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)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Split Champs assignment (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=148233)

nuclearnerd 05-05-2016 17:33
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
I've already gone on record that I support* the move to bring more teams to champs, even if it means a championsplit. As much as we all love to see the best meet the best here, most students in FRC don't get anywhere near to the best teams from far away, so they won't care as much as we do. So shed a tear for the friends we'll miss, then welcome all of the new entrants!

That said, I am intrigued by the last paragraph of the announcement. It would be cool to have the culminating event be a televised, professionally produced TV series. You could have the Einstein finals be a best-of-7 series, with a few hours between each match to make repairs, changes, and work on strategy and be interviewed. It would be boring to watch live, but that wouldn't be the intent. Instead, the 8 hour day would be condensed into one or more 1/2 hour episodes for a mass audience, the same way they do for Battle Bots. The format works - lots more people around here know about Battle Bots than FRC, even though FRC is a vastly bigger program. Maybe FIRST could entice the same producers...

*Maybe a better way to put it is that I don't oppose the split. If there were a sane way to have 800 teams in one venue, and make things cheaper, I'd probably support that instead.

Mr V 05-05-2016 17:47
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by plnyyanks (Post 1584116)
This is the approach I'd like to see as well. Someone earlier in the thread referenced an old slide from 2011 that included this vision of FRC (note that none of this was ever official in any way)


But District Champs aren't to that point yet either. Like Basel said, FIRST and their event management companies don't run district champs - it's all the local people. And I don't know of any DCMP that runs conferences and has all the flashy lights like CMP does. As far as international/regional teams go, I though this thread from last year was a great start on the problem. Maybe as more areas move to districts, FIRST's event planning people have some more bandwidth they can apply to running District Championships.

Of course, none of this is anywhere near official, but if someone asked me where I envisioned FRC in a few years, this is what I would tell them.
It is interesting looking back on that and the progress that was made to that goal. A number of areas are finally up and running more or less per that document but a couple are just portions of the original plan.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob Steele (Post 1584123)
All I really have to say is this looks quite like the old 400 team version of champs times two. To fit everyone in (including the FLL's and FTC) that probably means 100 team divisions.

So, if you thought a 600 team CMP with 75 team divisions was watered down and saw how your "random" assignment of 10 matches could affect your potential to rank high during the qualification matches, think again ... just add another 25 teams.... how do they get there? Are they from waitlist? Do they add some other type of qualifying position at Regionals? Do they go even deeper into the Districts?

I hope that the powers that be look quite hard at this issue next year when they figure out how teams get points for qualifications.

I will miss seeing all of our new and old friends from the East Coast and Canada.

Good luck to you all!!
I bet that the district allocations will stay the current percentage basis and that will account for some of the extra space. The fact that there are currently less district teams at the tan states event means that could mean a potentially large differential in the % of teams at each event via the lottery.

Koko Ed 05-05-2016 17:51
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnFogarty (Post 1584026)
Well the statistical odds of 2056 winning their next world championship just went WAAAAYYY up.
Considering they're "Championship" ( I refuse to call it a championship. I just call it Superegional North) is full of FiM, MAR, NE District and Chesapeake District team plus teams from Ontario I think they're still in for a big fight.

Jaci 05-05-2016 18:01
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
<unpopular opinion>

2 Champs is great for teams competing internationally.

As an Australian Team, going to Houston instead of St Louis is going to make it multitudes easier for us to attend champs. Since we have a layover in Dallas Fort-Worth, it's going to take us less flight time to get to champs, and because of this cost-per-student is going to go down by multiple thousands of dollars.

I hate to say it but a lot of the opinions in this thread complaining about 2 Champs are only really from the POV of a team managed and run in the US, and to see the international teams from Australia, Israel, Brazil, China, Taiwan and more neglected in the conversation is kind of disheartening.

I know the split presents some issues with "fairness" of each Championship, but I won't get into the politics of that nor reveal my position on the matter. I'm simply here to put in my own point to show that the split is actually helpful in some way, especially to teams internationally who often find it hard to gather the money and support to make it to championships.

</unpopular opinion>

dag0620 05-05-2016 18:04
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaci (Post 1584176)
<unpopular opinion>

2 Champs is great for teams competing internationally.

As an Australian Team, going to Houston instead of St Louis is going to make it multitudes easier for us to attend champs. Since we have a layover in Dallas Fort-Worth, it's going to take us less flight time to get to champs, and because of this cost-per-student is going to go down by multiple thousands of dollars.

I hate to say it but a lot of the opinions in this thread complaining about 2 Champs are only really from the POV of a team managed and run in the US, and to see the international teams from Australia, Israel, Brazil, China, Taiwan and more neglected in the conversation is kind of disheartening.

I know the split presents some issues with "fairness" of each Championship, but I won't get into the politics of that nor reveal my position on the matter. I'm simply here to put in my own point to show that the split is actually helpful in some way, especially to teams internationally who often find it hard to gather the money and support to make it to championships.

</unpopular opinion>

Well one thing I did note, was that outside of Canada, all of the international countries with FRC Regional events got assigned to Houston. I find that an interesting im balance.

Thoughts?

MARS_James 05-05-2016 18:07
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dag0620 (Post 1584178)
Well one thing I did note, was that outside of Canada, all of the international countries with FRC Regional events got assigned to Houston. I find that an interesting im balance.

Thoughts?
Europe is assigned St.louis/Detroit

Madison 05-05-2016 18:09
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
A nascent thought that popped in my head after seeing this announcement --

It seems that most teams from outside North America will be competing in Houston (e.g., Israel, Turkey, mainland China, Australia).

Will teams competing at that event have a more difficult time effectively scouting and understanding the competition and level of play of the teams that can expect to see given the geographic and lingual barriers than will teams competing at the other CMP event?

Teams from Europe seem to be both fewer in number and more likely to speak English, I'd guess.

Koko Ed 05-05-2016 18:12
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot_Copper_Frog (Post 1584080)
As much as I love my fellow Michiganders...the Detroit championship is going to feel a whole lot like MSC.

I'm going to lobby hard for the frogs to travel to Hawaii for some fresh faces starting in 2018.
359 is always telling me Hawaii wants mainland teams to come and play.

Mr V 05-05-2016 18:17
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuclearnerd (Post 1584162)
I've already gone on record that I support* the move to bring more teams to champs, even if it means a championsplit. As much as we all love to see the best meet the best here, most students in FRC don't get anywhere near to the best teams from far away, so they won't care as much as we do. So shed a tear for the friends we'll miss, then welcome all of the new entrants!

That said, I am intrigued by the last paragraph of the announcement. It would be cool to have the culminating event be a televised, professionally produced TV series. You could have the Einstein finals be a best-of-7 series, with a few hours between each match to make repairs, changes, and work on strategy and be interviewed. It would be boring to watch live, but that wouldn't be the intent. Instead, the 8 hour day would be condensed into one or more 1/2 hour episodes for a mass audience, the same way they do for Battle Bots. The format works - lots more people around here know about Battle Bots than FRC, even though FRC is a vastly bigger program. Maybe FIRST could entice the same producers...

*Maybe a better way to put it is that I don't oppose the split. If there were a sane way to have 800 teams in one venue, and make things cheaper, I'd probably support that instead.
A TV special or mini series would be a great way to make it loud.

A start would be a battle of champions with a best of 7 or at least a best of 5 so they can fill an hour.

Ultimately though a series that covered all the finals of both CMPs and then culminated in that best of 7 or 5 would be better. The one problem I see with that is that the results of the two CMPS would have to be known well in advance of the Ultimate CMP, so that could dampen the interest of the public.

Another option would be to bring say all 4 teams that made it to the semi-finals from both events and have them play a new round of finals. You could have a hope of containing the results of a event that happens in a TV studio environment. Better suspense equals better ratings equals more people exposed to and learning about FIRST.

GuyM142 05-05-2016 18:19
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madison (Post 1584182)
A nascent thought that popped in my head after seeing this announcement --

It seems that most teams from outside North America will be competing in Houston (e.g., Israel, Turkey, mainland China, Australia).

Will teams competing at that event have a more difficult time effectively scouting and understanding the competition and level of play of the teams that can expect to see given the geographic and lingual barriers than will teams competing at the other CMP event?

Teams from Europe seem to be both fewer in number and more likely to speak English, I'd guess.
That's true about the scouting, this year we had to do our scouting at the hotel lobby and it wasn't optimal.
But the difference depends on if the divisions are going to be published for both Champs at the same time or will St.Louis/Detroit get their divisions later.

I think that because of the lack of regional competitions in Europe the chance to see a European team in champs is lower. To compare, Israel and Australia for example will definitely send at least 6 teams each.

Is there any statistical data about the international teams in each of the champs?

Nuttyman54 05-05-2016 18:24
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaci (Post 1584176)
<unpopular opinion>

2 Champs is great for teams competing internationally.

As an Australian Team, going to Houston instead of St Louis is going to make it multitudes easier for us to attend champs. Since we have a layover in Dallas Fort-Worth, it's going to take us less flight time to get to champs, and because of this cost-per-student is going to go down by multiple thousands of dollars.

I hate to say it but a lot of the opinions in this thread complaining about 2 Champs are only really from the POV of a team managed and run in the US, and to see the international teams from Australia, Israel, Brazil, China, Taiwan and more neglected in the conversation is kind of disheartening.

I know the split presents some issues with "fairness" of each Championship, but I won't get into the politics of that nor reveal my position on the matter. I'm simply here to put in my own point to show that the split is actually helpful in some way, especially to teams internationally who often find it hard to gather the money and support to make it to championships.

</unpopular opinion>
I appreciate your insight here, however this mostly stems from St. Louis not being a large US hub. Even for teams in the US, coming from the west coast usually involves a layover through Las Vegas, Houston or even Atlanta. There are many ways FIRST could have improved the travel situation for international AND domestic teams without splitting championship. Atlanta was far cheaper/easier for west coast teams than St. Louis was, and Houston should be an improvement as well.

Jaci 05-05-2016 18:24
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dag0620 (Post 1584178)
Well one thing I did note, was that outside of Canada, all of the international countries with FRC Regional events got assigned to Houston. I find that an interesting im balance.

Thoughts?
In terms of travel time and distance, this seems great (after a preliminary look at how flights transfer, since DFW and LAX are the most common entrypoints to the US, at least from Oceania).

If you're talking in terms of performance-balance, sure, there will be a bias between the championships just because of the way the stats work out. But, from what I've seen after talking to many international teams and even observed from my own teams, merely going to championships is an experience that is unparalleled. This year, 0 out of the 6 Australian teams attending champs made it to their division's playoffs, but we still ended up leaving the competition happy and inspired. Seeing the looks on these kids faces showed me that it's not ALL about the competition, and maybe this whole "getting more kids to champs" is a good idea.

Now's a good time to reiterate that this is my opinion, and may not reflect that of my teams or FIRST internationally. Again, the opinion I'm presenting is purely focused on travel logistics and not the performance split between the 2 Champs.

Michael Corsetto 05-05-2016 18:28
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dag0620 (Post 1584178)
Well one thing I did note, was that outside of Canada, all of the international countries with FRC Regional events got assigned to Houston. I find that an interesting im balance.

Thoughts?
North 1/2 CMP is the more impacted 1/2 CMP event. Madison posted last year that almost 1/2 of the entire FRC community is within driving distance of Detroit.

It makes sense that countries with a strong FRC presence are sent to South 1/2 CMP. There just isn't room at North 1/2 CMP. Europe, etc, are left at North 1/2 CMP just to give the event some international flair, with little substance. I would expect maybe 3 teams from outside the US/Canada at the 400 Team North 1/2 CMP. FIRST is trying to have their cake, cut it in half, and eat it too.

South 1/2 CMP will be much more well represented on an international level, percentage wise.

-Mike

NoahTappen 05-05-2016 18:34
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Any estimate on the amount of Michigan teams predicted to attend a Championship in 2017? I feel there will most likely be more Michigan teams at a Championship than teams at MSC, If so what is the point of having MSC as a step before the championship?

Michael Hill 05-05-2016 18:35
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto (Post 1584149)
While maybe balanced at the top, I expect Houston to have a much weaker field that STL/Detroit. North 1/2 CMP has 5 (6?) strong districts, while South 1/2 CMP gets PNW and GA, as well as many regional qualifying teams. Additionally, I expect Houston to welcome more teams off of the waitlist than North 1/2 CMP will.

That, coupled with a later weekend, means North 1/2 CMP will likely be more competitive and harder to get in to.

Bummer :(

-Mike
Yay....us non-district teams in the St. Louis Championship get hosed again....

Here's some interesting numbers...*
For the St. Louis Championship:
Total Number of District CMP Slots: 166
Total Number of Regional CMP Slots: 115
Total Allocated CMP Slots (District + Regional): 281
Total Number of Waitlist Spots: 119

For the Houston Championship:
Total Number of District CMP Slots: 52
Total Number of Regional CMP Slots: 150
Total Allocated CMP Slots (District + Regional): 202
Total Waitlist Spots: 198

* - Regional numbers were computed by lumping the host city of a regional. I know it's not exact since regionals hosted in states on the border of the CMP demarcation line will generally host teams from the other CMP region.

sdangelo 05-05-2016 18:35
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan Streeter (Post 1584101)
It would be interesting to see which CMP would have more teams from the 2016 CMP elims...
Spoiler for Code:
Code:
import json
import urllib2

BASE_URL = 'http://www.thebluealliance.com/api/v2/'
APP_HEADER = 'X-TBA-App-Id'
APP_ID = 'sdangelo:splitchamps:v0.1'

event_codes = ['arc', 'cars', 'carv', 'cur', 'gal', 'hop', 'new', 'tes']

def fetch_endpoint(endpoint):
    #Checks Blue Alliance for data
    full_url = BASE_URL + endpoint
    url = urllib2.Request(full_url, headers={APP_HEADER: APP_ID, 'User-agent': 'Mozilla/5.0'})
    response = urllib2.urlopen(url)
    return json.loads(response.read())

def get_teams(event_key):
    #builds list of all teams
    teams = []
    event = fetch_endpoint("event/2016"+ str(event_key))
    for alliance in event["alliances"]:
        for team in alliance["picks"]:
            teams.append(str(team))
    return teams

def get_locations(teams_list):
    stl = []
    hous = []
    allTeams = []
    for team in teams_list:
        data = fetch_endpoint("team/" + team)
        if data["country_name"] == "USA":
            s = data["region"]
            if s == "Maine" or s == "Vermont" or s == "New Hampshire" or s == "Massachusetts" or\
              s == "Connecticut" or s == "Rhode Island" or s == "New York" or s == "Pennsylvania"\
              or s == "New Jersey" or s == "Delaware" or s == "Maryland" or s == "District of Columbia"\
              or s == "Virginia" or s == "West Virginia" or s == "Kentucky" or s == "Ohio" or\
              s == "Michigan" or s == "Indiana" or s == "Illinois" or s == "Wisconsin" or\
              s == "Minnesota" or s == "Iowa" or s == "Missouri" or s == "Kansas" or\
              s == "Nebraska" or s == "South Dakota" or s == "North Dakota":
                stl.append(data["team_number"])
            else:
                hous.append(data["team_number"])
        elif data["country_name"] == "Canada":
            p = data["region"]
            if p == "Ontario" or p == "Quebec" or p == "Newfoundland and Laborador"\
              or p == "Manitoba" or p == "Nunavit":
                stl.append(data["team_number"])
            else:
                hous.append(data["team_number"])
        else:
            c = data["country_name"]
            if c == "Mexico" or c == "Haiti" or c == "Dominican Republic" or\
              c == "Ecuador" or c == "Columbia" or c == "Peru" or c == "Chile"\
              or c == "Brazil" or c == "South Africa" or c == "Israel" or\
              c == "Egypt" or c == "Jordan" or c == "Lebanon" or c == "Turkey"\
              or c == "Kuwait" or c == "United Arab Emirates" or c == "Singapore"\
              or c == "Malaysia" or c == "Australia" or c == "New Zealand" or\
              c == "Philippines" or c == "China":
                hous.append(data["team_number"])
            else:
                stl.append(data["team_number"])
    allTeams.append(stl)
    allTeams.append(hous)
    return allTeams

if __name__ == "__main__":
    stLouis = []
    houston = []
    for event in event_codes:
        teamsList = get_teams(event)
        locList = get_locations(teamsList)
        for team in locList[0]:
            stLouis.append(team)
        for team in locList[1]:
            houston.append(team)
    print "Number of elims teams in St. Louis: " + str(len(stLouis))
    print "Number of elims teams in Houston: " + str(len(houston)) + "\n"

    stLouis.sort()
    houston.sort()
    print "St. Louis teams:"
    print stLouis
    print "Houston teams:"
    print houston


Results:
Number of elims teams in St. Louis: 174
Number of elims teams in Houston: 82

Spoiler for St. Louis Teams:
11, 20, 25, 27, 33, 41, 45, 48, 67, 68, 70, 74, 85, 107, 111, 120, 125, 133, 135, 166, 172, 175, 176, 177, 188, 193, 195, 217, 225, 228, 229, 230, 236, 245, 287, 303, 319, 329, 333, 341, 346, 365, 379, 494, 503, 525, 548, 558, 610, 623, 639, 694, 708, 836, 858, 868, 869, 870, 876, 910, 999, 1023, 1024, 1058, 1086, 1089, 1114, 1124, 1153, 1241, 1250, 1257, 1305, 1306, 1310, 1405, 1418, 1501, 1511, 1519, 1625, 1640, 1675, 1676, 1712, 1718, 1730, 1731, 1732, 1736, 1747, 1756, 1768, 1775, 1796, 1806, 1885, 1918, 1923, 1986, 2013, 2052, 2054, 2056, 2064, 2067, 2137, 2168, 2194, 2337, 2338, 2363, 2451, 2474, 2481, 2502, 2590, 2614, 2648, 2767, 2771, 2823, 2834, 2883, 2987, 3015, 3042, 3044, 3098, 3130, 3314, 3352, 3357, 3419, 3452, 3534, 3538, 3539, 3546, 3604, 3618, 3620, 3641, 3683, 3688, 4001, 4003, 4009, 4028, 4039, 4085, 4103, 4329, 4362, 4391, 4525, 4536, 4564, 4607, 4678, 4920, 4967, 5050, 5114, 5150, 5172, 5254, 5401, 5406, 5448, 5460, 5813, 5895, 6175

Spoiler for Houston Teams:
16, 57, 118, 148, 179, 180, 207, 231, 233, 254, 294, 330, 359, 360, 364, 842, 971, 973, 987, 1011, 1065, 1197, 1261, 1296, 1318, 1323, 1369, 1425, 1477, 1538, 1540, 1619, 1662, 1671, 1678, 1690, 1746, 1983, 2046, 2122, 2383, 2415, 2468, 2471, 2557, 2637, 2642, 2848, 2907, 2990, 3005, 3166, 3211, 3238, 3309, 3310, 3339, 3360, 3476, 3478, 3481, 3663, 3824, 3937, 3990, 4061, 4264, 4334, 4451, 4468, 4469, 4488, 4587, 4740, 4828, 4911, 5572, 5803, 5842, 5854, 5924, 5940


If anyone sees any teams in the wrong list or code errors, let me know and I'll try to fix it. Québec may not be working correctly as my Python editor couldn't handle the 'é'.

ATannahill 05-05-2016 18:40
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoahTappen (Post 1584197)
Any estimate on the amount of Michigan teams predicted to attend a Championship in 2017? I feel there will most likely be more Michigan teams at a Championship than teams at MSC, If so what is the point of having MSC as a step before the championship?
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtfgnow (Post 1579506)
Michigan gets a percent of the spots at the championship equivalent to the percent of FRC teams that Michigan has, rounded up to the next whole spot, at whatever time the district allotment size is calculated.

Michigan received 76 slots this year, which is 12.67% of the 600 spots. If they get the same percentage next year, that is 101.33 spots of the anticipated 800, since we do not know exactly where between 75.01 and 76.00 Michigan fell, this means that it will be 101 or 102 spots if Michigan keeps the same percent of the number of FRC teams. How these 100+ spots are divided between the two championships (each of which are anticipated to have 400 spots) is, as of yet, unknown.

As I understand it, at least one reason that MSC became larger was so that not all teams at MSC would qualify for the Championship. It is possible the folks at FIM will grow MSC again, but currently that is speculative.

Michael Hill 05-05-2016 18:49
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Actually, I forgot about that...increasing from 600 to 800 teams....is this really right?

New Numbers
St Louis:

District Slots: 220
Regional Slots: 115
Total Allocated: 335
Total Waitlist: 65

Houston:

District Slots: 69
Regional Slots: 150
Total Allocated: 219
Total Waitlist: 181

Michael Corsetto 05-05-2016 18:56
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Hill (Post 1584204)
Actually, I forgot about that...increasing from 600 to 800 teams....is this really right?

New Numbers
St Louis:

District Slots: 220
Regional Slots: 115
Total Allocated: 335
Total Waitlist: 65

Houston:

District Slots: 69
Regional Slots: 150
Total Allocated: 219
Total Waitlist: 181
This looks about right?

Can you break down district allocation? I imagine almost 100 of the slots at St. Louis are going to Michigan. Essentially everyone who qualifies for their DCMP! :yikes:

-Mike

Michael Hill 05-05-2016 19:07
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto (Post 1584206)
This looks about right?

Can you break down district allocation? I imagine almost 100 of the slots at St. Louis are going to Michigan. Essentially everyone who qualifies for their DCMP! :yikes:

-Mike
St. Louis
Chesapeake: 33
Indiana: 12
Michigan: 101
Mid-Atlantic: 29
New England: 45
Total: 220

Houston:
North Carolina: 13
Pacific Northwest: 40
Peachtree: 16
Total: 69

So yes, pretty much everyone in Michigan DCMP is going.

dodar 05-05-2016 19:19
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Hill (Post 1584208)
St. Louis
Chesapeake: 33
Indiana: 12
Michigan: 101
Mid-Atlantic: 29
New England: 45
Total: 220

Houston:
North Carolina: 13
Pacific Northwest: 40
Peachtree: 16
Total: 69

So yes, pretty much everyone in Michigan DCMP is going.
What are the proportionalities of the total number of teams in those districts to the total number of teams allocated to those Super Regionals?

Michael Hill 05-05-2016 19:22
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dodar (Post 1584214)
What are the proportionalities of the total number of teams in those districts to the total number of teams allocated to those Super Regionals?
I'm not sure what you're referring to. See my previous to last post for a breakdown of regional slots vs district slots.

dodar 05-05-2016 19:28
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Hill (Post 1584215)
I'm not sure what you're referring to. See my previous to last post for a breakdown of regional slots vs district slots.
Are the amount of slots given to each district the same percentage as their percentage of total number of teams in the Super Regional region?

Edit: what rtfgnow said.

Eugene Fang 05-05-2016 19:29
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
http://www.thebluealliance.com/2champs

Have fun.

RIP.

Koko Ed 05-05-2016 19:32
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene Fang (Post 1584220)
This is more fun than should be allowed all things considered.

ATannahill 05-05-2016 19:33
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dodar (Post 1584219)
Are the amount of slots given to each district the same percentage as their percentage of total number of teams in the Super Regional region?

Edit: what rtfgnow said.
Sorry, I saw your post right after mine and deleted my post to avoid confusion.

So does this mean there will now be two waitlists?

dodar 05-05-2016 19:34
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rtfgnow (Post 1584222)
Sorry, I saw your post right after mine and deleted my post to avoid confusion.

So does this mean there will now be two waitlists?
4 actually. 2 for their respective Super Regional and 2 waitlists for teams wanting to switch Super Regionals.

Thad House 05-05-2016 19:41
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene Fang (Post 1584220)
The hearts and broken hearts are a nice touch... :(

wjordan 05-05-2016 19:49
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
1 Attachment(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene Fang (Post 1584220)
The applet has NC teams going to STL / DET when they should be headed for HOU.
Otherwise, a useful tool, thanks!

Eugene Fang 05-05-2016 19:51
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjordan (Post 1584229)
The applet has NC teams going to STL / DET when they should be headed for HOU.
Otherwise, a useful tool, thanks!
Thanks for the catch. Silly typo...

Things will be correct in ~10 min.

https://github.com/the-blue-alliance...791843f68c8610

Conor Ryan 05-05-2016 19:52
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
I wonder if the timing of the Vex Champs will have an impact on which event IFI sponsored teams will want to attend.

Looks like most of the NASA teams are headed south.

How many matches will teams expect to play?

Ruaridh 05-05-2016 20:05
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by paunatime (Post 1584045)
Guess we will be in Houston, missing our East Coast, Canadian, and some International buddies.
I know I say this a lot,
but man FIRST really $@#$@#$@#$@#ed up with this call.
Well, you do have all the Alberta teams....which is a real shame because it means we don't get to compete with all of our Canadian friends

nerdrock101 05-05-2016 20:06
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Teams will be assigned to attend a FIRST Championship (i.e., their “home” Championship) based on the location where the team is based and not the location of the event through which they qualify for Championship.
Hypothetically, what if teams from the Houston attending region won most of the championship slots from the regionals in the Detroit attending region as well as the Houston attending region?

Theseusgoats 05-05-2016 20:06
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
I could anything on this but will there be 8 divisions each or will they split them up? And if so, how will they split them up?

M217 05-05-2016 20:13
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theseusgoats (Post 1584238)
I could anything on this but will there be 8 divisions each or will they split them up? And if so, how will they split them up?
I don't believe that's been revealed yet.

Citrus Dad 05-05-2016 20:23
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by nuclearnerd (Post 1584162)
I've already gone on record that I support* the move to bring more teams to champs, even if it means a championsplit. As much as we all love to see the best meet the best here, most students in FRC don't get anywhere near to the best teams from far away, so they won't care as much as we do. So shed a tear for the friends we'll miss, then welcome all of the new entrants!

That said, I am intrigued by the last paragraph of the announcement. It would be cool to have the culminating event be a televised, professionally produced TV series. You could have the Einstein finals be a best-of-7 series, with a few hours between each match to make repairs, changes, and work on strategy and be interviewed. It would be boring to watch live, but that wouldn't be the intent. Instead, the 8 hour day would be condensed into one or more 1/2 hour episodes for a mass audience, the same way they do for Battle Bots. The format works - lots more people around here know about Battle Bots than FRC, even though FRC is a vastly bigger program. Maybe FIRST could entice the same producers...

*Maybe a better way to put it is that I don't oppose the split. If there were a sane way to have 800 teams in one venue, and make things cheaper, I'd probably support that instead.
Problem: getting all of the teams together for yet another trip (especially if it's not externally funded) will be difficult to accomplish before the end of the school year. The biggest problem is the events on school calendars in May and early June. After early June is a non-starter because seniors will have graduated and often are immediately out of hand into summer activities.

The better solution is to properly structure the Super Regionals to turn them into different types of Championships. There's threads on CD that propose viable solutions. (I still haven't seen a rationale argument that the 2 events must be equally diluted other than it might hurt someone's feelings.)

Citrus Dad 05-05-2016 20:25
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Hill (Post 1584208)
St. Louis
Chesapeake: 33
Indiana: 12
Michigan: 101
Mid-Atlantic: 29
New England: 45
Total: 220

Houston:
North Carolina: 13
Pacific Northwest: 40
Peachtree: 16
Total: 69

So yes, pretty much everyone in Michigan DCMP is going.
This is scary. Divisions may look like glorified regionals in play quality. This implies that the MSC will be more difficult to win than a Super Regional.

Citrus Dad 05-05-2016 20:27
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conor Ryan (Post 1584231)
Looks like most of the NASA teams are headed south.
I wonder if NASA understands this as a major sponsor...

EricH 05-05-2016 20:31
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Citrus Dad (Post 1584252)
I wonder if NASA understands this as a major sponsor...
You do realize that most of NASA's facilities are in the southern area or the coasts, right? Exactly the areas FIRST picked to go to the Houston whatever-you-want-to-call-it-but-not-championship.

b.arci 05-05-2016 20:32
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
While this post does not exactly discuss the same issue as the other posts in this thread (of which I will not reveal my opinion on—there has been some great discussion, but I do not have much to contribute), I would like to note something interesting.

If you look at Northern Canada on the map, at the Northwest Territories (NT), you'll note that the part of it belonging to the islands are attending St Louis/Detroit, while the mainland is attending Houston. It's just interesting that they followed geographical boundaries, rather than political ones on this. Does anyone have any insight on it? Does it stem from the way FTC teams are assigned to the FTC Super Regionals? Even though there are no FIRST teams from there (I checked - https://my.usfirst.org/myarea/index....ge=searchform).

It's just wierd. (An oversight maybe?) Hmm.

Billfred 05-05-2016 20:41
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conor Ryan (Post 1584231)
How many matches will teams expect to play?
This would be the question, wouldn't it? Let's say we have 17 hours of qualification matches (what we had this year), and a 7-minute match cycle. That's 145 qualification matches, which with 6 robots per match means there are 874ish robot-matches to play. At 100 teams per division, that's 8.74 plays. Boo hiss.

If that gets down to a 6-minute cycle, it gets to 10.2. That's right on what we have this year, but with the higher team count it does make the schedule that much more of a crapshoot. But you're still playing more than we did at Palmetto, so yay?

If they went to 8 50-team sub-divisions, you could run a 10-minute cycle and play 12. Doubt they go that route, especially with smaller venues, but I'll put it out there for giggles.

EricH 05-05-2016 20:46
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billfred (Post 1584261)

If they went to 8 50-team sub-divisions, you could run a 10-minute cycle and play 12. Doubt they go that route, especially with smaller venues, but I'll put it out there for giggles.
I'm actually hoping that's the route they go, or 4 100-team subdivisions each with 2 fields (despite the scouting nightmare that results). You could also shorten the hours/day the matches are running.

orangemoore 05-05-2016 20:48
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1584262)
I'm actually hoping that's the route they go, or 4 100-team subdivisions each with 2 fields (despite the scouting nightmare that results). You could also shorten the hours/day the matches are running.
It would be nice to see shorter days, with a better Cost per match.

Billfred 05-05-2016 20:50
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1584262)
I'm actually hoping that's the route they go, or 4 100-team subdivisions each with 2 fields (despite the scouting nightmare that results). You could also shorten the hours/day the matches are running.
Hadn't considered that angle, and that would certainly make a 6-minute cycle more feasible. However, FLL and FTC have to fit back into the America's Center this year. Can you do that with eight fields?

sdangelo 05-05-2016 20:56
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billfred (Post 1584267)
Hadn't considered that angle, and that would certainly make a 6-minute cycle more feasible. However, FLL and FTC have to fit back into the America's Center this year. Can you do that with eight fields?
According to the pit map, FLL is still in the America's Center. The Scholarship Row & Sponsor booths were moved to the hotel instead.

EricH 05-05-2016 20:57
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billfred (Post 1584267)
Hadn't considered that angle, and that would certainly make a 6-minute cycle more feasible. However, FLL and FTC have to fit back into the America's Center this year. Can you do that with eight fields?
Yep. Remember that you're also losing 200 FRC pits (and crates). That's 200 10' squares (and their aisles) that you now have available for FTC "stuff", plus a little.

Or, to put it another way: The Archimedes/Tesla pits turn into FTC. Move the FRC practice fields (and take out one of each type, maybe?) and you've got a pretty good shot at fitting a fair number of FTC teams in there. Whether it'll be enough is an open question, but it'll be pretty close.

orangemoore 05-05-2016 21:03
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Wait did they say FTC was coming back to the Dome?

Basel A 05-05-2016 21:15
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1584262)
I'm actually hoping that's the route they go, or 4 100-team subdivisions each with 2 fields (despite the scouting nightmare that results). You could also shorten the hours/day the matches are running.
Trying to get 100 teams into bleachers in Cobo Hall (Detroit CMP) will be a huge pain. Would much rather have 50 teams worth of bleachers at each division field. Also would be great not to have to scout two fields. It's pretty tough to do at MSC. Einstein is taken care of by being in Ford Field.

Basel A 05-05-2016 21:24
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto (Post 1584149)
While maybe balanced at the top, I expect Houston to have a much weaker field that STL/Detroit. North 1/2 CMP has 5 (6?) strong districts, while South 1/2 CMP gets PNW and GA, as well as many regional qualifying teams. Additionally, I expect Houston to welcome more teams off of the waitlist than North 1/2 CMP will.

That, coupled with a later weekend, means North 1/2 CMP will likely be more competitive and harder to get in to.

Bummer :(

-Mike
Whipped up a chart real quick. Houston would definitely have been weaker than St. Louis this year. This is both because their percentiled OPRs are lower, but also because Houston would have had more waitlisted teams (more districts in St. Louis fills it out better, plus more overall 2016 teams would've gone to St. Louis, 243 to 357).

Edxu 05-05-2016 21:27
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1584262)
I'm actually hoping that's the route they go, or 4 100-team subdivisions each with 2 fields (despite the scouting nightmare that results). You could also shorten the hours/day the matches are running.
I'm for this as well. As a strategist, I usually meet with my Drive Team 4-5 matches beforehand to detail what we're doing, and at events with short turnarounds *cough waterloo cough*, sometimes the teams that I talk with have a match right before the match that we play with them, making it very difficult to plan matches in advance.

A 10-minute turnaround would be a godsend for pit crew as well, as more space between matches means that you can do more and more of the checkup list between matches, keeping the robot in better shape.

Also fewer pit scouting assignments per person is really nice.

Pault 05-05-2016 22:16
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Honestly, I think that FIRST is really lucky that the 2 Super Regionals aren't even more uneven. At least there is a pretty even split with TX/CA going to Houston and ON/MI going to STL/Detroit. I could easily see a world where all the best teams are all in one half, especially considering how FIRST has a much longer history in Super Regional North territory.

evanperryg 05-05-2016 22:56
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
I've kept a list of alliance partners and other teams I've been fortunate to interact with over the last few years, and it's disheartening to think that I won't see many of those teams ever again. Many of the teams I have found most inspirational, most impressive, and most exciting to watch will be in Houston next year. I'm well aware that FIRST doesn't read CD, at least not thoroughly enough to notice this post, but FIRST, you made a mistake.

This isn't about seeing awesome robots, this is about seeing the awesome people. Now that I'm not a student anymore, I figured I'd finally have the freedom to roam the pits more, and talk to more of the amazing people who I've only ever gotten to talk to briefly. I was hoping to talk more with a few of the people I had met down at the Arkansas regional this year, but now they're all heading to Texas.

I hope that someday we'll see a return to a single world championship, but for now I'll hold dearly the memories I've made from the final four real world championships.

MikLast 05-05-2016 23:28
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edxu (Post 1584290)
I'm for this as well. As a strategist, I usually meet with my Drive Team 4-5 matches beforehand to detail what we're doing, and at events with short turnarounds *cough waterloo cough*, sometimes the teams that I talk with have a match right before the match that we play with them, making it very difficult to plan matches in advance.
One of the (very few) downsides of districts from a drive team standpoint: you never get time to relax.

wjordan 05-05-2016 23:29
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
1 Attachment(s)
I wrote a script to try and compare the north champs to the south champs based on historical OPR, and here's what I found:

Here's percentile OPR at worlds for North teams and South teams:
Code:
Year        North                        South               
        50th        75th        90th        50th        75th        90th
2004        44.82        56.59        70.47        32.14        46.97        64.60
2005        12.83        17.79        23.67        10.81        16.22        22.81
2006        15.20        23.38        33.03        12.39        19.94        27.46
*2007        -0.28        54.96        168.85        25.63        130.43        203.00
2008        21.51        32.25        41.92        17.10        25.05        36.73
2009        25.10        33.25        40.10        21.26        28.47        35.08
2010        2.22        3.81        4.90        1.91        3.27        4.32
2011        24.20        36.37        45.73        17.40        30.86        42.72
2012        13.20        18.38        25.27        9.90        16.53        25.58
2013        37.46        52.15        65.85        31.86        44.29        63.19
2014        51.69        68.34        85.10        46.57        62.57        81.38
2015        41.17        57.61        72.64        34.29        53.06        69.58
2016        37.20        45.28        54.27        31.66        40.23        49.52
And here's South OPR as a percent of North OPR at each percentile:
Code:
        50th        75th        90th
2004        71.71%        82.99%        91.67%
2005        84.25%        91.18%        96.34%
2006        81.54%        85.28%        83.14%
*2007        -9034%        237.31%        120.23%
2008        79.51%        77.66%        87.64%
2009        84.70%        85.62%        87.47%
2010        86.35%        85.76%        88.11%
2011        71.91%        84.85%        93.41%
2012        75.01%        89.97%        101.26%
2013        85.05%        84.93%        95.97%
2014        90.10%        91.56%        95.64%
2015        83.30%        92.11%        95.79%
2016        85.12%        88.84%        91.24%
A graph over time is attached. Based on this, I think it's pretty clear that the North champs is going to be the stronger event over Houston. While the top 10% of teams are fairly close between them, it's the North's much stronger middle tier that brings up the quality of play. Perhaps this is due to the fact that the North is mostly teams from districts, which have a tendency to improve the middle-tier teams over the regional model. The gap between the two regions has also stayed pretty consistent, despite the rise of powerful western teams such as 987 and 1678.

* I wasn't around for 2007, but does anyone know why the OPRs for that year are so out of whack?

EricH 05-05-2016 23:34
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjordan (Post 1584335)
* I wasn't around for 2007, but does anyone know why the OPRs for that year are so out of whack?
Exponential scoring, or I miss my guess. A particularly good team could place 8-9 scoring objects in the match, but whether they got 16 or 256 points for 'em depended a lot on WHERE they placed 'em and where the other alliance placed theirs.

Then there was the end-game bonus--dedicated ramp bots could be worth 0-60 points depending on how good their defense was and how good at climbing the ramps their partners were.

Nuttyman54 05-05-2016 23:40
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1584337)
Exponential scoring, or I miss my guess. A particularly good team could place 8-9 scoring objects in the match, but whether they got 16 or 256 points for 'em depended a lot on WHERE they placed 'em and where the other alliance placed theirs.

Then there was the end-game bonus--dedicated ramp bots could be worth 0-60 points depending on how good their defense was and how good at climbing the ramps their partners were.
And today we've learned that exponential scoring does not play nice with algorithms that assume linearity. Whodathunk!

Knufire 05-05-2016 23:42
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuttyman54 (Post 1584339)
And today we've learned that exponential scoring does not play nice with algorithms that assume linearity. Whodathunk!
#thisiswhywedothemath

vikesrock777 06-05-2016 01:39
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1584337)
Exponential scoring, or I miss my guess. A particularly good team could place 8-9 scoring objects in the match, but whether they got 16 or 256 points for 'em depended a lot on WHERE they placed 'em and where the other alliance placed theirs.

Then there was the end-game bonus--dedicated ramp bots could be worth 0-60 points depending on how good their defense was and how good at climbing the ramps their partners were.
I wasn't around back then, but wasn't that also the year of the weird experimental match balancing algorithm? Could that also be messing with the quality of OPR data?

EricH 06-05-2016 01:43
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by vikesrock777 (Post 1584357)
I wasn't around back then, but wasn't that also the year of the weird experimental match balancing algorithm? Could that also be messing with the quality of OPR data?
Uh... Yep.

And probably not.


The "match balancing algorithm" AKA "NOT YOU GUYS AGAIN", for the uninitiated, was an attempt to "balance" matches. Top third of team numbers had one on each side of the field. Bottom third had one on each side of the field. Middle third... You get the idea. Unfortunately for the algorithm designers, that just so happened to be 2056's rookie year... And most events didn't have the depth that they could get away with it. It didn't take long for teams to raise a stink.

The problem is that it was even(ly bad) across everybody, so I don't think it'd affect OPR that much.

Koko Ed 06-05-2016 05:02
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conor Ryan (Post 1584231)
I wonder if the timing of the Vex Champs will have an impact on which event IFI sponsored teams will want to attend.

Looks like most of the NASA teams are headed south.

How many matches will teams expect to play?
They'll probably only do 10 but they should do 12. They could keep the eight fields and just do the MSC thing and bounce them back and forth between the two fields even and odd numbered matches til they reach 204 completed matches with 102 teams each getting a dozen matches to play.

marshall 06-05-2016 08:17
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjordan (Post 1584229)
The applet has NC teams going to STL / DET when they should be headed for HOU.
Otherwise, a useful tool, thanks!
The problem is that you used 900... We break everything. ;)

GreyingJay 06-05-2016 10:01
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1584337)
Exponential scoring, or I miss my guess. A particularly good team could place 8-9 scoring objects in the match, but whether they got 16 or 256 points for 'em depended a lot on WHERE they placed 'em and where the other alliance placed theirs.
Ah, so just like Recycle Rush. :rolleyes:

MARS_James 06-05-2016 10:48
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyingJay (Post 1584450)
Ah, so just like Recycle Rush. :rolleyes:
Recycle rush was more of a multiplier in the Garbage Can with Rack n' Roll you had it based on how long a row you could create scored based on 2 to the power of the length of the row so basically starting with a row of 1 it went: 2 4 8 16 32 64 128 256. Then add in an end game that required two robots, one with a specific design element and you make it a math nightmare.

Lil' Lavery 06-05-2016 11:11
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjordan (Post 1584335)
* I wasn't around for 2007, but does anyone know why the OPRs for that year are so out of whack?
Beyond the exponential scoring already mentioned, the scheduling algorithm did not play kindly with OPR, as the three "bins" (old teams, middle teams, young teams) were never mixed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH (Post 1584358)
The problem is that it was even(ly bad) across everybody, so I don't think it'd affect OPR that much.
It impacts the math involved in calculating OPR, as you've essentially divided each event into three bins.

Alan Anderson 06-05-2016 13:59
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrendanB (Post 1584088)
Why even go a weak Championship?
Conferences? Sponsor and scholarship presentations? It's not just about the robots.

Knufire 06-05-2016 14:13
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrendanB (Post 1584088)
Why even go a weak Championship?
More wins = more grade A bumper fabric.

Eugene Fang 06-05-2016 14:22
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knufire (Post 1584540)
More wins = more grade A bumper fabric.
Only on about half of the alliances though.

Akash Rastogi 06-05-2016 14:45
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Anderson (Post 1584537)
Conferences? Sponsor and scholarship presentations? It's not just about the robots.
While it is not just about the robot, district teams sometimes cannot financially justify attending Champs, unless the team really feels it is worth going to. It is a different story for you Indiana folks since you are a lot closer.

For a lot of teams, the robot is still the central focus, and playing with friends and teams we love is also the justification for said expenses. Not every team will rationalize going or not going the same way.

I have a feeling the focus for a lot of teams will shift to their District Championship event as their last official event. Others may go to travel off-season events such as IRI and Chezy Champs (low cost+see your old friends)

GreyingJay 06-05-2016 14:54
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Anderson (Post 1584537)
Conferences? Sponsor and scholarship presentations? It's not just about the robots.
Actually, this leads to a good question - will conferences be duplicated at each championship? I hope I don't have to miss out on half the seminars.

Michael Corsetto 06-05-2016 15:00
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyingJay (Post 1584557)
Actually, this leads to a good question - will conferences be duplicated at each championship? I hope I don't have to miss out on half the seminars.
Many of the most popular seminars are given by mentors of teams that are annual contenders at the Championship, who volunteer their time to give these talks.

Do you expect these volunteers to now attend both 1/2 CMP's/Super Regionals?

Or, do you expect comparable experts in most/all subjects at both 1/2 CMP's/Super Regionals?

Carolyn_Grace 06-05-2016 15:18
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyingJay (Post 1584557)
Actually, this leads to a good question - will conferences be duplicated at each championship? I hope I don't have to miss out on half the seminars.
Do you attend all of the seminars now? I'm lucky if I get to two!

marshall 06-05-2016 15:45
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto (Post 1584561)
Many of the most popular seminars are given by mentors of teams that are annual contenders at the Championship, who volunteer their time to give these talks.

Do you expect these volunteers to now attend both 1/2 CMP's/Super Regionals?

Or, do you expect comparable experts in most/all subjects at both 1/2 CMP's/Super Regionals?
I think you'll get a different range of talks at each event with others stepping up to fill in the gaps created... granted, I'm being optimistic. I also hope that by this time next year FIRST has solidified a partnership with Twitch or YouTube or someone to get the talks recorded and posted.

Michael Corsetto 06-05-2016 16:06
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by marshall (Post 1584578)
I think you'll get a different range of talks at each event with others stepping up to fill in the gaps created... granted, I'm being optimistic. I also hope that by this time next year FIRST has solidified a partnership with Twitch or YouTube or someone to get the talks recorded and posted.
I totally agree here.

Those that expect a Karthik/Jared/Tom/Austin (some of the rockstars of FRC) presentation at both Super Regionals have their heads in the clouds.

I think many similar topics will be covered at both events. Just don't mistake quantity for quality.

-Mike

Jon Stratis 06-05-2016 16:11
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto (Post 1584589)
I think many similar topics will be covered at both events. Just don't mistake quantity for quality.
My hope is that there's some effort (by FIRST or the community) to have the presenters for similar talks work together to create a joint presentation both can be happy with. It still won't be identical, but working off the same slide deck or notes would certainly help!

marshall 06-05-2016 16:41
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto (Post 1584589)
I totally agree here.

Those that expect a Karthik/Jared/Tom/Austin (some of the rockstars of FRC) presentation at both Super Regionals have their heads in the clouds.

I think many similar topics will be covered at both events. Just don't mistake quantity for quality.

-Mike
I hope no one expects that but maybe I'm wrong. I've seen this happen in the hacker/maker community in the past where conferences diverge and you end up with different topics and speakers going to each. There are a lot of rockstars in FRC. Hopefully more of them step up and who knows, creating the opportunity could bring more of them out. While Karthik has always been Karthik, I don't know that he has always been Karthik*... if you know what I mean.

*The man who gives amazing talks for TED and FIRST and has a ton of enthusiasm and passion. Though I suppose its entirely possible he was forged that way and broke the mold in the process.

waialua359 06-05-2016 17:32
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by marshall (Post 1584605)
I hope no one expects that but maybe I'm wrong. I've seen this happen in the hacker/maker community in the past where conferences diverge and you end up with different topics and speakers going to each. There are a lot of rockstars in FRC. Hopefully more of them step up and who knows, creating the opportunity could bring more of them out. While Karthik has always been Karthik, I don't know that he has always been Karthik*... if you know what I mean.

*The man who gives amazing talks for TED and FIRST and has a ton of enthusiasm and passion. Though I suppose its entirely possible he was forged that way and broke the mold in the process.
Well I doubt Karthik will be at the South FRC Championships anyway.
VEX Worlds is scheduled for that weekend.

Lil' Lavery 06-05-2016 18:44
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Citrus Dad (Post 1584646)
Just had a discussion about that on moving toward better scheduling. FRC used a different scheduling scheme in 2007 in which teams were sorted into 3 bins and teams within the bins didn't play each other. That broke the statistical underpinning of the OPR (at least in the way it's now calculated) making the results nonsensical.
While this is true, even without that formula OPR would have been a poor predictor of future success given the exponential scoring (even if you assume 60-point end-games).

Knufire 06-05-2016 21:06
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
For the conferences, why can't FIRST just ensure that high quality recordings and presentation materials of all seminars be available online post-chanpionship?

EricH 06-05-2016 21:18
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knufire (Post 1584687)
For the conferences, why can't FIRST just ensure that high quality recordings and presentation materials of all seminars be available online post-chanpionship?
*chuckle* Yeah, 'bout that... This year's aren't up yet that I know about...

evanperryg 06-05-2016 22:38
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto (Post 1584589)
Just don't mistake quantity for quality.

-Mike
I was actually going to say this, except I was going to say it in regards to the entire concept of half champs, not just the seminars.

synth3tk 06-05-2016 23:17
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by evanperryg (Post 1584710)
I was actually going to say this, except I was going to say it in regards to the entire concept of half champs, not just the seminars.
Boom.

Cabey4 07-05-2016 17:33
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
It would be amazing if all the talks could be recorded next time.
I thought they were going to be this year, and now I'm kicking myself for not getting to see all of the talks I wanted to.
It would be great if they could record them next year.

GreyingJay 09-05-2016 10:27
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cabey4 (Post 1584862)
It would be amazing if all the talks could be recorded next time.
I thought they were going to be this year
Didn't they?? :( :(

CalTran 09-05-2016 10:51
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyingJay (Post 1585229)
Didn't they?? :( :(
Yes and no. There's been a lot of rumblings about them being recorded, but the official postings have yet to surface...

GreyingJay 09-05-2016 11:39
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalTran (Post 1585239)
Yes and no. There's been a lot of rumblings about them being recorded, but the official postings have yet to surface...
Alrighty. Here's hoping they turn up.

As I said in another thread about champs - Even though my team didn't qualify, I had half a mind this year to go anyway and just attend conferences, and bring my 4K video camera with me to record the sessions.

Maybe I'll actually try to make that happen for one of the champs next year.

synth3tk 09-05-2016 12:57
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreyingJay (Post 1585248)
Alrighty. Here's hoping they turn up.

As I said in another thread about champs - Even though my team didn't qualify, I had half a mind this year to go anyway and just attend conferences, and bring my 4K video camera with me to record the sessions.

Maybe I'll actually try to make that happen for one of the champs next year.
If you do, see if you can hook into the mixer board for audio. The last thing we need is a crystal-clear picture with muddy/noisy audio from the back of the room.

GreyingJay 09-05-2016 14:37
Re: Split Champs assignment
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by synth3tk (Post 1585274)
If you do, see if you can hook into the mixer board for audio. The last thing we need is a crystal-clear picture with muddy/noisy audio from the back of the room.
Would definitely hook into the mixer board or get my own external audio, say from a recorder placed toward the front of the room.

I'm just shooting the breeze here but I certainly hope to be able to make it out next year. I had the good fortune of attending champs in 2015 and I sat in on a couple of excellent sessions.

(If anyone would be in a position to help me get an audio feed, please feel free to PM me!)


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:32.
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