Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

But you said that the Chairman's points were relatively irrelevant. Fact is every point matters for qualifying for CMP, so CA needs to be properly weighted for that consideration even if it gets you an automatic entry with your robot to DCMP. Competition for CA at DCMP can be very stiff and some districts are only able to send 1 CA winner to CMP.

I think it is weighted just about right currently vs the point values for the other awards.

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

So, you think winning 2 qualification matches at the DCMP is more important than winning a Chairman's Award at a district event? Because that's the two are currently valued.

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

You're choosing to ignore the fact that the Chairman's automatically qualifies the winner to attend District Championship. That is worth significantly more than 10 points, especially for teams on the bubble of making it to District Championship, because no team that failed to qualify for the DCMP managed to make it to Worlds (through the district model, this does not include waitlist/outside regionals).

The teams 34-39 in the PNW region all easily qualified for the DCMP without the CA award (the fewest any of them scored is 69 points heading into the event). They all finished with 118.5 points as an average, all within one point of the team above and below them. In this case, if any of these teams won the Chairman's award, the most they would have needed is just three points to qualify, not even close to 10. The only other team within striking distance to a birth to Worlds AND ALSO won a Chairman's award was at 108 points, meaning that instead of the 10 point gift, they would have needed 21(!!!) points from the CA to qualify for Worlds. To me, that seems excessive, though I am sure it is not to everyone.

I'm sure there have been a few cases across the country since district implementation where a District Chairman's winning team failed to qualify for Worlds based on the difference of a few (three or fewer) points. But since the CA automatically qualifies a team for the next level of competition, I honestly think that the level of compensation is rather fair. Please excuse me for using "irrelevant" before, I think the proper term I was searching for was "reasonable".

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

So, a couple of us did a fun little analysis of how teams in GA stack up in the district points system.

We took all GA teams and gave them points according to their performance last season. Here are some assumptions we took:
1) We did not account for points that were awards to out-of-state teams.
2) We only counted the team's first two events, regardless of location.
3) If a team only went to one event, we doubled their score.

Based on the criteria above, the top 10 teams (in order) are:

1. 4468 - 1 Event(s) - 127.8 Normalized Points
2. 5608 - 1 Event(s) - 127.8 Normalized Points
3. 2974 - 2 Event(s) - 123.9 Normalized Points
4. 1261 - 2 Event(s) - 92.9 Normalized Points
5. 1746 - 2 Event(s) - 92 Normalized Points
6. 2415 - 2 Event(s) - 86.9 Normalized Points
7. 1414 - 1 Event(s) - 80 Normalized Points
8. 3329 - 1 Event(s) - 80 Normalized Points
9. 1648 - 2 Event(s) - 75.9 Normalized Points
10. 4188 - 2 Event(s) - 74.9 Normalized Points

Assuming that 40 teams end up attending state championships, the points cut off was at a mere 22 points.

However, 1-event teams like 4468 absolutely killed it at Peachtree, and while we can never know for sure, it's is unlikely that they would've repeated their 1-event performance earlier in the season. If we attempt to adjust for this, the top 10 teams become:

1. 2974 - 2 Events - 123.9 Normalized 1-Event Bias Points
2. 4468 - 1 Events - 95.85 Normalized 1-Event Bias Points
3. 5608 - 1 Events - 95.85 Normalized 1-Event Bias Points
4. 1261 - 2 Events - 92.9 Normalized 1-Event Bias Points
5. 1746 - 2 Events - 92 Normalized 1-Event Bias Points
6. 2415 - 2 Events - 86.9 Normalized 1-Event Bias Points
7. 1648 - 2 Events - 75.9 Normalized 1-Event Bias Points
8. 4188 - 2 Events - 74.9 Normalized 1-Event Bias Points
9. 4189 - 2 Events - 73 Normalized 1-Event Bias Points
10. 1414 - 1 Events - 60 Normalized 1-Event Bias Points

Assuming that 40 teams end up attending state championships, the points cut off slightly increases to 22.5 points.

Just some fun numbers,
- Sunny G.

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

Nice analysis! Team 4188 bottomed out at Perry so it shows a team can still make state if they have a decent turn around in their next district event.

Om another note, which district events will fill up first?
Week 2 Columbus
Week 3 Albany
Week 3 Dalton
Week 6 Kennesaw

Seems like Kennesaw with all the ATL teams.
Any thoughts?

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

Just by sheer logic, Kennesaw will fill the fastest. However, Columbus will also fill at a decent rate, so don't sleep on it. With two week 3 events, those will be the slowest to fill.

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

Unfortunately, Week 3 collides with GA TSA so a lot of teams will have no choice but to go to week 2 and 6 ...

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

With the initial capacity of 32 teams, going to both weeks 2 & 6 will not be an option for many teams. I suspect the Kennesaw will reach the wait list tomorrow.

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

Set multiple alarms on several devises... check
Have windows and google chrome keyboard commands memorized... check
wired mouse... check
clean mice and keyboard... check
firefox and EE web browsers up and ready to log in... check
backup computer ready... check
use shortest possible Ethernet cable... check
Remove unnecessary devises from router and wifi network... check

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

Now all you have to do is make a robot to register for you.

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

So far, registration has amounted to:

Columbus: 12
Dalton: 4
Albany: 2
Kennesaw: 23

Bringing the total number of teams signed up for events so far to 41.

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

Registration as of 10/14/15:

Columbus (Week 2): 29/32
Albany (Week 3): 11/32
Dalton (Week 3): 20/32
Kennesaw (Week 6): 32/32

I think we have an interesting scenario here, one that I don't ever recall happening before. Both Dalton and Albany do not have the 24 teams necessary to run a standard event, and Albany is especially low. It is also an interesting point to note that Dalton has just enough remaining open spots. It is possible that, after third event registration, Dalton reaches 24 teams, but I find it highly unlikely that Albany will more than double its team count.

What would GeorgiaFIRST do to resolve this issue? Combine the Dalton and Albany events? Scratch the Albany event and allow the teams who signed up for Albany sign up for another event? Run the event with the low number of teams? Or something else?

Has this ever happened before and I just don't know about it?

Re: Georgia Districts confirmed for 2016!
 

Precedent exists for an event running with very few teams. The 2008 Brazil Regional ran with only 13 teams competing, where the elimination bracket consisted of just 4 alliances. Ultimately, GA FIRST might incentivize teams to sign up for a 3rd district event and the team numbers for both the week 3 events might go up. We just have to wait and see.