Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

To add on to this, I think if FIRST is going through the trouble of adding in more opportunities for judging of awards, we need to be getting better feedback everywhere. I was very disappointed and had a confused look on my face when I took the awards lead down to pit admin to collect the nonexistent feedback, but going back over the feedback sheets we did get at Alamo and Virginia, I wish we got better feedback.

FIRST has my email and contact info for myself and the other contacts in TIMS. 422 went to championships to see how we stack up against other teams and learn from them. While we had the opportunity to do that with the robot, it was very disappointing to not get that same experience from judges of the highest honor in FIRST. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that we are miles behind 33, 340, 503, 604, 1108, 2486, or the Hall of Fame teams when it comes to program quality, but I want to know exaclty where we need to be improving and to see if we are missing anything.

I know under the new structure judges are overworked, but I would like the detailed, digital feedback offered at one of Spectrum's events (Dallas or Lone Star?) to be available at every event including Championship.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Each district (at least in MAR) was a bit different with this, some would run full 'practice matches' while others would just allow teams to connect to the field (which normally involved the robot sitting on a cart next to the field).

Personally, I think that practice matches load-in night are a good idea, but only if they're being done as an 'open' sort of thing, with additional (regularly scheduled) practice matches in the morning for those who were unable to practice on load in night, for a plethora of reasons. To lessen the load on volunteers, each team involved in the open practice could/should help reset the field, especially in games like Aerial Assist (and to a lesser extent rebound rumble) where two or three drive teams can handle the field reset in a minute or two...

Free fire zones
 

Following up on the practice field comments - I wish there were more "free fire zones" in the pits. We tried to recalibrate our shooter at the beginning of every day (our shot was dialled in pretty carefully: From against the low goal to "one robot distance" back from the low goal). Unfortunately the only place you could launch a ball and then adjust the robot was on the one practice half-field shared between two divisions (200 teams). There was a constant 1 hour wait for 10 minutes of access to this field. Many of our matches didn't have 1 hour between them, and it took us more like 15 minutes for a proper calibration. Moreover the field closed 1-2 hours before the pits at night, which made very little sense to me. In short, we never did get the shot perfectly calibrated (although it was close enough for all but one of our matches).

I loved what they did in NYC: They roped off a ~ 30 x 30 ft wide "unsupervised operating area" next to the practice field. Teams formed four parallel lines and operated their bots as needed (running auto, practicing shots against the wall). Everyone was gracious enough not to hog a lane, and I never saw a line up longer than 10 minutes, despite there being 100 bots in the regional. Even if FIRST was uncomfortable about a free-fire zone, it would be nice to have practice half-fields with more than two lanes when you're serving hundreds of teams.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I think you're missing the 6 hour unbag time in the week leading up to the event which is supposed to replaces the practice day. The first day is supposed to just be a load-ing/unbag/inspect and at some events practice is thrown in. I've been to events where we were allowed to practice Day 1 (Bridgewater) and events where we weren't, and practice was a couple hours at the beginning of day 2 (Chestnut Hill, Lenape 2013).

Of course, the 6 hour unbag time can't really replace true on-field with other team practice time. The issue with having a full practice day, at least in MAR, is probably the fact that the MAR events run Friday-Sunday in a highschool gym which would involve invading a high school during school hours.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Also at all NE Events (at least the ones I went too), we held a firm no teams in until 5 pm on Day 0. Out of the 4 district level events I went too, only one had the field ready for practice matches on Day 0, and that was because we started set-up on Thursday (what we called Day -1). So for us, we've kept the time teams spent on Day 0 significantly less to the old Thursdays at regionals up here.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

FIRST, please put all scoring category information into the team standings. With the foul points worth so much this year, there should be a resource more reliable than twitter for teams to find out who is getting penalized. In addition, please put more information about the previous match into the final scoreboard display. There is enough room on the display to show 2 more scoring categories.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

It would be far preferable to put it in the Match Results Page instead of the Team Standings Page, so we could have the info for each match rather than just the totals.

Or better yet, provide an API to the data instead of a web page that has to be scraped.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

To be honest after hearing this its a little disappointing. I know the first year of districts isn't easy and will take a few years before everything settles in but doesn't this hit a level of unfairness? I noticed it at a few of our events up here and while it didn't bother me I was curious to hear about if FIRST would grant extra unbag hours for certain situations.

Like Dave said NE events were strict on not opening the doors until 5pm many of which had no practice matches on Day 0 due to the field still being setup. At UNH week 2 the event organizers did express that there were scheduling issues with the venue which lead to these issues in a "perfect storm" situation. For starters they weren't allowed into the facilities where the pits were until 4-5 pm meaning as load in would normally start they were just getting to setup. Load in was pushed back to 6pm which didn't bother me too much but we've overhauled our robot in 3 hours so every hour is precious especially when its your first competition. There was an issue with load in due to the small parking lot and area to unload which meant only 3 teams could unload at a time so all teams were to line up in a parking lot around the corner and wait to unload. I arrived at the lot 45 minutes before doors open and didn't get into the building until 7:30 and there were still teams in line after me. Pits closed promptly at 10pm with about half of the inspections pushed off into the next day. *UNH was a well run event so I am not putting the event or its organizers down it really was a perfect storm*

If you still got 6 hours of unbag time you realistically got an extra 2 hours compared to teams in NE, 3 more compared to teams first in line at UNH, and 5 more than the last teams in the door. That's also for one event double that for two events because all NE events were 5pm-10pm at most.

I hope this doesn't sound like a whine its just a concern/observation I had after going through the districts this year and somewhat of a flaw I see in the unbag times. It wasn't a huge deal for our team but I know of many teams who had a lot to work on and the extra two hours would have meant a world of difference. This all probably comes down to the same arguments about expanding the witholding allowance which is never fair. Its brought out certain years and some years teams hurt by weather don't get an expansion. The years it is expanded the teams who had no days missed get the advantage because they were never hindered in the first place.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Absolutely this.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Partway through the season, Aidan gave the head refs permission to add additional referees and have some of the referees focus entirely on ball tracking and scoring. That's why, at the later events, you saw the four referees at tablets and 2-3 others without tablets. The specific arrangement and duties varied depending on how the head referee wanted to run it, but the referees at the scoretable-side pads were doing the ball tracking and scoring.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

The assertions in that linked post are just sad. FIRST really is stuck in the dark ages when it comes to properly exposing data and making it available in a timely manner.

In my opinion, TBA should be adopted as the official online scoring system. It already has an API, so simply getting the right data into TBA accurately and quickly will solve the problem since TBA has the rest of the infrastructure already.

Another thing that would be great is official client libraries for teams to build into their scouting systems (Probably Ruby, Python, iOS, Android would cover what most teams are using).

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

We didn't miss it - trust me, 1923 used every possible second of their unbag window.

I guess I misworded myself. My suggestions are, either get rid of the load-in-practice-time, or go back to a practice day on a normal schedule. Keeping students (and parents and volunteers) there til almost 11pm just to be able to practice on a full field wasn't really fair to them. And it certainly needs to be consistent across all the events...

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

This is something that I wish Blair and Andy had done more of during their time behind the desk. Getting some sports style announcers was awesome. But in my mind they were under used, why wasn't 27 interviewed? I mean they just won the biggest award. I think everyone wouldn't have minded 5 more minutes between matches to get some more details and interviews from team members.

I had a long discussion about this yesterday with someone. And to summarize FIRST is full of nerds. Engineers like their data, I mean I practically live in excel. But publishing more data doesn't help FIRST. Sure it makes more of us numbers people happy, but it costs FIRST time and money and doesn't really serve a major purpose for them.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Not to be too harsh, but I disagree with the above. If the person to whom you were speaking holds a high-ranking position within FIRST it is truly discouraging.


"...doesn't help FIRST... doesn't really serve a major purpose for them"

Seriously? If FIRST is truly about inspiration -- and not just the robot -- then it certainly does serve a major purpose. There are a lot of students (and mentors) out there who are very inspired by analyzing the numbers. Look at all the effort students put into this aspect of the program.


" it costs FIRST time and money "

This floors me. The data is already being generated. Just provide it to someone (like TBA) who values it and will gladly volunteer their time to make it available to students who are inspired by it.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

This. A million times this. I might be a bit bias, but TBA has more than proven it can handle being an official point of reference.

FIRST needs to focus on delivering correct data in a timely fashion (aka, instantly). If they can't do that than how can you expect them to deliver videos of matches in a timely fashion, something that is much harder to do.

Without match (and event/team) information videos are useless.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Agreed. This also bugged me a bit. A 4 team alliance is a 4 team alliance. Not a 3 team plus an "unshowable" pinch hitter. It's sorta how there is a thought some have expressed in the past that "2nd picks are lucky free riders" in previous games... IMHO it shouldn't matter when you were picked; you're an alliance member just as much as your partners and should be treated as such.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I don't have any knowledge of how the events were being run where your team competed, but FiM districts were attempting to adhere to a pretty strict schedule/closing time. Unload was pretty solidly 4-10pm, more-or-less kicking teams out at 10, to prevent too much volunteer burnout.
And on the other side of the coin, there's nobody there forcing teams to stay until pits close. That's the teams decision and right (granted teams are obviously going to stay as late as possible to get the most practice, but common sense should come into play if everyone on the team is exhausted/falling asleep).

The way I understood it, the 4th robot was an alliance specific backup robot. Maybe I misinterpreted this change, but I saw it as a way for alliances to pick the robot that would be the replacement bot (and also allow switch-in matches for more repair flexibility) rather than being auto-assigned one. Hockey players that are scratched from a game do not dress and therefore do not participate in the pre/post game handshake as well. I would relate these two events as similar in nature.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I think a good compromise would be to do some kind of introductions during the Einstein "test matches" while all four robots from the alliance are out on the field. I think those matches would also be a great time to have a quick rundown of the elimination rounds from each division.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

It isn't quite like that from the way I read the game manual. It's just like IRI; you present a lineup to the head ref for each match, which states who is going to play the next match. They aren't a backup robot, they're a 4th member you have as a strategic option. Yes, if one breaks, the 4th becomes the replacement, but that's not the sole purpose. But if you look at the upcoming match and predict that say the 4th member would be better suited than the 3rd, you can make the switch. For example, say the opposing alliance has a weakness to heavy defense and the 4th robot is an excellent defender but the 3rd is more offence oriented... they're just another card in your hand that you can play.

Likewise, during alliance introductions, the 4th alliance member is announced with the other alliance members and they are also is considered a defending champion if the alliance wins, so IMHO, they also should be part of the handshake.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I would really like to see some clarification and/or modification of the rules regarding withholding allowance and the definition of COTS parts. Currently, as best as I can tell, a motor with terminals on the wires is considered a fabricated component when it comes to withholding allowance, but the same motor is a COTS component when used at the beginning of the season (because otherwise reusing a motor from a previous year would be illegal, as it was fabricated outside of the build season).

Specifically what I would like to see is the withholding allowance move away from definitions using the words "fabricated" vs. "COTS" and instead use a system of "identical spares" vs. "upgrades". I think "identical spares" should be unlimited in quantity and weight. This includes COTS or custom gearboxes, motors and motor controllers with modified wires, assemblies that may be prone to damage, etc. - anything that is inside the bag on stop build day. Identical spares should be defined as the same material serving the same function fabricated in the same way and identical in form, weight, material, and use. Secondly, the "upgrades" should be limited similar to withholding, though perhaps a lesser limit (15-20 lbs), as the "identical spares" can be unlimited. Upgrades include anything that is kept out of the bag on stop build day, and anything that is fabricated after stop build day - anything that will be added to the robot to upgrade it after it is unbagged. Raw material is still separate from either definition and allowed in unlimited quantities.

The benefits I see to this system include...
1) Stronger teams are significantly less limited in their ability to bring in popular spares that will enable them to help all teams be competitive
2) Unlimited identical spares helps ensure all teams will be competitive as they can have replacements ready to go.
3) Eliminates fuzziness about withholding weight of spares that were fabricated during the six weeks vs spares that were fabricated after the six weeks, and in general is somewhat more enforceable.
3) The definitions don't conflict with those that are used to define what parts can be reused from one season to the next.
4) The definitions better convey what the purpose of the withholding allowance is for (if indeed it is for upgrades, i.e. assemblies that were withheld).

One situation that would need to be addressed in this system is how to address instances of teams bringing in entire assemblies that can be added to partners to make them a more useful member of an alliance. Overall I think this would clarify a lot of the withholding confusion and be more in line with the spirit of a six week build season.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I very much agree with this.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

THIS!!! A thousand times: THIS!!!
I don't want to watch blue alliance's ball roll up against the alliance wall unattended while 254 is shooting in the high goal under heavy defense on the other side of the field (out of frame). Full field view is the way to go.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

To me that sounds more confusing and more subject to abuse. Currently anything you stick in the bag is fine even if it is extra fabricate parts or assemblies that are either for spares, or something that you weren't able to fully assemble onto the robot.

Items like motors that have had terminals installed on the wires are quickly returned to COTS state with a snip of some wire cutters and don't take long to prepare to install on the robot. On the other hand there are items that do take significant assembly time like transmissions but again those can be returned to a COTS state and if you believe that you might need them you can have someone prepare them in the pits or during your 6hr unbag time (and put them in the bag) so they are ready to go if the need arises. If you don't need them and are attending another event then you can go ahead and put them in the bag.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

To me Autonomous seems way overpowered this year compared to most. In past years when you would try to score an auto-specific gamepiece, if your autonomous failed, the gamepiece would be discarded on the field and basically considered debris. Other years without auto-specific game pieces you could score the same game pieces like any other in teleop but without the auto bonus.

This year was the first year that failure in autonomous could decide the entire match, not by being outscored by the bonus, but by the inability to score for half the match or more because you have to chase down and score the auto balls (and at lower point values, since no assists or trusses counted).

FIRST needed to implement a rule that allowed auto balls to be removed from play by simply getting them off the field, and not forcing teams to waste huge portions of their matches trying to score them.


Now, on the topic of LiveStreams...
The issue with this is that YouTubes content detection is hyper-sensitive and zero-tolerance with livestreams (It's much more forgiving with uploaded videos). Our livestream for the GLBR District only pulled audio from the announcers mics, but small bits of ambient music would get picked up and flagged by YouTube, forcing the stream down. Furthermore, we were unable to get any feedback from FIRST HQ as to if the have any sort of licensing arrangements with music companies to even legally be able to stream the music, or for that matter, if they have ANY policy regarding streams.

I completely agree that the Michigan State Championship has one of the best webcasts available, the problem for applying this to other events is that they bring in the local PBS station to manage the entire thing and bring about $50k+ worth of equipment to run it. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see this at other events, but it doesn't seem like something that's scalable, beyond State and World championships.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I am often frustrated by this as while. However, my most recent inquiry in the matter resulted in the judge advisor at the time, not sure who it was, but I was told "There are no feedback forms at Championship because winning Regional / District Champs Chairman's means technically you are doing enough to win at the World Champs.

I would like to add that I would definitely be in favor of getting a feedback form at World Champs.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

It is not hard to do, but the hard part is getting a good stable internet connection that is fast enough to handle the constant upload speeds required to broadcast a HD stream.


At the begining of this season I would have agreed with you, but after broadcasting both a "multi-cam" broadcast and a "Full-Field" broadcast at 3 events this year, The viewership was almost double on the "Full-Field" streams.

You see, FIRSTers want the full-field view, they know the game and are entertained by the teams playing it and how it is played. But parents, grandparents and non-FIRSTers quickly get bored of a static camera angle.

Just my $0.02


- Bochek

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Even if this were true, which I do not believe for a moment, I still want feedback from judges who have never seen my team before. The problem with going to the same regional is that the pool of judges is pretty static. I would love to have a different perspective. That does not happen without feedback forms. Heck I would even take the judges coming to find the teams and having a 5 minute debriefing.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I would second the need for more feedback to teams. I'd also like to see more time with the teams.

But I can give you some advice: The award criteria given to you is the exact criteria the judges should be working off of. If you want to win a particular award, focus in on it and understand what the criteria are. Sell based on that.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

What I would like is comparative feedback. I know the areas FIRST wants us to focus in outreach. I want to know how we stack up against the rest of the competition. For Example: "Your work on X is really good. Look to improve in areas of FRC mentor-ship and world wide outreach."

That would give us a point of reference to work with.

On a side note: The only feedback given to teams is from the Chairman's judges. This needs to change. All the teams should be able to be get feedback if they want it.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

That would be awesome, but how to implement feedback for all teams is beyond me. The best way, and this is happening in some today, is peer review of Chairman's Submissions and sharing of judging tips.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

At CMP, the practice day schedule had regularly-scheduled matches first, then "filler line" matches later. This is exactly the reverse of what it should be. Filler matches should be scheduled first, then regularly-scheduled matches should follow.

For teams struggling to get inspected early on Wednesday, this change will provide a greater opportunity for them to get a practice match without having to deal with the filler line.

For teams who breeze through inspections, this change shouldn't really have an adverse effect.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

We were lucky to squeeze in to one of the last filler matches as we were never told when our practice match was.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

It was in your packet. Admin also had copies if you needed extras.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Don't do away with practice matches. They can be the lifeline to uninspected* teams that still need valuable field time.

If there's still a provision for uninspected teams to play on Thursday, I'm game.

*like us at North Bay, long story

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I'm going to come out and say that it is impossible without drastic changes to the process. It's doable in FLL due to the nature of their judging process. For those who don't know the FLL process is a rubric based score sheet with a section for general comments. (Much like the Chairman's Award) it means that teams know how well they did and can iterate from there.

Now, do I think FRC Judging should go to a rubric system and provide it as feedback to teams? I'm not sure. There are benefits and drawbacks to a rubric system.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Odd.

We weren't able to register until late on Wednesday due to travel issues. They made an exception and let me register the team and even then there was no schedule in our packet.

Its no big deal but this isn't the first time its happened this season where p-match schedules weren't handed out.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

It seems like the simple solution to practice matches would be to do what the Michigan Districts do: Open the field to matches on a first-come first-serve basis, allow each team to play two matches in a row, then send them to the back of the line if they want to play more. Everyone who wants to practice gets to unless they wait until the last minute.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

The only thing in my opinion this year was the fouls. Technical fouls seemed a little TOO punishing, but overall, this year was pretty good.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

In the 2 first regionals where we made Chairman's presentations, we got completely opposite assessments and advice from the 2 different sets of judges. We couldn't really figure out what we needed to focus on consistently. Despite that, I think our last presentation at our 3rd regional was the best by far.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I'm not completely wedded to this, but I liked the consequences of failed auto routines. This is real life--when your program doesn't work quite right, most often it's not just that you don't get all of the bonus points--sometimes it can put a life at risk. It also showed the importance of developing a response strategy to quickly clean up the mess. Teams had to make choices about whether to chase more points or reduce their risks--again a real world choice in many situations. Because the auto score was capped at such a low level compared to 2012 and 2013, it was less important to the overall game score, and teams that made a different risk assessment could quickly make up the difference, unlike last year. In 2013, an alliance could nail its auto, play great defense and seal the victory with a big climb at the end. This year an alliance had to play the whole way.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I was a volunteer on the VULCAN practice field next to CURIE. I just want to say that I had a great time meeting all of the teams who played on our field. For the most part things ran smoothly from Thursday afternoon on. I was appointed the queuer. I did my best to keep track of all the teams in the FILLER line so no one was overlooked. Most of the time we were running 10 to 15 minutes ahead of schedule.

The biggest problem we had were teams showing up for their match at exactly the time they signed up for. We did our best to inform teams to arrive 5 minutes before their match so I could get them q'd up. The majority of the teams complied. At times when we were running way ahead I would run into the pits to find the teams scheduled next to inform them that we were running ahead so they did not miss their scheduled match. ( I was probably the person the PIT ADMIN kept telling to stop RUNNING over the PA.) I just want everyone to know that I did my best to accomadate all of the teams utlizing our practice field.

I want to thank all of the teams and other volunteers for making my first volunteer experience at CHAMPS a most amazing experience. I am planning on doing the same job next year so maybe I will see you their.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

tl;dr.

On the Curie field, many teams missed matches!

With the lack of wifi/3G/4G connectivity in the pits, it was extremely difficult to know what match they were on.
Yes, I do know that by looking at the big screen, you can see what match was completed.

But is this process clear and coherent for the many new teams that come to CMPs for the 1st time? Posting a time on the match schedule HURTS the process. Even though we all should know matches dont always run on time, putting a time stamp next to matches will naturally make newbies think that's when their match will take place.

Connectivity should be a big priority next year, especially with 600 teams in 2015 and 8 fields to worry about.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Did everyone except me forget the bomb Dean kamen and Qualcomm dropped during the closing ceremonies? I think they hinted at getting Wi-Fi off the machines and back into our pockets.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Our solution for this is we have a scout text the match number of the match that was just finished to a student in pit who is tasked with timing.

We do this at regionals too.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Did they? I thought he was referencing Qualcomm helping during the Einstein 2012 shenanigans. (I don't recall if they were mentioned in the Einstein Report)

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Yes, veterans such as ourselves know better. But not to everyone, especially new participants.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I agree completely. I can't remember a time when TBA actually had a problem that wasn't caused by incorrect data from FIRST. I'm sure members of the FIRST community could come up with a more reliable method of providing the data. The issues with connectivity seem to happen even when there is a working internet connection.

Another issue that never got solved was the hot goal timing, which to me doesn't seem like an impossible task. Watch 1114 move and the goal light up in this match. It also happened in an Einstein practice match. When you only have ten seconds, every single second matters.

Also, to me it seems that the rules are too complicated, not only for teams, but for the volunteers. Over the season we've had a few technical fouls called on us on a rule the ref could not cite, or did not exist. The referee was understanding, and changed the score when incorrect, but if members of our team hadn't studied the rules and memorized the foul numbers, and went to the question box, we would have lost a few matches we deserved to win. Again, at the championship, one our alliance partners came up with a strategy to have a blocker that would drop out of the way once teleop started, but were told it was illegal to start high up, so they spent a bunch of time trying to build a mechanism to deploy it. With this many rules, it's really hard for referees to be consistent in calling things like bumper violations (not called 5 times in the matches I watched), ramming, herding, the differences in offensive and defense possession (I didn't even know there was a difference until CMP...), and contact in frame perimeter, which can be called as a tech foul every time your robot breaks the plane of the frame perimeter, a tech foul every time your robot contacts another robot inside their frame perimeter, or a foul every time your robot "intentionally" contacts another robot inside their frame perimeter. Most of these consistency problems were at previous event, and overall, the refereeing at the championship was much better than at our other events.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

For Judging, cut the fluff. Hit the key points with just enough detail. The Judges only know what the Team tells them. If the Judges want more info, they will ask if there is time remaining.

Florida FTC uses an Excel spreadsheet for League and State that makes giving the feedback to the Teams easy (we were the pilot program for the spreadsheet scoring system). As long as a Judge is consistent with their scoring for all Teams, it works very well. It eliminates "strong personalities" from lobbying for any one Team from one specific area and standardizes the primary criteria. However, each Judge looks for specific things from the Teams, rather they are presentation skills, technical knowledge, or a great grip on their finances/funding.

We use text messages to communicate to the CSAs and Field/Cue Inspectors issues that the Teams are having on the Field. We had about a 10 minute delay in receiving text messages last year at Champs that we did not seem to have this year. However, 4G was still clogged solid.

Jared, where do the Robot Rules and Game Rules begin and end? Some Teams and some Volunteers know both sets of Rules. Not all Teams (Students and Mentors) nor all Volunteers who should know all the rules (Refs, Inspectors, etc.) know all the rules. As we know, Interpretation and Implementation results will vary. For example: We had a very confused student ask us if the robot had to be inspected to play in a practice match. We said no. However, we also told him that the robot has to have been inspected to play in a practice match via the filler line. He was still very confused. To me, this responsibility falls on both the Teams and Volunteers to read and understand what the rules are really telling them. The frame perimeter rule drives us a bit crazy. The withholding allowance/identical spares/changeable mechanisms also drives us a bit crazy. Non-compliant bumpers drive us even crazier, if that is even possible.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

THIS!!
FIRST needs to take the lead on this. Want to know how to "Make it Loud"?
Start with broadcast standards and then add logistical support and financial support to ensure those standards.
If a regional can't meet the standards then they should not be allowed to broadcast. Not having a webcast would be better than some of the broadcasts that I attempted to watch.
There were instances in which I wanted to direct a sponsor, a friend, my school, or a potential mentor to a regional webcast, but then decided not to tell them, because the broadcast quality was so bad.
Lets fix this!!

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

After volunteering at the Greater Pittsburgh regional this year, I can say that I truly miss the days of regionals in the MAR area. You got a full day to work out issues, get inspected, play real matches that are being reffed as they will be for the rest of the event. And if the practice day is run correctly, each team gets ~8 matches to play in.

This also leads me to question why the MAR area needs the district system. This may be a topic for another thread, and has probably been beaten to death already; but seeing that there are 110 team in MAR, with 55 making it to MAR championships (and I don't recall there being that much growth in rookie teams this past year), why not throw another regional into the pot that used to be there already? (Philadelphia and Trenton)

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

$ee, there are plenty of rea$on$ a$ to why the di$trict $y$tem i$ better for the MAR region.


Also more play/many (myself included) love that a district system drastically "seasonizes" FIRST.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

However, $ome team$ near the population center of the di$trict have to $hell out quite a bit more ju$t to afford going to all three of their event$ in one $ea$on that are all over an hour away. The decrea$ed co$t of running di$trict$ has now in$tead been put on the team$ for their travel expen$e$, and I'm not $ure that'$ worth it.

I think the Mid-Atlantic Region has a lot of growing pains to attend to as far as their events go. Fortunately, the President of MAR, Gene O'Brien, has been very receptive to suggestions recently, and I'm looking forward to see what improves for 2015.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Coming a region outside the district system into the MAR district system, I much, much prefer districts. Our district practice day is far more productive with six hours of unbag time prior (this has replaced a full day of practice, and this is one of the last things I would want to give back for more practice matches). I am a firm believer that having six hours of unbag time available in our shop before each district event has dramatically increased our team's competitiveness the past two years, and it is one of the reasons that many teams have found they can get away with not having a practice robot (a big cost savings).

The district system allows more teams to make it into eliminations, more teams the opportunity to win awards, and more matches is a huge, huge plus. Also, I lost less work days and students lost less school through going to our two district events than I did going to the Greater DC Regional or MAR Champs this year. Districts are one thing I would not change.

For ourselves, I'm not worried about travel costs. We are on the western fringes of MAR, and we have hotel and transportation fees for every in-season competition we go to. That was five competitions this year, and we may do the same for several offseasons as well. We have a pay-as-you-go model, which scales well with the number of competitions each year.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

One small issue I had with this year's game (and don't get me wrong, I loved Aerial Assist) was how difficult it made scouting. Last year, scoring totals, accuracy, basic drivetrain statistics, and climbing results were about all you needed to know about a robot. This year, however, you needed to follow individual teams very closely on a match by match basis (what they did with the ball, how fast their mechanisms were, how smart the driver is, how much they fouled, how good their partners were, etc.) because very often the match outcome and how much was scored were out of the control of any one teammate. Also, you didn't need to just know how "good" a robot was, but had to be really aware of what roles they could fill. This complexity is good in that it encourages teams to watch the field and heightens the strategizing, but it really hurts teams who don't have the resources or infrastructure set up for watching every robot in every match of such a complex game.

At champs this issue was especially evident because with 100 teams on a field, some of those teams in the top tier had never even played together or against each other and were unaware of what the others could do! One thing they might be able to try next year (if the game is as complex as it was this year) is use the extra space to host more, smaller divisions (maybe 60 - 70 teams each). This would make keeping track of the teams much easier, and cause teams to play with each other more often on the field.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

On Friday night the Archimedes division had to play 4 replay matches. That evening the rankings only had 22 teams in the division because it only contained data from those 4 replay matches. Which caused a TON of confusion for many of my rookie team's parents back at home. They thought we were ranked 8th and the students spent a lot of time trying to explain that we were really in like 30th and the rankings for the evening were just wrong. :/

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Being an alumni from 340 who personally worked on Chairman's, an ex-website judge, and a mentor for many teams now I cannot even begin to tell you how important feedback is! Each year Dean gives homework, but that's often not the only guideline that the judges are looking for. When I worked on website and Chairman's for 340 the information from the judges was imperative when it came to not only improving for next year, but also knowing what we did well. It made it so the team rookies could also read/watch what was submitted and know the same thing. When the website award still existed and I judged, being able to tell the teams what they did and did not do well helped me judge them better.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Here's my biggest negative:

No published or adhered to field or FMS requirements. I made a post near the beginning of February about this: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...07&postcount=3

My post above is with respect to hot goal timing. Given that there are no requirements, it's no surprise that hot goal timing was an issue all year.

Without hard requirements, there is nothing to test against. With nothing to test against, you can expect that your end product will not work as your customers expect. If hard requirement were published for the field (hot goal timing in particular) it would have been clear to Manchester that the field was not meeting the expectations of the competing teams.

Furthermore, how are we supposed to develop a control strategy to play the game without us having the field requirements?

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Ok, I hate to be that guy but one of the lessons FIRST/RDs need to learn - Vegetarian food != just salad. I hate to complain about volunteer food but it's a small issue when I don't have time to run out and grab food somewhere else. Eating just salad for 2 meals a day for 3 days is not healthy. We have the same dietary requirements as the rest of you. If providing a vegetarian option is a problem let me know in advance and I'll make plans accordingly.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I think a bigger issue is giving fuller and better access to the various results pages for scouting systems to access them easily.

Also, there were serious problems with results pages going down or not updating, including at Worlds this year. At the two most popular regionals, Waterloo and Silicon Valley, results were largely unavailable the entire first day. That doesn't make for good publicity.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Here, here, for teams and spectators too! This is becoming a bigger issue as food production being recognized as a large contributor to climate change risk. (I can send folks stats if they are really interested.)

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I thought that's essentially what I was saying ?

Fuller = make all scouting-relevant data that FMS has collected available (instead of summing/combining the data in ways that cause a loss of useful detail)

Better = an easy-to access documented and stable API instead of scraping web sites whose formats may unexpectedly change mid-season.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Mid Season? Mid event... We've been asking for this for YEARS. :(

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

This.
I had a whole one comment on my sheet... It was along the lines of 'keep spreading FIRST'. :/

I do have to say though- the whole interview process seems kinda a lottery. I mean, an essay and a five minute interview (that from what I could tell, was just to serve as clarification for details)? How much does that really tell? Unless you are going solely by statistics (number of teams started, assisted, what have you)...

In 4H (in my state), for the highest awards we get we have to keep thoroughly documented records, which are assesed at a county level, then a state level, and then there is an (approximately) hour long interview to complete, that gets recorded and debated over several times to select ~30 students from the state to send to congress.

Something a little more rigorous seems due if the award is truly to select the absolute cream of the crop...

(This isn't to say the winners of this years' award didn't earn it. I don't know if they did or not. I'd enjoy being able to read some of the essays that get submitted! :D I think they gave a brief summary upon presentation in 2012, IIRC)

Other things that are negative... I'm not too keen on the PR that FIRST is pushing. FIRST drew me in because it wasn't about pop culture, political correctness, and almost everything that was pushed during the closing ceremonies. It was about promoting producerism; getting students involved in the real world. Now it's too much about inspiring. It's a bit like setting gasoline on fire. It makes a nice big pretty fire that a lot of people will notice, but you could be using that gasoline to power your car and get you somewhere. People also notice fast cars. I really don't think we need to make FIRST loud- we need to make it profound and visible. People need to be joining this organization for the right reasons- and I personally think that if your main reason for joining is because a pop star endorses it... you're doing it wrong.

But that's the nice thing about FIRST- ultimately, the teams make up the heft of the organization and are the real face of FIRST.

Also, integration between TBA and FIRST scoring? YES PLEASE!

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

That's more of a venue specific thing than related to FIRST specifically. You get what the venue provides when you order a vegetarian option. That said, the regional events I volunteered at had fairly decent vegetarian options, though I don't specifically recall seeing the vegetarian options in St. Louis.

Remember though, that a lot of these events are run on a shoestring. In Duluth; the Lake Superior and Northern Lights regionals they didn't even have coffee for the volunteers because it wasn't in the budget. Despite the fact that I'm pretty sure not serving coffee is a human rights violation I muddled on through.

So while I encourage the Event Managers to work so that the vegetarians get more than rabbit food I think that we as volunteers need to understand that some things just aren't within the control of the Event Manager/FIRST>

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

That's why I even offered to take care of it myself, they just need to let me know. I'm more making a bit of noise to raise awareness among folks that vegetarians exist and have the same dietary requirements as the rest of you, we just cannot eat meat. Salad isn't a meal for anyone.

And, maybe all food should just be vegetarian then, turns out meat is quite expensive. :P Maybe then they'd have budget for coffee.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Having these celebrities help bring FIRST to people who've never seen it before is important for the growth of FIRST. How are we ever going to get new teams and supporters if we just keep pushing to our own crowd?

Dean wants to make FIRST a household name, just like Girl Scouts or 4H - just to use examples of 'kid programs' that people know of even without being in the program.

We're about culture change. If the people society is currently celebrating (pop stars, star athletes) come out talking about this crazy robotics thing they just saw?! Well, those are some new audiences exposed to FIRST. That's the culture change we're looking for. Every student in the world knowing that FIRST is an option for them, and celebrating scientists and engineers for the rockstars they are. This is just the first step in that larger movement towards culture change.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I think we all get that, and believe it. However - it doesn't seem appropriate to do it at the competition. I get more excited seeing Woody's reading list than I do seeing Will.I.Am perform his new song. There has to be a way to draw in those wayward souls without boring the choir.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

FIRST is a very interesting and unique creature. It is entirely unlike any traditional after-school extracurricular (it's both year round and seasonal! It's a sport but a club! It has community service opportunities and competitions!) bears little resemblance to extra curriculars outside of the school system like 4-H or scouting (the programs share a loose set of goals, but unless combined have very different ways of gettign there) and FRC itself is a unique robotics opportunity that cannot be equated to FTC/VRC.

FIRST turned 25 this year, and like a lot of 25 year olds, it's collecting wisdom on top of smarts, it's finally starting to act like an adult (communicating and adapting to a changing landscape never seemed paramount the first 3 years I was in the program), and it's applying experiences and past mistakes to improve. However another trait it shares with most in their mid-twenties is not necessarily a lack of direction, but lack of a pinpoint endgame. It has skills, talents, and does its job very well, but where does the organization see itself in 25 years?

It's not fun to talk about, but when you think of FIRST in its next 25 years, it's hard to imagine a lot of key people around for its first 25 years will be sticking around. People get sick and/or old and then they die, and it's important that (as far as we know) the FIRST National Advisor and the Founder of FIRST are not immune to this phenomenon. No question that we as the FIRST community have a great thing going. Sure, there is always room to improve, but FIRST and FRC especially will be one of a kind for as long as it lasts. But in 25 years are we going to be telling ourselves we did a great job growing this program together, or are we going to kick stones on the road of regret because we lost focus after those who came before us left the program to us?

Dean talks a lot because he always has soemthing big to say. The last two years he has realized that FIRST has almost hit the ceiling on its niche success with its current sponsorship pool and mentorship draw. There are places in these categories where teams have room to grow, but on a greater organizational level it is time to figure out how to make this program a true mainstream success. How are we going to do this together? I honestly have no clue. I mean, even Dean barely knows how and he is far more intelligent than me. What I do know is that the old way of cozying up to x defense contractor and y branch of the army and z school of engineering is not going to do anything else but put FIRST on autopilot until it runs out of gas. I'm willing to try this new way of "convert the pop culture icon to FIRST, then water 3 times a week and watch it grow" and see where it takes us.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I know there's the food allergies / physical limitations section in VIMS, but I'd love to see them expand that, to help VCs get a better handle on the number of vegetarian / lactose-intolerant / gluten-free folk, to make it easier for them to get the right amount of food for everyone.

That said, the worst vegetarian food situation I've seen was two meals with salad as my only option, at a 3-day event. It could be better, but it could certainly be worse.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I agree with this sentiment. I think one potential growth path is to get school administrators to buy into the FIRST program as being consistent with their core educational mission. At least in California, they give it lip service, but little actual support for most teams. Michigan appears to be further along this path. Why not try to make FIRST as popular at football? It certainly is more relevant to today's world.

And I agree that FIRST needs to reach out through the pop culture. That might be done better outside of the competition venue, e.g., will.i.am releasing a video using FRC footage backed by his song.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

While getting too deep into the subject would derail the thread, I do think the teams and local organizations should be prioritizing making FIRST more mainstream now that it has been made viable in locations both predictable (Michigan, California, New England) and somewhat surprising (Minnesota, Oregon). Think of your team's operating budget without any registration fees. That is a reality in Michigan. Now think of that happening not just for you, but every other team in the states and beyond. Without having to worry about having enough money jsut to show up anymore, teams can really get to work on far more noble and exciting causes with the same amount of money available.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I share similar feelings.

I think FIRST is trying to get literally everyone interested in FRC and in an FRC team, which I don't think is necessarily the best move. Pop Warner football is a huge part of our culture, and I sure don't think they literally want everyone to join one of their teams. No, they try to appeal to the kids that like running around, and who's dads like football. AYSO soccer is a much more inclusive organization, but even they don't seem to have endorsements from kids TV shows or musicians in order to get kids that wouldn't be otherwise interested to join. Instead, they try to be open positive, and fun, but not pushy about trying to get every kid to join.

FIRST should aspire to be like a high school sport: something that everyone knows about and generally has positive feelings towards, but that not everyone joins. We should be a niche thing (just like soccer or swimming or chess club or cheerleading...) where kids that are interested in building things or robots (or just want to try it out because it looks cool) do FRC. The rest of the school should have a general idea of what FRC is, but they don't necessarily have to join it in order for FIRST's mission to be accomplished.

The current push seems to revolve around painting FIRST as this huge pop culture phenomenon/cult thing when it really isn't. Using popular musicians to support FIRST is good and all, but I don't think it really gets that many new recruits, and I do know it alienates or appears silly to a good fraction of the FRC population. I think the best endorsers for FRC are people like Elon Musk, Jonny Ive or Dean himself, people who kids that might be interested in FRC look up to as cool leaders who have been successful through science and technology.

Also, keep in mind the smart kids demographic is far from tapped out. There are still tons of smart kids at my school who might be interested in FRC through a "FIRST is an awesome place where you build cool things" or a "FIRST makes what you're learning at school not boring" based marketing push rather than the "Science is rock and roll" thing they seemed to concentrate on so far.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I agree with DampRobot. FRC has always been a sort of "varsity" robotics sport, that doesn't make the game smaller to get more people involved, like Vex and FTC do. I was way more excited to watch the Cheesy Poof's autonomous mode than I was to watch will.i.am or that other singer person. Instead of trying to gain popularity by adding famous pop culture people to the program, they should focus on making the robotics/competition part of FIRST more exciting to the public. Associating the program with famous people may get some people to find out about the program, but it won't get the general public interested and invested in FIRST.

i also agree with PayneTrain, that FIRST is having some growing pains, and are working out some details with the organization.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

A few thoughts on the topics at hand:

If you want world-wide recognition, you are going to have to reach out to world-wide brands and get them to feature FIRST on their products. Cocoa Cola, McDonalds, the Global Fortune 500. Let's hope everyone is as curious as will.i.am.

Do any FRC students play sports (three-sport, varsity athletes) or are the students in band? Who is FRC really targeting? Are they targeting students who play neither a sport or instrument or are they targeting everyone? Is FRC exciting enough for a student to give up a game or competition to participate in a District meet or Regional?

We have lost ~72 FRC Teams in Florida since 2003. I can't sustain what I have; therefore, how am I going to grow it? If we can't sustain our FRC Teams, where are we going to be in 25 years? Granted, some of the loss was due to the J.C. Penney Grants going away and some of it was due to lack of Mentors. I also know that at least two of these 72 teams became FTC Teams. If I won a good-sized lotto, I'd ask each of them if they wanted to restart their team and give them each 50k to do it.

Yeah, food issues. I'm right there with you. I am 'sensitive' to sodium bisulfite (anti-browning agent on lettuce, shrimp, dried fruit, processed meats, pickled onions, sauerkraut, and rooster chili sauce) and sucralose (Splenda). Eating these things is completely out of the question for me. I'll take all the meat I can get between the gluten-free and regular table, but a nice gluten-free pasta, vegetable curry, meatless chili, fruit platter, vegetable platter, baked potato, falafel, hummus, beans/rice buffet, cooked vegetables, with cheese on the side for my vegetarian, lactose intolerant, and gluten allergy FRC, FTC, and FLL friends would be wonderful.

No coffee?! What?! In Northern MN? It's a staple food. I would never make it through the day! That must have been torture/cruel and unusual punishment.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

In my experience, yes and yes. At my school, something like a third of the FRC team was also part of the marching band at any one time during my 4 years. While we didn't have any "3-sport, varsity athletes"(possibly because they are a dying breed), we had various team members that played baseball, basketball, tennis, football, soccer or were on the ski team at some point in high school.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

How did that work out? Any conflicts?

There were 7 people in my university design team group and 5 of them played university sports on scholarship. Many times, the sport conflicted with our design project (and we didn't even have to build anything in 6 weeks).

On our team, we have people who participate in all kinds of other extracurriculars. The way we handle build season is we have five work days a week, and members have to meet a certain number of hours to go on the trip to competition (it varies year to year depending on a lot of things and is ultimately set by the captain, but the last two years it's been 80 hours). Most team members have a variety of conflicts, but the flexible structure of our team allows them to work around those conflicts.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

For the band, we would lose 1 or two build season nights because most of the important members were at a band thing, and there was always a certain competition season week that we wouldn't compete because of a yearly band trip. The sports were usually not in season during build season, but if people had a game or something it wasn't a big deal. My team had a "you get what you put in" model. If you didn't have a specific responsibility for a robotics meeting or event, missing it was your loss.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

At our ~450 student high school, a large percentage (>50%) of the kids are in band. Always a good idea to keep the band directors up to date on competition dates. Found out the hard way that band directors do not appreciate it when two sections (percussion and French horn) are almost totally missing during a concert! (Choir director doesn't like it when his soloists come back from competition two days before Spring concert with no voice, but thankfully the sound guy is also our programmer/electrician so he can work some magic there . . . )

WRT athletics, we have had a number of two sport athletes, including several state qualifiers. Only a few have participated in Winter sports, however. We have had students opt out of attending competition due to athletics and others give up their sport in favor of robotics. These decisions were made carefully and thoughtfully. The toughest are the kids (and parents) who end up unable to attend competition because they tried to "do it all" and missed team requirements as a result. (We've also had kids opt out of the semi-annual Spring break band trip because it conflicted with competition.)

In all seriousness, we work with the AD, principal and superintendent to ensure they are all aware of dates and schedules. Our parents are also proactive at parent-teacher conference time and remind individual teachers of upcoming dates and even which students are involved in the current year. But with a small school, robotics has about the same % student body involvement as most of the varsity sports which helps.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Having consistent judging, by being in Week 2 and 3 Regionals then watching the Champs, the way the judging and calls were made compared to each other I thought wasn't fair. We lost matches because of unclear calls and even waiting for a Volunteer to get a ball that went out of the field back to the human player. Not that it actually was based off of this observation, but after Week 3 they added a rule about violent ramming into other robots, which I think was brought in after Woodie Flowers came and watched KC where some teams were hitting others pretty hard when they didn't need to for any necessary reasons that I could say. So the volunteers and judges having a handle on how to rule the game early on could be improved somehow.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

This is NOT a 3-hour sporting event where a fan may buy one meal and a snack. The World Championships are a 3-day event with may students at the venue for 12 hours eating 2 to 3 meals. This means the FIRST MUST demand a much higher quality food product out of the Edwards Dome vendors than what they provide for a Rams football game. If the vendor is unwilling to provide that food, then FIRST MUST break that contract with vendor and seek outside vendors who can provide a full well-round menu plan that is suitable for teenagers over a 3-day period. The current situation is unacceptable and if FIRST is truly looking out for the interests of its student members, it needs to demand MUCH more from the current vendors.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

<PetPeeve>Referees where the striped shirts, they make the call on the field. Judges where blue shirts and come by your pits for interviews and high five teams during awards. Safety judges wear green shirts and make sure everyone is staying safe</PetPeeve>

And now back to our regular programming....

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I agree completely. I can only stomach so much grease laden food in 3 days. And while it would be nice to get food from restaurants outside the stadium, I would imagine the majority of teams do not allow students to do so during lunch break.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

For lunch every day we had a parent get food from a restaurant (usually something like subs or sandwiches) and bring it to the parking lot across from Entrance A. We saved money and ate better. There were a lot of teams eating out on the sidewalks and in that parking lot. I'm sure that whatever food vendor FIRST has a contract with isn't too thrilled about that, but given the choices that they offer it isn't difficult to see why so many people just don't eat their food.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I feel like the primary reason why it will be hard for FIRST to become a sport-like organization is due to the lack of adult equivalent. People who join a high school FRC team probably won't have a job in FRC in the future, at least not a televised sporting event.
Sports such as basketball, soccer, swimming, etc. can all be seen at a national level with adults playing. FRC is restricted to high schools, so it's a lot harder for people to see that kind of spread.
In addition, the competition that people really want to see is championships in St. Louis, because many of the robots are on par with each other. At regionals or lower levels, there is a more clearly defined line between uber-teams and not-uber-teams.

On the other hand, robots going at it definitely has its appeal for a lot of people. It puts it on par with something like football just for the cool factor and the mindset that "wow, kids built something like that?"
I think if FIRST advertised enough, like with flyers or posters, it would attract a lot more people to it. First they would come see the competitions, even at a regional level, then they would sign their kids up later.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

The adult equivalent is the job where you work with other people to solve difficult problems, applying many of the same skills practiced in FRC. Instead of an elite league that hardly anybody can get into, we have an entire economy that almost any properly prepared adult can participate in.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Keep in mind I was commenting about the food provided for Volunteers vs. the food provided for Teams in response to a previous post. I agree with you though: it's not a 3-hour sporting event; it's a week-long event with long hours for the Teams and the Volunteers. I wonder if the EJD VIP Suite catering could be more involved for the general attendee's special dietary needs. BTW I watched/heard an FLL team struggle with the breakfast menu in our hotel due to several of the team members having a vegetarian diet.

asid61 and Nemo, if you are looking for a transition event from FRC to the real-world, NASA Mining Competition can provide the undergrad and graduate student transition prior to the real-world.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Depends on what's in the salad. If the salad is mostly just lettuce yes.

The ones my wife makes for me have broccoli, spinach, zucchini, carrots, tomato, mushrooms, radish, onions, celery, and a bit of romaine lettuce; dressed with olive oil, vinegar, and a dash of salt and pepper. I could live on that. Some days I do :-)

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Yeah, I wish. NOPE. Most of them are some mediocre lettuce and cherry tomatoes.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Guys please keep in mind that in many venues that FIRST works with (possibly including EJD), when you sign the contract to rent the venue, often your obligated to only use only the in-house retails locations to sell food to the public, and you have to use the in-house catering for any other food needs (Volunteers, VIPs etc.). There is a very good chance FIRST's hands are tied in this case.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I think most of us understand this. On the other hand, these events create positive economic impact where they're held, and cities want these contracts, right? Doesn't FIRST have any bargaining leverage to influence the terms of the contract?

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Adding to this (very tasty) food discussion: 3 members on my team have prominent food allergies and it has made it very difficult to find food they can eat. At the two MN regionals I've been to, one sold hot dogs and I think ice cream down by the pits (I usually went out to eat), and in the other the only food they sold was pretzels, hot dogs, and nachos (and of course ice cream). Thankfully the hot dog buns there were gluten free. It's really unhealthy for growing teenagers to just eat greasy food all day on top of going to bed at 2 am to wake up at 6 am and exerting their bodies while under stress.

Another thing that seriously irked me were the prices. I had to pay nearly 5 dollars for a water bottle. I don't have the money to do that three days in a row (they check our bags every morning) on top of having to pay for dinner, and I can assume a lot of other teenagers can't either. I feel as though FIRST should at least try to lower the prices as to allow people with lower incomes to not become sick/faint at their competitons.

Sorry if this came off as irksome, but I am very irked.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

So wait, it's acceptable to ignore dietary needs of a significant portion of the population because it's convenient?

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I didn't see the poster mention convenience, only contract obligations. The large arenas usually to require their in house services be used.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I'm a junior, and 2 sport athlete: Cross Country(where I'm a captain) and Track, all 3 years so far in high school. I've been varsity/near varsity for the past 2 years(though I've been deproving as I get more involved in robots, probably due to lack of decent rest, and build season eating habits :rolleyes:). Conveniently track and cross end at 5 and robots starts at 5:30, so I can attend meetings and practice, but it means not getting home until 9, and still needing to eat, shower, "do homework".

I have given up several track meets where I could have done well to go to robotics regionals(my coach was not pleased).

I tried wrestling for a while last year, but (among other reasons) its really hard to do a sport in the winter(build season) with robotics and IB-level homework, when you have robotics meetings and practice for 3 hours each every day. However, during the winter, I do attend 1-hour track conditioning practices 3-4 days a week and participate in chemistry olympiad.



I don't want to see the grades and/or sanity of a 3-sport varsity athlete who is truly involved with robots, if its even possible.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

I was able to do Football, Soccer, and Robotics during my 4 years in high school while taking all honors classes. Football slightly hindered the time and events I could go to to fundraise and soccer was during build season but I still was able to thoroughly be there more than most others. I wouldnt have changed it for anything else in the world; I can happily say I was on a championship caliber robot team, championship caliber football team, and soccer....well soccer was fun.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Yeah, I've given up Division 1 soccer and some other clubs like Science Olympiad and FBLA (FRC is more fun anyway) to have more time for robotics. Combined with all these AP courses these days, it's quite a lot when you're trying to be as involved as you can with the team. A lot of our team members are in some sort of music, and from time to time we have major conflicts (in 2013 a good portion of the team was missing one of our regionals because of a large band trip).

Somehow I've managed to still be playing in the orchestra.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Then it needs to be stipulated in the contracts that alternative dietary needs will be respected or that folks will be allowed to bring in food to meet those dietary conditions.

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

Yep, totally agree

Re: 2014 Lessons Learned: The Negative
 

This is not well advertised, but unlike most regional venues, we are allowed to bring our own food into the dome and convention center. The bag search people haven't ever cared about food or beverages that I've seen, they're just there for security. The staff at our regional events often make me dump out bottles of tap water before entry, only for me to refill them on the other side...

However, like you have said, if they can't provide alternatives, what will be available to volunteers (and to the general public) should be well communicated so that people can at least plan to provide for themselves if needed.