Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

My ?? was not in response to the first half of your sentence.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

:confused: If that wasn't the answer you were looking for then perhaps you clarify your "??"... We may build robots but we're not psychic.

I'm guessing you were questioning Thomas's hopes for a championship at VCU. Do you expect anything less than team members from VA who think a possible Capital Region championship event should be held in VA? It makes sense considering VA would be providing over 50% of the teams in the region.

Since I too have interest in this, I'll throw my ideas out there. Assuming DC/MD/VA do in fact form a Capital Region, I would think there would be six district competitions. MAR has 5 districts with 99 teams total, I think DC/MD/VA could pull off 6 districts with the current ~118 teams. So where would those six events be held? Since VA is by far the largest in area and number of teams, I would have 4 events in VA, 1 in DC, and 1 in MD. The 4 events in VA would probably be best spread out like the current FTC events are: North (Manassas/Chantilly/Alexandria), East (Norfolk/VA Beach), Central (Richmond), and West (Charlottesville/Lynchburg/Roanoke).

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

PayneTrain -
While you are correct that MI is broken into physical land divisions, these are more about models of potential growth than a support system... From the perspective of the teams I have been around. I have no knowledge of the inner workings of FiM, so I cannot say how the district boundaries affect their decision making.

The average student in MI doesn't know that physical boundaries even exists, let alone what they are. Many mentors don't know what they are other than lines in one picture. They really have no affect on anything in the mindset of many in MI. They do determine one of the district events that teams must attend. (teams are required to go to one of the closest events, and then can sign up for any event of their choosing in the state. This is to prevent local teams from being forced to travel a long distance to both their events.)

As far as support systems go I will use the example of my former team from HS. While they are from northern Macomb county, they share a closer bond with teams in their immediate area, including those who are over the county line in another district, than those to their south who reside in the Macomb district. They also share a closer bond with those in a completely different district to the west.

Eric -
There is a simple solution, make everyone go to the same number of events...
If teams can attend as many events as they desire, I would assume that the current rules regarding what districts count towards points would remain the same as in MAR and FiM, being the first two count. Quite frankly I am not in support of any team going to more events than others, especially when points are on the line for some, but not for others. However, seeing as people will fight tooth and nail against this, the current rules do a nice job of sorting out the mess.

However I do not understand where the notion that there would be a rush for week one and the last week events comes from. How is this any different than under the regional structure? Do we see a rush to register for those events now?

Also, one of the benefits of going to the district model is more localized events. Travel is meant to be lessened and thus should not be a factor; The costs of going to the number of events required for points should be rolled into one lump sum rather than paying per event, this would eliminate the bigger budget advantage; also by adding a regional championship wouldn't there be an additional entrance fee to the teams, driving the cost to attend World's higher; and time is solved by the changing the schedule to a two day format as the district competitions are now.

(ignore the grammar of the last statement. I have reorganized 5 times and can't seem to get it as it should be.)

It is clear that there is no ideal solution for the "rest of the best" as you put it. There never will be as long as FIRST continues to support the policies that it currently does, in my opinion. However this is a discussion that has the tendency to start flame wars; so why ruin a nice thread such as this.

Ultimately the second tier leads to the same result as a regional does now, under the current rules of FiM... I relate to what I know best. Save for those who qualify for World's by being ranked.

Also this entire discussion is about the best way to win, it is not about any of the ideals of FIRST... the things that actually matter. I wonder how our ideas of the ideal system would change if they were the main things guiding this discussion. I shall have to re-evaluate the scenario from a different perspective now.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

You're not going to force them to. You can only incentivize them to. If I have a team that can barely get the funding to go to one event, even if they've paid for two with registration, they're not going to go to a second one, period. (You can also insert "school clearance" for "funding".)

Again, you have to deal with the fact that some teams cannot attend more than one event due to factors that may be beyond their control, like school policies or lack of funding coming through. Or even entirely unrelated factors. Long story short, you've got to figure out an equalizer. The best equalizer, of course, is for everyone to attend two events. But you've got to have two events they can actually attend first. (Second best might be to just double the points from the first event. But there are problems with that... and averaging... and last event... and highest event... and lowest event... You get the point.)

It's human nature. Week 1 and Week 6 events are theoretically the "easiest", with Week 1 being the first time most teams have played the game and Week 6 combined with the withholding allowance giving teams time to react to perceived weaknesses. This effect would only be noticed if you had a single event counting for points. That's why you don't see any real rushes now (except in the crowded New England area--BAE GSR, traditionally Week 1, fills up very quickly).

See the UP teams before districts really started moving up north. If they'd been allowed to, they'd probably have opted out and gone to Wisconsin (and Duluth's opening would probably have been moved up a year or two). Also see "international team travel cost".

Yes, you could roll the required event numbers into one cost. Yes, you can change the schedule to a two-day format to save time. If you add a regional championship, or super regional--well, how much does it cost to attend MSC or MAR? IIRC, it's not as much as a traditional regional. It's the Championship cost that's the big factor, and the travel cost.

That's the POINT, doggone it!:mad: While you're in transition to districts, and while you have the areas with vastly lower density than Michigan, you have to have places for teams who are isolated from district events for whatever reason to play and have a chance at qualifying in a one-shot attempt. South America--maybe half a dozen teams combined. The Pacific Ocean areas outside the U.S., two teams. Turkey, half a dozen. Europe, half a dozen. Where are those districts going to be?

When you apply the district system with two events to get points in, and fail to account for those teams having to travel to the U.S., compete, stay a minimum of one week (or go home and come back), compete again, and then have to go home and wait just to have a chance to go to the World Championship by points, then get their travel arrangements in a matter of a week or two, you fail to create a low-cost model for those teams. Don't ever forget to account for those teams showing up. You need to either get them local districts, or give them a one-shot chance to get there. The inclusion of teams who want to use the one-shot event as their area championship ticket, if those were to exist at the time, is to fill out the field to workable as an FRC event. Think of it as a wild-card event, if you will. You could even have it after the qualification cutoff and only open it to teams who aren't qualified yet.

Although, because you relate to what you know best, you might not have considered that. Michigan's been playing under districts for 4 years now--that means no international teams in all that time. Or even teams from Hawaii or Alaska. I've seen those teams occasionally comment on how long they have to wait for their kits, or how much they have to raise to come play.

Let's see: Is it not gracious to give everyone the same shot at giving their best chance at making it to the next level of competition? Is it not professional to also try to lower their costs? This is not about the best way to win. It's the best way to have a reasonably fair qualification method to get to the Championships for teams unable to qualify under a point-based system due to lack of events. (If you want to discuss ideals of FIRST, I'd like to suggest looking at some threads from around the time FiM was released, commenting on this very theme and what effect FiM had on said ideals. I think we can agree that there was negligible effect in the long run, no?)


When you think about things from one perspective, you miss other things that can have a huge impact. In this case, I think you're missing the impact of the teams who would be excluded by travel time and cost combined from ever qualifying for the Championship due to lack of district events attended. Those teams need to have some way to qualify in one go. That's why I'm advocating a 2-tier system until somebody actually figures out a workable solution to single-event teams in a points-only system. Forcing teams to attend a second event to have a chance at the Championship isn't going to be any fun for anyone concerned.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Eastern Michigan isn't central to the state, but to the concentration of teams, and VCU is a few water bottle rules away from being my favorite venue.

Isn't the DC venue crazy expensive to rent out?

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Attending MSC or MAR requires the same registration fee as attending an additional regional outside a district structure: $4,000. (Note this is not the same cost as attending a 3rd district event in either area: $500 in FIM, $1,000 in MAR.)

This is a major and sometimes incapacitating cost to teams, despite grant opportunities provided by MAR (and I believe FiM). For teams that attended only one regional before the district model, it drastically raises the cost of the season and being able to compete at Worlds. Of course, I'm not saying we don't get something out of it (something I quite like), but financially it's true. Teams that attended two regionals before the model switch have not seen a rise in cost.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

apologies. I forgot I was in the rumor mill thread.

I think there is a lot of hard work and communication ahead for all the invested parties as the landscape shifts. But it will get figured out to benefit all the mentors, students, volunteers, educators, sponsors and champions in the area.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Sure there has, just not in this thread. Once there are several districts, teams can earn points in any district they like. MAR took the FiM points structure absolutely whole just for that (potential) reason. So long as all districts have the same system, they're compatible and comparable.
I think that's twice the size of a good district. Can you cut it into two? That allows for growth and manageability.
The number of teams a District sends to CMP is determined by the number of regionals that are replaced. So FiM had 3 regionals, MAR had two, and the relative number of teams sent are in that ratio (18 to 12). If California replaced 5 regionals, I would expect them to have 30 slots, right?
This is HUGE. I work for a living, and I am loath to burn all my vacation time to attend regionals. So far, I've missed 2 days of work (didn't go to NYC on practice day), which is a much better deal for me.
First 2 events is fair, since the learning curve allows for great improvements in later events. First event is too small a sample, average is NG because of the improvement over time favors wealthy teams, first and last the same. Most every team should be able to make 2 events, especially if they are Sat-Sun (no school lost) and closer to home...and the cost is the same (or less) than the previous single Regional.

MAR is superior to the regional model in almost every way. The only negative so far is that "outside" teams can't play (love those Brazilians!)...but once there are more Districts, and we can intermingle again, we're back to where we started, but with another tier between district and CMP.

As for CMP: Just find a larger venue. Ever seen Cobo Hall? McCormick Place? There are several that size.

Imagine that: CMP too big for a single dome.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

I'm not arguing with that logic, I was saying that since MI has been in the district system for a few years now, we have experienced a growth in teams since we switched. But the number of teams we send to Champs hasn't increased proportionally. So if CA and MI are both in a district system, and have virtually the same number of teams, we should be sending the same number of teams to Champs. That's what I meant by fair.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Michigan could have close to 5 events if it so wished.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Considering all the discussion of disticts in this thread, you may want to go back to the EWCPCast on the district model:

http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-98466/TS-569023.mp3

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

I've heard rumors of Texas more than others, but Califorina or the Pacific Coast (Hawaii and Alaska included) Seems to be the most logical from my point of view. District tend to have more politics than other events, but, in my oppinion, they are more fun. (I'm in Michigan.)

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

I miss seeing non-michigan team in Detriot. I remember Team 2283 Panteras competiting with 469, 217, 47 (now 51), etc. It was great and a real powerhouse regional. I just wished they allowed maybe 5 slots in michigan districts for non-michigan team and the non-michigan teams just competited like they were at a regional and everyone else played for points. I just miss the non-michigan teams.

For example, This is Great Lakes in 2007. Super Powerhouse Regional!
http://www.thebluealliance.com/event/2007gl

IMHO, making a California/Alaska/Hawaii district is very illogical. Imagine the cost of making EVERY team in this area attend two events, not even taking into account the cost for a Regional Championship.

I am also from Michigan. The district model works for us because 90% of teams have two districts within an hour of drive time. This significantly lowers the cost for a team because we don't need to account for hotel costs and bus rentals. The end of the day means that we drive home and rest for free, rather than paying $100 per hotel room per night.

There is almost no way that all 30+ teams from Hawaii can pay for one mainland event and their own district event. Its just not sustainable.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Thinking about it now, you're right, but California still seems very logical to me. They have alot of teams there, you know. :3 I suppose we couldn't really have two Hawaii district, with the same teams attending each, that'd get a bit boring. :p

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Why would that be boring? Only Hawaii teams (with the exception of one team from Taiwan) attended the Hawaii regional this year, so I think that having a district system there would actually benefit them a lot.

If you have a Regional of 60-80 teams, then I think that it's plausible to have two districts in its place.

Personally, I'd love to see two new districts in Hell, MI and Paradise, MI on the same weekend. :p We could have competing volunteer tshirts, hehe :D

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

That would be great, except that the Hawaii Regional only had 40 teams. A Hawaii-only district adds nothing at all, and a Hawaii+ district places massive travel costs on a ton of teams.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

In terms of teams, true. However, it would double the play time of the Hawaii teams.

Actually, you could use the exact same argument to support turning L.A. into a district zone. Most years, it's only CA teams (and often only SoCal teams) other than one Chilean team. That's a 60+ team event! And when there are teams from other places, usually it's Arizona or Nevada.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Why has this not been proposed before? Make it happen, people in charge.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

What about the state championships? Either you have most of the teams and wonder why you had the "district" events in the first place, or have a championship with 20 teams. And all of those teams have to pay more, of course...

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

California already has five, and will be adding a sixth next year.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

A championship with 20 teams? Nice elimination bracket, bro.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

That sounds awesome. The winners should compete for some higher award. XD It'd be fun.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

That's my point. I've been saying for a while that Hawaii is one of a couple examples why a complete district system may not be a great idea.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

It could work with Cali if they scheduled it correctly and limited the number of slots with the corresponding inland regional that would make teams have to go out to Hawaii to compete.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

I know people like the big-time regional atmosphere, but is there value to Hawaii teams of just getting more matches for the money? That's very a big part of the district system; you don't even really need the region/state championship if you have a good points qualifying system.

Just looking into cheaper events--say, a quasi-district model--might be a nice way of enhancing the program in some places, if not in Hawaii.

I don't like the idea of forcing CA teams to HI or vice versa. The idea of the district model is to encourage growth, partially by increasing teams' bang for their buck. Forcing teams, sometimes underfunded teams, to travel like that seems counter-intuitive.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Um, that would be you. If you want it to happen, make it happen. The rest of us are busy doing OUR own stuff, thanks.

.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

IIRC, the proposal of a HI/CA district would involve two district events in HI to ensure that they wouldn't all have to travel mainland; this makes the only issue in the region championship.

I think the big thing is that FIRST NEEDS to keep some places out of the district system in order to sustain international growth in places where there just aren't enough teams to have a system in place. Regionals like NYC, LA, and others that are filled with international teams need to stay in place. Also, they need to make the barriers moreso regional than "State XXXX, State XXXX, and parts of State XXXX", or if that is done, they need to allow for a circumstantial opt-out, in which a team can put in a request to opt out of the district system. This comes to my mind based off teams in the western half of Canada, because (with my extreme lack of knowledge in Canadian geography...) it seems like a lot of Canada is densely populated in the eastern half near Toronto. A district system that encompasses all of Canada would just hurt teams that go to regionals moreso on the western half of North America.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

I know that, I was just kidding. My sense of humor doesn't translate well to pure text, so I apologize.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Western Canada is being talked about for a Pacific Northwest area--Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and possibly part or all of Montana (and I already made my comments on which would probably be preferred), plus western Canada, instead of putting western Canada with Toronto.

I think the request to opt out, or more likely a request for another district assignment (e.g. New England instead of New York or Wisconsin instead of Michigan) is a really good way to go.

I've also already addressed the international/sparse area question. For these areas, there are a couple of options. Either you include them in the district that they usually end up in anyway (meaning they stay in the States for a week and a half, or go home and come back) or you give them a single event qualifying method. Or you let them go to any two district events, regardless of qualification area.

Oh, and BTW: Los Angeles is not "filled with international teams". This year, 66 teams attended. Brazil: 1. Chile: 1. That's 3%. Another team came from Nevada. Grand total 4.5% of teams were from out of state; most if not all of the rest were from Southern CA (AKA, half a state). That's pretty typical--you might get up to half a dozen out of state teams. Oh, and another regional is going to be added in the area. If that's not an argument to turn the L.A. Regional into a district system, I don't know what is! That said, I would not object to allowing international teams to play--the Chilean team's "home" regional is Los Angeles. But then you get back to the international travel dilemma.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Ah, I see about LA. I was moreso saying that because I've read prior something about how since NYC and LA are such major cities, teams go there due to flight arrangements and all that stuff.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Correct :D

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

My apologies, I was referring to dodar's statement in which I thought "It could work with Cali if they scheduled it correctly and limited the number of slots with the corresponding inland regional that would make teams have to go out to Hawaii to compete." meant that HI/CA teams would be forced into traveling for districts. (I personally am skeptical of compelling more travel than geographically necessary.) My proposal for HI did indeed include 2 district-type events.

Definitely. Though if FIRST is willing to split Pennsylvania for the district model, one would hope they'd readily split Canada at least once. I suspect few people would support Canada as a single district any more than making any other ~3,511,023mi² plot of land a single district.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Where?

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Please, please force us to attend The Hawaii Regional! Aloha!
Next year?? Hawaii, Spokane or Davis, and St. Louis. Sounds good to me.
Good luck to all 400 FRC teams this week @ Worlds. Sincerely, First Team 701.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

The Greater Kansas City Regional would be glad to have the Chilean team attend if southern California goes to a district format.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

As a member of the Alberta Tech Alliance, I think it's safe for me to explain our plans and achievements regarding a new regional event.

If you are not aware, there are about 60 teams in eastern Canada (Ontario region). There is a fairly strong FIRST community there, with several regional events. However, in western Canada, it is a different story. Our team, 4334, is one of two teams west of the east/west divide. Because there are so few teams, there is hardly any FIRST community. Nobody knows what we do, why we do it, etc.

Being one of two teams in an extremely large area is hard for a couple reasons. One, sponsorship is hard to find. Especially being a rookie team. Nobody wants to be the first to sponsor us. Also, it makes attending a regional event very, very difficult. In the 2012 season, all the regional events closer to us filled up very quickly. The closest event to us was Toronto. Now, I don't know if you're familiar with Canadian geography, but it is reaaaally far. And strangely enough, flying there is super expensive. We're lucky to have super supportive parents, and they all wound up paying airfare for us to attend GTR East. Frustrated, we started looking into hosting our own regional event. We talked it over with FIRST Canada, and they gave us the green light. Then at the championship, a meeting with the board was held regarding a new regional event. It was approved.

So, circumstances permitting, there will be a Calgary regional next year. You may be wondering how, being as there is only 2 teams... The Alberta Tech Alliance is working on building curriculum that we can take into Calgary and area schools, and making it as easy as possible for schools to have FRC teams. The Calgary Catholic School District has already approved $10,000 in sponsorship to every FRC team in one of it's schools. We also are working to use an unused school property as a communal build site, where teams can share expertise, parts, tools, a facility, and perhaps most importantly, rent.

The real question is, can we get 30 teams?

Time will tell.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

If you don't have 30, call south of the border and see if some of the Washington, Oregon, and Idaho teams will agree to come up. (And maybe a couple of Canadian powerhouses will show up.)

You've got a year, you've got motivation, you've got local assistance, you've got a Championship blue banner for the Archimedes division to get sponsors with. I think you can get pretty close to the required number.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

$10,000 dollars O.o starting a team will be easy! why cant I live in Canada D:


if my local teams have the money I'll make sure they go to your regional.
(30 team regional sounds fun all the ones here have been to big for to long)

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Just curious,
was this announcement supposed to made yet being that the regional doesnt seem to be finalized as of yet?

Since you brought it up, "The real question is, can you get 29 teams?" ;)

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

It is amazing what your team is doing. Only a rookie and you have already put things in motion for a regional, that is astounding.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Well... There was a meeting recently regarding the regional. There is a very small chance it won't happen at this point.

I like only having to find/start 29 teams. ;)

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

This sounds like it could be awesome! I will talk to my team about it. Calgary is pretty far away from seattle, but depending on how many regionals we attend, it might be viable.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

I'm wondering if anything will be announced to the RDs at their meeting this week in Manchester.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

It's safe to say Minnesota will not go districts this year as at the state championships it was confirmed that the Lake Superior regional in Duluth, MN will become a double regional. I think it's a bad move considering the size of the DECC (convention center), but I'm going to trust in the regional staff to make it all work out.

Re: New District Events for 2013?
 

Have you seen the AMSOIL Areana? I am assuming that is where the second regional will be taking place, I think it will be awesome! So we still have the first regional in the DECC and the second one in AMSOIL arena. After the annoucement was made I was looking up some specs on each area and I am surprised we haven't been in AMSOIL in the past as it appears to have much better ammenities.

Also it may have been announced as a Duluth double regional but the RD still had their after-season meeting at FIRST HQ. I wouldn't consider MN Districts out of the question but there is less of a chance that they will happen now.

I'm sure the year we get a Rochester regional we'll turn into a district.

Side note: From what I hear the DECC was not damaged from the flashfloods a few weeks ago.