Championship Location Announced [Archive]

Hallry

30-09-2013, 12:07

I was hoping for Indianapolis, or a return to Atlanta...but St. Louis will do.

The dates for Champs 2015-2017 are: April 22-25 (2015); April 27-30 (2016); and April 26-29 (2017).

EDIT: This also stood out to me in the article:
When FIRST competitors return to St. Louis, they will see even more new developments in the area, including an invigorated Arch grounds, Ballpark Village, and a redeveloped Union Station. Those new developments, of course, are augmented by many youth-friendly venues such as City Museum, City Garden, Saint Louis Zoo, the Saint Louis Science Center, the Saint Louis Art Museum, and the Missouri History Museum. “Our mix of attractions and venues is really quite impressive and attractive, particularly to young people,” said Ratcliffe. “We can’t wait to show another generation of FIRST what St. Louis has to offer.”

Please...not back to the Science Center...please...

EOC

30-09-2013, 12:13

Very good news for St. Louis area teams!!!

PayneTrain

30-09-2013, 12:20

This move sets a definitive bar for what the powers-that-be want champs to be over the next 4 years.

JB987

30-09-2013, 12:21

Disappointed...but we will get over it;)

lpickett

30-09-2013, 12:23

Great, I don't have to travel so far to see a lot of great teams.

ice.berg

30-09-2013, 12:37

Pretty disappointed in this decision I guess, even though I have no other venue to compare it to. It might just be I want something new and different, but to me STL has gotten kind of bland. But we will see whats down the pipe and what kind of changes they can make to improve CMP

Blackphantom91

30-09-2013, 12:47

I'm excited that it is in the same place because it is so close to home. I did want it to move to indy though. (Food Trucks!) I am interested in the new developments of the area for championships though. Sorry west coast teams.

Nate Laverdure

30-09-2013, 12:59

The dates for Champs 2015-2017 are: April 22-25 (2015); April 27-30 (2016); and April 26-29 (2017).
This means that FIRST CMP and VEX Worlds will coincide in 2014 and 2015.

Calvin Hartley

30-09-2013, 13:11

I would have enjoyed seeing a new city. The first year I went to Worlds was 2011, so I never have seen anything aside from St. Louis. Oh well. Don't get me wrong, I think St. Louis is a wonderful city for it. I just like to see new places.

Phyrxes

30-09-2013, 13:12

This means that FIRST CMP and VEX Worlds will coincide in 2014 and 2015.

Ugh, two years of potentially telling a group of students they have to pick one and can't go to both. Given the fact that May is effectively off limits I am not that surprised that this schedule happened.

Racer26

30-09-2013, 13:14

This means that FIRST CMP and VEX Worlds will coincide in 2014 and 2015.

Seems to me that's

a) going to be a problem for some teams and people which consistently make appearances in both places (like 1114 [who've never missed an FRC CMP since they were a rookie way back in 2003, and won't ever now that they're a HOF team, and who frequently send at least one team to VEX worlds] and Karthik [as part of VEX's GDC and a lead mentor for 1114 in FRC])

b) Yet another snipe at VEX/IFI by FIRST HQ, which frankly, are becoming quite tired. The stated goals of both programs are to better STEM education. Forcing people to choose between them is the WORST thing they can do. Stop wrestling over the existing Robotics program pie, and GROW the pie. First the switch away from IFI controllers in FRC, then the axing of FVC in favour of FTC, then minibots which ONLY allow Tetrix parts, VEX parts being specifically banned, and now this. Just stop. Seriously. Are these the messages we want to teach the kids?

Note: I have edited this post. After some more consideration, I don't necessarily believe this to be as malicious as I initially thought.

Thad House

30-09-2013, 13:17

Seems to me that's

a) going to be a problem for some teams and people which consistently make appearances in both places (like 1114 and Karthik [as part of VEX's GDC and a lead mentor for 1114 in FRC])

b) Yet another snipe at VEX/IFI by FIRST HQ, which frankly, are becoming quite tired. The stated goals of both programs are to better STEM education. Forcing people to choose between them is the WORST thing they can do. Stop wrestling over the existing Robotics program pie, and GROW the pie. First the switch away from IFI controllers in FRC, then the axing of FVC in favour of FTC, then minibots which ONLY allow Tetrix parts, VEX parts being specifically banned, and now this. Just stop. Seriously. Are these the messages we want to teach the kids?

I am sure they are not making them be the same weekend on purpose. I remember reading last year that the weekends they were placed on could not be changed. They could not go later because they would interfere with AP testing, and could not go earlier because of venue issues. So I'm sure if there was something they could do to put them on different weekends they would do everything they could.

Also I am sure the switch to NI from IFI was not a snipe at IFI, it was just who they wanted to go with. Moving to FTC was the same thing, and Minibots was trying to promote their own program, not trying to undermine another programs.

Nate Laverdure

30-09-2013, 13:19

Seems to me that's ... Yet another snipe at VEX/IFI by FIRST HQ...
Agreed. Even if these things aren't intentional snipes, FIRST needs to recognize that they're being interpreted that way.

There's 52 weeks in the year. Plenty of room.

Racer26

30-09-2013, 13:21

So I'm sure if there was something they could do to put them on different weekends they would do everything they could.

Call me cynical. You've only been around a short time. I've been around long enough to have seen enough little things to make me feel this way. I expect better from the organization I've devoted 10+ years of my life to.

Peyton Yeung

30-09-2013, 13:23

While I really wished the championships could be in Indy I guess the bright side is that Indiana should be moving to districts sooner since we don't have to worry about hosting anymore. :)

Ether

30-09-2013, 13:34

There's 52 weeks in the year.

52 weeks for CMP ??

Racer26

30-09-2013, 13:38

@Ether: Obviously not, but the point remains that VEX Worlds and FIRST Championship need not be on the same weekend.

Both programs ARE growing at a significant rate, and that's going to mean increasingly more collisions of their event dates. I don't believe for a second though, that it means their World Championship Events must share a weekend, especially when many of the people who are the most dedicated to either program, contribute to both.

Its no particular secret that MANY VRC teams are associated with FRC teams.

Thad House

30-09-2013, 13:40

I found the thread from last year where both people from VEX and people close to FIRST replied and gave their reasoning on the timing

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116489

Calvin Hartley

30-09-2013, 13:43

There's 52 weeks in the year.
52 weeks for CMP ??

Please, share with us your time travel knowledge. It would be especially useful during build season. :D

On a serious note, I'm not sure what weekends it could be realistically moved to without changing the rest of the competition schedule. MSC is a week 7 event (and I assume other District Championships are as well...?) putting it just two weeks before Championship. That alone is a time crunch. Putting it later seems to have been effectively dismissed due to AP testing and the like. Putting it earlier seems to me a bit too short notice for some teams to find they are qualified.

Just my thoughts. If you are more knowledgable than I, please enlighten me.

Steven Donow

30-09-2013, 13:48

Racer26

30-09-2013, 13:50

Travis Hoffman

30-09-2013, 14:03

Call me cynical. You've only been around a short time. I've been around long enough to have seen enough little things to make me feel this way. I expect better from the organization I've devoted 10+ years of my life to.

Why not simply post a Frank Answers Friday question about this particular topic?

He's probably already reading this thread anyway. Give him a chance to put forth an "official" explanation from a seemingly-trusted individual.

Cory

30-09-2013, 14:20

Call me cynical. You've only been around a short time. I've been around long enough to have seen enough little things to make me feel this way. I expect better from the organization I've devoted 10+ years of my life to.

I'm generally a pretty vocal critic of FIRST, particularly re: the whole VEX/IFI thing.

In this case it's total BS to insinuate that FIRST is taking a petty stance and trying to screw over VEX and your post is full of false outrage. Seriously, diagram out how you expect FIRST to not have championships on the same weekend as VEX champs.

7 weeks of regional events, one week between bag and tag day and week 1. 1 week between week 7 and Easter. 1 week between Easter and champs. Where is the time that you envision FRC Champs being held?

It doesn't exist. You have the last 7 days of April and that's it. Any earlier and build has to be less than 6 weeks. Any later and you're in AP testing. Both of those are untenable solutions.

JVN

30-09-2013, 14:36

b) Yet another snipe at VEX/IFI by FIRST HQ, which frankly, are becoming quite tired. The stated goals of both programs are to better STEM education. Forcing people to choose between them is the WORST thing they can do. Stop wrestling over the existing Robotics program pie, and GROW the pie. First the switch away from IFI controllers in FRC, then the axing of FVC in favour of FTC, then minibots which ONLY allow Tetrix parts, VEX parts being specifically banned, and now this. Just stop. Seriously. Are these the messages we want to teach the kids?

Your comments are way, WAY out of line. You should consider that you don't really know ANY of the facts involved in this situation, and maybe need to calm down.

In 2013 IFI was a Crown Supplier to FIRST, and we enjoy a fantastic working relationship with the folks in Manchester.

Nate Laverdure

30-09-2013, 14:45

Seriously, diagram out how you expect FIRST to not have championships on the same weekend as VEX champs. ... Any earlier and build has to be less than 6 weeks. Any later and you're in AP testing. Both of those are untenable solutions.
Interference between FIRST CMP and VEX Worlds is almost as crappy as any of the other options, and becoming crappier as more students become involved in both programs.

Backseat-driving the 2014 schedule, I come up with this:

-2 weeks (Apr 9-12) Interferes with existing Week 7 events. Resolving this interference would require significant (a) investment in fields and (b) volunteer growth to compress the Regional and District event schedules to 6 weeks. Also requires eliminating the Feb 20-22 slack week so that Week 1 events would immediately follow after Bag & Tag day.
-1 weeks (Apr 16-19) Interferes with Easter holiday (Apr 20).
+0 weeks (Apr 23-26) Existing. Interferes with VEX Worlds.
+1 weeks (Apr 30-May 3) Interferes with SAT testing (May 3-4) and in-class preparation for AP testing (begins Monday May 5)
+4 weeks (May 21-24) Interferes with final exams, proms, early graduations, etc.

Yes, any of these options would present us with a challenge we'd have to overcome.

Racer26

30-09-2013, 15:41

Your comments are way, WAY out of line. You should consider that you don't really know ANY of the facts involved in this situation, and maybe need to calm down.

In 2013 IFI was a Crown Supplier to FIRST, and we enjoy a fantastic working relationship with the folks in Manchester.

I am well aware of the long-standing relationship between IFI and FIRST. I may not have any intimate connections to anyone at either end, but I do have the experience of watching the last 10 years of that relationship as an outside observer.

As Nate said earlier, even if the snipes are not intentional, they have that appearance. For every person like me that's vocal enough to say something, there's dozens more thinking it. Regardless of whether or not my opinions are right or wrong, baseless or spot on, that's a bad thing.

Such appearances teach the wrong lessons about the world beyond high school. The lessons we teach unintentionally are just as important as all the lessons we set out to teach.

It is nice to see IFI doesn't seem to feel slighted by the date collision. I stand by my view that the net result is bad for both programs.

Maybe there truly isn't anything that could be done to avoid a date collision in 2014. Personally, I don't see the big deal with competing Easter weekend. It was not an insurmountable problem in 2013 when Easter collided with Week 5 of the FRC competition season. The team I work with is based in a Catholic school, and we competed that weekend. I agree its less than ideal, I'm just not sure that its a worse option than having the events overlap, given that so many people are key to BOTH programs.

I have a much harder time understanding a collision in 2015, when HQ was looking at other host cities, and significant structure changes are not out of the question, given the current overcrowding at CMP. Seems to me that some combination of shifting weeks, changing host cities, and changing the structure should have come up with a way to avoid it.

Frank has done a fantastic job improving transparency at HQ, which has done a tremendous service to fixing a lot of the problems that were brewing in and around the 2011/2012 seasons. This announcement feels a little too much like the old HQ for my liking. Maybe he'll chime in with some clarity soon.

Cory

30-09-2013, 15:51

I have a much harder time understanding a collision in 2015, when HQ was looking at other host cities, and significant structure changes are not out of the question, given the current overcrowding at CMP. Seems to me that some combination of shifting weeks, changing host cities, and changing the structure should have come up with a way to avoid it.

Frank has done a fantastic job improving transparency at HQ, which has done a tremendous service to fixing a lot of the problems that were brewing in and around the 2011/2012 seasons. This announcement feels a little too much like the old HQ for my liking. Maybe he'll chime in with some clarity soon.

Again, I fail to see any logical reason to assume that anyone intentionally made them both the same date. Do you think FIRST wants them to be the same? They have to know they run the risk of losing eyes on the event as well as participants who would have been there for FRC but are now at VEX. Maybe there was a venue conflict for other weeks. Maybe they could have resolved that by going to Atlanta or Indy, but it was too financially advantageous to stay in STL.

FIRST deserves to take flack for some (maybe even many) decisions they've made the last few years, but for you to single this event out as being absolutely their fault and a sign of ill will towards VEX is ridiculous.

BrendanB

30-09-2013, 15:52

This isn't meant to sound critical of VEX and is meant to be a legitimate question for discussion, but is there any reason, aside from venue contracts(and I guess focusing on the competition structure) that VEX Worlds can't be a week earlier?

To take this a little further, Vex made the decision back when it parted ways with FIRST to hold their Championship during the same time frame as the FIRST World Championship. I am NOT saying this is the fault of Vex but the April time works great for both programs so unless one of them chooses a different month to start holding their Championship we will have this problem going forward. Additionally every year both programs change what weekend they are held on in April depending on event availability and other factors.

I highly doubt FIRST made the decision to stick it to Vex by having them on the same weekend it is just bad luck it happened. The odds they would have to be on the same weekend is pretty high considering there are only so many weekends in April.

Blackphantom91

30-09-2013, 15:59

This situation is something organizations of the same nature run into. For example, before my days of a FIRSTER, I was a fighter who went to national championships every year. Due to how many qualifiers and when they could do the actual championship, they occurred on the same week of the 4th of July every year. Both organizations didn't do this intentionally, they just couldn't get the venues different dates based on the timeline of the qualifiers.

TBH I think its bad luck honestly. These events have to be planned out so far in advance it's not even funny. Also its kinda out of our control.

PayneTrain

30-09-2013, 16:02

If you think FIRST HQ is intentionally acting against the interests of other robotics competitions I have a secret document that shows who really killed Kennedy.

If you think this is a case of two multinational, multimillion dollar non profit agencies making multimillion dollar deals with large destination venues for years and years out in advance and have a very very small window of flexibility, I guess the next thing you're going to tell me is the sky isn't green and the earth isn't flat.

Racer26

30-09-2013, 16:08

FIRST deserves to take flack for some (maybe even many) decisions they've made the last few years, but for you to single this event out as being absolutely their fault and a sign of ill will towards VEX is ridiculous.

Point conceded. It is not solely HQs fault.

I'm even willing to concede that its probably not a sign of ill will.

I still think its one of the worst possible options, and having it happen two years in a row is even less acceptable.

I'll admit I'm ignorant of the AP testing problem -- we don't have such a thing in Canada. Our Grade 10 Literacy Test frequently collides with FRC events, and we work around it.

Surely VEX and HQ can work together to prevent this from becoming an annual problem though... Any reason VEX worlds couldn't be run on the week after FRC's week 7?

Walter Deitzler

30-09-2013, 16:16

And Champs is going to be a metro-link ride from my house for the entirty of my high school life.

This makes me very happy. :D

Alan Anderson

30-09-2013, 16:55

Any reason VEX worlds couldn't be run on the week after FRC's week 7?

Ahem. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1293826&postcount=22)

It looks like you're just arguing for the sake of argument now. Whether I'm spot on or making a baseless accusation shouldn't matter, right? ;)

Steven Donow

30-09-2013, 17:07

Ahem. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1293826&postcount=22)

It looks like you're just arguing for the sake of argument now. Whether I'm spot on or making a baseless accusation shouldn't matter, right? ;)

I actually posed this question earlier, not for the sake of argument. This year it interferes with Easter,but I don't thi it does future years(correct me if I'm wrong, I'm Jewish). Obviously this is ignoring the issue of venue contracts, but its not arguing for the sake of arguing(just that specific question/point)

EDIT: I'm on my phone and didn't realize my post was linked...my bad...

waialua359

30-09-2013, 17:24

As a robotics program that has now existed in its 15th year, we have been involved with FRC, VEX and Botball about 10 years ago.
Currently, our program has found value in offering both VEX (and now VEX IQ) and FRC in a 7-12th grade program and school. The ability to offer VEX at Middle School and providing a continuum up until 12th grade has proved valuable in providing our students with a much better skill set and STEM experience, prior to post secondary opportunities.

Regardless of the reasons that led to the challenges of trying to attend both events for 2014 and the next several years, it is still disappointing to our program at the school level.
We all have goals that our own programs strive for, and one of them was certainly working hard to qualify for both World Championships. Both events offer life changing and inspiring experiences that are priceless for students and their families.

We intend to participate in both regardless (if we qualify for VEX), however, team members, students and parents have to choose which one to participate in. It also gets a lot more tricky for us in coordinating who goes where and is responsible for what....

Racer26

30-09-2013, 17:25

Ahem. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1293826&postcount=22)

It looks like you're just arguing for the sake of argument now. Whether I'm spot on or making a baseless accusation shouldn't matter, right? ;)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is the season not Week 7> Week Off (because this is TOO SOON for teams to arrange to get to CMP after finding out Week 7) > Easter > CMP

What I'm suggesting is VEX's championship be placed on the week immediately following Week 7. This way, it would never interfere with FIRST Championship, because FIRST won't put championship that close to Week 7.

Nate Laverdure

30-09-2013, 17:39

Correct me if I'm wrong, but is the season not Week 7> Week Off (because this is TOO SOON for teams to arrange to get to CMP after finding out Week 7) > Easter > CMP
No, in 2014 there is no extra week between Week 7 events and Easter weekend. This may not be true in future years.

This will become obvious when the calendar (http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprograms/frc/calendar/month/2014-04) is updated.

Racer26

30-09-2013, 17:44

Ah. Fair enough.

ErvinI

30-09-2013, 19:02

I'll admit I'm ignorant of the AP testing problem -- we don't have such a thing in Canada. Our Grade 10 Literacy Test frequently collides with FRC events, and we work around it.

Certain schools in Ontario and other parts of Canada do have AP testing, but it is much less common here than in the states. Canadian universities still take these into account, however.

EricH

30-09-2013, 19:57

No, in 2014 there is no extra week between Week 7 events and Easter weekend. This may not be true in future years.
The other thing that may not be true (beyond the existing timeframe that both FIRST and VEX have announced) is that they are on the same weekend.

2014, same weekend. 2015, same weekend. VRC has yet to announce after 2015.

If I know the fine folks at IFI and REC, they've probably already picked up on FIRST's announcement of the dates, and as likely as not will attempt to avoid the FIRST Championship weekend in 2016 and 2017. Now, for above-stated reasons, that might not be possible. After all, May is bad, April has too many potential conflicts... March has FRC regionals...

Racer26

01-10-2013, 00:40

Certain schools in Ontario and other parts of Canada do have AP testing, but it is much less common here than in the states. Canadian universities still take these into account, however.

Huh. None that I know of, but OK. Maybe I'm wrong.

The other thing that may not be true (beyond the existing timeframe that both FIRST and VEX have announced) is that they are on the same weekend.

2014, same weekend. 2015, same weekend. VRC has yet to announce after 2015.

If I know the fine folks at IFI and REC, they've probably already picked up on FIRST's announcement of the dates, and as likely as not will attempt to avoid the FIRST Championship weekend in 2016 and 2017. Now, for above-stated reasons, that might not be possible. After all, May is bad, April has too many potential conflicts... March has FRC regionals...

Truth be told, I feel like colliding with an FRC regional weekend (Week 6, ideally) would be infinitely better than colliding with CMP. At least then, teams can schedule themselves around it.

Amanda Morrison

02-10-2013, 13:43

Truth be told, I feel like colliding with an FRC regional weekend (Week 6, ideally) would be infinitely better than colliding with CMP. At least then, teams can schedule themselves around it.

You (and plenty others in this thread) are failing to take into consideration other contracts that may already be in place with these venues.

Not only are there a very limited number of venues within the US that could accommodate the interesting demands of educational robotics competitions (such as power supply requirements, distance, layout, proximity to enough lodging spaces, and many other factors), you are assuming that these venues are not already in high demand for sports competitions, trade shows, and other large conventions.

The convention industry generally books shows in blocks of several years, if possible. This benefits the show (they have a guaranteed venue), the convention center (they can refine the needs of the show over time and bring in significant revenue), and the surrounding area (tourism, lodging, etc. brings revenue for local businesses). By the time this news went out to FIRST teams, I am very sure that the conflict of dates was known between the two competitions and already vetted to be unavoidable. Moreso, I trust that they were well aware of the effect this would have on teams, and had still determined this to be the best possible outcome given the circumstances.

Countless hours of planning and execution go into making these the best possible experiences for the teams. The event constraints and logistics are tremendous.

Racer26

02-10-2013, 13:52

Uh. I was talking about a longterm solution to the problem so that its not an annual issue. Shifting VEX Worlds back by a few weeks into the FRC Regionals would allow teams to plan to attend both (even if it means they must travel to more distant regionals for their FRC participation).

I was in no way suggesting this be a thing before 2016, the next year for which VEX Worlds have not yet been announced (and thus is likely not yet contracted to a particular venue.)

Sean Schuff

02-10-2013, 18:51

Just to break the somewhat hostile monotony of this thread...

Isn't anyone bummed that we're not going back to Orlando?? ::safety::

dodar

02-10-2013, 18:55

Just to break the somewhat hostile monotony of this thread...

Isn't anyone bummed that we're not going back to Orlando?? ::safety::

*raises hand*

Brandon Ha

02-10-2013, 20:33

OZ_341

02-10-2013, 23:43

Just to break the somewhat hostile monotony of this thread...

Isn't anyone bummed that we're not going back to Orlando?? ::safety::

VERY SAD!!! I feel bad for everyone that never had a chance to experience Champs at Disney. No offense to Houston, Atlanta, or St. Louis, but Disney was truly special. You can't understand unless you were there.

On a related note, I truly hope that they figure out and solve the Finale Celebration overcrowding problem.
Not only was the 2013 Finale poorly run, but it was flat out unsafe.

All that being said there are many logistical positives about St. Louis, which make it a suitable place for Champs.

Taylor

03-10-2013, 07:12

The only thing that I could ever ask anyone to try and get to happen, is someone somehow get the television show, The Great Food Truck Race, to stop by during that weekend... In general, I am a pro-food truck because you get "fast food" and its "cheap". The food selection at CMP, is somewhat limited to the local area and can be very chaotic and time-consuming, and this would just make it that little bit less.

We'll have three (https://twitter.com/Pierogiloveindy) food (https://twitter.com/Caribbean_Taste) trucks (https://twitter.com/GroovyGuysFries) catering our offseason event (http://www.thecagematch.com). If it goes well, other offseasons - and maybe official events - may follow suit.

Koko Ed

03-10-2013, 09:02

Just to break the somewhat hostile monotony of this thread...

Isn't anyone bummed that we're not going back to Orlando?? ::safety::

no

Alex2614

06-10-2013, 18:36

magnets

06-10-2013, 18:46

Alex2614

06-10-2013, 19:26

I like St. Louis, and we shouldn't complain about it, because it's a great place, and we don't know all the reasons that FIRST chose this location.

It's near a big airport, it's a pretty safe place, and there are plenty of great hotels in the area. The actual seating is really great, and the arena is very impressive. There's enough room for FIRST to get bigger if it needs to. In the area, there are a number of really neat restaurants that we always go to, and going up the arch is always a team favorite. I imagine that it is also cheaper/easier for FIRST, as they don't have to negotiate all the details with a new place, and they can keep everything mostly the same.

The food during the event is not great, but I don't remember ever being impressed anywhere else. As for the finale, that's not a problem with the location, but with FIRST's organization.

Having consistency is actually a good thing.

I disagree with this, though. St. Louis's airport isn't nearly as big as Atlanta or Indy, the convention center is extremely cramped as it is, and there is absolutely no space to spread out like there was in Atlanta. Space was everywhere, and we only used half of the facilities there. Also, Atlanta had a great finale location, and the past finales in St. Louis were absolutely terrible and a logistical nightmare. It is actually a problem with the location because it takes over an hour to get there, and the place physically cannot hold the number of people that we have. Plus, the staff there was completely rude and the opposite of helpful. We walked away from that venue practically in tears because of the way we were treated.

I mean, I understand that there are obviously reasons that they chose it over the other candidates, but the only thing they said was that they were "impressed with the facilities," but everyone that I have talked to that saw the championship in Atlanta completely disagrees.

The fundamental problem is that the FIRST officials don't have to worry about organizing a team of people that needs to stick together, and they spend a lot of time in the VIP areas. i.e. they don't have the participant perspective.

Just something to much on.

Pault

06-10-2013, 19:31

Very very disappointed in this decision. I will definitely be sending a letter to FIRST. Many participants and I always walk away from St. Louis in a bad mood, especially after ALL of the events on Saturday (not just the finale, even though that's a major aspect of our disappointment). Will post letter later on. Thoughts? Anybody actually like St. Louis (those that have been to championships outside of St. Lous, like Atlanta or Texas)?

Can you specify what your complaints were. I have never been to champs (yet...), but judging from what I've read in this thread, not everybody agrees that St. Louis is bad, and very few people hate it. The way you wrote your post kind of assumes that almost everybody who is reading it would agree with you, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Also, don't let the details take away from the entire experience. At an event the magnitude of championships, it is impossible to make everything perfect. And it doesn't make things any better that everybody who attends expects the event to be perfect and absolutely amazing in every way, because of how much effort they put into getting there. The reality is that championships, no matter how hard FIRST tries and how much money is put into it, will never live up to its expectations. Sure, there are things that FIRST can improve upon (like the finale), but in the end we need to be happy with what we get. The championships are supposed to be culmination of all the sweat and tears that teams put into their robots. It is up to you to enjoy it as that. You can love it for what it is, or hate it for what it isn't. The choice is yours.

dodar

06-10-2013, 19:32

I disagree with this, though. St. Louis's airport isn't nearly as big as Atlanta or Indy, the convention center is extremely cramped as it is, and there is absolutely no space to spread out like there was in Atlanta. Space was everywhere, and we only used half of the facilities there. Also, Atlanta had a great finale location, and the past finales in St. Louis were absolutely terrible and a logistical nightmare. It is actually a problem with the location because it takes over an hour to get there, and the place physically cannot hold the number of people that we have. Plus, the staff there was completely rude and the opposite of helpful. We walked away from that venue practically in tears because of the way we were treated.

I mean, I understand that there are obviously reasons that they chose it over the other candidates, but the only thing they said was that they were "impressed with the facilities," but everyone that I have talked to that saw the championship in Atlanta completely disagrees.

The fundamental problem is that the FIRST officials don't have to worry about organizing a team of people that needs to stick together, and they spend a lot of time in the VIP areas. i.e. they don't have the participant perspective.

Just something to much on.

Totally agree. In most of the key areas that are needed to be looked at for Champs, it seems like Atlanta is ahead of St. Louis.

Alex2614

06-10-2013, 21:16

Can you specify what your complaints were. I have never been to champs (yet...), but judging from what I've read in this thread, not everybody agrees that St. Louis is bad, and very few people hate it. The way you wrote your post kind of assumes that almost everybody who is reading it would agree with you, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Also, don't let the details take away from the entire experience. At an event the magnitude of championships, it is impossible to make everything perfect. And it doesn't make things any better that everybody who attends expects the event to be perfect and absolutely amazing in every way, because of how much effort they put into getting there. The reality is that championships, no matter how hard FIRST tries and how much money is put into it, will never live up to its expectations. Sure, there are things that FIRST can improve upon (like the finale), but in the end we need to be happy with what we get. The championships are supposed to be culmination of all the sweat and tears that teams put into their robots. It is up to you to enjoy it as that. You can love it for what it is, or hate it for what it isn't. The choice is yours.

Keep an eye out for my letter. I will post on this thread once it is completed. It explains all of this in detail. Everybody that I personally have talked to prefers Atlanta FAR more than St. Louis. I'm not just letting little details take away from the experience. I'm letting the really big logistical aspects take away from the experience. The only people that I have talked to that prefer St. Louis are the ones that have only been to St. Louis. There are a few exceptions, obviously, but that will always happen. Also, people that have posted in favor of STL have either a) never been elsewhere for cmp or b) citing very specific aspects of STL that they like, but not saying why it would be better than other locations, like, say Atlanta or Indy. I have yet to hear a very strong argument for holding it in STL.

IndySam

06-10-2013, 21:46

The past layout of the dome floor is simply awful. They put it on the short end (because of the main hospitality area) and there is simply not enough seating for the opening ceremony or the finals. Smaller teams that don't have enough people to go reserve seats are just simply out of luck.

FIRST choosing a better vantage point for their VIP's over a chance for all the students to watch really sticks in my craw.

cadandcookies

06-10-2013, 22:32

I have yet to hear a very strong argument for holding it in STL.

Well, clearly FIRST has.

I haven't ever been to Atlanta, so obviously can't comment on it, but certainly St. Louis seems at least manageable. I would hope that FIRST is still looking into optimizing the layout of the event.

I for one am willing to believe that FIRST has the best in mind when choosing the locations of the championships.

dodar

06-10-2013, 22:36

Well, clearly FIRST has.

I haven't ever been to Atlanta, so obviously can't comment on it, but certainly St. Louis seems at least manageable. I would hope that FIRST is still looking into optimizing the layout of the event.

I for one am willing to believe that FIRST has the best in mind when choosing the locations of the championships.

But thats just it, FIRST shouldnt settle for a "manageable" championship setup. FIRST should only want the perfect setup for the World Championships. When you bring in over 100,000 people to a city for close to a week and have them spending the amount of money into an economy, bringing the exposure to that city, and giving you a deal to continually have that for usually 2-3 years, FIRST should be able to pick any city they really want.

Jim Wilks

06-10-2013, 22:51

FIRST choosing a better vantage point for their VIP's over a chance for all the students to watch really sticks in my craw.

+1 for that

dtengineering

06-10-2013, 22:53

I'll admit I'm ignorant of the AP testing problem -- we don't have such a thing in Canada. Our Grade 10 Literacy Test frequently collides with FRC events, and we work around it.

Advanced placement exams have taken place in Canadian high schools for over 25 years.

Just because you don't know about them doesn't mean they don't exist.

And, for the record, in British Columbia there is no such thing as a "Grade 10 Literacy Test" that frequently collides with FRC events.

Canada > Ontario, eh?

Jason

Ryan Dognaux

07-10-2013, 00:19

The only people that I have talked to that prefer St. Louis are the ones that have only been to St. Louis.

This hasn't been my experience at all when talking to people, and I've been to every Championship venue since they were at Disney. I can cite things I disliked about every Championship I've attended, St. Louis included, but I've never felt like because the event was in St. Louis it was somehow not successful or less enjoyable.

What's one good reason to host it in St. Louis? Maybe the large amount of help the event receives from local teams, volunteers & companies that all pitch in to help support the event. Not that you wouldn't find this in Atlanta or Indianapolis, but I think our local supporters do a pretty awesome job.

I'm looking forward to reading your specific complaints about St. Louis.

BBray_T1296

07-10-2013, 00:54

I'm looking forward to reading your specific complaints about St. Louis.

+1

Alan Anderson

07-10-2013, 09:47

I'll admit I'm ignorant of the AP testing problem...

Fortunately, ignorance can be fixed, if one but pays attention.

"Pardon him. Theodotus: he is a barbarian, and thinks that the customs of his tribe and island are the laws of nature." (Julius Caesar, Caesar and Cleopatra by George Bernard Shaw)

Racer26

07-10-2013, 10:44

Advanced placement exams have taken place in Canadian high schools for over 25 years.

Just because you don't know about them doesn't mean they don't exist.

And, for the record, in British Columbia there is no such thing as a "Grade 10 Literacy Test" that frequently collides with FRC events.

Canada > Ontario, eh?

Jason

AP Exams in Canadian High Schools: Didn't happen in my school, nor any of my friends' schools that I'm aware of. Maybe they're more proliferous than I think, but I concede that they DO happen here.

I was actually aware that the Grade 10 Literacy Test is an Ontario-only thing, but, I'll admit my post made it sound like a Canada-wide thing. The truth of the matter is that until 2012, there were no regionals outside Ontario. It frequently is an issue for the ~70+ Ontario teams who have to leave several of their students home for at least one day of their competitions.

Ultimately though, I too am disappointed that HQ decided to keep CMP in St. Louis. The 3 championships that have been held there have all had fairly systemic issues related to venue size, poor planning, and a program that is rapidly outgrowing its format.

I only ever attended CMP in 2010, when it was in Atlanta. My experience there, was that the facilities we were using had a significant amount of room for us to expand.

Teams need more than 8 qualification matches.

We need more than 400 teams at CMP.

The 54 2014 regional events will qualify 324 teams to compete (not counting pre-qualified teams who earn a 2014 merit-slot and wasted wildcards). MICMP qualifies another 27, and the other 3 districts push the number very close to, if not over 400. Never mind HOF and Sustaining teams, and 2013 Champions.

CMP has to grow. Time restrictions mean it can't get longer, and teams can't play fewer qualification matches than 9, and ideally 10-12. Something's got to give.

Steven Donow

07-10-2013, 10:55

I was actually aware that the Grade 10 Literacy Test is an Ontario-only thing, but, I'll admit my post made it sound like a Canada-wide thing. The truth of the matter is that until 2012, there were no regionals outside Ontario. It frequently is an issue for the ~70+ Ontario teams who have to leave several of their students home for at least one day of their competitions.

This is an issue that "just has to exist". The 2011 NJ Regional coincided with the HSPAs(NJ state-wide proficiency test). MAR events often collide with this(though I believe MAR tries to avoid/have one of the two PA events that weekend). Now, I had trouble finding exact dates of the test via Google(seeing various dates in March-May), but as Ontario eventually moves towards the district structure, provided the test doesn't collide with Championships, that will eliminate the issue by having SatSun events or off-weeks.

I think we just need to accept that until the FRC event structure is significantly redefined, we're unlikely to see the lifting of major collisions.

And I don't believe my question earlier was answered: other than Easter and existing venue contracts is there anything, competition structurewise, preventing VEX Worlds from being during the weekend between Week 7 and Championships?

Chris Hibner

07-10-2013, 11:18

I disagree with this, though. St. Louis's airport isn't nearly as big as Atlanta or Indy...

Yes, Atlanta Hartsfield is much bigger, but the other part of this statement is completely false. St. Louis Lambert is 27.5% larger than Indy based on number of passenger flights (255,276 for STL vs 200,253 for IND), and 25% larger than Indy based on number of gates (50 for STL vs. 40 for IND)

I have been to all FIRST championship locations, and I prefer St. Louis to Atlanta.

PayneTrain

07-10-2013, 11:25

I think we just need to accept that until the FRC event structure is significantly redefined, we're unlikely to see the lifting of major collisions.

And I don't believe my question earlier was answered: other than Easter and existing venue contracts is there anything, competition structurewise, preventing VEX Worlds from being during the weekend between Week 7 and Championships?

I've been under the impression that the VEX competition structure is more flexible than the FRC structure, but I assume that the Anaheim Convention Center is a very popular venue for a lot of events and it's a favorite of the organizers and attendees for VEX worlds. There are key members of both competitions, and I assume one of the groups got backed into a corner where they had to take the dates. It's not ideal for anyone, but it is what it is.

I know people recognize the necessity of moving to a larger venue to support CMP yesterday, but I imagine FIRST HQ has to be getting a very beneficial deal to themselves and for the city for them to take this offer. Halfway through this extension on the venue agreement, half of the FRC population is going to be under the district system (assuming Eastern Canada, the Capital Region, and a few other locales put it together by then) which is going to streamline the competition and greatly slow the pace of increasing merit-based slots for CMP, and may even cause a small dip in the count. (For example, if slots are appropriated to an area under a district system relative to the population of teams in FRC, Ontario/Montreal could lose at least 10 "redundant" slots).

It feels like the program is crossing the canyon a lot of people saw coming 5 years ago and now they have to build the bridge across it on the fly. Under the existing system you're going to really feel the burn in CMP in 2-3 years spacewise even if they do everything possible, so this deal might just work well enough for where the program is now.

There are things FIRST can do: set minimum and maximum occupancy for a regional event to event out the probability of securing a merit-based slot from one of these events, add in more teams to CMP while definitely adding at least 1 more division, shrink pit size or size of something else... it can work. No venue is perfect and St Louis may not jive with long-term goals of the organization, but smart people work in HQ and they know what needs improving and they think they can work it all out in St Louis.

Calvin Hartley

07-10-2013, 11:33

...We need more than 400 teams at CMP...

Why do we need more than 400 teams? It's a Championship event. A championship naturally is intended for the top teams. I personally don't see the necessity of adding more teams, though I would like to hear your reasons for your opinion.

Alan Anderson

07-10-2013, 12:19

Pardon the ramble, but I have a bunch of stuff in my head that wants to get out.

Part 1: location

I like how convenient it is to get between the pits and the fields in St. Louis. The layout could be tweaked further, but it's pretty good. However, it's FULL. There's not really room for growth.

The World Congress Center in Atlanta is spacious. The field layout in the Georgia Dome was great. The walk from pits to stands was a hike, but not ridiculously far, and I enjoyed the regular opportunity to experience the outdoors along the way.

I prefer the experience I had in Atlanta by a very small margin, but I was a few years younger then. As I get busier (and perhaps a bit slower), I appreciate the proximity of pits and dome in St. Louis more.

Part 2: size

Option A: don't have more teams attending The Championship Event

As more regions make the transition to the district model, the number of Regional competitions will eventually decrease. That will make it possible to keep the number of teams qualifying for The Championship from growing past the currently barely manageable size. Perhaps it could even be reduced.

Option B: have more teams attending The Championship Event

Simultaneously inviting more teams and giving each team more matches just isn't going to work without adding more fields, and probably more divisions. A larger Championship needs a venue larger than the Edward Jones Dome area. Having more divisions also makes the Einstein matches take longer. And how does FIRST deal with the after-event party getting even larger?

Option C: add another level to the competition hierarchy

Instead of making the FRC Championship bigger, how about making it smaller? During the current "off week" in the competition schedule, hold a set of "Conference" competitions to select 24 teams to send on to the finals. It makes things more complicated, and it adds to the interference with school.

Part 3: experience

That "interferes with school" thing is a problem. It keeps a lot of teams from planning to attend the Championship without competing, even though there's so much to get out of it anyway. Many people seem to think that each team should have the opportunity to attend every so often, just to give the students the experience. Well, nobody at FIRST is stopping them from showing up and enjoying the event, or attending the presentations, or volunteering to help run it.

Taylor

07-10-2013, 12:24

And I don't believe my question earlier was answered: other than Easter and existing venue contracts is there anything, competition structurewise, preventing VEX Worlds from being during the weekend between Week 7 and Championships?
You're right, but the answer given is those two things are substantial enough to not need other roadblocks.
Why do we need more than 400 teams? It's a Championship event. A championship naturally is intended for the top teams. I personally don't see the necessity of adding more teams, though I would like to hear your reasons for your opinion.
I completely concur, and I think 400 FRC teams is unnecessarily large. My hope is that as districts proliferate, the size of the (FRC) championship shrinks. I also hope that the FTC championship grows in number of teams - mostly to honor all teams in the winning alliance, not just the captain.

Libby K

07-10-2013, 12:36

The fundamental problem is that the FIRST officials don't have to worry about organizing a team of people that needs to stick together, and they spend a lot of time in the VIP areas. i.e. they don't have the participant perspective.

Absolutely not true. So many people's perspectives go into these decisions, from all different backgrounds. Volunteers, team participants, FIRST staff/officials, VIPs, event managers - they are looking at all angles.

Teams need more than 8 qualification matches.

We need more than 400 teams at CMP.

With the current 4-field structure, you cannot have that cake and eat it too.

I will echo another post above me - Why do we "need" 400+?
(We DEFINITELY need more than 8 matches per team. That was unacceptable.)

Patrick Flynn

07-10-2013, 12:43

The past layout of the dome floor is simply awful. They put it on the short end (because of the main hospitality area) and there is simply not enough seating for the opening ceremony or the finals.

FIRST choosing a better vantage point for their VIP's over a chance for all the students to watch really sticks in my craw.

I agree that the floor layout isn't the best. And that things could be done to improve it.
But I also feel that the VIP's that give a lot of money to back this program deserve the best seating. I maybe alone here, but I think anywhere, Football, Hockey, etc, etc, you will see the big money supporters getting preferred seating. I think that there maybe a way to compromise here and work out some better seating. But I think that if someone is giving more money that me they get the better seats.
Also i understand that you spend a lot of money to get to champs, but the VIP's spend more than that on the program I'm sure.

Libby K

07-10-2013, 13:10

I agree that the floor layout isn't the best. And that things could be done to improve it.
But I also feel that the VIP's that give a lot of money to back this program deserve the best seating. I maybe alone here, but I think anywhere, Football, Hockey, etc, etc, you will see the big money supporters getting preferred seating. I think that there maybe a way to compromise here and work out some better seating. But I think that if someone is giving more money that me they get the better seats.
Also i understand that you spend a lot of money to get to champs, but the VIP's spend more than that on the program I'm sure.

^ This. There's no easy-way of saying this, but let's be real. Sponsors who give thousands (and in some cases millions) of dollars to FIRST - in direct sponsorship, mentorship, whatever the case may be - are going to get a focus when it comes to designing some portions of the Championship experience.

That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be some big improvements in the team experience (the biggest example being the wrap-party this year, but that's already been addressed in statements from FIRST)... It's just worth mentioning that yes, VIPs are going to get some things tailored to them. This should not be news to anyone with a realistic mindset about things.

Rosiebotboss

07-10-2013, 13:35

The fundamental problem is that the FIRST officials don't have to worry about organizing a team of people that needs to stick together, and they spend a lot of time in the VIP areas. i.e. they don't have the participant perspective.

With all due respect, you have NO idea what you are talking about! I am one of those persons of which you speak. These people arrive on Monday and leave on Sunday, working 12, 13, 14 15 hour days. And many of them are VOLUNTEERS....Yes, that is a pretty full week, so you can have the top quality event you are complaining about.

What specific ideas would you bring to the table to improve the event? Email them to frcteams@usfirst.org or me directly and I will forward them myself, unalderterated. And post them here so all can see.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might be asked to be on the committee!

Mr V

07-10-2013, 14:30

^ This. There's no easy-way of saying this, but let's be real. Sponsors who give thousands (and in some cases millions) of dollars to FIRST - in direct sponsorship, mentorship, whatever the case may be - are going to get a focus when it comes to designing some portions of the Championship experience.

That doesn't mean that there shouldn't be some big improvements in the team experience (the biggest example being the wrap-party this year, but that's already been addressed in statements from FIRST)... It's just worth mentioning that yes, VIPs are going to get some things tailored to them. This should not be news to anyone with a realistic mindset about things.

With all due respect, you have NO idea what you are talking about! I am one of those persons of which you speak. These people arrive on Monday and leave on Sunday, working 12, 13, 14 15 hour days. And many of them are VOLUNTEERS....Yes, that is a pretty full week, so you can have the top quality event you are complaining about.

What specific ideas would you bring to the table to improve the event? Email them to frcteams@usfirst.org or me directly and I will forward them myself, unalderterated. And post them here so all can see.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might be asked to be on the committee!

To build off of what Libby and Rosiebotboss have stated.

Many of the FIRST staff, like Frank, are out "on the floor" for almost all of their time at CMP barely having enough time to stop and eat during their sometimes 15 or 16 hour days. Yes some of the staff is dedicated to the VIP and press areas. However that is because they do need to take care of the VIPs from the sponsor organizations and people from potential future sponsors. The fact is w/o those sponsors, FIRST as we know it, would not exist. Sure as teams we bear a lot of the cost of participating but not the full cost. FIRST does try its best to provide the best possible experience for teams, but we MUST celebrate our current sponsors, and recruit new sponsors that make it possible. I assure you that the overall team experience at CMP is a top priority for FIRST.

Nate Laverdure

07-10-2013, 15:11

The food during the event is not great...
I like the Culinaria/Schnucks Market on 9th & Olive.

I was a freshman when I attended the Houston CMP in 2003. In my mind it doesn't approach the high quality of the St. Louis event I had the privilege to attend a decade later as a mentor. This is true across all the parameters I care deeply about, including "average number of cockroaches encountered per day."

Alex2614

07-10-2013, 17:39

To build off of what Libby and Rosiebotboss have stated.

Many of the FIRST staff, like Frank, are out "on the floor" for almost all of their time at CMP barely having enough time to stop and eat during their sometimes 15 or 16 hour days. Yes some of the staff is dedicated to the VIP and press areas. However that is because they do need to take care of the VIPs from the sponsor organizations and people from potential future sponsors. The fact is w/o those sponsors, FIRST as we know it, would not exist. Sure as teams we bear a lot of the cost of participating but not the full cost. FIRST does try its best to provide the best possible experience for teams, but we MUST celebrate our current sponsors, and recruit new sponsors that make it possible. I assure you that the overall team experience at CMP is a top priority for FIRST.

I've said this before. The fundamental issue, though, is that they don't have to deal with organizing 20-60+ youth and their parents in this venue. It was much easier to do so in Atlanta than in St. Louis. In fact in STL it's virtually impossible to stick together as a team because the layout is so cramped, convoluted, and confusing.

Patrick Flynn

07-10-2013, 17:52

I've said this before. The fundamental issue, though, is that they don't have to deal with organizing 20-60+ youth and their parents in this venue. It was much easier to do so in Atlanta than in St. Louis. In fact in STL it's virtually impossible to stick together as a team because the layout is so cramped, convoluted, and confusing.

You've said this quite a few times now. As someone who hasn't been to Atlanta can you please elaborate as to what makes St. Louis so much more difficult?

It seems to me that the FIRST staff organizing, 400 FRC teams, 3 different levels, FLL, FTC, and FRC, plus multiple divisions of each, plus VIPS, plus vendors and sponsors all while making sure that the teams have a good time and don't have the issues you are alluding too would have a much more daunting task than keeping a team together, So I'm sure that they understand the difficulty with organizing.

Libby K

07-10-2013, 17:58

I've said this before. The fundamental issue, though, is that they don't have to deal with organizing 20-60+ youth and their parents in this venue. It was much easier to do so in Atlanta than in St. Louis. In fact in STL it's virtually impossible to stick together as a team because the layout is so cramped, convoluted, and confusing.

Again, there are people who weigh into decisions who DO have team experience.

So, again, you're incorrect; FIRST does think about these things.

I'm going to echo Pat. What are your specific issues? Make them known.

Alex2614

07-10-2013, 18:03

With all due respect, you have NO idea what you are talking about! I am one of those persons of which you speak. These people arrive on Monday and leave on Sunday, working 12, 13, 14 15 hour days. And many of them are VOLUNTEERS....Yes, that is a pretty full week, so you can have the top quality event you are complaining about.

What specific ideas would you bring to the table to improve the event? Email them to frcteams@usfirst.org or me directly and I will forward them myself, unalderterated. And post them here so all can see.

Be careful what you wish for, you just might be asked to be on the committee!

I would love to be on the committee! There are so many aspects of the championship that could be much better for the participants, that I have voiced to FIRST a number of times.

I understand that a lot of these people are out there on the floor. I'm talking about the logistics of organizing a rather large group of youth and parents, and keeping them together in the extremely cramped venue in St. Louis. While Atlanta had fewer teams, it was still exponentially more spacious and open than St. Louis. With the big wide foyers, the glass walls, the huge lawn, open concept dome concourse layout, and nearby open and spacious venues (such as Centennial Olympic Park and the CNN Center). Not to mention a huge airport hub that is actually cheaper for most teams to fly into than STL. The St. Louis facilities are cramped, small, filled to the brim with people, and stuck in a place where there is no outdoor space but a tiny concrete "courtyard" and sidewalks next to the streets. Plus, crowd management in St. Louis (from the event staff of the venue and the science center both) was absolutely terrible. This is something has been said numerous times that will be fixed for the coming year, and never actually does.

You've said this quite a few times now. As someone who hasn't been to Atlanta can you please elaborate as to what makes St. Louis so much more difficult?

It seems to me that the FIRST staff organizing, 400 FRC teams, 3 different levels, FLL, FTC, and FRC, plus multiple divisions of each, plus VIPS, plus vendors and sponsors all while making sure that the teams have a good time and don't have the issues you are alluding too would have a much more daunting task than keeping a team together, So I'm sure that they understand the difficulty with organizing.

You're kind of comparing apples to oranges here. Yes, I know they have first-hand experience with organizing. But organizing a group of high school kids (that don't know the area or venue) multiplied by a hundred other teams that never seem to actually know what is going on, in a venue with such a convoluted layout is a little different. Maybe not as daunting, but just different. I understand the daunting task that they have. I'm just saying that we have a different kind of daunting task. Maybe it's not as horrible as it seems. Maybe my particular team has been particularly unlucky with this. Who knows. I'm just sharing my personal experiences.

Again, stay tuned for my response letter. This will also be complete with pictures and personal stories from the participants and those of us mentors who have had to deal with them. You may be surprised at how horribly we have been treated by the event staff in St. Louis over the past couple years.

Also, I will say this. Even if St. Louis was a great place, I feel that it needs to move around the country more than every 7 or so years. Not only does this give the kids experience in different cities, but it also gives these different regions the excitement of hosting championships and seeing what FIRST is all about. Give the west coast a chance at it for a year or two, then move it to the east coast, then to the midwest, and so on. Maybe this is impossible or not feasible. I don't necessarily have all the facts. This is just my $0.02. You can take it for whatever it's worth to you.

Alex2614

07-10-2013, 18:08

I also think that, despite all of St. Louis' downsides, there are a number of seemingly little things that could make the experience ten times better while we are there. But again, I will address those at a later date.

Alan Anderson

07-10-2013, 20:15

I've said this before. The fundamental issue, though, is that they don't have to deal with organizing 20-60+ youth and their parents in this venue. It was much easier to do so in Atlanta than in St. Louis.

I disagree. Atlanta's layout was a lot more spread out, and my experience is that it was easier for people to get misplaced along the path from one place to another. The tactic of making sure everyone knows the precise destination works fine in both venues, and it seems to me that it's easier for everyone to naturally take the same path to the same place in St. Louis.

In fact in STL it's virtually impossible to stick together as a team because the layout is so cramped, convoluted, and confusing.

Cramped is a value judgement. I'll grant that there's less space to spread out in the St. Louis venue, unless you wander a little bit away from the main action.

Convoluted? Not in my experience. Around the America's Center/Edward Jones Dome complex, I find the directions to get from place to place quite straightforward compared with the multiplicity of options at the Georgia World Congress Center.

Confusing is again a value judgement. Here, though, I'll point out that it took me less than two days to figure out effective routes to most locations through the America's Center, while it wasn't until my third year in Atlanta that I had come up with a quick and efficient way to get from the pits to the stands.

The St. Louis facilities are cramped, small, filled to the brim with people, and stuck in a place where there is no outdoor space but a tiny concrete "courtyard" and sidewalks next to the streets.

I always saw plenty of unfilled space upstairs in the America's Center when I had occasion to walk around. If you need a non-cramped spot to gather, it's there. There's a very nice outdoor space just to the east of the Edward Jones Dome, comparable to the West Plaza between the Georgia Dome and the convention center in Atlanta. The park area surrounding the Gateway Arch isn't significantly farther from the venue than Centennial Olympic Park was. I'm sorry you seem to have such a bad opinion of what St. Louis offers in the way of useful space, but on these issues at least your complaints are not overly compelling.

IndySam

07-10-2013, 21:29

dodar

07-10-2013, 21:56

Steven Donow

07-10-2013, 21:57

Ya, I am sorry to say that I have seen this happen a few times; the teams leaving early part. I guess the question has to be, which should be preferred: allowing participating teams to get to reap the rewards of their hard work over the year or keep the 6-figure/7-figure sponsor happy. I kinda dont see the reasoning behind keeping a sponsor happy but then putting out teams.

I'm not gonna take sides in this argument, but the reasoning of keeping a sponsor happy is that without sponsors, there would be no championship/season/FIRST in the first place.

Karthik

07-10-2013, 22:10

Jay O'Donnell

07-10-2013, 22:12

I like the Culinaria/Schnucks Market on 9th & Olive.

Just seconding this recommendation. My team ate here 3 or 4 times in 2012 due to the cheap food but insanely good burgers. (and sometimes some live music!)

Billfred

07-10-2013, 22:14

This is all easy to say when you have your reserve seat on the floor to watch all of the ceremonies but tell this to the team that goes home early because there's no place for them to sit to watch the finals.

Ya, I am sorry to say that I have seen this happen a few times; the teams leaving early part. I guess the question has to be, which should be preferred: allowing participating teams to get to reap the rewards of their hard work over the year or keep the 6-figure/7-figure sponsor happy. I kinda dont see the reasoning behind keeping a sponsor happy but then putting out teams.

I'm not gonna take sides in this argument, but the reasoning of keeping a sponsor happy is that without sponsors, there would be no championship/season/FIRST in the first place.

Let's leave aside names here (and besides, Libby is a bad example to use since she's usually presenting the Imagery Award). The number of VIPs that get the primo seats is not so large in number that moving them out would help much--you might get one more team on the ground, but which team gets that rub? (Chairman's is already spoken for, and the 12 Einstein teams won't fit.)

When I watched Einstein 2012 from the tornado seats, there was plenty of room for more teams to get in. (Not that you wanted to be that high up that day, but that's different.) For the fiery hoops you'd have to jump through to give those seats to students, I'd just rather show some appreciation for those that make FIRST able to do what it does at the price that it does.

Libby K

07-10-2013, 22:41

Let's leave aside names here (and besides, Libby is a bad example to use since she's usually presenting the Imagery Award). The number of VIPs that get the primo seats is not so large in number that moving them out would help much--you might get one more team on the ground, but which team gets that rub? (Chairman's is already spoken for, and the 12 Einstein teams won't fit.)

When I watched Einstein 2012 from the tornado seats, there was plenty of room for more teams to get in. (Not that you wanted to be that high up that day, but that's different.) For the fiery hoops you'd have to jump through to give those seats to students, I'd just rather show some appreciation for those that make FIRST able to do what it does at the price that it does.

IndySam's point is that the Einstein field faces the VIP boxes up top - in Atlanta, they were on the 'long side' of the arena rather than the 'short side' in STL.

I'm not trying to say that this layout is ideal - I'm just echoing Pat's point that FIRST is going to arrange the field so that VIPs have the opportunity to see the finals and major award ceremonies that are held on that stage. It is a fact of life that without their support, we would not be able to have FIRST events on the scale that we do currently. If VIPs and sponsors don't enjoy the show, they might not support us next year. And then where would we be?!

I wasn't saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying it's realistic.

Mike Starke

07-10-2013, 22:50

But organizing a group of high school kids (that don't know the area or venue) multiplied by a hundred other teams that never seem to actually know what is going on, in a venue with such a convoluted layout is a little different. Maybe not as daunting, but just different. I understand the daunting task that they have. I'm just saying that we have a different kind of daunting task. Maybe it's not as horrible as it seems. Maybe my particular team has been particularly unlucky with this. Who knows. I'm just sharing my personal experiences.

Sounds like you need to bring a more manageable number of students to Championship. If your team doesn't have the support it needs to supervise students in this environment, then cut back on the number of kids you bring.

Ryan Dognaux

07-10-2013, 23:17

I wasn't saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying it's realistic.

I will say it's completely the right call. I work for Boeing and we have executives that come out to the Championship every year. I want them to have the best experience possible, including viewing matches and speeches, because their support means Boeing team mentors can receive grant funding and help keep many teams running financially. The people that get to make the call on whether FIRST teams will receive millions of dollars in funding over a period of years should get the royal treatment. It's no secret that many companies are having to cut back, the least we can do is show our thanks to those that are still supporting FIRST on a much different level than most of us do.

dtengineering

08-10-2013, 02:02

...And I don't believe my question earlier was answered: other than Easter and existing venue contracts is there anything, competition structurewise, preventing VEX Worlds from being during the weekend between Week 7 and Championships?

Moving the VRC World Championship forward would require moving all of the VRC regional qualifying events forward, too.

That would mean moving forward all of the tournaments required to qualify for regional qualifying tournaments. Speaking as a VRC event/region organizer... the thought doesn't excite me.

Is it possible? Perhaps. But it is also equally possible to move the FRC build period into the six weeks before Christmas, and start the FRC competition season in January.

Equally impossible? Maybe that would have been better wording.

Jason

IndySam

08-10-2013, 09:04

I'm quite certain she would feel the same way if she was sitting in the stands.

Sure there are ways to optimize layouts to get more desirable seating for teams, but claiming that a VIP doesn't understand/care because they already have a good seat is pretty disingenuous.

Totally missed my point big guy.

IndySam's point is that the Einstein field faces the VIP boxes up top - in Atlanta, they were on the 'long side' of the arena rather than the 'short side' in STL.

I'm not trying to say that this layout is ideal - I'm just echoing Pat's point that FIRST is going to arrange the field so that VIPs have the opportunity to see the finals and major award ceremonies that are held on that stage. It is a fact of life that without their support, we would not be able to have FIRST events on the scale that we do currently. If VIPs and sponsors don't enjoy the show, they might not support us next year. And then where would we be?!

I wasn't saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying it's realistic.

Libby, Thanks for explaining my point.

I probably should have worded that better. I would never begrudge Libby her seat on the floor. If you have seen her at the champs she is non stop work.

My point is that it could be arranged much better. The hospitality area is looking at the Lego championship 90% of the competition and you can't see anything that's happening from up there. It would be better served if it was facing an FRC field.

VIP's could be given floor seats or a reserved area in the stands down low during opening ceremonies and the finals, most are down there anyway. I know that during the opening ceremonious most of the people in those hospitality area seats are regular FIRTSers like me who are lucky enough to have the connections to get a VIP pass.

Cory

08-10-2013, 10:24

Patrick Flynn

08-10-2013, 10:46

If this argument is centered on VIP seats there are 360* of suites that can be used. No reason the boxes can't be moved to the sidelines, unless FIRST is using one of the special much larger box/club areas in the end zones, which I'm unsure of.

The section that FIRST currently uses is not one of the boxes, but rather a club seating section. They are located behind the score board on each end. There is a open lobby area that has a sort of restaurant/ lounge area and then a couple sections of seats that open to the stadium floor below.
The Edward Jones Dome has two of these club sections each located on an end of the stadium.

Racer26

08-10-2013, 11:54

I was asked why I think CMP needs to be bigger than 400 teams by several people above.

Lets look at a comparison of the last few years.

2013: 2524 Total Teams, 400 Teams at CMP, 15.8%
2012: 2339 Total Teams, 400 Teams at CMP, 17.1%
2011: 2065 Total Teams, 352 Teams at CMP, 17.0%
2010: 1808 Total Teams, 344 Teams at CMP, 19.0%
2009: 1677 Total Teams, 348 Teams at CMP, 20.7%
2008: 1501 Total Teams, 340 Teams at CMP, 22.6%
2007: 1301 Total Teams, 344 Teams at CMP, 26.4%
2006: 1133 Total Teams, 344 Teams at CMP, 30.4%
2005: 988 Total Teams, 340 Teams at CMP, 34.4%
2004: 927 Total Teams, 292 Teams at CMP, 31.4%
2003: 787 Total Teams, 291 Teams at CMP, 36.9%

As you can see. Teams attending championship as a percentage of all FRC teams has been in steady decline.

2014: 54 Regionals, MICMP awards 27+, MARCMP awards 14+, PNWCMP awards 14+?, NECMP awards 14+?, at least 393 in-season merit based CMP seats, 98.3%+ of all CMP (assuming 400 seat cap)
2013: 58 Regionals, MICMP awards 27, MARCMP awards 14, 389 in-season merit based CMP seats, 97.2% of all CMP
2012: 52 Regionals, MICMP awards 18, MARCMP awards 12, 342 in-season merit based CMP seats, 85.5% of all CMP
2011: 48 Regionals, MICMP awards 18, 306 in-season merit based CMP seats, 86.9% of all CMP
2010: 43 Regionals, MICMP awards 18, 276 in-season merit based CMP seats, 80.2% of all CMP
2009: 40 Regionals, MICMP awards 18, 258 in-season merit based CMP seats, 74.1% of all CMP
2008: 41 Regionals, 246 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 72.3% of all CMP
2007: 37 Regionals, 222 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 64.5% of all CMP
2006: 33 Regionals, 198 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 57.5% of all CMP
2005: 31 Regionals, 186 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 54.7% of all CMP
2004: 26 Regionals, 156 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 53.4% of all CMP
2003: 23 Regionals, 138 in-season merit based CMP Seats, 47.4% of all CMP

CMP has already reached nearly 100% saturation of merit-based teams. Additionally, this doesn't account for the other merit-based qualifiers (Sustaining, HOF, and reigning champions, reigning EI winner)

At this point, you either have to start qualifying fewer teams, which is difficult to do fairly, or make CMP bigger.

Siri

08-10-2013, 12:07

...At this point, you either have to start qualifying fewer teams, which is difficult to do fairly, or make CMP bigger.Fair, scalable Worlds qualifications is one of the main benefits of districts. In fact, it's a key mission of the model, precisely because of the realistic maximum size of Champs. It really shouldn't have to get bigger, nor should it. 400 is a lot of teams--and perhaps more importantly, a lot of volunteers and supporting resources. We've certainly got some growing pains in this era, but the upshot shouldn't require a drastic size increase.

Libby K

08-10-2013, 12:20

If this argument is centered on VIP seats there are 360* of suites that can be used. No reason the boxes can't be moved to the sidelines, unless FIRST is using one of the special much larger box/club areas in the end zones, which I'm unsure of.

Pat mentioned it, but the VIP area used is a special club/lounge area, with its own seating dropped down in front. That way, VIPs can stay up in the lounge area to watch Einstein (and not take up normal arena seats, which leaves room for the kids). The only VIPs on the floor are those speaking in the ceremonies, and anyone in their party. Most of them are upstairs in that lounge, as there is a reception after Einstein in that space (and there's food. Who wouldn't stay with the food?!) The smaller boxes along the 'long side' of the arena are the tiny private ones - which are reserved for media interviews and meetings, and would not serve the purpose of a VIP lounge well, since each box only fits about 10 people.

In Atlanta, this club area was on the 'long' side - but didn't have enough seating for people to watch matches - in fact, matches were displayed on TVs. As a result, the 'kid-award-recipient' seating was in the regular stands, and all floor seats were for VIPs.

Now in STL ~800 students (2 award-recipient wristbands per team) are in the floor seats, with VIPs up in the club area.

This means that ALL available arena seats are for teams/volunteers to watch the Einstein matches. It's still a crunch, but then again it's very hard to see such a small field from most of the seating -- which is why the matches AND ceremonies are displayed on the divisional field screens. Sitting at either one of the divisions nearby Einstein would work as well. (Yes, I am VERY aware that it's not the same- and that sometimes the sound wasn't working well in the divisions- it's just another thought.)

Rosiebotboss

08-10-2013, 12:26

I was asked why I think CMP needs to be bigger than 400 teams by several people above.

CMP has already reached nearly 100% saturation of merit-based teams. Additionally, this doesn't account for the other merit-based qualifiers (Sustaining, HOF, and reigning champions, reigning EI winner)

At this point, you either have to start qualifying fewer teams, which is difficult to do fairly, or make CMP bigger.

Which is why FIRST is moving towards Disricts. In a few years, we may well find ourselves with a Super Regional Model as well. The District Champs would play in a Super Regional, say one in the 4 quadrants of the US, northeast, south east, mid west and west coast for example. Then the teams would qualify for Worlds from the Super Regionals. World Champs would still be 400 teams.

From a venue perspective, where else would be an appropriate venue? What city has a domed stadium with a huge conference center attached with 25,000 hotel rooms within wlaking distance?

dodar

08-10-2013, 12:37

Which is why FIRST is moving towards Disricts. In a few years, we may well find ourselves with a Super Regional Model as well. The District Champs would play in a Super Regional, say one in the 4 quadrants of the US, northeast, south east, mid west and west coast for example. Then the teams would qualify for Worlds from the Super Regionals. World Champs would still be 400 teams.

From a venue perspective, where else would be an appropriate venue? What city has a domed stadium with a huge conference center attached with 25,000 hotel rooms within wlaking distance?

Atlanta.

And the district model being the standard throughout FIRST will be alot longer than a few years. Its gonna take at least a decade for the team density down in the southeast to reach the capacity needed for districts.

Racer26

08-10-2013, 12:58

Fair, scalable Worlds qualifications is one of the main benefits of districts. In fact, it's a key mission of the model, precisely because of the realistic maximum size of Champs. It really shouldn't have to get bigger, nor should it. 400 is a lot of teams--and perhaps more importantly, a lot of volunteers and supporting resources. We've certainly got some growing pains in this era, but the upshot shouldn't require a drastic size increase.

I agree its one of the primary benefits of the district model: BUT. Until all teams are on the district model, its not fair to them to qualify proportionately fewer than would qualify in a regional model.

One of the main things I don't understand is what the obsession with domed stadiums is. Orange County Convention Center is the worlds largest convention space. You could easily plunk fields with enough temporary seating, and have plenty of room for the pits. As long as the temporary seating is done properly, it wouldn't be a problem.

I believe the growth of the program will continue to accelerate. Currently, MI is qualifying teams at approximately the same rate as an area with 4-1/2 45 team regionals, about 1 team in 7.7.

Ontario in 2013 had 3 regionals and 73 teams, qualifying about 1 team in 4.

MAR qualified about 1 team in 7.8.

It seems to me that FIRST is targeting a rate of about 1 team in 8 for the long-term ratio.

For a 400-team CMP, thats 3200 total teams. On our current growth trajectory, we reach that number by 2016 at the latest.

Alan Anderson

08-10-2013, 13:32

One of the main things I don't understand is what the obsession with domed stadiums is. Orange County Convention Center is the worlds largest convention space. You could easily plunk fields with enough temporary seating, and have plenty of room for the pits. As long as the temporary seating is done properly, it wouldn't be a problem.

The stands for the convention center FRC fields in St. Louis were pretty much as big as would fit, and were slightly too small to handle everyone who wanted to watch. It worked out, barely.

But how much seating is "enough" for Einstein?

dodar

08-10-2013, 13:37

The stands for the convention center FRC fields in St. Louis were pretty much as big as would fit, and were slightly too small to handle everyone who wanted to watch. It worked out, barely.

But how much seating is "enough" for Einstein?

I dont think you understood his post.

JB987

08-10-2013, 13:53

Regarding VIP seating...if I remember correctly, haven't a large number of prime regular, bottom (not floor) center section seats been set aside for them each year in addition to the boxes described by Libby? I seem to remember wondering why my team (and others competing on Einstein) were stuffed in sections to the side of center and seeing many empty seats available and teams getting over to Einstein later than other ones eventually being placed in the prime section;) There were empty seats last 2 years in that section even after moving in late comers. Not really complaining though as we were happy to be closer to the floor than other teams not on Einstein:D

As far as setting up stands in convention center...it is doable for Divisions (as we have seen in St.Louis) but likely extremely expensive to set up an Einstein arena with 25-30,000 additional seats. We got quotes for $40-60,000 just for 2000 seats at a convention center here in Las Vegas for our regional. Can't imagine the cost (and time) associated with setting up temporary seating for 30,000 just for Einstein.

Joe Ross

08-10-2013, 14:11

It seems to me that FIRST is targeting a rate of about 1 team in 8 for the long-term ratio.

Given that you've shown the ratio varies wildly from region to region and year to year, what causes you to draw this conclusion? Don't you think there are other factors in play?

Racer26

08-10-2013, 15:05

Steven Donow

08-10-2013, 15:14

I'm drawing this conclusion based on the updated number of seats HQ assigned to our two 2013 district championships. I expect the number of seats awarded to our four 2014 district championships will keep pace at around 1 team in 7.7-7.8. Maybe I'm wrong, but thats what I'm expecting.

Anybody know if the number of qualifiers from MI, MAR, PNW, and NE are announced for 2014 yet?

Ontario will roughly keep pace with the 1 team in 4 rate in 2014, with 5 regionals qualifying 30 teams, from an estimated 115-120 competing.

The qualification of district teams is supposed to follow that region's percentage of total FRC teams=the same percentage of team's at championships. So, let's say MAR is 10% of all FRC teams and there are 400 teams at championships, MAR should have 40 qualifying spots at championships.

themccannman

08-10-2013, 15:17

Cory

08-10-2013, 15:33

I dont think you understood his post.

His point is you'd have a really hard time setting up stands in a convention center at the scale required. You're basically constructing an arena. This (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/14261) is from Einstein in 2002 when championships was 290 FRC teams, no FTC, and far fewer FLL teams. Think about how much bigger that has to be to accommodate basically twice as many people.

Racer26

08-10-2013, 15:58

As several other people have mentioned, due to the large average size of FRC teams along with the volume of teams at CMP, we're approaching the maximum capacity of any city to host the event. I don't think you can take many more than 400 teams to a single city to compete due to the physical limitations of the city itself, I can't think of very many places that can handle a regular population influx of 25,000+ people in one week. Instead of increasing the size of CMP I think the only solution (as previously mentioned) is adding another layer of qualification, e.g. super regionals. Looking at other highschool sports their qualification ladder goes something like this:

divisions --> sections --> regions --> states --> nationals --> worlds.

FRC could adapt a similar method with districts --> regionals --> CMP.

I hope I'm not being redundant but I'm just casting my vote.

Certainly this is the direction things will have to go long-term. Until we get more districts online though, this isn't a workable solution.

I don't believe that we've reached the maximum feasible size for CMP.

I agree there are few places that have the space and the ability to deal with the influx of people a bigger CMP would require.

I would say, actually that there is just two. Orlando, and the OCCC, or Atlanta, and the GWCC/Georgia Dome.

Examining dual-field divisions a bit further:

I think we all agree that GWCC had significantly more space than we needed for the pits. Enough to easily house up to ~600 FRC teams, plus FLL and FTC, still with room to spare.

This:
15282

Is an NFL-football field (large rectangle, 360x160ft), with 12 FRC-field sized areas (40x70ft) drawn on it. The truth of the matter is that the floor of both the EJD and the GD are significantly larger than an NFL field, so things wouldn't be quite this cramped.

While Einstein is being used for FLL, it could be curtained off from Archi and Curie to reduce noise pollution. Then for the Einstein rounds, some of the Archi and Curie seating can serve dual-duty with the curtains dropped.

In 2013, we played 134 matches per division, with an average cycle time of 7:03, with 100 team divisions.

Each team played 8 matches, except 4 per division who each played a surrogate match.

With a match cycle time of 7:03, there is no reason to believe that achieving 200% of a single field's matches is impossible, but for sake of argument, lets say you achieve 194%. 260 matches, at 6 teams/match, and 130 teams/division = 12 matches per team. 520 team CMP capacity AND everyone gets 12 matches, without extending the length of the event. For what its worth, 7:03 cycle times is the longest cycle times CMP has had since 2008.

Everyone cites a limited number of volunteers as a sticking point for a bigger CMP. I don't see that as a problem. Bigger CMP, means more teams, means more people to volunteer.

Steven Donow

08-10-2013, 16:08

Certainly this is the direction things will have to go long-term. Until we get more districts online though, this isn't a workable solution.

I don't believe that we've reached the maximum feasible size for CMP.

I agree there are few places that have the space and the ability to deal with the influx of people a bigger CMP would require.

I would say, actually that there is just two. Orlando, and the OCCC, or Atlanta, and the GWCC/Georgia Dome.

Examining dual-field divisions a bit further:

I think we all agree that GWCC had significantly more space than we needed for the pits. Enough to easily house up to ~600 FRC teams, plus FLL and FTC, still with room to spare.

This:
15282

Is an NFL-football field (large rectangle, 360x160ft), with 12 FRC-field sized areas (40x70ft) drawn on it. The truth of the matter is that the floor of both the EJD and the GD are significantly larger than an NFL field, so things wouldn't be quite this cramped.

While Einstein is being used for FLL, it could be curtained off from Archi and Curie to reduce noise pollution. Then for the Einstein rounds, some of the Archi and Curie seating can serve dual-duty with the curtains dropped.

In 2013, we played 134 matches per division, with an average cycle time of 7:03, with 100 team divisions.

Each team played 8 matches, except 4 per division who each played a surrogate match.

With a match cycle time of 7:03, there is no reason to believe that achieving 200% of a single field's matches is impossible, but for sake of argument, lets say you achieve 194%. 260 matches, at 6 teams/match, and 130 teams/division = 12 matches per team. 520 team CMP capacity AND everyone gets 12 matches, without extending the length of the event. For what its worth, 7:03 cycle times is the longest cycle times CMP has had since 2008.

Everyone cites a limited number of volunteers as a sticking point for a bigger CMP. I don't see that as a problem. Bigger CMP, means more teams, means more people to volunteer.

Bigger CMP doesn't mean more teams to have people volunteer...many team's bring what is considered a "skeleton crew" compared to what they bring to regionals/districts. And just because there are more volunteers(many teams don't bring people/have people strictly volunteering at Champs...) doesn't mean there are more trained volunteers...that's the challenging part. With an additional field you need additional FTAs, Head Refs, head Queuers, scorekeepers, Field Supervisors, inspectors, etc. All positions that require significant training. Not to mention that with the double-field structure, what happens if one field has technical issues? This could essentially derail the entire competition. The reason there were so few matches/team this year at championships was due to the significantly longer reset time compared to past years.

Racer26

08-10-2013, 16:18

With an additional field you need additional FTAs, Head Refs, head Queuers, scorekeepers, Field Supervisors, inspectors, etc. All positions that require significant training.

Except you don't. That's the whole point of a double-field division, and not going to an 8 division format. A dual-field division only needs one set of refs, one set of scorekeepers, one set of field resetters. It really only needs some additional queuers, and some additional crowd control volunteers. Most of the additional volunteers needed are relatively untrained positions.

Not to mention that with the double-field structure, what happens if one field has technical issues? This could essentially derail the entire competition.

And this is different from a single-fielded division how? If anything, having 2 fields allows for some added fault-tolerance in this regard.

The reason there were so few matches/team this year at championships was due to the significantly longer reset time compared to past years.

Agreed. The truth of the matter though, is that matches are 2:15 long. Match cycles since 2009 have always been in excess of 6 minutes, so my 200% argument should hold true.

FIRST had to make Championship Qualification matches start on Thursday afternoon to get 10/team in 2010 and 11, and just 9/team in 2012. We all agree that more matches is better.

Steven Donow

08-10-2013, 16:27

Except you don't. That's the whole point of a double-field division, and not going to an 8 division format. A dual-field division only needs one set of refs, one set of scorekeepers, one set of field resetters. It really only needs some additional queuers, and some additional crowd control volunteers. Most of the additional volunteers needed are relatively untrained positions.

And this is different from a single-fielded division how? If anything, having 2 fields allows for some added fault-tolerance in this regard.

1. Refs need breaks in between matches and if you're having two seperate fields, they scorekeepers can't just keep getting up and walking back and forth between scoring tables(the people at the scoring table are what I define as scorekeepers, different years have allowed different definitions).

2. There IS more room for error. 2 fields allow for less tolerance because it implies the solution to a field fault can't just be "play on another field" or "play through matches on one field while the other field sorts out it's issues" because then that could mess with match separation.

Alan Anderson

08-10-2013, 16:34

The qualification of district teams is supposed to follow that region's percentage of total FRC teams=the same percentage of team's at championships...

That's an unwarranted assumption. I'm pretty sure the original district-based region quota was based on how many Regional competitions it replaced, not on how many teams it involved. Besides, what is true right now might not be true later. There are rumblings of a significant revamping of how merit-based qualification might change in the near future.

Racer26

08-10-2013, 16:35

1. Refs need breaks in between matches

So you have a few extra. I know from the fields I've volunteered on they had a few extra. The goal here is to require less than 200% of the volunteers.

and if you're having two seperate fields, they scorekeepers can't just keep getting up and walking back and forth between scoring tables(the people at the scoring table are what I define as scorekeepers, different years have allowed different definitions).

I envision this as being done with a single scoring table, connected to two sets of field hardware. I agree, walking back and forth would be silly. The two fields would need to be connected in order to generate sensible rankings anyway.

2. There IS more room for error. 2 fields allow for less tolerance because it implies the solution to a field fault can't just be "play on another field" or "play through matches on one field while the other field sorts out it's issues" because then that could mess with match separation.

CMP already has no ability to easily switch over to "play on another field". Yes, technically Einstein sits there set up, and they keep a spare field on a truck in the loading dock, but the reality is that to switch anything like that out is a non-trivial operation.

As long as the sequence of the matches is respected, match separation should be unaffected by playing through on the working field.

Lil' Lavery

08-10-2013, 17:02

As several other people have mentioned, due to the large average size of FRC teams along with the volume of teams at CMP, we're approaching the maximum capacity of any city to host the event. I don't think you can take many more than 400 teams to a single city to compete due to the physical limitations of the city itself, I can't think of very many places that can handle a regular population influx of 25,000+ people in one week. Instead of increasing the size of CMP I think the only solution (as previously mentioned) is adding another layer of qualification, e.g. super regionals. Looking at other highschool sports their qualification ladder goes something like this:

divisions --> sections --> regions --> states --> nationals --> worlds.

FRC could adapt a similar method with districts --> regionals --> CMP.

I hope I'm not being redundant but I'm just casting my vote.

What [US] sport(s) actually follow that format all the way through a national tournament, let alone a world championship event? For the most part, there aren't "official" high school sports championships beyond the state level, and only rarely are there actual competitions/tournaments to decide them. For instance, the High School football national champion is typically decided by a poll.

While the appeal of that format is obvious, there are significant challenges that it poises as well. The financial costs and time comittments to teams, volunteers, and FIRST/planning comittees increase with each level of competition added. For many teams, it's simply not feasible to compete four or five times in a single season.

The appeal of that structure is obvious, and the logic behind it is easy to follow. But there should also be a parallel discussion. Rather than adding layers of competition, when is it time to start removing them? At what point is a "champioship event" simply not feasible? At what point is it no longer the best return on investment for the time and cost sunk into it by the participants, sponsors, and volunteers? Would FRC benefit from more of a "world festival" event similar to FLL?

Mr V

08-10-2013, 17:06

That's an unwarranted assumption. I'm pretty sure the original district-based region quota was based on how many Regional competitions it replaced, not on how many teams it involved. Besides, what is true right now might not be true later. There are rumblings of a significant revamping of how merit-based qualification might change in the near future.

You are correct that the original system was that a district sent they same number of teams as did the traditional regionals that the district replaced. However in that time FiM continued to grow and grow, so for the 2013 season they and Mar got a percentage of the available slots (less those dedicated for pre-qualified teams, I assume) based on the percentage of teams their district represents.

That is why FiM had sent 18 teams until the 2013 season when they sent 27 teams. Mar sent 12 teams their first year based on replacing 2 regionals but for the 2013 season they sent 14. I am expecting to see something similar happen this season so I don't expect that the districts will know exactly how many teams they will send until after the payment date.

Patrick Flynn

08-10-2013, 20:09

Examining dual-field divisions a bit further:

Is an NFL-football field (large rectangle, 360x160ft), with 12 FRC-field sized areas (40x70ft) drawn on it. The truth of the matter is that the floor of both the EJD and the GD are significantly larger than an NFL field, so things wouldn't be quite this cramped.

While Einstein is being used for FLL, it could be curtained off from Archi and Curie to reduce noise pollution. Then for the Einstein rounds, some of the Archi and Curie seating can serve dual-duty with the curtains dropped.

In 2013, we played 134 matches per division, with an average cycle time of 7:03, with 100 team divisions.

Each team played 8 matches, except 4 per division who each played a surrogate match.

With a match cycle time of 7:03, there is no reason to believe that achieving 200% of a single field's matches is impossible, but for sake of argument, lets say you achieve 194%. 260 matches, at 6 teams/match, and 130 teams/division = 12 matches per team. 520 team CMP capacity AND everyone gets 12 matches, without extending the length of the event. For what its worth, 7:03 cycle times is the longest cycle times CMP has had since 2008.

Everyone cites a limited number of volunteers as a sticking point for a bigger CMP. I don't see that as a problem. Bigger CMP, means more teams, means more people to volunteer.

I think your missing a couple things here, First yes bigger CMP means more teams, but that doesn't necessary mean more volunteers. Many of the people that volunteer are coming regardless of if their team does or not.

Now about the adding more fields,
Einstein there leaves no VIP area to see the field. Thats been addressed here before, the VIPS will get the good seats so that doesn't work.

Where is the stage and floor seating going?

Yes you've managed to cram the fields in but you've left less than 10ft between fields assuming the stadium is 50ft longer than the football field.

The tunnel to the convention center isn't centered on a long side so that spacing doesn't really work out.

Here's a map of the dome floor from last year. Laying the fields out the way you have just isn't reasonable
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=14708&d=1366812834

Racer26

08-10-2013, 20:37

I think you're forgetting that I've oversized the areas by a fair margin. An FRC field is 27x54ft, and the area I allocated for each field was 40x70. Additionally, an NFL football field is 57,600 square feet. The Georgia Dome advertises 106,000 ish square feet of floor space.

Yes, it would be tight. I think its possible.

Patrick Flynn

08-10-2013, 20:43

maths222

08-10-2013, 21:27

Also, remember that FTC has 4 fields, and in their current configuration, that requires a space approximately as large as 1 FRC division currently occupies. Most of that space could not be reduced, as the driver areas are just far enough apart for ref teams and robot carts to comfortable fit between them. If FTC returned to the square, not diamond, layout, the width would be about the same, although the depth requirements of FTC might decrease.

Alex2614

09-10-2013, 00:45

I have three wild ideas that may be impossible.

First of all, i don't think we need 8 divisions. I can definitely see moving to 6 divisions, though. That seems most attractive to me.

1) FLL moves to the center of the floor with grandstands erected around that space. That gives FLL a more intimate playing environment and allows for more space. You could then take Patrick's picture and alter it a bit so that a couple of the filds are on the "short side" of the stadium. I don't like the option of moving FLL or FTC entirely into the convention center, so that seems pretty attractive.

2) Place an FTC field (and even an FLL table) for every FRC field. This eliminates the need for separate areas, and they just round-robin the playing. Run an FRC match, then FTC, then FLL, then repeat. (or combine this option with option 1 and just do FTC/FRC together, and FLL in their own separate area, either in the center of the dome floor or in a similar configuration to what we have now)

3) Move the championship to a location that has a basketball arena. I saw a proposal on CD (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=105379&page=1) to move the championship to the LA convention center and the Staples Center. FRC fields in the convention center. I know this seems unattractive, but it could work with the right setup (https://www.google.com/search?q=convention+center+grandstands&es_sm=119&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=Kt1UUuWoMMj84AObj4H4CA&ved=0CAkQ_AUoAQ&biw=1440&bih=805&dpr=1#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=MHRGYoPBzkE6lM%3A%3BvWEwZc0qNIt1pM%3Bhttp%25 3A%252F%252Fwww.husseyseating.com%252Fstorage%252F header_internal_images%252Fapplication%252FConvent ion.jpg%253F__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION%253D1313766 869559%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.husseyseating.com% 252Fconvention-centers%3B718%3B312). I saw somewhere a picture of convention center grandstands with a "concourse" walkway going around the middle (http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i161/ladakn/20120226_160835.jpg). Given a space like LA that has a much larger convention center than St. Louis (more of the size of the Georgia World Congress Center, if I'm not mistaken, but in one building). FTC and FLL play in the basketball arena. Then Einstein moves in on Saturday, basically ensuring that everybody has a a good seat 360 degrees all the way around the field. We only use one side of the dome for closing ceremonies anyway, I imagine the seating capacity is similar to the # of people we have at championships.

It seems like FIRST was considering option 3 with the site selection for 2015-17. Many of the facilities that won a bid did not have a football dome (Detroit, Louisville off the top of my head; others?).

Again, this may not work at all, but it's a thought. I always prefer to start with the craziest, most impossible ideas, and slim them down from there.

bduddy

09-10-2013, 01:26

I took last years map replicated the field size and tried to post 5 in. Simple put they don't fit. Actually 4 barely do.What about placing two of the fields on the short sides of the floor?

Chris Hibner

09-10-2013, 08:39

Many of the facilities that won a bid did not have a football dome (Detroit, Louisville off the top of my head; others?).

Did you word the part about Detroit not having "a football dome" that way because Detroit has two football domes? (As in: Detroit doesn't have a football dome, it has two!) Just wondering ^o)

maths222

09-10-2013, 09:51

Place an FTC field (and even an FLL table) for every FRC field. This eliminates the need for separate areas, and they just round-robin the playing. Run an FRC match, then FTC, then FLL, then repeat. (or combine this option with option 1 and just do FTC/FRC together, and FLL in their own separate area, either in the center of the dome floor or in a similar configuration to what we have now)

From an FTC perspective, this does not make sense. Sticking more people in an already crowded area will only make seating worse. FTC, with its smaller field, is much better up close. I know FRC is not that great from far away, but it is much better than FTC (the screens are not nearly good enough to be far away. Also, FTC has 2 divisions, with two fields each. Having division fields separated by a whole FRC field will only make people need to walk back and forth a lot, and be stuck sitting behind FRC teams who can afford to stay put (not trying to complain, just pointing out that it does not really make sense. Also, FTC currently has 1 scoring table per division, and one set of interconnected field electronics. Dividing it around an FRC field would make that very difficult. Also, this would save very little space other than the gap between FTC and Curie (I think), as the fields would not get any smaller, and they are pretty compact as they are.

Alex2614

09-10-2013, 10:30

From an FTC perspective, this does not make sense. Sticking more people in an already crowded area will only make seating worse. FTC, with its smaller field, is much better up close. I know FRC is not that great from far away, but it is much better than FTC (the screens are not nearly good enough to be far away. Also, FTC has 2 divisions, with two fields each. Having division fields separated by a whole FRC field will only make people need to walk back and forth a lot, and be stuck sitting behind FRC teams who can afford to stay put (not trying to complain, just pointing out that it does not really make sense. Also, FTC currently has 1 scoring table per division, and one set of interconnected field electronics. Dividing it around an FRC field would make that very difficult. Also, this would save very little space other than the gap between FTC and Curie (I think), as the fields would not get any smaller, and they are pretty compact as they are.

I don't think you fully understand what I'm saying. If we had more FRC divisions, we could team up an FTC division with an FRC division. So two FTC fields (one division) for an FRC division. The FTC fields would be just as far as they are now. And the FTC teams could stay put because they only play on that field. but instead of putting all FTC fields together, you spread out the divisions among FRC divisions. so FTC would be set up just like FRC, with their divisions separated. This also promotes interaction between the two programs.

Alex2614

09-10-2013, 10:33

Did you word the part about Detroit not having "a football dome" that way because Detroit has two football domes? (As in: Detroit doesn't have a football dome, it has two!) Just wondering ^o)

From what I have seen, they are not attached to a convention center though. Unless I am missing something.

BrendanB

09-10-2013, 10:35

I don't think you fully understand what I'm saying. If we had more FRC divisions, we could team up an FTC division with an FRC division. So two FTC fields (one division) for an FRC division. The FTC fields would be just as far as they are now. And the FTC teams could stay put because they only play on that field. but instead of putting all FTC fields together, you spread out the divisions among FRC divisions. so FTC would be set up just like FRC, with their divisions separated. This also promotes interaction between the two programs.

But now similar to FRC you are going to need to have FRC's equivalent of Einstein for FTC teams to gather and play their finals. That ends up using more space than the current layout with FTC in one area with their own space in the stands.

maths222

09-10-2013, 10:59

Nemo

09-10-2013, 12:05

What [US] sport(s) actually follow that format all the way through a national tournament, let alone a world championship event? For the most part, there aren't "official" high school sports championships beyond the state level, and only rarely are there actual competitions/tournaments to decide them. For instance, the High School football national champion is typically decided by a poll.

While the appeal of that format is obvious, there are significant challenges that it poises as well. The financial costs and time comittments to teams, volunteers, and FIRST/planning comittees increase with each level of competition added. For many teams, it's simply not feasible to compete four or five times in a single season.

The appeal of that structure is obvious, and the logic behind it is easy to follow. But there should also be a parallel discussion. Rather than adding layers of competition, when is it time to start removing them? At what point is a "champioship event" simply not feasible? At what point is it no longer the best return on investment for the time and cost sunk into it by the participants, sponsors, and volunteers? Would FRC benefit from more of a "world festival" event similar to FLL?

I agree. Our team would be really hard pressed to attend a fourth event. Three is already tough.

Super regionals could be the top level. It would remove the need for a gigantic championship event, and most teams wouldn't have to travel a ridiculous distance to get to them. Certainly I'd miss the chance to compete with teams in other regions, BUT if everybody is eventually in a cross-compatible regional system, teams can sign up for competitions in other regions if desired.

I pointed out in another thread that a configuration topping out with super regionals still leaves the door open for a really small Einstein type event that only invites super regional winners. No Georgia Dome + World Congress Center required for that event. And if that wasn't in the cards, there's still IRI.

Nate Laverdure

09-10-2013, 13:05

Super regionals could be the top level. It would remove the need for a gigantic championship event, and most teams wouldn't have to travel a ridiculous distance to get to them. Certainly I'd miss the chance to compete with teams in other regions, BUT if everybody is eventually in a cross-compatible regional system, teams can sign up for competitions in other regions if desired.
This is a really cool idea. One additional challenge is that CMP is currently used for many administrative functions: announcing big changes, presenting top-tier awards, giving important speeches, etc. These things would either have to be split or repeated amongst each of the super-regionals, or they'd have to find another venue. Also, I imagine it would be tougher to invite a super-VIP to an event that's not necessarily the year's premier event.

Steven Donow

09-10-2013, 13:15

This is a really cool idea. One additional challenge is that CMP is currently used for many administrative functions: announcing big changes, presenting top-tier awards, giving important speeches, etc. These things would either have to be split or repeated amongst each of the super-regionals, or they'd have to find another venue. Also, I imagine it would be tougher to invite a super-VIP to an event that's not necessarily the year's premier event.

Doesn't Kickoff serve the same purpose? My assumptions/feelings/hopes would be that when we eventually move to the SuperRegional structure(ie. what was in that powerpoint; I personally feel like this won't be for at least 10-15 years), we'll eventually have a yearly "FIRST Conference/Convention/World Festival". Think, everything about the Championship, but without the competition. There could be so many more panels/roundtables, and the executive meetings that FIRST has at Championships could occur then.

Of course, that's just my little "fanfiction" of the future of FIRST, but I think the specific administrative things you mentioned are irrelevant towards the eventual addition of SuperRegionals/removal of Championship(which wasn't in the powerpoint laying out the potential SuperRegional structure)

Chris is me

09-10-2013, 13:46

But now similar to FRC you are going to need to have FRC's equivalent of Einstein for FTC teams to gather and play their finals. That ends up using more space than the current layout with FTC in one area with their own space in the stands.

This could be done by placing the FTC finals on Einstein during Saturday morning. This ends before noon, so at FRC alliance selection time, the FTC fields can be removed. Perhaps even place them on risers, VRC style. Maybe these risers could roll away to the side hallways of the Dome to clear Einstein more quickly.

I'm not sure I'm sold on the "FTC divisions with FRC divisions" concept, but it does seem like a cool way to combine the programs. The big problem becomes seating. FRC is already really crowded. While FTC doesn't take up as much space, any less space in some FRC fields means some people can't get seats at all.

While I hate to suggest it, really... FTC's smaller field size, desire for close-up seating, and smaller crowd size make it a natural fit for pit fields. To make Dome prominence possible, perhaps 1-2 divisions could still be in the Dome. Or maybe more of the eliminations are shifted to Saturday and FTC runs on Einstein. Just spitballin' here.

Alex2614

09-10-2013, 14:57

If I understand correctly, all this would do is split up the existing FTC divisions into two separate areas. Am I correct? Also, how does having more FRC divisions affect this then, other than what matches are playing when? Regarding the Einstein concern, one of the sets of FTC fields could be used for divisional playoffs, just as the Franklin half of FTC is currently used for finals.

No, you are not correct. As I have said before, I would place an ENTIRE FTC division with an FRC field (multiple FTC fields). Also, I know that the idea of increasing the number of FTC teams at worlds has been addressed. So why not move to 4 FTC divisions? Or keep the same number of FTC teams, but make 4 divisions of 50 (rather than 2 of 100). Again, just a thought.

Take a look at the attached PDF. Very rough, but you get the idea. I honestly think that all three of these options could work (in particular both option 1s, and option 3). In all three examples, I have 6 FRC divisions and 4 FTC divisions. This could work with any number of things, though. Including 2 FTC divisions as we have now. In fact, if we keep it at 2 FTC divisions, we could split FLL up among the FRC fields as well (or the remaining ones without an FTC partner). THEY WOULD HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT FLL TEAMS DO NOT CROSS THE STADIUM though. I'm not saying have FLL teams playing all over the stadium, but rather have some play on one side and some play on another (as with FRC now and FTC in my document).

I do realize that this is not perfect. I realize that there are still some minute issues that would need to be addressed, that I have not yet come up with a solution. One example is the FTC finals. I like this:
This could be done by placing the FTC finals on Einstein during Saturday morning. This ends before noon, so at FRC alliance selection time, the FTC fields can be removed. Perhaps even place them on risers, VRC style. Maybe these risers could roll away to the side hallways of the Dome to clear Einstein more quickly.

Another issue that has been brought up is seating. Could we open up the upper deck? Just a thought, really. But you also have to think that on the sides of the FRC fields now is empty space, and empty seats. the FTC fields would go beside the FRC fields where there is currently empty space.
Again, I know that there are lots of details that still would need to be addressed. But I think with some creativity and planning, SOMETHING LIKE this could work. I"m not saying I have all the answers. Just throwing out something that could be worked with and morphed into something awesome.

Alan Anderson

09-10-2013, 16:03

Take a look at the attached PDF. Very rough, but you get the idea.

How much time have you spent on the floor of the Edward Jones Dome? I'm trying to picture it from the middle, and I'm having a hard time imagining how everything will fit. You haven't left much room for the AV support, and I don't see how any of your proposals can handle the traffic flow. Your layouts all seem to provide much less access to the entrance tunnel than exists at present.

I'm also slightly concerned about the noise from one field interfering with an adjacent one, but that wasn't really a big problem between Newton and Archimedes last year, so it's probably manageable.

maths222

09-10-2013, 16:09

One comment: concurrent adjacent FRC fields might actually be OK, given that speaker audio can be pretty directed (IE FTC), and visual distractions seem not to have been a problem for the adjacent fields in 2012-13 (I think).

Lil' Lavery

10-10-2013, 12:38

I have three wild ideas that may be impossible.

First of all, i don't think we need 8 divisions. I can definitely see moving to 6 divisions, though. That seems most attractive to me.

How do you work Einstein with 6 divisions? The Einstein tournament and presentation ceremony already traditionally run well after their slotted time, and adding two more divisions makes it even worse. You no longer have a clean tournament brackets like you would with 2, 4, or 8 alliances advancing, so you likely have to do some sort of round robin.

Six alliances in a round robin means five matches per alliance, or fifteen total matches. That's six to nine more matches as are currently run on Eisntein, and has no real provision for tie-breakers or a true Championship match. In other words, the final match played might not even involve the team who is crowned champion. Can you think of a more anti-climatic ending? If you attach a playoff or championship match to the back-end, it's yet more time added on to the Einstein proceedings.

Six divisions doesn't work from an Einstein perspective.

themccannman

10-10-2013, 14:06

How do you work Einstein with 6 divisions? The Einstein tournament and presentation ceremony already traditionally run well after their slotted time, and adding two more divisions makes it even worse. You no longer have a clean tournament brackets like you would with 2, 4, or 8 alliances advancing, so you likely have to do some sort of round robin.

Six alliances in a round robin means five matches per alliance, or fifteen total matches. That's six to nine more matches as are currently run on Eisntein, and has no real provision for tie-breakers or a true Championship match. In other words, the final match played might not even involve the team who is crowned champion. Can you think of a more anti-climatic ending? If you attach a playoff or championship match to the back-end, it's yet more time added on to the Einstein proceedings.

Six divisions doesn't work from an Einstein perspective.

This was my first concern too before even worrying about field arrangement. Einstein already takes up just about the maximum amount of time that it can without running late into the night. Having 8 divisions would mean 21 games on einstein. I can't figure out a good way of having a 6 team bracket, you can't give any teams by's into the semi's because there's no seeding order, and if you let every team play each other that's 15 games just for quarter finals. There's also always the possibility that multiple teams come out with the same W/L record screwing up the bracket.

If we do move to 6 FRC fields, those fields would have to be fields that teams from every division rotate onto to save time. However, that makes it a nightmare for teams trying to find seats and scout matches at a different field every couple of matches. 8 fields would be more manageable for teams, but it would still be problematic trying to watch and scout matches halfway across the stadium, let alone scouting multiple matches happening at once.

I don't think more than 4 FRC fields is doable unless each field is it's own division. You can't have 6 divisions because that screws up einstein, and you can't have 8 divisions because there's not enough space in the dome for 8 FRC fields, 2 FTC divisions, and an FLL hybrid einstein/presentation stage area.

Point out if I made any errors, but I just don't think expanding CMP is really possible considering these issues plus all of the previously mentioned ones.