I'm going to elaborate too much on what I think would be a good alternative to the Even/Odd system, but here's what I would like to see as a good alternative.

As I read through these I realized my idea was close to Andy Baker's. FIRST is much more than the robots, but we are here because of them! Now I'm not denying that teams that win the extra awards such as animation, inventor, etc. shouldn't get benefits and be allowed to go to Nats because they should, but we can't exclude the robots here people. I like the idea of large Qualifying Regionals (for example, the Midwest would have a big Qualifying Regional) , which would then put you into the National Competition. Although it's not the most fair alternative, there are so many teams that it's hard to be truly fair to all teams. In addition to these large Qualifying Regionals, teams could also qualify for Nationals through a point system like the current one which includes all the awards like Chairmans, Animation, Robot Design Awards, etc.

That's my .02 cents.

I don't know if this has been stated before, so here goes my idea for how teams should qualify

1) Those that exemplify the ideals of FIRST go. No exceptions.
2) All awards are offered a spot at nationals.
3) Rookie teams get a small percentage of the spots open at Nationals.
4) Finally, competitiveness gets the last spot as who can go. Those teams that win get the final spots not taken by #1 and #2.

I know that the competitiveness is a big part of the nationals, but then again, as has been said before, FIRST is not about the robots. It's about the atmosphere. The main purpose is inspiration. Not competition. I don't know how flawed, or even if it is, the system above is. It's just how I feel they should do things. If they want a real competitive event, have another national event, but just for the best teams from all over. It would be nice if everyone could go, but that's impossible. If they want competitive events, make a special one just for that, for the best teams to go to, but then make the current nationals for the ideals of FIRST. Make it a learning experience, and have a seperate "Super Bowl" event.

My thoughts
 

In 2000, as a junior in high school I attended the Nationals for the first time. At regionals that year I knew I would be back for my senior year, at nationals I was hooked for life.

FIRST is about the inspiration and the Championship does just that. I feel that every student should have a chance to go to the championship with their team at some point in their high school career. Therefore, teams should be able to go every x years (less than 4) regardless of the team’s performance.

Other criteria that is important:
1) Teams that perform well at regionals during the current year should be able to attend.
2) Teams that win current year regional awards that would assist in inspiring students at the championship. (example: teams that win spirit usually encourage more enthusiasm from everyone at the event, making it more enjoyable)
3) Teams that performed well previous years. Teams should have a chance to come back to the championship to defend their titles.

Overall the Championship should include the teams that will have the greatest impact on the students that will attend. And the teams that have the students that need to be inspired.

Eric

Re: Championship
 

But is it really possible to go ahead with the old system?
Someone (wiser than me), pointed out that we have already expanded beyond the odd/even system.

After qualifications, there will be about 200-250 spots open for even teams. But, think how many teams there are to fill these spots (I don't have the exact numbers.)

In the future, it will get worse.

I believe that FIRST should keep with the "some teams qualify, some teams get a free ride" system. The big question is, how should the "free ride" system work? I agree with what Eric O posted above, every team should get a chance to go, even if it takes 4 (or more) years for their "free ride".

Perhaps, FIRST should keep track of how long it has been since a team attended nationals. Those teams that haven't gone in the greatest amount of time, get a "free ride". It might start taking quite a few years to cycle through the teams, but by then, hopefully we will have "super-regionals" or even East/West divisions, or something along those lines. This solution will work for at least, the next 3 years. (until post-Atlanta).


FIRST should do whatever it can to ensure that nationals remains competitive (the BEST robots go each year), and that even the "not best" teams get the chance to attend every few years...


I trust that FIRST will come up with the best solution for doing this, but I feel it is important that this happens. (Dave asked for opinions, this is mine.)

This means that the system for determining what teams are the "best" needs to be reexamined. What awards cause a team to qualify. Do we really want "historical" performance to allow for qualification? *shrug* Again, I don't have the answers, but I trust those "powers that be" at FIRST will be able to figure things out.

Dave, Good Luck.



John

Odd/Even
 

Since we all agree that part of the excitement about the Championship event is the competion, and part is the networking and collaboration between teams, why not offer a solution like this?

Do not base the even/odd stipulation on team numbers, but rather, hold a lottery during the spring for the following year. (That way teams have lots of time to plan AND you will not always be competing at Championships with the same odd- or -even-numbered teams).

During the Odd years, teams who received an odd number during the lottery can qualify to attend the Championship event where they will compete against other teams who received Odd numbers. During that same year, Even teams can qualify to attend a "conference" with other Even teams where they can attend workshops, demonstrations and network (party) with other teams.

This way, each year a team will have an opportunity to either qualify for the Conference or the Championships.

Fairness.
 

I don't like odd/even - you may not have the
'best' robot when your number comes up. You also need a lot of lead time to schedule and fund a national run - I have been in a situation where my team qualified at the last minute to attend the nationals - but even with the $$$ just did not have enough time to organize the trip. So the trick is how to have a 'fair' system that doesn't favor wealthy teams over poor teams. I think
A random lottery together with a merrit system would work.

I never had an issue with the qualification system. It is a set of rules. You play by them. Sometimes you go, sometimes you don't.

Any changes to the qualification system must ensure that all teams, no matter the quality of there performance at regionals, have some chance to attend the Championship. The Championship is where most rookie teams (that did not spin off of an existing team) get their inspiration to go on and try to compete the next year.

If you go to a performance based system, then Super regionals will be required, as mentioned in an earlier post.

There has to be a buffer of some kind between the "everyone is welcome" atmosphere at regionals and the "only winners are welcome" atmosphere of a performanced based Championship.

Yes, you will get better competition. But is that what you are pursuing?

If the Championship is only about winning, you might as well get rid of the Chairman's Award. It will become meaningless in no time.

Finally, good luck Dave and your committee. I hope you get some useful ideas from this and all of the other posts.

whoa
 

Wow, this is a LONG thread, so I haven't had time to read all of the posts. I hope I'm not posting anything that has been mentioned already.

I agree that it might be difficult to change things this late for this year, so perhaps waiting for next year would be good, but then again, we had even teams 2 years ago, odd last year, so it wouldn't be fair to have even teams go this year and then change it before the odd teams get to go next year.


%%% CRAZY PROPOSAL %%%%%%%%

I think that the majority of the spots should be based upon the current year, with just a little bit guaranteed from history. However that might make it difficult for travel arrangements.

Here is what I would propose (I know it's quite a bit away from the status quo, but I think drastic measures will be needed before too long, so why not start now?):

1) Hold the kick-off the 2nd Saturday in September. This gives teams 2 weeks to organize a team (most schools start the last week of August now).
2) Robots must ship near the last Tuesday of October (six weeks plus 3 days - same schedule as now).
3) Hold regionals all through November and first two or three weeks of December (skip Thanksgiving weekend). If necessary, hold regionals the first couple weeks of January.
4) Schedule the Championship during its current week. That way, there is at least 3 months (maybe 4) for teams to book travel once the regionals are over.
5) Teams that get to go to the Championship are chosen as follows:
a) X number (say 300 teams) - history teams = Y teams
b) rank the teams based upon a point system for the CURRENT year.
c) the top Y teams in the points get to go to the championship.

%%%% END CRAZY PROPOSAL %%%%%%%%%%

Dave, I know that is a little more detail than you want, so here are the meta- criteria:

- Base the criteria for the Championship mostly (say 80 - 90%) on the current year.
- Line up the schedule to be more throughout the school year - a year-long thing with a break in the middle.
- Give teams a LOT of time to book travel arrangements instead of making them scramble if they qualify at the last minute.

4 years
 

The only useful suggestion that I can think to make is to have a random component and a performance component.

I would suggest that both be based on a rolling 4 year cycle (high school is 4 years long, right?)

A team's chance at getting a random invite should increase each year that they do not attend the championships. Hopefully the numbers would work out that teams would not be held out of the championships for an entire high school cycle.

For the performance aspect, I would suggest that teams keep their last four years worth of qual points. Teams that are consistently good, but not champions or whatever would eventually get rewarded with a shot at the championships.

WHOA! That is a heated thread...
 

Hi all,

I hated the even/odd thing from the beginning because it was DOOMED FROM THE START due to 30% annual growth.

I agree with PJ that a balance of random and performance based criteria is needed.

I also agree that a lottery that essentially gives you more and more chances of making it the more years you miss the lottery is a good way of making it work.

I would also add that a team that signs up for the Nationals, then backs out should go to the back of the line in terms of lottery odds.

Until TV is paying for teams to go to the Nationals (ala the NCAA tourney), I cannot see FIRST going to a system where all teams qualify based on this year's competition. It is a good goal to think of, but not realistic until some revenue source outside of the team's pockets is paying the bills.

That is all I have for now...

Joe J.

Re: Chamionship Qualification - feedback needed ASAP!
 

First I would like to thank Dave L for asking the community. This reflects the respect and trust they have for FIRSTers. I have read some excellent ideas so let me add to these recommendations (some of the ideas have been said already):

1. Most important group- invite all to the National event all regional chairman’s Award and Inspiration Award winners.
They represent the heart of FIRST.
2. Invite all Rookie teams to the Championship. They should be given an opportunity to attend the National.
If they decide not to attend for any reason, their invitation to the National can be held & used for future Nationals.
3. Invite all teams that have NEVER attended a National Championship.
To attend the National is one of the best award and satisfaction any FIRST team can have.
4. Invite all non-field-of-play award winners are to the National. Best design, idea, function, spirit etc.
5. Any additional slots in the National can be given out using a lottery system. This can be done early in the season.

The list is by most importance to less importance.
:)

I am in favor of increasing the "aura" of the regionals. I would like to see the prestige factor of the regionals raised. Let going to the regionals become as important as going to the finals, not merely a stepping stone to the finals.

As for a championship, let the top four teams of each regional east of the Mississippi go to the East Finals. Let the top four teams of each regional west of the Mississippi go to the West finals. Empty slots at each final could be filled using some selection process.

Let the top two teams from each final compete to determine the national champion on National TV with the proceeds used to fund the finals.

The "old guy" from Mesa Arizona,
Ken Loyd
Teacher/Advisor
Team #64
The Gila Monsters

Most of any commentary I'd have has already been covered. The main issue I've always had about qualifying for nationals has been the fact that it is nearly impossible for a team to qualify for nationals the next year unless you attend two regionals. This is because the point system requires you to have five points which means you have to win the regional and a technical award if you only attend one event. This can be a very challenging thing to do. Given that it's not really an option for many teams to attend two regionals (particularly if they are attending nationals this year), I think that the qualification process should be made to allow more teams to attend based on previous years preformance while limiting the number of teams that attend on the even/odd side of things.

Matt

One suggestion from this thread, which I really liked, is to first limit Championship attendance to teams that have submitted a Chairman's Award entry.

So much of the spirit of FIRST is based upon the ideals embodied by the Chairman's Award that the basic effort of filling out a questionaire and writing a 4 page paper should be a prerequisite for attending the Championship.

Other selection methods of course would follow, but the first criteria should be a CA submission.

Other meta-criteria:

A selection process which is scalable to the number of teams.

If you have 100 teams or 1500 teams, the selection process would not need to change.

A selection process which allows us to focus our efforts on inspiring and mentoring students, building good robots and teams, rather than on winning regional competitions.

If a team is spending all of its energies at a regional to qualify for nationals, then it cannot, of necessity, spare resources to help other teams and make their experience more inspiring.