[FRC Blog] Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Posted on the FRC Blog, 8/2/16:
http://www.firstinspires.org/robotics/frc/blog/inter-district-play-for-2017

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Not what I was hoping for, but it is what it is.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

It's a little surprising that only 11 teams participated in inter-district play. Is that due more to availability than interest from teams?

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

As a lower budget team in a regional area, if there were a district close enough (for example, Texas), we would go to that in a heart beat. I find it disheartening that they still do not allow non district teams to attend district events, especially with the clarifications about earning no points. A district event would help us greatly.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

It could also be that districts are relatively spread out at this point. (especially for FRC where you often only need to go as far as a state away to get to regionals)

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

In an already packed competition season I would imagine most teams have no interest in adding an additional practice event in their schedule. It has it's advantages but also has its disadvantages.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Except in the case where you have MAR, CHS, and NC all neighboring each other.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

That's the impression I get. There is very limited availability of inter-district slots, and you don't find out if you've gotten one until very late in the registration cycle (December, when waitlists are cleared). This is too late for teams to adjust their "home" district event schedules, and too late to attend regionals or a third home district, so teams have to basically take a bet on the district event being available to them.

Regional play costs more, but you can register for that as soon as unrestricted event registration starts and if there are open slots you'll get one and be able to confirm that right away. Plus you can actually qualify at those events. So I think regionals have been more popular than inter district play.

Inter-district play can be a huge competitive advantage though if you time it right. 3314 traveled out of MAR to the Waterbury district last year, using the Week 1 event to iron out the bugs in their machine (and still put up impressive scores). This event didn't count for points for them, and they were able to take the lessons learned and then return to MAR with a more competitive robot and team.

CT might as well be touching NJ for the purposes of this discussion; some MAR teams have good access to some NE events and vice versa.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

I think week 1 is the only real way that this works and there weren't all that many week 1 events in NC, CHS, MAR... let alone ones that had space after the first round of registrations.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

It's still an advantage, albeit much less of one, if you go to an event before your second points event.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

EDIT- Indiana and Michigan are reasonably close too.


Team 74 from Michigan made it to an IN District event... From TBA it looks like that was their first event last year.

I personally would love to see more interdistrict play.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Week 1 works best, but theoretically, as long as you go before your second in-district event, you should get better because of your out-of-district event*.

Additionally, travel plays a role. It takes 3 hours to get from Richmond to Raleigh. That's not too bad, but not all NC events were in the Raleigh-Durham area. If a team from Richmond wanted to go to an NC event and the Raleigh events didn't line up, a trip of 4+ hours likely awaited them. So not only do the weeks have to line up compared to your in-district events, your OOD events can't be too far away either.

*Theoretically, on average.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

It is still and advantage but much more of a logistics nightmare. A lot of Maryland Schools spring break runs right around weeks 3 and 4 which is half of the points getting opportunities for CHS.

DISCLAIMER: YMMV depending on locality. Maryland is a bit weird sometimes.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

It's probably been brought up before, but FIRST won't let this happen. The reason a DCMP isn't free was FIRST's decision. Charging 4k for a DCMP makes up for the fact that FIRST doesn't see 4k second regional registrations from teams in a District area.

FIRST counts on netting an extra 4k from a certain percentage (~35%) of Regional teams for second plays, just like FIRST counts netting an extra 4k from District teams for the DCMP (which happens to come out to 30-40% of teams in a given district).

Much of FIRST's operating budget is funded by FRC teams (FTC and FLL do not provide revenue to FIRST at the same level), so I don't expect to get a cheaper second play unless we go to districts.

I expect that FIRST will continue to count on netting 5-6k from all FRC teams, 4k from relatively fixed percentage (30-40%) of those teams, and 4 million dollars from FRC teams for #2champs.

-Mike

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

You can do a Week 4 and 5 in-district, so weeks 1-3 could all be before your first event.

I think if FIRST/the districts really wanted to encourage inter-district play, they should at least open up registration the same time as 3rd plays.

Ontario and Michigan will be pretty close, I think?

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Depends which part :p

I'm sort of surprised there were only 11 teams able to compete inter-district. I wonder what that number will be next year.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Yes, but Michigan seldom has open spots.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

This begs the question, how many 2 and 3 regional teams would give up a chance to qualify for champs to save $3,000 and 1 night in a hotel, while risking that the slots are still available on Nov 10th (or later should Inter-Districts teams get dibs)?

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

I think there are 2 groups of teams that this would be appealing to.

1. Teams who are confident that they will still qualify for champs with one less regional. This group is likely small, but prominent.
2. Teams that think they are unlikely to qualify for worlds anyways and/or don't have the money for the 2nd regional. This group is likely very large.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

East side Michigan teams and Ontario teams will have a chance to get together pre-CMP for the first time since GLR became MSC. Pretty cool.

As for us West Coast Michiganders, Indiana beckons. The Average Joes have been dreaming:

Everybody knows a little place like Kokomo
Now if you want to go and get away from it all
Go down to Kokomo

Give us the right week and we'll be there. :cool:

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

+1000.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

I would kill for the chance at getting a shot at a Weeks 1-3 District Event. My team attends one Regional that has always been (and will always be for the foreseeable future) a Week 5 event. My team has not been able to go to a second Regional due to costs, but if that price point dropped by a few thousand dollars, I think we could. By the same token, we have never won our home Regional, and we have no reason to believe that we could win another Regional like Palmetto or Bayou if we were to travel there. However, if we were to get in any type of competition before our home Regional, I feel a Blue Banner might be much more attainable.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

So I think I understand why FIRST won't open up Districts to teams from Regionals. If they allowed this, teams that had been attending 2+ Regionals would try and switch to a cheaper District event, even if it meant they couldn't actually qualify in their district "practice" event. This would mean FIRST would be earning less revenue, and the quality of play in both the Regionals and Districts might suffer. Not entirely sure about that last statement, but I could see it happening.

However, as has been mentioned, there are teams that cannot afford a second Regional, but could afford an additional District event. In this case, if only teams that registered for one Regional qualified to pick up any leftover District spots, FIRST would, theoretically, see an increase in revenue. This should also increase level of play at the Regional level. Again, take that last statement with a grain of salt.

Is there any chance of FIRST considering this? Now at this point in time, there would probably only be a minuscule amount of teams able to take advantage of this. But as FIRST continues its transition to Districts over the next decade, it might be extremely beneficial to allow teams from Regionals to begin blending into Districts.

Just my thoughts on the matter.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

I think you're underestimating how few teams would take advantage of this. Saving $3000 in terms of admittance costs means we have a giant budget compared to what we would use for a second regional, meaning we would go to much further expense to go to a district event.

The issue with teams currently going to regionals flooding district events is a good point though, but I doubt that's the only reason that FIRST isn't allowing regional teams to go to district events. I'd love to hear Frank or someone else in HQ's opinion and reasoning.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Your revenue logic makes sense, except one point: For any "extra plays" in districts (3rd/4th plays, interdistrict plays, etc.), the extra play registration fee goes to the District Organization, not to FIRST. So FIRST does not see more revenue if all open district event slots get filled with interdistrict teams, but each District Organization would see additional revenue.

I think the level of play on the field always goes up as more teams get more matches/events. This trend can be seen year after year.

TL;DR, FIRST loses 4k of potential revenue for every Regional team is allowed to play at a District event. I don't see FIRST allowing this situation, at least in the short term.

-Mike

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

$4,000 of perceived revenue, teams like Cougar Robotics and Full Metal Jackets might never be able to afford a second regional. Also this is under the assumption that they won't change the pricing model for regional teams.

Just a quick idea would be to set regional to district reg to Nov 14th and then charge regional teams $1.5k, with $1k of it going to FIRST and $500 to the district. Everyone wins: district teams still get first shot at inter-districts, low income regional teams can play more, FIRST gets more money, and Districts get more money.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

As a less funded team, its hard enough to pay for DCMP, let alone go across the country to get to a different district.

Is there an official reason that this still isint allowed?

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Michigan has not had open spots, so IN teams cannot go north.

I think there is strong interest, but there needs to be more availability.

Inter-district play is very cool. We traveled to NC to play, and a few MI teams have been in IN.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

$$$$

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

And for the other west coast of Michigan (west UP), if/when Wisconsin goes districts, we might be interested in an Oshkosh/Appleton event.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Ah, thank you for the information. I had no idea that districts had their own entities. On that note, are District Organizations just separate accounts within FIRST, or are they completely different legal entities?

I couldn't agree more.


I would agree with Mike and say that we won't see much blending of the Regionals and Districts within the next few years. The more parties involved, the more complex everything becomes, and the longer the rollout would take. That's just how these things work.

But I do believe there is a potential solution out there, and a need to find the solution as soon as possible. There are teams out there that would pay for a practice event, and there are (maybe) events that could host these teams, allowing FIRST or the entities associated with FIRST to earn revenue, to allow FIRST to contribute and grow even more. Heck, this may be a way to bolster newly formed Districts that might have trouble filling out some of their more outlying events. But my main point is that FIRST and FIRSTers should be thinking about how to transition from the Regional system to the Districts system. At the moment, Districts are being formed after, and only after the Regional system has been proved to be untenable in a specific area. Granted, some of the Districts seemed to have been formed in a more healthy manner than others, which is a great thing. But I think if FIRST and FIRSTers in an area wait until they can't stand the Regional system to make the transition to Districts, there will be stragglers, and isolated pockets, and slowed growth in certain areas for years and years and years to come. So I would love to see solutions as how to blend and smooth the break between Regionals and Districts so that everyone can start to see the heightened levels of competitive play, intellectual challenge, and inspiration that FIRST can bring.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

They are different legal entities. Some have likened the district model to FRC's version of franchising. This is part of the large number of the behind-the-scene changes that come along with a region switching to the district system.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

And I'll reference a prior post about some of those behind the scenes changes:

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Last time I checked, a third district in Michigan for a Michigan team was $500. Unless the prices in Michigan have changed and I missed it, it's no wonder Michigan teams stay at Michigan events and there are rarely openings. Why would FIRST actively discourage inter-district play by making it more expensive on TOP of the travel costs a team will incur if they want to go play with nearby friends?

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

This a thousand times. As long as in-state teams register for 3rd-events before out-of-state teams, it will continue to be infinitely difficult to district out-of-state. I'd wager that is the primary reason so few teams do out of state district events; they can't get in!

I thought in the past out-of-state 3rd districts cost whatever an in-state 3rd district would have cost. Am I mistaken?

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Actually, I just learned something. The district systems allowing inter-district play compromised on a $1000 price because some districts charge $500, and others charge $1000 for a third play.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

FiM and MAR charge $500 for an additional event.
PNW has their unique agreement with FIRST, not sure what their additional event fee is.
IN, NC, PCH, NE, CHS all charge $1000 for additional in-district plays.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

PNW is $1000 too.

The question is are FiM and MAR raising theirs to $1000 for next year too, or did FIRST not want to point out to those of us in the later forming districts that we pay twice the price as teams in those areas.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

This difference has existed for a number of years, ever since NE went districts. Given that this fee also goes directly to the local district organization, I don't think we can assume that FIRST HQ has control over the amount.

Personally, I don't mind the higher fee either. The money is going to a group of people that have more intimate knowledge of the region (and it's needs) and know how to best utilize it for the benefit of the local teams.

Re: Inter-District Play for 2017
 

Yes NE and PNW were the first to charge $1000 for additional plays and since then every new district has opted to charge that amount.

I'm not assuming that FIRST has mandated that price. Though they certainly have ultimate control on whether they sign the proposed MOU or not and could demand changes before they sign it. I don't believe that charging less than the other districts would be a sticking point for FIRST since they don't see any of that money. Now if a District proposed say $2500 for an additional play then I certainly could see FIRST pushing back on that. I know back when PNW started and the cost for additional plays was mentioned by FIRST they pointed out the different prices in the different Districts and this blog post represents a change from that.