Chief Delphi - 3rd Regional Question

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)

- General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - 3rd Regional Question (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=115483)

Re: 3rd Regional Question

Quote:

Originally Posted by shewejff (Post 1253558)

I share the same concerns as moogboy about teams playing in their third event, particularly the massive number at Bedford. From seeing what happens at these later events in years past, our team didn't even consider going to Troy, Livonia, and especially Bedford. The "home" event that is selected for us has been a later event the last few years, and we don't even consider going to it.

Yes, filling in those empty slots "increase[s] FRC team participation". The problem is that the teams that are going to a third event are typically better than your average Michigan FRC team. They're frequently the more well established teams that also have better than average robots. To back up this point, I looked at the 26 third event teams competing at Bedford. On average, they scored 30 points towards going to MSC at the events that they have already played. Michigan teams earn an average of about 24 points towards MSC at each of their events. Those third event teams are higher caliber teams that now have two events of practice and tweaking their robots under their belts. They're going up against "average" FRC teams with only one event of practice. I'd be curious to see the average number of points that the 14 second event teams get at Bedford. I'd bet that they are going to get much lower than average of 24 points.

I don't really know a good solution to the problem. I understand that having an event with 14 teams isn't acceptable. If there was a better way to distribute the open spots across all the events, that would be optimal (e.g., all events capped at 36 teams). The only problem is that you don't really know exactly how many Michigan teams there will be next year so an exact cap amount isn't known immediately, but a reasonable approximation wouldn't be that hard. It would mean that teams can't go to third events (they can still go out of state), but it would make it more fair for the teams at the later events.

At the very least, teams shouldn't be eligible for awards at their third event. Every award the third event teams win also sucks away points from the second event teams. Judging by the awards that the third event teams have already won at their first two events, it wouldn't surprise me if only a small handful of awards (if any) are won by the second event teams at Bedford.

Thank you for coming up with that data! I have been meaning to do something similar, just for myself.

Also, I strongly support the no awards for third event teams thing you just mentioned. I'm not sure if that's something that could be requested or what? I know that my team wants to start grooming younger students in the interview process, maybe we could ask to be interviewed but not considered? I'll bring this up to my mentors at the first opportunity.

Re: 3rd Regional Question

Quote:

Originally Posted by shewejff (Post 1253558)

At the very least, teams shouldn't be eligible for awards at their third event. Every award the third event teams win also sucks away points from the second event teams. Judging by the awards that the third event teams have already won at their first two events, it wouldn't surprise me if only a small handful of awards (if any) are won by the second event teams at Bedford.

By my count there are 13 awards in FiM that are worth points (14 in MAR). If only 14 or so teams are eligible for these awards then there is a near 100% chance of earning one. That is ridiculous. The awards would be basically meaningless.

Using that system a team attending Bedford as a second district would have a huge advantage over teams that did not.

Giving away free points is not the answer.

Re: 3rd Regional Question

Quote:

Originally Posted by moogboy (Post 1253594)

Also, I strongly support the no awards for third event teams thing you just mentioned. I'm not sure if that's something that could be requested or what? I know that my team wants to start grooming younger students in the interview process, maybe we could ask to be interviewed but not considered? I'll bring this up to my mentors at the first opportunity.

While this is commendable on your part, I don't know if the judges would even allow you to not be considered for awards. But training younger students is definitely a good idea for a third event. We are also going to Bedford as our third district, and I really hope to completely switch around who does what.

One way I'm looking at is that students who did well throughout the season will get "rewarded" at Bedford. For example, I'll be sending a new student down for alliance selections so that they can get the experience, and I'll be picking who that is based on who the best scout throughout the season was. And we might move a student who has worked really hard and dedicated a lot of time to this season into the pit crew.

So while the third district does have its downsides, there are a lot of good ways to use it to better your team.

Re: 3rd Regional Question

I would say this:

If any team, for any reason, declines an award or to compete in the eliminations, that is their call. This does include the reason being that the event is their third district event. As long as they choose that as a team, and make it known to the appropriate parties (judges, refs, MC possibly), I don't think anybody would have a problem with that. (And it has happened before. I can think of two separate cases.) The team could even promote another team for the award, if they wanted.

However, I do not think that it should be required for any team to do so, regardless of number of events played. Doing that, as noted, creates a huge issue with points advantages.

Re: 3rd Regional Question

Quote:

Originally Posted by P.J. (Post 1253608)

Of course, and as a co-president I'm looking to leverage the time in as many ways as possible to benefit the team. Giving younger guys more responsibilities and shifting around some roles to help meet some unfulfilled wishes is definitely part of the plan.

Re: 3rd Regional Question

Quote:

Originally Posted by AGPapa (Post 1253605)

Bedford is a pretty crazy situation with only 14 second event teams competing, so I'll agree with you that this isn't a fantastic recommendation for that event. When you look at a more typical late season event like Livonia and Troy, I still think it would make a good change.

That being said, I have a feeling that even if you gave 2-5 points to all 14 of the second event teams at Bedford, they may may still have a hard time hitting the 24 point average.

EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm not advocating that any third event teams this year purposely ask judges to not to give them awards or decline alliance selections or anything of that sort. I personally think that the FiM rules for next year should be changed to eliminate third events, and if that's not possible, changed to not allow third event teams to get awards.