Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

I disagree. Districts definitely make a large majority of teams better and we saw it in the PNW this year:

-More matches: Practice paid off and Increase in Strategic play at team's second events and the District Championship
-Unbag Time: Even several rookie teams made significant changes between events and saw great success later on, because of this. *Huge shout-out to 4980*. Iteration is a huge part of engineering

The list can go on and on. Just getting teams out to more events means more opportunities to get awards and opportunities to perform well. This can be a great source of motivation and inspiration for some.

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

Could you imagine Texas teams in 2-3 years if we went districts!!! We have 2 world champs in the last two years. Im scared to think on how good texas would become.

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

I knew Districts worked when FiM did their first championships back in 2009 and HOT was going to the championships with 85 matches under their belt to my teams dozen. I can't wait til New York goes District!

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

Correction: 4967 won Highest Rookie Seed and Rookie Inspiration
4917 won Rookie All Star

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

One of the biggest reasons that I think that districts make teams better is increased exposure to a variety of teams.

If you play in one event, you get a certain idea of what is required to be successful so you make some improvements to try to achieve the benchmark you saw. Then in your next event you see some teams that blew away anything you saw in your first event. Time to reset the benchmark.

Then you make it to the regional championship (I hate when it's called the district championship) and you realize how high the bar really is. Now you really have to figure out how to raise you game.

By the time you make it to World Championships, you've already seen the game at such a high level that you're ready for anything. The fact that the district system forces a higher level of competition results in the teams being much more prepared for what they'll see in St. Louis.

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

I have to somewhat disagree. There were still a good number of teams unable to manipulate the ball at MAR champs and was certainly not at the championship level.

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

The Team 358 all awards spreadsheet can solve this quickly.
Here is a sort of all Einstein apperances prior to this season, I haven't updated it yet with 2014 results.

Team # of Division Titles
177 7
217 6
67 5
233 5
25 5
71 4
111 4
254 4
469 4
33 3
60 3
175 3
968 3
987 3
1114 3
16 2
64 2
118 2
144 2
148 2
173 2
294 2
330 2
340 2
494 2
503 2
1126 2
1218 2
2056 2
51 1
53 1
56 1
59 1
65 1
66 1
68 1
75 1
85 1
108 1
115 1
121 1
122 1
125 1
179 1
180 1
190 1
195 1
201 1
207 1
222 1
236 1
245 1
247 1
279 1
292 1
296 1
302 1
303 1
341 1
343 1
348 1
349 1
378 1
435 1
451 1
522 1
548 1
610 1
766 1
781 1
862 1
868 1
910 1
971 1
973 1
1024 1
1038 1
1124 1
1139 1
1241 1
1270 1
1319 1
1388 1
1477 1
1503 1
1507 1
1519 1
1625 1
1640 1
1678 1
1902 1
2016 1
2041 1
2194 1
2753 1
3138 1
3357 1
3476 1
4334 1

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

^That.

I think the rather obvious conclusion that more matches--with the ability to improve between/during each event--makes for more competitive robots is, well, rather obvious.

Districts allow teams more matches and more time to work on their robots. If that *doesn't* improve teams, then teams are doing something wrong!

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

I don't think I did a good job of making my point, so I'll try again.

(Aging myself here a bit...)

Back when "The Dream Team" dominated the Olympics way back when, there was debate about if a team dominating the Olympics was good for basketball. After all of the debate, the consensus was that having the Dream Team would cause the rest of the world to raise their level of play because now they knew what basketball at the highest level was like. In the end, that prediction came true because the USA has since been challenged and beaten - the rest of the world rose to the challenge.

I think the same effect happens to teams that compete in FIRST. The better the teams they compete against, the better they themselves will be. I know that we learned a lot from MSC that made us a way better team then we would've been without it.

There will always be teams that are happy with where they are. However, there are also a lot of teams that want to be very competitive and want to be the best. If your target of what is "the best" is higher than others targets, then I believe your higher target will naturally make you better.

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

Here's a thread I created in 2009 to talk about FiM's success that year on Einstein. It should provide some interesting perspective based on the past few years. With more years and other regions, we have plenty more data since then. Additionally, you'll notice that the two factors I broke out specifically at the end have since been adopted outside of the district model.
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=77045

Not sure if I agree with your assessment. There were certainly teams that didn't have effective ground loading methods, but almost every team at MAR championship could register a possession from the human player. That's a large part of what led to the creation of the "double exchange" strategy (firing a ball immediately back to the human player after getting a possession), which in turn was very popular this past weekend (including 2590's alliance using it to reach Einstein).

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

I don't think a lot of people remember how averse a majority of the community was to districts until they actually played out so magnificently in Michigan. There was a lot of talk about it "not really being FIRST" and the like. Look at how far we have come!

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

Sorry, this is what I meant. My point was that the level of competition was generally lower than at Champs and MSC.

That strategy was a smart way to deal with the limitations of a lot of robots, but the lack of intake especially gave these robots little strategic depth beyond that, unlike the alliances at champs that used this strategy.

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

The best part about the district model from my perspective, was that we were able to bring upgrade packages throughout the season. Increasing our competitiveness as the season progressed. This was likely helpful to many other teams, which overall increased the competitive nature of the PNW this year.

My biggest problem with districts, is how much school I've missed over the last month. Between 1 day for OSU, 2 for DCMP, and 3 for CMP, it's too much. Especially in the middle of AP study season.

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

From my understanding officials where approached in Texas about joining the district model and they were uninterested about that idea because they are able to stay financially feasible with the regional model and are able to produce very good teams from it. That said I would love to see Texas join the district model and match FIM for a total power house district that would significantly boost the excitement of elimination matches at championships.

PNW and NE FIRST both sent a lot of teams to eliminations this year because of the district model and I can't wait to see even more areas adopt it and make the competition at championships that much more intense and fun to watch.

Re: Proof that districts work: PNW
 

To be fair you only missed one more day of school vs attending a single regional and winning your way to CMP at that event. Note when selecting the schedule for the PNW district events we specifically offered to have Sat-Sun events and none of the venues wanted that schedule, they all wanted to do Fri-Sat events.

The reality was that in the PNW the cost of the first year of the district system was not that much higher than running the Regionals of the past, particularly the 2011 and 2012 seasons. That included purchasing fields, fleshing out our AV equipment to have enough for 2 fields, Pipe and drape, floor protection, pit power distribution system, and the materials to build the road cases to transport all of those items. Now that the initial significant capital expenditures have been made the cost in future years will be significantly less than running multiple regionals.

With the change to the district system some of the initial registration, and all of the 3rd event fees go back to the district, so overall in the long run it becomes much more financially viable and sustainable than multiple regional events. Though if the district chooses to rent things like pipe and drape, floor coverings and pay an outside vendor for catering and AV production the long term savings may not materialize or be as significant.