Saving Seats Epidemic

[JamesSpencer]

Overall I believe most people’s championship experience was a positive one but there is one issue that we still need to fix as a community. Saving Seats! As members of an organization devoted to changing culture, the process of acquiring seating should not resemble a Black Friday sale in any way.

I understand the desire to keep your scouting/cheering team centrally located but sectioning off a segment of the stands is not the way to do it. In fact FIRST has specifically prohibited it in section 4.14 of the manual (note the bold underlined part).

4.14 BLEACHER RULES
Sitting together in a group during competition matches makes the game more exciting and fun. It’s where you can show support for your team. Since very often there is not enough seating to accommodate everyone, there has to be a policy regarding seating. Teams are not allowed to save seating space.

With this in mind, it is not permitted to hang banners or ribbons to designate such an area. We will remove and discard any banners, roping, etc... Please take turns sitting in the bleachers, if seating is limited. Share the fun. When you see there is a crowding problem, leave after your team's match and return later for another few matches.

http://i44.tinypic.com/2qjbpds.jpg

Not to single the above team out but they were just the most visual example of what was happening. My own team anticipated the seating shortage and woke the entire team up at 5 and bussed to the venue to be in line by 6. When the doors were opened imagine our dismay when there were groups of four trying to reserve seats, in one case four individuals were trying to keep over 80 seats. I instructed my team to sit on the border between two of these groups as we had the entire team there and they did not. The situation became very confrontational and concerned some of the students. The team who felt their space was being stolen then informed me that my team and I were being not graciously professional as attempt to get their way, to which I replied that there is no saving of seats. In talking with them later, in a much calmer state, they said that they only section off their portion of the stands because they saw another team doing it last year. We need to stop this trend from continuing to grow further and we need to stop playing the GP card in an attempt to get our way. Hopefully we can find a solution in a non-inflammatory manner.

[Carl C]

FIRST needs to either allow seats to be reserved or implement a better system. This "Black Friday Epidemic" can be truly frustrating!


Copied from another thread:

We've run into this problem also. At Palmetto, there were 61 teams and hardly any seats, so there were many who acted ungraciously and darted in front of everyone, even going so far as taking other team's seats. What made this worse it the fact that no team was allowed to reserve seats for the next day (though many did it anyways), so this was a daily occurrence. We did not care so much about where we sat as ling as we all could sit together, but with a medium-sized teams with many parents, siblings, and mentors, this was nearly impossible.

At North Carolina, we had a similar issue, but thankfully Team 3196 kindly allowed us to use their empty seats before eliminations. Afterwards, however, our team was unable to sit together as we made a run to finals, which was rather frustrating.

It is probably up to the respective regional directors, but I hope this issue could be resolved at one point.

[Maldridge422]

As mentioned in this comment (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1270677&postcount=33), saving seats is really bad for spectators. How can anyone be expected to attend an event if the only space in the stands is for people specifically associated with teams? Maybe having a sort of "scouting/media" section reserved for 5-10 members of each team would allow the rest of the stands to be clear of clutter and blocked off sections. Thoughts?

[dcarr]

It's an extremely tough problem - once somebody starts doing it, pretty much everyone else has to do the same in order to keep up and have somewhere to sit.

I think the quick answer is that if you're going to save seats, you've got to do it the hard way - by putting bodies in them.

[PayneTrain]

...


Oh, the seat-savers were out in full force on Galileo and I wanted to pull my hair out at how unbearable some were.

I would like to take this time to thank 1114 and 610 for "doing it right". Both of those teams were doubtlessly awake before the sun even rose on the East Coast, and they took up as many seats as needed by their team because all of their members were actually present.

Like I said in another thread, teams need to educate everyone on their team concerning all of the rules, including parents on this specific rule.

Also, I know for the VA regional, there was a supervisor who seemed especially designated to prevent seat saving, even to the point where he wanted us to not not have anything in seats to give off the appearance we were saving seats. I guess you could have a volunteer babysit the stands, but really, if we need a volunteer to babysit the stands we have a bigger problem.

[MechEng83]

At the 2011 Championship, I encountered a VERY rude mentor/parent/adult from a team who was reserving 5 entire rows on the lower level in front of the Einstein stage. I, along with 2 of my students had rushed from our pit to the stands for the opening ceremonies. We saw plenty of open seats in the "reserved" section and sat at the upper corner edge, as there were very few other seats available.

This particular person came up, yelling and screaming at us that the seats had been reserved. I calmly stated to her that seats could not be reserved and that we were not moving. My students had no idea what to do, but I firmly repeated my statement. I look young, so I assume she figured I was just a kid with some attitude problem. The situation was never resolved, but she threw up her hands and gave up.

THEN, an elderly lady came down the aisle and took a seat at the edge of the "reserved" section. The same woman came back with a vengence, and I swear, I saw rabid foaming of the mouth. She yelled and screamed at this elderly woman (who, I might add threw back some hilarious responses, including how "un-GP" the screaming woman was).

Thankfully, another mentor from the team came and grabbed the woman and diffused the situation, telling her it was ok to let us sit in those seats. Eventually, the rest of the team arrived to claim their "reserved" seats, and managed to consolidate into TWO rows.

Because of this incident, I instruct ALL my students that seats may not be reserved and make sure they all can quote the section of the administrative manual (4.14) stating this.

Now, I'm not advocating being rude and targeting spaces that are blocked off by other teams, but when there is truly no other place to go, don't feel bad about sitting in their reserved section. The rules, and GP are on your side.

[Moon2020]

How are we going to solve this issue?

Suggestions:
A formal lottery for reserving/swapping seats with teams of a similar size after matches?
Moving the events to bigger venues with more seating?
Limit the amount of people each team can seat to a max number based on the venue size (team members/mentors/parents take turns)?
All of the above?
Leave the chaos as-is?

[Walter Deitzler]

I would like to take this time to thank 1114 and 610 for "doing it right". Both of those teams were doubtlessly awake before the sun even rose on the East Coast, and they took up as many seats as needed by their team because all of their members were actually present.



1114 and 610 (and 118 as well) did "do it right", and not only because they showed up early and had their entire team grab seats. They also, if they had any open seats, would allow spectators, such as myself and other members of my team, to sit among them. I was gifted the chance to sit with all three of those amazing teams, and made many friends while I was at it. It was definitely one of the most memorable experiences of my life.

If you are saving seats and a spectator wants to sit there, follow these team's examples, as it will most likely be a very rewarding experience for not only yourself, but for the spectator!

[MagiChau]

As one way to help the problem I think a reminder to not reserve/save seats be sent in the FIRST email, team update before week 1 events, and Frank's FRC Blog would be a few simple ways to alert teams. It is clear having it in the administrative manual is simply not enough because not everyone reads it.

[dcarr]

Aside from literally ticketing seats, does anyone have observations or best practices from other events that involve "first come, first serve" seating? Not sure what kind of events those might be, but I think we need something better than what we have. At the same time I think it's vital that the ability for teams to sit and cheer together be maintained.

[dcarr]

As one way to help the problem I think a reminder to not reserve/save seats be sent in the FIRST email, team update before week 1 events, and Frank's FRC Blog would be a few simple ways to alert teams. It is clear having it in the administrative manual is simply not enough because not everyone reads it.

It's mentioned in the email sent out to teams every week during competition.

[Kevin Leonard]

The most important part for our team is getting seats that are good enough for the scouting team. Our spectators and spirit crew can find a seat somewhere (especially at champs) with a less ideal view of the field.

As mentioned in this comment (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1270677&postcount=33), saving seats is really bad for spectators. How can anyone be expected to attend an event if the only space in the stands is for people specifically associated with teams? Maybe having a sort of "scouting/media" section reserved for 5-10 members of each team would allow the rest of the stands to be clear of clutter and blocked off sections. Thoughts?

I think this could be a great idea. Having a section of seats in ideal viewing location that is reserved for scouting teams and media people.
This would (for us at least) remove a lot of the stress that comes from needing to have a set of seats for the scouts.

That being said, that wouldn't solve every issue. Especially when you're talking about regionals with limited seating. The Connecticut regional has limited seating for the 56 teams that attended this year, and it becomes difficult to find enough seats for our entire team to sit. The scouting section idea might actually hurt here, as not as many teams scout at regionals as the teams that scout at worlds.

[iyermihir]

An announcement each morning during a regional could help prevent people from saving seats. I think that many people are not aware of the rule. Even people who are doing it with full knowledge of the rule may stop and think about it before saving seats.

-Mihir Iyer

[Marc S.]

I think the GP card could go either way. Yeah your taking their seats that they are trying so hard to defend, but they are trying to save seats with almost no one there.

At SVR I talked to a rookie mentor from another team, and he mentioned to me how ungraciously professional he thought the pink team was for taking up half the stands in the center section of the stadium. "Their spirit people take up the same amount of room as the scouts from 20 other teams." he said. Its an interesting thought, 90% of their seats went to cheerers who loved to stand and block the view of people behind them, but they did get there first. I only mention the identity of this team because they ironically won the championship Gracious Professionalism award.

So it begs the question, what is more graciously professional? Is it, "we only need these higher quality seats for our scouts", or "they got their first so we should respect their right to take up as many seats as they can"?

[GaryVoshol]

We went to a Christmas program at a church once, as visitors. They had stated the time the program started, and when doors opened. We arrived a few minutes before the doors opened, and when let in found that all the good seats had been covered with coats to be reserved by church members. We never returned to that church.

Is that the image we want of FIRST? When the public come in, they are rudely told they can't sit here because it's reserved for a team? I wouldn't return.

[Mike Marandola]

I think one possibility, specifically at internationals, would be for FIRST to reserve about 6 seats for each team towards the center of the field. The rest of the seats would be first come first serve. This way every team would have a good view of the field for scouting and such. Everyone is racing to get these center seats so I think every team should be given a certain number of them.

[Woolly]

If your average team needs ~10 people to scout, and there are 60 teams at a regional, what you end up with is 600 people redundantly recording what is mostly the same data.
If, somehow, everyone could agree on a scouting standard before they show up at the regional, you could have a representative from every team do all the scouting, and it could probably be uploaded to a neutral location on the web. Then, any fancy metrics/calculations that a team are doing just have to be set up to pull information from that neutral source.
Thus the need to sit in the bleachers and be together the whole event is alleviated for most teams.

Now, how do you get everyone to agree on a scouting standard? Well, for one the regional committee could hold a meeting 2 weeks before the event where everyone shares what data they need for scouting. It would not take much to hash out, as every year almost everyone's scouting sheets contain the same data.

[Ernst]

Hey guys. I'm from 1732. Those are our seat savers. Please let me explain.

I know they're bad. I know you don't like them. WE don't like them.

We simply didn't see any alternatives. As a team sending 84 (!) people down to St. Louis this year, we were unsure as to what our course of action should be. At the Wisconsin and Boilermaker Regionals we kept a general area of seating "reserved" by leaving piles of stuff there, rendering many seats useless, leading to people's things being stepped on, and, inevitable, losing things. We did, in the process, create a space for the scouts, spirit team, parents, mentors, and guests that came along. Unfortunately, we always had people sitting alone. We've struggled with seating for the past few years that I've been on the team, always ending up spread out. As a last resort, and after seeing many other teams to so, we opted for these felt, rubber band, and sticker combinations.

I never saw anyone who wasn't on our team shooed out of one of the marked seats. I remember, possibly the day that photo was taken, giving up entire rows because of the outrage over our seat savers. On Saturday we didn't bring them. We learned our lesson and sent half of the team to the venue really early.

I apologize.

[CENTURION]

If your average team needs ~10 people to scout, and there are 60 teams at a regional, what you end up with is 600 people redundantly recording what is mostly the same data.
If, somehow, everyone could agree on a scouting standard before they show up at the regional, you could have a representative from every team do all the scouting, and it could probably be uploaded to a neutral location on the web. Then, any fancy metrics/calculations that a team are doing just have to be set up to pull information from that neutral source.
Thus the need to sit in the bleachers and be together the whole event is alleviated for most teams.

Now, how do you get everyone to agree on a scouting standard? Well, for one the regional committee could hold a meeting 2 weeks before the event where everyone shares what data they need for scouting. It would not take much to hash out, as every year almost everyone's scouting sheets contain the same data.

1306 is working on this :D

Anyone interested should check out this thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116182)

We rolled out the CrowdScout system at the Wisconsin Regional, and in Curie Division this year, and it worked wonderfully, so we will definitely be continuing development of the system (streamlining data entry, making things easier for teams), and the organization around it (deciding on what data is needed, etc.)

[jessss]

At the Minnesota Regionals the first few rows of the center section of seats were reserved for teams. Each team got two seats for scouting, the team number was placed on each seat which was nice. It gave every team an opportunity to use the two seats to scout, record matches or even just sit and watch matches. It was nice because each team knew that they had these two seats and didn't have to worry about saving the seats. I know most teams need more than two scouters but I think it helped at our regionals.

[ttldomination]

Hey guys. I'm from 1732. Those are our seat savers. Please let me explain.

I know they're bad. I know you don't like them. WE don't like them.

We simply didn't see any alternatives. As a team sending 84 (!) people down to St. Louis this year, we were unsure as to what our course of action should be. At the Wisconsin and Boilermaker Regionals we kept a general area of seating "reserved" by leaving piles of stuff there, rendering many seats useless, leading to people's things being stepped on, and, inevitable, losing things. We did, in the process, create a space for the scouts, spirit team, parents, mentors, and guests that came along. Unfortunately, we always had people sitting alone. We've struggled with seating for the past few years that I've been on the team, always ending up spread out. As a last resort, and after seeing many other teams to so, we opted for these felt, rubber band, and sticker combinations.

I never saw anyone who wasn't on our team shooed out of one of the marked seats. I remember, possibly the day that photo was taken, giving up entire rows because of the outrage over our seat savers. On Saturday we didn't bring them. We learned our lesson and sent half of the team to the venue really early.

I apologize.

If you're bringing 84 people, then seat them in separate areas, seat them towards the rear or off to the side. Do you HONESTLY, expect to seat all 84 people in a prime, central location and then not expect to step on some toes?

- Sunny G.

[Woolly]

1306 is working on this :D

Anyone interested should check out this thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116182)

We rolled out the CrowdScout system at the Wisconsin Regional, and in Curie Division this year, and it worked wonderfully, so we will definitely be continuing development of the system (streamlining data entry, making things easier for teams), and the organization around it (deciding on what data is needed, etc.)

Right, now if only we could require every team to send 1 rep to scout, such that it becomes plainly obvious to teams where to get good scouting info, rather than showing up to alliance selections and just picking by rank/reputation/#of LEDs.

[Kevin Sevcik]

First off, I'd like to point out that any suggestions of "first-come-first-served buuuut {reserved scout/media area, 6 prime seats per team, current match cheering section, etc.}" is pretty much an argument for the status quo. Teams reserving a handful of seats for scout aren't the problem. Teams reserving 40+ seats with 3 people are the problem. No matter your exception, there will still be teams with 40+ people they want sitting together looking for seats in the first-come sections. Making exceptions for small amounts of people is just shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.

Crazy idea:
Most complaints seem to center around people having to sit "alone". Sitting "alone" in this case seems to mean sitting somewhere not surrounded by people you've been stuck working on a robot with 12 hours a day for the last 6 weeks. Instead you're surrounded by people who've been stuck working on a robot for 12 hours a day for the last 6 weeks.

Surely all of us FIRSTers have enough in common that we're never actually alone in the stands no matter who's sitting next to us. Maybe if more of us made a point of spreading out a bit more and getting a bit more comfortable with all the other similarly crazy people in the stands, there'd be less worry about having to reserve completely contiguous, uninterrupted blocks of 40+ seats.

In furtherance of this, I think I'll spend more time at my next regional actively sitting just a bit away from my team. Feel free to call me crazy now.

[dcarr]

In furtherance of this, I think I'll spend more time at my next regional actively sitting just a bit away from my team. Feel free to call me crazy now.

As open minded as this is, it's not a way to build and share team spirit, to share the highs and lows with the people you've worked with, love, and care about. To me, a FIRST event wouldn't be the same without this.

Whatever changes are made to seating in the future, having teams be able to sit together, at least while their robot is on the field, is of utmost importance.

[CENTURION]

Right, now if only we could require every team to send 1 rep to scout, such that it becomes plainly obvious to teams where to get good scouting info, rather than showing up to alliance selections and just picking by rank/reputation/#of LEDs.

The end goal for the CrowdScout system is just that: Get every team at a regional involved. Now making it a requirement might be a bit harder :rolleyes:

First off, I'd like to point out that any suggestions of "first-come-first-served buuuut {reserved scout/media area, 6 prime seats per team, current match cheering section, etc.}" is pretty much an argument for the status quo. Teams reserving a handful of seats for scout aren't the problem. Teams reserving 40+ seats with 3 people are the problem. No matter your exception, there will still be teams with 40+ people they want sitting together looking for seats in the first-come sections. Making exceptions for small amounts of people is just shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic.

Crazy idea:
Most complaints seem to center around people having to sit "alone". Sitting "alone" in this case seems to mean sitting somewhere not surrounded by people you've been stuck working on a robot with 12 hours a day for the last 6 weeks. Instead you're surrounded by people who've been stuck working on a robot for 12 hours a day for the last 6 weeks.

Surely all of us FIRSTers have enough in common that we're never actually alone in the stands no matter who's sitting next to us. Maybe if more of us made a point of spreading out a bit more and getting a bit more comfortable with all the other similarly crazy people in the stands, there'd be less worry about having to reserve completely contiguous, uninterrupted blocks of 40+ seats.

In furtherance of this, I think I'll spend more time at my next regional actively sitting just a bit away from my team. Feel free to call me crazy now.

Okay, you're crazy, but you're my kind of crazy ;)

I love hanging out with other teams, you can get into some very fun discussions.

[Woolly]

Also, if you're involved with the control system (Programming, Electronics) I find that it's actually great if you sit away from your scouts and sit in those wide-out seats that no one uses behind your team's driver station.
You'll be able to see exactly what your drivers are trying to do with your control system in a real match, instead of in a relaxed practice match, and probably be able to know if anything needs to be changed before you even hear their report when they get back to the pits.

[Kevin Sevcik]

As open minded as this is, it's not a way to build and share team spirit, to share the highs and lows with the people you've worked with, love, and care about. To me, a FIRST event wouldn't be the same without this.

Whatever changes are made to seating in the future, having teams be able to sit together, at least while their robot is on the field, is of utmost importance.I'm not really advocating for everyone spreading out over the entire stadium. Just a relaxation of the requirement that the entire team has to all sit in one spot with no gaps whatsoever. Because everyone here knows that the only way that could happen is if everyone is assigned seats that have been mapped out in advance by the RD. If teams are more willing to co-mingle then thursday-friday-saturday morning becomes a lot easier because each team's footprint in the stands ebbs and flows as the matches come and go.

Also, if you're involved with the control system (Programming, Electronics) I find that it's actually great if you sit away from your scouts and sit in those wide-out seats that no one uses behind your team's driver station.
You'll be able to see exactly what your drivers are trying to do with your control system in a real match, instead of in a relaxed practice match, and probably be able to know if anything needs to be changed before you even hear their report when they get back to the pits.We should lobby for a programmer observation zone near the field so we can hover over the drivers and they can hear the hair tearing when they forget that they have speed trim knobs that are probably why they're consistently shooting low all match.

[Tom Line]

I have to admit, I'm probably a seat-saver's worst nightmare.

I run back and forth from the pits to the stands to watch our matches and then help in the pits. As a result, I never go all the way up to where our kids and mentors sit. At champs, I routinely walked up to a row of seats along the rim (the single row up against the railing), MOVED people's stuff from the seats, and sat in them. I got a couple 'how dare you' looks, but no one got up the courage to say something.

Sorry, but if there isn't a body it in, then it's there to be used for someone else. If someone came back to sit, I'd move immediately. So far - it's never happened. Not once.

I suspect the problem is that people are usually too passive to say something. Come in. Sit where you can. If you see a team hoarding 4 rows when they only appear to need two, then simply go and talk to them. If they claim they are saving, quote the rule, and ask gently if they will please move their things so other people can have room to sit.

At that point, there is nothing more that you can do. That is the gracious and professional path, even if it is the hard one where you may find some push back.

[Jon Stratis]

Disclaimer: The first and only time I actually sat in the stands this year was during Einstein matches (and my seats were way off to one side... I watched the matches more on the big screens than I did the actual field)

Here's a crazy thought...

Teams save a ton of seats because, at certain times (like opening, closing, and awards ceremonies) all of the team is in the stands. At all other times, those teams need way fewer seats.

So... why don't those larger teams clear out a section of "their" seats after opening ceremonies (you know, the ones for the people who go down to drive, work on the robot, give VIP tours, talk with other teams, etc), and invite smaller teams who may not have gotten great seats to join them? Show a little GP with those seats that stay empty though most of the matches! When it comes time for the awards ceremony, why can't everyone work together and shuffle over to let teams expand to include all of their members? Why does GP exist in the pits and on the field, but not in the stands? Lets get everyone to stand up before ceremonies and spread out a little... call it FIRST's version of the 7th inning stretch.

Something tells me people don't get all this upset because they have a bad angle to see the video of some politician saying how great our program is... They get upset because they want a better angle to view the matches.

[LucasM]

FIRST needs to either allow seats to be reserved or implement a better system.

I think this is a great idea. It would help mitigate the "land rush" situation when the doors open.

[MrTechCenter]

I think the GP card could go either way. Yeah your taking their seats that they are trying so hard to defend, but they are trying to save seats with almost no one there.

At SVR I talked to a rookie mentor from another team, and he mentioned to me how ungraciously professional he thought the pink team was for taking up half the stands in the center section of the stadium. "Their spirit people take up the same amount of room as the scouts from 20 other teams." he said. Its an interesting thought, 90% of their seats went to cheerers who loved to stand and block the view of people behind them, but they did get there first. I only mention the identity of this team because they ironically won the championship Gracious Professionalism award.

So it begs the question, what is more graciously professional? Is it, "we only need these higher quality seats for our scouts", or "they got their first so we should respect their right to take up as many seats as they can"?

The Pink Team, 233, won the Championship Spirit Award, not Gracious Professionalism. Not that they don't show any GP, I've talked with several of their members, including their cheerers and they are all gracious and professional.

[KevinShi3]

Another issue I saw with the seat saving rule was this year's opening ceremonies. In Archimedes a medium sized team left towels with their team icon to save their seats so that they could all watch the opening ceremonies together. Another medium sized team came over and began to take those seats while taking these towels off and placing them in the seats behind them. One poor student from that original team was left to argue with a whole team while their team was away. Since FIRST wasn't broadcasting the opening ceremonies to the other divisions what should this team have done?

They could either miss the opening ceremonies and sit their in their seats in order to "save seats with bodies" or go to opening ceremonies because this might be one of the last times some of the students there could ever see them. I feel like FIRST should have at least broadcast the opening ceremonies to the other divisions because to this day I can't seem to think of a solution to this dilemma.

[BL0X3R]

I believe one thing that may not completely solve the problem, but will greatly help, is to have the better seats reserved for the teams who are in the current match.

I don't know about everyone else's teams but 4488 tends to follow a pattern (I know, a pattern after one regional and one trip to worlds :rolleyes: ): the scouters are always there, and when one of the matches we participate on comes everyone but the drive team can be seen in the stands (if anyone in Curie saw us attempting to save seats this is why)

If we were given seats to use during our matches, our scouters would have gladly taken about seven seats and set up their station there, joined everyone during the matches, then gone back to their scouting area.

I saw this strategy in practice on Einstein, though slightly modified (I believe all the Division Champions were given the center rows) and it worked rather well for those teams, the only problem was that the other four divisions were all crowded into the left over space. If this were to be used for each division, you'd only have to reserve a quarter of that space, because it's for one match combination instead of four, and you'd have one division's worth of the other teams that want to watch the match in the other areas instead of the entirety of the championship participators.

The best part? Everyone will, at a variable number of points (this year it was eight) be able to watch their robot that they've worked so hard on compete. All of the teams there deserve this opportunity to watch their teams up close, not just the ones that got seats early and stayed there for the duration of the competition.

The few unsolved problems I know of are the awards and if a few very large teams are all in one match at the same time. We could use the seating method we use right now for the awards, but I'm sure we can come up with a better solution with time. As for the large teams problem, there are some solutions I currently have, though none of them quite work for me (the first is to have a really large reserved area, restricting the other teams not competing. The second is to expand the area when necessary and essentially temporarily kick people out of their seats, which I REALLY don't want to see happen)

I hope you'll all take this suggestion into consideration, refine it, find and fix issues with it, and mitigate or even solve the problems proposed with this system.

[Chi Meson]

Our team unfortunately tried to follow the rule and as a result we never got to sit fully together as a team.

When we had a game on the second match of one day, there were at least two teams in our division where 50+ seats were saved by 3 or 4 kids. The rest of the team were not even there when the matches started. No team in the second match. No team in the third match.

We managed to scrounge half a row of seat (up to the tape stretched across several rows by yet another team, who were, at least, mostly there--I got glares as I moved the tape down one seat so I could sit down). As the pit crew and mentors arrived for our match, there was nowhere near us for them to sit so...

They had to find the empty seats scattered among the other teams

Later in the day, our team managed, like an amoeba, to soak up various adjacent seats (our block looked like the state of Maryland [seriously, check it out on a map]), and after I gave up my seat for one of our students I stood in the aisle.

For about five minutes

looking at the team behind us who had four seats taken up by scouting boxes. Subtle hints were ignored. A direct question of "do all those boxes need to take up all those seats?" resulted in no effect.

So yeah, it's a problem. Everyone knows you're not supposed to, yet everyone does. The best teams do. Chairman Award Winning teams do.

If you are reading this, chances are your team does. And of course we have in the past (though we have never gotten any "good" seats because we don't send out the 3 kids an hour ahead).

Here's my solution:
Rule 1: One person in the stands gets to save 1 seat! If you need 50 seats, you better send at least 25 people into the stands to keep them.

2nd rule: a person in the stands gets seating precedence over any t-shirt, pom-pom, pennant, flag, number, or box. No argument.

[Koko Ed]

Unless FIRST gets directly involved and start penalizing teams for abusing the rule nothing will change.

[Mike Marandola]

If your average team needs ~10 people to scout, and there are 60 teams at a regional, what you end up with is 600 people redundantly recording what is mostly the same data.
If, somehow, everyone could agree on a scouting standard before they show up at the regional, you could have a representative from every team do all the scouting, and it could probably be uploaded to a neutral location on the web. Then, any fancy metrics/calculations that a team are doing just have to be set up to pull information from that neutral source.
Thus the need to sit in the bleachers and be together the whole event is alleviated for most teams.

Now, how do you get everyone to agree on a scouting standard? Well, for one the regional committee could hold a meeting 2 weeks before the event where everyone shares what data they need for scouting. It would not take much to hash out, as every year almost everyone's scouting sheets contain the same data.

That would be great idea also. We implemented something like this with team 20 at worlds and it worked out very well. I said scouting but the 6 seats could be used for any purpose.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Unless FIRST gets directly involved and start penalizing teams for abusing the rule nothing will change.The Lone Star RD has occasionally had to take the microphone and remind teams of the rule. And threaten to stop the regional cold if teams keep breaking it. It helps, but the reminders shouldn't be necessary.

[Jimmy Nichols]

Last year we had problems at QCR with seat saving. Teams left seat covers, banners, etc. in efforts to save their spots. We even had one team who had some members sign up to volunteer, they came in early with their volunteer credentials and went into the stands to save seats about 5 minutes before the venue opened. I personally watched with the FTA and RD as my team came down and was stopped by the person who instructed my students that the seats were saved. We had a talk with this team's lead mentor. Now our team hangs our banner, but not in an effort to save seats, if we don't sit in front of our banner, its ok with us. We just hang it to promote the team.

1114 and 610 (and 118 as well) did "do it right", and not only because they showed up early and had their entire team grab seats. They also, if they had any open seats, would allow spectators, such as myself and other members of my team, to sit among them.

This is exactly how we do it. We set our morning schedule so that we can all get their early enough to get the best seats as a group. Teams tend to stay where they park on Thursday for the remainder of the event, at least at Regionals.

I instruct ALL my students that seats may not be reserved...

This is priority one when we get to the regional on Wednesday night at our team meeting. I also instruct them not to get into a confrontation and if it does escalate to come tell me so I can relay to the Event Manager. I also let them know that anyone who comes to our "section" and tries to sit in an open see needs to be welcomed.

Teams that I have spoken to on this issue and stories I hear from other Event leads and Key Volunteers are the same. Teams claim that seat saving is allowed at Regional X or that's how they were taught to do by team Y. I hear the same story and it needs to change.

[Jimmy Nichols]

An announcement each morning during a regional could help prevent people from saving seats. I think that many people are not aware of the rule. Even people who are doing it with full knowledge of the rule may stop and think about it before saving seats.

-Mihir Iyer

At QCR we made this announcement several times.

[BrendanB]

I know at the Championship, PTR, and GSR they made several announcements about the seats rule but they made the announcements in the pits. Not really the best place to announce that.

[IndySam]

As visitors to QC I must say that we had no problem finding seats. First we came in an 48 invited us to have a seat in their section and during the finals we sat with 1741.

This is in direct contrast to last year at Midwest where we were denied seats by a couple of well known teams until finding a home with the great folks from 71.

[Jimmy Nichols]

As visitors to QC I must say that we had no problem finding seats. First we came in an 48 invited us to have a seat in their section and during the finals we sat with 1741.

This is in direct contrast to last year at Midwest where we were denied seats by a couple of well known teams until finding a home with the great folks from 71.

This year we didn't seem to have any problems. I know each morning when I surveyed the stands before the venue opened, there weren't any seat saving devices in play.

[Koko Ed]

The Lone Star RD has occasionally had to take the microphone and remind teams of the rule. And threaten to stop the regional cold if teams keep breaking it. It helps, but the reminders shouldn't be necessary.

As with the practice field, to many FIRST teams, when it comes to the need to seeing that your team's needs are met it's amazing how easily the creed of FIRST is so easily forgotten.

[BigJ]

I am a pit guy. The only time I am in the stands is usually for our matches and for opening/closing ceremonies. For most matches I even usually find the closest seats to the pits to see our autonomous mode so I can fix it or make suggestions to the kids.

I do know that the policy on 1675 is to spread out a little bit to have spaces for pit/chairman's/tour-guiding/etc people to sit for ceremonies at least. However if anyone is looking for a place to sit they are welcome to sit with us.

Even though I nag the kids they are still always bringing heavy coats/bags/etc that don't fit well with them in a stadium seat. Such is life in Wisconsin/Midwest during regional season.

This year we have been fortunate to kind of "partner up" with a friendly team through an alum who mentors our team such that seating is never really a problem except for the latest parts of the event, but in past years one problem I noticed was "encroachment". Teams spread out near us would spread out farther when our "edge" people would leave for lunch/pit/etc leaving us with not enough seats for elims/ceremonies. Heck, when we won an award at Midwest this year our team was split in 2 areas of the stands, it was a little awkward and not as exciting as shrieking with the whole team as the judge text was read.

I am with the poster suggesting "You better have half or more as many people as seats" as well as letting people looking for a seat sit wherever they want. Us brown-shirts are friendly, we don't bite. (Even if we are a little crazy).

[dubiousSwain]

Hey everyone, chronic seat saver here.

Our team has 11 students and 9 mentors. When we get to the events, there ends up being 4-5 people in the stands because the kids are working in the pits.
But when our team is up, *gasp*, our team needs 16 seats! If our 4-5 scouters don't save seats, our mentors and pit crew don't have anywhere to sit. We realize its against the rules, but we see no other way. If anyone has a solution, feel free to tell me.
Thank you

[robobuilder]

As a scout myself I have been guilty of saving seats. I realize it is frustrating to wake up at 5 to find a line of teams with 3-4 representatives trying to save seats. But they woke up even earlier than you did, while the rule the rule does say that saving seats for groups is not allowed (which my team respects) I think a possible solution is that a small group from a team should be able to acquire 'scouting passes' like media passes but instead of letting people onto the floor this would allow them into a reserved section with ideal viewing for scouting. The passes would have to be rotatable of course (not have names) but this would prevent 1 person trying to save 60 seats. Thoughts?

[Ryan Caldwell]

I was told by a concerned mother that i was sitting in a saved seat when i was at the front edge of what was easily 50 empty seats taped off.
After explaining that the manual has a rule against saving seats and getting the oh so classic response of everyone else is doing it. I told her that she might be in the wrong place as FIRST isn't well known for creating mindless sheep. Now i'm a self admitted smartass and was pleased with the banter but I did feel a little bad after she came down to continue the argument and all I did was "Bah" at her like a sheep while watching the remainder of my teams match...

Cheers! and remember "if ya can't convince them confuse them" - HS Truman

[MrForbes]

As far as I know, our team never sat together as a team at Championships this year. I was busy running back and forth watching matches and playing with the robot in the pits, but I never had a problem finding a seat to watch matches (usually sitting with 842, 610 or 118 on Galileo).

I also noticed the many announcements in the pit about "no saving seats", but never heard that announcement in the stands, which is where the folks who need to hear it are sitting.

[Carolyn_Grace]

A simple, "We're trying to have enough space for our drivers and pit crew to sit during our matches, but you're absolutely welcome to sit with us. You'll be surrounded by people cheering like crazy and wearing [color of your team shirts]," seems to work quite well.

Saying something with a smile in good-nature generally tends to help any situation.

[MamaSpoldi]

Aside from literally ticketing seats, does anyone have observations or best practices from other events that involve "first come, first serve" seating? Not sure what kind of events those might be, but I think we need something better than what we have. At the same time I think it's vital that the ability for teams to sit and cheer together be maintained.

At the Granite State Regional, they had a decent sized section front and center that was set aside for the teams in the current match. I didn't find out about it until Saturday, but it seems like a good idea. Maybe the whole team (for large teams) would not fit there but at least each team could have a representation in that excellent viewing area. This idea could, for example, solve issues with those coming up from the pits to watch their team's match... and therefore seats for them would not need to be saved in the rest of the stands. Has any other regional tried this?


I also like the idea of a reserved section for scouters from each team (although 10 per team sounds excessive since there are only 6 robots on the field at a time). The issue I don't have a solution for with this is that there are 100 teams in a division at Champs which would result in 600 seats being reserved front (actually middle to back of lowest section is actually a better view for scouting) and center. If there are teams who are not using these seats then those prime seats are wasted. Maybe a registration of the number of scouting seats that you need (up to a maximum of 6-7) would work. Then seats would not be wasted.

[Mykey]

I am sure that the majority of the people involved in First have both the knowledge of, and the ability to understand, the "do not save seats" rule. It is announced continually over the PA's, written in the rule book, posted online, and as I have heard through the many stories people are telling it directly to each other.

I understand wanting to stay together as a group. However, this is one of the times when plain old logistics force us to take a more gracious approach to a situation.

I personally would be straight up embarrassed to be sitting in a seat that had a sign on it stating "VIP Reserved" while someone was announcing that saving seats is against the rules. I am not making up the sign. We saw it at regionals.

Saving seats says "you are important" to the person it is being saved for. What message do you think everyone else is getting from you?

[Pendulum^-1]

Overall I believe most people’s championship experience was a positive one but there is one issue that we still need to fix as a community. Saving Seats!

So very glad that someone (besides me) started this thread, and that so many people echoed concern about the problem. As the pit crew leader on a small team that does not practice reserved seating, I could write a huge wall of text about my experiences over the last several years. But I'd rather just focus on a proposed solution.

Proposed solution:
:cool:
Event organizers would designate a two cheering sections, one for each alliance. These cheering sections would be comprised of 60-100 seats each, and would be among the very best seats in the house. Comparable to those reserved for the VIPs. (It could even be to the left and right of the VIP section.) The teams for each alliance in each match would self-organize alliance cheering squads to fill the seats. When their match ends, both entire cheering sections would vacate immediately, and the cheering squads for the alliances in the next match would fill the Red and Blue cheering sections. This cycle would continue all tournament long.

Notes:
1) It should not be much of an issue, time-wise, for people to migrate into/out of the cheering sections. Field resets take more than 5 minutes, and it takes less time than that for teams to file from the higher levels of the arena to the field and back to get their awards.

2) The energy levels in preliminaries would go up dramatically. WIth reps from three teams sitting in each alliance cheering section, and sitting near the field, these sections would be loud, indeed.

3) Students, aside from just the drive teams, would get to know and visit with their counterparts on other teams. Networking opportunities would go up A LOT.

4) Any solution would have to impose minimal requirements on the event staff. The teams themselves should be able to police this themselves, especially after a few rounds, and teams start to understand the concept better.

5) My number of 60-100 is entirely flexible. The community can figure it out over the course of several events, and come to a suitable number. I only suggest that entire rows of a section be designated, in order to facilitate entry/exit.

6) This should take some of the pressure off of teams to reserve huge sections of stands. Sure, some large tracts will still be reserved, but the situation won't be quite as contentious, as it is during the mundane qualification matches on Friday and Saturday am, when multiple rows of prime seating are laying fallow for hours, just waiting for their big team to occupy the seats during the elimination matches on Saturday afternoon.

7) It is critical that these sections be among the best seats in the house. If not, they won't be used as intended.

[Duncan Macdonald]

A simple, "We're trying to have enough space for our drivers and pit crew to sit during our matches, but you're absolutely welcome to sit with us. You'll be surrounded by people cheering like crazy and wearing [color of your team shirts]," seems to work quite well.

Saying something with a smile in good-nature generally tends to help any situation.

Shouldn't your drivers be elsewhere?


...
FIRST isn't well known for creating mindless sheep.
...
I'd be willing to discuss this in another thread.

[Koko Ed]

The best way to get people to curb bad behavior is to hit them where it hurts.
Teams come to the competition to win awards and I bet they wouldn't act they way they do if there was a judge nearby but the judges have better things to do than babysit unruly teams.
Here's a viable solution: A few years ago at IRI they instituted a Stealth Judge (Andy Baker's brother) who hung out in the stands to see how teams behave (because most teams can the Junkyard Dog act when they see someone in a open collard blue shirt and play nice til they go away). After they go away all bets are off! If they have no idea that they are being scrutinized by an undercover judge who gets to see their bad behavior in full effect they can then inform that team that they will not be receiving any awards this weekend. I bet that'll curb their nasty attitude very quickly and hopefully for the future as well.

[Duncan Macdonald]

The best way to get people to curb bad behavior is to hit them where it hurts.
Teams come to the competition to win awards and I bet they wouldn't act they way they do if there was a judge nearby but the judges have better things to do than babysit unruly teams.
Here's a viable solution: A few years ago at IRI they instituted a Stealth Judge (Andy Baker's brother) who hung out in the stands to see how teams behave (because most teams can the Junkyard Dog act when they see someone in a open collard blue shirt and play nice til they go away. After they go away all bets are off! If they have no idea that they are being scrutinized by an undercover judge who gets to see their bad behavior in full effect they can then inform that team that they will not be receiving any awards this weekend. I bet that'll curb their nasty attitude very quickly and hopefully for the future as well.

Yeah recognition is nice, but are we are trying to teach our kids the reason to do anything is for the awards? (This is my main issue with some teams chairmans or safety motivation already)

The implementation of this would need to be painfully blunt for most teams to understand why they weren't ever winning anything. "This award would have gone to WXYZ but they are jerks so we are giving it to ZYXW" and that would really make ZYXW feel great about themselves too.

[ASmith1675]

I've been a member of the pit crew since I first joined a team. Lately, its gotten to a point where its not worth the effort to try to procure a seat with the team to watch the match live. I know a few of our other pit members felt the same way this year.

To be honest, I'd be perfectly happy with watching a proper full field stream video of the match from the pits. The pit streams at the regionals we attended this year were decent enough to get an idea what was happening in the match, but usually cut away as soon as you really wanted to see what your robot was doing. I'm willing to bet there are other pit crews out there that would just as soon watch from the pits so that they can be ready when the robot comes back. (This is particularly frustrating at champs where the walk from the stands to the pit is ~15mins depending on your field, and there is no video anywhere in the pit area)

Having this option available might help cut down on some of the back and forth traffic between the pits and the stands that some are saving seats for. Obviously, this would not be a full solution, but every little bit helps.

[MechEng83]

Lately, its gotten to a point where its not worth the effort to try to procure a seat with the team to watch the match live.

A few programming pit crew members set up a smart phone to stream the match at Champs, considering we were in Newton. It worked fairly well from what I understand.

[Racer26]

Yeah recognition is nice, but are we are trying to teach our kids the reason to do anything is for the awards? (This is my main issue with some teams chairmans or safety motivation already)


Yep. Totally my beef with the Safety award. All it really seems to promote is safety theater, which helps nothing, and arguably hurts by creating a false sense of security.

[Maldridge422]

At the Minnesota Regionals the first few rows of the center section of seats were reserved for teams. Each team got two seats for scouting, the team number was placed on each seat which was nice. It gave every team an opportunity to use the two seats to scout, record matches or even just sit and watch matches. It was nice because each team knew that they had these two seats and didn't have to worry about saving the seats. I know most teams need more than two scouters but I think it helped at our regionals.

I also like the idea of a reserved section for scouters from each team (although 10 per team sounds excessive since there are only 6 robots on the field at a time). The issue I don't have a solution for with this is that there are 100 teams in a division at Champs which would result in 600 seats being reserved front (actually middle to back of lowest section is actually a better view for scouting) and center. If there are teams who are not using these seats then those prime seats are wasted. Maybe a registration of the number of scouting seats that you need (up to a maximum of 6-7) would work. Then seats would not be wasted.

I think 2-3 seats for scouters would be very useful. It would cut down on the amount of scouting materials in the rest of the stands while only blocking off a relatively small area. Additionally, it would encourage collaborative scouting and data collection OR more innovate scouting practices. The rest of the stands would, ideally, be free of non-human objects and reserved sections.

[BrendanB]

Creating more team sections in the stands does NOT solve the problem. Designated sections for cheering are nice, but what do those teams do once their match is done? They go right back to their seats so in effect by creating these "sections" we are taking up even more seats which doesn't solve the problem.


Same thing with scouting. Some operations take 2 people, others take 8+, and some teams don't even scout.

I personally think if we are going to have sections they should be for the public/non-team members so the public can come in a feel welcomed not shuttle/pushed off to the worst seats at the arena.

[efoote868]

I'd like FIRST to create a lottery. Then assign seating as follows:

The best section of seating is reserved for VIP, such as parents with children under 10, those that aren't affiliated with a team (yet), corporate sponsors etc.

The next section of seating is divided up into blocks of 6 seats. Each day at competition, teams are randomly assigned a block of seating along with their 6 passes. Teams are then left to decided how they use their 6 seats, however they see fit. If they want the people in the pits to have them that's fine; if they want their scouts to use them that's also fine.

The last section of seating will either be randomly assigned in blocks of 25, or free for all seating depending on the venue. This sort of system should cut down on "we're saving this seat for xyz," because if xyz is that important, they'll get one of the better reserved seats.

[jvriezen]

I personally think if we are going to have sections they should be for the public/non-team members so the public can come in a feel welcomed not shuttle/pushed off to the worst seats at the arena.

I agree that this touches on the worst issue of seating. Lunch time on Saturday is where you see the worst of this. The majority of a a team is out eating lunch (esp. if they are not in elims) and a few team members (or those returning early) try to hold all the seats.

Now here come the public that have never seen an FRC match before. They are confronted with what appears to be lots of empty seats with coats spread out, people telling them this is reserved, so if they stay, they end up in the cheap seats. There is no need for scouting on Saturday afternoon, and FIRST is about spreading the message and inspiring others so why not honor the public with the best seats?

What if FIRST made it a practice to reserve excellent seating for the general public starting shortly after Alliance selection? Some of the public will have team connections and may wish to sit near their teams, others just read the local paper and saw there was a free robotics competition and have no team affiliation. I'm not sure how many unaffiliated public folks typically show up at a regional, I'm sure that varies widely based on many factors. -- They may not need more than 200 seats or so, and teams wouldn't be pushed back very far.

[Jon Stratis]

I agree that this touches on the worst issue of seating. Lunch time on Saturday is where you see the worst of this. The majority of a a team is out eating lunch (esp. if they are not in elims) and a few team members (or those returning early) try to hold all the seats.

Now here come the public that have never seen an FRC match before. They are confronted with what appears to be lots of empty seats with coats spread out, people telling them this is reserved, so if they stay, they end up in the cheap seats. There is no need for scouting on Saturday afternoon, and FIRST is about spreading the message and inspiring others so why not honor the public with the best seats?

What if FIRST made it a practice to reserve excellent seating for the general public starting shortly after Alliance selection? Some of the public will have team connections and may wish to sit near their teams, others just read the local paper and saw there was a free robotics competition and have no team affiliation. I'm not sure how many unaffiliated public folks typically show up at a regional, I'm sure that varies widely based on many factors. -- They may not need more than 200 seats or so, and teams wouldn't be pushed back very far.

I think this is a great idea! At champs this year, they reserved an entire section for volunteers right at half field on Einstein, which was a great move. Many of the volunteers spend their entire time in the pits working with teams, and the only matches they ever see are Einstein. Now we just need to do something similar for people with no team affiliation...

[Pendulum^-1]

Creating more team sections in the stands does NOT solve the problem. Designated sections for cheering are nice, but what do those teams do once their match is done? They go right back to their seats so in effect by creating these "sections" we are taking up even more seats which doesn't solve the problem.

After a team's match is over, they can go where ever they want to go. As most of my team spends nearly all of our time in the pit area, either working on our robot or talking to other pit crews, we would not occupy other seats in the arena. One of the prime benefits for ALL teams is to have a decent seat to go to when your team is on the field.

The purpose of the cheering section would be to make optimal use of prime seats for Friday and Saturday AM. I challenge the concept that the optimal use of prime seating on Friday and Saturday AM is to act as a laundry repository for large teams with the resources and/or perceived requirement to reserve vast tracts of prime real estate for the Saturday eliminations and/or Friday evening awards.

I agree that something should also be done to help out the general public. As the situation stands right now, whenever I do invite friends to the event, I feel obliged (and somewhat embarassed) to explain the seating situation in advance. Needless to say, it probably discourages some from attending.

[Mr.Smoky15]

Honestly, I think they should have a quick segment at kickoff about this, so no team can play a "but we didn't know" card, and then it should be the responsibility of the parents and mentors to keep students busy at competition and out of the stands, so that interested parents or sponsors can actually see the field.
This was far less an issue at the St. Louis Regional, as we have enough space for all the teams. It could be better, but Championship was terrible.

[Moon2020]

I think this is a great idea! At champs this year, they reserved an entire section for volunteers right at half field on Einstein, which was a great move. Many of the volunteers spend their entire time in the pits working with teams, and the only matches they ever see are Einstein. Now we just need to do something similar for people with no team affiliation...

I am one of the Volunteers who doesn't get to watch a match until Einstein. There were members of the public sitting with us in section 127.
It is not a new concept; I remember a section being reserved for Volunteers/VIPs in Atlanta also.

[Orion.DeYoe]

So I think the big issue here is that teams want all of there members to sit together in one area for the entirety of the competition.
Several people suggested (and they repeated this over and over and over again at championships) that you move in for your match and then leave afterwards.
But here's the issue: I don't know how many people you bring to your competitions but we bring our whole team. And I haven't seen any team bring only a pit crew and drive team (who are the people that can leave after their match). We also don't want our entire team wandering around the event between matches.
However we are a small team (~20 people plus a few family and friends that tag along at the events) so when you suggest that we separate 6 people or so to a separate section for scouting that's almost/more than half of the people that we have sitting in the stands at one time. Now I am down in the pit or on the field for the competition and I'm constantly back and forth from the pits to the stands (getting scouting information, swapping out people in the pits, getting my lunch, etc.) and if there isn't a designated area where I can find my team at all times then that just adds stress to an already stressful situation.
So as I said before: the issue here is that teams want all their members to sit together for the entirety of the competition.
I'm certainly not going to settle for anything less than that.

Okay so now that I've bored you all with my irritation that FIRST doesn't allow the saving of seats I will present my solution.
I think that FIRST should reserve parts of the stands for certain teams. FIRST has access to how many people are on your team (also, registering how many people will be with you at the competition could be a part of registering up for an event) so they could easily decide how many seats your team will need. They can also reserve several decently sized sections for spectators who are not affiliated with a team. The sad truth is that there are very few people who watch events who are not affiliated with a team in some way so this system wouldn't inconvenience anyone not with a team.
Also if they want to reserve a section (with a very good view of the field) for scouters then they can do that as well.
So that's my opinion.

[faust1706]

It's ok, not polite, to save seats at smaller regionals. In 2011 at the st louis regional, there were under 30 teams, and the venue has held 45+ teams the past two years. So it was roomy :D but at internationals, 100 teams in a space that holds maybe 60 at most. I understand if your team has 30-40 members while others have <20, but that still doesnt give you a right to reserve entire sections....

[GeorgeM]

Oh come on guys, does this really need to be addressed?

Why not have your FULL team arrive earlier than the seat takers and sit in the seats that you want? Or why not hold your ground when someone tells you that this seat is reserved? Yes, you may get into an argument - but it is clearly stated in the rules that seats are not allowed to be saved. They can choose to sit in between the full team if they'd like, but generally people don't like doing that. I've been on both sides of the argument enough times to realize that the "reserver" eventually loses.

The problem with trying to change the culture of saving seats is that more teams with more students will show up earlier and try to race into the building, creating an even bigger "Black Friday Sale" scenario, which is apparently the exact opposite of what you want.

Another thing that adds to the problem is that teams can choose to sit in the "reserved" seats, but - like the "reservers" - want to sit together as a team. What this means is that if people are mad that teams are saving seats in sections, it's because it doesn't let their team sit in a section. That's some backwards logic.

Additionally it's the kids that "lose" the race that make such a big fuss about the teams that win it. In most cases, teams only send a skeleton crew to get seats - which means that the ones who lose have no right in being mad that other teams got their first. If their teams gets there before the "reservers" team gets there - then by all means, take the reserved seats! What's stopped people from doing that? Oh, right, their team doesn't get there before the "reservers" team...

What's another 30 minutes (at a regional) in the scheme of things? Kids spend longer than that on their hair...or dressing up in bad costumes...What's the problem with taking a quick nap in the stands before ceremonies start? What do the teams that get the best seats do? Send an early crew to stand at the front of the line, then send the rest of the team earlier to join them. 1114, 2056, 254, 148, and more ALL DO THIS - You want to be the best? Do as they do.

This problem stems from laziness and lack of courage to stand up to someone who is breaking the rules. The arguments are usually very passive aggressive, and even when there is a disagreement both sides see it differently. (I've been the victim of an alleged debacle with an older woman for being in "my section". The lady further went on to contact my team and tell them how unimpressed she was of my behavior. Although not true it taught me a few things - namely that there are two sides to every story.)

Moral of the Story: If you're unhappy about something, change it. Send the full team earlier...

[Kevin Leonard]

The end goal for the CrowdScout system is just that: Get every team at a regional involved. Now making it a requirement might be a bit harder :rolleyes:


The thing with this system is that not every team wants to scouts, cares to scout, or thinks they need to scout. Scouting is a lot of work. While I do think that cooperative scouting can be great (as evidenced by Team 20's collab scouting at our regionals and at champs), I don't know if every team should be involved.

If every team has the same scouting data, everyone knows who the best robots to pick are, and it gets rid of the competitive edge you get by scouting.

And not every team is looking for that competitive edge.

I think scouting collaboratively is a good thing, but sharing the information with everyone removes the "profit" incentive from the equation that is the edge meant to allow your team to perform better than others in elimination rounds.

These are just my thoughts- not necessarily all of Team 20's, just mine.
Take them for what they are.

[MisterJ]

Most every other sporting event in America has assigned seats on your ticket. Seems fairly simple to implement with a few volunteer "ushers". In order to accommodate others, there could be a large "bleacher" section for "general admission" towards the back or sides. (Lawn seating, anyone?)

[CENTURION]

The thing with this system is that not every team wants to scouts, cares to scout, or thinks they need to scout. Scouting is a lot of work. While I do think that cooperative scouting can be great (as evidenced by Team 20's collab scouting at our regionals and at champs), I don't know if every team should be involved.

If every team has the same scouting data, everyone knows who the best robots to pick are, and it gets rid of the competitive edge you get by scouting.

And not every team is looking for that competitive edge.

I think scouting collaboratively is a good thing, but sharing the information with everyone removes the "profit" incentive from the equation that is the edge meant to allow your team to perform better than others in elimination rounds.

These are just my thoughts- not necessarily all of Team 20's, just mine.
Take them for what they are.

Those are certainly some fair points. And we also realize that getting every single team at a regional to collaborate is next to impossible, plenty of teams are going to prefer their own scouting system.

About teams not wanting to scout though: That's the main purpose of CrowdScout, to distribute workload. At the WI regional, the total cumulative man-hours spent scouting is about 64,125 (And that's assuming that there are 10 teams who don't bother to scout) Every team that scouts spends roughly 1282 man-hours per regional on scouting. That's a heck of a lot of redundant work.

Even with only one or two teams on board, the scouting burden on those teams goes down drastically. Suddenly, you only need three scouters, or two, or even just one per team.

[MrJohnston]

Some thoughts:

* Seating was a major issue at Nationals for all the reasons previously outlined. It is crazy that somebody can camp out all weekend in a "prime" viewing location, watching every single match from an ideal vantage, when some kids completely miss some of their team's matches - simply because they did not bully (yes, bully) their way to the ideal seats... Something really should be done.

* Collaborative scouting: With a large team, we are always looking for jobs for all our kids to do. Moreover, we have created a couple of formal leadership positions around scouting. We'd rather do most of our work internally so as to allow our students to do this.

* Seats reserved for teh public: Definitely.

Two possible solutions:
* Assign seats. However, assign the same set of seats to two different teams, only giving them enough for one team. Let the two teams work it out such that everybody can watch their teams matches. Coordinating with a "partner" team is much easier than with various other teams.

* We already have five fields set up for play. There should be room for a sixth (allowing for more qualificaiton matches)... However, instead of designating one field as teh "Newton" field, simply number them 1-6. Teams would have scheduled matches on all six fields. This way, teams would not be reasonably able to camp out at one spot all weekend. This would naturally create enough movement in the stands that there woudl always be open seats for gropus of people.


Finally, the ferocity with which folks will "save" seats is really upsetting. My most frustrating moment came at the Seattle regional. Our team was hosting 100 4th graders for about two hours on Friday - about one hour of which was to be in the stands watching the competition. We were given leave (by the tournament directors) to hold on to about 150 seats for that one hour so that some of our students coudl sit with the younger kids. As other teams came to sit in that area, we spoke with them about it and simply asked that they allow the smaller kids sit in that area during the one hour they would be present. They moved in and, when the time came, most refused to allow the small kids somewhere to sit. Those who refused were a variety of mentors, FRC teams and families. They even refused to give up empty seats. Worse, the fire marshall was already upset at the number of folks standing in the aisles and was kicking folks out of the stands who could not find seats. It was brutal having to talke 10-year-olds out of the stands and try to find them somewhere to stand alongside the field in a near mosh-pit. The $@#$@#$@#$@# thing about it, is that one team told me that they were trying to win the spirit award and if they were not together cheering, the judges would not know how much spirit they had.

Seeing similar struggles at Nationals and reading justifcations here, I am convinced that a few rules and announcements is not going to change this aspect of our culture. Either we are all going to have to pay more and have much larger venues so that there is never a shortage of seats, or we are all going to have to bring the change to our teams.

[Citrus Dad]

Oh come on guys, does this really need to be addressed?

Why not have your FULL team arrive earlier than the seat takers and sit in the seats that you want? Or why not hold your ground when someone tells you that this seat is reserved?
Moral of the Story: If you're unhappy about something, change it. Send the full team earlier...

Sorry, but that's not the solution. We have a problem of "tragedy of the commons" or "the rule of capture". Both are recognized by economists as a systemic failure that creates significant problems that must be addressed. Requiring early arrival, posting guards, etc. are all resource drains during a competition that is already grueling, especially for smaller teams or teams without the resources to bring their full team. Why do we want to drive off smaller, less wealthy teams? The point of FIRST is to spread the message about the importance of STEM education and the role of robotics competition in enhancing that.

A better solution is to 1) consider seat allocation formulas--as suggested elsewhere, FIRST knows how many are registered 2) distinguish seating between those that are necessary for team functioning, i.e., scouting and those that are not i.e., spirit. The latter group should be placed in the upper tiers to open up seating for 1) scouts and 2) the public on the last day. In addition, FIRST might consider moving the non-qualified teams into the upper seats during the elimination rounds.

This year, we were squeezed between two teams in the spirit competition for a day, and it made our scouting more difficult. The next day was better, but two other large teams still spilled into our small area. Let's try to make this more pleasant and not a battle for seating space every day.

One other note--some of us are still preparing to support our team after the competition day is over. I went to bed well after midnight both nights working on scouting and strategy. Requiring me and others working with me to get there by 7 am just to save a seat fails to recognize the importance of contributions being made by all team members.

[Citrus Dad]

The $@#$@#$@#$@# thing about it, is that one team told me that they were trying to win the spirit award and if they were not together cheering, the judges would not know how much spirit they had.

I agree with MrJohnston's points, especially about the ABSOLUTE need to accommodate younger students at the arena.

If this is what it takes to win the spirit award, then FIRST needs to change the spirit award. This attitude is totally counterproductive.

[Siri]

The $@#$@#$@#$@# thing about it, is that one team told me that they were trying to win the spirit award and if they were not together cheering, the judges would not know how much spirit they had.It sounds like FIRST needs to redefine the spirit award to emphasize mingling with other teams and/or point out that teams who share seats and accommodate the public will have at least as strong a shot (if not much better).

I overheard more than a few aggressive confrontations outside the doors of Worlds when people tried to "cut" in line. It's reaching a level of self-centeredness that is really very difficult to hear. As a side note, some of the push may be relieved if the pits had a separate entrance.)Open the back doors and station all the Green Shirts there instead of at the hall entrance, and don't allow anyone to exit the pits for the stands for maybe 30min to avoid cutting.) There aren't anywhere near as many pit people waiting as stands guys, but it would still diminish the crush somewhat and would really make traffic flow at the stairs safer--no cross traffic.


I like the ideas on FIRST distributing seats, particularly requiring teams to partner with each other. Here's a comprehensive straw man proposal that incorporates a lot of what has been said:
1. When you register on TIMS, you indicate how many Prime Seat armbands (max can depend on the venue, maybe 3-6) your team would like. A certain number would be guaranteed and the rest would go via lottery. Enough would be reserved for VIPs, the public, tour groups, etc. This does require a TIMS update and several more volunteers.
3. You also indicate how many Standard Seats you want in say 3 groups (you could request #1=30, #2=20, #3=0, or 5/5/5, or 80/0/0, whatever). Depending on availability, these are assigned by lottery and may overlap with another team's requiring cooperation. Again, enforcement is a consideration. Perhaps undercover judges would be enough, though.
4. During elims, all Prime Seats are opened to VIPs and the general public, with the next best seats being divided amongst the 8 alliances.

[Bob Steele]

Having read through this entire thread... I have decided on a new approach for our team...

Next year we will have several students whose specific duties will be to help people find seats... Student Seating Ambassadors or something...

They will be stationed at critical points and will help people coming in to find seats.... We will have to train them.... help grandparents to find their kids teams... answer questions... etc...etc...They will NOT be SEAT POLICE but rather will act by example to help achieve a solution to the problem..
Our students/team members will also be instructed to make space for people coming in...ALL people...

So many people come wandering in and the last thing we want to happen is for them to get turned off... they don't know where to sit anyway...
Why not usher them to a team to "host" them and let them know what is going on? If approached in this way, any team should be willing to let them sit with them...

In this way, a team can talk about FIRST ... explain the game...
and help gain new friends for FIRST.... gain new supporters for their progam.

We are going to try this next year... and see if we can get more teams to do it... ASK people to sit with them.... make them part of the "family"

This could be a start....

Let me give you an example... we were at the Spokane event this year..a couple came up to us and students and mentors in our group talked to them about FIRST. It turned out that this couple was house-sitting in Spokane and were actually from our home area... They had sort of stumbled into the event and we talked like we always do..We like to talk about how FIRST has changed the culture in our school...

The other day I received a check in the mail from them... they wanted to let us know that they want to support the team...they liked what FIRST was doing......totally unsolicited... we weren't fundraising we were just talking (enthusiastically) about what FIRST meant to our team...

Just saying...

[Koko Ed]

Having read through this entire thread... I have decided on a new approach for our team...

Next year we will have several students whose specific duties will be to help people find seats... Student Seating Ambassadors or something...

They will be stationed at critical points and will help people coming in to find seats.... We will have to train them.... help grandparents to find their kids teams... answer questions... etc...etc...They will NOT be SEAT POLICE but rather will act by example to help achieve a solution to the problem..
Our students/team members will also be instructed to make space for people coming in...ALL people...

So many people come wandering in and the last thing we want to happen is for them to get turned off... they don't know where to sit anyway...
Why not usher them to a team to "host" them and let them know what is going on? If approached in this way, any team should be willing to let them sit with them...

In this way, a team can talk about FIRST ... explain the game...
and help gain new friends for FIRST.... gain new supporters for their progam.

We are going to try this next year... and see if we can get more teams to do it... ASK people to sit with them.... make them part of the "family"

This could be a start....

Let me give you an example... we were at the Spokane event this year..a couple came up to us and students and mentors in our group talked to them about FIRST. It turned out that this couple was house-sitting in Spokane and were actually from our home area... They had sort of stumbled into the event and we talked like we always do..We like to talk about how FIRST has changed the culture in our school...

The other day I received a check in the mail from them... they wanted to let us know that they want to support the team...they liked what FIRST was doing......totally unsolicited... we weren't fundraising we were just talking (enthusiastically) about what FIRST meant to our team...

Just saying...
I never understood why teams want to drive away potential recruits to the cause. I know of nothing that sells FIRST better than a competition and when you see people who aren't involved in FIRST at the event and looking to engage us the dumbest and most selfish thing to do is to drive them away because you want your whole team to sit together. Let them sit with you and assimilate them. FIRST is contagious and resistance is futile.

[Aidan S.]

Sorry, but that's not the solution. We have a problem of "tragedy of the commons" or "the rule of capture". Both are recognized by economists as a systemic failure that creates significant problems that must be addressed. Requiring early arrival, posting guards, etc. are all resource drains during a competition that is already grueling, especially for smaller teams or teams without the resources to bring their full team. Why do we want to drive off smaller, less wealthy teams? The point of FIRST is to spread the message about the importance of STEM education and the role of robotics competition in enhancing that.

A better solution is to 1) consider seat allocation formulas--as suggested elsewhere, FIRST knows how many are registered 2) distinguish seating between those that are necessary for team functioning, i.e., scouting and those that are not i.e., spirit. The latter group should be placed in the upper tiers to open up seating for 1) scouts and 2) the public on the last day. In addition, FIRST might consider moving the non-qualified teams into the upper seats during the elimination rounds.

This year, we were squeezed between two teams in the spirit competition for a day, and it made our scouting more difficult. The next day was better, but two other large teams still spilled into our small area. Let's try to make this more pleasant and not a battle for seating space every day.

One other note--some of us are still preparing to support our team after the competition day is over. I went to bed well after midnight both nights working on scouting and strategy. Requiring me and others working with me to get there by 7 am just to save a seat fails to recognize the importance of contributions being made by all team members.



I don't think it would be feasible to employ a lottery system to allocate seats, simply on the fact that a team's needs differ so greatly at a competition. These points have been brought up previously in the thread, but I wish to re-iterate them. Some teams bring 10 people to an event, some bring more than 100. How can we equally divide up seats when teams do not have equal needs?

In general, teams don't want to be split up at an event, hence the rush to grab seats at the beginning of the day. But I think most teams are successful in adhering to the rules that FIRST outlines for seating allocation. When we send a crew of students early to sit in the section we would like, we never stop other individuals form sitting there alongside us, rather we welcome them to join us. The main issue here is people not understanding the policy that FIRST has outlined.

The race for seats in the morning has become an aspect of the competition. On the final day of champs, I arose at 5am, after going to sleep the night before past midnight, to take a group of students to get in line at the front doors. We were one of the first teams in line at the doors when they opened. Our early crew of students is actually excited to get to the event before anyone else, and takes great pride when we are the first team there. Now, when the doors open, we calmly go to sit in the section we want, but by that point, the rest of the team has also arrived, albeit further down the line, and within a few short minutes, our entire group is sitting together, ready to take on another day of competition. The competition starts when the doors to the venue open, not when opening ceremonies start or the first match is played. In St. Louis, the doors opened at 7am, so that's when the entire team arrived.

Allocating an area for scouting is unfeasible simply because of the diversity of how teams scout. Some teams take 20+ students to scout an event, some take 2, some take none. Some scout by watching matches, some talk to teams in the pit, some do both. Since the amount and type of scouting a team does is so dependent on the team itself, I doubt that there is an accurate way to allocate the correct amount of seats at an event to accommodate everyone. At some events, 100 seats will be far too much, and at others, 100 seats won't accommodate more than 5 teams.

You bring up the topic of spirit as a non-necessity of team function. I am going to have to disagree with you on this point. I can only speak for experience from my own team, but for us, there is no distinction between spirit and scouting (or any other division for that matter). On the contrary, our scouts are probably the loudest supporters of our team when they are on the field. Our students take great pride in cheering on our drivers when they are in the midst of a match, and telling individuals sitting in a dedicated "scouting section" that they can't cheer on their team because it is distracting to the other scouts will only result in two outcomes: either the scouts will continue to cheer as they did before, ignoring the new rule, or they will simply choose not to sit in the "scouting section" and join the rest of their team.

Now, I do agree that there needs to be a solution for seating for the general public. I think that this can be achieved by roping off a section of seats for people who are unaffiliated with teams and just want to take in the action. It's generally pretty easy to tell who is on a team and who is a spectator, and this would be easy to enforce.

In short, I believe that we shouldn't allocate everyone the same seating space at events, because, since our needs as teams are so diverse, there is no way to make everyone happy with this type of system. The system we have now works, as long as everyone clearly understands what the rules are.

[Ryan Dognaux]

What it's like to try to find a seat at some FRC events: http://youtu.be/nKubwgJK8q8

But really, it's as easy as citing the manual and just sitting down in the seat. Ignore the people yelling at you about how they're trying to save three seats for every one person on their team and they'll go away. FIRST come, FIRST serve :rolleyes:

[IKE]

What if they did a silent auction for getting position in line? Highest bid gets first spot in line, and so on... Doors open at 7 for highest bidder. That team is given a 10 second head-start before the next highest bidder gets to go.

Bids must be submitted by the night before via a certified cashiers check. All procedes are divided to the Dean's List finalist scholarship (or other charity). If teams do not submit a bid, then they are in with general admission that starts after the final bidding team.

This would put a real tangible value on how much teams want good seats other than waking up at 3 AM to stand in front of a door that will open at 7am... Or... (think black friday madness).

[Alan Anderson]

...Nationals...

What is it going to take to get people to stop calling it that? It's almost as irritating as hearing Will.I.Am constantly refer to "US FIRST" (sure, that's an acronym for the official name of the organization -- the United States Foundation for Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology -- but the de facto name is just FIRST).

The $@#$@#$@#$@# thing about it, is that one team told me that they were trying to win the spirit award and if they were not together cheering, the judges would not know how much spirit they had.

"The Team Spirit Award celebrates extraordinary enthusiasm and spirit through exceptional partnership and teamwork furthering the objectives of FIRST." It really isn't about standing together as a single team and cheering.

[bduddy]

"The Team Spirit Award celebrates extraordinary enthusiasm and spirit through exceptional partnership and teamwork furthering the objectives of FIRST." It really isn't about standing together as a single team and cheering.There's a widespread interpretation (including, apparently, among some judges) that it is, though. Although by some of the award descriptions I heard this year, other judges are treating it as the EI runner-up award (would that make it the Chairman's second runner-up award?), so no one really knows...

[bduddy]

What if they did a silent auction for getting position in line? Highest bid gets first spot in line, and so on... Doors open at 7 for highest bidder. That team is given a 10 second head-start before the next highest bidder gets to go.

Bids must be submitted by the night before via a certified cashiers check. All procedes are divided to the Dean's List finalist scholarship (or other charity). If teams do not submit a bid, then they are in with general admission that starts after the final bidding team.

This would put a real tangible value on how much teams want good seats other than waking up at 3 AM to stand in front of a door that will open at 7am... Or... (think black friday madness).
I'm trying to figure out if this is the worst idea ever posted on CD or brilliant satire.:yikes:

[IKE]

I'm trying to figure out if this is the worst idea ever posted on CD or brilliant satire.:yikes:
Apparently the worst idea ever as I am interested in a serious discussion of it. Mind you you are not buying seats but just a position in the line to get them. All proceeds go to charity.

[bduddy]

Apparently the worst idea ever as I am interested in a serious discussion of it. Mind you you are not buying seats but just a position in the line to get them. All proceeds go to charity.Really? OK, let me count the ways:

- The general idea that teams with more money will end up with better
- Encouraging a sense of ownership over seats even worse than already exists (good luck if you're a spectator!)
- Trying to put every team attending champs (or even a significant number) in "line"
- Once teams "get" their seats, are they that team's forever? Surely not...
Finally, and most importantly...
- You're basically asking teams to stampede. The question is not if there will be injuries, but how many.

[IKE]

How is the stampede different than now? In my scenario those that pay the most get a head start ( say 10 to 15 seconds over the next team. Yes whoever pays the most gets first choice. Yes they will likely feel entitled but that already happens.

[IndySam]

What if they did a silent auction for getting position in line? Highest bid gets first spot in line, and so on... Doors open at 7 for highest bidder. That team is given a 10 second head-start before the next highest bidder gets to go.

Bids must be submitted by the night before via a certified cashiers check. All procedes are divided to the Dean's List finalist scholarship (or other charity). If teams do not submit a bid, then they are in with general admission that starts after the final bidding team.

This would put a real tangible value on how much teams want good seats other than waking up at 3 AM to stand in front of a door that will open at 7am... Or... (think black friday madness).

But that would give an unfair advantage to the rich teams.

Oh wait, wrong thread :)

[Siri]

I don't think it would be feasible to employ a lottery system to allocate seats, simply on the fact that a team's needs differ so greatly at a competition...Allocating an area for scouting is unfeasible simply because of the diversity of how teams scout. Some teams take 20+ students to scout an event, some take 2, some take none. Some scout by watching matches, some talk to teams in the pit, some do both. Since the amount and type of scouting a team does is so dependent on the team itself, I doubt that there is an accurate way to allocate the correct amount of seats at an event to accommodate everyone...Having a lottery and allocating the identical seating space to teams are not the same thing. If teams indicate how many they'd like to bid for, events can guarantee a minimum (3-6) and randomly assign the rest to interested teams. I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it's certainly doable.


I doubt FIRST would ban cheering from any prime/scout designated seating spots. Maybe ban standing and cheering, and if scouts would like to they're free to sit in the normal seats.

In St. Louis, the doors opened at 7am, so that's when the entire team arrived.Doesn't arriving at 7am put most of your team behind several hundred people?

[Aidan S.]

Doesn't arriving at 7am put most of your team behind several hundred people?

What I meant by this is that we send a smaller group (say a dozen) students early (usually around 6am) to get in line and participate in the "race" so to speak, but the remainder of the team still arrives before the doors open. So there is a small group to stake out the ideal section, and when they find one, the entire team will be there to join them and sit there and get started on the day's activities. This allows the students to rotate duty in the early crew.

[jvriezen]

Perhaps this should the only approved method of saving seats:
http://www.larknews.com/archives/301

[IKE]

What I meant by this is that we send a smaller group (say a dozen) students early (usually around 6am) to get in line and participate in the "race" so to speak, but the remainder of the team still arrives before the doors open. So there is a small group to stake out the ideal section, and when they find one, the entire team will be there to join them and sit there and get started on the day's activities. This allows the students to rotate duty in the early crew.

This is very good stuff to know. I will be certain to have my team of commandos arrive at 5:29 AM to ensure they are ahead of your 6-ish kids.

[PayneTrain]

This is very good stuff to know. I will be certain to have my team of commandos arrive at 5:29 AM to ensure they are ahead of your 6-ish kids.

5:28 AM here. Matched and raised.

[MrJohnston]

5:28 AM here. Matched and raised.

Sorry - My team will not be making hotel reservations in the future. We're simply going to sleep in dark corners at the venue and will be in the prime seats while you two are still scuffling over who's first in line. Not only will be get prime seats, but we'll save a good bit of change on lodging.

[robochick1319]

Hey guys. I'm from 1732. Those are our seat savers. Please let me explain.

I know they're bad. I know you don't like them. WE don't like them.

We simply didn't see any alternatives. As a team sending 84 (!) people down to St. Louis this year, we were unsure as to what our course of action should be. At the Wisconsin and Boilermaker Regionals we kept a general area of seating "reserved" by leaving piles of stuff there, rendering many seats useless, leading to people's things being stepped on, and, inevitable, losing things. We did, in the process, create a space for the scouts, spirit team, parents, mentors, and guests that came along. Unfortunately, we always had people sitting alone. We've struggled with seating for the past few years that I've been on the team, always ending up spread out. As a last resort, and after seeing many other teams to so, we opted for these felt, rubber band, and sticker combinations.

I never saw anyone who wasn't on our team shooed out of one of the marked seats. I remember, possibly the day that photo was taken, giving up entire rows because of the outrage over our seat savers. On Saturday we didn't bring them. We learned our lesson and sent half of the team to the venue really early.

I apologize.

I appreciate you coming forward and apologizing for the seat savers but I don't think you are to be blamed or hated for it. When the whole world is saving seats, what are you expected to do to ensure that your team and team visitors have a place to sit? It was gracious of you to move as you did.

This debate can go on forever but the only real way to solve it is for everyone to agree to not save seats. Unfortunately, that will not happen. Teams still leave signs in the stands when they go to lunch and (regrettably) leave them in the stands when they leave for the day.

There are tons of rules stated by FIRST that are not actually enforced. Best example is this excerpt from section 4.13 of the manual:

We ask that you bring attention to your team in ways that are in good taste and in the spirit of the competition. Please refrain from the following:

Using noisemakers;
Using objects that can damage bleachers or floors;
Wearing inappropriate clothing; and/or
Taping or affixing items or papers to walls, bleachers, floors or other site areas.

How often are these rules broken with innocent intentions? Often.

I think the best solution for FIRST is to limit the competition sizes. Please don't get me wrong, I don't think the number of teams in FIRST should be capped. Instead, we need more regional events and/or a district set up. I'm sorry, but 65 teams in Palmetto and 60 in Peachtree was AWFUL. Not only is saving seats a problem but so is pit crowding and robot transportation.

Alternatively, if you want to have 60 teams in Peachtree, find a better venue to hold them. If the number of teams and team members increase, logic says that the regional venue should change as well.

[Citrus Dad]

I don't think it would be feasible to employ a lottery system to allocate seats, simply on the fact that a team's needs differ so greatly at a competition. These points have been brought up previously in the thread, but I wish to re-iterate them. Some teams bring 10 people to an event, some bring more than 100. How can we equally divide up seats when teams do not have equal needs?

An allocation method isn't a lottery--it's systematic. If the formula is well known, teams will shift their needs. Also, setting up a trading system where teams can trade their seating requirements will solve the problem of differing needs.

In general, teams don't want to be split up at an event, hence the rush to grab seats at the beginning of the day. But I think most teams are successful in adhering to the rules that FIRST outlines for seating allocation. When we send a crew of students early to sit in the section we would like, we never stop other individuals form sitting there alongside us, rather we welcome them to join us. The main issue here is people not understanding the policy that FIRST has outlined.

You're attitude is great if other teams also had that approach. Unfortunately, that's not the case, as we encountered with several large teams this year. The problem seemed to be the worst with the parents who didn't really have any other role than to spectate or cheer (students were generally more accommodating). It's time to consider splitting up the larger teams at the competition if that's what it takes. It's already inconvenient moving in an out of the stands past these large groups. As far as adhering to FIRST rules, there is no seat saving under current rules, so none of these teams are adhering to the rules.

The race for seats in the morning has become an aspect of the competition. The competition starts when the doors to the venue open, not when opening ceremonies start or the first match is played. In St. Louis, the doors opened at 7am, so that's when the entire team arrived.

Since when is the race for the seats another aspect of the competition? FIRST's stated policy is clearly and obviously trying to discourage this.

Allocating an area for scouting is unfeasible simply because of the diversity of how teams scout. Some teams take 20+ students to scout an event, some take 2, some take none. Some scout by watching matches, some talk to teams in the pit, some do both. Since the amount and type of scouting a team does is so dependent on the team itself, I doubt that there is an accurate way to allocate the correct amount of seats at an event to accommodate everyone. At some events, 100 seats will be far too much, and at others, 100 seats won't accommodate more than 5 teams.

No team has a 100 person scouting system--those teams would split into a scouting section and a spirit/spectating section. I think an initial allocation of 10 seats per team should be sufficient. As I mentioned above, the allocations could be tradable so smaller teams could give up their seats to teams that need more.


You bring up the topic of spirit as a non-necessity of team function. I am going to have to disagree with you on this point. I can only speak for experience from my own team, but for us, there is no distinction between spirit and scouting (or any other division for that matter). On the contrary, our scouts are probably the loudest supporters of our team when they are on the field. Our students take great pride in cheering on our drivers when they are in the midst of a match, and telling individuals sitting in a dedicated "scouting section" that they can't cheer on their team because it is distracting to the other scouts will only result in two outcomes: either the scouts will continue to cheer as they did before, ignoring the new rule, or they will simply choose not to sit in the "scouting section" and join the rest of their team.

Spirit is important for promoting the event, but it isn't important to specific function of a team. Our scouts cheered, but they didn't spend time dancing or fun activities. They were scouting mostly. I'm sorry, but I saw several large teams pursuing the spirit award where most of the members weren't scouting (and in at least one case it was the parents who were spending most of the effort on chasing the spirit award.) I think the spirit award is a fun way to promote the event, but those working on that don't need to be integrated with the scouts. I don't see cheerleaders sitting the press box at a football game with the coaches.

Now, I do agree that there needs to be a solution for seating for the general public. I think that this can be achieved by roping off a section of seats for people who are unaffiliated with teams and just want to take in the action. It's generally pretty easy to tell who is on a team and who is a spectator, and this would be easy to enforce.

I don't think its as easy as you might think to distinguish spectators and team members. However, FIRST probably can give spectators tickets for the special section.

In short, I believe that we shouldn't allocate everyone the same seating space at events, because, since our needs as teams are so diverse, there is no way to make everyone happy with this type of system. The system we have now works, as long as everyone clearly understands what the rules are.

The point of these posts is that the current system is NOT working. We're trying to propose a better solution. The tragedy of the commons is common, but there's also good solutions. But it means disrupting those who are comfortable with the current system, and they are always the most resistant. As I mentioned above, there's a means of setting up a clearinghouse to trade seat allocations so differing requirements can be accommodated. (And each team could bring a receipt showing that they made the trade.) The bottom line is that not everyone does understand the current rules and those rules are (un)enforced in uneven ways. The fact is that the current rules are impractical due to the extensive scouting that has developed.

[Gregor]

Spirit is important for promoting the event, but it isn't important to specific function of a team. Our scouts cheered, but they didn't spend time dancing or fun activities. They were scouting mostly. I'm sorry, but I saw several large teams pursuing the spirit award where most of the members weren't scouting (and in at least one case it was the parents who were spending most of the effort on chasing the spirit award.) I think the spirit award is a fun way to promote the event, but those working on that don't need to be integrated with the scouts. I don't see cheerleaders sitting the press box at a football game with the coaches.

Did you go up and ask all these teams if they were cheering for the Spirit Award, or are you just assuming that all the cheering teams were cheering for the award?

[Cory]

I fail to see the problem here. You want good seats, get there early. There should be staff in the venue during the mad rush that kick teams out of seats they are trying to occupy with flags, banners, pom poms, signs, whatever. That solves that problem. We had our entire team up extremely early (as did 3-4 others) in order to be one of the first teams in. All our mentors were up past midnight every night too. If you want good seats, that's what you've got to do.

The real problem is that it's a complete madhouse getting in and totally unsafe. Everyone has heard stories of students getting shoved, knocked down, hit, trampled, etc. One of our students may have fractured his foot on Saturday morning due to the mad rush when the doors opened.

This year security actually tried to enforce a line, up until about 6:30-6:45. Right around then the 1 person they had out there was completely overwhelmed by the massive quantities of people showing up and effectively ceased to have any authority. This resulted in the 4 teams who were there hours early getting in first, the people who showed up at 6:45 and line jumped getting in next, and the 20 teams who got there after the first 4 (and stood in line like they were supposed to) getting in about 200 people after they should have. This is completely unfair to those who followed the process but failed to be at the very front of the line.

Solution: more security outside, instead of inside.

Security likes to play the "guess the door" game. Stop being coy about which doors will open. Clearly label the doors that will be opening (and limit it to maybe 2-3 doors at the start) and it will be much easier to enforce the creation of a line. Teams will also have less opportunity to start sprinting once inside. If you got in front of the wrong doors 2 hours early you were just as screwed as showing up when the doors opened. Or teams (again) showed up at 6:45, stood in front of an empty doorway, and then that doorway opened when there had been no previous indication it would do so.

Stop counting down to the doors opening. This is incredibly dangerous as it actively encourages people to start shoving and running once the doors open.


I think some kind of coupon system could be wise. Barricade off the courtyard outside the doors, institute proper lines (maybe by division) and be there at 5:00-5:30 AM to distribute tickets to the first x people in line for maybe 2-3 "zones". When you get to your field, you have to show your tickets to go down in the seats. This wouldn't be terribly difficult to do and only needs to be enforced for the first few minutes. The teams who get there first get the seats they want and nobody needs to run because anyone who jumps them in line won't have the right "zone" tickets.

That still adds complexity to a situation that just needs order outside the doors, though. After 20 years you'd think FIRST could figure out how to make people form a proper queue. If they could do that and have fewer entrances for the first few minutes then everything would get a lot better.

[Aidan S.]

An allocation method isn't a lottery--it's systematic. If the formula is well known, teams will shift their needs. Also, setting up a trading system where teams can trade their seating requirements will solve the problem of differing needs.

A possible way to implement this could be giving teams each a block of seats (say the average size of a team, around 25) and allowing them to book them in advance, like a sporting event. There will be a pool of extra tickets left over, and teams can indicate how many extras they want/require, and then the organizers of the event can allocate them accordingly. This system is akin to purchasing your seats in advance.

You're attitude is great if other teams also had that approach. Unfortunately, that's not the case, as we encountered with several large teams this year. The problem seemed to be the worst with the parents who didn't really have any other role than to spectate or cheer (students were generally more accommodating). It's time to consider splitting up the larger teams at the competition if that's what it takes. It's already inconvenient moving in an out of the stands past these large groups. As far as adhering to FIRST rules, there is no seat saving under current rules, so none of these teams are adhering to the rules.

I have rarely come across a student who is unaware of the rules with respect to seats, but I think all teams should make the effort to educate all spectators that will be joining them on the rules, so there is no confusion or conflict.

Since when is the race for the seats another aspect of the competition? FIRST's stated policy is clearly and obviously trying to discourage this.

They are trying to discourage a free-for-all from ensuing at events. Nobody wants the opening few moments of a day to look like a scene out of a black Friday sale at a shopping mall. If the teams all entered in a calm fashion, and picked their seats based on the order they lined up in, there would be no issue. the problem stems from people trying to cut in front of others who lined up before them.

No team has a 100 person scouting system--those teams would split into a scouting section and a spirit/spectating section. I think an initial allocation of 10 seats per team should be sufficient. As I mentioned above, the allocations could be tradable so smaller teams could give up their seats to teams that need more.

I agree with the idea of a trading system, I think that if it can be implemented for an entire team, there wouldn't be a need for a strictly scouting section.

Spirit is important for promoting the event, but it isn't important to specific function of a team. Our scouts cheered, but they didn't spend time dancing or fun activities. They were scouting mostly. I'm sorry, but I saw several large teams pursuing the spirit award where most of the members weren't scouting (and in at least one case it was the parents who were spending most of the effort on chasing the spirit award.) I think the spirit award is a fun way to promote the event, but those working on that don't need to be integrated with the scouts. I don't see cheerleaders sitting the press box at a football game with the coaches.

I think that if we do go to an allocation system, it would be relatively easy to create a "quiet zone" in the stands and allow teams to request seats in that area for whatever purposes they desire. Let the teams decide if they want to send their scouts there or keep them with the larger group.

I don't think its as easy as you might think to distinguish spectators and team members. However, FIRST probably can give spectators tickets for the special section.

I was referring to general spectators, who ware unaffiliated with teams. I'd assume that these individuals would not be team clothing from a team at the regional, so it would be relatively easy to distinguish them from the rest. I agree that giving them tickets or visitor's passes would be an easier way to distinguish them.

The point of these posts is that the current system is NOT working. We're trying to propose a better solution. The tragedy of the commons is common, but there's also good solutions. But it means disrupting those who are comfortable with the current system, and they are always the most resistant. As I mentioned above, there's a means of setting up a clearinghouse to trade seat allocations so differing requirements can be accommodated. (And each team could bring a receipt showing that they made the trade.) The bottom line is that not everyone does understand the current rules and those rules are (un)enforced in uneven ways. The fact is that the current rules are impractical due to the extensive scouting that has developed.

There are issues with the current system, I don't disagree. And, like with every solution, there will be people who are for and against it. If there were a way to implement this seat allocation method so that it occurs online before the event, that it would cut down on the work of volunteers and teams needing to coordinate trades on the already hectic days during an event.


Aside: I would like to clarify a point that I brought up earlier. Our team sends our entire group to get in line for seats at an event together early, except the drive team and pit crew. They join us when the doors open to the stadium, and usually go to work in the pits immediately. All the people who would be using seats in the stadium are in line together, and there is no saving of seats by any member of our team. I apologise if my earlier point may have been misleading.

[Grim Tuesday]

A possible way to implement this could be giving teams each a block of seats (say the average size of a team, around 25) and allowing them to book them in advance, like a sporting event. There will be a pool of extra tickets left over, and teams can indicate how many extras they want/require, and then the organizers of the event can allocate them accordingly. This system is akin to purchasing your seats in advance.


Why not allocate each team the number of members+mentors they each have? This is information FIRST has available through TIMS every year. The only issue is parents and other visitors that might want to sit with the team. Maybe add an extra 20% to that number in events with lots of seating.


In my home regional event, Finger Lakes, the regulars have been attending for so long that everyone takes the same seats every year. We always sit in the top of the venue, closest to the pits. 1126 sits next to us. 3173 sits beneath us. 1511 sits across from us. In four years I've never seen this change and I'd hate for some sort of assigned seating change it. That said, as long as it was reserved seating like airplanes are, it could work.

[dellagd]

Personally, I like the idea of giving each team a reserved section for 12 members. Thats 2 people per robot and really not many teams go more than that. These seats get the best positions relative to the field.

I've rushed into the arena before, and my real concern is just getting a prime location for our scouts. If the rest of the team isnt as close as possible, or if we're a little spread out, it really isnt the end of the world.

The priority is making sure our scouting can be successful, and that is a big priority. If the cheer-ers, parents, spectators, or whatever you want to call the not-directly-contributing members of the team cant see which discs go into the red top slot clearly, I (and they) wont care so much.

I know getting there really early is not fun, but there really should be a way to prevent the initial mad run. And if a team is there a little later, they shouldnt not be unable to scout because 3 teams of 50 people took up all of the seats in the front rows. Are those the only spots scouting is possible from? No, not at all, but it just doesnt seem right. I have respect for waking up a 5 am, but still, every team should have a good chance to succeed at scouting, I mean, getting those people to watch a hundred match is hard enough as it is! :P

[Ryan Dognaux]

After 20 years you'd think FIRST could figure out how to make people form a proper queue.

Setup one of these outside the event with a few security personnel and watch your problems ago away -

http://www.linelogic.com/images/home_images/hero/retractable-belt-systems.jpg

Or maybe we should ask the Brits (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTartgZ6n9Q&feature=youtu.be&t=12s) for some advice.

[Mike Marandola]

Setup one of these outside the event with a few security personnel and watch your problems ago away -

http://www.linelogic.com/images/home_images/hero/retractable-belt-systems.jpg

Or maybe we should ask the Brits (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CTartgZ6n9Q&feature=youtu.be&t=12s) for some advice.

Yes, First needs some British volunteers. All will be solved.:)

[Jaxom]

In my home regional event, Finger Lakes, the regulars have been attending for so long that everyone takes the same seats every year. We always sit in the top of the venue, closest to the pits. 1126 sits next to us. 3173 sits beneath us. 1511 sits across from us. In four years I've never seen this change and I'd hate for some sort of assigned seating change it. That said, as long as it was reserved seating like airplanes are, it could work.

So, in effect you're reserving seats via tradition. What would the reactions be if a team outside of the area comes to FLR for the first time and unknowingly sits in one or more of these teams' seats? Or if a rookie team in the area does the same thing?

[Koko Ed]

So, in effect you're reserving seats via tradition. What would the reactions be if a team outside of the area comes to FLR for the first time and unknowingly sits in one or more of these teams' seats? Or if a rookie team in the area does the same thing?

They always exclaim what good fortune it is that the seats at the bottom of the stands are readily available and gleefully sit there. Then they realizes that everyone crowds around the field and learn to sit up higher like everyone else.

[Kimmeh]

They always exclaim what good fortune it is that the seats at the bottom of the stands are readily available and gleefully sit there. Then they realizes that everyone crowds around the field and learn to sit up higher like everyone else.

This is a good point. I've seen lots of talk about saving "prime" seats for teams when their robot is on the field. How do we define what seats are the best? Personally, I'd rather watch from higher up than right by the field.

[Gregor]

They always exclaim what good fortune it is that the seats at the bottom of the stands are readily available and gleefully sit there. Then they realizes that everyone crowds around the field and learn to sit up higher like everyone else.

Yep...

[Koko Ed]

Yep...

Everyone who has never been to FLR before always learns to sit up higher.
We don't control the crowd around the field. Makes the joint louder and FLR rock. Especially during the elims.

[pfreivald]

But really, it's as easy as citing the manual and just sitting down in the seat.

At Championship in 2011, my brother, his wife, and I snuck off to sit and watch a couple of matches from up close--it was their first exposure to FIRST, and they'd driven six hours just to see it.

We moved someone's stuff in a couple of chairs and a woman came (literally) shrieking at us about how those seats were for her team. Joe looked at her and deadpanned, "Unless you're willing to commit assault, we're sitting here." She backed off, and we sat down. I've used that line twice more at FIRST events, and it's worked.

But in general it is a problem. The Black Friday scenario increases the chances that someone will get hurt, and I'm sure FIRST wants neither the injury nor the liability.

[FrankJ]

Maybe print a bunch of business with the rule about not saving seats & hand out to all the teams in the pits. Then when someone comes up & complains about sitting in "their" seats, you could just hand them a card.

[akoscielski3]

Everyone who has never been to FLR before always learns to sit up higher.
We don't control the crowd around the field. Makes the joint louder and FLR rock. Especially during the elims.

Everyone standing in front of the field blocking over half of people's views was the worst part of FLR for me. I could only see disks being shot and a lot of people. Hated that.
Sure it made the teams get up and cheer but from experience you can do that in the stands.

Just saying

[Coach Norm]

I fail to see the problem here. You want good seats, get there early. There should be staff in the venue during the mad rush that kick teams out of seats they are trying to occupy with flags, banners, pom poms, signs, whatever. That solves that problem. We had our entire team up extremely early (as did 3-4 others) in order to be one of the first teams in. All our mentors were up past midnight every night too. If you want good seats, that's what you've got to do.

The real problem is that it's a complete madhouse getting in and totally unsafe. Everyone has heard stories of students getting shoved, knocked down, hit, trampled, etc. One of our students may have fractured his foot on Saturday morning due to the mad rush when the doors opened.

This year security actually tried to enforce a line, up until about 6:30-6:45. Right around then the 1 person they had out there was completely overwhelmed by the massive quantities of people showing up and effectively ceased to have any authority. This resulted in the 4 teams who were there hours early getting in first, the people who showed up at 6:45 and line jumped getting in next, and the 20 teams who got there after the first 4 (and stood in line like they were supposed to) getting in about 200 people after they should have. This is completely unfair to those who followed the process but failed to be at the very front of the line.

Solution: more security outside, instead of inside.

Security likes to play the "guess the door" game. Stop being coy about which doors will open. Clearly label the doors that will be opening (and limit it to maybe 2-3 doors at the start) and it will be much easier to enforce the creation of a line. Teams will also have less opportunity to start sprinting once inside. If you got in front of the wrong doors 2 hours early you were just as screwed as showing up when the doors opened. Or teams (again) showed up at 6:45, stood in front of an empty doorway, and then that doorway opened when there had been no previous indication it would do so.

Stop counting down to the doors opening. This is incredibly dangerous as it actively encourages people to start shoving and running once the doors open.

I think some kind of coupon system could be wise. Barricade off the courtyard outside the doors, institute proper lines (maybe by division) and be there at 5:00-5:30 AM to distribute tickets to the first x people in line for maybe 2-3 "zones". When you get to your field, you have to show your tickets to go down in the seats. This wouldn't be terribly difficult to do and only needs to be enforced for the first few minutes. The teams who get there first get the seats they want and nobody needs to run because anyone who jumps them in line won't have the right "zone" tickets.



+1 this post and response.

[JB987]

Just a question that hasn't come up yet in this post...how absolute shall the adherence to the rule be? If we follow the letter of the rule, then a scout who runs to the rest room and is gone for only a couple of minutes is out of luck? Same would be true for anyone in the stands? There are teams like ours that have scouts (laptops) linked via ethernet or otherwise need proximity with the other scouts to exchange paper match data. Perhaps this is one of the strongest arguments for at least reserving seats for scouts?

[Citrus Dad]

Just a question that hasn't come up yet in this post...how absolute shall the adherence to the rule be? If we follow the letter of the rule, then a scout who runs to the rest room and is gone for only a couple of minutes is out of luck? Same would be true for anyone in the stands? There are teams like ours that have scouts (laptops) linked via ethernet or otherwise need proximity with the other scouts to exchange paper match data. Perhaps this is one of the strongest arguments for at least reserving seats for scouts?

We had the same situation and a relatively small team.

Making the championships unpleasant by requiring those who stay up late working on a robot or scouting to then get up to save a seat (especially when they won't let you bring in food) is not a strong recruitment tool for mentors. We need to think about the whole experience and what everyone should be getting out of it. Making it even more grueling is not a solution.

[Nathan Pell]

The Pink team won the Team Spirit award at championships as they did in 2012. The Pink team doesn't like to 'block people'. They always sit down when the matches start. They are cheering for every team every match - that is why they are standing.


I think the GP card could go either way. Yeah your taking their seats that they are trying so hard to defend, but they are trying to save seats with almost no one there.

At SVR I talked to a rookie mentor from another team, and he mentioned to me how ungraciously professional he thought the pink team was for taking up half the stands in the center section of the stadium. "Their spirit people take up the same amount of room as the scouts from 20 other teams." he said. Its an interesting thought, 90% of their seats went to cheerers who loved to stand and block the view of people behind them, but they did get there first. I only mention the identity of this team because they ironically won the championship Gracious Professionalism award.

So it begs the question, what is more graciously professional? Is it, "we only need these higher quality seats for our scouts", or "they got their first so we should respect their right to take up as many seats as they can"?

[EricH]

Just a question that hasn't come up yet in this post...how absolute shall the adherence to the rule be? If we follow the letter of the rule, then a scout who runs to the rest room and is gone for only a couple of minutes is out of luck? Same would be true for anyone in the stands? There are teams like ours that have scouts (laptops) linked via ethernet or otherwise need proximity with the other scouts to exchange paper match data. Perhaps this is one of the strongest arguments for at least reserving seats for scouts?

I think in most cases, if you are saving one seat for someone whose rear was in there for a while but had to run to the restroom or to some other point in the stands for a couple of minutes, or even scouting data to the pits, and you said something to the effect of "Yeah, my buddy Joe is due back from the restroom in a couple minutes and needs to sit here because he's scouting" then most people will be gracious about it. Especially if you point them to a nearby empty seat (say, a row up or down). Letter of the rule violation? Yeah. Spirit of the rule violation? I don't think so.

I think where most people have the issues is when small group takes up large block of seats and doesn't let anybody else sit there, not where one seat in a group of people opens up briefly and is saved for that sitter's imminent return.

[Nathan Pell]

I walked over early this year on Saturday at 8:30am, and there were already 5 other teams in front of me. As mentioned before, they are the 'top' teams such as 254, 148, 118, etc.

At some regional events, I have even heard of teams camping out in line, kind of like getting in line to buy concert tickets.


What I meant by this is that we send a smaller group (say a dozen) students early (usually around 6am) to get in line and participate in the "race" so to speak, but the remainder of the team still arrives before the doors open. So there is a small group to stake out the ideal section, and when they find one, the entire team will be there to join them and sit there and get started on the day's activities. This allows the students to rotate duty in the early crew.

[Tristan Lall]

What about a compromise: "your team may save n seats per m team representatives currently seated adjacently"?1

I think that in many venues, n = 1, m ≥ 3 would satisfy the people who are desperately hoarding the best seats in case a few more members of the scouting team show up. In the less-populated sections (e.g. upper bowl seating at the Championship, except at Einstein), n = 1, m ≥ 1 would be fine.

1 Yes, I know there are issues with overlapping groups and the definition of adjacency.

[spydan]

1306 is working on this :D

Anyone interested should check out this thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116182)

We rolled out the CrowdScout system at the Wisconsin Regional, and in Curie Division this year, and it worked wonderfully, so we will definitely be continuing development of the system (streamlining data entry, making things easier for teams), and the organization around it (deciding on what data is needed, etc.)

Team 708 was thinking about making our scouting information publicly available. I am glad that someone has created something like this. I will try and see if our team would like to implement this! We, too get frustrated with the seat saving.We make sure to have people be using the seats if we are going to need them.

[karomata]

The bottom line is that you can only control the action of yourself and those of your own team. If teams wish to not be graciously professional and wish to save seats even though they're not supposed to, theres nothing that others are able to do about it other than control their own actions. And we really don't need to complain to FIRST about the issue, I think FIRST already has enough to worry about. Teams will do as they wish, and instead of making an issue over such a minor thing, we could just rise above their level of constructive attitude and only worry about conducting ourselves graciously and professionaly. You can see the field from anywhere in any of the stands at any of the venues, the venues were built to work that way. If there simply aren't enough seats, then just communicate that with the team reserving seats. If they continue to refuse, then you should talk to your regional committee. But other than that we really shouldn't complain to anyone about it. To sum it up, I hate to use slang, but nothing really describes the situation like it is better than saying: haters gonna hate.

[Koko Ed]

The bottom line is that you can only control the action of yourself and those of your own team. If teams wish to not be graciously professional and wish to save seats even though they're not supposed to, theres nothing that others are able to do about it other than control their own actions. And we really don't need to complain to FIRST about the issue, I think FIRST already has enough to worry about. Teams will do as they wish, and instead of making an issue over such a minor thing, we could just rise above their level of constructive attitude and only worry about conducting ourselves graciously and professionaly. You can see the field from anywhere in any of the stands at any of the venues, the venues were built to work that way. If there simply aren't enough seats, then just communicate that with the team reserving seats. If they continue to refuse, then you should talk to your regional committee. But other than that we really shouldn't complain to anyone about it. To sum it up, I hate to use slang, but nothing really describes the situation like it is better than saying: haters gonna hate.
But we've already left it up to the teams to police themselves. That's how we got to this mess in the first place. To just simply say: it's not that big a deal is to act as if it didn't happen when it's obviously a problem that needs to be dealt with. And if it requires FIRST to intervien personally to solve it then they should.

[Marc S.]

If FIRST is going to intervene then here's a solution that I hope for.

10 seats be saved for each teams scouts. As a scout I know that 6 people is not enough. Ideally a team ha6 people scouting data, a data entering person, a team sheet organizer, and 2 strategic scouts. You may even be able to argue 11 or 12 seats cause having a mentor is useful too. Having two rows of 5 or 6 would be nice.

Also, wouldn't this be up to individual regional/distict coordinators?

[Carolyn_Grace]

Ahem....here is my modest proposal:

It is a melancholy object to those, who walk through these great competitions, or travel from event to event as volunteers, when they see the walkways and the stairways crowded with unfortunate students of the FIRST generation, attempting to view their team's matches and importuning other teams for just a little bit of their space.

These vagrant teams, instead of enjoying prime seating, are forced to employ all their time begging for their helpless students who, as they wander aimlessly around the venue, either turn seat-thieves for want of their own space, or leave their dear native team, to fight for seating among their opponent Red Alliance, or sell themselves to the event coordinators, hoping for at least a seat for one match.

I think it is agreed by all alliances, that this prodigious number of seatless-students at the heels of their mentors, and frequently of their sponsors, is in the present deplorable state of the FIRST kingdom, a very great additional grievance; and therefore whoever could find out a fair, cheap and easy method of providing these children sound and enjoyable seating among the elite, would deserve so well of the ChiefDelphi community, as to have his statue set up for a preserver of the FIRST nation.

I shall now therefore humbly propose my own thoughts, which I hope will not be liable to the least objection.

I have been assured by a very knowing Michigander of my acquaintance in FiM, that a young healthy student well geeked, is, after 6 weeks of build season, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether fried, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve as a side to roasted corn on the cob or cheap $2 nachos in a bag at IRI.

Those teams who are populated (as I must confess, growth is inevitable) may flea the carcass; the skin of which, artificially dressed, will make admirable handouts for other teams, and team-shirts for next year...

A Modest Proposal (http://ebooks.gutenberg.us/Coradella_Collegiate_Bookshelf_Collection/swift-amodestproposal.pdf)

[Kimmeh]

I have been assured by a very knowing Michigander of my acquaintance in FiM, that a young healthy student well geeked, is, after 6 weeks of build season, a most delicious nourishing and wholesome food, whether fried, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve as a side to roasted corn on the cob or cheap $2 nachos in a bag at IRI.

First off, I found this whole thing beautiful. I love A Modest Proposal.

But I do question if anyone is "delicious, nourishing, or wholesome" after the fare one eats for the six weeks of build season...

[Taylor]

Ahem....here is my modest proposal:

Save the neck for me, Clark (http://youtu.be/Spmqbs8YCW8?t=15s).

(oops. We're not supposed to be saving things. Nevermind.)

[Koko Ed]

First off, I found this whole thing beautiful. I love A Modest Proposal.

But I do question if anyone is "delicious, nourishing, or wholesome" after the fare one eats for the six weeks of build season...

They're full of pizza and Dew. That's hardly nourishing.

[Carolyn_Grace]

They're full of pizza and Dew. That's hardly nourishing.

There's tomato sauce on the pizza.
Anyway, that extra weight that everyone puts on during build season will mean there's extra meat on the bones. Just need to balance it out with a few carrot sticks.

[Citrus Dad]

But we've already left it up to the teams to police themselves. That's how we got to this mess in the first place. To just simply say: it's not that big a deal is to act as if it didn't happen when it's obviously a problem that needs to be dealt with. And if it requires FIRST to intervien personally to solve it then they should.

I agree. This is a classic "tragedy of the commons" problem that needs to be addressed by FIRST. Almost all of the environmental problems of our world have arisen from similar circumstances, and all require some sort of intervention to be solved.

[Citrus Dad]

If FIRST is going to intervene then here's a solution that I hope for.

10 seats be saved for each teams scouts. As a scout I know that 6 people is not enough. Ideally a team ha6 people scouting data, a data entering person, a team sheet organizer, and 2 strategic scouts. You may even be able to argue 11 or 12 seats cause having a mentor is useful too. Having two rows of 5 or 6 would be nice.

Also, wouldn't this be up to individual regional/distict coordinators?

I agree with this proposal.

[efoote868]

If FIRST is going to intervene then here's a solution that I hope for.

10 seats be saved for each teams scouts. As a scout I know that 6 people is not enough. Ideally a team ha6 people scouting data, a data entering person, a team sheet organizer, and 2 strategic scouts. You may even be able to argue 11 or 12 seats cause having a mentor is useful too. Having two rows of 5 or 6 would be nice.

Also, wouldn't this be up to individual regional/distict coordinators?

2 of the 10 you listed don't need a nice view of the field. Also I'm not quite sure what you mean by "strategic scouts," but if you have all 6 robots covered then surely you'll get all interactions on the field.

[Mike Schreiber]

I find this entire topic almost laughable.

I understand we do not have the best system for seating at events. I hate to be a the pessimist, but do you really think FIRST is sitting around thinking what type of raffle system would work best for seats? Somehow I get the feeling they have bigger concerns. Not only that, but if FIRST actually needed to design an elaborate system to assign seats I would feel silly as if I was back in elementary school. Quite frankly, I'm not convinced the idea is possible nor desirable to be organized on a FIRST wide level. The variation in venues etc makes this questionably feasible.

On a humorous note how about a "15 Minute Parking Section" meant for teams to just walk up watch their match and leave.

Social experiment: Section off a small, but easily accessible area in front of the field, with a sign that looks official saying "These seats are available to teams while their robot is playing on the field, please remain no longer than is appropriate." See what happens.

In all seriousness you should probably ask somebody in some sort of position of power before you try something like that, but I would like to see how trustworthy our fellow FIRSTers are.

[Pendulum^-1]

Social experiment: Section off a small, but easily accessible area in front of the field, with a sign that looks official saying "These seats are available to teams while their robot is playing on the field, please remain no longer than is appropriate." See what happens.

In all seriousness you should probably ask somebody in some sort of position of power before you try something like that, but I would like to see how trustworthy our fellow FIRSTers are.

Looks like we are coming full circle. My earlier post (well hidden as one post among the 130 other posts) is nearly identical to this idea. Simple, straightforward in execution. Maybe several of us should petition our local regionals and/or our leading teams at our regionals to organize such an area, and see how people like it.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1271285&postcount=52

The only thing I would add to the post: Cheering section people should stay seated during their match, so others can see the field.

Simple, simple, simple. Whatever we propose has to be nearly zero effort from the event staff.

[Citrus Dad]

I find this entire topic almost laughable.

I understand we do not have the best system for seating at events. I hate to be a the pessimist, but do you really think FIRST is sitting around thinking what type of raffle system would work best for seats? Somehow I get the feeling they have bigger concerns. Not only that, but if FIRST actually needed to design an elaborate system to assign seats I would feel silly as if I was back in elementary school. Quite frankly, I'm not convinced the idea is possible nor desirable to be organized on a FIRST wide level. The variation in venues etc makes this questionably feasible.

I suspect at the regional level that this can be left to the local committees. However, I think it could be a bigger issue if outside spectators show up in greater numbers. Isn't Kammen's aim to make this as visible as other sports?

The real issue is in St. Louis where the most motivated teams come together. And again, this is an important issue if Kammen truly wants to spread the popularity of this program. On the other hand, in my experience these types of issues are never addressed ahead of time until a true crisis arises, at least in part because many people dismiss its importance early on. So we'll see how this plays out--it doesn't mean that I and others need to sit back complacently simply because a solution isn't likely in the near term.

[Citrus Dad]

2 of the 10 you listed don't need a nice view of the field. Also I'm not quite sure what you mean by "strategic scouts," but if you have all 6 robots covered then surely you'll get all interactions on the field.

Those two extra usually are needed to manage the scouting system on site--remember that WiFi is illegal in the venue and that the system either needs to be hardwired together or paper passed to a central person after every match. (I'm curious as to your alternative proposal for data management with only 6 people sitting together.) Also in our experience, 6 scouts can only follow a portion of what happens on the field. We had 2 additional strategic scouts and what they provided was the extra part that made our alliance selection strategy work so successfully in Curie. One additional point--the team needs to be able to rotate scouts--there's no way that anyone can pay attention straight through for hours without a break. 10 is a minimum.

[Siri]

Those two extra usually are needed to manage the scouting system on site--remember that WiFi is illegal in the venue and that the system either needs to be hardwired together or paper passed to a central person after every match. (I'm curious as to your alternative proposal for data management with only 6 people sitting together.) Also in our experience, 6 scouts can only follow a portion of what happens on the field. We had 2 additional strategic scouts and what they provided was the extra part that made our alliance selection strategy work so successfully in Curie. One additional point--the team needs to be able to rotate scouts--there's no way that anyone can pay attention straight through for hours without a break. 10 is a minimum.I agree and we do the same, but do all 10 don't have to be in those seats at once if you're rotating them? We'd be fine with 8 seats where people could switch in and out.

[efoote868]

Those two extra usually are needed to manage the scouting system on site--remember that WiFi is illegal in the venue and that the system either needs to be hardwired together or paper passed to a central person after every match. (I'm curious as to your alternative proposal for data management with only 6 people sitting together.) Also in our experience, 6 scouts can only follow a portion of what happens on the field. We had 2 additional strategic scouts and what they provided was the extra part that made our alliance selection strategy work so successfully in Curie. One additional point--the team needs to be able to rotate scouts--there's no way that anyone can pay attention straight through for hours without a break. 10 is a minimum.
My suggestion is a block of no more than 6 reserved "prime" seats.

There is usually a 3-5 minute break between matches. Scouts can get their assignment for say, 6-8 matches, take their notes, then swap out with fresh scouts, deposit their notes at the central location (which doesn't need prime seating and typically will have lots of files / equipment with it, takes lots of room).

Plenty of time. Also, you don't need to watch every robot every match. You could watch one side the entire event, and you should get each robot at least 3-4 times. You could also pair up with another team to take notes, and you'd have a block of 12 eyes on the field. Use the extra 3 people to watch interactions.

[jamierose]

I find this entire topic almost laughable.

I understand we do not have the best system for seating at events. I hate to be a the pessimist, but do you really think FIRST is sitting around thinking what type of raffle system would work best for seats? Somehow I get the feeling they have bigger concerns. Not only that, but if FIRST actually needed to design an elaborate system to assign seats I would feel silly as if I was back in elementary school. Quite frankly, I'm not convinced the idea is possible nor desirable to be organized on a FIRST wide level. The variation in venues etc makes this questionably feasible.

On a humorous note how about a "15 Minute Parking Section" meant for teams to just walk up watch their match and leave.

Social experiment: Section off a small, but easily accessible area in front of the field, with a sign that looks official saying "These seats are available to teams while their robot is playing on the field, please remain no longer than is appropriate." See what happens.

In all seriousness you should probably ask somebody in some sort of position of power before you try something like that, but I would like to see how trustworthy our fellow FIRSTers are.

There was a section like that at BAE Granite State Regional and it actually worked pretty much perfectly. I don't know how well it would work at champs, though.

[SarahBeth]

There was a section like that at BAE Granite State Regional and it actually worked pretty much perfectly. I don't know how well it would work at champs, though.

There was also a section like this in Lewiston, it was standing room on the floor by the field and teams who's teams were on the field could go down and cheer. It worked really well.

[Brandon Holley]

I understand we do not have the best system for seating at events. I hate to be a the pessimist, but do you really think FIRST is sitting around thinking what type of raffle system would work best for seats? Somehow I get the feeling they have bigger concerns. Not only that, but if FIRST actually needed to design an elaborate system to assign seats I would feel silly as if I was back in elementary school. Quite frankly, I'm not convinced the idea is possible nor desirable to be organized on a FIRST wide level. The variation in venues etc makes this questionably feasible.


Cory made a great post a couple pages back. This topic may seem ridiculous, but people have been seriously hurt in the mad rush for seats at Championship (and I'm sure other events as well). IMO, something needs to be done about the queue for seating. I linked to Cory's post because he explains the situation perfectly. It basically comes down to total chaos and teams having to take their OWN measures to protect themselves from being trampled.

If you haven't experienced being right at the doors when they open in St. Louis, it may seem trivial, but in my experiences is needlessly chaotic and dangerous.

-Brando

I fail to see the problem here. You want good seats, get there early. There should be staff in the venue during the mad rush that kick teams out of seats they are trying to occupy with flags, banners, pom poms, signs, whatever. That solves that problem. We had our entire team up extremely early (as did 3-4 others) in order to be one of the first teams in. All our mentors were up past midnight every night too. If you want good seats, that's what you've got to do.

The real problem is that it's a complete madhouse getting in and totally unsafe. Everyone has heard stories of students getting shoved, knocked down, hit, trampled, etc. One of our students may have fractured his foot on Saturday morning due to the mad rush when the doors opened.

This year security actually tried to enforce a line, up until about 6:30-6:45. Right around then the 1 person they had out there was completely overwhelmed by the massive quantities of people showing up and effectively ceased to have any authority. This resulted in the 4 teams who were there hours early getting in first, the people who showed up at 6:45 and line jumped getting in next, and the 20 teams who got there after the first 4 (and stood in line like they were supposed to) getting in about 200 people after they should have. This is completely unfair to those who followed the process but failed to be at the very front of the line.

Solution: more security outside, instead of inside.

Security likes to play the "guess the door" game. Stop being coy about which doors will open. Clearly label the doors that will be opening (and limit it to maybe 2-3 doors at the start) and it will be much easier to enforce the creation of a line. Teams will also have less opportunity to start sprinting once inside. If you got in front of the wrong doors 2 hours early you were just as screwed as showing up when the doors opened. Or teams (again) showed up at 6:45, stood in front of an empty doorway, and then that doorway opened when there had been no previous indication it would do so.

Stop counting down to the doors opening. This is incredibly dangerous as it actively encourages people to start shoving and running once the doors open.


I think some kind of coupon system could be wise. Barricade off the courtyard outside the doors, institute proper lines (maybe by division) and be there at 5:00-5:30 AM to distribute tickets to the first x people in line for maybe 2-3 "zones". When you get to your field, you have to show your tickets to go down in the seats. This wouldn't be terribly difficult to do and only needs to be enforced for the first few minutes. The teams who get there first get the seats they want and nobody needs to run because anyone who jumps them in line won't have the right "zone" tickets.

That still adds complexity to a situation that just needs order outside the doors, though. After 20 years you'd think FIRST could figure out how to make people form a proper queue. If they could do that and have fewer entrances for the first few minutes then everything would get a lot better.