Chief Delphi
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Championship Event (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=12)
-   -   Town Hall Meeting Video (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=136953)

Vale 03-05-2015 11:37
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Abhishek R (Post 1479496)
I agree with your entire post.

To address your last part, in my opinion, I don't think that's a problem. We have so many deserving teams and mentors of their respective awards, and I think it'll be great to bring them recognition faster.

What I'm disappointed with is that I'll miss out on seeing half the great teams and robots from around the world. Does this mean I'm less motivated to be the best? No, myself and my team will try just as hard to achieve our goal of being the best we can be. Does it mean I'll leave FIRST? Not at all, this is such an amazing program.

I'm just a bit upset that this was the solution. I'm still not convinced there wasn't a better option that didn't require a split in the Championship event.
I agree, and I'm pretty sure that your opinion is shared with many people within the program.

Now excuse me if I'm somewhat repetitive, but yes, this is upsetting for people. It's disappointing to not be able to see all of the powerhouses and inspiring teams in one place, as well as friends from half-way across the country and maybe the entire world, under one roof. However, as a rookie, this is my reality check. It doesn't mean a complete fall from grace, but instead, a change to how I approach the program as a whole. Instead of all fun and games, I now see it in a more business-like perspective, which isn't necessarily bad.

Maybe there wasn't any better option, I mean, considering the way that the people of FIRST have set their goals towards expansion. FIRST has always been evolving, and now we must adapt to it once more.

We'll work as we go to develop the nature of the program. Perhaps we might end up loving 2 championships more than we do one. I'm hopeful that we do.

jman4747 03-05-2015 12:55
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Lame (Post 1479575)
They certainly didn't do it purposefully. Did they do it at all? It's difficult to say, at least until 2017.

So why do we write here at all? What's done is done. There are certain elements that are set in stone and cannot be changed. What good does talking about it online do? I can't speak for others, but for me, I think the leadership is missing something important, and I hope that maybe I'll say something that gets passed on to someone else, and eventually makes its way to the leadership and that makes the little light bulb go on for them.

I say that they are missing something because I have seen three attempts to communicate with the First community about this decision. There was the announcement itself, there was the town hall presentation and discussion, and there was the post-announcement survey. In my opinion, all three of them demonstrated that they didn't understand their audience. All three of those communication attempts showed a complete misunderstanding of how their communication attempts would be perceived.

With that in mind, I think that I have a different way of explaining things that might help one side see the other side's point of view. There are more than two sides, but the biggest general groupings are people who absolutely hate the split, and people who think it doesn't really matter, and that people should embrace the positives of the split plan. People in each general group post here, but it doesn't seem like either side is doing much in the way of convincing. Why not?

In my opinion, what we have here is a case of rationalism versus emotion. The primary arguments for the split are highly rational. They deal with numbers of teams who can participate, and the costs for each team. They could be shown on a spreadsheet.

The anti-split crowd's arguments are frequently emotional. The most common arguments are either that they want to gather all of the best robots in one place, or that there cannot be two world championships, by definition, and that somehow that's important. They sometimes try to argue beyond that, to rationalize their arguments, using the literal meaning of that word. It doesn't often work. The rationalized arguments often ring hollow.

You might think that, as engineers, we should embrace the logical over the emotional. I think that is completely wrong. We use the word "inspiration" a lot. It's in our name. Inspiration is an emotional reaction. The leadership needs to understand the emotional nature of the reaction, and play off of that. Never, ever, dismiss it as irrelevant. In understanding those emotions lies the key to First's continued success.

Think about this. First is not the only student robot competition in the world. There are others. Some have thousands of participants and a global reach. Rationally, the others are just as good as First. However, they aren't as successful. I think that's because there is something about a First event that is highly emotional. Something about the environment we have created taps into some really primal emotions in a way that appeals to us in a big way. Whether students, alumni, or mentors, we want to keep coming back and be a part of it. There is more screaming, cheering, and crying at our events than there are at those other events, because there's something about our events that seem more important.

That's enough for the moment, but I think if you want to understand why there was so much hostility toward the split championship model, first understand the emotional appeal of the phrase "world championship". After understanding those arguments, you may still conclude that the leadership's plan for two season finale events is better than a single event, but you will understand why some people don't see it that way.
I'll give you all the all but the "one champion" and "diluted event" arguments. Those usually come off as selfish more so than emotional.

I think everyone who subscribes to those arguments should have to in person ask every wait list and rookie all star team at 2016 champs to leave and see what happens. Whenever you say those things you are personally insulting someone and you can't use a blanket statement to brush that away from you. Cutting the attendance of wait list and RAS teams is a very easy and practical way to open up space but then it isn't very emotionally satisfying to us is it? If you want to raise the "bottom" telling them they aren't good enough to go to the "real" championship is just going to make the "bottom" resent you. It is for this reason I find a lot of the "nay" arguments to be hypocritical at best.

Also if you believe FIRST is removing your ability to be the only winner and that makes you quit than you literally just quit because you can't be the only winner.

David Lame 03-05-2015 18:00
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479644)
I'll give you all the all but the "one champion" and "diluted event" arguments. Those usually come off as selfish more so than emotional.

I think everyone who subscribes to those arguments should have to in person ask every wait list and rookie all star team at 2016 champs to leave and see what happens. Whenever you say those things you are personally insulting someone and you can't use a blanket statement to brush that away from you. Cutting the attendance of wait list and RAS teams is a very easy and practical way to open up space but then it isn't very emotionally satisfying to us is it? If you want to raise the "bottom" telling them they aren't good enough to go to the "real" championship is just going to make the "bottom" resent you. It is for this reason I find a lot of the "nay" arguments to be hypocritical at best.

Also if you believe FIRST is removing your ability to be the only winner and that makes you quit than you literally just quit because you can't be the only winner.
I've seen some arguments I would agree are selfish, and others that could appear selfish because they aren't worded well.

Most of the "one championship" variants, though, don't seem very selfish to me. Most of the people who are really wrapped up in "one championship" are people who understand that they are highly unlikely to ever be part of a championship alliance. They don't want "one championship" for themselves.

There is a powerful emotional tug to the phrase "world champion". The very existence of a world championship feels very significant. When explaining First to other people, I drop that phrase a lot because I know that when I tell them that there is a world championship, their opinion of First goes up a notch. We are a significant enough activity to bring teams together from all over the world. When my team competes in a district match, the fact that we could go on to the world championships is a motivator. The fact that we can watch the people we compete against at the world championship, and that some of them might appear on Einstein Field, and maybe bring home the blue banners, is significant.

Some of you right now are thinking some variation of "that doesn't make any sense", and are tempted to explain why, really, there is no practical difference between what we do now, and what we will do when there are two championships. You are thinking rationally. It doesn't work. As long as you do that, you won't understand the force behind the opposition to the split.

On a closely related note, although the relationship might not be obvious, the First leadership really needs to understand that the "championship experience" doesn't end at the stadium door. They really proved that they didn't get that this year.

Actually coming up with a plan is still not obvious. The "emotional" side also must understand the practical realities. First leadership is absolutely right that the system that exists now does not scale, and would break as more teams are added. They really did have to do something, and no matter what they did, something would change and someone would be unhappy about it. I'm not going to say that they made the wrong decision. I will say that they don't appear to understand why people are unhappy with the decision. That makes it difficult for them to communicate, and if they never get it, they won't be able to take steps that might give back at least some of what has been taken away.

Citrus Dad 03-05-2015 22:38
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
What if FIRST gave a party and no one came?

What if the top tier teams looked at the split championships and the possibility that they might have to fundraise for yet another event after that to crown a single champion? Might they consider skipping those those championships entirely? The IRI already exists to bring together top tier teams. Might the most competitive teams simply decide to avoid Detroit and Houston and just go straight to Indiana (or some other new event)?

I'm not sure that FIRST is considering this possibility sufficiently. Top tier teams aren't only the most competitive--they usually are also the most organized and networked. Organizing a separate championship event won't be that difficult. Look at the success of the Chezy Champs as one example of staging a significant well run event on a low budget, where all of the teams left happy.

And if those teams didn't attend, how would the other teams feel about going the the dual champs now? They wouldn't be able to rub shoulders with the best teams or see top level competition. And how would they feel about winning a further diluted championship?

FIRST needs to think about this more dynamically. It's not a static situation with no other avenues available.

Rachel Lim 04-05-2015 01:20
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
I should probably be studying, not writing ridiculously long posts, but I was reviewing APUSH notes and thought there were some interesting parallels (and maybe this is also an excuse not to do homework...)


Humans are emotional beings. I think we can all agree on that, even if you think enjoyment is not a purely emotional experience. If you disagree, consider this:

If we were truly logical, we would not need to be inspired to do something, we'd already be in it if we wanted to.
If we were truly logical, we would not need a competition, because by the time you compete you've already built your robot.
If we were truly logical, we wouldn't care if there were multiple championships or if many teams were excluded from a single one.

Obviously that doesn't work or apply to the majority of members in FIRST, or we wouldn't be here. What then, is the draw of the competition?

1. The desire to be the best.
2. The desire to see who is the best.
3. The desire to see how you compare to other teams.

The desire to be the best.
It seems selfish, and it is in some ways, but it's also true. There is a reason communism doesn't work. We want what's best for everyone, but we also need something to keep pushing us on. FIRST has both, and that's one of the reasons it has been so successful. Without the desire or the need to be the top, innovation stops.

War, as destructive as it is, has led to some of the most amazing technological discoveries because countries find the need to do better than their enemies. Peace leads to a sharing of those technologies and (arguably) a better life for all. The coopertition aspect of FIRST tries to draw into the best of both.

I draw the line between the good and bad aspects of competition in this way: if I try to do my best, and try to win in that way, I'm doing it right; if I try to pull others down, and try to win in that way, I'm doing it wrongly.

The desire to see who is the best.
The above points don't just apply to those who know they are at or near the top--watching the top teams compete, saying "someday, I want to be able to do that" is what pushes me to keep learning. In many ways, this point fits in with the previous one. Only by seeing what the best do can we understand what we can improve on.

The desire to see how you compare to other teams.
Once again this draws from the first point, but I think there's a difference. No one wants to be at the bottom, or be told they aren't good enough. It's why the idea of "cutting out" some of the teams that would otherwise qualify, or separating the two tiers of champs, is upsetting. In some ways, I think the "everyone is a winner" attitude is in our culture. I've certainly heard it in school, in other classes, and to some extent at robotics. I understand why it's around, and I completely disagree with it.

Everyone cannot be a winner.
Everyone cannot be at the top.
Everyone can try to be a winner and to be at the top.

It's not an easy lesson to learn on a team or in life. Last year, when we didn't make it to champs, it was a hard realization for everyone. But I think it made this year mean more. And if we hadn't made it this year, it would have meant pushing even harder next year. I use the same rule in school--if it's easy, I look for something harder, then when I struggle, I try to learn from those who are doing well. I think that there is an important distinction to make here, though: not winning does not mean failure or a lack of inspiration. Success comes from being inspired, and being inspired means a continued push to do better.

This leads to another issue: the teams and students who aren't at this point yet. Because arguably, pushing to be the best means you're already inspired to stay. This is why I think the DCMP / super DCMP / super regional method is the best in the end. DCMPs (or their equivalents) can collectively reach more teams than two champs, and will still have enough inspiration in them to reach the teams that need the additional push. And it allows for a single champs, for the teams, students, and mentors who use the competition to keep pushing on. But back on topic:

Why do we care?
Because I started off this post by saying that humans are emotional beings. And being emotional, we care about how we compare to other teams, how well we do, and are pushed by outside forces to do better.

And...?
We want to win. We don't want to fail.

The desire to be the top, and the fear of being the bottom, has shaped history. If I tried, I could probably link the rise and fall of the various political parties, social movements/rebellions, historical figures, and even groups/countries to those two concepts. If there's one thing to learn from history (other than the fact that it takes way more index cards than math), it's that motivations don't change much. Crowning a winner creates a sense of accomplishment for the winning alliance, and a goal for everyone else. Yet excluding teams from champs defines them as "not good enough."

Both are emotional responses, both could be classified as "selfish," and both are human nature. But since it's FIRST's goal to inspire students, not send them on long philosophical discussions, I should tie this all together. To inspire students, we need to acknowledge both the need for a sense of accomplishment and the need to be able to aim for the top exist. FIRST seems to be focusing too much on the first, and CD too much on the second. We're not purely logical, so even if one of those goals seems more so, it won't be completely effective alone.

Give students a sense of accomplishment, then keep pushing them to do better. The former hooks students in, the latter keeps them (and their mentors) going. DCMPs for the first, a single champs for the second.

jman4747 04-05-2015 01:32
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Citrus Dad (Post 1479726)
What if FIRST gave a party and no one came?

What if the top tier teams looked at the split championships and the possibility that they might have to fundraise for yet another event after that to crown a single champion? Might they consider skipping those those championships entirely? The IRI already exists to bring together top tier teams. Might the most competitive teams simply decide to avoid Detroit and Houston and just go straight to Indiana (or some other new event)?

I'm not sure that FIRST is considering this possibility sufficiently. Top tier teams aren't only the most competitive--they usually are also the most organized and networked. Organizing a separate championship event won't be that difficult. Look at the success of the Chezy Champs as one example of staging a significant well run event on a low budget, where all of the teams left happy.

And if those teams didn't attend, how would the other teams feel about going the the dual champs now? They wouldn't be able to rub shoulders with the best teams or see top level competition. And how would they feel about winning a further diluted championship?

FIRST needs to think about this more dynamically. It's not a static situation with no other avenues available.
Dude chill. You even won it this year.

I thought the "top tier" wanted to help other teams do better and set an example on the field? But I guess you and your friends on all the other "top" teams would rather not even bother with the rest of us?

An amazing club. Draped in glamorous running molten blue. As the heat of their misplaced frustration melts away all they have accomplished.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479644)
Also if you believe FIRST is removing your ability to be the only winner and that makes you quit than you literally just quit because you can't be the only winner.

Michael Corsetto 04-05-2015 02:39
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479779)
Dude chill. You even won it this year.

I thought the "top tier" wanted to help other teams do better and set an example on the field? But I guess you and your friends on all the other "top" teams would rather not even bother with the rest of us?

An amazing club. Draped in glamorous running molten blue. As the heat of their misplaced frustration melts away all they have accomplished.
Think about it in the positive light.

If 200 or so teams go to an alternative World Championship, that's 200 more teams that can go to either 2017 FIRST CMP.

That's more inspiration for more students, right?

Everybody LOVES Championships.

-Mike

Akash Rastogi 04-05-2015 03:00
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479779)
Dude chill. You even won it this year.

I thought the "top tier" wanted to help other teams do better and set an example on the field? But I guess you and your friends on all the other "top" teams would rather not even bother with the rest of us?

An amazing club. Draped in glamorous running molten blue. As the heat of their misplaced frustration melts away all they have accomplished.
Dude.

I feel like you know little to nothing about these top tier teams.

Helping others? They do more to help those around them than anyone else...Basically why most of the top tier teams are also Chairman's winners. They help these teams with amazing initiatives and programs built from the ground up. They help them with mentoring and finding sponsors, as well as everything else. The elite teams I'm thinking of do more in one year to develop the programs of others than most do in 10 years.

Helping others starts locally and from the ground level, not at the $@#$@#$@#$@# championship event. I can help and develop more teams through mentoring locally and providing resources than I can by 1 more team going to champs.

How dare you say they don't want to help others do better.

jman4747 04-05-2015 03:21
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi (Post 1479785)
Dude.

I feel like you know little to nothing about these top tier teams.

Helping others? They do more to help those around them than anyone else...Basically why most of the top tier teams are also Chairman's winners. They help these teams with amazing initiatives and programs built from the ground up. They help them with mentoring and finding sponsors, as well as everything else. The elite teams I'm thinking of do more in one year to develop the programs of others than most do in 10 years.

Helping others starts locally and from the ground level, not at the $@#$@#$@#$@# championship event. I can help and develop more teams through mentoring locally and providing resources than I can by 1 more team going to champs.

How dare you say they don't want to help others do better.
So why all the trouble with the championship split? You are literally saying that teams only seeing half of the "top" at one event isn't the main point. That everything else they do outside of it is more important so why do you even care if it is split? How does splitting champs stop them from continuing to do what you say?

The proposal in the previously quoted post has the "top" teams leave everyone else behind to have their own tournament at the same time. The problem is the message it sends to the teams still competing at the official championship events "we don't want you here because #1 we won't have a real champion and #2 because the event will be more fun to watch without you". That is one of the messages it will send. I am responding to the proposal in that post. I don't hold any animosity toward "top' teams and won't unless they did something like that.

FIRST gets more teams to champs and you help more of them at home. How do these things hinder each other?

David Lame 04-05-2015 06:54
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
If the First leadership deigns to seek the opinion of students, I hope Rachel Lim is included in the focus group.


(Even if she really should be doing her homework.)

Banderoonies 04-05-2015 08:30
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Everyone criticizes my "divorce" analogy. However, when a family gets divided into two championships and the "kids" have absolutely no say in the matter, that is what it felt like to me. Sorry for those of you that took offense at this analogy. I meant no offense. I simply found the split really sad and very "dividing" of this organization.

Do I want more teams to have opportunity? Of course! That has been our operating model for a very long time. More of our work goes into helping other teams & the community than building our robot.

Ultimately,I fear one championship will end up being considered "better" than the other. There is a sad likelihood of that happening. What does that do to all of those competing at the other? Will that diminish their experience?

I am in total agreement with the goal of having more opportunities for other reams.....I simply think how FIRST developed a solution to this problem could have been better implemented and communicated.

But it's done. So lets all just accept it, and try to work within the new model. The swirl helps no one.

BrennanB 04-05-2015 08:43
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479786)
So why all the trouble with the championship split? You are literally saying that teams only seeing half of the "top" at one event isn't the main point. That everything else they do outside of it is more important so why do you even care if it is split? How does splitting champs stop them from continuing to do what you say?

The proposal in the previously quoted post has the "top" teams leave everyone else behind to have their own tournament at the same time. The problem is the message it sends to the teams still competing at the official championship events "we don't want you here because #1 we won't have a real champion and #2 because the event will be more fun to watch without you". That is one of the messages it will send. I am responding to the proposal in that post. I don't hold any animosity toward "top' teams and won't unless they did something like that.

FIRST gets more teams to champs and you help more of them at home. How do these things hinder each other?
Firstly, it seems like the arguments you are presenting are an unfounded assault on every successful team that has a differing opinion that you, when the fact is... Without them you probably wouldn't even be here. These teams have a massive positive impact in their community and around the world. 1678 wasn't always a winner. A three-peat on Einstein is crazy awesome, and it took some hard work to get to where they are. (By the way, you won a regional in your second year of existence, it took them 6 years) But they were in your position once too, and while I don't know specifically what all the factors which made them a super successful I would hazard a guess that a significant factor was seeing top teams perform, possibly in their first ever champs trip in 2011. They haven't stopped being winners ever since, which inspires me because it drives people to do better.

Let me tell you a little bit about Canada, and a couple of teams that nobody has really heard of before called 1114 and 2056. :rolleyes:

From 2006-2013 (That's 8 years! Or two full cycles of students. :ahh: ) Either 1114, 2056, or both were on the winning alliance in every single event in Ontario. (2006-2011 if you want every event in Canada) They have 17 blue banner wins together. Was there complaining that they won everything all the time? Sure. Did they go sit in the corner and wait for FIRST to add more teams to the championship? Nope. Were 1114 and 2056 an absolute inspiration to the teams that chose to make them inspirations? Absolutely!

1114 and 2056 pushed all of Canada to do better. Not to mention the world. There were some close calls, which forced both the finalists and winners to do even better next time. Look at all the particularly strong teams that have come out of Canada: 188, 610, 1241, 1310, 1325, 1334, 1503, 4334 to just name a few. I want to leave this with you...

People are motivated by close failure, not big success.

What I mean by this is that if you "almost" win, this drives you even harder to do it next time. Winning is a self defined goal.

Take this self defined goal: When I faced the double (then undefeated) pair of 1114/3683 in the semis of GTR-East in 2014. My goal was to take it to 3 matches. Not let them walk away with an undefeated record from the event. Much to my surprise, we won the event.

Sometimes we succeed. And sometimes we "almost" fail, like our very next event.

My strong feeling is that if more spots had opened for Canadian teams to qualify earlier, all teams in Canada wouldn't be as competitive as they are today.

But, all that said. Seems like FIRST has made up it's mind, and we will have to do the best with what we have got. Just because they say it is right, doesn't mean it is.

Libby K 04-05-2015 09:22
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banderoonies (Post 1479798)
Everyone criticizes my "divorce" analogy. However, when a family gets divided into two championships and the "kids" have absolutely no say in the matter, that is what it felt like to me. Sorry for those of you that took offense at this analogy. I meant no offense. I simply found the split really sad and very "dividing" of this organization.
Your divorce analogy was very similar to one I've used in private conversations. It was wonderfully put, and I'm so sorry that the moderator was so rude to you for it. The 'family' doesn't deserve that kind of treatment.

The fact about this split is, the community be segmented even further than it already is. Think about the reaction when Districts first came to be - "We'll never get to play with our friends from (insert location here) since they'll be locked to their region!" The response, before inter-district play, was - well, you can see them at the Championship, so....

Now we won't get to. There are so many people who travel on their own to the Championship to volunteer, to attend conferences, to watch their friends from all over the world play, to meet the 'greats'. FIRST would ask these die-hard supporters to travel twice?

I'm not a Championshplit fan, and it's going to be hard to ever convince me to be. The FIRST community does not need to be fractured in order for it to grow.

BrendanB 04-05-2015 09:50
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479786)
The proposal in the previously quoted post has the "top" teams leave everyone else behind to have their own tournament at the same time. The problem is the message it sends to the teams still competing at the official championship events "we don't want you here because #1 we won't have a real champion and #2 because the event will be more fun to watch without you". That is one of the messages it will send. I am responding to the proposal in that post. I don't hold any animosity toward "top' teams and won't unless they did something like that.
And if they decided to do that what's the problem? It is their decision what events they go to. If they feel they would rather spend their time & money attending another event that is more competitive AND allows them to compete with teams from across the country they have grown close to over the years then so be it. Not every program has the luxury that they can travel to a ton of events each year and if you have to spend $20k-$40k+ to compete at the Championship you'll start questioning why you are attending that event.

There are lower tier (but still competitive teams) who forgo attending St. Louis because they really don't feel like spending the money to go if they know their shots at being successful are low. It is an expensive, time consuming trip.

Like Mike said if the Championship is more about how many teams we can get to attend so we can inspire more students then more teams choosing not to attend the event results in more teams getting to attend the event. Isn't this great? :)

I'd be interested if we saw a similar change in a different aspect of the program in an area other teams cared about and what their reaction would be. What if we completely re-structured the Chairmans award and removed giving out one at the end of the season and did away with HOF status to the winning team and no auto bid to champs. Would we see a drop in teams who presented? Its easy to look at this when it doesn't have an impact on your program but when it does this is serious.

jman4747 04-05-2015 10:15
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrennanB (Post 1479804)
Firstly, it seems like the arguments you are presenting are an unfounded assault on every successful team that has a differing opinion that you,
Um, how? My initial reply said that the idea of high preforming teams skipping championships entirely after qualifying merit based completely subverts the the argument that splitting champs stops other teams from seeing the best play in person. And that regardless of any other stated reasons sends a negative and demeaning message to other teams.

The second responds to a rebuttal that points out truthfully that what teams do for each other outside of championships often outweighs the single event. My response to that is why then the problem with a geographically split championship vs one split by robot ability? It shouldn't matter that it is split and measures suggested in the post I was replying to in the first place shouldn't be necessary.

At what point did I actually "assault every successful team". When you refuse to go to the official final event(s) in order solely to have one final elite competition it does sound like you don't want to be bothered with everyone else.

Andrew Schreiber 04-05-2015 10:27
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479823)
At what point did I actually "assault every successful team". When you refuse to go to the official final event(s) in order solely to have one final elite competition it does sound like you don't want to be bothered with everyone else.
Ok, I'll bite.

I have zero interest in competing with, or watching a competition, that includes the bottom 50% of FRC teams as the CULMINATING event of the season. I don't want to be bothered by everyone else; I want to watch the best of the best duke it out because it's inspiring. And each year our team works our butts off to earn the right to be part of that inspiring event.

BrennanB 04-05-2015 10:53
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479823)
Um, how? My initial reply said that the idea of high preforming teams skipping championships entirely after qualifying merit based completely subverts the the argument that splitting champs stops other teams from seeing the best play in person. And that regardless of any other stated reasons sends a negative and demeaning message to other teams.
That's the point I think. To get people to change. Doesn't mean it is the best way to do it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479823)
The second responds to a rebuttal that points out truthfully that what teams do for each other outside of championships often outweighs the single event. My response to that is why then the problem with a geographically split championship vs one split by robot ability? It shouldn't matter that it is split and measures suggested in the post I was replying to in the first place shouldn't be necessary.
Apples and Oranges aren't the same thing, even though they both are fruit. Yes a "split" occurs in both scenarios. They aren't comparable in the way you describe. One cuts the globe in half, while the other does not. Any attempts to merge them together are nothing more than small bridges that don't really suffice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479823)
At what point did I actually "assault every successful team".
I actually wrote "unfounded assault on every successful team that has a differing opinion that you" which implies some successful teams may have the same opinion as you. I don't know for sure. I suppose it was mainly this post. If you like to discuss this specific part further we can move it to PM's.

Akash Rastogi 04-05-2015 11:37
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479786)
So why all the trouble with the championship split? You are literally saying that teams only seeing half of the "top" at one event isn't the main point. That everything else they do outside of it is more important so why do you even care if it is split? How does splitting champs stop them from continuing to do what you say? How do these things hinder each other?
I'm not sure where you think I wrote this at all. Your interpretation is incorrect. I am not literally saying this at all.

As a response, I would agree with Andrew's post, even if it comes off as a little abrasive, at least it is honest.

"I have zero interest in competing with, or watching a competition, that includes the bottom 50% of FRC teams as the CULMINATING event of the season. I don't want to be bothered by everyone else; I want to watch the best of the best duke it out because it's inspiring. And each year our team works our butts off to earn the right to be part of that inspiring event."

It is about earning the right to be there. That is important as ever in today's world to teach people that they need to earn their way into something based on merit. No waitlists, no random spaces for teams who didn't win events, or get here based on a good points system like the districts. (Again, why I'd rather grow the district system so that more teams can "earn" their way into a championship event.) FIRST is using the worst and least productive method to actually grow this program and inspire more kids.

If you don't earn a spot somewhere, I don't believe you should be there.

Taylor 04-05-2015 12:05
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi (Post 1479848)
If you don't earn a spot somewhere, I don't believe you should be there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by FIRST Wobsite*
"To transform our culture by creating a world where science and technology are celebrated and where young people dream of becoming science and technology leaders."
Dean Kamen, Founder

Mission
Our mission is to inspire young people to be science and technology leaders, by engaging them in exciting mentor-based programs that build science, engineering and technology skills, that inspire innovation, and that foster well-rounded life capabilities including self-confidence, communication, and leadership.
It would be quite difficult for one to Change The Culture if one only preaches to the choir.
*

Akash Rastogi 04-05-2015 12:15
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taylor (Post 1479855)
It would be quite difficult for one to Change The Culture if one only preaches to the choir.
*
You act as if this 1 event is the only place these kids can be inspired. Is that honestly what you think?

Inspire people locally. Have them earn their way to champs.

Taylor 04-05-2015 12:19
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi (Post 1479856)
You act as if this 1 event is the only place these kids can be inspired. Is that honestly what you think?
It's not what I think, it's what's constantly coming from the mouths of the Founding Fathers of FIRST.
Which is why I quoted the source in the way I did.
In lots and lots of interviews Dean has done, he focuses on the experience of students who are socioeconomically disadvantaged, and the effects that CMP has on them. I can find them and link them, but I'm confident you've seen the same articles/videos.

Lil' Lavery 04-05-2015 12:51
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Akash Rastogi (Post 1479856)
You act as if this 1 event is the only place these kids can be inspired. Is that honestly what you think?

Inspire people locally. Have them earn their way to champs.
Different students are inspired in different ways. The Championship experience has been a way to inspire certain students for a while now. There are some high profile mentors who were inspired by trips to Championship that they did not qualify for. While I agree that we may need to continue to adjust to find the proper balance, I don't think completely cutting off teams from attending if they don't qualify is the way to go.

smistthegreat 04-05-2015 13:28
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery (Post 1479862)
Different students are inspired in different ways. The Championship experience has been a way to inspire certain students for a while now. There are some high profile mentors who were inspired by trips to Championship that they did not qualify for. While I agree that we may need to continue to adjust to find the proper balance, I don't think completely cutting off teams from attending if they don't qualify is the way to go.
How would you define the "championship experience"? I've heard a lot of people talking about it and how good it is, but I'd love to hear a concrete definition. So far, all I know is that it isn't any of the following:
- Meeting teams from around the country and world
- Playing with only the most competitive robots
- Competing in a stadium in front of thousands of cheering people
I know it isn't any of these things because FIRST is taking these away. I'm very curious as to what their intended experience actually consists of (and why it can't happen at the district cmp level, but that's a discussion for another time).

Lil' Lavery 04-05-2015 13:31
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smistthegreat (Post 1479878)
How would you define the "championship experience"? I've heard a lot of people talking about it and how good it is, but I'd love to hear a concrete definition. So far, all I know is that it isn't any of the following:
- Meeting teams from around the country and world
- Playing with only the most competitive robots
- Competing in a stadium in front of thousands of cheering people
I know it isn't any of these things because FIRST is taking these away. I'm very curious as to what their intended experience actually consists of (and why it can't happen at the district cmp level, but that's a discussion for another time).
:rolleyes:
You only play with 1/8 of the "most competitive robots" as it is, with divisions.
You can still meet plenty of teams from around the country and world in a split championship.
We have yet to see exactly which portions of the competition will take place in the stadiums. There's still potential for something similar to the Einstein field at EPCOT back in the day (a rotation of which division is playing on the big stage at any given moment).

I don't like this dual championship, but the hyperbole has to stop. FIRST didn't "take away" these aspects of Championship.

BrendanB 04-05-2015 13:36
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smistthegreat (Post 1479878)
How would you define the "championship experience"? I've heard a lot of people talking about it and how good it is, but I'd love to hear a concrete definition. So far, all I know is that it isn't any of the following:
- Meeting teams from around the country and world
- Playing with only the most competitive robots
- Competing in a stadium in front of thousands of cheering people
I know it isn't any of these things because FIRST is taking these away. I'm very curious as to what their intended experience actually consists of (and why it can't happen at the district cmp level, but that's a discussion for another time).
Competing with the other FIRST programs: JrFLL, FLL, & FTC.

Although to be completely honest I'm not sure how much of FRC has the time to wander over to those programs especially with them splitting into other venues.

smistthegreat 04-05-2015 13:39
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery (Post 1479882)
:rolleyes:
You only play with 1/8 of the "most competitive robots" as it is, with divisions.
You can still meet plenty of teams from around the country and world in a split championship.
We have yet to see exactly which portions of the competition will take place in the stadiums. There's still potential for something similar to the Einstein field at EPCOT back in the day (a rotation of which division is playing on the big stage at any given moment).

I don't like this dual championship, but the hyperbole has to stop. FIRST didn't "take away" these aspects of Championship.
I will certainly meet plenty of teams from around part of the country and part of the world. But "world championships" and "half of the world that is geographically closest to Detroit championships" is a big enough difference to warrant noting.

The announcement very clearly states that all competitions will take place in the convention centers, with the domes for ceremonies.

My original question still stands: what exactly is the championship experience that FIRST is trying to share with more and more teams?


"For the Houston Championship, Opening Ceremonies will be held in the Toyota Center, home of the Houston Rockets. Competition matches for all programs will be held in the George R. Brown Convention Center, followed by Closing Ceremonies in Minute Maid Park, home of the Houston Astros, which has a retractable roof.

For the Detroit Championship, Opening and Closing Ceremonies will be held in Ford Field, an enclosed domed stadium, which is home to the Detroit Lions. Competition matches for all programs will be held in Cobo Center."

Lil' Lavery 04-05-2015 14:23
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smistthegreat (Post 1479886)
I will certainly meet plenty of teams from around part of the country and part of the world. But "world championships" and "half of the world that is geographically closest to Detroit championships" is a big enough difference to warrant noting.
See the town hall meeting where they explicitly stated they're considering the opportunity for allowing some crossover between events.

Quote:
Originally Posted by smistthegreat (Post 1479886)
The announcement very clearly states that all competitions will take place in the convention centers, with the domes for ceremonies.
Define opening and closing ceremonies. Some years that has included Einstein. Others it hasn't. A video announcement announcing the change is not going be the final say on the matter, and FIRST solicited feedback on this in their survey. There's still potentially for flexibility here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by smistthegreat (Post 1479886)
My original question still stands: what exactly is the championship experience that FIRST is trying to share with more and more teams?
To put it simply, an event with a much grander scale than any others the participants will get to attend. More teams, more competitive teams, more programs, more sponsors, more suppliers, more production value, etc

jman4747 04-05-2015 14:49
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smistthegreat (Post 1479878)
How would you define the "championship experience"? I've heard a lot of people talking about it and how good it is, but I'd love to hear a concrete definition. So far, all I know is that it isn't any of the following:
- Meeting teams from around the country and world
- Playing with only the most competitive robots
- Competing in a stadium in front of thousands of cheering people
I know it isn't any of these things because FIRST is taking these away. I'm very curious as to what their intended experience actually consists of (and why it can't happen at the district cmp level, but that's a discussion for another time).
#1 Seeing a new variety of different designs and being able to talk about what went into them in person while seeing them in person. Even if they don't work there the nuances and tricks that went into implementing them the story behind the creation etc.

#2 Hearing different stories from teams and people you wouldn't have otherwise met

#3 Seeing use of other technologies you didn't see at your regional/district.

#4 Ability to compete again during the season. For instance, we could only afford one regional event but after we got the word out that we were invited to attend the world championship we were able to raise the necessary money. That is money we couldn't get to go to another regional but being able to say "championship" made a difference in giving it seemed and allowed us to extend our season.

#5 Dealing with the stress was a learning experience in itself. It really was a wake up call to the younger students about countless things and when we are able to compete more effectively we can take this knowledge with us and do that much better.

#6 leaning how to plan travel in the future and seeing improvements to be made to communication.

Navid Shafa 04-05-2015 15:02
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479908)
#1 Seeing a new variety of different designs and being able to talk about what went into them in person while seeing them in person. Even if they don't work there the nuances and tricks that went into implementing them the story behind the creation etc.

#2 Hearing different stories from teams and people you wouldn't have otherwise met

#3 Seeing use of other technologies you didn't see at your regional/district.

#4 Ability to compete again during the season. For instance, we could only afford one regional event but after we got the word out that we were invited to attend the world championship we were able to raise the necessary money. That is money we couldn't get to go to another regional but being able to say "championship" made a difference in giving it seemed and allowed us to extend our season.

#5 Dealing with the stress was a learning experience in itself. It really was a wake up call to the younger students about countless things and when we are able to compete more effectively we can take this knowledge with us and do that much better.

#6 leaning how to plan travel in the future and seeing improvements to be made to communication.
Georgia will be going to the District Model next year. You can achieve all of these goals at a District Championship.

Citrus Dad 04-05-2015 15:15
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by smistthegreat (Post 1479886)
"For the Houston Championship, Opening Ceremonies will be held in the Toyota Center, home of the Houston Rockets. Competition matches for all programs will be held in the George R. Brown Convention Center, followed by Closing Ceremonies in Minute Maid Park, home of the Houston Astros, which has a retractable roof.

For the Detroit Championship, Opening and Closing Ceremonies will be held in Ford Field, an enclosed domed stadium, which is home to the Detroit Lions. Competition matches for all programs will be held in Cobo Center."
Note in these descriptions that almost none of the competitions will be held in a large sports stadium. They look like they all will be held in convention centers similar to the majority of matches in 2011 in Atlanta. The sports arena experience will be disappear.

One alternative solution to this problem, that may still be unsatisfactory, but ensures that a large audience can see the "ultimate" final. The problem is that one set of teams may miss more school, although that can be mitigated.
Bring the top 4 alliances from champsplit 1 to champsplit 2 and have them play on the Einstein field set up in the sports stadium on the final day. There wouldn't be separate champions for the champsplits, just qualifiers. This would turn them each effectively into Super Regionals. Unfortunately we almost certainly never see alliances that mixed Texas teams with Michigan/Ontario teams.

Citrus Dad 04-05-2015 15:17
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery (Post 1479898)
See the town hall meeting where they explicitly stated they're considering the opportunity for allowing some crossover between events.
Understand that the Texas and Michigan/Ontario teams will never cross over to the other venue in any significant numbers. And that might be true for an even wider area.

Citrus Dad 04-05-2015 15:27
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747 (Post 1479779)
Dude chill. You even won it this year.

I thought the "top tier" wanted to help other teams do better and set an example on the field? But I guess you and your friends on all the other "top" teams would rather not even bother with the rest of us?

An amazing club. Draped in glamorous running molten blue. As the heat of their misplaced frustration melts away all they have accomplished.
I am only making an observation not a threat. I can't control what other teams are considering. We aren't organizing an uprising. But I do know that there is enough dissatisfaction with the proposal across many, many teams that consistently play in the elimination rounds at Champs that I wouldn't be surprised to see something like this happen. IRI already is a very popular event. Teams interested in focusing on a single unified champion might decide that will become their championship.

I think that most/all of these teams would be very sad to leave the official champs, but then they have conflicting motivations. Helping and interacting with other teams is one, but the other is probably more important. FRC is about competition as a motivation toward cultural change--this is not set of science fairs. And the most successful teams are motivated by competition. 254 and 1114 year after year try to win the championship with the most innovated well-executed robots. If they were just interested in traveling to Champs to help other teams they could rest on their laurels as HOF teams--they automatically qualify every year. It's that competitive fire that really motivates them, so expect them to choose based on that motivation over any other. It's not a put down for other teams; it reflects the core of their teams' culture which is directly in line with the unique principle that FIRST relies on to motivate students towards STEM.

I will make a point that often make here: You cannot rely on the "goodwill" of individuals to arrive at your overall community goal. You need to set out the right incentives with concrete consequences to arrive at those goals. The Chairman's award is a great example of how an incentive has led to a culture of coopertition where teams now share their experiences and resources. But that didn't come about just because FIRST told everyone to do it. If champsplits undermines the competitive incentives of the top tier teams, then expect them to act differently in the future. If you want them to continue to share their experiences at Champs, then give them the right incentives to participate.

Rachel Lim 04-05-2015 15:35
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Here's my theory: it's not the fact that you qualified for championships, it's knowing that you succeeded.

To jman4747: I think you've brought up many interesting (and some valid) points, but please consider how your posts are coming across. Being in the minority is hard, but I think you can get your opinions across if you're careful and respectful.

To others who've replied: I've always found the majority of CD posters to be mentors on famous teams. It creates an amazing collection of knowledge and a great place to learn. I also think it means sometimes CD forgets not everyone is like them. Because you guys are adults, but students are just kids.

A few pages back, when I wrote my post about how people are emotional and thus FIRST needs two different goals, I think I missed something that has an equally large role. It's that FRC is aimed at high schoolers. Students. Kids. People who are emotional to an even larger degree. We're passionate, insecure, often irrational, and in the end, just people trying to make sense of a world that's huge, confusing, and sometimes just plain unfair. It's why students and young adults are often at the base of most social movements. It's how Hitler and Mao Zedong gained power (Hitler Youth / Red Army), how the civil rights movement and Vietnam War protests gained momentum, and why so many of my posts go on long winding roads that confuse even me.

Criticism is the key to improvement, yet it hurts. Being told you're not good enough is the only way to want to do better, yet it's hard. Knowing there are outside forces, outside your control, that define how your team does is true, but it's unfair.

Most students end up on teams shaped by mentors before they joined. Trying to change things when they're already being done a certain way is very, very hard. Instead of trying to push up, which can seem close to impossible, wouldn't it seem fairer if everyone could start again at the same level? If you're success wasn't defined by the mentors your team has (or doesn't have)? Sometimes we just want to know we have a chance. Sometimes we just want to know that we're not always at a disadvantage, that we can succeed. And then sometimes we need something higher to aim at. Sometimes logic just doesn't work because we're not logical. Sometimes we just don't want to listen, because the truth is hard.

I understand the emotions on both sides. There have been so many times I wish students could just look and see everything they've missed, that "good enough" is the main barrier keeping them from doing more, and to ignore the adults who say we can stop improving. But there are also so many times that I wish adults could understand what kids are really trying to say, and that sometimes, you need to tell students that they've succeeded before you can tell them to improve. And no, I don't have a solution. I'm personally way too confused to figure out what I really think, let alone figure out how to convince other students.

I think society in general has gone way too far in the "good enough" direction, but that CD often goes too far in the "never enough" direction. I think everyone, but students in general, need to hear both. I was told the first on my team, and joined CD because I got to hear the second. Hand out success in pieces: a bit to draw them in, a bit to keep them in, then space them out farther and farther so they keep pushing harder. Being told you're not good enough from the start just turns students away. Being told you're right when you know you're not just sounds fake. This is why I believe so strongly in the DCMPs -> single champs format.

Go too far one direction, and you won't keep the students you could really affect.
Go too far in the other direction, and you won't keep the mentors who really define FRC.

Note: This may not be representative of all students, or even most of them, just to be a huge over-generalization based on my own opinions and what I've seen. And I don't think I'm particularly representative of most students.
(Oh, and thanks David Lame, but I think if FIRST wants the opinions of the majority of students, I probably am not the best choice. Also, I did do my homework in the end...)

jman4747 04-05-2015 15:57
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Navid Shafa (Post 1479913)
Georgia will be going to the District Model next year. You can achieve all of these goals at a District Championship.
Not all of them. I think it will be just GA teams thus no interstate/international interaction. Also the venue for the state championship will likely be in Atlanta maybe 10-45 min from our shop.

David Lame 04-05-2015 18:04
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman4747;1479908#4
Ability to compete again during the season.
We are so spoiled in Michigan.



I think your view of the Championship Experience is one that is shared by many. It's a very "inside the stadium" view.

grstex 04-05-2015 19:33
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Citrus Dad (Post 1479726)
What if FIRST gave a party and no one came?

What if the top tier teams looked at the split championships and the possibility that they might have to fundraise for yet another event after that to crown a single champion? Might they consider skipping those those championships entirely? The IRI already exists to bring together top tier teams. Might the most competitive teams simply decide to avoid Detroit and Houston and just go straight to Indiana (or some other new event)?

I'm not sure that FIRST is considering this possibility sufficiently. Top tier teams aren't only the most competitive--they usually are also the most organized and networked. Organizing a separate championship event won't be that difficult. Look at the success of the Chezy Champs as one example of staging a significant well run event on a low budget, where all of the teams left happy.

And if those teams didn't attend, how would the other teams feel about going the the dual champs now? They wouldn't be able to rub shoulders with the best teams or see top level competition. And how would they feel about winning a further diluted championship?

FIRST needs to think about this more dynamically. It's not a static situation with no other avenues available.
Can we call the Detroit and Houston winners the "official champions" and the winners of this other event the "shadow champions," and instead of medals they get black hooded cloaks? Because that would be awesome and I would support it 100%! ;)

Seriously though, what would this solve? If I'm a sponsor for a team that qualified to go to the "Official" Championships, pitch to me why I should pay to send a team to an "unofficial championship" instead. What are the benefits of one over the other?

Knufire 04-05-2015 22:51
Re: Town Hall Meeting Video
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by grstex (Post 1480011)
Can we call the Detroit and Houston winners the "official champions" and the winners of this other event the "shadow champions," and instead of medals they get black hooded cloaks? Because that would be awesome and I would support it 100%! ;)

Seriously though, what would this solve? If I'm a sponsor for a team that qualified to go to the "Official" Championships, pitch to me why I should pay to send a team to an "unofficial championship" instead. What are the benefits of one over the other?
I've often marketed IRI as the "All-Star Game" of FRC to people not familiar with the program. It conveys the (IMO) right about of prestige and officiality.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:06.
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi