MARC 2012
 

Attached is information and application for this years M.A.R.C. June 22-23. If interested in coming, please fill-out the form and return ASAP.

2012 M.A.R.C. ROBOTICS COMPETITION


WHAT: Michigan Advanced Robotics Competition (MARC)

WHEN: June 22th at noon and
June 23th (ALL DAY)

WHERE: Monroe High School
901 Herr Rd
Monroe, MI 48161

PRICE: $350
$300 for the 12 original teams that attended the inaugural MARC event

TEAM LIMIT: 42+ (Depending on # of teams that apply)

REGISTRATION: Now until May 30th. Pay by May 25th and receive a $50.00 discount. (Original teams $350 - $50 (plank-owner discount) - $50 early-bird discount = $250)

HOW TO REGISTER: 2012 Michigan Advanced Robotics Competition (MARC) Registration Form.

FOOD: Teams can purchase hot dogs, nachos, pizza, cheesy bread and water/pop during the event (both days) at the arena.

LODGING: Available close by.

VOLUNTEERS: We have NUMEROUS positions that need great volunteers - field reset, queuing, field repair, refereeing, pit admin...the list goes on. Those interested in volunteering should contact Marjie Jenkins. Due to the lack of volunteers to fill some primary roles, special discounts will be given to teams that provide volunteers for refereeing, judging, and queuing ($25 OFF PRICE),

QUESTIONS/INFO: Contact Steve Ketron 734-265-3574
KETRON@MONROE.K12.MI.US

Marjie Jenkins (Volunteer Coordinator)
marjiejenkins@gmail.com

Re: MARC 2012
 

I am hoping to encourage my kids to go this time.

Re: MARC 2012
 

1023 will be there! :)

Re: MARC 2012
 

2851 will be there, with an all rookie drive team :yikes:

Re: MARC 2012
 

I expect 1732 to attend again this year.

I encourged every team within several hours from Monroe to attend. We've attended MARC 4 of the 5 years since the first year in 2007 and have had an amazing time each year. Its a great relaxed event to try out new drivers or practice for IRI.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Man, MARC last year was amazing. Haha, maybe because we won maybe not. I hope the Hilltoppers definetly come again, it was really great meeting you guys last year!

Re: MARC 2012
 

Team 2834 will be there. We always look forward to it each year and had a great time.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I'm trying to convince my guys we should get our butts kicked in Michigan on my birthday.

Here's hoping registration won't lockout until next week.

Re: MARC 2012
 

As one of the original 12, I am sure 910 will be coming again as well. It has been fantastic to see how the event is grown over the years, from only the 12 of us in 2007 to people fighting to get into the 42 slots now :ahh: Steve and his whole crew do such a great job and it just gets better every year. I encourage teams from outside MI to apply, since with the district system we don't get to make many outside friends. :p

Re: MARC 2012
 

M.A.R.C. is a really fun event to attend and I give all the credit to the amazing volunteers that have helped me throughout the years for making it such a success. I enjoy seeing new teams come every year and I have pushed a couple of out-of-state favorites to attend this year. I am not giving team names but hopefully they will be able to make it. They will make our event even more enjoyable by giving our Michigan teams the oppertunity to compete with and against them.

Come on guys, I know you can convince your teams to travel here.

Re: MARC 2012
 

FIRST Team 68, Truck Town Thunder, is looking forward to competing this year.

Re: MARC 2012
 

1718 once again plans to be there...we've attended every year except for the first year. We always have a great time at this event. Plus, we have a mentor title to defend...please tell me there will be a mentor tournament again.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Mentor matches have been way to long in the past. We are looking into ways of making them shorter. Also, I don't know how teams will feel about their mentors driving over the bridges and breaking their robots. Please voice your opinions on this topic.

Re: MARC 2012
 

As one of the Plank members Team 1504 will be there.:D :D

Re: MARC 2012
 

I can't remember how mentor matches have been done in the past, was it single match elimination? If not, then that would be a good way to cut down on time.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Team 470 will most likely be attending! Word on the street is the famous Grant is emceeing this year so I know I can't wait to be there!

Re: MARC 2012
 

Steve, you could do the Mentor matches as a single elimination. That would speed up the process.
This event is just too much fun!

Re: MARC 2012
 

If you don't have teams pay to do the mentor matches (we don't charge for them for Ruckus) then you won't feel so much pressure to do them even if we're behind. If we are doing ok on time then we go for it. If we're behind we call it a day and go get some sleep.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Give each team a ticket and they can turn it in when they want a mentor to drive during the regular matches.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I will be sending in our registration Tuesday... Hoping we can make the cutoff again - had a great time last year!

Re: MARC 2012
 

More make each teams last qualifying match a mentor match.

As one of the original 12, FIRST team 279, TechFusion, will be there
It is a great event and a good way to see which younger students can step up.

Re: MARC 2012
 

M.A.R.C. is the birthplace of the world famous emcee "GRANT". I only hope that he is able to make it back again this year.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I don't think MC Grant was born. More like formed out of pure energy. And fueled by caffeine and enthusiastic crowds. :)

Re: MARC 2012
 

Actually think the formation started with the combination of green hair spray and a big smile.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Team "TnT" 280 has sent in the registration and looking forward to a great experience as always at M.A.R.C.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Team 862 Lightning Robotics has sent in the registration and is looking forward to being a first time attendee at M.A.R.C.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Caffeine? The man himself claimed at the Ann Arbor district in 2010 that all that energy comes from nothing but H20. :cool:

Re: MARC 2012
 

Inspiration by Copioli probably contributes to His Grantedness.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Are there going to be any rule changes at MARC this year? I know in the past it has been similar to IRI where some of the less popular or (how to put this delicately) less well thought out rules were changed.

If there are plans to make rule changes, there is already a great discussion going on in the IRI 2012 thread, so the powers that be (meaning you Gary :p ) can read that over if they haven't already been following it and they're looking for inspiration.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Steve,
From time to time can you post a running list of who is coming to MARC this year?
Thanks

Re: MARC 2012
 

Team 1675, The Ultimate Protection Squad, is looking forward to FINALLY getting to play with our Michigan friends!

Re: MARC 2012
 

I can from time to time post a list of teams that have applied to come. Although I try my best to have every team that applies come to the event, I have to wait to see how many teams apply and how much room I have in the facility. The one thing for sure is that I want to have the number of teams competing a number dividable by six. This is so we don't have any waisted rounds.

I will post my first list tomorrow.

Re: MARC 2012
 

OK, as one who has never attended the event but has heard of the "legend" of the MARC venue's "hot"ness, can those who attended last year please give me an honest descriptive assessment of the comfort levels at the venue - both in pits and at the field?

For example...is it "sitting in the outdoor stands at the Disney-era Championship" hot? :D

I have heard from several that the temp was much better last year. What measures are in place/will be in place to keep the heat down?

Re: MARC 2012
 

It was a little cooler last year because the outside temperature was a bit lower than normal. Highs were around 70 vs a typical 80 degree high for end of June in MI

They usually have large fans to move air in/out of the gym. But it is still hot. Wear shorts, bring plenty of water/sports beverage.

The area where the pits are just outside the gym is air conditioned if you need a cool down break.

Re: MARC 2012
 

If you have ten rounds like last year, then #ofTeams can be divisible by three.
If nine rounds, then #ofTeams needs to be an even number

Re: MARC 2012
 

Last year I also purchased (3) industrial dry misting fans specifically for the gym. Could not tell how effective they were last year because of how cool it was.

Bascally, gym (playing field) is hot and the pits cool

Re: MARC 2012
 

It's generally cooler in the pits, but it gets plenty warm in the gym. It's nothing unbearable - just warm enough to make you want to complain about it. :ahh: Bring plenty of water to drink to stay hydrated.

Re: MARC 2012
 

The pits are rather comfortable and air conditioned. It was the gym that was the issue.
Worse.

It was a strangely cool and gray weekend last year so with the temperature down outside it was rather pleasant inside. The heat took a vacation and made an appearance 9in milder form) at IRI instead.
Steve purchased some cooling fans that spray a fine mist to keep the temperature down in the gym.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I talked to the kids. They want to give it a shot so we'll be there ready to Rebound Rumble!

Re: MARC 2012
 

Updated list of teams that have applied:
48
68
107
191
280
494
830
862
1675
1718
2337
2832
2834
2851
3175
3357
3548
3641

The following 12 teams are original participants (PLANK-OWNERS) and are automatically in the event:
51
70
226 (did not participate last year)(HAVE NOT RECEIVED VERBAL YET)
240
279
503
910
1023
1243
1504
1528
1732

Re: MARC 2012
 

Teams 245 and 3547 just applied and 1732 confirmed that they will be coming. List of teams getting bigger and better.

Re: MARC 2012
 

You said your capacity was 42+? Does that mean that if more than 42 teams apply you'll make room for them, or does it mean you'll choose the best teams or do a lottery or what?

Re: MARC 2012
 

Last year I had 47 teams participate. I could hold more teams but it comes down to #teams vs #matches for the money. I prefer to have at least 10 qualification matches per team. As long as I have enough teams apply, I could go up to 54 teams comfortably.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Here is the updated list:
48
68
107
191
245
280
461
470
494
830
862
1675
1718
2337
2612
2832
2834
2851
3096
3175
3322
3357
3547
3548
3641
4395

The following 12 teams are original participants (PLANK-OWNERS) and are automatically in the event:
51
70
226 (did not participate last year)(HAVE NOT RECEIVED VERBAL YET)
240
279
503
910
1023
1243
1504
1528
1732

Re: MARC 2012
 

Wow, that's 37 already! Should be a blast!

Re: MARC 2012
 

Here is the updated list as of 4/30/12:
48
68
107
123
191
245
280
461
470
494
548
830
862
1675
1718
2137
2337
2612
2832
2834
2851
3096
3175
3302
3322
3357
3547
3548
3641
4395

The following 12 teams are original participants (PLANK-OWNERS) and are automatically in the event:
51
70
226 (did not participate last year)(HAVE NOT RECEIVED VERBAL YET)
240
279
503
910
1023
1243
1504
1528
1732

Re: MARC 2012
 

Are you considering any rule changes? I would love to see the 2 qualifying points for the bridge go away! :D

Re: MARC 2012
 

1918 Just sent in our registration. We are looking forward to this awesome event and having a chance to see some good friends again.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I would love to see the co-op points switched to 1 point if you make it and 0 for anything else. However, that is not my decision. I leave all the rules changes up to my head ref (gary V.)and his team.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Why go away? The co-op bridge was one of the more exciting things in this game. Last second co-ops were amazing to see. Reducing to 1 co-op point I can deal with, but removing them completely not so much.

Re: MARC 2012
 

100% agree. FIRST is all about cooperating with you opponents and working together. As far as lessening the point value, the goal was to make it as valuable as winning (so you could ‘win’ even when you lost). If you lessen the points, that negates that to an extent.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Well.. for us.. at worlds.. we were 8-1 and in 16th rank mostly because 3 agreed upon coops didn't show up to coop with us. (not that the co-op failed for trying, but that they just wouldn't try to do it) That's why I'd like it to go away. :D Seems to allow teams to control others rankings a little too much. I like doing the co-op, just don't like the impact it has rankings. 1 point would certainly be better than 2.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I have seen this happen to ourself and others. This is exactly why I think it should be lowered.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I am not sure that making it 1pt is going to make things any better. If nothing else, it makes it easier for a team to decide not to do it. Which, if you are on the other side of that decision is still going to effect your ranking. All it does is change the situations in which a team decides to coop or not.

We used the coop bridge with great success this year. We took advantage that winning + coop will move us way up in the rankings and that doing it consistently everytime will lead to great success. In our local districts team s that knew us pretty much agreed we should be the ones to do it, and we had no shortage of willing and capable partners. At MSC, so teams from farther away from metro-Detroit, did not know us so well and we had to have a direct conversation about why we should do it. Everyone at MSC was capable. In St. Louis, it was even worse...we needed to convince most teams that we should be the one coop'ing and then struggle to find an opponent that was capable of performing the task with us.

I also saw a lot of teams declining to coop or agreeing and not showing up. We have never experienced that this season, but I can imagine that is probably one of the worst feelings...knowing someone is messing with your ranking for their own benefit (without beating you) or even worse they just lied to you.

Making it 1pt, lessens the pain of those lies, but also makes it easier to either decieve someone or just plain tell them you don't want to do it. It definitely changes the dynamic a bit.

It still takes the same effort and time to do it. If you are going too...wouldn't you want to get the most benefit from it?

I say either leave it as 2pts...or get rid of it all together for off-season events and let us just run up the scores as much as possible...:D

Re: MARC 2012
 

That is a very good point I hadn't thought of Adam. I think you are right about this.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I think that the value of the bridge is exactly what first has been trying to accomplish with coop bridge. It allows teams that were not able to play the game well to play in the elimination rounds. How many times in Michigan alone did we see a robot that could not shoot and in some cases even pick up a ball end up as an alliance captain.
It might be fun to make it no value and just run up the score. That would also give us a chance to do some triple balancing in the quals.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I don't have any problem with co-op since we were pretty successful with it all year; in fact, although a little more difficult, we managed to go 9 for 9 on Galileo. However, if you do decide to do away with it for MARC, it might be interesting to play elimination rules (triple balance) for the whole thing. Of course that may open a whole other can of worms...the scheduling gods may put some teams consistently on alliances that can triple while others get doomed to alliances that don't have a chance. My preference would be to keep the co-op...I like to think that most teams at this event would put an honest effort into doing it, or at least be honest in telling you that they don't plan to.

Re: MARC 2012
 

You'd have to be pretty shallow to either not try to co-op, lie about co-op, or break up a co-op attempt at an off-season event. (IMHO anyway)

Re: MARC 2012
 

And expect to ever get another invite to return...

Re: MARC 2012
 

I'm pretty positive that we will be attending. :]

Looking forward to playing again
Regards, Bryan

Re: MARC 2012
 

While I agree 100%, that doesn't mean that if the point value was reduced it would make it more likely that teams would decide not to coop at an off-season event. Even if they don't lie or breakup a coop, a team deciding to not coop is not a very pleasant event for the other alliance.

I am fine with leaving it as 2pts. That makes it worthwhile to stop playing for the win and going to coop. If it's worth less, then which do you go for when you see you are losing the match, but agreed to coop? Win the match for 2pts or do what you said you would do for 1pt?

I can tell you that even when it was worth 2pts, teams continued to score way past the agreed upon time, just to rush the coop balance and end up failing.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I vote for 1 point for a co-op balance to give more weight to your win-loss record. I still think teams would opt for the co-op balance because you basically get credit for 1/2 a win. We had the second best win loss record at MSC but ended up in 16th place after quals. We had a solid performance but did not have good luck when it came to the co-op bridge whether it was us or our alliance partners.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I agree. The co-op bridge should be 2 pts or 0 pts.

Now if you decide on 0 pts, then question becomes whether or not you allow triple balances in quals. I'd say no because of the random pairings.

Would make strategy interesting at the end of the match knowing most of the time that the best shooter on an alliance will continue to shoot until the end. And would have some 'ammo' with the inbounders throwing balls to their side.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Team Cosmos is excited to be at MARC this year :D

We hope to meet some old friends and make new ones, as usual!

Re: MARC 2012
 

If the coop is worth 0 points, I would say you make the qualifications points as follows:

- Triple Balance = 40 Points
- Double Balance = 20 Points
- Single (Coop or Alliance Bridge) Balance = 10 Points

This would allow for teams to still perform the triple balance but if you have a match with 3 long bots you could still get 30 points. Two bots on the alliance bridge and 1 bot on the coop bridge.

-Clinton-

Re: MARC 2012
 

If coop is worth 0, then I think the coop bridge and barriers should be removed. This would allow for higher teleop scoring, and the possibility of triple balancing during qualification matches.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I like this! So, once one team goes to the co-op bridge, would it be off limits for the other? Or, would a double co-op just provide the same points to both teams?

Re: MARC 2012
 

I would say that they can coop together to get the same points, but you can not try to tip the bridge in order to unbalance the bridge.

Maybe as a bonus for cooping together you give each team like 12 more points for Hybrid because it is the tiebreaker after Qualification Score.

Some of these might be hard to do depending on the FMS and the scoring system.

-Clinton-

Re: MARC 2012
 

My vote would be to leave it as is @ 2 points.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Instead of coop bridge with 0 or 1 coop points and therefore 0 or 1 qualification points but this requires a robot from each alliance to balance, how about if one robot goes to coop bridge and get a single balance, the robot will get 1 coop point and therefore 1 qualification point. This way, if the other alliance will not come to the coop bridge to balance, you can still get 1 more qualification point for seeding and the other alliance have less power to mess with your seeding. If there is a rule like that, it will give more incentive for both alliances to go to the coop bridge which is what FIRST wants to encourage teams to do.

I also like what Clinton proposed. It may comes down to what is feasible in the scoring system to accomodate the rule change.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I like a combination of what Clinton and Ed proposed. However seeing a bunch of triples in the quals would be awesome. If the coop bridge is going to have value, allowing just one balance to get a qual point would make for some interesting decisions by teams, rather to do a triple of coop.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I really like this idea! It gives incentive for teams to do the co-op if they know that 1 alliance will get at least 1 point if they don't show. The only drawback is that one team may say they were coming .. so you would probably have to put a time limit on when you could single it. .. other than that.. I like it..

I also like the idea of having more opportunities to try triples.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Unfortunately in the scoring system there's no easy way to individually assign QP to teams. (That I can think of).

It is much easier to manipulate game scores for bridges, hybrid, etc though for Clint's idea.

Re: MARC 2012
 

How about:
- 2 QP for a triple balance on the co-op bridge, regardless of which alliance the 3 bots came from. All 6 bots on the field get the points.
- 1 QP for a double balance on the co-op bridge. Bots must be from opposite alliances. All 6 get the points.
- 10 alliance scoring points each alliance robot on a bridge (co-op or alliance).

That would encourage a lot of triple balancing (just for the fun of it) without penalizing a team for sending 2 or 3 of their bots to the co-op bridge. It would incentivise everybody to be helpful whether or not they are on the bridge. It wouldn't penalize a traditional co-op balance too much, while encouraging triples. Since any bot on the field can be part of the triple, it maximizes the chances of making it happen.

Re: MARC 2012
 

If you do 1 point for a single co-op, then what would prevent teams from going early and balancing the bridge themselves and not allowing the other alliance the chance to get the point.

Re: MARC 2012
 

The incentive is if one team is already on the coop bridge and they see the other alliance's robot coming to the coop bridge, they will get one more qualifying point if they would lower it themselves and "invite" the other robot to come up to the coop bridge. If they want to be selfish and take the one point and deny the other alliance any points, the other alliance can force the bridge down and go up. I don't think this will happen in Michigan and because the incentive is big enough.

Re: MARC 2012
 

This. I think any time you offer up an opportunity for a team to mess with another one, then it's a bad idea.

Say (under this proposed idea) I am on the coop bridge waiting for my opponent. He continues scoring...so I balance the bridge for 1pt. Then he comes to the bridge to coop, expecting to get an extra point. I stay balanced and upset them for not unbalancing...since I don't think we can get re-balanced with 2 robots in time. Or heaven forbid, they unbalance the bridge themselves and we fail to get re-balanced. Who is at fault and how many people have their feelings hurt?

The same goes for allowing triple balancing or awarding a different amount of points for triples, doubles, or singles on the coop bridge. There is always a way that a devious, but strategic coach can find to take advantage of these proposed ideas.

All these rule changes make it easier to decieve some one, not harder. I would hate for MARC to turn into this type of event because the rules were changed (in hopes of improving the play) without fully understanding the impact of these changes.

I think the GDC knew that if the coop bridge was any less valuable teams could find ways to decide not to do it. At 2Qps, its as good as a win and keeps you up in the rankings even if you lose a match.

The coop bridge in Michigan has been a postive experience all season long. My opinion is either leave it alone, and we all coop together or get rid of it and lets turn up the scoring and see who is really the best in qualification using W-L-T.

Re: MARC 2012
 

If it was up to me, then I would get rid of the entire thing and have a scorefest. However ever since day one of the M.A.R.C., I gave the authority to change rules to the Head Ref and his team. They are the ones that have to remember their changes. So why not give them the power.

I have to say that every year that Gary has been the Head Ref, he has carefully looked at the game and made only the slighest of changes to the rules. These changes have been in the teams and refs best interest and without a doubt made M.A.R.C. both very fun and exciting. Stay tuned and Gary will give his teams changes (if any) for this years event.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I agree that Gary has done an excellent job. It seems every year, people start suggesting changes just for change sake rather than in an attempt to improve some faulty part of the game. While some of the changes seem like they could be very interesting, they also would change the game too much. Gary has always reeled everyone back and only made necessary (usually minor) changes to help improve the game.

I think the coop does deserve some discussion; however, if it was up to me, I would keep it as is.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Would anyone be interested in doing a team shirt exchange if so come to team 1528's pit and let me know what size you need i need a large so if your interested stop by

Steve
Please put 279 on your list of attending.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Your on the list.

Re: MARC 2012
 

I thought the same thing when I looked at the list, but if you go to the bottom for the "Plank holders" you will find yourself! :)

Re: MARC 2012
 

There is only one week left for teams to apply. If your team is thinking of coming to participate in M.A.R.C., then please get in your application. I will not accept any late applications.

Re: MARC 2012
 

HOT has submitted a registration form.

If we get in we will be bringing a 100% brand new drive team. This (I believe) is the first time someone has not had experience on the drive team heading into an event since 2007. So, it's going to be interesting.

Can't wait to play again!

Re: MARC 2012
 

We will be having a brand new drive team and new drive coach also since the crew this year were all seniors. It will be interesting. I hope they won't do too much damage to our robot and others' robots. Attention teams, please do not get too close to our robot in the matches. Caution, new drivers. :)

Re: MARC 2012
 

Adam, gotta love a rookie drive team. We have always used rookies at the MARC in fact the drive team we used this season got their start at the MARC last year. They then went on to the WMRI putting them starting this last season with just two off seasons under their belts. We expect to bring this last seasons drivers to MARK but will be using rookies much of the time so we have a clue where we are when this years team graduates after next season. So it will be interesting from our end as well.
As always we are looking forward to great fun at the MARC this year.

Re: MARC 2012
 

Seeing as our Drive Team this year consisted of 2 sophomores and a Senior we'll be bringing a 1/3 new drive team. Beware of our Manipulator shooting balls at the most unseenly times.

Re: MARC 2012
 

BX will also be running a full rookie drive team. We are hoping to practice with them a little first.

If anyone is interested in coming down to Bedford Township (Temperance, MI) (on the border of Toledo, Ohio) and practicing on our field and bridge, let me know. :)

Re: MARC 2012
 

Backups (mostly) for my team as well. The driver, operator and coach are graduating that weekend.

Re: MARC 2012
 

This is going to be a very exciting event with all these new drivers taking over. 1528 will also have a new driver. Can't wait to see how everyone does. Good luck to all participating and have fun.

Re: MARC 2012
 

A new saying for M.A.R.C. :

"M.A.R.C., just as much fun as IRI at 1/2 the price", Does this sound like it would work?

Re: MARC 2012
 

While true. I alway think of it as, what a great place to learn to drive before going to IRI.

Re: MARC 2012
 

" CAUTION- STUDENT DRIVERS" :D
" The Future Now"
Leave iri out of it. Stand on your own merits, because you can.

Re: MARC 2012
 

"MARC: The Hottest Offseason Competition of the Summer"

Re: MARC 2012
 

"Like"

Re: MARC 2012
 

Double Like

Re: MARC 2012
 

"MARC: The Hottest Offseason Competition of the Summer"

Don't think that could be more true!!

Re: MARC 2012
 

Looking forward to another great time at MARC (although wish the pig was back)..We will be breaking in a rookie drive. As well as letting some team members get a chance to drive, just because it is fun.

Great event Steve,,, Thank you