View Full Version : Michigan rankings
J. Stofflett
29-03-2009, 00:18
Looks like 42 points will do it for most teams.
http://www.firstinmichigan.org/staticpages/index.php?page=Results_Overall
roboraven15
29-03-2009, 00:21
lol i just made a thread like this..... except pasted teams..... anyways news is out
Looks like 42 points will do it for most teams.
http://www.firstinmichigan.org/staticpages/index.php?page=Results_Overall
Why was 2960 left out if they had 42 points as well?
Lil' Lavery
29-03-2009, 00:37
Why was 2960 left out if they had 42 points as well?
From the Michigan rules supplement
If any teams have the same number of points, the following hierarchy of tiebreakers will be used to break the tie:
1. Elimination Round Performance Points
2. Best Elimination Round Finish
3. Draft Points
4. Highest Draft/Seed Achieved
5. Qualification Round Win-Loss Points
6. Most Wins
7. Highest Match Score
8. Second Highest Match Score
9. Third Highest Match Score
10. Coin Flip
Jack Jones
29-03-2009, 00:39
Why was 2960 left out if they had 42 points as well?
Tie breakers - page seven: Here (http://www.firstinmichigan.org/filemgmt_data/files/Final%202009%20Supplement%20Rules%20with%20Forms.p df)
Paul Copioli
29-03-2009, 00:41
They must have been out on a tie breaker. Here is the rules excerpt:
Tie Breakers
If any teams have the same number of points, the following hierarchy of tiebreakers will be used to break the tie:
1. Elimination Round Performance Points
2. Best Elimination Round Finish
3. Draft Points
4. Highest Draft/Seed Achieved
5. Qualification Round Win-Loss Points
6. Most Wins
7. Highest Match Score
8. Second Highest Match Score
9. Third Highest Match Score
10. Coin Flip
ATannahill
29-03-2009, 00:43
when do we know who gets in?
dragonrulr288
29-03-2009, 00:50
when do we know who gets in?
check the link. there is a cutoff line. sadly 216 is 6 slots underneith it :/
ATannahill
29-03-2009, 00:52
check the link. there is a cutoff line. sadly 216 is 6 slots underneith it :/
Don't be disheartened, if 6 teams drop out you could attend. What I meant is when do we know the final teams attending after drop outs are accounted for?
Akash Rastogi
29-03-2009, 00:54
Holy crap MI Champs is going to be like watching a similar version of IRI. I can't wait.
roboraven15
29-03-2009, 00:56
Don't be disheartened, if 6 teams drop out you could attend. What I meant is when do we know the final teams attending after drop outs are accounted for?
we dont know drop outs till they drop, which i imagen will begin soon
Herodotus
29-03-2009, 01:10
Holy crap MI Champs is going to be like watching a similar version of IRI. I can't wait.
I was thinking the same thing. Can't wait for States, it'll be even better than GLR last year.
dragonrulr288
29-03-2009, 01:10
Im trying to deside whether or not to tell my school if i need the mascot or not... lol...
I suppose i will just have to check tommorow then. is the list updated at the same link after people start dropping out? and how many teams usually drop out?
ATannahill
29-03-2009, 01:13
Im trying to deside whether or not to tell my school if i need the mascot or not... lol...
I suppose i will just have to check tommorow then. is the list updated at the same link after people start dropping out? and how many teams usually drop out?
I am guessing the right most column will be a check or something to say if the team is going. Since this is the first state competition we do not know how many people will drop out.
The original top 64 teams have till noon on monday to accept or decline.
Springman
29-03-2009, 13:48
It seems to me that there should be some automatic admittance into the state championship for district winners. It is unfortunate that team 216 may not even get a chance to play at the state level after ranking 2nd in the qualifications and captained their team to the West Michigan district championship. I say this because their team managed to beat up on us pretty well in the finals. I understand that this was there third event, and their points earned do not count in the current setup, but I think that all winning alliance captians at a minimum should be eligible at the state level. Anyone else have thoughts on this one?
MishraArtificer
29-03-2009, 13:59
Looks like 240 is waaaaaay out of the lineup for GLR (cough, cough) States...I wonder if they'll let me in anyway?
GVDrummer
29-03-2009, 14:10
It seems to me that there should be some automatic admittance into the state championship for district winners. It is unfortunate that team 216 may not even get a chance to play at the state level after ranking 2nd in the qualifications and captained their team to the West Michigan district championship. I say this because their team managed to beat up on us pretty well in the finals. I understand that this was there third event, and their points earned do not count in the current setup, but I think that all winning alliance captians at a minimum should be eligible at the state level. Anyone else have thoughts on this one?
I agree with you Springman, 216 had a rough time up in traverse city for it being their first competition, every single one of the students was new to the program including the coaches so they had no idea what to expect.
When you look at 216's record and their improvements I would say they are the most improved team out there. Here is the information that backs this up: http://www.thebluealliance.net/tbatv/team/216
Traverse City: (5-7-0)
Lansing: (11-7-0) Regional Finalists ~ Thanks 1 and 245!!
West Michigan: (16-2-0) #2 Seed, Regional Champions ~ Thanks 1918 and 1254!!
Over the weeks 216 used the 8 hour work times to redesign and rebuild there robot and they did an amazing job. From scoring 3-4 cells per round in Traverse City to on 20+ cells in the finals at West Michigan.
I have to agree with your opinion on Regional Winners getting an automatic placement. It will be tough watching 85-1918-245-1-33-703 plus all the others and wishing we were there.
Also thanks again to 1918 & 1245 for their awesome play!!!
Dan
Alex Dinsmoor
29-03-2009, 14:39
I personally think that regional winners should not get an automatic invite to states. The point of the point system was to give each team a fair chance at playing at states. This point system would almost guarantee a spot at states for any team who wins a competition.
Winners
Alliance Captain and First Pick 30
Second Pick 24
If you were on the winning alliance (even if you were 2nd pick), you would still get 24 points; more than half of what it takes to get to states. If you were able to win 8 matches in the qualifications at your two events you would have made it in. And chances are if you win one, you will do very good in your other events.
The point system celebrates consistency in playing. If FiM would allow teams to count their third event win, then how would the team who gets bumped out of going to states feel? Just because team X has enough money to go to three events, means they get to go because they won on their third event? You need to think of the teams on the bubble, and how they would feel.
I know that my team does not have the funding (or the time) to go to three events. If a team from below us in the rankings got to go because they got lucky and got picked third (or earned their way), I would feel pretty upset.
Here is something for you to think about also: What happens if a team is on their third event and becomes a backup robot and then goes on to win the event all because of a robot failure?
XaulZan11
29-03-2009, 14:51
I personally think that regional winners should not get an automatic invite to states. The point of the point system was to give each team a fair chance at playing at states. This point system would almost guarantee a spot at states for any team who wins a competition.
I agree with you that the 3rd (or 4th or 5th) district a team competes in shouldn't count towards qualifying for state, but I don't think it is right that a team like 858, who won Lansing, not be qualified for state competition. Yes they were the 24th pick and will most likely still go (as they are 66th), but I just don't think it is right.
Other than that, I'm wondering from people that know the teams well, are the best 64 teams going? Or are the rankings skewed in some way?
Wayne TenBrink
29-03-2009, 15:02
I had already posted my long winded opinion on the FIM thread before seeing this one. I'll summarize it again here by saying that I really hope to see 216 & 858 at State.
chinckley
29-03-2009, 17:22
I have to agree with your opinion on Regional Winners getting an automatic placement. It will be tough watching 85-1918-245-1-33-703 plus all the others and wishing we were there.
Also thanks again to 1918 & 1254 for their awesome play!!!
Dan
Thanks for asking us. We had a great time and hope to be at States. We will know tomorrow morning. We hope you are there too.
GaryVoshol
29-03-2009, 17:45
When the District concept was presented, there were 16 geographical districts defined in Michigan. It was recognized that with 60-odd places at EMU - the biggest event venue in the state - that the traditional method of 6 teams qualifying to Atlanta wouldn't work for advancement to the State Championship - as soon as we got to 10 district events, there wouldn't be any "wildcard" spots open for any point structure.
With an increase in teams next year similar to what happened this year, we will have to have an 8th district event. Depending on how many teams register, there will again be somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 open spots for teams to attend a 3rd event. Of course the economy could change everything.
Teams knew going in that the third event would not count toward state qualification. If a team wanted to compete in Week 5 and have that event count, they had to go to only 2 events. Just like traditional regionals are apportioned through the season so the field equipment and volunteers can be rotated, so with districts. Somebody has to be first and somebody has to be last. Often site restrictions and availability dictate when an event can be run - either it has to be a certain week or you won't get that site.
I applaud 216 for the great strides made this season. Unfortunately it just didn't work out for them and other teams that are just below the bubble, unless now some other teams have the even greater misfortune to not be able to afford State.
I think the district concept has pretty much proven itself; the wonderful things I expect to see next weekend will just confirm that. Sure, there are tweaks that need to be made. Every team should submit a thorough and thoughtful evaluation. The organizing committees need to know how to make even better events next year. And the rest of FIRST needs to know whether and how to implement more district structures around the country.
Alex Dinsmoor
29-03-2009, 18:13
I agree with you that the 3rd (or 4th or 5th) district a team competes in shouldn't count towards qualifying for state, but I don't think it is right that a team like 858, who won Lansing, not be qualified for state competition. Yes they were the 24th pick and will most likely still go (as they are 66th), but I just don't think it is right.
Other than that, I'm wondering from people that know the teams well, are the best 64 teams going? Or are the rankings skewed in some way?
I do agree that if you win one of your first two events you should get to go. 858 did really good at lansing, and after seeing their poor luck at Traverse, they definitely should have gone.
And I'm also an expert on teams :) I have gone to and scouted at 4 events, so I think I know my stuff.
Looking at teams that are just below the cut, I'm sad to see some good teams didn't make it. Teams like 3115 (amazing rookie team), 1189 (has lots of potential), 3096 (really high on my scouting list), 2960 (I mean they were amazing at Troy), 2719 (great rookie team that were great opponents at Detroit) and 2337 (seeing as their batteries are secure :P ).
3115 teamed up with 2719 (and 2612) in the QFs at Detroit, and were a great alliance to play against. They were good teams, and I wish to see them all at States (I know I will with 2612 :) ).
Now I don't see any teams that shouldn't be going, but I do feel that some are ranked to high for their performance. I know that many teams have been "Carried" to their rank, and some should be significantly lower in the rankings then they are. And I'm not going to name any of the "Carried" teams because that isn't a demonstration of GP.
Jack Jones
29-03-2009, 19:15
...
I know that many teams have been "Carried" to their rank, and some should be significantly lower in the rankings then they are. And I'm not going to name any of the "Carried" teams because that isn't a demonstration of GP.
There is no need to name them, they/we already know. What would be a true demonstration of GP would be for those teams to step aside and let the more deserving teams in.
The carried team phenomenon is bound to happen with the top eight in-picking and the serpentine draft. When a powerhouse number one picks another powerhouse in the top eight, then best of what’s left after fourteen more picks has a pretty good chance of getting carried on to a major point bonanza.
Maybe next year, they should give points for first picks only, then a few consolation points to the second pick for advancing to the semis and finals. That's not going to fix it completly (it always has and always will happen) but it would deminish the impact a bit.
GaryVoshol
29-03-2009, 19:34
But that 16th pick only gets 1 point for draft selection to the #1 alliance, and gets less points if the alliance wins in elims. I think it is already taken into account. When the plan came out I didn't understand and didn't like the lesser points for the third member of the alliance, but now I do understand.
fuzzy1718
29-03-2009, 19:36
Maybe next year, they should give points for first picks only, then a few consolation points to the second pick for advancing to the semis and finals.
That would do no good because there are many third pick teams that help their alliance quite a bit. The only way around it is to change the elimination round structure completely, which is ill advised. There will always be teams that are pressed through by luck, just as there will always be teams that fall through the cracks, but that is life.
First will never be 100% "fair", just as life will never be 100% "fair". Some things are out of our hands, just deal with it. I think no changes are needed, as far as the third pick goes, but there are other areas in the points system that need improvment; I'll leave those are for a later discussion.
I agree with you Springman, 216 had a rough time up in traverse city for it being their first competition, every single one of the students was new to the program including the coaches so they had no idea what to expect.
I am very confused with what is happening in Grandville. Is Team 216 a second team from Grandville High School that already has team 288? So even though all students were new to the program including the coaches, they are not considered a rookie team. There is something wrong with this picture when Team 2771 has 9 students and their mentor who left Team 288 who have done FRC for years to start a new team and they are considered a rookie team. It just doesn't seem to be fair.
Alex Dinsmoor
29-03-2009, 19:45
Maybe next year, they should give points for first picks only, then a few consolation points to the second pick for advancing to the semis and finals. That's not going to fix it completly (it always has and always will happen) but it would deminish the impact a bit.
Like assign third pick points based on their ranking/how far they go into the elimination rounds.
Say the #8 alliance wins the event, their second pick was actually the 9th pick so their 2nd pick would get more points than the 2nd pick (16th overall) for the #1 alliance if they win.
Besides that, the current point system is pretty solid. Although I think the point gap between winners, finalists, and semi-finalists are pretty large. If FiM based the semi and finalist's points more on if they went to 3 matches vs 2, the points would be even more realistic.
GVDrummer
29-03-2009, 19:53
I am very confused with what is happening in Grandville. Is Team 216 a second team from Grandville High School that already has team 288? So even though all students were new to the program including the coaches, they are not considered a rookie team. There is something wrong with this picture when Team 2771 has 9 students and their mentor who left Team 288 who have done FRC for years to start a new team and they are considered a rookie team. It just doesn't seem to be fair.
Ed Law,
To clarify some of your questions you are correct when stating 216 is part of 288. Both are affilated with Grandville High School.
There are 20 plus students involved with the program and out of those students there is 1 who is returning. That student is part of Team 288
The rest of the students are new to the program as well as most are with robotics.
With the coaches one is brand new to the program with no previous experience with FRC. The other coach was involved with robotics 11 years ago when he helped start the robotics team. But then left the following year.
Don Wright
29-03-2009, 19:59
The point system is to award consistent good play. If you go and do poorly at your first event, then you have a lot of ground to make up. If you do well in your second event and make it up, great... If not...you might be on the sidelines for the championship... Maybe you should have been better prepared for that first event...
How do you think the teams that got left out of the NCAA basketball tournament felt? I'm sure there are MILLIONS of opinions about why this team or that team should have not be in, or was left out... And that doesn't even have a solid points system behind who gets in...
There will ALWAYS be feelings of why this team or that team should have been included/not included... But you can't make all of the people happy all of the time.
I think the point system worked well and the State Championship event is going to be "wicked awesome"...
dragonrulr288
29-03-2009, 20:09
I am very confused with what is happening in Grandville. Is Team 216 a second team from Grandville High School that already has team 288? So even though all students were new to the program including the coaches, they are not considered a rookie team. There is something wrong with this picture when Team 2771 has 9 students and their mentor who left Team 288 who have done FRC for years to start a new team and they are considered a rookie team. It just doesn't seem to be fair.
216 and 288 are bothe grandville teams. we chose to have 2 teams this year for more hands on experience for our team. we have 2-3 returning people, and all new coaches. we are not called a 'rookie team' because we are an established team, and have been for 10 year now [wow! 1999!!].
Sadly, due to a change of leaders, and a few things unbeknownst to the students, we had a team split we werent expecting. Code red formed with the old Robodawgs coach, a few of the former Robodawg students, and other schools in our area, and are a 'rookie team' from what FIRST deemed, so they are a 'rookie team'.
And I hope that 216 goes to state, we worked hard through much of what a 'rookie team' faces, with so few people that returned, but a drive to work our hardest. Thanks to thoes who think we should go.
I also think, as a few others said, It would be a true example of GP if the teams that qualify for state who maybe got up there through a bit of good fortune would step down, and let teams thay may have had a hard time early on, but came back to kick some bolts on to state.
However this is an opinian, and as I am entitled to mine, you may have yours.
I hope to see you all at state!
~Abby, 216~
roboraven15
29-03-2009, 20:21
so we are banking on the hope our school will send a P.O. to either pay or lend us the money for states, we'll find out tomorrow morning... i hope not too many teams can't afford it, its rather sad that teams qualify then can't afford to go
216 and 288 are bothe grandville teams. we chose to have 2 teams this year for more hands on experience for our team. we have 2-3 returning people, and all new coaches. we are not called a 'rookie team' because we are an established team, and have been for 10 year now [wow! 1999!!].
Sadly, due to a change of leaders, and a few things unbeknownst to the students, we had a team split we werent expecting. Code red formed with the old Robodawgs coach, a few of the former Robodawg students, and other schools in our area, and are a 'rookie team' from what FIRST deemed, so they are a 'rookie team'.
And I hope that 216 goes to state, we worked hard through much of what a 'rookie team' faces, with so few people that returned, but a drive to work our hardest. Thanks to thoes who think we should go.
I also think, as a few others said, It would be a true example of GP if the teams that qualify for state who maybe got up there through a bit of good fortune would step down, and let teams thay may have had a hard time early on, but came back to kick some bolts on to state.
However this is an opinian, and as I am entitled to mine, you may have yours.
I hope to see you all at state!
~Abby, 216~
Hi,
Thanks for clarifying the history between 216, 288 and 2771. Congratulations on your accomplishments as a new "non-rookie" team and the improvement on the robot you were able to make within a few weeks. I think Grandville High School is a great example to other big teams to split into two teams so more students have hands-on experience on the robot instead of having very limited responsibilities. It is not easy to make that choice especially with the economy we have in Michigan to have to raise more money. Team 216 is only 6 places below the cutoff. There will probably be teams who can not raise the money (not that we hope any team will not be able to) or decide to skip State to save money and go to Atlanta. I really hope you can make it after all your hard work.
I don't have any hard feelings with 2771. I want to congratulate them on their accomplishments. They did a lot of work and provided a great service to other teams through their webcasts. They won 3 of the Rookie All-Star Awards at the 7 districts. I think they deserve to win the Chairman's Award instead for their work and let other true rookie teams have a chance at the Rookie All-Star Award. In my opinon, even with 4 veteran FRC students on the team at the time of kickoff and 5 more veteran FRC students join only after the kickoff should not qualify them as a rookie team. I know FIRST allowed them to decide on their own because of that unique situation. I don't think it is a very GP tihng to make the choice they made. I think FIRST should clarify the definition of rookie team.
Ed
Steve Ketron
30-03-2009, 07:06
Hi,
Thanks for clarifying the history between 216, 288 and 2771. Congratulations on your accomplishments as a new "non-rookie" team and the improvement on the robot you were able to make within a few weeks. I think Grandville High School is a great example to other big teams to split into two teams so more students have hands-on experience on the robot instead of having very limited responsibilities. It is not easy to make that choice especially with the economy we have in Michigan to have to raise more money. Team 216 is only 6 places below the cutoff. There will probably be teams who can not raise the money (not that we hope any team will not be able to) or decide to skip State to save money and go to Atlanta. I really hope you can make it after all your hard work.
I don't have any hard feelings with 2771. I want to congratulate them on their accomplishments. They did a lot of work and provided a great service to other teams through their webcasts. They won 3 of the Rookie All-Star Awards at the 7 districts. I think they deserve to win the Chairman's Award instead for their work and let other true rookie teams have a chance at the Rookie All-Star Award. In my opinon, even with 4 veteran FRC students on the team at the time of kickoff and 5 more veteran FRC students join only after the kickoff should not qualify them as a rookie team. I know FIRST allowed them to decide on their own because of that unique situation. I don't think it is a very GP tihng to make the choice they made. I think FIRST should clarify the definition of rookie team.
Ed
I currently have to teams at Monroe High School. 1528 and 2719 (rookie team). However, to get classified as a rookie I had to submit a request for review of our team. I stated that 2719 is a classroom team and is not a part of the 1528 team. I have 2 students on my team with FIRST experience. When the decision came back to allow us to be a rookie team, it was clearly stated that we were considered a rookie team because we only had those two students with previous FIRST experience. I was told that we could have up to a total of 5 experienced students on my team to be classified as a rookie. If 2771 has a total of 9 experienced students on there team, then they should be stripped of there rookie status and any awards they received with it. You are absolutely correct in stating that 2771 should show some gracious professionalism and report the change of status and return thos awards.
Steve Ketron
30-03-2009, 08:18
"Looking at teams that are just below the cut, I'm sad to see some good teams didn't make it. Teams like 3115 (amazing rookie team), 1189 (has lots of potential), 3096 (really high on my scouting list), 2960 (I mean they were amazing at Troy), 2719 (great rookie team that were great opponents at Detroit) and 2337 (seeing as their batteries are secure )."
Alex, thank you for the complement. 2719, worked really at Detroit to make a competitive robot. Considering the week before at Cass Tech, they were only on the field three times. At Cass Tech, they completely changed out their drive train and transformed an illegal shooter out to the garbage can that you saw at Detroit. This is a huge complement to my students. They really busted their butts to be able to compete and I will pass on to the team your high remarks. Thank you
Springman
30-03-2009, 09:28
Not to cause too much contention, but my thoughts concerning team 216 earning a spot in the state tournament was based only on their being the winning alliance captain. To clarify, I do not believe that the first or second pick teams from the winning alliance should get an automatic spot, just the captain. This is just my $.02.
Not to cause too much contention, but my thoughts concerning team 216 earning a spot in the state tournament was based only on their being the winning alliance captain. To clarify, I do not believe that the first or second pick teams from the winning alliance should get an automatic spot, just the captain. This is just my $.02.
Springman,
I agree with you on this. If I remember correctly when you won a Regional in the past did that not give you a place in Atlanta? I think the winning captain should get a spot at state. But of course I have a vested interest in wanting it that way:)
But the way it looks right now 216 will not be going to state.
That is sad for all the students
Dan - I believe that there will be at least 8 teams above the cut not going to state. That should be known at the end of the day.
Don Wright
30-03-2009, 10:45
The problem is that because 216 was one of the few lucky teams to be able to go to a third event for $500, if the points or results were able to be counted, isn't that not fair to other teams that could not go to a third event (due to no slots available), even though they improved their robot significantly in their second event (830 comes to mind)?
I commend 216 on their improvement and think it's great that they did so well at WM. But they had the pleasure of a third event for $500 which is AWSOME in it's own right. Some of us that want a third event have to pay $4000 for that...
Paul Copioli
30-03-2009, 10:46
drhall,
I understand that you are disappointed, but your team should compare to if you competed last year instead of this year:
This year, for $5,500 registration you received:
49 matches and three events.
Last year for $6,000 you would have received:
8 or 9 matches (at GLR or West Michigan). Based on your first event performance this year, that is all the matches you would have had.
Or looking at it from a three events standpoint:
This year = 49 matches and $5,500
Last year (Assume GLR, Detroit, and Midwest) = 39 matches and $14,000 not including travel.
While I hope 216 gets in (I think you will), your team should be very glad your non-rookie first year (that is just wierd to me) was this year and not last year.
Paul
P.S. - To just assign the alliance captain an automatic berth is silly. If you want my reasons, I will list them in a PM as the list is too long for a normal post.
Dan - I believe that there will be at least 8 teams above the cut not going to state. That should be known at the end of the day.
Larry,
Thank you for the information. If we are able to go that would be great, but all the teams above us deserve the spot before 216.
Also a big THANK YOU to you and all the other people from this past weekend that made WM the best Regional we attended. You guys did a great job in making it work great.
Dan
Ok, got to say this on what was said above about captain/first pick/second pick differentiation.
There should be little to none. Some teams get to be the alliance captain out of luck. You end up making excellent choices for your two picks and you will have a win. In other words, all three could be achieved by luck.
Also, the second pick is perhaps the most important pick in forming an alliance. The first pick is usually rather obvious. Pick a team that is ranked highly that works well with your team. The second pick involves so much more. It requires you to know more about all the teams then the other captains. Being able to pick the team that everyone overlooks. In all honesty the rank does not matter at all. If you end up getting picked by an amazing team that ranked 1 and 2 in the qualifications, you too are an amazing team. You didn't prove it by winning matches in the qualifications, but you did prove it in other ways. You just did a great job networking, your robot must be pretty good, your entire drive team must be great to work with....The list goes on.
In all honesty, there will always be luck in the game. If I recall they mention somewhere that they put luck in on purpose for excitement. But get used to it.
If a team that was "carried"(your term not mine) gives up their spot out of "GP", that would be completely ridiculous. They put in so much work, regardless of how their robot itself did. Your team won that spot, not your robot, so what?
A true form of GP would be to send out a congratulations to all the teams that made it, regardless of whether or not you think they should have.
PS: I know nothing of the Michigan ranking system, but I do know something about life and people. Please read my remarks above as an honest assessment of what is posted here alone.
GaryVoshol
30-03-2009, 12:16
Not to cause too much contention, but my thoughts concerning team 216 earning a spot in the state tournament was based only on their being the winning alliance captain. Regardless, they were the winning alliance captain in their third tournament. Unless there is opportunity for every other team to compete in 3 events, any results in the third event cannot be counted.
I currently have to teams at Monroe High School. 1528 and 2719 (rookie team). However, to get classified as a rookie I had to submit a request for review of our team. I stated that 2719 is a classroom team and is not a part of the 1528 team. I have 2 students on my team with FIRST experience. When the decision came back to allow us to be a rookie team, it was clearly stated that we were considered a rookie team because we only had those two students with previous FIRST experience. I was told that we could have up to a total of 5 experienced students on my team to be classified as a rookie. If 2771 has a total of 9 experienced students on there team, then they should be stripped of there rookie status and any awards they received with it. You are absolutely correct in stating that 2771 should show some gracious professionalism and report the change of status and return thos awards.
Steve,
2719 should definitely be considered a rookie team. The argument that 2771 use to justify themselves as a rookie team is that at the time of kickoff they only have 4 students with FIRST experience. The other 5 students with FIRST experience joined their team after the kickoff. How many days after the kickoff did they join is not even the question here? This is what FIRST says as criteria for rookie team.
1. A new team that starts in a school/organization/alliance that has never run an FRC team before (most teams are formed within a single school, but some comprise two or more schools, or are organizations such as Scouts, Boys & Girls Clubs, home schools etc.)
2. A returning team may qualify as a Rookie, but in order to do so must not have been in a competition for three years. That is, going into the 2009 season, they cannot have competed in either seasons 2008, 2007 or 2006. Teams whose last competition season was 2005, or earlier, can return this season as a Rookie, OR, they can continue as a veteran with their original number if they wish to do so. Teams that choose to register as a veteran would not be eligible for the above listed Rookie incentives and recognition.
3. Where multiple schools were combined into a single team, and that team now wants to separate into different teams, or any single team wants to separate into different teams, the new teams do not qualify as Rookies unless the requirements set forth above in 2 are met. These teams will need to register as a new team and contact FIRST at frcteams@usfirst.org for further instructions.
4. Where multiple existing teams want to combine into one team, the new team does not qualify as a Rookie. The combined team can select to use one of the existing team numbers, or can apply to FIRST for an unused number from the rookie year of the oldest team. In either case they should advise team support which teams have combined by emailing frcteams@usfirst.org.
5. If a mentor, or teacher, from an existing team leaves and starts a team at a new school, that team does qualify as a Rookie team.
6. If individual students who have been involved in a team leave that school and start a team in their new school that team also is generally considered a Rookie, providing it meets condition 1, and does not involve sufficient students to be considered a version of condition 3. As a maximum, the number of students in the new team that have competed in prior teams must not exceed 5.
FIRST did not state at what point in time that the number of students in the new team that have prior FIRST experience must not exceed 5. My interpretation, based on the spirit of the rule, is that from the time of kickoff to the end of that season, so that it is fair to other rookie teams. 2771 chose to use the letter of the rule and picked the date of kickoff only for meeting that criteria.
This is from their website.
Code Red Robotics was started by students who left Team 288, The Robodawgs, after a leadership change.
After the initial four former 288 team members planted the Grand River Prep team, five more former Robodawgs wanted to join without even being asked.
Code Red Robotics now has eight freshman from Grand River Prep, nine Grandville Students, plus students from four other Grand Rapids area high schools.
You be the judge.
Ed
Steve Ketron
30-03-2009, 12:37
Steve,
2719 should definitely be considered a rookie team. The argument that 2771 use to justify themselves as a rookie team is that at the time of kickoff they only have 4 students with FIRST experience. The other 5 students with FIRST experience joined their team after the kickoff. How many days after the kickoff did they join is not even the question here? This is what FIRST says as criteria for rookie team.
1. A new team that starts in a school/organization/alliance that has never run an FRC team before (most teams are formed within a single school, but some comprise two or more schools, or are organizations such as Scouts, Boys & Girls Clubs, home schools etc.)
2. A returning team may qualify as a Rookie, but in order to do so must not have been in a competition for three years. That is, going into the 2009 season, they cannot have competed in either seasons 2008, 2007 or 2006. Teams whose last competition season was 2005, or earlier, can return this season as a Rookie, OR, they can continue as a veteran with their original number if they wish to do so. Teams that choose to register as a veteran would not be eligible for the above listed Rookie incentives and recognition.
3. Where multiple schools were combined into a single team, and that team now wants to separate into different teams, or any single team wants to separate into different teams, the new teams do not qualify as Rookies unless the requirements set forth above in 2 are met. These teams will need to register as a new team and contact FIRST at frcteams@usfirst.org for further instructions.
4. Where multiple existing teams want to combine into one team, the new team does not qualify as a Rookie. The combined team can select to use one of the existing team numbers, or can apply to FIRST for an unused number from the rookie year of the oldest team. In either case they should advise team support which teams have combined by emailing frcteams@usfirst.org.
5. If a mentor, or teacher, from an existing team leaves and starts a team at a new school, that team does qualify as a Rookie team.
6. If individual students who have been involved in a team leave that school and start a team in their new school that team also is generally considered a Rookie, providing it meets condition 1, and does not involve sufficient students to be considered a version of condition 3. As a maximum, the number of students in the new team that have competed in prior teams must not exceed 5.
FIRST did not state at what point in time that the number of students in the new team that have prior FIRST experience must not exceed 5. My interpretation, based on the spirit of the rule, is that from the time of kickoff to the end of that season, so that it is fair to other rookie teams. 2771 chose to use the letter of the rule and picked the date of kickoff only for meeting that criteria.
This is from their website.
Code Red Robotics was started by students who left Team 288, The Robodawgs, after a leadership change.
After the initial four former 288 team members planted the Grand River Prep team, five more former Robodawgs wanted to join without even being asked.
Code Red Robotics now has eight freshman from Grand River Prep, nine Grandville Students, plus students from four other Grand Rapids area high schools.
You be the judge.
Ed
ED, I should not be the judge. With regards to Gracious Professionalism, team 2771 should present the facts to FIRST and let them be the judge. Only by them accepting or declining your team rookie status would this issue be solved.
Paul Copioli
30-03-2009, 12:39
Ed,
If you want me to be the judge, then 2771 broke the spirit of the rule. So, taking 2771's lead, I will start a rookie team next year with a new school that has 4 students at kickoff. Miraculously, I will then obtain 5 more students from a seasoned veteran after kickoff.
I am not at all accusing 2771 of this, but your post above just gave the formula to get around the intent of the rookie rule.
My question is, what is rookie about 2771 this year? Students? Nope. School? Nope. Mentor? Nope.
I am sure it wasn't 2771's intent, but it sure does seem odd to me. All that aside, I think 2771 is a great team who did a great thing this year with the webcast, etc ... rookie or not. However, if I were the "Emperor of FIRST" or the "boss of the Emporer of FIRST" 2771 would not be a rookie team.
Paul
GaryVoshol
30-03-2009, 12:48
School? Nope. School, yes. They are in the Grand River Prep Academy (HS), a new charter school. It is located two suburbs away from the Grandville location of 288/216 - yet for some reason the address on the FIRST website is Grandville. Still, the 5-member rule applies to teams in a new school.
I think that 2771 got their rookie status correctly at the time it was made. Perhaps after adding members they never went back to ask FIRST again. Or perhaps FIRST decided that once a status was given, that status will stay - a valid position because there does have to be some cutoff point, whether that be kickoff, ship (bag) day, or first competition.
To make an analogy, the question becomes does a team need to be "reinspected" when they add "new equipment"?
PS, let's be very careful with this thread.
Alan Anderson
30-03-2009, 13:10
You be the judge.
I'd be willing to serve on a jury, but FIRST headquarters is the only legitimate judge.
Tom Line
30-03-2009, 13:25
Frankly, seeing this information makes me believe that 2771 shouldn't have been a rookie team.
However, they were. I also believe that should be the end of it. They met / meet the rule, depending on how you want to read it. Whether they broke it in spirit is up to FIRST, but at this point, what are your options? Declare them a non-rookie, go back and rejudge 3 competitions, let the other teams know, screw around with the points totals, and throw everything into disarray? Grant 3 other teams rookie status and allow them into Atlanta?
You can be certain that not a single member of team 2771 was actively trying to break the system. It happens. Now it's highlited a potential rule issue in regards to rookie status.
As for what is graciously professional, 2771 are a great team with a great robot. They show up ready to play, and frankly they made every competition a better, louder, happier place.
I believe the rule should be simplified and corrected. As for the rest of it, let's just move on and have a great Michigan Championships.
Springman
30-03-2009, 13:28
I am sure there are other threads concerning this issue, but this one seems to be near the top. Please do not take offense if your team is mentioned in the following. I am only using team numbers to reference what I see as a potential FIM point system problem. 67, 216 and 1918 have all competed exceptionally this year.
The problem is that because 216 was one of the few lucky teams to be able to go to a third event for $500, if the points or results were able to be counted, isn't that not fair to other teams that could not go to a third event (due to no slots available), even though they improved their robot significantly in their second event (830 comes to mind)?
I commend 216 on their improvement and think it's great that they did so well at WM. But they had the pleasure of a third event for $500 which is AWSOME in it's own right. Some of us that want a third event have to pay $4000 for that...
In retrospect, I think that you may have hit on the real issue. If you look at the competitions this past weekend, there was a significant impact by teams entering their third competition. 67, 216 and 1918 are just a couple examples of teams that 'took' points out of the system that other teams near the middle of the pack could have used. Consider what these two events in particular would have been like without teams competing in their third event. At West Michigan, there were over 90 points (30 each for the win and 15 each for the 2 seed captain/selection) removed from the system by 1918 and 216 alone for their victory. Right now I feel that FIM should seriously consider not allowing a third event for any team because of this impact.
XaulZan11
30-03-2009, 13:37
In retrospect, I think that you may have hit on the real issue. If you look at the competitions this past weekend, there was a significant impact by teams entering their third competition. 67, 216 and 1918 are just a couple examples of teams that 'took' points out of the system that other teams near the middle of the pack could have used. Consider what these two events in particular would have been like without teams competing in their third event. At West Michigan, there were over 90 points (30 each for the win and 15 each for the 2 seed captain/selection) removed from the system by 1918 and 216 alone for their victory. Right now I feel that FIM should seriously consider not allowing a third event for any team because of this impact.
But those teams were needed to make the districts more 'even'. I don't know how many teams were competiting in thier 3rd event, but what if there were only 30 teams without them? I would be upset if I missed the elmininations at a 40 team event and then find out an equally talented team make it at a competition with only 30 teams. The various districts will never be perfectly equal, but I think the current system is best.
GVDrummer
30-03-2009, 13:44
At West Michigan, there were over 90 points (30 each for the win and 15 each for the 2 seed captain/selection) removed from the system by 1918 and 216 alone for their victory. Right now I feel that FIM should seriously consider not allowing a third event for any team because of this impact.
I agree with what you are saying here in the fact that teams competing in a third event have no effect in their qualifying score for state. It does how ever affect other teams in the aspect of points being taken away.
Now I want to bring this part up. With the teams that competed at West Michigan Regional this weekend, I believe a majority of them have already competed in 2 events. I can not get an exact number of the ratio but I am sure their was a significant amount that have so don't take me for granted with the number of teams. My point is if teams were only allowed to compete in two events. Most of the events in weeks 4 and 5 would be a lot smaller and therefore teams who compete in the later weeks have less teams to compete against and therefore have a more likely chance to place higher and score more points. Then therefore have an advantage of teams that compete earlier on in the season.
All in all, this was the first year for the Michigan District regional events and state championship and I believe it ran pretty well for the first year. I am sure that if FIRST continues with this structure we will see changes in the program to try and even out the playing field. But one thing we always have to remember is this event is not about winning and which teams get to go to state, but increasing the knowledge of students and have them learn the aspects of science, technology and Gracious Professionalism.
~Jake
EricLeifermann
30-03-2009, 13:49
I agree with what you are saying here in the fact that teams competing in a third event have no effect in their qualifying score for state. It does how ever affect other teams in the aspect of points being taken away.
Now I want to bring this part up. With the teams that competed at West Michigan Regional this weekend, I believe a majority of them have already competed in 2 events. I can not get an exact number of the ratio but I am sure their was a significant amount that have so don't take me for granted with the number of teams. My point is if teams were only allowed to compete in two events. Most of the events in weeks 4 and 5 would be a lot smaller and therefore teams who compete in the later weeks have less teams to compete against and therefore have a more likely chance to place higher and score more points. Then therefore have an advantage of teams that compete earlier on in the season.
All in all, this was the first year for the Michigan District regional events and state championship and I believe it ran pretty well for the first year. I am sure that if FIRST continues with this structure we will see changes in the program to try and even out the playing field. But one thing we always have to remember is this event is not about winning and which teams get to go to state, but increasing the knowledge of students and have them learn the aspects of science, technology and Gracious Professionalism.
~Jake
I'm all for allowing teams to have a 3rd event. On the other side, if they didn't allow 3 events, then a way to increase the # of teams in the later weeks would be to get rid of 1 or 2 of the 7 districts. 2 weeks in a row now we have had 2 events. If we took away 1 or 2 of those, the events would all be full.
Springman
30-03-2009, 14:01
Now I want to bring this part up. With the teams that competed at West Michigan Regional this weekend, I believe a majority of them have already competed in 2 events. I can not get an exact number of the ratio but I am sure their was a significant amount that have so don't take me for granted with the number of teams. My point is if teams were only allowed to compete in two events. Most of the events in weeks 4 and 5 would be a lot smaller and therefore teams who compete in the later weeks have less teams to compete against and therefore have a more likely chance to place higher and score more points. Then therefore have an advantage of teams that compete earlier on in the season.
~Jake
These are just some ideas to create equal opportunity for teams. I have probably already spent too much energy on this issue. Some real quick math offers some options:
Option 1:
132 teams * 2 districts each = 264
264/7= 37.71 about 38
*Cap the team limit at 38. Two districts would have 37 teams, the rest would have 38.
Option 2:
132 teams * 2 districts each = 264
*Eliminate one district. The remaining 6 districts will have exactly 44 teams each. (264/6=44)
Paul Copioli
30-03-2009, 14:03
[QUOTE]Now I want to bring this part up. With the teams that competed at West Michigan Regional this weekend, I believe a majority of them have already competed in 2 events. I can not get an exact number of the ratio but I am sure their was a significant amount that have so don't take me for granted with the number of teams. My point is if teams were only allowed to compete in two events. Most of the events in weeks 4 and 5 would [/QUO
There were 16 teams that had 3 district events. Six of them were at Troy: 67, 68, 247, 910 are the teams I remember off the top of my head.
GVDrummer
30-03-2009, 14:08
[QUOTE]
There were 16 teams that had 3 district events. Six of them were at Troy: 67, 68, 247, 910 are the teams I remember off the top of my head.
Thank you for that clarification, so 10 teams at the WMR competed in 3 events taking up 1/4th of the roster at the tournament.
GVDrummer
30-03-2009, 14:10
These are just some ideas to create equal opportunity for teams. I have probably already spent too much energy on this issue. Some real quick math offers some options:
Option 1:
132 teams * 2 districts each = 264
264/7= 37.71 about 38
*Cap the team limit at 38. Two districts would have 37 teams, the rest would have 38.
Option 2:
132 teams * 2 districts each = 264
*Eliminate one district. The remaining 6 districts will have exactly 44 teams each. (264/6=44)
This does seem like the logical thing to do to give all the teams an even opportunity to compete in the tournaments.
Enigma's puzzle
30-03-2009, 14:20
Hopefully next year we will just have enough teams that one district event will have to expand in order to allow the everyone to get two events, and no one will have to worry about a third instate event. PROBLEM SOLVED start mentoring new teams.
Corey Oostveen
30-03-2009, 14:54
In Regards to all the attacks on 2771 I am quite saddened.
We did not want to be a rookie team so we asked FIRST if we could attain a first year veteran status.
They replied stating that it would be foolish to consider yourself a veteran team. But they said that we qualify for both.
So we talked to many people that have been involved in FIRST for a long time telling them our plan of being a first year veteran team. All of the people we talked to laughed and told us there was no way we were a veteran team.
So convinced that we are actually a Rookie team we went forward.
We started with:
4 students that have been involved in FIRST before
$0 dollars to our name.
No sponsors
NO tools, NO supplies, NO past years robots, NOTHING!
NO Place to build our robot
We had nothing but the fight to keep the goals of FIRST alive.
So we will not apologize for going with the recommendation of MANY highly regarded people in FIRST. Along with direct permission from FIRST.
The reason we had more team members that have competed before than our original 4 is we took in students that were kicked off from the their teams. Along with taking the students that hated how things were operated, and the change in direction that happened with the team they were on, We took in the kids who wanted to pursue the goals of FIRST!
For those who feel we are not truly rookies, or that we cheated the system, or that we are not Graciously Professional. Please seek the truth before making such public judgments.
We will gladly give all the awards we have won back (this includes many non rookie awards), because we know it isn't about the trophies! We don't care about the trophies, we just are doing what we know is best for these kids.
We Build Robots to Build Better People!
Corey Oostveen
Don’t understand all this fuss about 2771 and rookie status. Here is the point breakdown from their first two events.
Traverse City
0 points ROOKIE ALL-STAR AWARD
12 points Quarterfinalist
14 points Qualifying
12 Seed ranking
26 points total collected at the TC district event.
Kettering
0 points ROOKIE ALL-STAR AWARD
2 points Highest Rookie Seed Award
2 points Chrysler Team Spirit Award
11 points Qualifying
11 points for draft pick
20 points for Finalist
26 Seed ranking
46 points at the Kettering district event
74 total points for the two events
21st place in the rankings. So, even if we take the 2 points away for the Highest Rookie Seed award at Kettering it would not affect the outcome.
Let’s give this team credit for what they have achieved.
Paul Copioli
30-03-2009, 15:13
Corey & Larry,
Please do not misconstrue any of my comments as comments against 2771. At Kettering, they were, by far, my favorite team. I am concerned more with the integrity of the process.
Our team went through a very similar dilemma between 2001 and 2002. We actually had to pull a "rookie" team number (817), until some of us petitioned Bob Hammond (the FRC director at the time) for the "new" team to keep the 217 number.
If we were classified a rookie team that year, it would not have even been fair to the actual rookies that year.
Having no tools does not make you a rookie. Having no money does not make you a rookie. Having 9 veteran members and a veteran mentor, to me, means you are not a rookie. With that said, I am positive you did your due diligence. The initial post satated, "you be the judge" so I took the challenge; otherwise, I would not have even posted.
I look forward to seeing you all at the MSC this weekend.
Paul
You maybe correct about the rookie status and this may need to be corrected. But all this talk is hurting students when we should be lifting them up.
dragonrulr288
30-03-2009, 15:23
I say dont worry about Code Red being called a rookie team. next year they wont be; simple as that. I have no hard feelings against anyone in Code Red, or the team. So shall we drop it? It was FIRST's choice anyways...
Has the link been updated? I want to know if 216 can go to state!!! Ive been worried all through school but it hasnt updated!!!
ATannahill
30-03-2009, 15:27
I say dont worry about Code Red being called a rookie team. next year they wont be; simple as that. I have no hard feelings against anyone in Code Red, or the team. So shall we drop it? It was FIRST's choice anyways...
Has the link been updated? I want to know if 216 can go to state!!! Ive been worried all through school but it hasnt updated!!!
watch out here https://my.usfirst.org/myarea/index.lasso?page=teamlist&event_type=FRC&sort=teamnum&year=2009&event=gl or contact your TIMS members, they probably can tell you.
Currently there are 53 teams signed. So, if no other teams sign up you may make it in. Your only 6 place under the cut line.
Hope to see you there.
You are all having a very good discussion about the status of 2771, Code Red Robotics. I appreciate the input from everyone about our status as a rookie team because it something we wrestled with, too. This is only my third season in being involved with FIRST, and I really enjoy the community that focuses on student development. I’m the head coach of 2771, so please let me share the details of about our team. (It’s a long read … sorry about that)
Code Red has been an open book right from the beginning. We sent details of team formation to national FIRST in New Hampshire and to FIRST in Michigan in November and December 2008. We provided full disclosure of who, what, why the teamed formed.
Even as recently as mid-February, we communicated with FIRST in Michigan about our team status and roster. We also posted that info on our website so that everyone would know. In their reply, FIRST advised us that we qualify as a Rookie team, and that we could choose our status, rookie or veteran.
Our students discussed the matter and we also got help from the FIRST community. For help with that, our team consulted with FIRST Michigan officials, and multiple coaches and former coaches for guidance on rookie status. Everyone told us, “You guys are most certainly a rookie team.”
We made the decision to seek Rookie status for the following reasons:
We didn’t even have a host school until late August, about ten days before school started. We worked pretty hard to get the word to the students and get them excited about FIRST.
Going into October Registration, we had no sponsors, no parts, no tools, no build space. We had four veteran students, and several freshmen from a first-year high school.
Our Head Coach was just a team parent two years ago, and was an assistant for one year in, for the 2007/2008 season with Team 288.
We got our build space on December 05, which was a great blessing. We had an empty space then, and not a single tool or part.
We had a handful of committed students who worked very, very hard to build the team up from nothing. The coaches agreed to help to start the new team only if the students and their families were determined to stick with it. It’s only our second year of coaching and had a feeling it would be incredibly hard work to start a new team. That’s why we asked for help from local teams and sought partnerships wherever we could. We did learn that collaborating and forming partnerships were needed to build a program that would benefit students.
Since we had no resources in the fall, we entered the BEST robotics competition as a learning tool. We did a terrible job at BEST, but learned a lot in the process. That program helped our students develop teamwork and drove home the need for team structure and a project plan. It also taught us to ask other teams for help. Davison High school is a master at BEST robotics and gave us a lot of tips. If you want to see what that is all about, go to http://www.bestinc.org/MVC/ .
We gained strength only because the vision of the team, set by the students, was an attractive one. The kids felt good about asking their friends to join a team that stressed character development and fun while learning engineering side of things. After our first four veteran students started the team, four more former 288 students joined the team. Again, we notified FIRST in Michigan right away. We are a rookie team, but I know many teams are telling us we don’t act like a rookie team.
Our students are encouraged to nurture their faith, to have balance in their lives and to seek excellence in all they do.
Code Red is succeeding because the team puts others FIRST.
2771 stayed and assisted in the cleanup and full field pack up at the Traverse City event
We have supplied Student ambassadors for Traverse City VIP guest
We assisted in the field pack up at Kettering
We supplied Student ambassadors for Kettering VIP guest
We also Webcast all Michigan Events (free of charge or payment in any type)
We hauled the playing field from the Lansing event to the west MI event (note we did not even participate in the Lansing event).
Pulling the trailer was no small task. A half-ton chevy pickup struggled to move it across the parking lot. So we needed to use a ¾ ton suburban to haul it to GVSU - gas mileage was killer. :)
We setup and tore down West Michigan. Our students actually worked from right after school on Wednesday until 8:00 PM to help set up WMD, sacrificing prep time for the tournament.
The tear down at WMD included picking up two layers of flooring with Creston’s team, and our kids stayed until 9:30 that night and missed a planned team party. They were bummed, but stayed willingly because it needed to be done.
Throughout the competition season, our students have started and actively mentor two Lego League teams at a grade school. Instead of rebuilding our robot, we are working two nights a week to inspire and teach younger kids. Having a competitive robot is a goal of Code Red, but not as important as providing opportunities to others.
If anyone noticed, we cheer for all other teams at the competition, including 288 and 216. We respect them and admire their achievements. Code Red wants to be an asset to the FIRST community, and also to kids who have not even heard of FIRST robotics yet
We had some veteran FIRST students, but we have a team and have built partnerships in a short time only due to God’s grace and tons of hard work. There is a whole lot more to our team than just the web site, and our robot, and our students. We have learned a lot from other FIRST teams, especially Team 904. We’ve gotten help from Team 1254, BOB,(Team 85), Team 74 and many others. Our team worked hard to get corporate partners on board, and we are grateful for the support.
With help from others, Code Red students have earned their way toward any success they’ve achieved. FIRST agreed that we are rookies. Just a few month’s ago, we had nothing but a few students, a couple of coaches and a dry erase board. We handed a marker to the students, and asked them,, “What do you want your robotics team to look like.” The kids (returning and rookies) wrote our vision statement and the team goals. Because it is they’re vision, they have a vested interest in achieving it. If you’d like to see our vision statement, let me know.
We have a blend of students who set some very high goals, and work well as a team to get there. The vision set by FIRST of gracious professionalism has attracted many first-year students to the team and, “they get it”.
Thank you all very much for your time.
By the way, congratulations to the people who put on WMD. It was a wonderful event. Also, congrats to 216, 1918 and 1254 You were a great alliance!
Ryan Caldwell
30-03-2009, 15:54
Speaking for 2851 Crevolution a rookie team out of michigan, we noticed this issue and decided we better work a little harder. FIRST officials call 2771 a rookie thus they are a rookie end of story.
Dose this mean other rookie teams might have to work a little harder to keep up? Yes
Should 2771 give back thier awards? H3ll No!
those students put in hard work to win nomatter if they competed last year or had never even seen a FIRST comp before.
I think some of us are missing the big picture, it is just a game we play to further our students excitement and learning potential.
Is it cool to win? H3ll yeah
Is it cooler that students have pride in themselfs, in thier team? H3ll yeah
This issue should have been handled with more class and discression, these are just kids. Don't try to put an * on thier accomplishments.
I wish 2771 the best of luck at states, we'll see ya there.
Code Red has been an open book right from the beginning. We sent details of team formation to national FIRST in New Hampshire and to FIRST in Michigan in November and December 2008. We provided full disclosure of who, what, why the teamed formed.
Even as recently as mid-February, we communicated with FIRST in Michigan about our team status and roster. We also posted that info on our website so that everyone would know. In their reply, FIRST advised us that we qualify as a Rookie team, and that we could choose our status, rookie or veteran.
[...]
We gained strength only because the vision of the team, set by the students, was an attractive one. The kids felt good about asking their friends to join a team that stressed character development and fun while learning engineering side of things. After our first four veteran students started the team, four more former 288 students joined the team. Again, we notified FIRST in Michigan right away. We are a rookie team, but I know many teams are telling us we don’t act like a rookie team.
It looks like you guys followed all the proper steps in this situation. Contact FIRST and FiM, and when things change, contact again and follow what they tell you, is the way to go in this case. They told you you could choose, and a number of vets told you you were a rookie. So, you formed as a rookie. I can't say that I'd do differently.
If you object, this is not the proper place to do so. Contact FIRST and FiM directly. Guess what, you've been beaten to it.
To 2771, good luck in your upcoming competitions.
dragonrulr288
30-03-2009, 17:40
hmm.. I wonder how many times I have clicked the refresh button on the stat list... Ahh! why isnt it updating?? Its driving me insane!
hmm.. I wonder how many times I have clicked the refresh button on the stat list... Ahh! why isnt it updating?? Its driving me insane!
Abby,
We will not know until tomorrow at the soonest- You will get an e-mail before it even shows up on any website letting you know if we are going.
Mr. Hall
GaryVoshol
30-03-2009, 18:24
With the teams that competed at West Michigan Regional this weekend, I believe a majority of them have already competed in 2 events. 7 in WMD, 6 in Troy D were competing in their 3rd event. Far from a majority. There was also one team in Lansing that was the 3rd event.
I'm all for allowing teams to have a 3rd event. On the other side, if they didn't allow 3 events, then a way to increase the # of teams in the later weeks would be to get rid of 1 or 2 of the 7 districts. 2 weeks in a row now we have had 2 events. If we took away 1 or 2 of those, the events would all be full.With fewer districts, there wouldn't be enough spots for all teams to get 2. We needed 6.6 events to ensure every team could go to 2.
EricLeifermann
30-03-2009, 18:38
With fewer districts, there wouldn't be enough spots for all teams to get 2. We needed 6.6 events to ensure every team could go to 2.
If you bumped it up from 40 teams to 44 teams you would get everyone 2 comps with 6 events. You might not get 12 matches but 10 or 11 is still WAY better than 7.
I've been thinking about the 2771 dilemma. I really don't think they were rookies, but they are much closer to a rookie then a veteran. Of the two, they were in the right place. Perhaps FIRST should consider making a third classification. One that would be between the two ends of the spectrum.
Welcome to the big dance 3119, glad to see you make it. 58 and counting
NC GEARS
30-03-2009, 21:51
In Regards to all the attacks on 2771 I am quite saddened.
We did not want to be a rookie team so we asked FIRST if we could attain a first year veteran status.
They replied stating that it would be foolish to consider yourself a veteran team. But they said that we qualify for both.
So we talked to many people that have been involved in FIRST for a long time telling them our plan of being a first year veteran team. All of the people we talked to laughed and told us there was no way we were a veteran team.
So convinced that we are actually a Rookie team we went forward.
We started with:
4 students that have been involved in FIRST before
$0 dollars to our name.
No sponsors
NO tools, NO supplies, NO past years robots, NOTHING!
NO Place to build our robot
We had nothing but the fight to keep the goals of FIRST alive.
So we will not apologize for going with the recommendation of MANY highly regarded people in FIRST. Along with direct permission from FIRST.
The reason we had more team members that have competed before than our original 4 is we took in students that were kicked off from the their teams. Along with taking the students that hated how things were operated, and the change in direction that happened with the team they were on, We took in the kids who wanted to pursue the goals of FIRST!
For those who feel we are not truly rookies, or that we cheated the system, or that we are not Graciously Professional. Please seek the truth before making such public judgments.
We will gladly give all the awards we have won back (this includes many non rookie awards), because we know it isn't about the trophies! We don't care about the trophies, we just are doing what we know is best for these kids.
We Build Robots to Build Better People!
Corey Oostveen
I agree with you Corey. I feel that you shouldn't have to give back any of your trophies. This is bull what people are saying about you guys. Being a FIRST participant isn't about winning or losing. It is about leading students towards the fields of science and technology. If you feel that you have successfully led some of these students toward this field then I applaud you. Its about the experience, not the record. I'm on your side in this situation. YOU'VE GOT MY BACK!!
wo-bot 141
30-03-2009, 22:01
2771, Code Red. i have been in first since i was in 7th grade. i was not doing FLL. i was helping the FRC in our school as much as i could. You are a team that stuck out to me as soon as our pit was next to yours in TC. you are a Great team. I will NEVER forget about you guys. i know a bit more about first then others in this event. i have gotten to the point where i see a number and i could tell you where the team is, there team name, and there past robots. so 2771 is now a number i will never get out of my head. you have earned my respect in the highest of regards. NOBODY should give you a hard time on what you have accomplished. I cant wait to see your team grow.
Akash Rastogi
30-03-2009, 22:15
Regardless of all this chitchat, there's a few teams I had questions about:
1918- These guys seem like they have a solid bot, any details on their robot, strategies, stuff like would be appreciated.
217- I know they run super cells to a great extent, what is their driving style around the field? Quick and agile? What other gameplay and strategy do they use in most matches? Same question about 245.
Thanks.
Jack Jones
30-03-2009, 22:18
Regardless of all this chitchat, there's a few teams I had questions about:
1918- These guys seem like they have a solid bot, any details on their robot, strategies, stuff like would be appreciated.
217- I know they run super cells to a great extent, what is their driving style around the field? Quick and agile? What other gameplay and strategy do they use in most matches? Same question about 245.
Thanks.
I'd fill you in on them, but don't want to spoil the surprise when you meet them in Atlanta.;) ;)
Enigma's puzzle
30-03-2009, 22:25
1918's strategies are to dump lots of balls on you, it works pretty well, they were one of our teams favorites.
For the real info, a fast slippery robot, it is basically a giant clear box with no top and half of the front. The floor of the box hopper rises and the balls roll out the front, it rises slow enough to make you think you can escape, but it is actually too fast for you to escape if you aren't moving. Very exciting to watch.
NC GEARS
30-03-2009, 22:28
Regardless of all this chitchat, there's a few teams I had questions about:
1918- These guys seem like they have a solid bot, any details on their robot, strategies, stuff like would be appreciated.
217- I know they run super cells to a great extent, what is their driving style around the field? Quick and agile? What other gameplay and strategy do they use in most matches? Same question about 245.
Thanks.
Our bot's name is Otis-You can work from there. Our strategy-to complete the given tasks of Lunacy. thats all you should need :P
klrswift
30-03-2009, 22:40
Welcome to the big dance 3119, glad to see you make it. 58 and counting
Yes, glad to see you can make it, 3119. Remember that 910 is cheering for you every time you go out on to the field.
Hey David,
We should get some pictures of our robot here on Chief Delphi. They don't have to be revealing but maybe some clues will help people guess how good our bot is this year :D.
Also, on a side note, should we ask Shane to update the Web page? It seems like it has been that way since TC. In fact, I believe it hasn't been updated since TC.
Alex Dinsmoor
30-03-2009, 23:01
Yes, glad to see you can make it, 3119. Remember that 910 is cheering for you every time you go out on to the field.
As well as your ex-alliance partners; Team 201 :)
Akash Rastogi
30-03-2009, 23:52
Hey David,
We should get some pictures of our robot here on Chief Delphi. They don't have to be revealing but maybe some clues will help people guess how good our bot is this year :D.
Also, on a side note, should we ask Shane to update the Web page? It seems like it has been that way since TC. In fact, I believe it hasn't been updated since TC.
Revealing of what? Its already been seen in public, if you don't want to post pics I understand, otherwise please share full photos.
Wayne TenBrink
31-03-2009, 08:05
There is some video of Otis at a preseason practice on the CD "robot showcase" thread. There is also some video of a finals match at Traverse City on YouTube (shows us hitting BOB pretty hard, but they still won). I can't post the link from here, but if you search "FRC Traverse City", it is one of about 4 or 5 hits.
J. Stofflett
31-03-2009, 11:13
I see a couple teams ranked in the 70's are in, have they opened registration for the remaining spots?
there are 7 teams missing from original 64, and they are down to 67th rank. Sorry ,just saw what you said about being in the 70's, your right. Must just be the way they load up to first site. Can't believe 216 is going to say no.
there are 7 teams missing from original 64, and they are down to 67th rank. Sorry ,just saw what you said about being in the 70's, your right. Must just be the way they load up to first site. Can't believe 216 is going to say no.
216 has not said no!!
Working out details--Thursday is students last day and lots of AP test
chinckley
31-03-2009, 14:35
216 has not said no!!
Working out details--Thursday is students last day and lots of AP test
We just saw you pop up on the list. Team 1254 is VERY glad you are going.
See you Thursday morning.
Carolyn Hinckley
Teacher
Team 1254
I say dont worry about Code Red being called a rookie team. next year they wont be; simple as that. I have no hard feelings against anyone in Code Red, or the team. So shall we drop it? It was FIRST's choice anyways...
I agree with you that we should drop this discussion as long as we keep the facts straight. FIRST did not decide that 2771 has to be a rookie team. FIRST said they can decide to be either a rookie team or a veteran team. It was their choice. For fairness to other rookie teams, I think they made the wrong choice.
2771 is a great team. I applaud them for all the things they did, considering they basically started from scratch as they said with no money, no tools and no place to build. I applaud them for the services they provided, tearing down the field, setting up the field, hauling it, webcast just to name a few. I would nominate them to win the chairman's award if they decided to be a veteran team. I think they add a lot to the competition with their enthusiasm as a team. And I definitely do not think they need to give back the awards. But like Paul said, none of these makes them a rookie team.
It was their choice. I am glad they brought up the issue to FIRST and FIM and notify them when five more veteran students joined. That was the right thing to do and I applaud them. I am glad they asked for advice from others. Did they ask the legal experts or moral experts? Ultimately it was their choice. Nobody held a gun to their head to decide to be a rookie team. Yes they did their due diligence so it was legal according to FIRST, but morally it was wrong. I don't think FIRST is correct in letting a team decide whether to classify themselves as a rookie or veteran team. FIRST set up the rules and they need to clarify it and enforce it, and should not be wishy-washy about the whole thing.
I am not here to condemn their action. I am trying to teach my students to always do the right thing, what is morally right and not just legally right. I thought that is what FIRST wants us to do, to follow the spirit of the rule and not lawyering the rules. We are responsible for our actions, in making our own choices. Just because somebody said it is okay does not make it okay.
I am saddend about some of the comments in support of their action. It shows me that moral relativism prevails in our culture today especially in the younger generation. They believe that there is no absolute right or wrong. Everybody is entitled to their own opionion about what is right and it is based on what they feel is right. This is what I hear from these people "Team 2771 did so many good things and I support them no matter what they do and I am willing to overlook their choice because it is not important to me and it does not affect me." Sorry about this simple generalization. I know not everybody feels that way.
It is still their choice to do the right thing. Not yours or mine. There is an absolute right and wrong and it is not done by polls.
Respectfully,
Ed
LWakefield
31-03-2009, 21:14
At the West Michigan district, Code Red team 2771 was very nice to us. They came up and talked to us. Also, one of the mentors and some of the students congradulated us for our win.
Also, I thank team 2771 for webcasting. My relatives watched it.
There is an absolute right and wrong and it is not done by polls.
I agree there is a right and wrong. However, who is to decide? Nobody. It is something each of us must look inside of ourselves and decide. If they do something I don't agree with, it isn't my place to say anything against them. That is for FIRST to do if they see fit. Also, I really don't care what they did, it has nothing to do with any of the awards they won or anything of the sort. My question is this, "do you feel it is right to critique other people's decisions?". To me, that is morally wrong.
Is "If somebody does something you don't agree with, be sure to tell them." the message you want for your students?
Quite frankly, it really isn't any of our business. Unless your a rookie team that might have won one of those awards, you really hold no stake in the matter.(and neither do I) Even if you are one of those rookie teams, it is good to go up against an "unfair advantage".
This is a message I'd like to tell all you teams out there: Feel free to have your adults do all of the students work, I don't mind. It just gives the students I work with that much better experience. It just increases the challenge and requires them all to do that much better to compete.
*I am very students-do-the-work oriented. Not trying to start a debate on that, it just fit in well with what needed said.
I agree there is a right and wrong. However, who is to decide? Nobody. It is something each of us must look inside of ourselves and decide. If they do something I don't agree with, it isn't my place to say anything against them. That is for FIRST to do if they see fit. Also, I really don't care what they did, it has nothing to do with any of the awards they won or anything of the sort. My question is this, "do you feel it is right to critique other people's decisions?". To me, that is morally wrong.
Is "If somebody does something you don't agree with, be sure to tell them." the message you want for your students?
Quite frankly, it really isn't any of our business. Unless your a rookie team that might have won one of those awards, you really hold no stake in the matter.(and neither do I) Even if you are one of those rookie teams, it is good to go up against an "unfair advantage".
This is a message I'd like to tell all you teams out there: Feel free to have your adults do all of the students work, I don't mind. It just gives the students I work with that much better experience. It just increases the challenge and requires them all to do that much better to compete.
*I am very students-do-the-work oriented. Not trying to start a debate on that, it just fit in well with what needed said.
Thank you for sharing your point of view. I appreciate your thoughtfulness on this matter. We are going off the topic here but here we go.
What you said and your point of view is exactly what I described as moral relativism. Relativism can be described as saying all points of view are equally valid and each person is to decide what is right or wrong based on their upbringing and experience and there is no absolute right or wrong. Let me use some examples. Most people across all cultures would probably agree that taking something from somebody without permission is wrong or borrowing money from somebody and refuse to repay is wrong. Why? A small number of people may not agree. Is it just a difference in opinion? If somebody did that to you, do you think that action is wrong because that person did something you don't agree with? Do you think it is wrong only because it affected you? If it happened to somebody else you don't know, is that action okay then because you really don't care?
No, this is an example (may not be the best one but it just came to my mind) of universal truth, an absolute right and wrong. It is not an opinion.
Some people think that it is okay to take things from others under some circumstances.
"He was mean to me so I took it as a revenge."
"I took it from the store not for my own use. I plan to give it to somebody as a present."
"I need the money more than her. What I took do not even make a dent in her bank account."
"All my life these people keep taking advantage of me. What I took from them I deserve every bit of it."
Are these valid arguments? Is stealing permitted under some circumstances? Most people would think not but some people use these excuses to justify their actions.
I respectfully disagree with your statement that each of us look inside of ourselves and decide what is right and wrong.
My second point is about justice and fairness. I agree with you that just because you have a difference in opionion as somebody else does not mean you have a right to criticize other's action. However when something is unfair and unjust, do we just sit idle. If someone you don't know is accused of a crime and is about to be sent to jail for life, and you know for sure that person did not commit the crime, do you say it is really none of your business and you carry on with your life? Is it just a difference in opinion between you and the jury? Most people will probably say something because they believe in justice and fairness. That is why we should speak up to help the poor and the weak who can not defend themselves. A lot of people goes to jail because they can not afford to hire a good lawyer to get the truth out.
So since only 3 rookie teams did not get a chance to win the rookie all-star award who might have otherwise ultimately win one of the 2 spots to qualify for Atlanta, who may have a senior on the team and this is their first and only chance to experience the World Championship, it is okay because it did not affect you. Base on your thoughtful writings, I don't think you would think that way if you have considered that.
My message to my students is not "If somebody does something you don't agree with, be sure to tell them." In this case, it is not just an opinion. It is morally wrong. Most rookie team would be afraid to voice their opinion fearing that they would be criticize as being un-GP like or thinking the award is more important than the experience. Some just didn't know about this issue at all. That is why I feel obligated to bring this up, to question their decision and to tell my students to do the right thing every time they make a decision, and consider how you may affect some people when you make that decision.
Your point about student do all the work I mostly agree. I don't think this relates to what we were talking about. This topic has been debated many times on CD. FIRST is a mentor based program. In my opinion (and yes it is just an opinion) that engineering mentor should not just sit there and do nothing unless the students ask them a question. If I understand FIRST's philosophy correctly, engineering mentors should work side-by-side with the students and participate like anybody else. They would brainstorm, voice their opinion, suggest design options, go over the pros and cons of different design just like anybody else on the team. The difference is they have a college degree and have real world experience that will benefit the students. On our team, we used QFD to decide on the robot fundtions. I came up with one initial concept but many of the subsequent improvements we made came from the students. As far as building the robot, my students did 100% of the work. They did 100% of the fabrication and assembly. I never touched any of the tools except sometimes when I need to find the tools for the students because somebody misplaced them.
If you would like we can sit down and discuss about whether there is absolute truth and absolute right or wrong off line. I am afraid the moderators are going to ban me for preaching. :-)
Thank you for taking the time to voice your opinion. It shows that you do care.
Ed
In response to Ed's finish: The discussion is what PM is for. I'll send you one, and we can continue this there.
Everyone else continue on with your convo. Sorry for the sidestep.
Ed, I know you're going to disagree with this, but FIRST can reassign a team if they so choose. They chose not to do anything, knowing that enough veterans had been added to disqualify the team from rookie status. Does this make things right, ethically? Not necessarily. Legally, yes. Morally and ethically, you make the call. Would I have done the same thing? No. I'd have probably asked FIRST for a veteran number and veteran status under the definition of rookie. The team in question did not. It may have been too late to do so when this happened, also.
In my opinion, the bigger issue is that after winning 1 RAS, they chose not to take themselves out of judging for the others. This is admittedly a team decision, but good practice often dictates that once a team wins an RAS at one regional event, at any future regional events they inform the judges of this fact and ask to be removed from consideration. This tends to happen at regionals outside of MI, and in MI before the district system: if you've already qualified through one award, you opt out at the next event if you can; sometimes this is required (RCA, for instance) and sometimes you can't exactly do that(Regional Champion).
Again, that's simply good practice; nowhere is it required. However, what is the guiding principle of FIRST? Gracious professionalism. GP requires that good practice be followed, unless there is a very very very very good reason not to.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.