IRI - What Can Be Improved

[Chris Fultz]

We want to continue to improve the IRI to be sure teams want to keep coming back. We need your help, with what things you really like (so we keep them) and what things could be improved (so we can change them).

So, this thread is "What Can Be Improved".

Thanks for your input.

[Cynette]

I have one!

Make sure the Pit Announcements could be heard on both sides of the gym.

In the pit area there was the section on the side where teams could go to practice. Apparently you could not hear the pit announcements in that area. When we were queuing we would sometimes have a team not show and yet not be in their pit. We would finally remember to look on the other side of the curtain and there they would be - clueless that we were looking for them.

[jtdowney]

Perhaps I just missed it but better signage for people who arn't familiar with FIRST. Like competition field this way. I had a feeling my parents had a hard time finding where to be.

Hat's off to you though Chris and every else involved with IRI. I had a great time.

[Mike Martus]

To be improved:

The standings - main arena as teams are lined up

A larger screen that shows more and scrolls slower would be nice on Saturday.

[Andy Baker]

One thing we forgot... flags for the Canadian and Israeli national anthems.

AB

[JaneYoung]

1. Very small thing -
better writing tools (wide tip markers) for the Talent Show judges.
The paper was great.

next two I'm hesitant about but:

2. Pick a few people/volunteers to write a very brief paragraph rating their hotel selection/experience and post it with the hotel information for new out of towners who are trying to decide. I'm not picky and don't care but I wasn't traveling with a team. The rating will give an idea. Example: room size adequate, close to venue, kitchenette, good breakfast, great pool.
Or - dark parking area, pot holes, no housekeeping service during stay, no breakfast, small room, dirty pool. Things of that nature. Reason I suggest hand picking or finding a way to do this is to keep the grumbling and useless information at a minimum. It is an assumption on my part that the hotels listed in the IRI information are tried and true but some folks like to know a little more about the area and hotel.

3. I'm still not sure but I think Indianapolis is 55 mph. That is way different from Texas. If something could be provided in the travel information regarding the standard inform. such as mph or pay attention to the road markers (those totally rock), it might be helpful. If the mph is 55, I was very very lucky my Texas foot did not get a ticket. I could get down to 60.

Chris, you make an awesome NEM.

[sanddrag]

Is there air conditioning in the pits gym? The field gym was nice but it was hot in the pits.

[Jeremiah Johnson]

Is there air conditioning in the pits gym? The field gym was nice but it was hot in the pits.

I don't think so, I kept hearing that it was cold in the gym... but no complaints about the pits.

[Dave Flowerday]

How about taking a cue from the Championship and doing some of the awards during downtime during the finals?

[Jeremiah Johnson]

Direct video feed from the new prank to the field? That way it can't be ruined before the intended person(s) can see it?

And yes, I agree with Dave Flowerday... I like the idea of awards during the downtime... but leave time for dancing, too!

[Pavan Dave]

If possible, maybe make the pits a little bigger. The whole other side of the gym was empty (except for the small practice area) and there were teams that were inside the competition gym because there wasn't enough room. This wasn't really a problem although it would be much nicer and more spacious. :D

[Jeremiah Johnson]

If possible, maybe make the pits a little bigger. The whole other side of the gym was empty (except for the small practice area) and there were teams that were inside the competition gym because there wasn't enough room. This wasn't really a problem although it would be much nicer and more spacious. :D

They weren't there because there wasn't enough room, it was because they were event "sponsors" that did something special to earn that spot.

[Schnabel]

Is there air conditioning in the pits gym? The field gym was nice but it was hot in the pits.

There was AC in the pits last year as far as I can remember. I'm thinking that it wasn't working. Don't quote me on that though.

I think that we should have an official time for the CD@IRI Webhug. I think it would be really cool if it was in the program booklet and everything.

[AndyB]

Mentor Matches were always fun. I missed them.

[Ryan Dognaux]

Mentor Matches were always fun. I missed them.

I agree, the mentor matches were always an interesting twist to the competition.

And to elaborate a bit more on the pit situation (I think): Setup takes place on Thursday, and when I came in, there were Volleyball games actually happening on the other side of that curtain. I think the pit space was pretty nice in the aux. gym and I like seeing some of the pits in the main gym just because you know those teams are either the host teams, or they've done something awesome to make the IRI happen, or they're just a really really great team who came from, oh I don't know, Israel for example :)

This seems to happen every year, but on Friday the talent show and dinner sort of run into each other and overlap a bit. I know this is hard to schedule and probably can't be helped, but maybe we could work on that for next year. I agree with A/C in the Aux. gym, if that's doable, it's a must have.

[Lil' Lavery]

If there is a back-up alliance selection again next year, make sure that all members have to play in at least one match. Otherwise don't include it.
While many alliances did utilize all four members to a certain extent, as one of the teams that was selected but never took the field, I can tell you it wasn't much fun. Our experience may vary from the reactions of other teams in the same scenario (494 probably has less of a problem with it than we did), but it really sucks to be sitting there helplessly while watching your alliance on the field. FIRST required it when they had more members than were on the field (and still does in FTC). It allows for 32 teams to still see action in the eliminations, and still keeps the strategic element of when youre going t play each team. You don't even have to say one play per "series" (round, whatever), all you're basically saying is that they have to play once during the entire elimination rounds.

[rick.oliver]

If there is a back-up alliance selection again next year, make sure that all members have to play in at least one match. Otherwise don't include it.


I agree. I like the 2004 rules that forced the rotation of all three teams into the matches, though. I would prefer to follow that policy, obviously amended to include four teams. I like the idea of having more teams competing longer. The depth of the field at IRI should allow for high quality, robust partners to the 4th level. If that were not to be the case, then I would drop it and return to the standby pool.

[Jeremiah Johnson]

If there is a back-up alliance selection again next year, make sure that all members have to play in at least one match. Otherwise don't include it.
While many alliances did utilize all four members to a certain extent, as one of the teams that was selected but never took the field, I can tell you it wasn't much fun. Our experience may vary from the reactions of other teams in the same scenario (494 probably has less of a problem with it than we did), but it really sucks to be sitting there helplessly while watching your alliance on the field. FIRST required it when they had more members than were on the field (and still does in FTC). It allows for 32 teams to still see action in the eliminations, and still keeps the strategic element of when youre going t play each team. You don't even have to say one play per "series" (round, whatever), all you're basically saying is that they have to play once during the entire elimination rounds.

To add to that, make it so that if you're down 1-0 you should play the back-up? Or make it that if you're in the finals, the back-up has to have at least played in one match or they have to play at least once in the final round.

[Travis Hoffman]

I'd bring back the mentor matches but not have them count in the standings. Just because they don't count doesn't mean they won't be a lot of fun - I'll never forget the comedy of errors that was the 2005 Team 48 mentor team of me, human player Amanda Morrison, and copilot Karthik K....

Amanda run run runs to put tetra on robot manipulator and run run runs back to the safety pad.

Karthik drops tetra outside of the field once power is restored.

Repeat this at least 3 or 4 times.

Paul Copioli in the background mercilessly railing on our ineptitude.

Travis (upon noticing Karthik is operating the elbow in reverse) - "Hey Karthik - move the switch the other direction, dude!"

Karthik - "Ooooooooooooooooooooooooh."

Travis drives to goal - Karthik ultimately scores the tetra - hurray for perseverence - crowd goes wild!

I missed that kind of extra fun at IRI this year. But the above example also illustrates exactly why mentor matches shouldn't count!

[Dave Flowerday]

While many alliances did utilize all four members to a certain extent, as one of the teams that was selected but never took the field, I can tell you it wasn't much fun.
Was it less fun than simply packing up your pit after quals? That's what you would have done during the season obviously...

I think IRI made it clear that the backup robot was simply that... a backup. If teams weren't interested in filling the backup role they could have declined. I still think it's an improvement over having the "next 8" sitting on the sidelines on the off chance they got called up (that's probably not fun either).

I like leaving the option open to the alliances to decide the best combination for each match, though I do sympathize with teams who were part of an alliance but didn't get to play. But at least they were part of the alliance and got to help strategize instead of sitting on the sidelines, right? Plus, I hate the problem that crops up when you're required to play a team even if they're broken.

[MGoelz]

To add to that, make it so that if you're down 1-0 you should play the back-up? Or make it that if you're in the finals, the back-up has to have at least played in one match or they have to play at least once in the final round.

So, maybe each time an alliance loses a match, there is a requirement that the next match include playing the back-up robot, and if your alliance makes it to the finals and still has not played the back-up (meaning they haven't lost), then that becomes a requirement.

Of course by doing this, you now have to consider what to do when a robot breaks and such. There would seem no point in a 4th robot, if you can't save your alliance, should something go wrong.

Basically, we need redefined rules about the use of back-ups. :)

[Lil' Lavery]

Was it less fun than simply packing up your pit after quals? That's what you would have done during the season obviously...

I think IRI made it clear that the backup robot was simply that... a backup. If teams weren't interested in filling the backup role they could have declined. I still think it's an improvement over having the "next 8" sitting on the sidelines on the off chance they got called up (that's probably not fun either).

I like leaving the option open to the alliances to decide the best combination for each match, though I do sympathize with teams who were part of an alliance but didn't get to play. But at least they were part of the alliance and got to help strategize instead of sitting on the sidelines, right? Plus, I hate the problem that crops up when you're required to play a team even if they're broken.

Packing up our pits is what 116 did in 2005 and 2006 at IRI, and we still loved the event. And honestly, I think I might have preferred that, although other teams and team members opinions will likely vary. And while we knew that we may never actually play, having your fate in the hands of other teams is a very unsavory situation.
And I only suggested having to play a team once during the eliminations, so unless you drafted a broken team, you shouldn't have to play a broken team.

The way I would envision it is that each team only HAS to take the field once (but can play in more than one), during the entire elimination rounds. So, if you did lose your first match, your back-up would have to take the field in your second. But if you won/tied that first match, you could opt to save them for later (but you'd have to play them the next time you were on the verge of being eliminated or if you're on the verge of winning the finals and they still haven't been played).

[Eugenia Gabrielov]

Here are a few things that come to mind -

Traffic in the hallway by the arena that led to the pits - things got really hectic there, and I don't know how avoidable that is because it seems to be the only really good place to put traffic through (both of the robot and human variety).

I want to second the suggestion for announcements on both sides of the aux. gym - I remember fetching teams from the practice field that only had a few matches to get up, and weren't aware of it.

[AndyB]

I would enjoy a rule that says something like, your 4th robot must play in at least one match per round.

This would make things a bit more interesting, as well as the fact that it doesn't force any alliance to play a broken robot unless that robot is the 4th.

[Richard Wallace]

If there is a back-up alliance selection again next year, make sure that all members have to play in at least one match. Otherwise don't include it.Was it less fun than simply packing up your pit after quals? That's what you would have done during the season obviously....Basically, we need defined rules about the use of back-ups. :)I think the IRI folks gave us well defined rules on the use of back-ups. They were clear that a back-up is not a mandatory substitute for one of the AC's earlier picks. Sean seems be saying that being a back-up was OK, but getting a robot on the elimination playing field by mandatory substitution would have been better.

You wouldn't be a competitor if you didn't want to see your robot in the game. However, I think the AC has earned the right to decide which robots to play, without restrictions.

BTW, it's not just the back-up that might be left on the sidelines by an AC pursuing their best shot at victory -- any member of the alliance might suffer the same fate. As I recall, 469 sat out in favor of the high-scoring 148, and that was the alliance captain's prerogative.

[Richard Wallace]

Traffic in the hallway by the arena that led to the pits - things got really hectic there, and I don't know how avoidable that is because it seems to be the only really good place to put traffic through (both of the robot and human variety).I thought you did an excellent job managing that traffic.:)

Maybe it could have been partially alleviated by locating the T-Shirt and Raffle Ticket table somewhere else?

sorry for the double post.

[Cory]

Packing up our pits is what 116 did in 2005 and 2006 at IRI, and we still loved the event. And honestly, I think I might have preferred that, although other teams and team members opinions will likely vary. And while we knew that we may never actually play, having your fate in the hands of other teams is a very unsavory situation.
And I only suggested having to play a team once during the eliminations, so unless you drafted a broken team, you shouldn't have to play a broken team.

The way I would envision it is that each team only HAS to take the field once (but can play in more than one), during the entire elimination rounds. So, if you did lose your first match, your back-up would have to take the field in your second. But if you won/tied that first match, you could opt to save them for later (but you'd have to play them the next time you were on the verge of being eliminated or if you're on the verge of winning the finals and they still haven't been played).

But if you lose the first round, and are forced to play your backup in the second round, odds are that you're at even more of a disadvantage than before (unless you look at select alliances like 48's or 968's where they took full advantage of the backup bot)


BTW, it's not just the back-up that might be left on the sidelines by an AC pursuing their best shot at victory -- any member of the alliance might suffer the same fate. As I recall, 469 sat out in favor of the high-scoring 148, and that was the alliance captain's prerogative.

Very true. 177 was 968's second pick, and didn't play once.

[Jim Zondag]

Possibly a Practice field. 910 Brought a protable goal with a small piece of carpet and I saw a number of teams using it. Depending on the game design, This may not always be something teams could easily bring themselves. Also, More Latex balloons to put Karthik in :)

[Chris Marra]

It would be ideal, though perhaps not feasible, to extend pits farther into the practice gym so there is more room for queuing inside of the competition venue, since I know it got very tight and some teams' pit spaces were severely affected by the number of teams there.

As others mentioned, queuing through the same hallway and doorway as spectators used was also a little frantic. If it were possible to use the other exit from the practice gym, go around the outside, and come into the competition gym around where 1577's pit was on the wall opposite of the regular entrance, this would be a lot more ideal to clearly separate spectator's and robots.

Also, even though I know it was more of a fault than something to improve on, when 10 additional matches appeared on the ranking monitors that made it seem like teams had mere minutes to strategize and get their robots onto the field, I know our team freaked out, and even more-so when the field crew had no idea what was going on. I know noone is to blame for this, but it was a confusing situation, so I suppose it can be improved?

Finally, a new match scheduling algorithm :p.

[Josh Murphy]

It seemed like they were queing 5 matches prior to your match, which should be cut down to 3.:)

[David Brinza]

Is there air conditioning in the pits gym? The field gym was nice but it was hot in the pits.Fortunately, it was unseasonably cool for late-July in the Midwest (it could easily have been over 90 F). I stepped outside to cool off a couple of times.

[Nica F.]

Those teams with the pits next to the field seemed to me a bit crowded seeing that the robot traffic was going on right in front of their pits and as times got more hectic, there wasn't much space for either those teams to maneuver and teams trying to line up for a next match. + all of those who decided to make their way to the silent auction from that side added to the crowding as well.

I don't know if i just didn't hear them, but announcements concerning things like the team dinner/webhug/talent show/ and such would be nice.

[Cynette]

It seemed like they were queing 5 matches prior to your match, which should be cut down to 3.:)For the most part, we were queuing 5 matches ahead! The field queuing area determined early on that they had room for five sets of teams without extending into the hallway. So thats what they told us to do. During those times when the crew was hustling to make up time, it really seemed to help that the extra teams were ready.

But I do think that if that's what the expectation was, we should have better communicated that to the teams.:ahh:

[Travis Hoffman]

For the most part, we were queuing 5 matches ahead! The field queuing area determined early on that they had room for five sets of teams without extending into the hallway. So thats what they told us to do. During those times when the crew was hustling to make up time, it really seemed to help that the extra teams were ready.

But I do think that if that's what the expectation was, we should have better communicated that to the teams.:ahh:

I rather enjoyed waiting in line - less time in the relatively hot pits - more time up close with the teams and the matches on the field. :)

[Jeremiah Johnson]

Also, even though I know it was more of a fault than something to improve on, when 10 additional matches appeared on the ranking monitors that made it seem like teams had mere minutes to strategize and get their robots onto the field, I know our team freaked out, and even more-so when the field crew had no idea what was going on. I know noone is to blame for this, but it was a confusing situation, so I suppose it can be improved?

LOL. Only one person (from 1902, I believe) believed me when I told them there were no extra matches. I even made calls over the PA telling people that the final match was being played... yet people kept asking. LOL. That's just a funny thing I thought I would add. No big deal, though. I was confused for a bit, too.

[234smidget]

backup robot- I thought was pointless because they were not used but again great for the team because they still got an award(once winning) :D

can we have someone sing our national anthem. it would make the opening mean so much more and make it look better

[Pavan Dave]

PLEASE do not make the IRI a super-regional-like event with two fields and the whole shebang!

[Wayne Doenges]

One thing I would like to see.
When playing the national anthems of other countries (Israel and Canada), display their flag on the projection screen.

[JackN]

I had three minor complaints

1. Could we have two choices for food at the dinner? I am not a fan of taco salad or whatever they served, but last year's food was great. Something like hot dogs or hamburgers would be great.

2. I had a hard time with the numbering system of the pits. It looped and just seemed generally goofy to me. But I can deal with that not changing.

3. Could pits be put in the little hallway behind the charity auction on the far side of the competition. Maybe move the the sponsors pits to there so we don't have the mass of people on that side.

Just a few small ones not really anything major

[Cynette]

2. I had a hard time with the numbering system of the pits. It looped and just seemed generally goofy to me. But I can deal with that not changing.ummm... weren't they just in numerical order in a serpentine fashion starting with the lowest order tucked way in the corner to the highest number in the front near the curtain? (except for the sponsoring team pits). Maybe that was more obvious when you were sitting at the pit admin table, but for the group of us doing queuing, we had no problem finding the pits, once we figured out which teams were not in that pit area.

But that does bring up another thing. Whenever we had a team to queue that was in the field area pits we sent a runner from pit admin to make sure they knew they were up soon. And while it seemed effective and the runner had a great time going back and forth, it might have been more efficient to have a radio or some other means of communicating to that area. And the same thing for Genia who kept going back and forth to make sure we were queuing the matches at the same rate she needed them. It would have been simpler to buzz us periodically and ask if we were queuing match number so and so...

[JBotAlan]

It's going to seem like I love griping, where I'm just trying to be thorough. So, here it is:

I'm really surprised nobody posted this yet: Someone please test the sound system before the opening ceremonies. The Israeli national anthem was absolutely *painful* because there was so much treble it penetrated my brain! It was better the second day, but still not great.

I didn't see a practice field--a perfect spot would be on the other side of that curtain. For that matter, it would've been nice to get a larger pit and spread into that part of the gym. But that's just a luxury.

The guys' bathroom was disgusting every time I went in there. Enough said.

I was slightly bummed that the concession stands were closed towards the end on Saturday. Then again, we just turned around and went to a restaurant.

I would've liked to see the "if you're touching the wall you don't get the bonus points" rule pulled; that always seemed like a stupid rule...but I'm only sore about it because that was a deciding factor in the first finals match...with us being decided against ;).

That's about all I have.

This was definitely much more fun than last year! You must be doing something right :).

JBot

P.S. YAY! No tech inspections!:D

[Richard Wallace]

P.S. YAY! No tech inspections!:DHas the IRI ever had robot inspections? I'm guessing not, because at that point in the year inspections shouldn't be necessary. If a robot had a real issue with safety or rules compliance, I'm pretty sure there would be several people very near the field who could spot it. People with stripes on who also have significant experience with the robot rules. One guy in particular who doesn't miss much.

[JBotAlan]

Has the IRI ever had robot inspections? I'm guessing not, because at that point in the year inspections shouldn't be necessary. If a robot had a real issue with safety or rules compliance, I'm pretty sure there would be several people very near the field who could spot it. People with stripes on who also have significant experience with the robot rules. One guy in particular who doesn't miss much.

I don't remember if we had them last year...but it's still a great relief to not need to stand in line to have someone approve the electronics board you know is already in order.

[GaryVoshol]

I would've liked to see the "if you're touching the wall you don't get the bonus points" rule pulled; that always seemed like a stupid rule...but I'm only sore about it because that was a deciding factor in the first finals match...with us being decided against ;).Sorry, the committee that came up with the rule changes missed that one. And then when it happened the first time, we had no choice but to disallow points, because that's what FIRST's rule said. We didn't like it, but we had to be consistent. It should be the referees' discretion as to whether the robot was leaning against the wall for no points, or just touching the wall. (Rules mods for future off-season events, take note.)

I recall two instances in the knockout rounds; there may have been more. In one case, 107's ramps had a flap of polycarb that was supposed to go between the ramped robot and the wall, preventing the condition - but the flap didn't deploy on one side of the robot, and the ramped robot touched the wall. Another time a bot was touching the glass, despite the drive team's efforts to pull on the alliance station. Actually that only made the decision easier, the refs could clearly see the touching as the wall moved back to contact the robot :yikes:

[JBotAlan]

I totally agree with the reason the rule was enforced. Thank you for upholding the integrity of the judging.

Another time a bot was touching the glass, despite the drive team's efforts to pull on the alliance station. Actually that only made the decision easier, the refs could clearly see the touching as the wall moved back to contact the robot :yikes:

Yeah......that was us...:o :D

I heard about that one when they got back. We would've gotten away with it, too, if it wasn't for those meddling kids..er...judges! :)

But in all seriousness I would not be happy with winning because of a controversial call. Changing the rules during a game is wrong; thank you for not doing that, as hard as that may have been.

And I am really happy with our finalist award. My autonomous last year made sure we didn't make it past quarters--wish I had video, but the robot took off at full speed (~15ft/sec)--it was supposed to shift down after .5sec--and nearly smacked into another robot (causing me to get balled out by a judge...:ahh: ) and ending its short-lived high-speed journey smashing into the other side of the field dramatically, throwing the main battery a few feet out of the holder and causing the robot to freeze in place for the rest of the match. Gosh, that was fun to watch...

Wow, that got off-topic. Sorry...

JBot

[Pavan Dave]

Placing the official IRI logo on the site would be helpful especially if teams want to make "IRI Patches" or for a number of different reasons.

[Wayne Doenges]

But in all seriousness I would not be happy with winning because of a controversial call. Changing the rules during a game is wrong; thank you for not doing that, as hard as that may have been.
I'm sorry to report that it did happen.
In one of our matches, and the one before it, a ref gave out penalties for a robot breaking the plane of the home zone at the end of the match. In our case, we lifted a robot, but when the game ended the robot, that we supported on our wings, arm came up and broke the plane. We got a 10 point penalty and lost the 30 points for the lift.
In a later match, I saw a robot with a peice of lexan CLEARLY over the home zone line, and touching the floor beyond, not get a penalty.

[Andy Baker]

I'm sorry to report that it did happen.
In one of our matches, and the one before it, a ref gave out penalties for a robot breaking the plane of the home zone at the end of the match. In our case, we lifted a robot, but when the game ended the robot, that we supported on our wings, arm came up and broke the plane. We got a 10 point penalty and lost the 30 points for the lift.
In a later match, I saw a robot with a peice of lexan CLEARLY over the home zone line, and touching the floor beyond, not get a penalty.


This does not mean that the referees "changed the rules".

In this case, either a call was missed by the referees, or the penalty did not get called for a different reason (maybe the robot was not outside of the 72" imaginary box). Obviously, there is not enough information here to determine which is the case.

Andy B.