in the the middle of the pack. Saturday morning we were picking up steam and were seeded in the low teens going into our final match (the 2nd to last of the seeding rounds). We knew the #1 seed Team 33 wanted to pick us, but we went out and performed as well as we could for that match. We ended up with a memorable match (a robot rode on our back while we drove to the endzone after balancing) & our highest seeding score at nats and finished .7 out of 8th place.

Our team leader likes to use this as an example of GP for our rookie team members. All teams have an obligation to their alliance partners to try their hardest during every match. If a team throws a match, the low score will lower their partner’s ranking and may pull them out of the top 8. Being honest, acting with integrity, and living up to the high standards of a gracious professional are far more important than winning the competition.

Mike

16

After searching for the exact wording, I would have to say that Adam and Joe are correct. (I assume those who know us may have trouble believing that Eric and myself could have been wrong, but don’t worry, the sun will still rise tomorrow.) :slight_smile:
I had assumed that the top 8 could only pick from the remaining field, but the rule says they pick from all remaining “unpartnered” teams. I guess I assumed that “unpartnered” teams meant “unseeded” teams, instead of… well… “unpartnered”.
However, remember that while a seeded team has the luxury of declining an alliance offer from a higher seeded team if they don’t feel it is a good match, once they do they can not be picked by another seeded team - as once any team declines one offer, they can not accept another. (but if you are seeded, you would still be allowed to pick a partner)
The nice part is that the 2002 picking rule addresses exactly the situation Eric and Mike explained so well - teams will no longer have to wonder if they are better off as a 9th seed than an 8th. (which takes away a wonderful ethics and integrity gut check/lesson for FIRST teams, but is probably the proper way to do it to guarantee fairness for all).

JM

17

Due to the nature this year that Regionals are qualifiers and the game is very vicious I have to this to say to people. Through a Regional it separates the good teams from the bad teams. Now if your a bad team going against a good team how do you get into the elimination round. The correct answer is with only three matches left on that Saturday you are going all out and at this point a DQ won’t matter because if a DQ comes hey look I’m already at the bottom of the standings. What I am saying is you won’t really see rough play until the last couple of qualification matches; until then it is too risky for a team to be DQ. A famous quote from Coach Bill Belichek (Coach of the Super Bowl New England Patriots) “The scariest games are the ones where the opponents have nothing to lose and all to gain.”

P.S I will not be involved in illegal activity

18

Jason M quote…
<<(I assume those who know us may have trouble believing that Eric and myself could have been wrong…>>
Actually I suspect they have known all along that at least one of us (I’ll actually cop to this) is usually wrong :slight_smile:

I am RELIEVED that we don’t have to face this issue.

But in the process of building a strong frame to handle impacts coupled with a kinda cool drive train we may have a fairly nasty “bad” robot. (ie Slammer)

the team has talked about it. Its not something we are planning on using first but I think we will respond to violence with violence. And that really saddens me. Pushing, shoving , all cool. But at the speeds teams are talking about 130 pounds is just a whole lot of KE to deal with (for the physics challenged Kinetic Energy… 1/2 M V ^ 2, M is Mass V is velocity)
I hope we look back on this season as the one we worried about but it all worked out OK. remeber how we kept changing our minds about last years Game? I know I started by hating it and grew to really really like it. But hey I use to bowl.

As soon as we get some more parts bolted to the bot we’ll post some pic’s

Hope every one is still having fun.
Jason what regional are you at? San Jose or Seattle or??

Later
Eric

19

What if…
a team that gets disqualified for rough play or damaging an opponent is exempt from being a choice as an alliance partner. Seems to me that disqualification from being able to be picked will curtail alot of the bad behavior.

20

I think it is really important that we look at how the “three times losing opponent’s score qualifying points” will determine what teams do with their robot in competition.

There are three things team will be doing because of the way QP works:

  1. To get as much qualifying points as possible. This will make teams to challenge themselves and build a really good robot that will score more points than opponents. That robot won’t be going around damaging others, because that team will believe that the better shape other robots are in, the better partner and opponents they will get to score more QP for them while winning. These robots will let opponents score as much point as possible, sometimes even help their opponent scores.

If all the teams are this kind of robot, we won’t have to worry about anything that might demonstrate the opposite of gracious professionalism. But the world is not perfect.

  1. To win as many matches as possible, and demonstrate itself as a really good alliance partner. This will make teams build a robot designed to win, instead of helping others to get as many point as possible. There are potentially two type of robots in this group:

Type A: Robots that won’t care if they get 0 qualifying points, as long as they win every match. They won’t go around damaging robots because their robot is so good that they will beat undamaged opponents. Even though they are not helping their alliance partners’ score, I don’t think they are necessary “ungracious” in their performance. At least better than trying to damage other robots.

Type B: Robots that believe damaging other robots will help it win the championship. Although they won’t intentionally use an arm to beat up other robots (which will lead to disqualification), these robots will keep pushing other robots until their drive motors burn out, or intentionally take advantage of structural weakness of other robots. By the end of qualifying rounds, there will be a lot of damaged robots, and these group B robots will be obvious choices of alliance partner.

  1. There will always be the group of rookie and middle teams who are trying to build a functional robot, or try to score as many points as they can.

These robots will do the best they can in every match, and depending on their luck, they will get paired with #1 type robots or #2 type of robots. Who they get paired with and go against will ultimately decide how much qualifying points they will get, and how much damage they receive.

So, with the groups identified, here is what I think will happen.

There will be a bunch of good robots from experienced teams, which belong to #1 or #2. And because a lot of these teams are veterans, they understand the concept of gracious professionalism; they won’t go around doing damage. They might help out their partners and opponents by scoring points for both side, or they just score for themselves to win. A few of these teams will belong to #2 and win without much QP, and even less of those will intentionally damage other robots.

Then there will be a group of less experienced teams with decent robots, and I think they are even between #1 and #2, because these robots as good in controlling a match. They will most likely to score as many point as they can. Luck will decide whether they win with lots of QP (because of good partner and/or good opponents), or win with little QP (because of bad partner that just want to win, or bad opponents that couldn’t score too much), or lose with a lot of QP for their opponents. A lot in this group won’t be doing a lot of damages to other robots, because they don’t want to, or not capable of, or too busy trying to score points for a win. Again, only a few of these will damage other robots.

Finally, the leftovers will try to get their robot working, and will never be able to damage other robots even if they try. Luck will ultimately decide if they can win with little QP, or lose with little QP.

After all these analysis, my conclusion is that there will be little robots going around to damage robot because of a few reason:

Most experienced teams will understand “gracious professionalism”. They might also let opponents score as much as possible to get high qualifying points.

Most of the other teams will be too busy scoring points to win, and/or they won’t want to damage other robots. They will be in there trying to play the game and play it well.

A lot of rookie robots will be busy getting their robot working, and won’t be capable to damage other robots.

This leaves really little teams to go around and do bad things to others, due to the nature of qualifying rounds. I suspect a lot of damages to robot will be due to accidents…

During finals… robots will be damaged due to the nature of this game… But I don’t think teams will intentionally damage other robots…

Please correct me if I am wrong.