View Full Version : Alliance Selection Rules
Chris is me
03-04-2011, 18:14
Team 2791 was at the CT Regional this weekend, and coming into Saturday we were in a picking position. We decided to use an iPad as a scouting aide in order to make our list and consolidate notes on teams in something compact and readable. I'd seen this done on a webcast and thought it was a really novel idea.
Late Saturday morning, it was announced that "electronic devices are strictly prohibited during alliance selection". Our team calmly went to the Pit Admin table to talk to someone about this. After pointing out that several regionals had allowed exactly what we were doing before and showing in the rules that there was no prohibition on cell phones or anything of the sort for alliance selection we were told "Well, they don't specifically allow it either so we can make the rules however we want.". Disappointed, we copied our list onto paper and proceeded to miss eliminations anyway.
We were told the intent of the rule is that only the alliance captain can be making the picks, with no outside information. Yet I've seen this happen time and time again with text messages, whiteboards, even shouting from the stands. We've done it before and no one minds. I've seen teams like 1114 use whiteboards. I honestly thought it was common practice.
So:
1. Does this rule exist?
2. Is this a rule decided event by event?
GaryVoshol
03-04-2011, 18:18
The GDC specifically allowed it: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=17137
I think it's decided event-to-event. I've seen it both ways.
And, as we all know, rules that change from event to event are a bad thing.
FWIW, I think they may be trying to stretch <T25> and <T26> to cover alliance selection. That's not a legitimate stretch; the team reps aren't even in the alliance stations... And it can be argued that if the device in question doesn't have it's connection on, it's included in <T26> anyway.
The GDC needs to rule one way or the other. Otherwise, Archimedes captains will be complaining about Newton captains being allowed to use electronic devices during selection... Well, hopefully not that bad.
Chris is me
03-04-2011, 18:30
I pulled out the rule book and after I showed them there was no rule, they didn't say they were enforcing T25 or T26 - they agreed with my interpretation that alliance selections are not matches. They just said that because it wasn't in the rulebook, it was their jurisdiction.
I can't remember if I asked to call FIRST HQ - but I think I did and they said it was too late or something. Oh well.
Nuttyman54
03-04-2011, 18:31
Incidences like this occurred at DC this year (we were informed on Saturday morning) and on Archimedes last year (we were informed 5 minutes before alliance selections. We were allowed to use whiteboard in DC, but not on Archimedes last year.
We inquired like you did at DC, but received the same answer that since it wasn't in the rule book, the Head Ref had the right to make the call. Before Archimedes I had never seen or heard of any instances where this was the case. I think that FIRST needs to make a clear ruling in the actual game manual so that it is fair and consistent between events.
Some teams have elaborate electronic scouting setups like your iPad, which allow their scouts to quickly re-sort and re-arrange their list based on the changing needs of the alliance, which is not possible through paper means. Teams who have spent time on such a system have the right to know long before the event if they will be allowed to use it, or if their time is better spent making sure their on-field scout has everything they need on paper.
The GDC specifically allowed it: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=17137
"There are no rules that prohibit laptops or team collaboration during the alliance selection process. These methods are permitted, however the team is expected to make quick and expeditious decisions in the interest of keeping the process moving."
Looks like they were wrong :eek:
I've always kept it to one student on the field and about the only thing I figured wasn't allowed was a cell phone.
BrendanB
03-04-2011, 18:36
I wish FIRST would come up with a message to head refs on what is allowed and not allowed. It seems every event has different policies which makes it unfair when the head ref makes a call that the GDC allows.
It just doesn't make sense when this happens. IF whiteboards are allowed I don't see why phones make any difference since they both are providing a number. I have seen so many teams take forever to make a decision when going through their paper data whereas it seems that they think texting prolongs the process.
Nuttyman54
03-04-2011, 18:39
"There are no rules that prohibit laptops or team collaboration during the alliance selection process. These methods are permitted, however the team is expected to make quick and expeditious decisions in the interest of keeping the process moving."
Looks like they were wrong :eek:
Keep in mind that the Q&A is not the rules. Refs may use it as guidelines and base their calls on it, but there is no requirement that they follow the Q&A interpretation. As it stands it's still technically the Head Ref's decision, however shaky that logic may be
That being said, it's likely that if we had known about this Q&A ahead of time we would have brought it to the head ref's attention. Unfortunately this one slipped by us, and we were not anticipating the ruling at DC. I can't speak for anyone at CT who may or may not have known about this Q&A.
At this point I'm really hoping the GDC sees fit to address this in the next rule update so that it is consistent from here on out.
flyingcrayons
03-04-2011, 18:39
at NJ, i took my phone out during alliance selection to check a text from a teammate (unrelated to alliance selection, but it was very important nonetheless). i also was able to communicate with a team mentor about my selection.. i would have picked that team regardless, but i felt better getting approval lol. at DC, they explicitly said that you couldnt use electronic devices, and i didnt. ive never had problems with this at NJ, or even Philly. it seems weird that different regionals have different rules. seems shady to me. i think FIRST is going to have to make a definitive statement about this before it gets out of hand
Tyler Hicks
03-04-2011, 18:43
During alliance selection, I have used my cell phone to text fellow members in the stands who had other scouting data. I've also used a laptop to sort scouting data. I figured it was perfectly legal, I don't see what harm it would cause.
XaulZan11
03-04-2011, 18:47
I find the lack of consistency frustrating. At Wisconsin our representative asked before alliance selections if he could recieve/send texts on his cell phone and said he could. When it was time to make our second selection, he was told to put the phone away by the MC (not sure what grounds he has to make that decision). At Midwest the represenatives were told they couldn't use phones right before alliance selection; thankfully we planned ahead this time.
If they are concerned that cell phones, laptops, Ipads will cause too much of a delay, how about giving teams 5 minutes to make their selection? If they don't make the selection in time, they are given the highest ranked team.
With whiteboards, teams shouting, hand signals, its just too hard to deny teams communication.
During alliance selection, I have used my cell phone to text fellow members in the stands who had other scouting data. I've also used a laptop to sort scouting data. I figured it was perfectly legal, I don't see what harm it would cause.
If the phone was ok then why not just be allowed to have a full team down there with you to help you make the pick? Personally I don't think phones should not be allowed on the field during matches (apparently a coach on one of the teams at GTR was actually talking on his phone in the middle of a match) or during alliance section period.
Chris is me
03-04-2011, 18:56
If the phone was ok then why not just be allowed to have a full team down there with you to help you make the pick? Personally I don't think phones should not be allowed on the field during matches (apparently a coach on one of the teams at GTR was actually talking on his phone in the middle of a match) or during alliance section period.
I really think the reason that whole teams are disallowed is for space reasons. What's the problem with having more than one person decide something for a team?
BrendanB
03-04-2011, 19:00
I really think the reason that whole teams are disallowed is for space reasons. What's the problem with having more than one person decide something for a team?
I agree it is kinda like match strategy but even harder since things change fast!
I wonder what a head ref would do if someone broke a no white board rule? Held up the number as it was their turn! :p
548swimmer
03-04-2011, 19:00
I really think the reason that whole teams are disallowed is for space reasons. What's the problem with having more than one person decide something for a team?
Agreed, especially since the decision in question affects the entire team.
Akash Rastogi
03-04-2011, 19:03
If the phone was ok then why not just be allowed to have a full team down there with you to help you make the pick? Personally I don't think phones should not be allowed on the field during matches (apparently a coach on one of the teams at GTR was actually talking on his phone in the middle of a match) or during alliance section period.
What's your issue in allowing the field rep to receive texts from their scouts/team members? We do it often when a dark horse team is still available during selections just to make sure our field rep noticed they are available.
Mike Betts
03-04-2011, 19:04
...apparently a coach on one of the teams at GTR was actually talking on his phone in the middle of a match...
That is prohibited by <T26>:
<T26> Devices used solely for the purpose of planning or tracking strategy of game play are allowed inside the ALLIANCE STATION, if they meet ALL of the following conditions:
...
Do not communicate with anything or anyone outside of the ARENA.
Do no include any form of enabled wireless electronic communication (e.g. radios, walkie-talkies, cell phones, Bluetooth communications, WiFi, etc.)
...
That is prohibited by <T26>:
I've seen alot of things slide this year that should have been penalties at numerous events from human players being out of the station to Media Pass people coaching from the sidelines.
The refs do not often pay attention to what goes on in the drivers station when there is alot going down on the field.
thefro526
03-04-2011, 19:18
I've always kept it to one student on the field and about the only thing I figured wasn't allowed was a cell phone.
The Cell Phone thing seems to change based on Events. As a student, I would often text my teammates right up to when I would announce our selections - heck on Curie in 2009 I did the entire Alliance Selection while Talking on my cell phone. IMO, as long as the person puts the phone down when speaking into the mic, it's not really an issue - and those reps that are on a phone are usually unprepared....
Also, it appears that the GDC doesn't mind what Aids you bring to the field, as long as it's not another person and doesn't interrupt the flow of of selections. (Maybe if more teams brought a computer or used a cell phone during alliance selections we could avoid the all too common "look at the board for 2 minutes and pick a team at random")
JaneYoung
03-04-2011, 20:31
I've seen alot of things slide this year that should have been penalties at numerous events from human players being out of the station to Media Pass people coaching from the sidelines.
The topic of Media Pass people and abuse of the privilege deserves its very own thread.
Jane
kjohnson
03-04-2011, 21:24
This needs to be addressed by the GDC as a rule update, not just a Q&A response so it can be standardized across all regionals, districts, and the Championship. Its not fair to teams to be denied access to resources other teams can use freely. I agree that cell phone calls should not be placed on the field during alliance selections, but I don't see a problem with texting your team if you aren't currently making your pick.
The topic of Media Pass people and abuse of the privilege deserves its very own thread.
A team was penalized and given a yellow card at the Virginia Regional last year when a Referee noticed the drive coach communicating with someone outside the playing field, not even the person with the Media Pass. I feel like this happens much more often than it is noticed.
The topic of Media Pass people and abuse of the privilege deserves its very own thread.
Jane
Are there rules about this? As a "media pass person," my primary role WAS to take pictures, but at times I discussed strategy, talked to refs (they got everything right, fortunately), etc., though never during a match!
Chris is me
03-04-2011, 22:09
Are there rules about this? As a "media pass person," my primary role WAS to take pictures, but at times I discussed strategy, talked to refs (they got everything right, fortunately), etc., though never during a match!
I'm pretty sure Jane isn't touching on people who do that, but rather people using the Media pass as a "floor badge".
Tyler Olds
03-04-2011, 23:30
I find the lack of consistency frustrating. At Wisconsin our representative asked before alliance selections if he could recieve/send texts on his cell phone and said he could. When it was time to make our second selection, he was told to put the phone away by the MC (not sure what grounds he has to make that decision). At Midwest the represenatives were told they couldn't use phones right before alliance selection; thankfully we planned ahead this time.
If they are concerned that cell phones, laptops, Ipads will cause too much of a delay, how about giving teams 5 minutes to make their selection? If they don't make the selection in time, they are given the highest ranked team.
With whiteboards, teams shouting, hand signals, its just too hard to deny teams communication.
<soapbox>
John,
When a student tells me that the entire regional has to wait because he is waiting for a text to make a selection, I believe that I have full grounds to have him put his phone away. What if something happens and he does not recieve a text back? Are we supposed to wait and wait and wait?
The alliance selections are supposed to be a fun and exciting process; if 3000 people are waiting because your team has not prepared your student with a comprehensive list (especially when you are a 5+ year team), then it dulls the moment while he is waiting for a text. We do not have time to let each team take 5 minutes to make a pick (16 picks x 5 minutes = 1 hour and 20 minutes).
The shouting believe it or not, makes it a much more fun process for other teams to be heard that they want to be picked. It tends to remind me of an episode of the Price is Right.
Moral of the story: Have your team member prepared and you won't run in an issue at all and you won't have to go to CD posting in different sections your dislike for what happened. I understand that your alliance partner had another suggestion of who to go with, but the point is moot as there was time to take care of this before your next pick came and that is still no reason to delay the process any further by waiting for a text as other teams have to face the same difficulties.
</soapbox>
Moral of the story: Have your team member prepared and you won't run in an issue at all and you won't have to go to CD posting in different sections your dislike for what happened.
And every team in the top 15 really needs a list. This year 10,000 lakes had a bunch of teams below 8th seed as alliance captain and when we reached the 7th seed the representative had no idea what to do and lacked a list, granted it was a rookie team IIRC, but it still shows the importance of preparedness.
JaneYoung
04-04-2011, 00:10
I'm pretty sure Jane isn't touching on people who do that, but rather people using the Media pass as a "floor badge".
Yes. Instead of checking them in and out, the passes are kept, giving access to the floor - not necessarily being used as a media pass but as a free pass to access that the person would not otherwise have. Not cool.
Jane
XaulZan11
04-04-2011, 00:11
<soapbox>
John,
When a student tells me that the entire regional has to wait because he is waiting for a text to make a selection, I believe that I have full grounds to have him put his phone away. What if something happens and he does not recieve a text back? Are we supposed to wait and wait and wait?
The alliance selections are supposed to be a fun and exciting process; if 3000 people are waiting because your team has not prepared your student with a comprehensive list (especially when you are a 5+ year team), then it dulls the moment while he is waiting for a text. We do not have time to let each team take 5 minutes to make a pick (16 picks x 5 minutes = 1 hour and 20 minutes).
The shouting believe it or not, makes it a much more fun process for other teams to be heard that they want to be picked. It tends to remind me of an episode of the Price is Right.
Moral of the story: Have your team member prepared and you won't run in an issue at all and you won't have to go to CD posting in different sections your dislike for what happened.
</soapbox>
Tyler, the issue was not that he was not prepared with a list of teams, but the alliance captain wanted to selected a team that was not that high on our list and our representative wanted to ensure it was an ok selection. All the decisions on 1732 scouting/strategy is a collaboration between myself and several key student scouts and alumni, and I wanted to ensure alliance selection is another collaboration. Thus, our student team lead (who drives and thus doesn't know much about the other teams), asked if he could use his cell phone during alliance selections so all of our scouts could sit together and discuss the selections. So, while it may seem we were not prepared, we were actually very prepared and ensured before hand that our system was within the rules and would be allowed. I'll be honest, I have a ton of respect for you, but I don't appreciate you publically stating we were not prepared for alliance selections when that was not the case.
I do agree that time is a factor, but I would rather have a 2 or 3 minute limit and allow cell phones/computers/smoke signals/white boards. Having teams shout their team number or having student looking at the screen completely lost on who to pick, does not make anyone look good; just not very professional looking, in my opinion.
Andrew Schreiber
04-04-2011, 00:17
And every team in the top 15 really needs a list. This year 10,000 lakes had a bunch of teams below 8th seed as alliance captain and when we reached the 7th seed the representative had no idea what to do and lacked a list, granted it was a rookie team IIRC, but it still shows the importance of preparedness.
Everyone should make a list. It is a good exercise in evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of teams and robots.
Vikesrock
04-04-2011, 00:20
Everyone should make a list. It is a good exercise in evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of teams and robots.
Also good for when you get picked by one of these clueless alliance captains.
Akash Rastogi
04-04-2011, 00:33
I have never waited for a text. It is instant like it's supposed to be. Also, we never expect the field rep to text back. We only send messages to them, not back and forth. It speeds up selection for us, not sure about others.
Lil' Lavery
04-04-2011, 00:33
While I'm somewhat divided on this issue, my instinct is that it should be just the rep on the field with no communication to the stands beyond what everyone else can see/intercept. No cell phones/texts, wifi, etc. Electronic devices without wireless communication, sure. But any communications to outside sources should be of the type that everyone can see/hear (whiteboards, shouting, etc.)
That's my take on the issue, with no real firm grounds to stand on other than my beliefs.
I do agree that time is a factor, but I would rather have a 2 or 3 minute limit and allow cell phones/computers/smoke signals/white boards. Having teams shout their team number or having student looking at the screen completely lost on who to pick, does not make anyone look good; just not very professional looking, in my opinion.
If we go with a time limit, it should be more like 45 seconds, not 2-3 minutes. At 3 minutes a pick, you're looking at what could become a 48+ (declines) minute selection process. That's ridiculous.
While I realize there will always be unprepared teams, all teams (with the exception of the #8 captains second selection) need to be ready almost immediately when the MC comes to them. None of these minute+ delays in order to debate, communicate, and deliberate. The alliance selection process should be quick and relatively painless. There will always be 1-2 teams who don't have a list or haven't been keeping good track of who's been picked and slow down the process. There's no need for the teams who actually are prepared to slow it down as well.
Ian Curtis
04-04-2011, 01:11
I'll be honest, I have a ton of respect for you, but I don't appreciate you publically stating we were not prepared for alliance selections when that was not the case.
I do agree that time is a factor, but I would rather have a 2 or 3 minute limit and allow cell phones/computers/smoke signals/white boards. Having teams shout their team number or having student looking at the screen completely lost on who to pick, does not make anyone look good; just not very professional looking, in my opinion.
They do not randomly select which alliance captain selects next. It seems to me like it would've been a non-issue if your AC had gotten a text from the stands while the pick prior to yours was in progress. If you are prepared, surely you could send him a list of two teams, so he/she has a backup in case the first choice got selected by the alliance prior to yours? Is there some other issue that prevents this?
XaulZan11
04-04-2011, 01:33
They do not randomly select which alliance captain selects next. It seems to me like it would've been a non-issue if your AC had gotten a text from the stands while the pick prior to yours was in progress. If you are prepared, surely you could send him a list of two teams, so he/she has a backup in case the first choice got selected by the alliance prior to yours? Is there some other issue that prevents this?
I don't really want to continue to talk about what happened, but since you asked. As the 2nd alliance, after the 6th (or so) alliance made their 2nd selection, we texted our representative (who also had a list) 5 teams in order. The alliance captain wanted a team that wasn't on that list of 5, so our representive texted back "what about XXXXX". I believe we were in the process of texting back when it was our alliance's turn to pick. So, long story short, we were working on the pick before it was our turn, but it was just one of those tough situations that take time. If anyone has any suggestions on how we could have been more efficient, I'm interested in hearing them.
synth3tk
04-04-2011, 01:56
If anyone has any suggestions on how we could have been more efficient, I'm interested in hearing them.
The seconds shaved from instant messaging instead of texting can be a huge help.
Akash Rastogi
04-04-2011, 01:59
I don't really want to continue to talk about what happened, but since you asked. As the 2nd alliance, after the 6th (or so) alliance made their 2nd selection, we texted our representative (who also had a list) 5 teams in order. The alliance captain wanted a team that wasn't on that list of 5, so our representive texted back "what about XXXXX". I believe we were in the process of texting back when it was our alliance's turn to pick. So, long story short, we were working on the pick before it was our turn, but it was just one of those tough situations that take time. If anyone has any suggestions on how we could have been more efficient, I'm interested in hearing them.
I'm still not seeing the issue here. I'd rather see your team texting back and forth than what I see most teams do- yelling like morons across the arena with the field rep cupping their hand to their ear :p
Anyway, the point to all teams is this- help those around you learn that they need a list.
Teams trust one driver to drive the robot.
Teams trust one operator to operate the mechanisms.
Teams trust one human player/analyst/payload spec1al1st.
Teams trust one coach to coach the drive team.
Why the controversy over trusting one student representative, who has had 2-3 days to prepare, to make an alliance picking decision?
No cell phones, no computers, no electronics. Using them during selections is selfish and rude. It sends a message of unpreparedness. If I were in that position, would be mortified to be talking on the phone or sending/receiving texts or playing with a computer while an entire regional (and those watching the webcast) awaits my decision.
One piece of paper, on a clipboard, with your top 23 teams in ranked order. And a pen to cross out those already picked. And a smart, capable student representative. That's all you need.
Yes. Instead of checking them in and out, the passes are kept, giving access to the floor - not necessarily being used as a media pass but as a free pass to access that the person would not otherwise have. Not cool.
Jane
The guy I saw at the side of the field giving instruction to his team from the side of the field. That is outright cheating and that team should have had their media badge privileges taken away.
Whenever my teams are involved with alliance we give our representative lists of teams with 2-4 different columns ranking teams for several different roles. Last season our rep was given a list with the best scorers from each zone according to our scouting. Also there is a master list given to provide an exact ranking of every team in our estimation.
In the past I have signaled to my representative who to take by holding up a whiteboard or by signaling numbers with my hands. I usually only do this when I am sitting with our partners or potential partners. I know when I was a student I would have liked a group of people telling me who to pick.
Kims Robot
04-04-2011, 09:13
I'm glad someone finally brought this up.
We saw this rule for the first time at DC and although I heard the announcement "no electronics on the field"... I sort of assumed it meant no cell phones, as I had seen plenty of teams with laptops at other regionals. Our printer wasn't working and we couldn't get our list printed, so I sent our student with a laptop. The field crew sent the laptop back and we panicked trying to handwrite everything and all the notes... fortunately we ended up in 16th not 12th like we were when we were prepping the student, so it became a non-issue, but it seems unfair. I don't like how much they are discouraging using technology for a technology competition. I get the timeframe thing, and maybe even if people thought it was "rude" to be talking on a cell phone... but using a laptop that was used for all of your scouting and alliance selection work??
Im with those that think it needs to be consistent across all the regionals.
BrendanB
04-04-2011, 10:00
Teams trust one driver to drive the robot.
Teams trust one operator to operate the mechanisms.
Teams trust one human player/analyst/payload spec1al1st.
Teams trust one coach to coach the drive team.
Why the controversy over trusting one student representative, who has had 2-3 days to prepare, to make an alliance picking decision?
No cell phones, no computers, no electronics. Using them during selections is selfish and rude. It sends a message of unpreparedness. If I were in that position, would be mortified to be talking on the phone or sending/receiving texts or playing with a computer while an entire regional (and those watching the webcast) awaits my decision.
One piece of paper, on a clipboard, with your top 23 teams in ranked order. And a pen to cross out those already picked. And a smart, capable student representative. That's all you need.
Unfortunately some teams put either their driver or team captain who has had no interfacing with the scouts/data on the field for selections just because of their role. Depending on the knowledge of that student and if we ever were in that situation I wouldn't trust them to make a good decision, hand me a phone. ;)
I have never waited on a text. I have even waited more time on a captain or two team alliance spending 5 minutes looking through a piece of paper to make a pick. This year at GSR there was an incident where an unprepared captain was told to put their phone away and then had to stare at the screen for both their first a second picks as they had no idea. Another thing is some teams don't prepare in their last few matches as the rankings are finalized and teams slip up into pick position.
If you can't have a laptop with a pick list and you can't have a phone ipod thing-a-ma-jig with text/list why should you be able to have a piece of paper? Just saying.:confused: :)
nahstobor
04-04-2011, 10:37
I think the most important thing is that there is no penalty for picking a team using illegal communication. Until FIRST says "If you are caught communicating with someone outside the arena, you are not allowed to select the team that was communicated to you," I don't think things will change. Teams will find ways to communicate picks down to the field.
As someone posted earlier in the thread, I'd much prefer a time limit rather than banning communication. Something like this (maybe with tweaked numbers):
In each round of alliance member selection, Alliance Captains must invite a team within 70 seconds, minus 5 seconds for each invitation accepted in the round.
The numbers might need to be changed for communication on the 7th/8th alliances 2nd pick.
EDIT: Realized declines do happen :P and if a mid-seed gets a decline then the timing would be disadvantageous compared to if a 1st seed got a decline. Harder to make fair than I thought.
Zuelu562
04-04-2011, 10:58
EDIT: Realized declines do happen :P and if a mid-seed gets a decline then the timing would be disadvantageous compared to if a 1st seed got a decline. Harder to make fair than I thought.
With that in mind, the decline would reset their pick timer to what it started at, to allow for re-selection(s). Pick 7/8 would always have 10 seconds (and 2/1 on the return trip).
Also, the timer would start as the Emcee (or whoever is talking to the representative) asks "who's your pick".
Brandon Holley
04-04-2011, 11:06
It seems like theres 2 separate issues we are debating here.
The first is the general inconsistency of the rules event to event regarding whats allowed on the field for selections. I myself have seen everything from whiteboards, cell phones and iThings to shouting, hand signals, and even interpretive dance. To me, if you can communicate to your teammate who is selecting, then what is the difference how they get the information. Whether its because I yelled it across the arena, showed some sort of hand signal or sent a text/email...whats the difference.
The other fundamental issue is whether people should be communicating with the alliance selector at all. On that note, I think its somewhat unfair to leave all of that pressure of alliance selections to one student. Sure, we leave the driving of the robot and operation of the arm etc to one student, but collectively the drive team operates the robot, the burden can be shared. Being on the field, under the lights, with a microphone in your face, with hundreds of people screaming random team numbers at you and the pressure of choosing your alliance for your entire team, I'm ok with letting these people get some assistance.
-Brando
Unfortunately some teams put either their driver or team captain who has had no interfacing with the scouts/data on the field for selections just because of their role.
Teams put a lot of emphasis on picking the right individuals to be on the drive team. Why would they not put similar priority on the very important role of Student Representative?
I have never waited on a text. I have even waited more time on a captain or two team alliance spending 5 minutes looking through a piece of paper to make a pick. This year at GSR there was an incident where an unprepared captain was told to put their phone away and then had to stare at the screen for both their first a second picks as they had no idea. Another thing is some teams don't prepare in their last few matches as the rankings are finalized and teams slip up into pick position.
Would this process have been faster if the person in question was able to call into the stands? I doubt it. Many chefs make muddled stew.
The alliance selection process is a linchpin of FIRST. Perhaps the most important thing that happens at any event. Everybody's eyes, whether they be from teammates, judges, current or prospective sponsors, are trained on the student reps. They should be clever and articulate enough to be able to make a decision by themselves. Anything else is embarassing.
Brandon Holley
04-04-2011, 11:10
Teams put a lot of emphasis on picking the right individuals to be on the drive team. Why would they not put similar priority on the very important role of Student Representative?
We put a tremendous amount of importance on who will be choosing our alliance if given the opportunity. It's still a tremendous responsibility in a very intense environment.
-Brando
BrendanB
04-04-2011, 11:14
Teams put a lot of emphasis on picking the right individuals to be on the drive team. Why would they not put similar priority on the very important role of Student Representative?
Would this process have been faster if the person in question was able to call into the stands? I doubt it. Many chefs make muddled stew.
I do not know why a team would not send someone prepared to the field. The fact is it is happening. I gave our team captain a list of the top 20 scorers and a list of how many points havebeen scored by each team.
Yes, it probably would have been faster if he called the stands. :)
Zuelu562
04-04-2011, 11:21
I really agree with Brandon's post; the consistency in both legal methods of communication to the team representative and the policing of those methods should be addressed in the manual, or at least generally noted and given to the event's staff.
A simple line, rule or even a blue box regarding legal methods of communication during alliance selections would probably do a great deal fix this problem.
From the tone of my post, you can tell I wholeheartedly agree with allowing the alliance selector to receive information from outside of the field area (not necessarily out of the venue mind you, AKA 3G connection). I've been the representative myself twice, once at BattleCry10 and this year at BAE/GSR. It's a hard job, lights, the entire venue looking at you, and a microphone in your face can be very intimidating, and you only say (at least) one sentence and a number! Having something, even a single piece of paper with 7 or eight hardly-legible numbers scribbled on it makes it easier (trust me). Having anything more is just gravy and if the selector finds it easier, let if be.
Remember GP in this scenario. If you're accessing say, TheBlueAlliance, during alliance selection when it is your turn, that's something I am against.
The Lucas
04-04-2011, 12:04
All volunteers (refs, inspectors, emcees, etc..) should strive to enforce all rules consistently and correctly. There is no rule that prohibits electronic or communication devices during alliance selection (Q&A has said so regarding laptops), so to ban them is both incorrect and inconsistent. Only venues-specific rules (power tools in the pit) should be different in same week events, and this is not a venue-specific rule.
With that being said, it is important that everyone makes the the picks they want in a timely fashion. While a "draft clock" might be fun, I think it would put more stress on some reps that are already overstressed. When the Emcee asks for your selection you should not be waiting on communication, you should be ready (text messaging can actually help with this since they can be easily exchanged before your turn). It might take a few seconds to make another pick in the event of a decline.
This is my suggestion for making picks. Every representative (not just captains) have a paper list even if it just a backup to a electronic version of the list. Use the list to make your first pick. Communication before the pick only to confirm remaining teams on the list or late breaking info like Team XXXX broke in their last match (due to time constraints you usually have to make your list before the last round of matches). If you are AC8 you need to also be ready to make your second pick without revaluation (the down side of being AC8). All other AC should communicate with their first pick rep and their scouting team (via text message) to determine what you need in a 2nd pick based on the capabilities of your alliance (do we need another minibot?) and your matchup (we face Team XXXX so we need Team YYYY to play D). There is no way you could accurately predict all the scenarios that play out during the alliance selection so you have to adjust your 2nd pick accordingly. Stop all communication once the pick before you is announced (communication should be in the form of lists of 3-5 picks so you can adjust to that pick before you). Take a deep breath and announce your 2nd pick clearly when the Emcee asks.
JohnBoucher
04-04-2011, 12:29
There is always a driver meeting that could include instructions on how the alliance selection process will take place. This puts the info out for all teams. If a ban on tablet computers, white boards exists, then that is the time to inform the teams, not late Saturday AM.
synth3tk
04-04-2011, 12:36
There is always a driver meeting that could include instructions on how the alliance selection process will take place. This puts the info out for all teams. If a ban on tablet computers, white boards exists, then that is the time to inform the teams, not late Saturday AM.
IF FIRST doesn't make a global ruling (which I think would be the best solution), then at the very least, what John suggested should be enforced. Yes, it'd still suck not to be able to use your iDevice or laptop, but at least you'd know about it well ahead of time, and can make the appropriate changes by Saturday morning/afternoon.
Vikesrock
04-04-2011, 15:52
I agree that this is two separate issue being discussed.
Regarding this year, I hope we see consistent enforcement of the rules (or lack thereof) in all Week 6 events and Championship Divisions.
Regarding what I would like to see for alliance selections in the future, I would like to see some borrowing from sports here. Give each team a pick clock and when the clock runs out other alliances can jump ahead and make their picks. I'd say maybe 45 seconds for the first round and a decline adds 20 seconds to your clock. After the first 8 picks, have a 2 minute pause for the alliances to confer, then go through the second round at a lower clock, maybe 30 seconds.
I would let teams communicate however they want to whomever they want. If they don't get their pick in within their allotted clock because they are waiting on communication it's their loss.
Grim Tuesday
04-04-2011, 17:24
And every team in the top 15 really needs a list. This year 10,000 lakes had a bunch of teams below 8th seed as alliance captain and when we reached the 7th seed the representative had no idea what to do and lacked a list, granted it was a rookie team IIRC, but it still shows the importance of preparedness.
In reality, all teams should make a list. If your picked, then you can tell who picked you complements your robot.
On another thing said earlier in this thread (sorry, I dont have a quote), the Q&A is considered a supplement to the rules, unless it directly contradicts it, in which case, one of the two will be updated, usually by the next team update. If it isn't, then FIRST HQ takes precedence at the regional. In other words, Q&A overrules the head ref.
XaulZan11
04-04-2011, 17:40
In other words, Q&A overrules the head ref.
Another confusion is that I'm not sure who makes the decision. Would it be the head ref that makes this decision, our would it be the regional cordinator or the announcer? I don't believe head refs have any say in awards and I get the feeling that alliance selection is somewhere in between matches and awards. I just don't know the inner-working of regionals...
George A.
04-04-2011, 17:52
Another confusion is that I'm not sure who makes the decision. Would it be the head ref that makes this decision, our would it be the regional cordinator or the announcer? I don't believe head refs have any say in awards and I get the feeling that alliance selection is somewhere in between matches and awards. I just don't know the inner-working of regionals...
There's a bunch of "head honchos" that could be responsible for making this decision. There is always 1 or 2 event managers (usually from Show Ready Events) that oversee everything to make sure timing is on schedule.
There is also the Head Ref that could make the decision, since they are the one that rules their field with an iron fist (it's arguable that alliance selection isn't in their jurisdiction)
So there are several outlets that this call could be made from, it's just up to FIRST to make a ruling once and for all that all events have to abide by.
Keep in mind that the Q&A is not the rules. Refs may use it as guidelines and base their calls on it, but there is no requirement that they follow the Q&A interpretation.
From the wording of Team Update #21 (http://www.usfirst.org/uploadedFiles/Robotics_Programs/FRC/Game_and_Season__Info/2011_Assets/Team_Updates/Team%20Update%2021.pdf) it sure sounds like the GDC considers Q&A answers to be authoritative.
From the wording of Team Update #21 (http://www.usfirst.org/uploadedFiles/Robotics_Programs/FRC/Game_and_Season__Info/2011_Assets/Team_Updates/Team%20Update%2021.pdf) it sure sounds like the GDC considers Q&A answers to be authoritative.
Yeah... update 21 clears this up http://www.usfirst.org/uploadedFiles/Robotics_Programs/FRC/Game_and_Season__Info/2011_Assets/Team_Updates/Team%20Update%2021.pdf
Lil' Lavery
05-04-2011, 17:25
I don't really want to continue to talk about what happened, but since you asked. As the 2nd alliance, after the 6th (or so) alliance made their 2nd selection, we texted our representative (who also had a list) 5 teams in order. The alliance captain wanted a team that wasn't on that list of 5, so our representive texted back "what about XXXXX". I believe we were in the process of texting back when it was our alliance's turn to pick. So, long story short, we were working on the pick before it was our turn, but it was just one of those tough situations that take time. If anyone has any suggestions on how we could have been more efficient, I'm interested in hearing them.
You could have simply given the total list to the student representative on the field, with any needed notes and categorizations, rather than keeping your brain trust off-field with all the information. Then your student representative would have known about that team and what to do in that situation without having to spend time texting back and forth.
In other words, Q&A overrules the head ref.
No, it doesn't.
Yeah... update 21 clears this up http://www.usfirst.org/uploadedFiles/Robotics_Programs/FRC/Game_and_Season__Info/2011_Assets/Team_Updates/Team%20Update%2021.pdf
All it clears up is that GDC considers their Q&A answers to be authoritative.
It doesn't clear up the rule apparently, judging by the varied opinions on this thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94336).
All it clears up is that GDC considers their Q&A answers to be authoritative.
It doesn't clear up the rule apparently, judging by the varied opinions on this thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=94336).
If Q&A was authoritative, then that Team Update would have said that Q&A is authoritative. Rather, they updated the rules, which implies they changed something. That suggests that Q&A answers are different from the rules, and that changing the rules directly is somehow greater than answering a Q&A.
As for the varied opinions, T25 and T26 have been rehashed many times, and I believe we CDers as a community can have a consensus that they do not apply to alliance selections.
However, I do wonder (@Sean) why Q&A doesn't overrule a Head Ref? It's directly from the GDC, and the GDC's interpretation should take precedence over a Ref's, right?
If Q&A was authoritative, then that Team Update would have said that Q&A is authoritative. Rather, they updated the rules, which implies they changed something. That suggests that Q&A answers are different from the rules, and that changing the rules directly is somehow greater than answering a Q&A.
Here's the exact wording of the update (emphasis & color mine):
There were some questions at previous weeks’ events about what is allowed on the field during the Alliance Selection process.
We’d like to remind everyone of our answer to a Q&A post on this subject from 16 February, 2011 (found at http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=17137).
“There are no rules that prohibit laptops or team collaboration during the alliance selection process. These methods are permitted, however the team is expected to make quick and expeditious decisions in the interest of keeping the process moving.”
The part in blue is a verbatim copy of the Q&A ruling.
The part in red means nothing if not that GDC considers Q&A authoritative.
jvriezen
05-04-2011, 17:52
A simple solution for future games (or a future Team Update):
The moment the prior alliance captain's selection 'accepts', a countdown clock is started-- say 2 minutes or whatever (maybe less). The next captain can use her cell phone to call her grandmother for advice or whatever, if she wants, but if there is no choice made when the time runs out, then she gets the highest available seed which is not an alliance captain.
If she chooses a team already taken, well, she better hope there's still enough time on the clock, because it is not being restarted.
Optionally, there could be some special exception for rookie teams, since they often have no clue how the process works-- give them more time perhaps.
Takes the Emcee and the ref out of it, for the most part and this 'quantifies' GDC's desire to keep things moving.
John Vriezen
Team 2530 "Inconceivable"
Mentor, Drive Coach, Inspector
Here's the exact wording of the update (emphasis & color mine):
The part in blue is a verbatim copy of the Q&A ruling.
The part in red means nothing if not that GDC considers Q&A authoritative.
In retrospect that seems really obvious. Sorry about that. :P
The Lucas
05-04-2011, 21:35
However, I do wonder (@Sean) why Q&A doesn't overrule a Head Ref? It's directly from the GDC, and the GDC's interpretation should take precedence over a Ref's, right?
Nope, read <T04>
<T04> The Head Referee has the ultimate authority in the ARENA during the competition, but may receive input from additional sources, particularly Game Design Committee members, FIRST personnel, and technical staff that may be present at the event. THE HEAD REFEREE RULINGS ARE FINAL! The referee will not review recorded replays under any circumstances.
In the Arena, the Head Ref overules everyone including the GDC. Everyone must abide by their ruling, even if it is clearly incorrect according to the rules. You can ask questions or give input to influence a ruling but ultimately "what they say, goes". Fortunately, Head Refs are highly trained and trying their best to abide by the rules and GDC interpretations. Any Head Ref that is just arbitrarily making up rules will not be a Head Ref for long.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.