2013 Lessons Learned: The Negative

[Mr.Smoky15]

It may have already been said, but I feel like there needs to be a regional limit. Teams that already have more experience are the ones who go to 2, 3, or 4 regionals a year. If anything, rookies should have more chances to earn a trip to the Dome. Powerhouse teams ending their season with 2 or 3 Regional Winners trophies really hurts the competitiveness of FIRST. Also, a team who's robot can already smash half of a regional to pieces getting extra to work at the regional the week before just kills the entire build season.

[joelg236]

It may have already been said, but I feel like there needs to be a regional limit. Teams that already have more experience are the ones who go to 2, 3, or 4 regionals a year. If anything, rookies should have more chances to earn a trip to the Dome. Powerhouse teams ending their season with 2 or 3 Regional Winners trophies really hurts the competitiveness of FIRST. Also, a team who's robot can already smash half of a regional to pieces getting extra to work at the regional the week before just kills the entire build season.

Ideally you'd have every single regional during the same week. That just can't happen logistically though. I think that if a team is capable of going to multiple regionals, they should be able to. Priority should be (and is) given to teams who go to 1 or 2.

[Gregor]

It may have already been said, but I feel like there needs to be a regional limit. Teams that already have more experience are the ones who go to 2, 3, or 4 regionals a year. If anything, rookies should have more chances to earn a trip to the Dome. Powerhouse teams ending their season with 2 or 3 Regional Winners trophies really hurts the competitiveness of FIRST. Also, a team who's robot can already smash half of a regional to pieces getting extra to work at the regional the week before just kills the entire build season.

There are hundreds of threads on this. The general consensus is that any team can attend 4 if they so choose. It is probably a good idea to start this in one of those threads instead of here, because this is a "problem" every year, not just 2013.

[Thad House]

This year was MUCH better for teams that went to multiple regional and won, because of the Wildcard. So that is much less of an issue now.

[RoboMom]

I want to see more solutions to the problems listed in this thread!

FIRST needs to have a computer with a searchable database for team information versus a print out. I helped a bus driver from Michigan find his team after the event staff and police officer could not help him. He only knew the city of the team. Luckily, I had the master list of teams in an Excel file that included the team numbers, city, and sponsors. Additionally, it needs to include the teams' names to help make it complete. I cannot even begin to tell you how many teams I looked up for people. .

One of my hats was as the trainer and go-to person for the St. Louis Convention temporaries, ie, the "Event Information" booth in the lobby in front of the entrance to the pits. This is year 3 for me doing this job. They were asked non-stop questions over the 4 days by teams, and the public. We had various printouts of teams but it wasn't until Sat. that I saw your master list of all the teams in pit admin, sorted by geography and thought "there it is!" We spent way too much time flipping through divisions, through programs, through assorted lists. By Friday I would have traded my vest with 13 pockets to have a computer with a searchable database. We were slammed with these inquiries about teams just because of where this booth was-I have so many stories including crying moms. And depending on whether they wanted a pit visit vs. watching the team on the field in the Dome and which section to send them to there, guided the conversation. In addition, I would love to have a little more coordination between pit admin and the event information booth. This is doable!

I hate I am posting in the "negative" thread.
Can we make a "it's doable" thread?

[RoboMom]

RE: the conferences.

I have volunteered to do a conference presentation the past two years. I am very happy they were free this year. Whether hundreds attend (Karthik) or a few dozen (mine ;) ) each of these sessions have a lot to offer.

There was a mentor who attended my session last year. He did not have teams competing. His organization funded him to attend the conferences. All the rest of the event was gravy.

There are many schools and organizations who would allow and, gasp, even fund people to attend.

I would love to see the conferences expand and be a destination in themselves. Program books. Professionally done abstracts and bios. More days. More sessions. But I'd also love to keep them free.

I don't believe FIRST has the bandwidth to do this now, so it would take a partnership with another organization. And some funding.

This is doable.

[David8696]

Please read the first line of my signature.

My apologies. To be fair, I did use the term Championships the first time. It's my first year of FIRST, go easy on me ;)

[nickcvet89]

There should be more gamecasts like the one's from MSC. If you haven't seen it, here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUUL97AQ_3A) is the link to the finals. I wish all regionals/regional championships had something like this.

[Moon2020]

Wow! Yes, it is doable! I hope the right people are reading these threads!

We apparently need several team database computers (for a few key Volunteers and a few self-serve computers) set up at the most strategic locations in the venues (entrance, pit admin, the two inspection stations, etc.). Maybe a few "FIRST Ambassadors" with maps to personally escort people to the locations as well, as many people were super confused in the FRC Divisions by the pit maps. I had to ask an RI to escort a very confused person to a specific team in our division.

Maybe you could use text messaging to talk to Pit Admin? We used text messaging to communicate between the Galileo field out in the Dome and the Galileo inspection station when robots were having issues on the field. It's not instantaneous, but it worked pretty well for us.

One of my hats was as the trainer and go-to person for the St. Louis Convention temporaries, ie, the "Event Information" booth in the lobby in front of the entrance to the pits. This is year 3 for me doing this job. They were asked non-stop questions over the 4 days by teams, and the public. We had various printouts of teams but it wasn't until Sat. that I saw your master list of all the teams in pit admin, sorted by geography and thought "there it is!" We spent way too much time flipping through divisions, through programs, through assorted lists. By Friday I would have traded my vest with 13 pockets to have a computer with a searchable database. We were slammed with these inquiries about teams just because of where this booth was-I have so many stories including crying moms. And depending on whether they wanted a pit visit vs. watching the team on the field in the Dome and which section to send them to there, guided the conversation. In addition, I would love to have a little more coordination between pit admin and the event information booth. This is doable!

I hate I am posting in the "negative" thread.
Can we make a "it's doable" thread?

[Grim Tuesday]

Wow! Yes, it is doable! I hope the right people are reading these threads!

We apparently need several team database computers (for a few key Volunteers and a few self-serve computers) set up at the most strategic locations in the venues (entrance, pit admin, the two inspection stations, etc.). Maybe a few "FIRST Ambassadors" with maps to personally escort people to the locations as well, as many people were super confused in the FRC Divisions by the pit maps. I had to ask an RI to escort a very confused person to a specific team in our division.

Maybe you could use text messaging to talk to Pit Admin? We used text messaging to communicate between the Galileo field out in the Dome and the Galileo inspection station when robots were having issues on the field. It's not instantaneous, but it worked pretty well for us.

Speaking of texting, it might be worthwhile to ask ATT to beef up reception at the dome and specifically the convention center. TMobile and Verizon both worked fine but for all my friends with ATT, message delivery time was measured in hours not seconds.

[Moon2020]

Speaking of texting, it might be worthwhile to ask ATT to beef up reception at the dome and specifically the convention center. TMobile and Verizon both worked fine but for all my friends with ATT, message delivery time was measured in hours not seconds.

Agreed. We had about a 5 to 10 minute lag time on AT&T.

[nuttle]

> I would much rather see eight 50-team divisions, 10 qualifying matches and a quarter-final round at Einstein.

This is a hard solution to provide, but this is an attractive way forward on what seems to be the consensus biggest negative and probably the only way to even incrementally expand CMP (not that there aren't other considerations that might preclude this). One possible approach would be to run two divisions on each field, one in the mornings and one in the evenings. This would shorten the days for teams and reduce the number of people around for at least some of the time, but would require more volunteers (possibly for two shorter shifts in longer days). At the same time, everyone would still be at CMPs and there would be enough overlap that it would be one event.


It is really hard to justify a ranking system where wins and losses are not the top-line criteria, but maybe there is a way to reflect strength of schedule somewhere in the rankings. Individual team offence/defense can't be kept like the score, but maybe some scouting stats could be considered.

[DampRobot]

It is really hard to justify a ranking system where wins and losses are not the top-line criteria, but maybe there is a way to reflect strength of schedule somewhere in the rankings. Individual team offence/defense can't be kept like the score, but maybe some scouting stats could be considered.

At this point someone says that OPR should be used as the criteria for seeding. And then someone else points out how bad of an idea it is.

[Grim Tuesday]

At this point someone says that OPR should be used as the criteria for seeding. And then someone else points out how bad of an idea it is.

As much as people hate it, OPR in 2013 would probably have provided better seeding than W/L/T. Unfortunately, there is never any way to correlate it to actual on field performance in eliminations vs W/L/T since eliminations are intrinsically linked to the seedings defined by W/L/T.

[Tristan Lall]

> I would much rather see eight 50-team divisions, 10 qualifying matches and a quarter-final round at Einstein.

This is a hard solution to provide, but this is an attractive way forward on what seems to be the consensus biggest negative and probably the only way to even incrementally expand CMP (not that there aren't other considerations that might preclude this). One possible approach would be to run two divisions on each field, one in the mornings and one in the evenings. This would shorten the days for teams and reduce the number of people around for at least some of the time, but would require more volunteers (possibly for two shorter shifts in longer days). At the same time, everyone would still be at CMPs and there would be enough overlap that it would be one event.
I'd lean toward the opposite: 4 100-team divisions, each with two fields, preferably on the dome floor (space permitting). As long as we're satisfied enough teams are playing in the eliminations, it avoids an extra (Einstein quarterfinal) round of playoffs.

There would be a need for more volunteers, and of course more field sets would have to be used for competition matches.

[DanielCH]

I'd lean toward the opposite: 4 100-team divisions, each with two fields, preferably on the dome floor (space permitting). As long as we're satisfied enough teams are playing in the eliminations, it avoids an extra (Einstein quarterfinal) round of playoffs.

There would be a need for more volunteers, and of course more field sets would have to be used for competition matches.

Two fields per division? Scouting your division would be doubly difficult.

[hiyou102]

I think a solution to getting more space would be splitting up FRC, FTC, and FLL champs. This would allow more teams from FTC and FLL to to go and allow for more FRC divisions. They could still be in the same venue, just separated by a day or twoo.

[PayneTrain]

Two fields per division? Scouting your division would be doubly difficult.

In its existing floor plan configuration it may be difficult, but theoretically you could place them next to each other and play a match on one while the other one goes through reset.

[Tristan Lall]

In its existing floor plan configuration it may be difficult, but theoretically you could place them next to each other and play a match on one while the other one goes through reset.
That's the ideal. It may be possible with staggered fields, or fields placed two deep or pointed toward the centre of the dome. Some of those arrangements pose problems for viewing, but it's probably manageable if there exists enough space. (Does anyone have 2013's dimensioned floor plan handy?)

You could always share three fields among two divisions if you had to. (In the old days of the FRC championship, you played on both Einstein and Newton during the qualifying round.)

If the extra fields for each division ended up in the pits, then yes, it could be a pain to scout (and verging on impossible for smaller teams).

[bduddy]

How about a compromise? 6 fields, one division each; with ~70 teams each, there should be more than enough time for 10 matches or more. How do you deal with 6 alliances on Einstein, you ask? A round robin! I think that would be awesome, getting to see matches between so many amazing alliances. You could decide the winner straight off the round robin, or take the top 2 for a final best-of-3 (maybe if one of the finalists has a better W/L it gets to start with a win?) Yes, obviously this would take more time with the current format, but you could probably slice an hour or so off the divisions and still have 10 matches, not to mention all the time currently wasted before and during Einstein...

I can't take full credit for it, as it was discussed in TBA chat... still think it would be really cool, and I think it's pretty clear that there is room for 2 more fields.

[MrBasse]

9 foot falls. not fun to watch.

I think I have to go against this one... 9 foot falls are a huge draw for a crowd (think NASCAR). Nothing could make the entire audience come together like a robot taking a dive this year. Even more so when that robot actually showed up to their next match and performed. There was nothing in the manual that said you had to climb, and those that chose to take the games name for what it was and climb were well aware of the risk involved.

After climbing the pyramid 20+ times in competition, we only fell once. That time was completely due to bad coaching on my part. A lot comes down to what you build and how you build it. Climbing itself wasn't hard to do, designing a fail safe method of climbing was the tough part.

[Denise Bohnsack]

Admission is free. It would be strange to charge $2000 for a team to do all of that stuff when all they have to do is show up and do that stuff as it is now.

A good point but I have a good answer. If "Inspire" teams without robots were given special structured opportunities with opportunities to attend special workshops it would be worth the charge. Also bringing a smaller group of team leaders would be more affordable for some teams. More importantly: Many schools will not let students go unless there is some "official" invitation to attend and the school can justify it as a sanctioned activity. Schools are paid per student for the student to attend class each day at their facility so they are careful which activities they let students take off class to attend. I hate to admit this, but when I took off work and took my son out of school to attend the Atlanta World Championship, I had to call him in sick, otherwise under school policy it would have been an "unexcused absence" even though we were attending the FIRST championship and the school had a FIRST team. (I contend my son had previously missed no days before and had good grades so I feel the absence was justified and the learning experience he had at championship was educational.) So inviting schools to attend championships in some official capacity, (maybe through certain awards or special invitation or award) which honors them and gives the team an opportunity to attend minus the robot gives credibility to the teacher who requests permission for her team to attend.

Another thought: Maybe this is a bad idea, I am just throwing it out there. Could there be an extra field for a B championship, played by robots who are rookie teams, wild card teams, wait list invitees, and teams who might qualify other ways but maybe don't have the experience of championship under their belts? Perhaps teams that have a slower or problem robot but have great community programs which qualify them to attend World.

I am not complaining here, because FIRST is not about the robots, but in one of our matches, one of the rookie teams was confused and failed to show up, and the other team showed up with the wrong bumpers, and was not allowed to play. So it was our 1 robot, against 3. Again, this is just how it goes and we were just happy and honored to be at championship, but perhaps if these teams had a chance to compete at championship on another field and learn how the system works, (Championship the first year is overwhelming) it would be a good thing for all. And all the matches would move quicker with less teams playing for the World Championship honor. Perhaps this is a bad suggestion, but it is something to think about. And maybe this idea could solve some of the issues I am reading about. It also would serve as a field for emcees, announcers or referrees in training. As I stated before, just attending World Championship without a robot is an amazing experience and one I wish more students,teachers and mentors could experience, good robot or not.

[Kidney]

I didn't like a couple of things about kickoff this year. I feel like they showed the game animation way too early and it wasn't as suspenseful as it was in previous years. Maybe I'm weird, but I actually liked sitting through a few hours of talking and animations and whatnot before the game reveal, I think it built up more suspense that way.

This is also more of a local thing, but the St. Louis FRC Kickoff at the Science Center was in a different area than where it used to be (was in planetarium last season and before) and I feel like the atmosphere wasn't as epic as it used to be. Also they used to play a slideshow of the pics from the STL regional the previous year and it was a fun nostalgia spree each time before kickoff.

Plus no Stephen Colbert, man...

[Mykey]

Another thought: Maybe this is a bad idea, I am just throwing it out there. Could there be an extra field for a B championship, played by robots who are rookie teams, wild card teams, wait list invitees, and teams who might qualify other ways but maybe don't have the experience of championship under their belts? Perhaps teams that have a slower or problem robot but have great community programs which qualify them to attend World.


I do not think that labeling anyone as "B" teams is a good idea.

The wildcard teams are there because they "earned" the way. Being seeded 4 of 60+ teams in a regional is an accomplishment. If 6 teams show up with prior wins then the only way to not be a "B" team would be to beat out the "A" teams from other regionals?

Also... stacking the deck against rookie teams seems to be an excellent way of discouraging newcomers.

About the waitlist: I must admit that my first reaction to hearing that teams could "buy" their way to championships was not positive. I felt a bit of contempt for them. I was wrong to feel that way. The championships are, as they should be, about more than just rankings.

[themccannman]

Maybe I'm weird, but I actually liked sitting through a few hours of talking and animations and whatnot before the game reveal, I think it built up more suspense that way.

ohmygodno, kickoff was perfect this year, for some of us western teams getting up at 4 am to go to kickoff sucks as it is, waiting through 2 hours of talking is a waste of our time. I liked this year where we showed up to kick off, got the game, saw the field and left, it was much less dreadful than last year.

[Nemo]

Maybe I'm weird, but I actually liked sitting through a few hours of talking and animations and whatnot [snip]


Yeah, that is a little odd.

Our team doesn't have a close local kickoff, and traveling out of state for that event isn't practical when we can watch the same animation at home and then immediately use our home facility to start working on the game. So kickoff is one part of the year when we get to make our own decisions about how much introductory material is appropriate. We keep the kickoff on in the background and wait for the good parts. I've watched the whole thing a couple of times, and I end up zoning out for parts of it. Planning the kickoff warrants the same type of editorial restraint as planning Einstein - while the messages might be 100% on the money, the attention span of the average viewer (adults included) is finite.

[indubitably]

ohmygodno, kickoff was perfect this year, for some of us western teams getting up at 4 am to go to kickoff sucks as it is, waiting through 2 hours of talking is a waste of our time. I liked this year where we showed up to kick off, got the game, saw the field and left, it was much less dreadful than last year.

I agree it was wayyyy better this year but I do think that it needed a bit more build up. I remember asking people around me to reassure me that this was, in fact, the game animation because it caught me by such surprise. I don't think it needs more speeches or anything, just a little hype is all.

[Nate Laverdure]

Something not mentioned so far (because I'm probably the only one who cares): can the MCs bring back the original pre-match cadence?

Red team are you ready?
Blue team are you ready?
Drivers behind the lines...
3, 2, 1, go!

Saying those two lines would only take a few extra seconds, and it would do a lot for my sanity and stress level if my team ever lets me be drive coach again. :)

[EricLeifermann]

Something not mentioned so far (because I'm probably the only one who cares): can the MCs bring back the original pre-match cadence?

Red team are you ready?
Blue team are you ready?
Drivers behind the lines...
3, 2, 1, go!

Saying those two lines would only take a few extra seconds, and it would do a lot for my sanity and stress level if my team ever lets me be drive coach again. :)

They do something along those lines at every competition I've ever been too. Its not always both alliance but "Drivers are you ready?" and they look at both alliances for thumbs up be for saying the rest of the schpeel that you mentioned.

[Taylor]

-snip-
kickoff sucks as it is, waiting through 2 hours of talking is a waste of our time. -snip-

These folks are bright, intelligent leaders in their respective fields that are giving collectively millions of dollars, hours, and resources straight to you because they believe in you. If they choose to talk to you during kickoff, it's probably because they have something important/inspirational to say, and you should probably pay attention.

I have always been confused by the hordes of people who swarm Dean wherever he goes, give two minute standing ovations whenever his name is mentioned, and then gripe when he wants to talk to us.
Dean Kamen is a pretty smart dude. If he wants to talk to me, I want to listen.

[Tyler Olds]

Something not mentioned so far (because I'm probably the only one who cares): can the MCs bring back the original pre-match cadence?

Red team are you ready?
Blue team are you ready?
Drivers behind the lines...
3, 2, 1, go!

Saying those two lines would only take a few extra seconds, and it would do a lot for my sanity and stress level if my team ever lets me be drive coach again. :)

Actually saying the "Red team are you ready...." part does add on quite a bit of time, especially if we wait for acknowledgement from the alliance members (if we don't, then what is the point of saying it at all?), and when we are generally working on a very tight match rotation (this year was a little bit of an exception because the FTA's overestimated the amount of time needed for match rotations) we try to shave off every second we can.

The current way that Emcee's are directed to say it is:
(Wait for Green Light, look to see if FTA, Head Ref, teams, and Scorekeeper are ready)
Drivers behind the lines...
3, 2, 1, go!

...or some sort of similiar varient.

[MARS_James]

Something not mentioned so far (because I'm probably the only one who cares): can the MCs bring back the original pre-match cadence?

Red team are you ready?
Blue team are you ready?
Drivers behind the lines...
3, 2, 1, go!

Saying those two lines would only take a few extra seconds, and it would do a lot for my sanity and stress level if my team ever lets me be drive coach again. :)

At Orlando, South Florida, and Newton (the three events I attended) the MC's all said this or something similar:
"We have a green light:
Red Alliance are you ready?
Blue Alliance are you ready?
3, 2, 1, GO!"

Sometimes they would add in the drivers behind the line but not always.

[Nate Laverdure]

Again, this is an exceedingly minor issue.
The current way that Emcee's are directed to say it is:
(Wait for Green Light, look to see if FTA, Head Ref, teams, and Scorekeeper are ready)
Drivers behind the lines...
3, 2, 1, go!
At Chesapeake, Greg Needel explained to me that his instructions are to omit these lines during qualifications, but to say them during eliminations.
Actually saying the "Red team are you ready...." part does add on quite a bit of time, especially if we wait for acknowledgement from the alliance members (if we don't, then what is the point of saying it at all?)
I'd argue the point is to help develop a rhythm for everyone involved in the field operations. It's a verbal cue that prompts people to transition from "setup" tasks to "gameplay" tasks. Like every NFL quarterback knows, messing with the cadence has subtle but powerful effects on mental preparedness.

[Lij2015]

First time posting on here, just been scouring lately.
Not anything about the game that hasn't already been said, but I just want to see if anyone else's team had this problem.
Did anyone else have to format their cRio's multiple times to get it to work?
It took at least 3 times when we added something, switched it to a smaller one, or did it on our second robot.

[apples000]

This isn't really a complaint, but in most matches in the events that I was at/watched, the announcer uses the phrase "pre-programmed instructions" to describe autonomous mode. Also, the check to see if the alliances are ready is useful. Just because a team's robot is connected doesn't mean that they have selected their auto mode on the smart dashboard. I've seen them start without everybody ready only twice, but it would be a good thing to bring back.

[CalTran]

This isn't really a complaint, but in most matches in the events that I was at/watched, the announcer uses the phrase "pre-programmed instructions" to describe autonomous mode. Also, the check to see if the alliances are ready is useful. Just because a team's robot is connected doesn't mean that they have selected their auto mode on the smart dashboard. I've seen them start without everybody ready only twice, but it would be a good thing to bring back.

I'm not a programmer but what's wrong with calling autonomous mode "pre-programmed instructions"?

Also, I dunno if it applies to other regionals, but the two I drove at this year, if you held up a thumbs down they'd wait for you.

[apples000]

There's nothing wrong with pre-programmed instructions, but it gets a little repetitive to hear "In autonomous mode robots operate under pre-programmed instructions and score double points!" every time your match starts. Thinking back to it, it was only at one of the events that this was said every time.

[Gregor]

This isn't really a complaint, but in most matches in the events that I was at/watched, the announcer uses the phrase "pre-programmed instructions" to describe autonomous mode. Also, the check to see if the alliances are ready is useful. Just because a team's robot is connected doesn't mean that they have selected their auto mode on the smart dashboard. I've seen them start without everybody ready only twice, but it would be a good thing to bring back.

If you're not ready have someone (Coach maybe?) wave your hands in the ref/MC's direction. They wont start without you if you make it known.

[BigJ]

I'm not a programmer but what's wrong with calling autonomous mode "pre-programmed instructions"?

Also, I dunno if it applies to other regionals, but the two I drove at this year, if you held up a thumbs down they'd wait for you.

Autonomous mode commands are programmed instructions. I don't program before I program :p

[Ginto8]

Autonomous mode commands are programmed instructions. I don't program before I program :p

But you don't program while the match is going on, hence pre-programmed ;)

[Lij2015]

But you don't program while the match is going on, hence pre-programmed ;)

#beingthatguy
That'd make the entire match pre-programmed. XD

[orangemoore]

#beingthatguy
That'd make the entire match pre-programmed. XD

Yes pre-programmed but not controlledb

[Gregor]

Cylinders are not fun to design for or inspect. A nice rectangular size constraint would be much easier on everyone involved.

The inconsistency between inspections at regionals (this is always something), but particularly shooter guards this year. This shouldn't be up to the LRI. It should have at least been adressed (one way or the other) after week 1 at the latest.

[Grim Tuesday]

Cylinders are not fun to design for or inspect. A nice rectangular size constraint would be much easier on everyone involved.

The inconsistency between inspections at regionals (this is always something), but particularly shooter guards this year. This shouldn't be up to the LRI. It should have at least been adressed (one way or the other) after week 1 at the latest.

The cylinder was the bane of my existence and invaded my dreams this year. I understand that challenging constraints can be lots of fun but this one seemed arbitrary. I think the reasoning for it was to accommodate the amorphous frame rules this year. Also, very few inspectors knew how to properly inspect for this, instead measuring maximum point-to-point distance instead of the actual cylinder. Some suggestions for better constraints:

-Max point-to-point distance on the robot
-Maximum extension from each side of the frame
-Max dimensions of a rectangular prism

[Moon2020]

Cylinders are not fun to design for or inspect. A nice rectangular size constraint would be much easier on everyone involved.

The inconsistency between inspections at regionals (this is always something), but particularly shooter guards this year. This shouldn't be up to the LRI. It should have at least been adressed (one way or the other) after week 1 at the latest.

Yes, agreed, inconsistent and confusing. Game rules vs robot rules. It's not just the cylinder or shooters, it's bumpers also. Everyone has different experiences and areas of expertise. RIs have to know every design solution a team may come up with and if it complies at all possible times of a match. Thus, please help us to help your teams.

For bumpers, I like to feel the bumpers and push on them to make sure of their construction and ensure they are secured to the frame. However, not every RI does the hands-on-the-robot approach when it comes to bumpers. Why do I have to feel the bumpers and push on them? Why can't I just look at them?

We want every team out on the field competing in their matches. It is our job to help the teams get out there on time and be successful; however, there is also a limit to what we can do in a few hours vs what the robot rules stated 6 or more weeks prior. Thus, I'm going to have to ask you all to meet us half way.

I am going to suggest that each team have a seasoned student compliance lead that goes through the rules and checklist criteria comparing them to the actual build of the robot to ensure compliance to the rules prior to bagging the robot. I say this because we have seen several cases where the team assumed the rules had not changed from the previous year and went to town on their build resulting in a very noncompliant robot showing up at a regional. Knowing this happens frequently, we have offered as well as other super experienced teams have offered to inspect the robots for compliance prior to bag and tag. Unfortunately, we do not get many takers of this valuable service.

[jawebste]

This was our first trip to the Championships. And while it was exciting and wonderful, and the access to seating was awful. And the teams that manage to make it in the morning and hold three or four rows are being incredibly rude and setting an awful example for our students.
The two wristbands for each team to be able to have at least two people see Einstein and then whatever they did so the teams playing there got preferential seating seemed to work, and that is a credit to the staff at the Dome. I was waiting near the entrance to the "pink band" seating to meet our captain to whom I was giving the band as he had to return from the pits. I was embarrassed by the number of people giving the Dome officials grief because the officials would not let them through without the correct identification. So not gracious.
If "scouting seating" has been discussed, then based on the behavior of the people in the stands, each field would require a couple of volunteers at all times to enforce the pin or badge system or whatever each team would be provided. But I would support this process and it would help the teams that are not able to stay right near the dome. Not every team can be right next to the stadium.
Someone in this thread mentioned big screens overhead broadcasting the matches to the pits, like the standings, and I think that would help ease the pressure in the seating area. But I would be a little concerned about safety as even with the standings some people get glued to the screen and overlook their surroundings.

[Gregor]

Not that this is new to this year, but the inconsistency weighing the withholding allowance.

I was 3 events Thursday morning, yet only one weighed the withholding.

[Siri]

Not that this is new to this year, but the inconsistency weighing the withholding allowance.

I was 3 events Thursday morning, yet only one weighed the withholding.Somebody weighed the withholding? I haven't even seen this once in 7 years. We only ever weight ours out of habit.

[Gregor]

Somebody weighed the withholding? I haven't even seen this once in 7 years. We only ever weight ours out of habit.

Thursday morning at Finger Lakes. I heard it happened last year at Queen City(?) too.

We were well under our withholding weight (20 lbs), so it wasn't an issue, but the fact that it happens somewhere and not others is the frustrating part.

[akoscielski3]

Thursday morning at Finger Lakes. I heard it happened last year at Queen City(?) too.

We were well under our withholding weight (20 lbs), so it wasn't an issue, but the fact that it happens somewhere and not others is the frustrating part.

Queen City it DID in fact happen. I remember because we had our bumpers outside of the bag so they had us weigh them. Also at Waterloo (2013) they had me weigh our sponsor panel that they saw me bringing in. I don't remember any other time we had to weigh our parts we were bringing in.

I wonder if The Aluminum Falcons had to weigh their new shooter and such this year after people saw them changing it in competition??

[Gregor]

Queen City it DID in fact happen. I remember because we had our bumpers outside of the bag so they had us weigh them. Also at Waterloo (2013) they had me weigh our sponsor panel that they saw me bringing in. I don't remember any other time we had to weigh our parts we were bringing in.

I wonder if The Aluminum Falcons had to weigh their new shooter and such this year after people saw them changing it in competition??

Did you have a withholding at FLR this year?

[akoscielski3]

Did you have a withholding at FLR this year?

I can't remember. I don't think so, our inspectors never really checked.

[Gregor]

I can't remember. I don't think so, our inspectors never really checked.

Ours was weighed as we were walking in the door during load in, not during inspection.

[akoscielski3]

Ours was weighed as we were walking in the door during load in, not during inspection.

No we were never weighed. The only thing that was weighed that I brought in was our sponsor panels but that was in Waterloo, not FLR.

[Nate Laverdure]

Queen City it DID in fact happen. I remember because we had our bumpers outside of the bag so they had us weigh them.
You shouldn't have had to do this.
The OPERATOR CONSOLE, BUMPERS, and any ROBOT battery assemblies (as described in R05-A) are exempt from this limit.

[Gregor]

You shouldn't have had to do this.

2012 they were not exempt.

[cmrnpizzo14]

At FLR all items were weighed in during the load in excluding items such as bumpers and batteries that were exempt. All items I believe were weighed even if they were clearly underweight so that the inspectors would know how much you had brought in and then could add more weight to that later in the regional.

[pfreivald]

Rob Heslin (LRI) can probably speak to this better than I, but FLR RIs weighed every withholding allowance as it came in the building, whether Wednesday evening or Thursday morning. I assumed this was common practice.

[Moon2020]

We also weigh withholding allowance as it comes through the door, rather it be Wednesday or Thursday.