Re: Registration 2013
 

16: CMP, Hub, WI, AR
25: CMP, NV, MAR-Hatboro, MAR-TCNJ
118: CMP, TX, LA, SJC
216: Tor-E, W CA, MI-Traverse, MI-Troy
244: Tor-E, W CA, MI-Traverse, MI-Troy
288: Tor-E, W CA, MI-Traverse, MI-Troy
341: CMP, NV, MAR-Hatboro, MAR-Springside
365: CMP, MD, MAR-Hatboro, Mar-Lenape
987: CMP, SDC, UT, NV
1114: CMP, Tor-E, WAT, TOR-W
1528: Queen, OH, MI-Waterford, MI-St. Joseph
2056: CMP, Tor-E, WAT, TOR-W

Re: Registration 2013
 

For a second there I thought you meant 1114/2056 had joined a 4th regional while I wasn't watching.

For several of these teams their 4th event is CMP.

Re: Registration 2013
 

A few of these teams could actually compete in 6 events if they play in their District Championship and also go to Champs. Not sure which gets beaten up worse...the team robots or team members :D On a side note, 987 will only compete in 2 regionals and Champs if we don't get NASA Challenge Grant for Utah...

Re: Registration 2013
 

Tasmania has fielded a team, those devils.

Re: Registration 2013
 

There's a lot of truth to this! Building a robot to survive 2 districts, a Regional, a Region Championship, and World Championships (plus 4 - soon to be 5 - off season events) is a challenge in itself.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Totally agree. Our robot this past year, while not playing as much as some of you guys in districts played, still reached the 100 match plateau by seasons end. We're very proud of the fact that the robot reached that level and is still going strong.

-Brando

Re: Registration 2013
 

Strictly theoretically speaking, 1114 and 2056 COULD play 5 regionals, all in Canada, plus CMP.

I'm actually a little surprised we didn't see 1114 take the leap yet this year to play in the 3 Ontario regionals + Montreal, and have a crack at being the first team to win 4 regionals in the same season. I mean, now that they've won CCA, there aren't really any more 'traditional' high-level awards left for them to aim at that they haven't already won at least once before.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Do not underestimate the difficulty of repeating their high level of performance (both on and off the field) year after year. It's quite a feat.

-Brando

Re: Registration 2013
 

Believe me I don't. I have had the privilege of front row seats for their entire FRC career.

However, knowing Simbotics, they're always striving toward a lofty goal, taking things to new heights. I'm not sure where they can strive to go from here that doesn't feel like more of the same.

They're already 4 time triple regional winners (06,08,10,11), 3 time CMP Division Champions(08,10,12), 1 time Champions of the World(08), Championship Chairmans Award Winners(12), 6 time RCA winners (06,08,09,10,11,12), have spent much of the last 10 years building new teams and events, both FIRST and VEX, have been on a serial TV program and more.

Where else can they go? I certainly can't wait to see.

Re: Registration 2013
 

I think a lot of top teams design robots to be "Einstein" level to win. Even though Simbots have won a championship, they're probably hungry for another one, two, or three championships.

Out of all the teams that I've looked up to, they're the one of the few teams that consistently has the robot, the drivers, and the scouting to drive a championship winning team. Being there is "easy" for them, pulling it off is "hard" and I'm sure they'll keep pushing to win the champs no matter how many other big awards may or may not be available.

Sidenote, they're missing a Championship WFA?

Edit: Apologies if I missed the point of your post.

Re: Registration 2013
 

You didn't really miss the point. I have no doubt they'll be in the thick of it time and time again to win champs.

CMP WFA is one they still don't have to my knowledge. IIRC Mark Breadner is the only Canadian CMP WFA winner, and his ties (originally, anyway) are to 188.

I'm really excited to see what 1114 can accomplish now. They should have some additional pull for sponsorship dollars, which should allow them to expand the simbot effect in new and exciting ways.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Are these slots in the districts or what? I do think we claimed the last one south of the Mason-Dixon line. (Palmetto? Full. Peachtree? Full. North Carolina? Full. Orlando? Full. Bayou? Full. Virginia? Full. Smoky Mountains? Full. South Florida? Full now! :D)

Re: Registration 2013
 

They may not show it, but the South isn't quite done yet.
North Carolina just added 3 more teams and Virginia just added 2 more.

I'm counting the estimated reserved slots that haven't been assigned or claimed yet.
South Florida, Bayou, Orlando, North Carolina probably have a good number of slots still unaccounted for.

With those last two teams Virginia's probably full now with 64 teams, and maybe Palmetto's full, possibly Peachtree. Smoky Mountain is close.

P.S.
The only events with appreciable openings are Greater Totonto West(18) & Hub City (11)
A smattering of other events have a few open slots:

• (6) Western Canada
• (5) each at MAR's Mt. Olive & Lenape Seneca
• (5) Israel
• (4) Las Vegas
• (2) Buckeye

Re: Registration 2013
 

Oh, absolutely--but it seems like open slots were not this scarce last year.

Palmetto's a crap shoot with the new venue, but Peachtree probably has about six slots waiting out. (There were 60 teams last year, and it was surprisingly not that tight.)

Re: Registration 2013
 

I suspect Virginia is now completely full at 64, unless they have some super secret space to put more pits that I don't know about.

Re: Registration 2013
 

^They could move some of the promotional booths out of the pits, or, god forbid, the Tropical Smoothie stand. But really, we usually cap at 60 teams and haven't matched 64 since Overdrive. I think as the Langley Regional it's pushed all the way up to 66, but the key word here is "push"... as in, you have to push your way through the pits.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Orlando just went up to 61 teams and only one of the new ones is a rookie

Re: Registration 2013
 

Smoothies aren't a necessity?! Say it isn't so....

:ahh:

Re: Registration 2013
 

Interestingly, NYC still has not released it's 10 or 12 reserved spots...

Re: Registration 2013
 

NYC may be holding spots for teams affected by the hurricane in NYC and Long Island. Just a guess.

Re: Registration 2013
 

It is unlikely that you will hear anything until mid December..." - NYC RD

So hey, let's play the "Veteran team that's already signed up for at least one regional/district event and is on the NYC waitlist" game!

48
1676 (?)

Re: Registration 2013
 

There are a few LI teams on the NYC waitlist as a second event, too.

New team registration has fallen off, even with the Alberta and Australian surge. It's getting closer to the 2011 new team growth rate.
New team generation (318) is running 16% behind last year at this time (see attached - gray is 2013, red is 2012, black is 2011).

A group of four rookie teams just got reclassified to new "veteran" teams and traded in for lower team numbers.

Veteran team re-registration is right on target with a 91.3% return rate.

Total growth is ~11% better than last year at this time.

Re: Registration 2013
 

the FRC Blog had some news about the events where they will still accept teams.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Not done yet. Expect a burst of teams to show up the last week, but I'd guess that we're down to the last 80 or so (mostly rookie) teams to register. To keep up the average growth rate we'd need twice that (~170 more teams). Typically, more teams will register than will actually play. Last year we dropped back 27 teams from the high point, reached a week after registration closed.

A summary to date:

• 2481 teams (~10% over last year at this time)
• 92% team retention (tied for best ever with 2003)
• 208 veteran teams gone missing
• 331 new teams (rookies + new vets)
• 21 defunct teams resurrected (two thirds of these teams sat out just one year)

Growth > 20%
800.0% ----- Australia
750.0% ----- Canada-AB
157.1% ----- AR
100.0% ----- Bosnia
100.0% ----- Canada-BC
100.0% ----- Canada-SK
100.0% ----- Dominican Republic
100.0% ----- Netherlands
100.0% ----- SD
61.9% ------ Mexico
46.2% ------ TN
30.0% ------ ME
25.0% ------ IA

Most Teams > 100:

216 ----- CA
192 ----- MI
180 ----- MN
138 ----- NY
130 ----- TX
112 ----- WA


Missing (by %)

33.3% ----- WY
33.3% ----- MT
31.8% ----- Israel
30.0% ----- NV
27.8% ----- HI
24.3% ----- TX
21.8% ----- Canada-ON
20.0% ----- Turkey
20.0% ----- MS
19.6% ----- GA
16.7% ----- KY
16.7% ----- NM
15.0% ----- CO
13.3% ----- DC
12.9% ----- LA
12.5% ----- Canada-QC
12.5% ----- ID
11.1% ----- UT
10.5% ----- FL

-------------------------------
A summary of the data is attached.

Re: Registration 2013
 

What happened to 10 of the Hawaii teams? Do they usually register late Mark?

Thanks for all of the information you supply on registration year after year, I always find it very interesting!

Re: Registration 2013
 

Just curious, what differentiates "new vets" from "defunct teams resurrected?" Is a new vet a team formed from experienced members but registered as a new team?

Also curious, how do you come by all this information? Do you have some sort of system that collects data from the FIRST website? Or is this officially distributed information?

Thanks once again for all the awesome data and analysis. It's wonderful to see the growth of our beloved program.

Re: Registration 2013
 

A defunct team retains the number they previously had, I believe this indicates they have the same main/alternate contact(s). A new vet is when a location that previously had a team, starts a new team most likely with new leadership, they recieve a new number exactly like a rookie team would.

Re: Registration 2013
 

A new vet is often a spin-off from an existing team.

Re: Registration 2013
 

For example, Team 193 (MORT Beta), a rookie team, is a 'spin-off' of existing Team 11 (MORT). 193 will be made up of the freshman that go to 11's high school.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Here's a graph showing the ages of the teams still missing from 2012.
Half are 1-2 year teams.
25% of the missing are what might be called second generation teams, i.e., they are more than 4 years old, so all the original student members would have graduated by now.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Then how come 1592 was not considered a "new vet" when they were founded? As they were a spin-off of 233.

Re: Registration 2013
 

FIRST HQ has changed the rules over the decades. Here are the current rules (not in effect in 2005).

• 2013 Team Combines and Separations
• 2013 Rookie Team Criteria

This is all based on or derived from freely available data from the FIRST website. Sometimes it's a semi-automated data scraping, other times and places it's just copied into a spreadsheet. Depends on if I'm borrowing a machine or not.
Some historical intermediate data, like snapshots of registration, I collected and preserved in years past, because I figured I'd want easy access to it some day.

Don't know. It's possible some are just hidden on the Hawaii waitlist.
The missing teams only ever attend the Hawaii Regional, with the sole exception of 368.
Five of the missing ten were registered by this time last year, so it's probable that half just haven't done it yet.

Re: Registration 2013
 

2500 teams now.
~9% more than last year at this time.
161 teams more than played last year.

There seems to be a drop-off of rookie teams from the last couple of years.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Probably because of the JC Penny Grant

Re: Registration 2013
 

We have team numbers above 4800 now.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Woohoo, Team 4800 is from Vegas, baby! Now to see who snags 4848....

Re: Registration 2013
 

Where the Rookies are playing:

rookies - vets - ratio --- Event
17 ---- 16 ---- 106.3% ----- W CA
14 ---- 31 ----- 45.2% ----- Northern Lights
12 ---- 27 ----- 44.4% ----- AR
13 ---- 30 ----- 43.3% ----- Tor-W
12 ---- 35 ----- 34.3% ----- Israel
9 ----- 29 ----- 31.0% ----- HI
11 ---- 36 ----- 30.6% ----- TN
8 ----- 29 ----- 27.6% ----- Hub
13 ---- 50 ----- 26.0% ----- WA
7 ----- 27 ----- 25.9% ----- WAT
11 ---- 45 ----- 24.4% ----- GA
7 ----- 37 ----- 18.9% ----- PIT
9 ----- 49 ----- 18.4% ----- TX
5 ----- 28 ----- 17.9% ----- MI-Gull
8 ----- 47 ----- 17.0% ----- NV
8 ----- 47 ----- 17.0% ----- SDC
8 ----- 49 ----- 16.3% ----- NY
4 ----- 28 ----- 14.3% ----- MI-Detroit
5 ----- 35 ----- 14.3% ----- Tor-E
7 ----- 50 ----- 14.0% ----- N. Star
6 ----- 44 ----- 13.6% ----- C WA
5 ----- 37 ----- 13.5% ----- Spokane
6 ----- 45 ----- 13.3% ----- SAC
7 ----- 53 ----- 13.2% ----- Alamo
5 ----- 38 ----- 13.2% ----- UT
4 ----- 32 ----- 12.5% ----- MAR-Bridgewater
5 ----- 41 ----- 12.2% ----- CO
4 ----- 34 ----- 11.8% ----- IN
6 ----- 51 ----- 11.8% ----- OH
4 ----- 34 ----- 11.8% ----- Pine Tree
5 ----- 43 ----- 11.6% ----- Inland
5 ----- 44 ----- 11.4% ----- NC
6 ----- 54 ----- 11.1% ----- 10K
6 ----- 54 ----- 11.1% ----- FL
3 ----- 27 ----- 11.1% ----- MI-Waterford
4 ----- 37 ----- 10.8% ----- Montreal
3 ----- 28 ----- 10.7% ----- MAR-Lenape
6 ----- 56 ----- 10.7% ----- SC
5 ----- 48 ----- 10.4% ----- IL
5 ----- 48 ----- 10.4% ----- SFL
3 ----- 29 ----- 10.3% ----- MAR-Springside
5 ----- 50 ----- 10.0% ----- LA
5 ----- 52 ------ 9.6% ----- MD
3 ----- 32 ------ 9.4% ----- MAR-Mt Olive
3 ----- 33 ------ 9.1% ----- MAR-TCNJ
3 ----- 38 ------ 7.9% ----- CV
4 ----- 51 ------ 7.8% ----- SJC
3 ----- 40 ------ 7.5% ----- Dallas
3 ----- 40 ------ 7.5% ----- MO
4 ----- 54 ------ 7.4% ----- DC
4 ----- 55 ------ 7.3% ----- WI
4 ----- 56 ------ 7.1% ----- CA
3 ----- 43 ------ 7.0% ----- MA
2 ----- 29 ------ 6.9% ----- MI-Troy
3 ----- 45 ------ 6.7% ----- AZ
3 ----- 45 ------ 6.7% ----- CT
2 ----- 30 ------ 6.7% ----- MI-Livonia
3 ----- 51 ------ 5.9% ----- OK
2 ----- 38 ------ 5.3% ----- Crossroads
3 ----- 58 ------ 5.2% ----- OR
3 ----- 61 ------ 4.9% ----- VA
2 ----- 41 ------ 4.9% ----- Lake S
2 ----- 45 ------ 4.4% ----- FLR
2 ----- 45 ------ 4.4% ----- LI
2 ----- 49 ------ 4.1% ----- Queen
2 ----- 52 ------ 3.8% ----- KC
1 ----- 29 ------ 3.4% ----- MI-St Joseph
1 ----- 35 ------ 2.9% ----- MAR-Hatboro
1 ----- 35 ------ 2.9% ----- MI-Traverse
1 ----- 35 ------ 2.9% ----- WOR
1 ----- 43 ------ 2.3% ----- NH
0 ----- 31 ------ 0.0% ----- MI-Grand Blanc
0 ----- 31 ------ 0.0% ----- MI-Kettering
0 ----- 31 ------ 0.0% ----- MI-West

Re: Registration 2013
 

China is trying again this year at the Spokane Regional

Team Number: 4813
Team Name: shen zhen da da le le
Team Location: Shen zhen, GD China (shares a border with Hong Kong)
Rookie Season: 2013
Team Nickname: R2
Year - Event : 2013 Spokane Regional

Re: Registration 2013
 

Does this team have mentor support from a veteran team?

Re: Registration 2013
 

Huānyíng guānglín 4813!

Re: Registration 2013
 

I think Cantonese is spoken there rather than Mandarin.

zhe yan
這

Do any of the Spokane Regional teams have members fluent in Cantonese?
That would be a nice veteran team contact to make.

Re: Registration 2013
 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shenzhen#Languages Sounds likely that Mandarin is the lingua franca of the younger demographic of Shenzhen...:)

Re: Registration 2013
 

I will check and see if I have any students thats can help.
We will be at Spokane. I will see if I have any students that know also...

R

Re: Registration 2013
 

They speak both Mandarin and Cantonese. I would say almost all people in Shenzhen can speak Mandarin and most people can speak Cantonese. My guess is they learn English also in school. By the way, Shenzhen is not practically in Hong Kong. I am very glad to see a team coming from there. Hopefully they will expand to other cities.

Re: Registration 2013
 

During my recent visit to China, I found that almost all the teenagers spoke English quite well. Probably much better than Americans trained in Mandarin or Cantonese speak those languages. My point is that the language barrier will not be a major problem.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Do we need an American teenager to translate for us older folks? :)

Re: Registration 2013
 

I've made a few trips to Guangdong province recently, on business for Whirlpool. We have both engineering labs and motor suppliers in that part of China. Shenzhen is among the easiest parts of China for foreign travelers to reach -- I like going by ferry from HK. I will very likely be there again for a few days during the upcoming build season.

I agree with Eric's comment above re: language. There are more than 100 million people in Guangdong province today, and a significant fraction of them either speak or are learning to speak English. Of course many of those are young people, with better than average education and a keen interest in science and technology.

Back to my question: does anyone know if FRC 4813 has mentor support from a veteran team?

Re: Registration 2013
 

Team 1208 would love to mentor and support them, but we are not going to the Spokane Regional. If no one from that regional steps up, we will be glad to fill that role.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Put Singapore on the list to mentor, too.
This one needs a Toronto West mentoring team.
No language barrier here, unless the mentoring team is French-Canadian I suppose...

Team Number: 4817
Team Name: Singapore American School
Team Location: Singapore
Team Nickname: Singapore Eagles
Event: 2013 Greater Toronto West Regional

P.S.
Singapore has the furthest to travel to their event at 9300 miles (great circle distance).
Beating out the two Girls/Boys of Blacktown, Australia teams (7700 miles) and the Los Angeles team attending Israel (7500 miles).

Re: Registration 2013
 

Our Singapore FTC sister team will be visiting the US in January for a competition. They have made this trip many times since 2005, when they participated in their first FVC event at Champs. Team 341 also did a trip to Singapore, with our FRC robot in tow, back in 2006. The trip took 36 hours door to door. (and nothing went wrong with the flights or transfers) That was a very tough commute, but well worth the visit. Very glad to see a team from Singapore making the move towards FRC.

Re: Registration 2013
 

We will certainly be available to mentor them ...How do we get contact information? We will be at the Spokane Regional

thanks

Re: Registration 2013
 

No contact info. is listed in TIMS for them.
I'd try contacting FIRST HQ, maybe Carla Proulx, FRC International Coordinator.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Idle curiosity lead to this...
FRC teams (as of last weekend when I did this) will travel 1.4 million miles to attend events.
That doesn't count the district championships or the additional 367 teams expected to attend the World Championship in St. Louis.
Hawaii wins because all of Australia is attending (or maybe not because a bunch of Australian teams just got removed).

These are the sum of the one-way great circle travel distances in miles of the teams attending each event.

The first two columns are the total for the event & average per team.
The next two columns picked an arbitrary cutoff of 300 mi (as the crow flies) and did the total & average (avgs are a little low, but I'll fix them).

column 1 -----------------column 2-----------------column 3 -----------column 4
Total Travel Distance -- Avg Distance/team -- Total Local Travel -- Avg Local Travel -- Event

67723 ----- 1782 ------ 1159 ------- 31 ------- HI
46462 ------ 845 ------ 6890 ------ 125 ------- NV
30255 ------ 917 ------- 713 ------- 22 ------- CMP
29149 ------ 883 ------- 116 -------- 4 ------- W CA
22445 ------ 423 ------ 3128 ------- 59 ------- SFL
20952 ------ 368 ------- 645 ------- 11 ------- NY
19287 ------ 321 ------ 4805 ------- 80 ------- FL
18941 ------ 357 ------ 1970 ------- 37 ------- IL
17864 ------ 288 ------ 6007 ------- 97 ------- SC
17738 ------ 422 ------ 6229 ------ 148 ------- Spokane
16436 ------ 283 ------ 1816 ------- 31 ------- DC
16003 ------ 276 ------ 3337 ------- 58 ------- TX
15145 ------ 352 ------ 2392 ------- 56 ------- Tor-W
14950 ------ 249 ------ 1873 ------- 31 ------- CA
13104 ------ 230 ------ 5758 ------ 101 ------- OH
12445 ------ 289 ------ 2345 ------- 55 ------- Dallas
11634 ------ 212 ------ 3512 ------- 64 ------- LA
11246 ------ 250 ------ 5969 ------ 133 ------- Northern Lights
11162 ------ 186 ------ 5782 ------- 96 ------- Alamo
10722 ------ 210 ------ 3049 ------- 60 ------- SAC
10419 ------ 282 ------ 4082 ------ 110 ------- Hub
10385 ------ 242 ------ 1962 ------- 46 ------- UT
10364 ------ 225 ------ 1184 ------- 26 ------- MA
10076 ------ 206 ------ 4138 ------- 84 ------- NC
9869 ------- 210 ------ 1116 ------- 24 ------- Israel
9086 ------- 239 ------ 2826 ------- 74 ------- IN
8721 ------- 159 ------ 2666 ------- 48 ------- SDC
8505 ------- 158 ------ 4763 ------- 88 ------- OK
7242 ------- 177 ------ 4320 ------ 105 ------- CV
7205 ------- 168 ------ 6233 ------ 145 ------- Lake S
7194 ------- 156 ------ 1587 ------- 35 ------- CO
7087 ------- 177 ------ 3295 ------- 82 ------- Tor-E
7048 ------- 110 ------ 4336 ------- 68 ------- VA
7021 ------- 149 ------ 2812 ------- 60 ------- TN
7006 ------- 137 ------ 5034 ------- 99 ------- Queen
6920 ------- 177 ------ 4853 ------ 124 ------- AR
6686 ------- 139 ------ 3028 ------- 63 ------- Inland
6445 ------- 117 ------ 1496 ------- 27 ------- SJC
5927 ------- 126 ------- 855 ------- 18 ------- LI
5787 ------- 123 ------ 3409 ------- 73 ------- FLR
5664 -------- 99 ------ 4125 ------- 72 ------- MD
5623 -------- 95 ------ 4203 ------- 71 ------- WI
5612 ------- 112 ------ 5612 ------ 112 ------- C WA
5546 ------- 135 ------ 1603 ------- 39 ------- Montreal
5342 ------- 134 ------ 4665 ------ 117 ------- Crossroads
5206 ------- 145 ------ 1904 ------- 53 ------- WOR
5022 ------- 132 ------ 3537 ------- 93 ------- Pine Tree
4674 -------- 87 ------ 2836 ------- 53 ------- KC
4443 -------- 73 ------ 3441 ------- 56 ------- OR
4185 -------- 70 ------ 2347 ------- 39 ------- 10K
4038 ------- 112 ------ 4038 ------ 112 ------- MI-Traverse
3956 -------- 82 ------ 2104 ------- 44 ------- AZ
3681 -------- 65 ------ 3681 ------- 65 ------- N Star
3490 ------- 116 ------ 2438 ------- 81 ------- MI-St Joseph
3419 -------- 61 ------ 3102 ------- 55 ------- GA
3202 -------- 73 ------ 3202 ------- 73 ------- PIT
2690 -------- 79 ------ 2260 ------- 66 ------- WAT
2679 -------- 62 ------ 2679 ------- 62 ------- MO
2587 -------- 59 ------ 2187 ------- 50 ------- NH
2063 -------- 33 ------ 1625 ------- 26 ------- WA
1983 -------- 64 ------ 1983 ------- 64 ------- MI-West
1793 -------- 37 ------ 1793 ------- 37 ------- CT
1698 -------- 51 ------ 1698 ------- 51 ------- MI-Gull
1202 -------- 33 ------ 1202 ------- 33 ------- MAR-TCNJ
1173 -------- 33 ------ 1173 ------- 33 ------- MAR-Hatboro
1137 -------- 37 ------ 1137 ------- 37 ------- MI-Troy
1106 -------- 36 ------ 1106 ------- 36 ------- MI-Grand Blanc
1101 -------- 36 ------ 1101 ------- 36 ------- MI-Kettering
1019 -------- 29 ------ 1019 ------- 29 ------- MAR-Mt Olive
957 --------- 27 ------- 957 ------- 27 ------- MAR-Bridgewater
939 --------- 30 ------- 939 ------- 30 ------- MAR-Lenape
689 --------- 22 ------- 689 ------- 22 ------- MI-Livonia
665 --------- 21 ------- 665 ------- 21 ------- MAR-Springside
627 --------- 21 ------- 627 ------- 21 ------- MI-Waterford
406 --------- 13 ------- 406 ------- 13 ------- MI-Detroit

Re: Registration 2013
 

Michigan hit 200 teams.

Two additional Chinese teams have replaced some of the dropped Australian teams at the Hawaii Regional.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Well, registration officially closed at noon today.
Don't think it ends quite so abruptly though. Many waitlists are still to be cleared, and teams will continue to drift in and out.

• 2562 teams
• 223 more teams than last season for 9.5% growth (below the past decade's average by ~3%)
• 382 new teams (17% fewer than last year)
• 25 resurrected veteran teams (came back after 2 to 7 years)
• 182 of last years vets are missing, but that's actually the best retention rate (93.3%) that FRC has ever had.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Just curious.... Who has the honor of owning the highest team number and what is that number?
Thanks for all the effort that you put into this each year.

Re: Registration 2013
 

At one point this afternoon, there was 2564 teams. 2 must have dropped.
4 of the 5 with the highest numbers came from MI. The highest is team 4839 from Ishpeming, MI.

Re: Registration 2013
 

How many Ontario teams are there compared to last year. How many have not registered that competed last year?

Re: Registration 2013
 

THere are 87 Ontario teams this year. 26 of of these are rookies There were 78 Ontario teams last year. This means that there are 17 missing vets.

Re: Registration 2013
 

4841 out of Tucson, AZ

Re: Registration 2013
 

The highest team number for this season probably hasn't shown up quite yet.

After registration closes there will continue to be a gradual rise in the number of teams for the next 10-12 days, before they begin to fall off as loosely organized teams fall apart, fundraising hopes are dashed, unions go on strike. The final count will probably end up around what it is now.
Expect the peak in registration numbers to be reached around December 17 or so, before it begins to drop back to around today's number.

Last year the registration process was extremely long and drawn out. Believe it or not, last year the final team wasn't dropped from the FIRST roster until the first week in April (April fool's I suppose).

Re: Registration 2013
 

Anybody know who the 17 missing Ontario vets are?

EDIT: They are:

Older vets:
843 (been a 2 regional team every year since 2004 [actually, 2005 was WAT/CMP])
1009 (previously defunct from 2007-2010)
1053 (been attending GTR-West only since 2003)
1221 (been attending GTR-West only since 2003, missed 2009, and played GTR-East as well in 2012)
1514 (been attending GTR [GTRE in 2011] since 2005, added Waterloo in 2012)
1535 (a mix, been to CMP 3x, usually attended at least one Ontario regional every year since 2007)
1835 (been attending GTR-West only since 2006)
2076 (WAT in '07, GTR/WAT in 08/09, didn't play in '10, GTR-West in '11/'12)

Single-year teams:
4022
4094
4236
4248
4249
4258
4307
4357
4367

Re: Registration 2013
 

I've been maintaining some maps of the missing teams. I update it every few days:
http://batchgeo.com/map/8609ea5e7bfa...7f3fcb7f0e09ee

Rookie team locations too: http://batchgeo.com/map/1fc7f4d6e73f...b47448ab26a4ce

Re: Registration 2013
 

Not really on-topic, but when is Michigan going to get the appropriate number of bids to CMP proportional to the number of teams in the state?

Re: Registration 2013
 

I was hoping 3 years ago. We still have not.
Another question would be when we are getting more districts as 10 is almost too few for 206 teams.
Hopefully, both of those get raised next year.

Re: Registration 2013
 

When are they going to start clearing off some of these waitlists?

Re: Registration 2013
 

Kudos to Minnesota, they have seen some explosive growth in the past few seasons and have not lost a single team this year (yet). Growth + sustainability = recipe for success! Good job!

Re: Registration 2013
 

May I point out that last year Michigan had 190 of 2339 teams or 8.12% of all teams, Michigan then had 36 of 400 at CMP or 9% of of teams at CMP thus it is proportional

Re: Registration 2013
 

I asked the same question; the RD handles the waitlist, so whenever he/she is able to clear it is when it is done.

Re: Registration 2013
 

But how many of those were from open registration at the start of the season? They only award 18 slots at Michigan CMP. With no open registration to speak of this year, that number is likely to decrease, perhaps significantly. They only other way for Michigan teams to qualify is via winning an outside regional (along with CCA and Einstein, etc).

For comparison, MAR had 26 out of 99 teams at CMP last year, 12 qualified at MAR CMP, 9 teams registered in the fall, 4 spots were opened up by teams double qualifying at MAR CMP (outside regional winner/preregistration/CCA), and 1 CCA winner.

This year we will have our 12 slots at MAR CMP, 4 teams registered from last year (3 CCA and 1 Einstein 12), and then possibly a few more if any MAR teams qualify via outside regionals (looks like 10 out of 109 teams plan to attend another regional this year). A few of those 12 slots could be lost if 25,103,341, or 365 attend and win MAR CMP or MAR EI/CA.

Regardless, I don't think there's any denying that Michigan produces some of the strongest teams in FIRST, and they'll likely be under-represented this year.

Re: Registration 2013
 

2012 MAR Teams = 99 or 4% (99/2339)
2012 MAR Teams sent form their Regional CMP = 12 or 3% (12/400)

2012 MI Team = 190 or 8% (190/2339)
2012 MAR Teams sent form MSC = 18 or 4.5% (18/400)

Like Scottandme said most of the additional MI teams either paid their way and didn't make it via the District model. Michigan should be sending 36 teams to the Championship via MSC. Also remember that Michigan is going on its 5th year of the district model and we still send the same number of teams (18) in 2012 that we did back in 2009.

That's why we do the math!?

-Clinton-

Re: Registration 2013
 

Then Michigan teams should go to OOS regionals and win those to get in.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Also looking at robot performance, MI and MAR were well represented in the elimination rounds in 2012. 96 teams were chosen for eliminations, or 24% of teams at CMP. A quick check indicates that 23 of those teams were from Michigan and 8 were from MAR.

The math shakes out to show that 63.8% of Michigan teams at CMP were selected for eliminations, and 30.7% of teams from MAR at CMP were selected for eliminations, ahead of the expected value of 24%.

As a part of the entire CMP event: Michigan made up 9.0% of the teams attending, but 24.0% of elimination teams were from Michigan. MAR represented 6.5% of the total teams at CMP, and represented 8.3% of the elimination teams.

As a share of the entire region: 12.1% of all Michigan teams (190) made it the CMP eliminations, and 8.1% of all MAR teams (99) made it to the CMP eliminations. The average for every FIRST team is 4.1% (96 of 2339 teams).

Re: Registration 2013
 

That's not really a logical answer. Michigan and MAR already have a very good to excellent method for ranking teams. Two qualifying events (24 qualification matches and eliminations) that feed into a region championship. Telling teams to spend the time and money to go to another event isn't the easy answer.

We were one of the (18?) teams that attended 5 events last year, and it was draining. Two MAR districts, Montreal, MAR CMP, and World CMP. That was $18,000 in registration alone. Thanks to our hard work, excellent sponsors, and school district we were able to manage that, but we're not the norm in that regard. We could have skipped MAR CMP since we won at Montreal, but had we not been lucky in that regard it's a mandatory 4 events before you can qualify for CMP.

You can also be an excellent team and not manage to get lucky enough to win a regional. Look at 118 this year, they had to win their 3rd and final regional to get a bid for CMP, and they were easily one of the top 10 robots in FIRST.

The easy solution is to adjust the number of bids to be proportional to the number to teams as a region grows. Michigan and MAR are the guinea pigs here, and it's tricky since everyone else is still in the regional system. I think the intent was to keep the same number of slots as there were in the regional system, so MAR got 12 as Philadelphia and NJ were dropped in the transition to MAR. MAR grew by 10 teams this year (99 to 109), so we now have 1 CMP slot for every ~9.1 teams. Michigan has 1 CMP slot for every ~11.4 teams (18 for 206 teams).

It's not a direct comparison, but California is close to Michigan in size (216 teams), and has 6 Regional events. No idea about waitlists, but right now those 6 events have 320 teams registered, or 1 slot for every 8.9 teams competing (53 team/event average). Competing in Michigan is roughly equivalent to attending a 68 team regional, with teams that are significantly better than average.

Re: Registration 2013
 

I found out that Susan, RD for Ohio, has authorized the clearing of QCR's waitlist but it isn't expected to happen until the end of the week. Not sure why it takes so long. I suppose they are contacting each team and asking them if they want in, and then waiting for a reply.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Yes it is. Every other team that competes in FIRST has to either win their regional or win an award that merits a CMP slot. FiM and MAR teams get 2x the chances to get to CMP than everyone else. You guys dont have to win your competitions to go to the region championships where you can still win slots or you can go OOR to play somewhere else and still win and get in.

Re: Registration 2013
 

I was given a similar answer for New York City's waitlist.

I expect this answer might be similar for most events.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Similarly, your team can go to (and pay for) a 2nd or 3rd or 4th regional if you want another chance to qualify.

In my opinion, Michigan has a pretty good point. It would be fair to increase the number of qualifying teams from that region.

Re: Registration 2013
 

I am trying to figure this out, but not succeeding. How do you figure? Much was just posted about the number of qualification spots in FIM/MAR compared to an equivalent regional. Most regions of the country feature more qualification spots per team than in the district areas.

Furthermore, it takes FIM/MAR teams a minimum of 3 events (2 districts + Region CMP, though one could technically opt to skip one district) to qualify for the World Championship. That's 3 weeks out of 7 that are not available to attend an outside competition, and if you want to minimize the number of back to back competitions, it REALLY limits your options. Add to that the fact that because of the district system, you need to travel a potentially long ways to find another Regional.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Michigan should get more CMP slots, but it shouldn't be done strictly by percentage of Michigan teams in FRC = percentage of Michigan teams at CMP, simply because that's not how it's done anywhere else. 6 teams qualify at a regional regardless of the size of the regional. I would think a fair way to do it(for Michigan and MAR) would be to come up with a number of teams for an "average regional", and base the numbers on that. For example, if we say the average regional has 50 teams and Michigan has 216 teams, 216/50 = about 4 average regionals, 6x4=24 slots.

Re: Registration 2013
 

FiM and MAR only get 2x the chances IF they go out of state.

Last year only 4.7% (Total of 9) of Michigan teams went out of state. Only one of those teams (27) won an award (they won EI) that got them to the Championship without the need to go to MSC. However, RUSH also won the MSC Chairman's award that also guaranteed them a spot for Champs.

If non-FiM teams go to the same number of events as a FiM team that goes to 2 districts and MSC. Those teams technically get 3x the chances to make it to the Champs. Not to mention the level of competition at a regional vs MSC.

-Clinton-

Re: Registration 2013
 

This is exactly it. When Michigan went to districts in 2009, they were given the equivalent number of slots as they had previously with regionals. 3 regionals x 6 slots = 18 slots. I believe MAR did the same thing when they started.

What hasn't been addressed with the district system yet is how that increases with team growth. Michigan has many more teams now than when they started, and had they still been in a regional setup, they probably would have added at least one, maybe two more regionals by now, because the team base has grown and can support it. Right now they're still stuck with the same 3-regional equivalent. Fast growing regions like Texas, California and Washington have all expanded their events:

Texas: 2009 - 2 events, 2013 - 3 events
California: 2009 - 4 events, 2013 - 6 events
Washington: 2009 - 1 event, 2013 - 3 events

This means that those states/regions are qualifying more teams through regionals than they were several years ago, proportional to the team growth in the state. Michigan is not, because they have been fixed at 18 slots since 2009, regardless of the team growth and increase in the number of districts in the state.

Re: Registration 2013
 

FiM and MAR teams would have two chances to get to Champs, only if they go out of their region. But teams that go to two regionals (which is most) have two chances as well. Only 10 teams are signed up for out-of-region competitions for 2013 out of the 109 MAR teams. That's just 11%.


Some might argue that MAR teams get an additional (third) chance since the MAR Regional took 12 spots from the combined NJ and Philly Regionals, but one must remember that they are competing there against TWICE the usual amount of teams, and also that the qualifying spots are distributed differently. Three winners, two Chairmans, but only 1 EI, 1 R.A.S., and then the 5 next highest ranked teams.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Um, no. This is a false statement.
What did you use as the basis for this?


I imagine as District systems become more prevalent, the system must eventually be based on percentage of overall FRC team population.
To give one area more slots, means that some other area must lose slots.
Regionals as an entity unto themselves would need adjustment to qualify fewer teams.
You can't just think to add slots-poor economics.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Whoops, my apologies. I misread the data that was posted earlier. I retract that statement.

Speaking of that, Mark, do you have any updated info of what percentage of teams are going to each number of competitions (1 event, 2 events, etc.)? Specifically, teams not in district models? I know the percentage of MAR teams attending outside regionals is 10.9%, and I don't believe any are signed up for more than 2 districts.

But just me thinking (specifically about MAR):

*MAR teams have two sets of regional spots to qualify for Champs, but they are distributed differently. Also, there is about twice the teams competing for them. And, as has happened in FiM, as time goes on, there will be more teams competing for the same limited number of spots.
*Yes, MAR teams have the chance to go out of chance to an outside regional to increase their chances. But, don't all teams have the ability to attend more competitions (of course budget ranges in all teams)?

Re: Registration 2013
 

You left Minnesota off your list... 2 events in 2009, 4 events in 2013. I firmly believe we'll move to a district model sometime in the next couple of years. I doubt it'll happen for 2014 though - we need to build up the volunteer base a lot more to support the number of events a district system has. Maybe after we add one or two more regionals!

Re: Registration 2013
 

Wow, thanks for bringing us back to reality. When you think about it that way, it would seem like FIRST's hands are tied. No one wants to take away the championship qualification from one of the regional awards, but with the end of open Championship registration, it looks like FIRST thinks 400 teams is already too many. I would agree that this type of change will probably come with the addition of more district systems.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Currently the 400 spots at championship does not have this issue (yet).

2013 Total Events = 76
2013 FiM Events = 11
2013 MAR Events = 7
2013 Regionals = 58 = 76-11-7

Slots at Champs = 400
FiM CMP Slots = 18
MAR CMP Slots = 12
Regional Slots = 348 = 58 * 6
Remaining Slots = 22 = 400-348-18-12

But we are approaching that point very soon.

-Clinton-

Re: Registration 2013
 

+17 Hall of Fame
+ 5 Original and sustaining teams (not already in the Hall of Fame)
=
400

We're there. In fact, we're over capacity given the 2012 Einstein resolution. Only declines and double qualification will keep it at or under 400.

Re: Registration 2013
 

And then Wildcards will push it right up again...

Re: Registration 2013
 

Wildcards can't push it over, since they are simply taking the slot of a double-qualified team. It will reduce the number of "empty" slots due to double-qualified teams.

But the raw facts are that as it stands, close to 400 teams will qualify or have already qualified for Championships, without any waitlist or open registration.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Wildcards can only consume the slots allocated for in the math above, and only for teams that have previously won an event (not CA/RAS/EI). I forget the exact numbers, but FIRST published data that said the acceptance rate to attend CMP was much higher last year than previously seen. I think they said something like 85-90% of qualified teams ended up attending, which was higher than historical precedent suggested.

That's the likely cause for the elimination of open registration slots (along with general growing pains outlined above). FIRST wants to have a good idea of exactly how many qualified teams are going to attend before accepting non-award winners. Just like college acceptances and waitlists.

There are 33 teams currently registered for CMP (HOF, Sustaining, Einstein). There are 378 more spots possible across the 58 regionals/MI/MAR. So assuming that everyone accepts, the currently registered teams don't win a banner, and there are no double winners (CA/RAS/EI & Regional, etc), that's 411 teams. I may be fuzzy on the wildcard slots, but I think it only applies to a team that previously won an event, not preregistration or CA/EI/RAS.

I think we'll be comfortably under 400 teams qualifying, even a 90% conversion of those 378 possible slots gives us 373 teams at CMP. Then it all comes down to how many teams FIRST actually wants at CMP.

Does anyone have data (Mark?) for how many teams preregistered for CMP last year?

Re: Registration 2013
 

What I meant but not what I wrote :)

Re: Registration 2013
 

142, but many of those pre-registered teams actually dropped out.
So really, 113 teams that competed at Championship pre-registered, some were HOF, original/sustaining teams, previous year's champs, and many others later qualified through competition.

P.S.
A little more detail for those interested in this sort of thing:

• 31 of the 113 pre-registered teams ended up also qualifying through competition or as HOF, etc.
• 82 pre-registered teams (the rest of the 113) got to CMP without otherwise qualifying.
• 95 teams were pulled from the waitlist without otherwise qualifying.

So 177 non-qualifying teams went to Championships.
If we apply that to this season (and I haven't miscounted something)...
177 (slots)
- 9 for extra Einstein teams
- 48 = 8*6 for new Regionals
----------------------
120 teams may get in off the waitlist (give or take circumstances).

Re: Registration 2013
 

I have a feeling that due to the ending of open registration, acceptance rates for Championship will climb even higher. Imagine being faced with the decision to go or not go when you can't just register again next year. Albeit, not every team will accept, but I bet it will be over 90%.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Registration for a third MAR District opened yesterday.
Seems to be lots of room available, but since all but one event is at the waitlist stage, I suppose that the RD will be filtering teams onto the event lists.

Only one team (1279) appeared on a third event so far. That seems to be because they signed up for the sole remaining District that hasn't reached initial capacity and so got right on the list.

Three teams (1617,2070, 4373) are still only shown as registered for a single District event.
For comparison, FiM has 80 teams that haven't been assigned a second District event yet.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Sorry, I got distracted by Xmas shopping and forgot to respond to this question.

For ALL events (Regional/District/CMP) these are the current counts (give or take - event lists are still volatile) :
Note: not all District teams are registered for two events yet.

• 4 events - 13 teams (0.5%)
• 3 events - 57 teams (2.2%)
• 2 events - 782 teams (30.4%)
• 1 event - 1717 teams (66.8%)

For Regional-Only teams:

• 4 events - 6 (0.3%)
• 3 events - 41 (1.8%)
• 2 events - 580 (25.7%)
• 1 event - 1626 (72.2%)

Re: Registration 2013
 

You're close. First, a team must qualify for the Championship this season, meaning they win an event or one of the qualifying awards. Then, they must be a winner of a subsequent event, which triggers the wildcard process, in which a Championship bid is extended to one finalist team. This will usually be the alliance captain, but will move to the first pick if the alliance captain has themselves already qualified for Championships, and can further move down to the other finalists for the same reason. Only one finalist team can get this bid, and if that team declines it, the wildcard slot goes unused. Hope that clears things up a little.

Re: Registration 2013
 

Where did you get that from? I don't see it detailed here:

http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprogr...T-Championship

Re: Registration 2013
 

From that blog post:
(Emphasis mine)
What I meant was if 1 already-qualified team wins the event, only 1 team is given the opportunity to go to Championships. This team is the first finalist team which has not yet qualified, going in order from alliance captain to backup team. Since the slot only gets passed down the order for this reason, if the slot is offered to the alliance captain, the other teams on the alliance cannot get it, even if the alliance captain declines to attend.