QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!

[archiver]

Posted by Andy Grady at 12/24/2000 12:20 AM EST


Other on team #126, Gael Force, from Clinton High School and Nypro Inc..



Hi all, time for another question of the week...

Question 12/24/00: What would you like taken out of the game this year that was in it last year?

have a happy and safe holiday

Andy Grady

[archiver]

Posted by Marjory Stager at 12/24/2000 9:07 AM EST


Student on team #47, ChiefDelphi, from Pontiac Central and Delphi Automotive Systems.


In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/24/2000 12:20 AM EST:



: Question 12/24/00: What would you like taken out of the game this year that was in it last year?


I really liked how they had the two in one field thing going on, that was cool.

Marjory
'Frosty'

[archiver]

Posted by Brad Breedlove at 12/24/2000 10:55 AM EST


Student on team #45, Technokats, from Kokomo High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.


In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/24/2000 12:20 AM EST:



I would like to see the limbo bar beacome just a memory. I thought that it constricted the game too much. Although i did like the bots who could go underneath the bar.

Brad

[archiver]

Posted by bill whitley at 12/26/2000 10:33 AM EST


Student on team #70, Auto City Bandits, from Powers Catholic High School and Kettering University.


In Reply to: Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Brad Breedlove on 12/24/2000 10:55 AM EST:



I enjoyed the limbo bar. I thought it diversified the field, made the game much more enjoyable. After seeing 400 robots in a day all the same time, they begin to look the same :). It's good to see some that fit into a different mold.


: I would like to see the limbo bar beacome just a memory. I thought that it constricted the game too much. Although i did like the bots who could go underneath the bar.

: Brad

[archiver]

Posted by nick237 at 12/24/2000 1:17 PM EST


Engineer on team #237, sie h2o bots, from Watertown high school ct and sieman co.


In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/24/2000 12:20 AM EST:



I would like to see the penalty system changed. If a team causes a penalty the points should be taken from them but the other team that is against them should not suffer the loss of the triple the winning score.
I think a winning team should have extra points when a team violates a rule.
This system cost our team 15QP`s at the national and would have made a large change in our final standing.
Dont punish the inocent.
nick 237



: Hi all, time for another question of the week...

: Question 12/24/00: What would you like taken out of the game this year that was in it last year?

: have a happy and safe holiday

: Andy Grady

[archiver]

Posted by Joe Johnson at 12/24/2000 2:46 PM EST


Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.


In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/24/2000 12:20 AM EST:



If I had my one change, I would say, end seeding at the
end of the day on Friday.

Give picking teams the night to digest their choices.

Have the Draft happen first thing on Sat.

Doubling the number of teams that draft would be nice
as well -- since there will be more time for the
Elimination Tourney.

But...

That is getting more into what I want to ADD to FIRST
and the question was what did I want to SUBTRACT.

So... I will stick with just this:

Eliminate Seeding Rounds from Saturday.

Comments?

Joe J.

[archiver]

Posted by Lora Knepper at 12/24/2000 5:00 PM EST


Other on team #419, Rambots, from UMass Boston / Boston College High School and Seeking Sponsorship.


In Reply to: No more Seeding Rounds on Sat.
Posted by Joe Johnson on 12/24/2000 2:46 PM EST:



: So... I will stick with just this:
: Eliminate Seeding Rounds from Saturday.


I think I'd have to agree with you there Joe. It is insane when you have 30 minutes to figure out which teams out of a HUGE number makes the perfect ally for your team. If teams were given Friday night to really sit down and discuss the day's events, let the strategy and scouting teams talk about the other robots, I think some very good pairings would be made without having some teams 'forgotten' in the heat of the moment just because they may not have a well known name...and even some that did.

Though, as always, doing this would most likely eliminate a seeding round for each team, so it's really a toss up as to what would be best...more game time, or more time to plan ahead? ...

~ lora

[archiver]

Posted by Andy Grady at 12/24/2000 6:36 PM EST


Other on team #126, Gael Force, from Clinton High School and Nypro Inc..


In Reply to: No more Seeding Rounds on Sat.
Posted by Joe Johnson on 12/24/2000 2:46 PM EST:



Im gonna have to disagree with Joe on this one. Reason being, what about those teams who don't make it into the elimination rounds. Im sorry but id rather play 2 rounds if we are out of it on friday than nothing at all. However I do agree that teams should be given more time to look over who they want as partners. So here is my suggestion. Run seeding thursday night (as they did in 98), friday and early saturday. Late saturday morning or around noon, teams are given 1 1/2 hours to mill over who they want, then the selection begins, followed by a 15 minute strategy break, and on to the games.

Cya,
Andy Grady =)

[archiver]

Posted by bill whitley at 12/25/2000 11:01 PM EST


Student on team #70, Auto City Bandits, from Powers Catholic High School and Kettering University.


In Reply to: Re: No more Seeding Rounds on Sat.
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/24/2000 6:36 PM EST:



I have to agree with Andy on this. Many teams do not make the finals and they should be allowed the oppurtunity to participate in at least 1 match on Saturday. I've been through two FIRST seasons so far, and haven't made the finals once. It's killer to put so much blood, sweat & tears into this robot and to have it not preform the way you had hoped and designed it to. Saturday is already a hard enough day for all teams (except 3). I think that sending hundreds of people to the competition for a day when they know they have nothing to do would not be good for FIRST.

I would like to see seeding matches start earlier so that we can get more matches, more interaction, more scouting. I also think that all teams should be able to go to nationals. Going to nationals is what really hooked me on FIRST my rookie year. Some time soon we will probably have to break into division at nationals, but I think that all teams should be given the oppurtunity to attend.

: Im gonna have to disagree with Joe on this one. Reason being, what about those teams who don't make it into the elimination rounds. Im sorry but id rather play 2 rounds if we are out of it on friday than nothing at all. However I do agree that teams should be given more time to look over who they want as partners. So here is my suggestion. Run seeding thursday night (as they did in 98), friday and early saturday. Late saturday morning or around noon, teams are given 1 1/2 hours to mill over who they want, then the selection begins, followed by a 15 minute strategy break, and on to the games.

: Cya,
: Andy Grady =)

[archiver]

Posted by Nate Smith at 1/1/2001 4:00 PM EST


Other on team #66, GM Powertrain/Willow Run HS, from Eastern Michigan University and GM Powertrain.


In Reply to: Re: No more Seeding Rounds on Sat.
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/24/2000 6:36 PM EST:



: Run seeding thursday night (as they did in 98), friday and early saturday...

Just a thought....as far as I know from my three years at nationals so far, the vast majority of the teams that attend nationals are already there by Wednesday afternoon. So, what if inspections and practice rounds were held on Wednesday, possibly going into Thursday morning, and then start seeding Thursday after lunch? Just a thought...

Nate

[archiver]

Posted by Michael Betts at 12/26/2000 3:13 PM EST


Engineer on team #177, Bobcat Robotics, from South Windsor High School and International Fuel Cells.


In Reply to: No more Seeding Rounds on Sat.
Posted by Joe Johnson on 12/24/2000 2:46 PM EST:



: Eliminate Seeding Rounds from Saturday. [Joe J.]

Dr. J.,

I think that this is the first time I have ever disagreed with you. Give the teams the most play time that you can.

This is especially important at the regionals. It means that family and friends who could only get away on Saturday will get to see your team play. A rookie team may not get their robot fully functional until Saturday morning. Give them that extra chance to accomplish their goal.

As a veteran team who expects to do well, your selection process should be done Friday evening. On Saturday, you just 'fine tune' due to late breaking developments (broken robots, et cetera).

I know the goal of your post was to 'raise the bar' in the finals but I can't support this one... There must be another way.

To that end, I would like to see regional placement figured into the seeding for the National. But that's getting off of Andy's topic and is another discussion for the future.

IMHO - Mike

[archiver]

Posted by Raul at 12/26/2000 5:23 PM EST


Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.


In Reply to: No more Seeding Rounds on Sat.
Posted by Joe Johnson on 12/24/2000 2:46 PM EST:



Joe,

This seems like a controversial answer you have given.
I don't know whether to agree or disagree with you on this one.

Eliminating seeding rounds on Saturday has its merits, especially at the nationals where there are so many teams. But at the same time it has its drawbacks, which have been pointed out by others in response to your post.

I think it is important to get more teams involved in the elimination rounds; but not at the expense of not letting some teams play on Saturday. I would say that your proposal would work well in small regionals where the extra time could be used to allow ALL teams to be included in the eliminations.

My 2 cents on this one.

Raul

[archiver]

Posted by Jason "JDoggyDog" Trotter at 12/24/2000 2:53 PM EST


Student on team #191, X-CATS, from Joseph C. Wilson Magnet High School.


In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/24/2000 12:20 AM EST:



Personally, I disliked the fact that when an alliance member's robot didn't work, that you couldn't have an alternate team fill in. So basically you were in a 2 on 1 match. Just my two cents.

Happy Holidays from the X-Cats!

Jason T.

[archiver]

Posted by Brian Savitt at 12/24/2000 8:18 PM EST


Student on team #56, Robbe Xtreme, from Bound Brook High School and Ethicon Inc..


In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/24/2000 12:20 AM EST:



Personally, I would like to see a substitute team being able to play with your team if an alliance member hasn't shown up, thats assuming that we still haev alliances this year though, but also I disliked the 3x the loser score idea, even though it was in the good spirit of FIRST,

thats all from me
just my .02

Brian

[archiver]

Posted by Ken Leung at 12/26/2000 8:30 AM EST


Student on team #192, Gunn Robotics Team, from Henry M. Gunn Senior High School.


In Reply to: Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Brian Savitt on 12/24/2000 8:18 PM EST:



: but also I disliked the 3x the loser score idea, even though it was in the good spirit of FIRST,

I will have to agree that 3x the loser score isn't such a good idea... There will be times when some team intenionally get 0 points to mess up the winner's record. Plus it get out of hand when one side have to cover both side's scoring in order to get a good standing, and you can see how this scoring affect the game by looking the teams who got into top 16 seeding at the national competition.

[archiver]

Posted by Raul at 12/26/2000 8:53 AM EST


Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.


In Reply to: Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Brian Savitt on 12/24/2000 8:18 PM EST:



I agree with Brian on this - 3x loser score was too harsh on some.

My favorite scoring scheme was the one use this year at CDI: Winner gets their score plus 2x the loser's. Loser get their score plus 1/2 the winner's. This way know one was embarassed by getting zero qualifying points in any match. Also if you tied, both sides got 2x their score - no tie-brakers.

Raul

[archiver]

Posted by bill whitley at 12/26/2000 10:26 AM EST


Student on team #70, Auto City Bandits, from Powers Catholic High School and Kettering University.


In Reply to: Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Raul on 12/26/2000 8:53 AM EST:



Another vote against the 3x the loser's score. You didn't have to count on only your alliance partner having good robots, but all 4 robots on the field producing points. That makes it very difficult for even an excellent robot to score solid points if the remaining robots on the floor are sub-par.

[archiver]

Posted by Justin Stiltner at 12/26/2000 9:57 PM EST


Student on team #388, Epsilon, from Grundy High School and NASA, American Electric Power, Town of Grundy.


In Reply to: Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by bill whitley on 12/26/2000 10:26 AM EST:



: Another vote against the 3x the loser's score. You didn't have to count on only your alliance partner having good robots, but all 4 robots on the field producing points. That makes it very difficult for even an excellent robot to score solid points if the remaining robots on the floor are sub-par.


How true,
Many matches our team would score for our OPPONATS and our partner would score for us then we would both hang because we knew that the other bots would do nothing.

Justin Stiltner
Team #388
Epsilon
Grundy Va,

[archiver]

Posted by Rich Reynolds at 12/25/2000 2:59 PM EST


Student on team #237, Sie-H20-Bots, from Watertown High School and Eastern Awning, Siemon Co..


In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/24/2000 12:20 AM EST:



lets see... out of all the great things FIRST comes up with, i think the one thing we could do without would be... the lack of space. If FIRST wants this program to be so large, they really need to rethink how its played, you can only fit so many people and robots into one room... and you can only have so many robots using the same doorways. For instance, At the New England Regional, the ramp up to the playing field at the meadows last year was a joke... It was all angled, and curved, the cart had like 3 wheels on the ground most of the time. Now im not sure how to fix the problem with more space, bigger buildings i guess, but this cant be held in a High School Gym anymore...

[archiver]

Posted by Andy Grady at 12/25/2000 7:08 PM EST


Other on team #126, Gael Force, from Clinton High School and Nypro Inc..


In Reply to: Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Rich Reynolds on 12/25/2000 2:59 PM EST:



Hi all,
I tend to agree with Rich on this one, those ramps were not very user friendly. Matter of fact, I suffered personal injury goin up them when my teams cart ran over my ankle. Not fun! Though I don't know if there is a way to fix it at the meadows, which just gives more reason to move the competition to a stadium type venue =)

Cya,
Andy =)

[archiver]

Posted by Rich Reynolds at 12/25/2000 7:25 PM EST


Student on team #237, Sie-H20-Bots, from Watertown High School and Eastern Awning, Siemon Co..


In Reply to: Those ramps = big ouch!
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/25/2000 7:08 PM EST:



yeah, i aswell had a nice bruse on my knee from being run over after one match...

[archiver]

Posted by Ken Leung at 12/26/2000 8:37 AM EST


Student on team #192, Gunn Robotics Team, from Henry M. Gunn Senior High School.


In Reply to: Those ramps = big ouch!
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/25/2000 7:08 PM EST:



Last year's field was pretty decend, as it was big enough and well designed for a challenging and exciting game. But it was really hard to move around, not to mention the amount of material to build a similar structure of the ramp + goal. We were trying to move the field to demonstrate the game, and end up bringing one goal and half of the ramp because of transportation problem.
I will have to say the puck and floppies from 1999 was much more effective in showing/telling about the FIRST competition, and still provide a really fun game to play/watch. You have got to love how a small moving platform created the whole exciting atmosphere!

[archiver]

Posted by Jessica Boucher at 12/26/2000 11:41 AM EST


Student on team #237, Sie-H2O-Bots, from Watertown High School and Eastern Awning Systems & The Siemon Company.


In Reply to: Re: Those ramps = big ouch!
Posted by Ken Leung on 12/26/2000 8:37 AM EST:



I will agree on the point that the puck was easy to explain and quite exciting, but floppies were another story altogether. If you did as many demos as I did (especially to little kids, because we did demos at all 4 elementary schools in town plus a middle school & a jr. high), the puck was easy to describe due to the hockey reference (even though we didnt bring it with us to demos), but floppies, though right there when we described them, were a little tougher because of the computer reference (because, yes, in Watertown they still make use of Apple IIes complete with 5 1/4' disks known as floppies).

So, if I had the coice, I would stick with the puck and do away with the floppies. Furthermore, there was way too much guesswork in making them (a way to resolve this would be to sell pre-cut parts and pre-measured bags of material for the inside, ours were way too thin)

Plus, kids liked the use of playground balls and really grasped the concept that they never bounce the same way twice.

-Jessica B, #237

: I will have to say the puck and floppies from 1999 was much more effective in showing/telling about the FIRST competition, and still provide a really fun game to play/watch. You have got to love how a small moving platform created the whole exciting atmosphere!

[archiver]

Posted by Raul at 12/25/2000 7:26 PM EST


Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.


In Reply to: Re: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Rich Reynolds on 12/25/2000 2:59 PM EST:



Rich,

I agree that sometimes the regional (and even the national) venue is a little too small for the number of teams involved. However I am also concerned about the regionals getting too big and goint to coliseum type venues. I think we should have more regionals and keep them smaller.

When I first heard the Midwest regional was being held at the same time as the Great Lakes, I knew there would not be anywhere near as many teams as last year. At first I was sad because so many good teams from Michigan would not come. But the silver lining was that it would be smaller and would give us an opportunity to spend time getting to know the newer teams.

So, my suggetion to your problem is to just have more smaller regionals. But at the same time, I believe that FIRST should make them less expensive to attend so every team can go to more than one. The ideal situation would be to have at least one regional within a short driving distance of every team.

Raul

: lets see... out of all the great things FIRST comes up with, i think the one thing we could do without would be... the lack of space. If FIRST wants this program to be so large, they really need to rethink how its played, you can only fit so many people and robots into one room... and you can only have so many robots using the same doorways. For instance, At the New England Regional, the ramp up to the playing field at the meadows last year was a joke... It was all angled, and curved, the cart had like 3 wheels on the ground most of the time. Now im not sure how to fix the problem with more space, bigger buildings i guess, but this cant be held in a High School Gym anymore...

[archiver]

Posted by Ken Leung at 12/26/2000 8:42 AM EST


Student on team #192, Gunn Robotics Team, from Henry M. Gunn Senior High School.


In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/24/2000 12:20 AM EST:



Not sure everyone will agree on this, but I think the whole idea of adding bumpers on the robot wasn't such a good idea. It kind of created confusion about what to use, and the bumper still end up not really effective. I say take away the bumpers to force teams to build a robust structure that can withstand crashing.

[archiver]

Posted by Rich Reynolds at 12/26/2000 11:55 PM EST


Student on team #237, Sie-H20-Bots, from Watertown High School and Eastern Awning, Siemon Co..


In Reply to: Bumpers!!!
Posted by Ken Leung on 12/26/2000 8:42 AM EST:



i would ahve to agree. the bumpers werent a great idea, not sure of the reason FIRST added those but.... Another thing is that bumpers would just be another part that might be damaged, if a bumper was hanging off, it could be the deciding factor between getting 10 pts, and 5 pts on the bar. Our team did decide against the bumpers, and went with a 'tank' of a robot! I think i worked better than any bumper.

[archiver]

Posted by Justin Stiltner at 12/27/2000 8:15 PM EST


Student on team #388, Epsilon, from Grundy High School and NASA, American Electric Power, Town of Grundy.


In Reply to: Re: Bumpers!!!
Posted by Rich Reynolds on 12/26/2000 11:55 PM EST:



: i would ahve to agree. the bumpers werent a great idea, not sure of the reason FIRST added those but.... Another thing is that bumpers would just be another part that might be damaged, if a bumper was hanging off, it could be the deciding factor between getting 10 pts, and 5 pts on the bar. Our team did decide against the bumpers, and went with a 'tank' of a robot! I think i worked better than any bumper.


Yea they werent a very good idea and the fact that you oculdent put them on a moving part of the bot killed their aplication for us. We needed to but them on our arm if I rember correctly.

Justin Stiltner
Team #388
Epsilon
Grundy Va,

[archiver]

Posted by Bill Beatty at 12/26/2000 11:02 AM EST


Other on team #71, Team Hammond, from Team Hammond.


In Reply to: QUESTION OF THE WEEK!!!
Posted by Andy Grady on 12/24/2000 12:20 AM EST:



I would like to see the final four on one field. It would not take that much longer, because you would fill up the dead cool down time with the other bracket. Now it is impossible to watch both semis.

[archiver]

Posted by Andy Grady at 12/26/2000 2:18 PM EST


Other on team #126, Gael Force, from Clinton High School and Nypro Inc..


In Reply to: Final Four On Main Field
Posted by Bill Beatty on 12/26/2000 11:02 AM EST:



Bill is 100% right here. It would be nice if teams could watch who they are potentially going to play before they actually do. Its unfair to the teams competing to have to send people to the other field to scout and miss their own semifinal matches. So yes, the semis and the finals should be played on one field.

cya,
Andy =)