View Full Version : Michigan, be honest, how is the district model?
I am part of Mid Atlantic Robotics a new 501 c3 non profit recently created to look into the district model in NJ, DE and Eastern PA. I know folks are working very hard on this.
Can you be honest and tell us how the Michigan District Model is working. We hear it is great. Please level with us.
What is working, what is not working, and what was completely missed?
Many thanks in advance...
Frank Larkin Director-at-Large
Mid Atlantic Robotics.
mobilegamer999
29-06-2011, 13:34
I am a from a Michigan team, and I was around from before the district model was used, and I would say, that it has major benefits and drawbacks. The biggest drawback is the extra cost to have to go to state and then to nationals. But the big advantage is the fact that limiting teams by a second level of competition makes for much more challenging opponents at nationals.
I'm actually on the same team as mobilegamer, and would have to agree with him.
The added level(s) of competition are very beneficial as you get to perfect your game as the season progresses. The added time gives you a competitive advantage once you get to nationals, but as mobilegamer said the added cost of State and *potentially* Nationals is difficult for teams to pay. Especially in Michigan.
I honestly don't see why FIRST doesn't allow FIRSTInMichigan to run our own State championship - other than they enjoy lining their pockets. Costs would significantly decrease.
Other than that, the smaller district events are more exciting and fast paced. Also they feel more "local" - everyone knows each other. This makes these events feel more competitive and friendly. It's really cool to see a new member meet new people from different communities and schools.
Why are you both calling the state championship an extra-cost? Isn't it the same as a regional? If anything it's cheaper because of the district model, not more expensive. I believe 2 Districts and state Championships still isn't the cost of 2 regionals. 3 events for a cheaper cost than 2 sounds like a deal to me.
My point is it's neither a drawback nor an advantage compared to the standard system elsewhere. If anything it's cheaper.
mobilegamer999
29-06-2011, 13:47
Why are you both calling the state championship an extra-cost? Isn't it the same as a regional? If anything it's cheaper because of the district model, not more expensive. I believe 3 Districts and state Championships still isn't the cost of 2 regionals. That is cheaper, not more expensive.
No, in Michigan, we have to pay the cost for 2 regional events which is the same cost as other state's district events, then if you do good enough at the regionals, then you have to pay another separate entry fee for state
XaulZan11
29-06-2011, 13:48
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the cost of attending 3 regionals and the Championship Event significantly more expensive than 2 districts, State Championship and then the Championship Event? If so, wouldn't that be an advantage to the district model and not a drawback?
No, in Michigan, we have to pay the cost for 2 regional events which is the same cost as other state's district events, then if you do good enough at the regionals, then you have to pay another separate entry fee for state
Yeah, but Districts aren't $4000 each like regionals are.
mobilegamer999
29-06-2011, 13:52
At start of season, $4000 gets you the KOP and 2 district events in michigan, and KOP and 2 regional events outside of michigan, then in Michigan, its an extra $5,000 for states if you go to state
At start of season, $4000 gets you the KOP and 2 district events in michigan, and KOP and 2 regional events outside of michigan, then in Michigan, its an extra $5,000 for states if you go to state
No, $5000 gets you a KOP and 1 regional outiside of Michigan...$9000 gets you 2 regionals and a KOP. Trust me, Michigan is cheaper.
XaulZan11
29-06-2011, 13:56
At start of season, $4000 gets you the KOP and 2 district events in michigan, and KOP and 2 regional events outside of michigan, then in Michigan, its an extra $5,000 for states if you go to state
Outside the Michigan, the $4,000 gets you the KOP and only 1 regional event. One of the biggest reasons Michigan switched to the district was to reduce costs.
Aren Siekmeier
29-06-2011, 13:56
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the cost of attending 3 regionals and the Championship Event significantly more expensive than 2 districts, State Championship and then the Championship Event? If so, wouldn't that be an advantage to the district model and not a drawback?
Only if you are one of the few teams who attend 3 regionals and the Championship every year (or pretty regularly anyway). That is a pretty small percentage of all the teams out there. For the teams who only attend their home regional every year, I'd think there's a huge advantage to going to a bigger regional event that potentially draws teams from elsewhere, as opposed to a small, local district event that just shelters them. It's a lot more inspiring to go a larger regional with some different people every year than just the same old district with the same old locals, and for the teams who have just attended the same old regional for years, having never attended Champs or tried something new, some inspiration might be in order.
On the other hand, the smaller district events do give a bit more playing time (I think?), and I think I've heard that Michigan attend a minimum of 2 district events? So maybe it's a wash.
mobilegamer999
29-06-2011, 13:58
No, $5000 gets you a KOP and 1 regional outiside of Michigan...$9000 gets you 2 regionals and a KOP.
Okay, just looked at USFirst's website and I was wrong, I thought non-Michigan teams got 2 regionals, but in fact they only get one. So the cost of 2 regionals IS the same as 2 district events, however, registration is not the only expense, transportation, lodging and food can rack up a hefty difference between 2 and 3 events.
nikeairmancurry
29-06-2011, 14:02
The cost of the first two districts regionals is paid for through registration.. And each additional district is $500.00
The state championship is $4,000.00
Meaning doing three events in Michigan (2 districts and States) = 9,000.00
Doing three regionals outside of Michigan is about 15,000
Plus the State Championship is almost einstien level play..
Now for my own personal opinion... Since its start in 2009, there are two things that stick out more than anything, FIRST's growth in michigan and how many robots actually make it out to the field for ever match. The districts being held in highschool gyms make the competition seem that much more exciting. i would suggust this system to others because of the level of play has risen all around our state.
Joe Ross
29-06-2011, 14:04
A good place to start would be the Brandeis evaluation of FiM after the 2009 season. http://www.usfirst.org/uploadedFiles/Who/Impact/Brandeis_Studies/Michigan_FRC_Evaluation_Summary_09.pdf
90% of the respondents thought the cost of participation was the same or better than 2008. 86% thought the logistics were the same or better.
Team leaders and mentors estimated that the average team cost for the District Tournaments in 2009 was approximately $9900; costs for teams attending the State Championship averaged an additional $5900. Total estimated costs for all teams in 2009 were $12,000. Teams that participated in prior years estimated that their team budget in 2008 was $25,000.
There were lots of other topics covered also, all overwhelmingly favoring the district system.
So the cost of 2 regionals IS the same as 2 district events.
No. You get 2 districts for and KOP for your entry (I think it's $5000). In order to do two regionals, you need to pay $5000 for the KOP and 1 regional, then another $4000 for your second. That's $9000 for 2 events. You are paying $5000. Michigan districts are cheaper.
2 districts and State champs is the cost of 2 regionals.
Edit: Nicholas beat me to it.
Aren Siekmeier
29-06-2011, 14:08
Looks like Nicholas got it well ahead of me...
OK I see lots of different stuff flying around, so I'll try to put it all to rest.
http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprograms/frc/content.aspx?id=460
Teams outside of MI pay $5000 for 1 regional and 1 KoP
Teams in MI pay $5000 for 2 districts and 1 KoP
Each additional regional is $4000
A 3rd MI district is $500 (I'm assuming you can only attend 3?)
MI State is $4000 (for MI teams only)
The World Championship is $5000
So with those numbers in front of me, the district system seems like it might be a good deal. But there are certainly a multitude of other factors to assess.
So the cost of 2 regionals IS the same as 2 district events.
Wrong.
Michigan
-------------
$5000 = 2 Districts + KOP
Not Michigan
-------------------
$9000 = 2 Regionals + KOP
Katie_UPS
29-06-2011, 14:15
EDIT: While writing my post, a flurry of others clearing up the costs of districts appeared. Information is repetitive
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the cost of attending 3 regionals and the Championship Event significantly more expensive than 2 districts, State Championship and then the Championship Event? If so, wouldn't that be an advantage to the district model and not a drawback?
Okay, so. I'm not from michigan, I can't answer the OP's questions. However, I'd like to shed some light on this particular subject.
According to usFIRST.org, costs are as follows:
Veteran Team costs (numbers change for rookies/veteran teams without the new control system):
In MI:
KOP + 2 district events: $5000
Additional district event: $500
State Champs: $4000
FIRST Championship Event: $5000
Everywhere else:
KOP + 1 regional event: $5000
Additional regional event: $4000
FIRST Championship Event: $5000
No matter where you are, the minimum to play is $5000 (to clear up any confusion).
To get to champs in an earn-to-play way (winning events/chairmans/EI/rookie all star), it costs teams
in MI: $5000 (registration) + $4000 (State) + $5000 (champs)= $14,000
not in MI: $5000 (registration) + $5000 (champs)= $10,000
So, for MI teams to say its more expensive is reasonable. They have to fund-raise an extra $4000 dollars for the intermediate step that is state. YES, they have more events for the initial cost (and a third district isn't too pricey), however, they need to pay the equivalent of TWO regionals to qualify for champs. Not-in-MI teams only need to pay for one regional to qualify for champs.
Teams that could only afford a regional and champs on the old system can't do that anymore (I'm assuming earn-to-play). To "be the best" in MI means that you also have to be able to afford/budget all the extra levels of competition.
(I'm sure someone will say "Then just fundraise more," but I'm just pointing out the fact that MI teams have to pay more to earn-to-play at champs)
To get to champs in an earn-to-play way (winning events/chairmans/EI/rookie all star), it costs teams
in MI: $5000 (registration) + $4000 (State) + $5000 (champs)= $14,000
not in MI: $5000 (registration) + $5000 (champs)= $10,000
(I'm sure someone will say "Then just fundraise more," but I'm just pointing out the fact that MI teams have to pay more to earn-to-play at champs)
I understand that to get to Nationals it could be cheaper out of state, but Michigan team can also opt to attend a regional. If they don't like the steps in districts, they can leave the state and do what everyone else does. The Michigan team also gets 4 events in this comparison, not 2 like the other team. It may be more money, but they are also getting more.
maverickfan138
29-06-2011, 14:33
To reiterate what has been said, there are many advantages and disadvantages to the Michigan model. I'll start with the advantages.
The cost has already been mentioned. It allows for teams to go to more events, which is what everybody wants, right? After two FIRST seasons, I have competed in eight events. The level of competition has already been mentioned as well. At certain districts, it may not be very competitive, but the State Championship is a blast. Watching teams nearly fill up the racks this past year made it very exciting. One of my favorite parts of FiM stems from competing at more events. I have been able to meet a lot of people from all over the state. Factoring offseason competitions and other events, I have been able to build relationships with not just other students, but alumni, volunteers, and mentors. FiM has a very friendly atmosphere and makes it very easy to build connections.
I do have a few things I don't like about FiM though. The first has to do with this year specifically. I did not like how competition winners did not get an auto-bye into the State Championship. Chairman's, Engineering Inspiration, and one other cultural award did not receive any qualifying points for the State Championship as well. I heard the reason behind this was the separate the cultural awards from other awards and highlight them as special. Instead, I think they should award teams with more qualifying points than regular awards. The biggest problem I see with FiM is that it does seem to isolate teams. Sure, you have teams like 217, 67, 469, etc who already have a name for themselves and everybody knows who they are, but at the saem time, there are plenty of other high caliber teams in Michigan who out of state teams have no clue who they are. In the state of Michigan, teams like 2337, 1918, 2137, 201, 1718, etc. are considered(well, I do, but I'm sure many others do as well) up there with 217, 67, 469, etc., a force to be reckoned with. I'm sure these teams find it very difficult to make a name for themselves down at the Championship, even with their performance on the field.
Chris is me
29-06-2011, 15:06
I understand that to get to Nationals it could be cheaper out of state, but Michigan team can also opt to attend a regional. If they don't like the steps in districts, they can leave the state and do what everyone else does.
I heard once of a team that wanted to opt out of MI and just go to the WI regional. Even if they opt to do this, they still had to pay the Michigan registration fee, making their only regional $9,000.
Other than that, the smaller district events are more exciting and fast paced. Also they feel more "local" - everyone knows each other. This makes these events feel more competitive and friendly. It's really cool to see a new member meet new people from different communities and schools.
While I agree with this - and love it - one of the biggest things that I miss because of FiM is meeting people from other teams across the country. I was only in FIRST/FRC for one year before the district model began, and my team only went to one out-of-state event (Pittsburgh), but I loved seeing all of the teams from places that I was unfamiliar with. In MI, you don't get to see the international teams either. It is impossible to do two districts, a regional, and the state championship without doing back-to-back events, which tends to put a strain on the students' school performance.
However, as has also been said, the districts are very fast paced and competitive. Getting two districts for the price of one regional allows rookies (and veterans, for that matter) a second chance to compete in case they run into glaring issues at their first event, without breaking the bank.
One other drawback is that the teams on the extreme borders of the area (in this case, the teams in the UP) experience higher travel costs because of their distance from the events. In New England, the events are more local to the teams there, and this wouldn't be as much as a problem. It's just a matter of where to draw the boundary lines.
I heard once of a team that wanted to opt out of MI and just go to the WI regional. Even if they opt to do this, they still had to pay the Michigan registration fee, making their only regional $9,000.
They paid $9000 and went to the WI regional, but did they attend 2 districts as well?
AdamHeard
29-06-2011, 15:18
I have no numbers to back this up, but from posts I've seen it seems like single regional teams are in the minority at champs. Furthermore, single regional teams are vastly the minority in elims at champs, and ridiculously in the minority for division/champs winners. There are some exceptions of course, but for how many teams total do a single regional, the numbers are low at champs.
So, if you want to go to champs (and do well), go to two regionals first ;)
nikeairmancurry
29-06-2011, 15:20
They paid $9000 and went to the WI regional, but did they attend 2 districts as well?
This is true... and many of teams opt to do this each year...
Brandon Holley
29-06-2011, 15:26
To get to champs in an earn-to-play way (winning events/chairmans/EI/rookie all star), it costs teams
in MI: $5000 (registration) + $4000 (State) + $5000 (champs)= $14,000
not in MI: $5000 (registration) + $5000 (champs)= $10,000
Yes this is true, but it is only one way to look at how your team is spending money (ie: what you are getting for the cost of the competition).
Another way to look at it is how much playing time you are getting with your robot. In that case, the matches/dollar (or dollars/match) metric may be a viable way to see what kind of payback your getting per model.
In that case, for a Michigan team electing to go to 3 districts we could see this:
-Assuming 14 official matches/competition as an average
-14 matches/competition * 3 competitions = 42 matches
-$5500 dollars (registration fee + 1 extra district) / 42 matches = ~$131.00/match played
For a team outside Michigan to reach the same # of matches:
-$5000 registration & 1 regional + $4000 2nd regional + $4000 3rd regional = $13000
-$13000 / 42 matches = ~$309.50/match played
In your example, the team from Michigan did have to pay an additional $4000 dollars to get to Championships, but they also got approximately 50% more matches played than the team from outside of Michigan for that cost. In dollar/match terms:
-Michigan team going to championship: $14000/56 matches played = $250/match
-Outside Michigan team to championship: $10000/28 matches played = $357/match
Furthermore, if the Michigan team wanted to pay the extra $500 dollars for a 3rd district, and an outside Michigan team wanted to go to a 2nd regional you get this:
-Michigan team, 3 districts, states and championship: $14,500/70 matches played = $207.14/match
-Outside michigan team, 2 regionals, championship: $14,000/42 matches played = $333.33/match
I don't necessarily agree that this is the best way to see how much bang your getting for each buck your team spends, but its an alternate way to look at the different models.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe all teams also have a chance to register for an open slot at Championships, as few as they may be. Often times, teams who win a competition may not be able to go to Championship just because booking a trip in a matter of weeks can be too difficult. Its just another side of the coin to look at.
-Brando
nikeairmancurry
29-06-2011, 15:33
Yes this is true, but it is only one way to look at how your team is spending money (ie: what you are getting for the cost of the competition).
Another way to look at it is how much playing time you are getting with your robot. In that case, the matches/dollar (or dollars/match) metric may be a viable way to see what kind of payback your getting per model.
In that case, for a Michigan team electing to go to 3 districts we could see this:
-Assuming 14 official matches/competition as an average
-14 matches/competition * 3 competitions = 42 matches
-$5500 dollars (registration fee + 1 extra district) / 42 matches = ~$131.00/match played
For a team outside Michigan to reach the same # of matches:
-$5000 registration & 1 regional + $4000 2nd regional + $4000 3rd regional = $13000
-$13000 / 42 matches = ~$309.50/match played
I don't necessarily agree that this is the best way to see how much bang your getting for each buck your team spends, but its an alternate way to look at the different models.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe all teams also have a chance to register for an open slot at Championships, as few as they may be. Often times, teams who win a competition may not be able to go to Championship just because booking a trip in a matter of weeks can be too difficult. Its just another side of the coin to look at.
-Brando
I do not believe most regionals average that 14 matches per event number, I would say its closer to 10 or 11
Chris is me
29-06-2011, 15:34
They paid $9000 and went to the WI regional, but did they attend 2 districts as well?
I think they ended up just doing Districts, but what I was trying to say though is that you have to pay $5,000 even if you opt out of any districts. I think?
I do not believe most regionals average that 14 matches per event number, I would say its closer to 10 or 11
I think he is counting eliminations as well as qualifications, not just qualifications.
Brandon Holley
29-06-2011, 16:02
I do not believe most regionals average that 14 matches per event number, I would say its closer to 10 or 11
Obviously it was just an approximation. I was assuming 10 qualifiers and 4 elims as thats a typical event for my team. Feel free to tweak your numbers as you wish. I think you will find the correlation is still evident.
-Brando
Back on topic a little.
I like they way we do it in Michigan. We have a lot of events we can attend and the excitement of state and even nationals. Either way I like Michigan's ways.
Mark McLeod
29-06-2011, 16:34
I think you might want to run real numbers on this before making up such a conclusion.
I just looked and it's almost 50/50 (46% vs 54%).
Statistically speaking, people can be notoriously bad guessers. (Apartment for Peggy)
I have no numbers to back this up, but from posts I've seen it seems like single regional teams are in the minority at champs. Furthermore, single regional teams are vastly the minority in elims at champs, and ridiculously in the minority for division/champs winners. There are some exceptions of course, but for how many teams total do a single regional, the numbers are low at champs.
AdamHeard
29-06-2011, 16:36
I think you might want to run real numbers on this before making up such a conclusion.
I just looked and it's almost 50/50 (46% vs 54%).
I stand corrected.
Do you have numbers on eliminations by chance?
GaryVoshol
29-06-2011, 16:47
The thing I miss most in the District system is not getting to see out of state teams. That could possibly be fixed with cross-district exchanges in the future as the district model expands. There would have to be some kind of limits put on it, but I think a workable model for traveling to other areas could be worked out.
The greatest cost benefit is for the average teams. In Michigan they get 2 events and at least 24 matches for their initial entry fee. Teams that go to a regional get one event with as few as 7 matches, although I understand they are trying to get more matches in most regionals. Still, it's a difference of ~10 matches vs. 24.
Yes, the State Championship costs $4000 extra, the same price as a second regional elsewhere. And with the point structure I don't think it is possible to qualify for the Championship event without going to State. (It might be mathematically possible, but highly unlikely.) But as pointed out above, many teams go to a second regional as is, so the total registration costs for the season are the same.
For some teams there is an additional travel expense to get to a second district event. In SE Michigan most teams are within daily driving distance of their 2 events if they choose to go to the nearest ones. But some teams elect to go to a more distant district. OK, travel to Traverse City or Niles might not be as exciting as travel to Orlando or New York, but the biggest draw to travel is going with your team, not the destination.
Also district events are only 2 days, so you only have to miss one day of school (unless you have to travel on Thursday).
So while there are a few drawbacks, the benefits far outweigh them in my estimation.
Tom Line
29-06-2011, 16:53
Pro's:
1. We pay less to play more. This has all sorts of benefits:
Exposure to more robots and more teams
More practice
More time to work out the bugs on the robots during competition
More friendships with awesome Michigan teams
Rapid-fire turn around means the teams get very good at fixing their problems
2. For awards like Chairmans, we get far more practice (have to present multiple times)
3. Michigan sends teams to championship that have done well repeatedly. Not just 1 time.
Con's:
1. Generally speaking, the field of teams we see in Michigan is limited to Michigan. I miss going up against Wildstangs, Technokats, Beatty, and many others nearby.
2. The events are somewhat less glamorous.
3. The district events are very much 'jammed' time wise. A day is cut out of a district to save money, which means we're usually up scouting until 1 AM on Friday night. There's no reall time to go swimming, go out and get a nice meal, etc if you're planning on picking the next day. Likewise, we start earlier. It's exhausting compared to a regional. We're HAPPY to go to state championships and world championships because, frankly, it's WAY more laid back with a much longer turn-around time between matches.
All in all, the district model is superior in my mind. However, there are things I miss about the regionals events - the glamor and glitz, the laid-back atmosphere and time to have fun, etc.
Brilliant responses...
Can you comment on the competitions themselves? Did you feel they were any less exciting or less satisfying because they were not as splashy or glitzy as the pre 2009 events run by FIRST?
What about the idea that you could switch one of your district events with another team. Call it a time share swap. You both register for the district event in your area, then you contact the other team and tell FIRST about the swap. They go in your place and you go in theirs.
FIRST may not like this becasue their comupter systems will have to support it but it might be a way to cheaply kill one of the complaints I am hearing be knocked down. You get to go away for 1/2 the cost of a traditional regional.
nikeairmancurry
29-06-2011, 17:32
Brilliant responses...
Can you comment on the competitions themselves? Did you feel they were any less exciting or less satisfying because they were not as splashy or glitzy as the pre 2009 events run by FIRST?
Depends on your taste... If you want to awe the people around you with the venue and make it feel like a pro-sports event, you don't want to try a distrct model...
By working in the highschool gyms and such and you get more people closer to the event and want to know more...
If you put in place a good DJ, high enegry people behind the table and normal team spirit then the event could be just as exciting as a normal regional..
The easiest way to compare is to an offseason event.. Like IRI, everything done in one gym and people are right there.. I usually don't hear to many complaints about that from the IRI participates..
artdutra04
29-06-2011, 17:59
...It's just a matter of where to draw the boundary lines.The best solution is usually the simplest: don't draw any borders (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1059693&postcount=47).
No matter how you try to slicey dicey up geographic areas into discrete regional districts, you are always going to anger people at or near the borders, who want to belong in a different region. This would particularly be a problem for the Northeast megalopolis (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northeast_megalopolis); it's too big to be a single "district" but too contiguous to be broken up into sub districts without the whine of a thousand banshees descending on the unfortunate person who arbitrarily put an invisible line on a map.
Chris is me
29-06-2011, 18:25
Semi on topic: If NJ and PA break into districts, and New England follows suit, we in the Capital region of NY could end up in a fun situation where we have zero nearby events because we're not included in districts.
I really don't get why districts are "locked".
Brilliant responses...
Can you comment on the competitions themselves? Did you feel they were any less exciting or less satisfying because they were not as splashy or glitzy as the pre 2009 events run by FIRST?
One thing I found interesting, is in Michigan, we play in the light! What I mean by that is the field lighting is visually stunning, but makes for horrible pictures, tough scouting, tough pit conditions. I stopped in a Pittsburgh, and it felt like you were playing in a mine.
Another thing I like is that there seems to be a better spreading of awards from event to event. With the extra events, there are more awards period. This tends to recognize more teams (at least at the district level) which in my book is a really good thing.
I really like that the level of play tends to match the venue. What I mean by that is the Districts tend to have a certain level of play involved, MSC another, and World Championship an additional step up. this tends to match the venue size and the requirements to qualify to be a part of that venue.
Having a qualified Championship event like MSC is so neat. It sets a good bar for middle ground and new teams to strive for. You have to be roughly top 1/3 in the state to qualify for it. While 20-30 teams are pretty predictable, the other 40-30 slots have potential for turn-over which is a motivator/reward to a lot of middle teams. Playing qualifying matches with teams that have 2 events under their belts is awesome. Teams have had time to develop a skill set and can play an active role in the match. The mix is exciting as usually allianes are good enough to not be completely ruled out. At MSC there was 1 0pt. alliance during the entire event. Even a competitive regional like Midwest had 10 0pt. alliances in the first 20 matches. Newton had 4 0pt. alliances in the first 20 matches. 4!!! at the "World Championship" in 20 matches!!!! is 10% of alliances in what was arguably the deepest talent depth division at the championship.
Its not perfect, but I really really like this system, and with a few tweaks (most controlled by FIRST HQ), it would be really close to ideal.
A few notes no one has picked up yet, I think:
-It's more tiring on volunteers. From 2008 to 2009, Michigan went from 3 events to 6. Roughly double the volunteer-events needed. Even if districts don't do full-day thursdays, it's an increase and more spread out.
-While there is less interaction with outside teams, that results in more interaction with inside teams. When you see the same team at 2-4 events (even 5, possibly) in a season, there's more camaraderie. The end result is greater cooperation and fewer failing teams.
-The group of teams headed to the Championship is more well-rounded and chosen more fairly. The point system will often send deserving finalist-captains to the CMP, who are completely left out in a regional system.
Aren Siekmeier
29-06-2011, 20:41
Minnesota, being I believe 2nd or 3rd for most FRC teams (MI is of course at the top, Texas in there somewhere, and California???) may also break into districts soon, depending on how FIRST assesses the success of the pilot and where Mark Lawrence and co. want to take Minnesota FIRST. So it's kind of interesting to think how things would be different.
First off, it does seem silly that the districts should be locked. Teams within a state (or region, I guess would probably be the case on the East Coast), should have the freedom to pick and choose districts. This helps relieve the monotony you get from seeing the same people over and over, and it probably wouldn't create any imbalance in competition (in fact, it would probably relieve that, too, with some of the better teams perhaps looking around for easier events, more average teams looking around for more competitive events, or vice versa, probably an even distribution).
If teams are left out of a state/region, for example in 2791's case, or for the few teams in the Dakotas, or wherever, there should be a straightforward process of applying to that state/region's tournament and participating as any other member (plus commute). And I say straightforward because it musn't discourage the formation or continuation of teams in such areas. The tricky part would be determining how remote a team must be to do such a thing (or maybe you don't care? as long as each team is in only one tournament, plus as many regionals as they want...)
Well that's a lot of unorganized thought on the subject...
Jim Zondag
29-06-2011, 21:07
Personally I love it, (but I will openly admit to a little bias :) ).
Why do we participate in FIRST?
Some of the posters in this thread seem to indicate that the primary goal is to get to the Champsionship via the easiest and cheapest path possible. Wrong. The only teams who should be at any championship are the ones who legitimately have some chance at being a champion, regardless of the sport. Anything other than this is just promotion of false hope.
The “Scalable District System” (this is the actual original name) was designed to increase participation, sustainability and growth in the FRC through several means:
1. Reduce the price of entry: This is more than just enrollment costs. More events and more teams means lower travel costs and more support.
2. Increase Return on Investment: Every team in our system plays 2 to 3 times more than teams do elsewhere under the traditional system for the same price and the same lost time from work/school.
3. Remove Barriers: We work hard to remove things that waste time, waste money, add needless complexity, or generate frustration. We still have much work to do here.
4. Create an Environment which promotes success: We want all teams to strive to be successful, and we provide measureables which allow them all to gauge their own success.
5. Provide Local Infrastructure: Our FIRST Community is here, not in New Hampshire. As with everything, the best help and support always come from a local level.
6. Bring more attention to the FRC: We have a great group who work together to promote all 10 of our events, not just one regional. The 2011 MSC special is just the beginning.
Many of the “fixed points” are set by New Hampshire and are not under local control:
1. Would we allow teams from other states to come here if we could?: Yes
2. Would we give points for the “Culture Changing Awards” if we could?: Yes
3. Would we reduce the initial registration fees if we could?: Yes
4. Would we reduce the cost for enrolling the State Championship?: Yes
If other regions chose to go a similar route as we have, maybe together we can make such changes. Thus far we have been unable to affect these items at all.
So, does it work? Yes it does.
- Team growth has been very good.
- Team Retention has been very good.
- Team Satisfaction has been very good.
- Team competitive success has been very good.
- Community awareness and media exposure has been exceptional.
Backing up to some points made earlier in this thread:
Fact: teams who play more get better. This is not just an opinion, it’s a fact.
Let’s look at some data. (Remember kids, without data, you are just another person with an opinion).
At the 2011 St Louis Event, we had the following breakdown of prior experience.
Teams at 2011 Championship - 352
Teams with 1 prior event - 163 - 46.3%
Teams with 2 prior events - 153 - 43.5%
Teams with 3 prior events - 29 - 8.2%
Teams with 4 prior events - 6 - 1.7%
Teams with 5 prior events - 1 - 0.3%
So there was a roughly 50/50 split of teams with 1 prior and teams with more.
So how did everyone do when they got there?
Teams in STL Elimination Rounds - 96
Teams with 1 prior event - 13 - 13.5% - 13/163 = 8.0%
Teams with 2 prior events - 56 - 58.3% - 56/153 = 36.6%
Teams with 3 prior events - 29 - 24.0% - 23/29 = 79.3%
Teams with 4 prior events - 4 - 4.2% - 4/6 = 66.7%
Teams with 5 prior events - 0 - 0%
So basically, even though almost half the field were in the “one prior event” group, only 8% of these teams advanced. The other, more experienced group, were 44% successful overall.
Every member of our Michigan top 20 ranked teams was in St Louis this year. 19 out of 20 (95%) of these teams advance to the Elims. No other group of any kind had a similar level of success.
We have studied the population trends in the FRC for over a decade. Team capability grows very consistently with experience through the first three events and then begins to level off. Only the very best teams begin their season at near full capability; the other 97% of the league see definitive growth with increased experience.
If you want to improve FRC in your region, you have to get the robots on the field. It is as simple as that.
"Hope is not a Strategy" - Rick Page
Akash Rastogi
29-06-2011, 21:16
Thus far we have been unable to affect these items at all.
Who or what, may I ask, has been responsible for this lack of change? Are these restrictions directly from NH or are the costs dictated by financial needs to run the events? Meaning- how much does it actually take to run the state championship?
Chris Fultz
29-06-2011, 21:32
So, does it work? Yes it does.
- Team growth has been very good.
- Team Retention has been very good.
- Community awareness and media exposure has been exceptional.
Jim (or anyone else) - is there any data that compares MI to RoW (Rest of World) for team growth and retention?
Jim (or anyone else) - is there any data that compares MI to RoW (Rest of World) for team growth and retention?
This (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=986397&postcount=209) post by Mark McLeod in the Registration 2011 thread makes some notes to that point, but a more thorough analysis is necessary to make any significant conclusions.
Quoted for ease of reference
Teams that played last year but haven't returned this year (by area).
MI and CA are equivalent in size, but MI had twice the attrition rate.
Loss as a % in the largest areas, Minnesota wins:
(Note: reworked these using last seasons total teams)
Minnesota (105) ---- 1.0%
Texas (104) -------- 3.8%
New York (119) ----- 6.7%
California (153) ---- 7.2%
Michigan (140) ---- 14.3%Missing in action:
MI ---------- 20
CA ---------- 11
OK ---------- 8
NY ---------- 8
Israel ------- 8
IL ----------- 7
OH ---------- 6
WA ---------- 5
FL ----------- 5
CO ---------- 5
CANADA-ON - 5
VA ---------- 4
TX ---------- 4
NJ ---------- 4
MA ---------- 4
IN ---------- 4
AZ ---------- 4
UT ---------- 3
PA ---------- 3
OR ---------- 3
MO ---------- 3
GA ----------- 3
CT ----------- 3
WI ----------- 2
TN ----------- 2
SC ----------- 2
NC ----------- 2
MS ----------- 2
LA ----------- 2
KS ----------- 2
HI ----------- 2
DC ----------- 2
AL ----------- 2
Turkey ------ 1
PR ----------- 1
NV ----------- 1
NM ----------- 1
Netherlands - 1
MT ----------- 1
MN ----------- 1
ME ----------- 1
MD ----------- 1
CANADA-QC - 1
CANADA-BC - 1
AK ------------ 1
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And on the positive side, here are the teams, by area, that are playing.
Twelve countries are represented.
Area ----- Registered
CA ---------- 175
MI ---------- 171
TX ---------- 145
MN ---------- 130
NY ---------- 127
WA ----------- 82
VA ----------- 68
CANADA-ON - 65
NJ ----------- 64
FL ----------- 61
MA ---------- 53
MO ---------- 52
Israel ------- 48
OH ---------- 48
OK ---------- 48
PA ---------- 48
IL ---------- 44
CT ---------- 42
AZ ---------- 40
GA ---------- 38
NC ---------- 36
CO ---------- 35
IN ---------- 35
OR ---------- 35
MD ---------- 34
NH ---------- 33
WI ---------- 32
HI ---------- 26
SC ---------- 25
LA ---------- 24
KS ---------- 19
UT ---------- 18
TN ---------- 16
CANADA-QC - 14
DC ---------- 14
KY ---------- 14
ID ---------- 13
Mexico ----- 12
AL ---------- 11
MS ---------- 11
NV ---------- 11
ME ----------- 8
MT ----------- 7
Brazil -------- 5
RI ----------- 5
WV ---------- 5
AR ----------- 4
Turkey ------ 4
IA ----------- 3
ND ----------- 3
VT ----------- 3
WY ---------- 3
AK ---------- 2
DE ---------- 2
NM ---------- 2
PR ---------- 2
UNITED KINGDOM - 2
Australia ----------- 1
CANADA-AB -------- 1
Chile ---------------- 1
Germany ----------- 1
Herzegovina -------- 1
Spain --------------- 1
Lil' Lavery
29-06-2011, 22:04
I'm going to make the same earnest plea I made a couple years ago when talking about the FiM district model. Please, try and isolate the variables.
I realize this is tough with only a couple years worth of district data to work from (and none of that is pure, since there are so many variables involved). For example, looking at retention rate. The economic crisis absolutely ravaged Michigan. It's expected that they would have higher than normal loss rates of teams. It's tough to figure out what role, if any, the district system played in that. Similarly, the amount of Michigan teams that reached the elimination rounds in St. Louis is likewise a combination of many factors (see my previous thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77045) for a similar evaluation).
Secondly, not all of the FiM district "features" have to be in a full-on district system. Ideas like eliminating Thursday practice days, increasing the total matches per event, increasing the quantity of events, reducing the cost of events, bag and tag, geographical segmentation, and two-tiered competitions should each be evaluated individually, rather than as a single package. It's entirely possible to implement some of those without going to a district model, and it's possible to go to a district model without implementing all of those.
Frank, I look forward to meeting with you and the rest of MAR at the July 9th meeting. I hope to have more solid evaluations prepared by then.
nikeairmancurry
29-06-2011, 22:16
Just a bit of extra info.. Thursday is not a complete loss in Michigan, most events have a 4 hour window for teams to come in.. Also I have been to many districts where you did have time on practice on thursday night.. and practice rounds on friday morning...
Jim Zondag
29-06-2011, 22:55
Who or what, may I ask, has been responsible for this lack of change? Are these restrictions directly from NH or are the costs dictated by financial needs to run the events? Meaning- how much does it actually take to run the state championship?
For the most part, the details of the financials are not really a topic for public discussion.
FRC has a standard participation pricing model, with the district "double registration" being the only real exception. In the case of the MI State Championship, as with all FRC events, the registration fees team pay to go to the event do not go to fund the event itself. The event itself is funded by the event sponsors like GM, BAE, etc. The registration fees have little to nothing to do with the costs of running the event.
Jim Zondag
29-06-2011, 23:08
Secondly, not all of the FiM district "features" have to be in a full-on district system. Ideas like eliminating Thursday practice days, increasing the total matches per event, increasing the quantity of events, reducing the cost of events, bag and tag, geographical segmentation, and two-tiered competitions should each be evaluated individually, rather than as a single package. It's entirely possible to implement some of those without going to a district model, and it's possible to go to a district model without implementing all of those.
It is good to hear someone else re-state this again. The system we use in Michigan is a collection of the features that we decided would work for us, given our team population, geographic distribution, volunteer base, and financial situation. Our way is one of many possible solutions. We explored many ideas thoroughly before settling on what we have. There are certainly lots of other ways this could be done using only certain pieces of our system, or by adding great new ideas. This is still a young sport, and it will continue to evlove as it matures. Each region needs to set its own goals and proceed accordingly.
I will say that if people want to remove "border restrictions" in the future, the closer our individual systems are to one another, the more likely we will be able to find ways to allow more flexibility in this regard.
-It's more tiring on volunteers. From 2008 to 2009, Michigan went from 3 events to 6. Roughly double the volunteer-events needed. Even if districts don't do full-day thursdays, it's an increase and more spread out.
I'm not sure how many people outside of MI know this, but each team is required to provide two volunteers for both days of each event that they attend. I'm sure that we all understand why this is required, but my team struggled to find two people to volunteer for our away event this year (West MI/GVSU), and I'm sure we weren't the only ones. Having two districts each week (with the exception of Week 2 - Waterford) also tended to spread out the experienced volunteers between events.
I hear alot of talk of people from mi complaining about the lack of out of area at their regional, but I would be curious to hear from the people who attend the New Jersey Regional and New York City Regional about how much diversity they see at their regional now. When our team went to peachtree regional we saw mostly the same teams every year, so much so you thought of them as neighbors.
My suspicion, these regional are already in high enough demand locally that the teams don't see many outside teams there now, but I don't know(the only regionals I go to are in places where iced tea only comes sweet).
If this is the case, limiting competition to the districts wouldn't bring earth shattering change to your competitors.
ratdude747
30-06-2011, 01:53
I may not be from Michigan but I DO remember the pre district era.
my biggest beef is it makes those not in Michigan locked out of Michigan. I remember going to great lakes rgional on 1747, and All i have to say it was one of my favorite regionals I've ever been to.
in my current position, if we went to states only, being in Kentucky in Louisville means that if there ever was a team on the Indiana side (one of my 5 year goals), we would be locked out of a district in Louisville. Which is imho, DUMB. We would have to go to at least Columbus, IN for the closest major Indiana City, which is about 1 hour away when there is a much larger city 10 min away across a bridge.
Also, I liked getting an excuse to go long distances by going to a far away, exotic regional. It was an added perk that in the past was something that attracted new members on the borderline of joining.
maybe have districts without the state championship and getting any award at the district with a trophy would get you to St. Louis (or wherever it is that year). anybody could go to any district competition, with a limit on how many per year (say 4 or so). that way, there would be less of a borders issue so Canadian teams on the border could go to US districts, Kentucky teams to Indiana districts, etc.
just my $0.02 on the issue.
Lil' Lavery
30-06-2011, 02:18
I'm curious about how teams from the Upper Peninsula feel about the district system these days and how it has evolved.
Mark McLeod
30-06-2011, 08:09
... I would be curious to hear from the people who attend the New Jersey Regional and New York City Regional about how much diversity they see at their regional now.
We ran those numbers (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=987658&postcount=237) (it was a group effort) after registration closed that gave the % of away teams at each Regional.
About a third at both NJ and NYC were teams that had other "home" Regionals. You can check the preceding posts in that thread to follow the discussion. It doesn't necessarily mean that the same teams aren't always showing up.
The last column gives an idea of the turnover rate (or team freshness?) experienced by each Regional year-to-year, that includes rookies.
That's probably your best measure of the amount of new & different teams mixing each Regional up.
Those numbers aren't final because a few teams were still being moved around between events, but that's the bulk of them.
Also the criteria of what an away team is, is talked about inside the spreadsheet attached to that post.
We ran those numbers (it was a group effort) after registration closed that gave the % of away teams at each Regional.
About a third at both NJ and NYC were teams that had other "home" Regionals.
That is a lot of diversity that would be lost, much more then I would have thought. Thank you for taking the time to run those numbers
JaneYoung
30-06-2011, 10:58
I am part of Mid Atlantic Robotics a new 501 c3 non profit recently created to look into the district model in NJ, DE and Eastern PA. I know folks are working very hard on this.
It seems that a group of people went through a lot of trouble just to look into the district model. Can you explain the intent and purpose of creating the non-profit?
Jane
Fact: teams who play more get better. This is not just an opinion, it’s a fact.
Which is why we should be doing everything we can to get more playing time for the teams.
As a Field Supervisor I see many teams play their 9 or 10 matches and then they are done for the year. The teams learn by competing, and 22 minutes of playing time isn't much of a return on 6.5 weeks of investment.
Everyone seems to be dancing around the cost of the regionals. $4000 or roughly $400 for 2 minutes and 15 seconds of playing time is not cost effective. We need a lower entry fee.
My dream would be a semi trailer that would pull up, unfold into a playing field in minutes, minimal number of volunteers needed for scoring, queuing, being refs, and playing for several hours. That would enable competitions among school conference teams, or school regionals, or county competitions.
We have a huge built in infrastructure for sports in this country. Most schools have football stadiums, baseball diamonds, basketball courts, ready for playing at any time. We aren't there yet with robotics fields all over, and probably won't be any time soon.
Maybe FRC needs to consider other field surfaces (turf, tennis courts, hardwood, asphalt) for games.
My fundamental point is we need to give the teams more and cheaper playing time.
Lil' Lavery
30-06-2011, 13:11
It seems that a group of people went through a lot of trouble just to look into the district model. Can you explain the intent and purpose of creating the non-profit?
Jane
From their FAQ document:
MAR is a New Jersey Non-Profit Corporation with IRS 501(c)(3) exemption as a charitable organization. It was created in October 2010 with the encouragement of US FIRST, Manchester, NH. Our mission is to promote and implement FIRST Robotics Competition (FRC) programs for the benefit of all FRC teams in our region, which spans all of Delaware and New Jersey and counties in Pennsylvania from Harrisburg eastward.
MAR will negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding with US FIRST that will define its relationship with US FIRST. This arrangement is not new: FRC is run by independent US FIRST affiliates in Long Island, Michigan, and other parts of the US. Like these organizations, MAR will raise funds from donors in the region, recruit and offer assistance to new teams, and plan and conduct regional events.
Jim Zondag
30-06-2011, 14:02
My dream would be a semi trailer that would pull up, unfold into a playing field in minutes, minimal number of volunteers needed for scoring, queuing, being refs, and playing for several hours.
For 12 years, we have been doing exactly this in Oakland County Michigan with our OCCRA Fall Robotics League.
It really is pretty awesome that we can run a full robot tournament on a Wednesday evening: start setting up at 3:30, be packed and out by 9:30pm.
http://www.oakland.k12.mi.us/Default.aspx?tabid=535
We used a lot of the lessons we have learned on OCCRA over the past decade when we designed the FiM structure.
My fundamental point is we need to give the teams more and cheaper playing time. Absolutely, teams build robots so they can use them.
Jared Russell
30-06-2011, 14:50
I have a couple of questions/concerns about the district model and its possible implementation across non-Michigan regions of the U.S...
1. When a Michigan team pays its $5000 registration fee, does all $5000 go to New Hampshire, or does a portion go to help pay for district events/local infrastructure/the state championship? On the surface, the district model seems to be a way for teams to keep paying FIRST the same amount of money while receiving less (in that the same volunteers who run teams now are responsible for coordinating and running on-season competitions).
2. Presently, a small, dedicated cadre of volunteers support many of the on- and off-season events in the Northeast (with similar patterns elsewhere). With the added time and effort of potentially twice as many field set ups/teardowns, inspections, etc., how big of an issue has volunteer burn-out been in Michigan? Do we think it would be even worse elsewhere, where there is a smaller pool of volunteer "regulars"?
3. With smaller district events, it seems like the average turnaround between matches for a team can be very short. On one hand this is great, as it allows for more plays. But on the other hand, a single malfunction or repair could conceivably affect the outcomes of more than one qualification match. How big of an issue is this in Michigan? Do we think it would be even bigger elsewhere, where there are fewer "elite" robot-building teams?
4. Certainly, some of the Michigan district events are loaded with former World Champions and annual powerhouses. These events yield great entertainment. But what of some of the lower profile district events? Is the quality of the on-field event compromised by the smaller field of teams in these cases?
5. Lastly, my understanding of some of the top-level goals of the district pilot in Michigan is as follows:
* The regional events were running out of room for rookie expansion
* Many teams in the region only attended one event each season for financial reasons, and more play time was a goal
* Local sponsorship for the three Michigan regional events was becoming harder and harder to get
How many rookies in your region are there annually? Is the pace of rookie growth non-sustainable for your current events? What percentage of your regional's attendees already attend more than one official event per season? Are there ways to make Regional Competitions more affordable without requiring a qualification structure? (I already know the answers to these questions for my region)
My point is, the success of the District Pilot in Michigan against these goals and the ones that Jim laid out earlier in the thread is well documented. In my mind, there is no doubt that Michigan *had* to switch to a different competition structure in 2009 for sustainability reasons. The model would have benefits elsewhere, but would also be riskier because, let's face it, Michigan represents a pretty unique concentration of dedicated and experienced FIRST volunteers and teams. Moreover, in my region at least, I haven't been convinced that the transition is a strict necessity from a sustainability standpoint.
2. Presently, a small, dedicated cadre of volunteers support many of the on- and off-season events in the Northeast (with similar patterns elsewhere). With the added time and effort of potentially twice as many field set ups/teardowns, inspections, etc., how big of an issue has volunteer burn-out been in Michigan? Do we think it would be even worse elsewhere, where there is a smaller pool of volunteer "regulars"?
This was my first year volunteering, so I can't accurately comment on how big the issue of burn-out has become based on experience. All I know is that positions did get filled, because otherwise it would have been noticeable. However, I do believe that it would be worse elsewhere if the pool was smaller. We have a great volunteer base in MI, but in my opinion, I don't think that we could have gotten away with it with too many fewer key volunteers. "Key" in this case being the field supervisors, FTAs, refs, and other positions that require specific knowledge/training. Roles such as crowd control and safety glasses table workers are mostly filled by the required two volunteers per team per event.
3. With smaller district events, it seems like the average turnaround between matches for a team can be very short. On one hand this is great, as it allows for more plays. But on the other hand, a single malfunction or repair could conceivably affect the outcomes of more than one qualification match. How big of an issue is this in Michigan? Do we think it would be even bigger elsewhere, where there are fewer "elite" robot-building teams?
Match turnaround sometimes IS incredibly short. The match schedule is random, though, so you can have a two-hour gap followed by a 3-match gap. Malfunction/repair effect on matches depends on the size of the problem and the capability of the team members in the pit, so it really isn't possible to judge how big of a problem it would be in a given area, and it isn't always based on how experienced a team is. Having "elite" teams at an event is very helpful if a team comes to the event with a problem and doesn't know quite how to fix it. For repairs that are a result of gameplay, it is easier for those familiar with the robot to do the work, but teams with high amounts of experience will oftentimes have some extra, vital supplies and replacement parts.
From experience, small repairs can usually be done easily even if there is a short turnaround time, and the distance from the pits to the queue usually isn't too far (and - apologies to the queuers for saying this - cutting it close in getting to the match on time is possible if the need is absolutely necessary). Large problems, however, can be devastating. We had an axle slip out of place at West MI, and it took us hours to get it fixed due to the need for machining and the distance to the machine shop. We missed several matches, and didn't get to our last match until the teams for that match were already loading onto the field. Had we been at a regional competition, I don't think that we would have missed as many matches, if any.
Tom Line
30-06-2011, 15:55
I'm going to make the same earnest plea I made a couple years ago when talking about the FiM district model. Please, try and isolate the variables.
I realize this is tough with only a couple years worth of district data to work from (and none of that is pure, since there are so many variables involved). For example, looking at retention rate. The economic crisis absolutely ravaged Michigan. It's expected that they would have higher than normal loss rates of teams. It's tough to figure out what role, if any, the district system played in that. Similarly, the amount of Michigan teams that reached the elimination rounds in St. Louis is likewise a combination of many factors (see my previous thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=77045) for a similar evaluation).
Secondly, not all of the FiM district "features" have to be in a full-on district system. Ideas like eliminating Thursday practice days, increasing the total matches per event, increasing the quantity of events, reducing the cost of events, bag and tag, geographical segmentation, and two-tiered competitions should each be evaluated individually, rather than as a single package. It's entirely possible to implement some of those without going to a district model, and it's possible to go to a district model without implementing all of those.
Frank, I look forward to meeting with you and the rest of MAR at the July 9th meeting. I hope to have more solid evaluations prepared by then.
Well put. Let me point out something regarding the growth of FIRST that the district model definitely DID help with. Michigan has a centralized 'authority' in First-in-Michigan (FiM). Because they could act as a single group, they managed to pull in some big-name sponsors. Because they were able to cut-costs, we're being given the same opportunity that we were given last year: new Michigan Rookie teams are having their entry fee paid for.
There's a lot to be said for the district model. Economies of scale are huge, as any engineer can tell you.
Tom Line
30-06-2011, 16:11
I'm curious about how teams from the Upper Peninsula feel about the district system these days and how it has evolved.
Another great question. There is no silver bullet. For the 95% of the teams in the state that this system helps with double the play time, it's definitely tough on teams that are far from the epi-center in southern Michigan. FiM has made an effort to get competitions north. The problem in the past has been that there simply weren't enough teams up there to support it.
We have the Traverse City regional. It's 4.5 hours from Detroit, but 8.5 hours from worse-case Ironwood in the UP. It ends up being a travel-event for all the UP teams anyway. However, the flip side is that pretty much any other event is going to be a travel event for them.
The downside to that is that if they want to earn their way in to States, they MUST attend 2 districts. Of course, their odds of getting in through a single normal regional event and winning to move on would be extremely small as well. 6 of one, half dozen of another.
...
Why do we participate in FIRST?
...
The only teams who should be at any championship are the ones who legitimately have some chance at being a champion, regardless of the sport. Anything other than this is just promotion of false hope.
...
Jim,
That's an interesting opinion, and I'm aware that you are quite passionate on the subject; but in a point-counterpoint use of this space, I would like to simply say that other valid opinions, assertions and raisons d'être exist, and are held equally passionately.
I personally like to find room for multiple reasons for STEM teams to attend and benefit from competing in the STEM World Championships; and I like to try to find a middle road through discussions about the subject.
In the broader picture, FiM seems to have found a process that works well for FRC in Michigan. Other folks can learn much from it. Congrats to all the hard workers in Michigan for all its successes.
Blake
...
in my current position, if we went to states only, being in Kentucky in Louisville means that if there ever was a team on the Indiana side (one of my 5 year goals), we would be locked out of a district in Louisville. ... We would have to go to at least Columbus, IN for the closest major Indiana City, which is about 1 hour away when there is a much larger city 10 min away across a bridge.
...Amen - Concentrations of teams do not respect state boundaries. Perhaps in a rather distant future enough teams will exist in enough locations to make this largely irrelevant, but that day isn't today.
Blake
ratdude747
01-07-2011, 00:13
Amen - Concentrations of teams do not respect state boundaries. Perhaps in a rather distant future enough teams will exist in enough locations to make this largely irrelevant, but that day isn't today.
Blake
Tell me about it. There is 2 parts of the area- Louisville and "not Louisville". the latter is the half in Indiana. You can guess where most of the wealth and resources are that could be used for FIRST.
I am the first and as it looks, the only Student living on the Indiana side of the Louisville to ever be involved in FIRST, let alone FRC.
The only reason I was involved (and knew about FIRST) was my 3 years prior on 1747 HBR In West Lafayette, IN. There, you could say i was umm, very devoted. Heck, my devotion earned me a 2010 Dean's list semi-finalist pin. You could say I was addicted to FIRST. As luck would have it, there was a team across the river who was happy to have a Veteran from another team become part of their family. It may have involved 45 minutes driving each way, but I was determined to have FRC as part of my Senior year in High school. And believe me, my devotion didn't lessen.
Had I not been exposed back at my old high school, I would have never known FIRST existed, let alone have the motivation to become part of it.
due to this, if Kentucky ever went to a district setup, my dream of bringing FIRST to the Indiana side of the river city, would be much more difficult. As it is, the nearest regional is back in my former home in West Lafayette at Purdue's Boilermaker regional, where my current team, 2783, has gone for the last 3 years. making districts state restricted would make it worse as many would see it as too dumb as to do anything you have to go 3 hours north on I65 instead of 15 minutes south.
I know that was a bit off topic, but that's my thoughts on turning FIRST into a state restricted sport.
Either way, GO FIRST! it must be good if i am willing to burn 1.5hr travel every day of build season for it (plus the same for the 8 weeks following for withholding/practice bot duties).
Craig Roys
01-07-2011, 06:27
You do not need to do a State/Regional Championship in order to benefit from the district model...by that I mean if you don't have a high enough concentration of teams for a state or regional championship then don't. However, teams could still benefit from playing more smaller competitions for less.
Say there's only 40 teams in a particular region; would you rather play one regional for $4-5k and get around 8-10 matches and maybe eliminations; or would you want to play two events against the same teams for the same amount of money and get 24 matches (12 per event) plus any elimination matches? Maybe you've got 60 teams in a particular area; then you could put on three 40 team competitions where all the teams register for any 2 of them. I'm sure there are many other ways to organize something around this idea.
The whole idea is more matches for less money. More time competing with the robot you spent 6+ weeks working on. If FIRST is going to continue to grow, it has to become more affordable for teams with more ROI. I'll admit that I was a little bit skeptical when the FiM system was initially introduced, but I can't see ever going back. Our first 3 years as a team (2006-2008) we averaged between 12 and 13 matches per season from our initial investment. In our past 3 years (2009-2011) we averaged between 33 and 34 matches per season from our initial investment (which, I believe, was less than the initial registration cost for the first 3 years). If you take out eliminations since those aren't guaranteed matches; then we averaged around 9 matches per season for the first 3 years for our initial registration vs a guaranteed 24 matches per season now from our initial registration. Even if there were no State Championship, I would still prefer this model because it gets you more playing time for less money.
Enigma's puzzle
01-07-2011, 10:51
If the area doesnt have enough teams to hold the "state" or "regional" championship, they could always use a similar point system to what is used in Michigan. And then adjust it for the number of people they send to championships.
Hypothetically,If the region gets 10 bids and has 4 districts, the 4 chairmen award winners get in and the 6 highest scoring teams, based on that similar point based achievement system.
...
due to this, if Kentucky ever went to a district setup, my dream of bringing FIRST to the Indiana side of the river city, would be much more difficult.
...
Remember, it isn't the notion of a "District model" that is the root of this situation. The root cause is that so many folks have a knee jerk tendency toward drawing district boundaries along state borders.
Force them to realize that being in one state or another (or one county/city or another) has nothing to do with being on a robotics team, and tell them to tell local and state officials that you think both they and the robotic programs simply don't need or want to create artificial boundaries at state borders.
When the old canard about state/local funds only being used to pay for folks inside of a boundary gets raised, simply tell them to go right ahead and do it; but to not confuse that support with saying that tournaments or other activities can only include those supported teams. They will find a compromise fast enough if folks like yourself stick to your guns. "Rules" like those get broken constantly.
Sure, in-state teams might get funding or other support from their state; but! that doesn't mean that the only way to draw a district boundary is to create one that excludes contact with or sharing costs with other teams and jurisdictions.
There is a huge difference between deciding to support a group of teams and deciding to exclude a group of teams. Folks often make the jump from one decision to the next for absolutely no good reason.
Blake
ratdude747
01-07-2011, 12:11
Remember, it isn't the notion of a "District model" that is the root of this situation. The root cause is that so many folks have a knee jerk tendency toward drawing district boundaries along state borders.
Force them to realize that being in one state or another (or one county/city or another) has nothing to do with being on a robotics team, and tell them to tell local and state officials that you think both they and the robotic programs simply don't need or want to create artificial boundaries at state borders.
When the old canard about state/local funds only being used to pay for folks inside of a boundary gets raised, simply tell them to go right ahead and do it; but to not confuse that support with saying that tournaments or other activities can only include those supported teams. They will find a compromise fast enough if folks like yourself stick to your guns. "Rules" like those get broken constantly.
Sure, in-state teams might get funding or other support from their state; but! that doesn't mean that the only way to draw a district boundary is to create one that excludes contact with or sharing costs with other teams and jurisdictions.
There is a huge difference between deciding to support a group of teams and deciding to exclude a group of teams. Folks often make the jump from one decision to the next for absolutely no good reason.
Blake
who said we even need borders?
I have an idea:
districts and world championship. thats all.
It would work where you would have district competitions all over the areas where FRC can be found.
Any team can go to any district they want. if they like being local, great. if they want to travel, fine.
Any trophy award gets a team the world championship. championship fields would be drawn from the list of those who got in and have paid their fees.
Essentially like 2008 only with smaller and more numerous competitions
who said we even need borders?
I have an idea:
districts and world championship. thats all.
It would work where you would have district competitions all over the areas where FRC can be found.
Any team can go to any district they want. if they like being local, great. if they want to travel, fine.
Any trophy award gets a team the world championship. championship fields would be drawn from the list of those who got in and have paid their fees.
Essentially like 2008 only with smaller and more numerous competitions
Unless I missed something you just described regionals. Maybe smaller cheaper regionals, but nothing that could be reasonably described as districts.
I am very impressed with the responses. You all get it. Now a few points...
Q: Why have a geographic "district" in the first place?
A: Management. FIRSTs computer system cannot take many combinations so they want to keep all the district rules the same across the country. I suggest we have a lot of smart folks that can solve that problem.
Q: Why can't everyone who wins a "district" event go to Nationals.
(assuming they can afford this)
A: That would create too many slots. Very soon Nationals will only be avavilable only to teams that score high with awards or win a regional. Read Bills Blog he is already hinting to this. We in Mid Atlantic Robotics may end up with only 1 Regtional. If that happens then the number of teams from our area going to nationals is cut from 12 to 6.
Q: What about a point system. Get rid of the Regionals and only hold districts. Highest points (awards + scores) go to Nationals.
A1: Problem1: You might win a district but not get to qualify for nationals.
A2: Problem2: FIRST wants that money from the second regional. FIRST only puts up money for a regional if it will be short. Donations make up the rest. So they do not want to get rid of teams going to second regional. That is gravy for them.
Any trophy award gets a team the world championship. championship fields would be drawn from the list of those who got in and have paid their fees.
If I'm interpreting that correctly...
Any trophy award? From Chairman's to Coopertition? I usually try to not immediately shut down an idea in a thread of serious discussion, but that one simply doesn't work logistically. That would be 25 teams per event at max, assuming that no team gets two trophies (e.g. no team were to win a judged award and be a finalist/winner, and the highest rookie seed was not a finalist/winner and did not win a judged award). There are currently 49 regionals (which includes MSC), 58 if all of the MI districts were to count in addition to MSC. Multiplied by the 25 awards, that would be a possible championship of 1225 or 1450 teams, respectively*.
Now, if it were to be specific trophy awards, and the championship was enlarged, it might work. However, you open up a giant can of worms when deciding which awards make the cut. Just engineering awards? Just non-engineering ones? Mix of engineering and non-engineering? Which ones do you choose? (and that's not a rhetorical question)
*if any of those numbers are wrong, please correct me. I scrolled down pages and counted, so they may be off by a bit.
that would be a possible championship of 1225 or 1450 teams, respectively*.
At that point there would need to be overlap 1450 is greater than the number of teams currently in FRC :P
At that point there would need to be overlap 1450 is greater than the number of teams currently in FRC :P
2011 FRC at a Glance has the number of teams at 2075 teams.
http://usfirst.org/uploadedFiles/Robotics_Programs/FRC/FRC_Communications_Resource_Center/Flyers/FRC_AtAGlance.pdf
personally i love the district system. although that's all I've known while on an FRC team, i think it aids FIRST's goal to make FRC a full-blown high school sport and get an FRC team in every high school. it allows the game to be played in a high school gym which is a huge help to spreading FIRST. it makes FRC more available to high schools in general.
i think a big point being missed here is that the districts don't need to be drawn at state lines. Michigan worked out that way because of the high concentration of teams in the state and the system could be modified to accompany multiple states or just certain regions for convenience
At that point there would need to be overlap 1450 is greater than the number of teams currently in FRC :P
Well, of course there would be overlap anyways, what with teams such as 1114, 2056, 359, & co. consistently performing top-notch :P And, as usual, there will be teams who decide not to attend due to financial or travel reasons. The numbers that I gave were purely theoretical and should not be considered realistic :o
GaryVoshol
02-07-2011, 06:38
Kara's numbers do raise a point. The Championships have been running out of room. If new events are added as regionals with guaranteed entry slots, we will someday have too many winners from regionals to invite to Championships, and that day may not be far off. If we ever near the goal of having FRC available in every high school in the country, there will be no way that every regional can advance 6 teams to the Championships. There will need to be a dual-tier championship qualifying scheme. Perhaps this is what Bill's Blog is contemplating, not for 2012 necessarily, but sometime in our near future. FRC will look more like FLL, where most teams can only aspire to qualifying for the first level of championships, equivalent to the MSC.
The biggest hassle in all of this is making travel plans. If you don't know you're going to the Championship until 2 weeks before it happens, you certainly can't get good fares.
Katie_UPS
02-07-2011, 06:40
Are there any hidden down-sides to districts? Is it awful to have to win a regional twice to go to champs? How exactly are robots picked for champs? (I understand 3 state champs, 3 chairman's, 3 EI's, and 3 RAS... but aren't they supposed to send 18 teams because they replaced 3 regionals? Who are the other six then? How are they picked?)
GaryVoshol
02-07-2011, 08:08
Are there any hidden down-sides to districts? Is it awful to have to win a regional twice to go to champs? How exactly are robots picked for champs? (I understand 3 state champs, 3 chairman's, 3 EI's, and 3 RAS... but aren't they supposed to send 18 teams because they replaced 3 regionals? Who are the other six then? How are they picked?)First, it's not 3 IE's and 3 RAS's - it's 2 of 1 and 1 of the other, and I forget which is which right now.
That leaves 9 teams that still go. They are based on the point totals earned during the season - the 2 districts weighted 1/3, and the MSC rated 2/3.
What this does is give deserving teams - for example, a team that was a Finalist in MSC - a chance to qualify for the Championship.
DonRotolo
02-07-2011, 09:02
The thing I miss most in the District system is not getting to see out of state teams.
-While there is less interaction with outside teams, that results in more interaction with inside teams. When you see the same team at 2-4 events (even 5, possibly) in a season, there's more camaraderie. The end result is greater cooperation and fewer failing teams
I would be curious to hear from the people who attend the New Jersey Regional and New York City Regional about how much diversity they see at their regional now.
I don't speak for my team here, just for myself.
The ONLY significant drawback to the district system is this lack of diversity. I highly cherish meeting teams from Israel, Brazil, Mexico, Canada, Turkey and several near and distant states. I see the kids getting a lot from it as well*. And as the world continues to get smaller in the professional world, understanding and accepting this diversity becomes more important at this stage.
All the other drawbacks are surmountable IMHO.
@Basel A: interesting take on camaraderie and reducing failing teams, that is something that had not occurred to me. Thanks for that.
Amen - Concentrations of teams do not respect state boundaries. Yes, and so Mid-Atlantic Robotics does not use state lines as boundaries.
*Like teaching Brazilian kids how to play Extreme Duck-Duck-Goose, even with a steep language barrier. Or hearing how schools work in Mexico. Or just seeing that people are essentially the same, no matter where they're from.
Here's a thought on the "closed" nature of the district system.
It wouldn't really make sense to open district events up to teams from non-district regions. The qualification systems are completely different, and an outside team couldn't qualify for championship from the district. Additionally, it would arguably deny teams from the district region another chance to gain points.
But is there any reason that teams from a district region couldn't travel to outside regionals (as some already do), and earn points for it? At a regional, they play the same game, and earn the same awards. The events are usually as big, or bigger. The opposing teams are usually just as good. A team that can do this should be able to work closer to a state/region championship event.
Taking this further, once multiple district regions are setup, cross-registration could occur. Michigan teams could compete in Mid-atlantic districts, and vice versa, earning points towards their home region. And as more regions add the district system, FRC comes closer to letting anyone compete anywhere they want.
Taking this further, once multiple district regions are setup, cross-registration could occur. Michigan teams could compete in Mid-atlantic districts, and vice versa, earning points towards their home region. And as more regions add the district system, FRC comes closer to letting anyone compete anywhere they want.
but what separates this from the current regional system? i feel like that would be the same system taking place now (aside from Michigan) with just the addition of a local State Championship. i think the point of the district system would be to grow teams in a local environment so that teams could grow and thrive and increase the competitive nature of FIRST
but what separates this from the current regional system? i feel like that would be the same system taking place now (aside from Michigan) with just the addition of a local State Championship. i think the point of the district system would be to grow teams in a local environment so that teams could grow and thrive and increase the competitive nature of FIRST
-An additional tier to go through for qualifying for championships, which in turn helps fine-tune the number of teams that qualify, allowing FIRST to keep championships at a reasonable size.
-Lower cost, district style events, giving teams more play time for the same price.
-More events, allowing teams to keep travel costs down if they wish to.
The fact is, most FIRST teams do not travel longer distances than they need to in order to compete, and stick to relatively local regionals, because its cheaper and easier. This wouldn't change, under a looser district system. The vast majority of Michigan teams would stick to Michigan, and the vast majority of mid-Atlantic teams would stay in the mid-Atlantic region. If a team wishes to, they can go outside their region and meet teams from far away, addressing the main complaint about the current system in this thread. I just don't think enough teams would leap up and run away from home to break the sense of community the district system creates.
ratdude747
02-07-2011, 14:25
If I'm interpreting that correctly...
Any trophy award? From Chairman's to Coopertition? I usually try to not immediately shut down an idea in a thread of serious discussion, but that one simply doesn't work logistically. That would be 25 teams per event at max, assuming that no team gets two trophies (e.g. no team were to win a judged award and be a finalist/winner, and the highest rookie seed was not a finalist/winner and did not win a judged award). There are currently 49 regionals (which includes MSC), 58 if all of the MI districts were to count in addition to MSC. Multiplied by the 25 awards, that would be a possible championship of 1225 or 1450 teams, respectively*.
Now, if it were to be specific trophy awards, and the championship was enlarged, it might work. However, you open up a giant can of worms when deciding which awards make the cut. Just engineering awards? Just non-engineering ones? Mix of engineering and non-engineering? Which ones do you choose? (and that's not a rhetorical question)
*if any of those numbers are wrong, please correct me. I scrolled down pages and counted, so they may be off by a bit.
the awards that win a trophy would be reduced... to maybe 10-5 or so
I don't know about reducing the trophy awards. So, I'll propose this system:
Blue Banner awards go on--RCA, Event Winner. No points are assigned.
Other awards get points based on perceived value: RAS, EI, RI get something about 30 points, the "engineering" awards get something like 20, other awards get 10 or so. Making eliminations is worth 10 points by itself; 20 for the finalists. (Someone else can do the exact numbers; MI does this as part of their points values, but do different points values. FIRST also used to do something like this, back before 2004, but I don't recall the details.)
Then, you take the points earners and either cut the field in half or take anybody above a certain value (or average value, or other similar item), and those teams get the Championship bids.
ratdude747
03-07-2011, 01:26
I don't know about reducing the trophy awards. So, I'll propose this system:
Blue Banner awards go on--RCA, Event Winner. No points are assigned.
Other awards get points based on perceived value: RAS, EI, RI get something about 30 points, the "engineering" awards get something like 20, other awards get 10 or so. Making eliminations is worth 10 points by itself; 20 for the finalists. (Someone else can do the exact numbers; MI does this as part of their points values, but do different points values. FIRST also used to do something like this, back before 2004, but I don't recall the details.)
Then, you take the points earners and either cut the field in half or take anybody above a certain value (or average value, or other similar item), and those teams get the Championship bids.
that would also work... sounds complex but then again it is a complex problem.
Lil' Lavery
03-07-2011, 02:45
You do not need to do a State/Regional Championship in order to benefit from the district model...by that I mean if you don't have a high enough concentration of teams for a state or regional championship then don't. However, teams could still benefit from playing more smaller competitions for less.
Say there's only 40 teams in a particular region; would you rather play one regional for $4-5k and get around 8-10 matches and maybe eliminations; or would you want to play two events against the same teams for the same amount of money and get 24 matches (12 per event) plus any elimination matches? Maybe you've got 60 teams in a particular area; then you could put on three 40 team competitions where all the teams register for any 2 of them. I'm sure there are many other ways to organize something around this idea.
The whole idea is more matches for less money. More time competing with the robot you spent 6+ weeks working on. If FIRST is going to continue to grow, it has to become more affordable for teams with more ROI. I'll admit that I was a little bit skeptical when the FiM system was initially introduced, but I can't see ever going back. Our first 3 years as a team (2006-2008) we averaged between 12 and 13 matches per season from our initial investment. In our past 3 years (2009-2011) we averaged between 33 and 34 matches per season from our initial investment (which, I believe, was less than the initial registration cost for the first 3 years). If you take out eliminations since those aren't guaranteed matches; then we averaged around 9 matches per season for the first 3 years for our initial registration vs a guaranteed 24 matches per season now from our initial registration. Even if there were no State Championship, I would still prefer this model because it gets you more playing time for less money.
Matches per event has almost nothing to do with the district system. Basically every strategy to increase matches per event that FiM used can be applied to a traditional regional without changing to a district system. FiM districts just end up running a much tighter and longer schedule (for more total matches) than any equivalent sized (or smaller) regional. The matches per event can, and in my opinion should, be increased under the traditional regional method.
The argument for more events at the same cost is valid, though.
Taking this further, once multiple district regions are setup, cross-registration could occur. Michigan teams could compete in Mid-atlantic districts, and vice versa, earning points towards their home region. And as more regions add the district system, FRC comes closer to letting anyone compete anywhere they want.
I like the idea. I would have suggested the very same policy. It seems to me that no matter where a team competes, it should be able to accumulate points towards its own regional championship. This way, teams would compete against the best of the best teams in their own region to qualify for championship, but would also have the opportunity to compete against whoever they wish during the regular season events, traveling if they so chose or staying local if that was their preference.
Lil' Lavery
03-07-2011, 14:31
I'd be wary equating one district system to another at this point. They could have very different rules and structures.
DonRotolo
03-07-2011, 21:51
...and goals.
FIRST has already said they want the same rules to apply to all districts. Otherwise how can they manage the computer system for registration.
To some extent I agree with this position but we can't run a competition at the bare minimum of what the computer programmer in FIRST can accomplish. As I have said a few times we have a lot of smart folks working with us who can write a system that can cover everything we want to do. We just have to get FIRST to listen.
Craig Roys
04-07-2011, 08:34
Matches per event has almost nothing to do with the district system. Basically every strategy to increase matches per event that FiM used can be applied to a traditional regional without changing to a district system. FiM districts just end up running a much tighter and longer schedule (for more total matches) than any equivalent sized (or smaller) regional. The matches per event can, and in my opinion should, be increased under the traditional regional method.
The argument for more events at the same cost is valid, though.
I wasn't so much talking about matches per event (although under the current FIRST Regional format, teams are unable to get 12 qualification matches in - I agree that could/should be changed), but rather number of matches per initial investment. Initial investment outside MI gets you 1 Regional with only 8-10 matches guaranteed. Initial registration in MI gets you 2 District events with 24 matches guaranteed.
Rich Kressly
20-07-2011, 14:08
Frank,
I don't visit here a lot these days, but I did send an email along to my former team - 1712 - with some of my thoughts on the matter. In brief, here are my thoughts:
1. Michigan has worked very hard to put a system in place that works well by a good number of metrics in their home region.
2. It's a shame some folks don't hear, very clearly, what both Jim and Sean are saying in this thread about doing what works for your region, and treating/addressing variables individually.
3. MI is pretty clear that increased FRC events per team and higher levels of on field play are primary goals of their organization. I like these goals, but they can have other unintended, and negative, consequences.
4. Local "control" is certainly a positive in many ways, but I really wonder about the effect on local volunteers, their schedules, their lives, what it means for everything else they already do (off seasons, FTC, VEX, FLL, JrFLL, Seaperch, BEST, etc) in the MAR region (and other regions without similar makeup to Michigan).
5. I've seen a lot of statistics in relationship to FiM model in the past few years. Is there any usable data on graduates of district vs "traditional" FRC model? Maybe from before districts and after districts in MI? Does a district type model inspire more students toward socially conscious futures in STEM than traditional model? Does it help increase the participation of students in STEM activities? Shouldn't we be more concerned about these metrics than who's more able to win a state/regional/world championship? Again, as Jim and others say, it comes down to purposes and goals.
Ryan Dognaux
20-07-2011, 15:56
Some things to take into consideration with the district model in the Mid-Atlantic Region:
- If the district model does get implemented for this upcoming season, everyone in the region needs to know exactly what they are getting for their registration fee. This includes number of events with entry fee, time frame of those events, and whether the format of the events will be changing or not. People want to know what they are getting for their money and providing this information in advance will be appreciated by all teams.
- I believe there has been discussion of running these events on a Saturday, Sunday schedule instead of a Friday, Saturday schedule as Michigan does. While I understand the difficulty of securing venues to host events (especially within High Schools, as securing a gym on a Thursday evening and Friday during the school year is incredibly difficult), I do not think a Saturday & Sunday structure would work well. You'd have people attending religious activities in the morning, thus attendance would drop significantly, and some teams might even have a hard time fielding a drive team Sunday morning.
One question I have to Michigan teams - are any district events hosted in high schools, and if so, how did you go about reserving an entire gym & pit area on a Friday school day?
Ultimately, I think a district event model would benefit this region with the proximity of teams in the area. However, it needs to be properly thought out and many aspects need to be planned and communicated before being implemented.
GaryVoshol
20-07-2011, 18:05
One question I have to Michigan teams - are any district events hosted in high schools, and if so, how did you go about reserving an entire gym & pit area on a Friday school day?
Most of the events are in High Schools:
Traverse - HS
Kettering - Univ.
Waterford - HS
W Mich - Univ.
Detroit (Wayne) - Univ.
Niles - HS
Ann Arbor - HS
Livonia - HS
Troy - HS
I'm not sure what is done to get the needed space (big gym for field, nearby aux gym or similar for pits). I do know most of the HS personnel are glad to host the events. They like the exposure and publicity.
Some things to take into consideration with the district model in the Mid-Atlantic Region:
- If the district model does get implemented for this upcoming season, everyone in the region needs to know exactly what they are getting for their registration fee. This includes number of events with entry fee, time frame of those events, and whether the format of the events will be changing or not. People want to know what they are getting for their money and providing this information in advance will be appreciated by all teams.
- I believe there has been discussion of running these events on a Saturday, Sunday schedule instead of a Friday, Saturday schedule as Michigan does. While I understand the difficulty of securing venues to host events (especially within High Schools, as securing a gym on a Thursday evening and Friday during the school year is incredibly difficult), I do not think a Saturday & Sunday structure would work well. You'd have people attending religious activities in the morning, thus attendance would drop significantly, and some teams might even have a hard time fielding a drive team Sunday morning.
One question I have to Michigan teams - are any district events hosted in high schools, and if so, how did you go about reserving an entire gym & pit area on a Friday school day?
Ultimately, I think a district event model would benefit this region with the proximity of teams in the area. However, it needs to be properly thought out and many aspects need to be planned and communicated before being implemented.
I am, to be honest, surprised that all of FRC competitions don't do Saturday & Sunday for 2 Days, and Friday, Saturday, Sunday like NYC did this year for 3 days.
Chris Hibner
20-07-2011, 19:42
I to be honest am surprised that all of FRC competitions don't do Saturday & Sunday for 2 Days, and Friday, Saturday, Sunday like NYC did this year for 3 days.
I really wish we'd go to Saturday/Sunday in Michigan. I killed a week and a half of vacation to attend our team's FIRST events this year. I really don't think I can do that again next year.
On the topic of FRC district events in high school gyms on Fridays I think that it's actually a benefit to the program. Since most of the district events occur in high school gyms it doesn't appear that getting to use high school gyms is a problem. Although I've only attended one high school gym district with my team (Troy), I can see playing on a Friday would be a good thing to attract attention to FIRST and FRC teams because students at the school which is hosting the event could spectate and learn about FIRST and the robotics programs at their school. I know that at least at the Troy District (Troy Athens High School) that students of Troy Athens sit in the stands not used by teams instead of a gym class on that Friday.
DonRotolo
20-07-2011, 23:35
I really wish we'd go to Saturday/Sunday in Michigan. I killed a week and a half of vacation to attend our team's FIRST events this year. I really don't think I can do that again next year.I also killed nearly 2 weeks' vacation to travel with the team to our events in 2011, and I just can't do that any more. Work used to be more understanding, but as management changes so do unwritten policies.
Right now MAR is holding webinars to get the word out and get feedback. There are several unanswered questions that need to get answered, such as:
> How can non-district teams also compete? (We would miss those Brazilians and Canadians)
> What happens to the money? (A significant surplus is anticipated; short-term MAR needs to buy a field and some other stuff, but long-term could this be refunded to opt-in teams?)
> Can teams opt out on an annual basis?
> Can teams also attend other regionals?
> What is the qualifying structure for the 12 teams going to St Louis? (I can account for 9 of the 12, how are the other 3 decided?)
> If a team is awarded Chairmans at a district, they need to go to 'State' to have a chance to 'win' RCA; what if they can't afford the 'State' Championship?
These and other thorny questions are in the process of research & answer, but it's kind of a chicken-vs-egg thing, and we still have no idea what FIRST might prefer. It's an interesting journey, I recommend everyone consider what they might do or decide if this were proposed in their area.
I DO NOT speak for my team, and this isn't an official statement.
Lil' Lavery
20-07-2011, 23:58
Unfortunately I keep missing the MAR forums/webinars due to scheduling issues. I hope to ask some questions about the system at one of them soon.
I have a pretty fundamental question that I'm not sure has been asked. In the short-term, could we simply relocate one (or both) of the area regionals to one of the alternate venues being proposed as district sites? Namely Philadelphia, which has usually been a ~40-45 team event anyway and had higher costs than Trenton. There were a number of proposed venues in the Philadelphia suburbs, why not just have a "traditional" regional at one of those?
That buys another year to continue planning and seek feedback from teams in order to make sure a district model is executed properly for this region.
Additionally, what about things like making our current regionals "bag'n'tag" events? Or running more total matches at our smaller events? The 44 team Philadelphia regional in 2010 only ran 66 total matches, thus why teams only had 9 qualifying matches. Michigan districts only have a few less teams, but get 12 qualifying matches per team by running around 80 matches. A simple increase in the amount of matches we run at our events can bring up the ROI numbers people love so much.
...
That buys another year to continue planning and seek feedback from teams in order to make sure a district model is executed properly for this region.
...
I can't imagine anyone thinks the area recently labeled MAR will be ready to implement a district system for the 2012 FRC season.
On the other hand I guess I can imagine it; but surely not...
Blake
PS: I thought the middle of the USA's Atlantic Coast was farther south than the area involved in this MAR; but I suppose that topic is a bit low on the priority list.
DonRotolo
21-07-2011, 20:44
could we simply relocate one (or both) of the area regionals to one of the alternate venues being proposed as district sites?
making our current regionals "bag'n'tag" events?
Some on our team noticed that NJ comes out ahead of the game, while Philly costs significantly more (for fewer teams) and is the money-loser in the region. I too would favor finding a less costly alternative to Philly.
Trenton was bag & tag in 2011.
I can't imagine anyone thinks the area recently labeled MAR will be ready to implement a district system for the 2012 FRC season.
Without it, one of the current regionals won't happen, as there is a $100k+ budget deficit. So, it's gonna have to happen in 2012.:ahh:
...
Without it, one of the current regionals won't happen, as there is a $100k+ budget deficit. So, it's gonna have to happen in 2012.:ahh:
OK
Along the lines of Sean's comments about keeping independent variables untangled, I personally wouldn't think that reducing costs also mandates switching to a district competition ladder similar to Michigan's; but I can see how the two changes can be linked.
Blake
prettycolors91
22-07-2011, 07:39
I'm curious about how teams from the Upper Peninsula feel about the district system these days and how it has evolved.
To be honest, it has posed significant benefits and challenges for those of us in the U.P. I work with three teams that center around Michigan Tech, and we're about 2.5 hours from the Wisconsin border. On the other hand, it takes us about 9.5 hours to travel to Traverse City, which is the closest district event to us.
The students that I work with have for the most part "grown up" in the district system, but many of the mentors and teachers remember the regional system in Michigan. The district model makes it difficult to coordinate several trips downstate with multiple teams. We are tackling this issue by trying to all attend the same district events, but that is not always possible when spaces fill up so quickly for the "hot" districts. Having all three teams at one district can also pose its problems, because the match turnaround. Many of our mentors "float" during the build season to help address specific needs that cater to their talents, and they can be stretched pretty thin during a district where all of their teams are present.
I am always hopeful that a district event will crop up in the U.P., but it's doubtful. Although many people express that they love traveling to far away places for competitions, the U.P. is probably not on their list of glamorous locales. We have about seven teams in the U.P., which means that we'd have to get at least 30 teams to travel to a new location, which would probably be around the Mackinac or Sioux region, which is still about 5 hours away for those of us in the Western U.P.
Overall, it would be much easier for us if we went to Wisconsin, but we all love the way that FiM is set up, and it gets much more "play" time for our students. I just wish we could have a district a little closer to home to help save on travel costs.
...
Overall, it would be much easier for us if we went to Wisconsin, but we all love the way that FiM is set up, and it gets much more "play" time for our students. I just wish we could have a district a little closer to home to help save on travel costs.So why don't you??? This is a serious question, not a rhetorical one.
The external borders of Michigan aren't magical lines-of-death.
I have a hunch that the presence or absence of a robotics team is usually correlated with the presence or absence of mentors, sponsors and/or faculty who get the urge to form one, and not with a state boundary.
Even when a team's existence is correlated with a state program of some sort, I have a further hunch that the state program(s) usually wouldn't object to the team competing in sane nearby locations.
Surely we/FRC have the ability to form (and evolve) districts that are based on where teams actually exist rather than on 200-300 year old state boundaries that exist for a zillion reasons other than efficient/effective STEM inspiration.
State boundaries often become a crutch rather than an aid in this sort of situation. I hope that doesn't become the case throughout FRC.
Blake
So why don't you??? This is a serious question, not a rhetorical one.
I don't believe FIRST HQ would allow a team to opt out in 2009 (first year it was "piloted") because there were concerns of a large group opting out.
UP teams could pay the $5K, and then pay $4K to attend Wisconsin ($9K for 1 event) or they could pay $5K and attend one district and pay $4k and attend Wisconsin ($9k for 2 events). This would be most similar to other 2 event teams (cost/travel), but the District would not allow for a birth to championship like regionals do so they still wouldn't be getting quite as much value for the money (though they would likely get more matches).
All this being said, it is tough for many teams that are fairly isolated from events. Team that are remote relative to Regionals still have to travel large distances (and have for many many years), but they do get more options of where they want to travel to.
If the goal for the 3 UP teams would be to be at the same districts in order to decrease logistical burdens, I would write a polite letter to the board of FiM stating your case. The board may be able to work with the person that finalizes the schedule to make a special case for them.
If the goal of the UP teams was to opt out of the District System, they would likely have to go to FIRST HQ to get approval. That being said if I remember right, even Wisconsin still was 5+ hours and required out of state logistics (many schools have special policies for taking minors across state boarders).
UP teams are in a tough spot, but they are also pretty tough people.
If the District style model spreads, this will hopefully take care of itself. I see in the future a system with around 30-35 Regional Championships and around 100-200 district events (100 Districts = 2000 teams 200 districts = 4000 teams). Each regional championship will likely have 10 or so championship slots. My guess would be that this would be about 5 years out for a conversion.
2009 Michigan District System Pilot
2010-District Model approved, but only Michigan 8% of teams 1 state Championship
2011 District Model approved, but only Michigan 8% of teams 1 state Championship
2012 Michigan and 1 or 2 other regions 16-24% of teams 1 MSC 1or2 "Regional Champsionships"
2013 3-7 more new regions 40-50% of teams 6-10 Regional Championships (some of the big regions may split).
2014 5-10 more regions with probably 75% of teams a district system with 10-20 Regional Championships and hopefully no longer having "boarder restrictions".
prettycolors91
22-07-2011, 19:14
Ike, I agree that if the district system spreads, then this problem will eventually work itself out. Until then, there isn't a fantastically affordable option for northern MI teams. Part of the problem is that there really aren't that many people in the UP! We seem to be clustered into isolated areas, but maybe that will change in the future.
Another reason for staying in MI besides cost is that many of us have strong relationships with our home town teams and sponsors. Advice and collaboration from old teams helps with networking, and we can all help each other out in a pinch. For example, HOT let our rookie team 3771 borrow a tool chest for a district where we couldn't transport sufficient tools and spare parts (due to driving in mini vans).
I am always blown away by how helpful FIRSTers can be, even after 10 years of participation. Everybody is always willing to lend a hand, and we lend one whenever we can.
PayneTrain
22-07-2011, 23:31
There will come a day when the district model is so widespread that teams won't have an issue, since the model seems to facilitate speedy growth. Problem is, a lack of existing team concentration is a roadblock to instituting the model. It's a weird game of tug-of war the models play.
Is there some place to read up on what MAR is doing? I'm interested in the discussions and ideas people have tossed around.
mickey d's 71
24-07-2011, 13:28
i heard a rumor about a midwest district ohio indiana illinois that would be a pretty cool district
Lil' Lavery
24-07-2011, 14:33
i heard a rumor about a midwest district ohio indiana illinois that would be a pretty cool district
If there's any truth to this statement, which is dubious at this point, I really feel sorry for Pittsburgh-area teams in the coming future.
mickey d's 71
24-07-2011, 14:37
If there's any truth to this statement, which is dubious at this point, I really feel sorry for Pittsburgh-area teams in the coming future.
why do u say that
Andrew Schreiber
24-07-2011, 14:42
why do u say that
Because they would have the SHIFT to competing elsewhere since they can no longer enter those regionals. Allowing teams to compete anywhere allows them to CAPITALIZE on their locations. For example, a team in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan is actually closer to out of state events than in state events.
mickey d's 71
24-07-2011, 14:45
Because they would have the SHIFT to competing elsewhere since they can no longer enter those regionals. Allowing teams to compete anywhere allows them to CAPITALIZE on their locations. For example, a team in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan is actually closer to out of state events than in state events.
that makes sense
Lil' Lavery
24-07-2011, 14:52
why do u say that
It would limit the number of nearby events for Western PA teams to chose from, as it would cut off the Buckeye and Philadelphia regionals. While DC, Baltimore, and Rochester would be potentially viable alternatives for some Western PA teams, cutting off both the ability to travel to the Buckeye and Philadelphia regionals as well as the supply of teams from those regoinals (including Pittsburgh regulars like 48, 128, 222, and 1038) will make things much more complicated for Pittsburgh-area FRC. I don't think anyone wants to see the Pittsburgh regional become a ~30 team regional again.
XaulZan11
24-07-2011, 16:03
If there's any truth to this statement, which is dubious at this point, I really feel sorry for Pittsburgh-area teams in the coming future.
And also the teams in the Milwaukee area, which is around an hour away from Chicago and the Midwest Regional. I believe this year there were around 12-14 teams who went to both the Wisconsin Regional (in Milwaukee) and Midwest (in Chicago).
Chris Fultz
24-07-2011, 16:37
Actually what has been discussed is an Indiana / Illinois combo, with the option of Ohio and Wisconsin if those states / teams wanted to become a part of a district type of system.
However, right now, there are not enough events to support a "pay once / play twice" scenario for the number of teams involved.
And, this is all just being discussed. Nothing agreed, Nothing set in place.
Jim Zondag
24-07-2011, 22:53
[QUOTE=Chris Fultz;1070281]However, right now, there are not enough events to support a "pay once / play twice" scenario for the number of teams involved.
[QUOTE]
From 2008 to 2009 we went from 3 events in Michigan to 8 events (7 districts and a Championship). It is not easy, but it can be done.
Being about 40 minutes South West of DC we have the "luxury" of a number of different regional events within about 2 hours of us, but I know our school district would welcome any change that have our students miss less class time.
Question for you Michigan people, do you day trip to the event or get a hotel close by and deal with the cost? Due to how far our district will let us take a school bus the big expense for us is hotel unless we go "far" away.
Question for you Michigan people, do you day trip to the event or get a hotel close by and deal with the cost? Due to how far our district will let us take a school bus the big expense for us is hotel unless we go "far" away.
We day trip to Kettering, Troy, and MSC (about 50 mins, 40 mins, and 1 hr 15 mins respectively).
We used school buses for those three trips.
The pit crew and comp team goes to the thursday districts (which start at 6pm) in vans and trucks, along with the robots and stuff. At districts, only the pit crew and comp team goes on Thursday. At MSC, the pit crew and comp team goes down in the morning, and the rest of the team joins us after lunch.
Being about 40 minutes South West of DC we have the "luxury" of a number of different regional events within about 2 hours of us, but I know our school district would welcome any change that have our students miss less class time.
Question for you Michigan people, do you day trip to the event or get a hotel close by and deal with the cost? Due to how far our district will let us take a school bus the big expense for us is hotel unless we go "far" away.
Honestly, it depends on the team. For some of the Detroit-area teams, there are almost three districts within a twenty minute drive (you only go to two), while the UP teams near Michigan Tech have 9.5 hours to get to Traverse City, and then they have to get to another district (probably West Michigan, an additional two or three hours, my estimate).
My team, on the outside corner of the Detroit metro area, has one within fifteen minutes and then two within about forty minutes, so no hotel is neccessary. However, once it is an hour or longer (the state championship), we get a hotel.
It depends on the event, for example 910 tries to do one "travel" event and one "home" event. Our home event is about 15 minutes from our school, so we don't use a hotel, while the travel requires a hotel. We could theoretically do two districts where we didn't need a hotel, we just don't. I know a lot of teams just do day trips to save the costs.
However, this is only how we do it and we are in metro Detroit, where most of the events take place. I know travel can be an issue for teams in the U.P., which has been discussed above.
GaryVoshol
27-07-2011, 07:11
... while the UP teams near Michigan Tech have 9.5 hours to get to Traverse City ...I wish people would quit blindly quoting this. Even Google and Mapquest say it's 7.5 hours from Houghton to Traverse City. So unless you're traveling by broken-down school bus that can only reach 47 mph max or have a significant weather delay, this estimate has added at least 2 hours to the actual time needed. (And as anyone who has ever gone to MTU knows, you can go much faster than the speed limit through most of the UP. Not that I admit to ever doing that. :rolleyes: )
Travel for the UP teams (and for the second event for northern LP teams) is a significant factor. Let's just not make it more than it really is.
Mark McLeod
27-07-2011, 09:09
There's this one REALLY long traffic light...:)
Being a data junkie, here are all the relevant driving times and distances assuming flights aren't taken and discounting inclement weather and traffic (Google Maps).
That's just driving time. It takes longer of course to load up the bus, depart and arrive. Sort of like saying our flight to Atlanta only took 3 hours, but it was 9 hours between school ending and getting into our hotel rooms herding cats.:rolleyes:
Remember a trip is twice as bad when you start recognizing that it's a round trip, then we realize that the poor Houghton team spent at best 34 hours or almost one-and-a-half 24-hour days just riding the bus for it's two district events in 2011. Uphill both ways...
Houghton, MI to:
hours ----- miles ------ event
7.5 ------- 394 ------ Traverse City
8.7 ------- 494 ------ Kettering
9.2 ------- 525 ------ Waterford
9.3 ------- 510 ------ West MI
9.4 ------- 538 ------ Troy
9.4 ------- 544 ------ Ann Arbor
9.6 ------- 552 ------ Livonia
9.6 ------- 558 ------ Detroit
9.7 ------- 517 ------ Niles
4.1 ------- 216 ------ Lake Superior Regional, Duluth, MN (shorter distance by boat I suppose)
6.0 ------- 331 ------ Wisconsin Regional, Milwaukee, WI
6.4 ------- 341 ------ 10K & North Star Regionals, Minneapolis, MN
7.75 ------ 422 ------ Midwest Regional
For comparison to the Mid-Atlantic region the time/distance from say Gettysburg, PA to Trenton, NJ is
hours ----- miles
2.8 ------- 160
The Sidney team still wins the travel pain award with a 10 hour flight to the Hawaii Regional (closest).
Just for fun I asked Google maps to plot a drive from Sidney, Australia to the Regional in Hawaii.
It actually produced an answer... with a 6,000km kayak leg in it.
I wish people would quit blindly quoting this. Even Google and Mapquest say it's 7.5 hours from Houghton to Traverse City. So unless you're traveling by broken-down school bus that can only reach 47 mph max or have a significant weather delay, this estimate has added at least 2 hours to the actual time needed. (And as anyone who has ever gone to MTU knows, you can go much faster than the speed limit through most of the UP. Not that I admit to ever doing that. :rolleyes: )
Travel for the UP teams (and for the second event for northern LP teams) is a significant factor. Let's just not make it more than it really is.
Busses tend to drive the speed limit ;P And taking a bus does tack on a little additional time because you have to stop for food, bathroom breaks, etc. Most people can drive from Detroit to Mackinac City in 4.5-5 hours, but when I take a bus up there with scouts, it's about 6 hours because we have to stop for two meals.
On a side note, I learned yesterday that the distance between Detroit and Houghton is greater than the distance from Detroit to Washington DC...
My team's school district doesn't have school busses, and we are not a large team, so we carpool to events. We also try to do one "home" event and one "away" event each year. Being directly north of Detroit puts us within 2 hours of all of the MI events except Niles, West MI, and Traverse City. We get a hotel if we travel to one of those events. Kettering, Detroit, Livonia, Waterford, and States are close enough that a hotel would just be a waste of money. Since we always can get enough willing parents to drive (and students, for close events), renting a bus has never been considered as a viable option.
Enigma's puzzle
27-07-2011, 17:07
Th
Houghton, MI to:
hours ----- miles ------ event
7.5 ------- 394 ------ Traverse City
8.7 ------- 494 ------ Kettering
9.2 ------- 525 ------ Waterford
9.3 ------- 510 ------ West MI
9.4 ------- 538 ------ Troy
9.4 ------- 544 ------ Ann Arbor
9.6 ------- 552 ------ Livonia
9.6 ------- 558 ------ Detroit
9.7 ------- 517 ------ Niles
4.1 ------- 216 ------ Lake Superior Regional, Duluth, MN (shorter distance by boat I suppose)
6.0 ------- 331 ------ Wisconsin Regional, Milwaukee, WI
6.4 ------- 341 ------ 10K & North Star Regionals, Minneapolis, MN
7.75 ------ 422 ------ Midwest Regional
I am a Michigan Tech Student (that means I live in Houghton), and the trip from Houghton to Grand Rapids has taken at the shortest 8 hours (speed limit of 70 in the LP), and at the longest 13.5 Hours. Its not all that inconceivable to be driving 20 or 30 miles per hour on some stretches of the UP when it is snowing.
DonRotolo
27-07-2011, 18:37
For what it's worth, MAR has posted a link to their July 11, 2011 forum, which covers most of the issues at hand, including those mostly decided and those still up in the air.
Here is the link (http://www.anymeeting.com/WebConference/RecordingDefault.aspx?c_psrid=E950DC808549)
It's an hour and a half, but goes into great depth, particularly the discussions at the end.
For what it's worth, MAR has posted a link to their July 11, 2011 forum, which covers most of the issues at hand, including those mostly decided and those still up in the air.
Here is the link (http://www.anymeeting.com/WebConference/RecordingDefault.aspx?c_psrid=E950DC808549)
It's an hour and a half, but goes into great depth, particularly the discussions at the end. Don,
Slogging through the recorded webinar at the link is a bit tedious for those of us who are just interested in the big picture take-away.
Do you have a connection to anyone you can convince to post a downloadable slide deck?
Blake
DonRotolo
28-07-2011, 20:25
Even Google and Mapquest say it's 7.5 hours from Houghton to Traverse City. Of course, it never snows in MI in March, nor do students need to eat ever...
post a downloadable slide deck?
This is an early version, the latest one I have seen is not much different. Sorry it is huge.
Thanks for posting the PDF Don!
joeweber
29-07-2011, 22:31
For those out of state teams that would like to know what it is like at a Michigan district event come to the Kettering Kick off event on September 17, 2011. Many of the great Michigan teams are there for you to compete with. The Kettering Kick off is run very close to what the district event is and by most of the same people.
For more information http://www.ketteringfirst.com/
FaceXTheXMuzic
29-07-2011, 23:00
Even though the cost to attend state and nationals separately goes up, the cost of traveling goes down because you don't have to travel across state lines to attend events. I like the way things are in Michigan now. However, I suppose my preference is biased because I wasn't around before they changed everything. Still, from what I've heard, I prefer it the new way. It's helped our team a lot.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.