Qualification for Disney in 2003
 

Hey I was wondering is it 3 or 5 points a team needs to qualify next year for Disney?

Also does the Spirit award count for 1 point in this system?

I honestly hope that FIRST gets rid of this mangled system anyway. I think that FIRST is admitting they have a problem, but no admitting that they have no solution for it. Everywhere Dean goes he "rallies the troops" to get more teams, more sponsors, more engineers, more colleges, more everything. Then, he turns around and says because we are getting so large not everyone that wants to can come to nationals. Ok, so the first step to fixing a problem is admitting you have it. I in no way think that FIRST should stop growing, I think in fact that there should be tons of growth. However, the solution proposed is not a solution to the problem. The current solution is basically to have even numbered teams compete one year, odd the next. That doesn't make very much sense. Or, you can go to a bunch of regionals one year and really go for tons of awards and get points to go the next year. Maybe the solution is having two semi-nationals... an east coast and a west coast, or having one national for only the winners of the regionals, or maybe just not having a national at all. At the end, I think FIRST must sit back and figure out a long term solution, fair to everyone, to fix this problem.

I don't believe it's Dean that's preventing us from going to Disney. I believe Disney can no longer handle us. Kinda amazing really.

Another problem with the qualification system is that some qualified teams can't afford to travel to Epcot. At Drexel, Team 157 "The Aztechs" was #1 seed and won the regional. However, they said they can't attend nationals for financial reasons. I think it will diminish the competition not to have such a great bot and team at nationals.

I think that the national should be open to teams that had a high seed in their regionals. It would remove the unfairness of the even/odd system and allow teams that deserve to go to Florida to enter the national. Winning a regional involves quite a bit of luck in addition to skill. The point system is also weak because the bigger teams with the 'wealthier' sponsors can devote more time to things like technical awards. Going by seeding at regionals is probably the most accurate way to send deserving teams to Florida. Say the top 15 teams from each regional qualify. Exceptions could be made for rookies too so they could have a chance to get in. Hopefully some kind of solution will be found by FIRST that allows as many teams in as possible.

In answer to your question.....
 

In answer to the original question about qualifications, you are required to have five (5) points to qualify for the championship. I am almost sure that the spirit award counts, I'm not totally sure but I'm almost certain it counts, someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Here is a link to the original letter posted by FIRST:
Championship Eligibility

What is so terrible about the even / odd system that we have now?

Every high school student in America should be afforded the opportunity to participate in FIRST, therefore we don't want to stop forming new teams. There are too many teams now, so not all of them can go to nationals.

The number of teams that go to nationals has been, until this year, limited only by the cost of attending. This is no longer limiting enough.

So why don't we send the top seeds from each regional? Because that is not what FIRST is about. There are teams that, no matter how hard they work, are so limited in resources and support that they'll never rank high enough to qualify. The beauty of this system is that every team gets to go at least once every other year. If a team performs exceptionally, they can go in their off year, otherwise, they don't have to wait long until their next turn to go.

Any system where there is a chance that a team will never get a chance to go to nationals won't get my vote.

The only change I would suggest would be to allow all rookie teams to go. Many rookies wouldn't go anyway, because of financial issues, but the ones that do will be better for the experience.

Going to Epcot
 

The even/odd system is not so bad.

Basically what the point system does is make sure the teams that consistently do well every year get a chance to go to nationals, while also keeping the total size of the competition down. For many rookie teams, it can take a few years to get to the point where they can consistently build a competitive robot. I believe that any team who participates for more than a couple of years can do this.

I do, however, like the idea of the East/West national and one Grand National to end it all. That seems like the fairest organization for the growing number of teams. With the dwindling economy, however, the sponsors of FIRST may not be able to shell out the extra cash necessary for another two huge competitions.

As for the "top seeds from regionals get to go" policy, this would not work. One can see from the disparity this season between teams that qualify well and teams that win the eliminations, to give preference to the top seeds would be unfair. If the points system must stay in place, one might suggest that the top 3 or so seeds and the winning alliance get to go to the national.

If Dean and his buddies can think up such "diabolical" games every year, you would think they could work this out too. I guess we just have to live with the current system.

Jeff Alpert
Team 469

Spilled milk?
 

Reading the above posts brings me back to the very start of the season and the firestorm of controversy about the change in the rulings.

FIRST cannot, in all fairness, change the rules next season without unfairly penalizing all of the odd number teams which were excluded this year. If they did that would create an even bigger controversy.

As for what qualifies you- well only the half dozen or so quality engineering awards FIRST has been posting with the Regional results are the ones which qualify. Spirit is great but is doesn't qualify you. It is a bit incredible to me that it doesn't considering the Inspiration part of FIRST.

The odd/even system has its flaws. It does exclude incredible teams. But that's the breaks. We hashed this out last October. Lets move on and prepare for 2003- the year of the ODD teams.
Lets have the ODD teams show FIRST just what the competition lost out on in 2002 by coming on strong in 2003.

BTW- despite incredible success (top 4 at RU, 2nd place, Eng. Inspiration Award) we were excluded and we are accepting it. The pain is still there but it will fade as we work on our goals. We are already prepping for our biggest season yet. Just think- we get an extra month to work on the next year's plans!


;) ;) WC

Wayne,

I agree with your statements and admire your positive attitude.

Raul

Out of fairness to odd-numbered teams, 2003 needs to be like this year. But after that, why not have competitions at both Disneyland and Disneyworld, with the winners competing up in New Hampshire, where this all started? The championship could either be at FIRST Place in Manchester or at Dean's house. Either location has enough space for only six teams. This isn't the first time this idea's been brought up, and it makes sense with five new regionals being planned next year. Two "national" competitions would allow more teams to compete, even if fewer teams were allowed at each competition.

Not Only Engineering Awards
 

Wayne,

All judged awards count for points. We got the Sportsmanship award last year and that is what put us over the 5 points for this year. All judged awards count (Spirit, Sportsmanship, etc), not just engineering awards. I think the distinction is awards that are voted on (Best Play of the Day).

-Paul

Disneyland won't work. Where will they put it? It is literally an amusement complex in the middle of a neighborhood. They have two hotels, two amusement parks. They don't have enough room for us to stay, let alone a place to compete.

Re: Spilled milk?
 

FIRST opened up Nationals to all teams last month.

http://www.usfirst.org/robotics/ch_registration.htm

Well then...how about a National Competition at Disney World and another at Universal in Florida running at the same time Thursday, Friday, Saturday with a Championship match between the two winners on Sunday at either Disney or Universal. That way everyone is already in Florida and only has to spend 1 extra day.

Ya, he said that that's why hes going this year. He won it last year. So if you win it this year, you can go next, etc, etc.

Chairman's award and Nats next year
 

I was wondering, MOE team 365 recieved that chairman's award at the Philly regional. I was wondering, does that qualify us for nats next year?

Thanks,
Joe

nats
 

i was sort of against limiting nationals when the idea was first proposed, but now i don't think its a problem...some people think dean wants nats to be smaller, others think that disney can't handle it...i think if ever team that could afford to go to disney went, we could be there for an entire week of qualifing rounds because there were just so many teams...can u imagine four days of qualifing rounds?....talk about boring!...yea....well...thats all i have to say

~~Shannon~~

An entire week of qualifying rounds? Nah. When FIRST start accepting every teams, and the national became twice as large as it is now, that'd require minimum of 50% more space...that is, if we only increase the pit area. However, if nationals were to take place with same time schedule as it is right now, they'd have to add four more playing field....yay! Well, that'd save the problem of having to have an entire week of competition but it'll bring up the problem about space. I don't know wether getting another parking lot freed up would cost less or having the national extend additional 3 days would cost less.

I remember hearing something that Disney will build an pit and field large enough for how many teams there are. So maybe it is just Dean trying to limit the amount and not Disney.

Re: Chairman's award and Nats next year
 

You'll have to check the qualification info on FIRST's web page, but I believe regional chairman's award winner qualifies you for this year, and will most likely give you points for next year as well...

While Disney did make this claim a few years ago, I have a feeling they didn't expect the growth that FIRST is having. Also, with the number of staff that FIRST has, they can only make the event so large before it grows beyond what they can manage. So, personally, I don't think it's just Disney making the call, and I don't think it's just FIRST either(sidebar: everyone saying it's Dean trying to limit should really say it's FIRST trying to limit...my experience working with FIRST staff makes me pretty sure that Dean has little to nothing to do with event logistics), but rather both Disney and FIRST feeling the growing pains of the ever-increasing number of teams.

From my understanding of the Championship Eligibility , if you win the regional chairman's award, that qualifies you for current year nationals only. But if you win it at nationals that qualifies you for next year and so on. I didn't see any points for the regional chairman's award either. Some one correct me if I'm wrong, think link is above.

My 2 cents
 

Here's what I think, which is in no way the definately right or nonprejudiced view (I'm on an odd team, so naturally I hate the current system.)
To be fair to all odd teams, next year the system must be the same.
But in 2004?
I support the idea of not 2, but 3 seminationals. One for the middle of the country.
But imagine the cost! most teams have to travel to make regionals, let alone the nationals or hypothetical semi nationals. And the winners, or top 8, 15, 20, whatever amount of teams do qualify, only large teams with gracious funding will be able to make all the trips. Think about teams, early in their lives, with smaller budgest than other teams that have been around longer. Also, I 've seen some low budget teams turn out great robots this year- it would be a shame to deny them competition because of money.
Money talks, the rest walks? No way fair.
Dean Kamen is being a little hypocritical with the rule changes, I admit, but I think it's better to limit the amount of people competeing in the nationals than the amount of people that can join FIRST. Let it grow to every highschool!
Good luck to everyone that's going to the nationals.
And sorry for my belated reply. I really have to check these forums more often.
:cool:

One thing to keep in mind...when the res_art9.htm page was created, it was specifically for the 2002 competition. Therefore, since there was no regional chairman's award winner in 2001, it was not listed. I am almost certain that, with the Chairman's award being the most prestigious award given by FIRST, the regional Chairman's award will have some point value for 2003.

I think before determining where to have a national event, or even how many are needed, a look into the distribution of teams nationwide needs to be made. The last time I checked(which was a year or two ago), there were not enough teams in the center of the country to warrant a national event there.

As others have mentioned, due to the nature of the event, there will always be a financial barrier for some teams. In that respect, I offer the following suggestions:

1. Get your team's school(s) and/or community to recognize the FIRST team on a level close or equivalent to that of any of the sports teams, with the same stipulation that the district/community/"boosters" will assist in travel expenses if a team does indeed qualify for nationals.

2. On FIRST's end, give the teams who qualify based on the current year's performance a waiver on their registration cost for the national competition. For those teams who get to go based on previous years' performance or the odd/even year criteria, they must pay the $4K registration costs as normal. This eases the financial burden further for those teams who are planning for nationals at the last minute because of performance at a regional event.

As I have mentioned several times before on this board, it is my feeling that having multiple national events dilutes the prestige of being able to call yourself national champions. After all, which sounds more impressive, "national champion," or "national champion, eastern division" ? It's my feeling that with a system similar to what I have described above, a single national event would still be feasible for some time to come.

I agree with you wholeheartedly that limiting the teams at nationals is the way to go, rather than placing a team # cap on FIRST itself. However, in regards to your other comment quoted above, I have to disagree. First, as I have mentioned previously on this board, shifting the blame to Dean on issues such as this is completely incorrect. While I'm sure he had some input on the process, in general, I am certain he has very little to do with event logistics, which this would definitely fall under. I suppose my main other issue with that statement is that I fail to see where Dean/FIRST is doing anything that I would call hypocritical. If you would clarify what you meant when you wrote that, I would be glad to discuss it further.

The point of the Regional Chairman's Award isn't to let more teams go to Nationals, but it's to recognize more teams. I that this award being added has little to do with National qualifications...

I agree with those of you who said we should keep the current system for next year, but after that i definitely think we need a change.

Let me just be totally straight and say i hate the idea of "semi-nationals". If i have a good robot, i don't want to be stuck playing just the west coast teams. I want to be able to play against beatty and chief delphi. What is wrong with limiting the nationals to those who rank highest in the regionals? That way, with some exception, the nationals could be a match up of the best, most experienced teams. No offense to those of you on rookie teams, but you don't need to go to the nationals. Enjoy your regional. Get a feel for how the competition works. And if you manage to do well one year, then you'll get to compete against everyone else the next year.

AmyBeth330 No offense to those of you on rookie teams, but you don't need to go to the nationals. Enjoy your regional. Get a feel for how the competition works. And if you manage to do well one year, then you'll get to compete against everyone else the next year.

Wooaa, I ABSOLUTELY disagree with that. We are in our fourth season and I still remember the very long nights and lack of success the first two years at the regionals. Had that been all we had to look forward to, then many on our team would have been discouraged and might not have continued (including some of the advisors [not me though]).

It was the first trip to the Nats. that opened our eyes so wide to the possibilities and the inspiration, that they still haven't completley closed. I've spoken to very many teams about their first experience at the Nats and, to a team, they ALL agree that that was a defining moment in their team's development, where they were inspired to do more work, better planning/design and felt that they had a better idea of the "big picture". You can get much of that at a regional, but like it's comparing a new Chevy Lumina to a new BMW, they're in two different leagues.

Denying rookies the right to go to the nats, or basing it on performance alone would KILL this program for many fledgling, underfunded teams. FIRST's National Competition would become a venue for corporate showmanship and we would lose many of the very people we seek to inspire.

!!!!!!PLEASE don't think that way!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:(

the best solution.
 

Many people may not agree with me but its just my opinion. Don't think I have a biased opinion because I am a even numbered team, but I think the new system is fair. FIRST is getting too large for Disney, thats a known fact. So what else is there to do??? There is a good posibility that my team won't make to nationals next year because of the system, I hate that I'll have to miss nationals in my senior year, but I have to get over it. the even/odd number system offers everyone a chance to go every other year. High school is 4 years and its good to go to at least 1 national before you graduate. I apologize to the rookie team seniors who won't be able to make nationals. But I disagree with the idea of semi-nationals. Once you sit and think, this is the best solution. I haven't seen a better one yet. The only solution I can think of is finding a larger site, and I don't see that happening soon.

Just my $0.02.:cool:

Sorry, i didn't mean to step on anyone's toes. See, when my team started doing FIRST five years ago, there were no regionals east of detroit. We had neither time nor money to go to a regional, so we went straight to nationals totally unprepared and overwhelmed. There were so many teams there that we knew them only by their buttons. Finally, a couple of years ago they started a west coast regional and it felt like my eyes were opened. Finally, there was time to slow down and actually meet people and talk to them. It was overall a much more positive experience. So...maybe this is just me, but i look forward far more to the regionals than to Disney because i know that i will know peple there, and i will actually get to compete with everyone there. In the regionals, i feel like my little christian school actually has a chance against everyone else. I guess, then, i just wish other people could have as positive experience as me.
Sorry.

Agreed...

I do look forward to regionals, but I find regionals just as fast-paced and stressful as the national competition. That could be due to going to a regional with 66 teams ...

Oddly enough, I have found that I meet more FIRST people through the net or at Nationals then I do at regionals.

This whole issue is frustrating because everyone wants to see all the robots and meet everyone (at least some of us do). So the only options are to make Nationals bigger, split it up, or limit Nationals....Personaly, i tend to lean towarards making Nationals bigger some how or to limit it....

Relax, it will all get worked out. Comming from the Northeast (ny) where there are a ton of choices for regionals, regional dosen't seem like as big of a deal. Every year we have attended a different regional, its cool but not nats. For those of you who have been to nats, remember the chills you got when you pulled up to epcot & saw the SIZE of nats. Awesome, everybody should get the oppertunity.

That being said, for a average funded team (us) there is alot that goes into planning for the nats. Our first year we scrounged money & sent a small team after doing well in NJ. You just can't send your team after winning a qualifying event.

Furthermore it is wrong to base nats on # & past year awards. As you can read in other threads judges make mistakes. We would already be just about qualified for next year if it weren't for a ref's miss-scoreing. It puts to much pressure on success & that's not what FIRST is all baout.

Ask, and ye shall recieve...
 

While in your opinion, it may be "wrong" to base national qualifying on previous years or team #, this was actually a solution presented by some of the teams at the team forums in August. Looking at this year's competition, you can actually see why...there are some teams that, due to the increased costs of booking for nationals at the last minute, are not able to attend event though they have qualified at an event this year. Rather than make this an issue for EVERY team who attends, FIRST has implemented, at the suggestion of the teams, a system where a large number of the teams know well in advance that they are attending, and can do the necessary financial planning well in advance.

Using previous year for qualificatoin
 

How else do you propose FIRST does it? Like Nate said, its not really logical to tell a team 2 weeks before nationals that they are qualified. It is hard enough to get bookings at Disney when you try 2 months in advance. I think that using a points system and then alternating from odd and even numbered teams is fine way to qualify. I know your side of the arguement: that if you have a great bot this year but your robot lacked last year, why should you be disallowed to compete at Nationals. The solution: I believe that FIRST does allow some teams to qualify based on their current year robots if they are exceptionally good but I would verify that with someone else

I agree with you 100%.

When clueless/inexperianced teams lower the scores of good machines, everyone loses.

Now, is FIRST about teaching/inspiring people about technology??

Or is it about making everyone "feel good"?

We don't want FIRST to become like Public Schools, do we? Its a COMPETITION, meaning that good machines should be rewarded, and those that dont do as well should strive to do better next year.

(Whoa, Im going to make people upset with this one)


--Ben Mitchell

I diagree
 

You probably will make some people upset with this one, I'm not upset though(maybe because I'm not a rookie team :) ) but I disagree 100%. I think it would be an awesome experience to be able to attend a nationals, especially your rookie year, it gives you something to look forward to, though my team wasn't a rookie team last year, I was a rookie, and I really enjoyed nationals and look forward to it this year and I hate that I may miss it next year because of the new system. But like I've heard many FIRST speakers say "Everyone is a winner in FIRST". So I really don't think winning the competition is THAT important, sure it would be really cool to win a competition, but I think its just as fun to be involved in FIRST and attending the event.

Although we all like that...


If your not playing to win, why are you playing? The idea behind FIRST is that a superior machine (engineering) will inspire people to better their own robots, much like imporvments to modern technology.

What are the benefits of having an awesome team and robot if the Nationals, the highlight of the season, are open to anybody?

I think the Nationals should be a priviledge for the teams that proved they have excellent machines, and have their act together. Having lots of rookies is great, but in my experiance, they just dont have, through no fault of their own, the experiance that veteran teams do, and on average (AVERAGE) their designs are more modes, and their dont exactly...sweep the competition off its feet.

The nationals, I feel, would be more exciting if the matches were among equals, that is, the top tier of teams (the nats could be multi-tiered to include everyone).

Of course, everyone is a winner in FIRST, but what's the point of putting so much time and effort into a winning team if anyone can walk into the National Championships?

--Im truly, honestly, not trying to bash rookies out there, but from experiance, poor-preforming robots drag other teams down, and that, i feel, is the worst sort of punishment a team could go through--all that work, all the $$$, and nothing to show for it except 30-something place out of 80 teams, when a team preformed excellently at a regional.

Sorry, but once again, is FIRST that "everyone is a winner"

or is FIRST teaching them to constantly strive to better themselves, and to work hard to make it in the world?

I think the message is the latter. Utopian philosophy does'nt work outside of a classroom.

--Ben Mitchell

How are the rookie teams suppose to learn if they do not get to see the the more experienced teams up close and personal?

Yes, they could see some local experienced teams at a regional but there are so many more ways to build a great robot that I feel they should be at the nationals.

Besides just because a non rookie team has a great robot one year does not mean they will have a great robot the next year. Team members and engineers do sometimes change from year to year as does the game.

Nats should be open to all rokie teams and the best of last year. All others will have to deal with the odd/even thing. Rokies get a "free" pass, where they can go whenever they want, let it be the first year or 10 years latter. Then teams that did well the previous year can go to the Nats.

Try this idea-

FIRST develops 40 regionals across the world- spaced as uniformly as possible in time and distance so people can reasonably get to them. With 20 now that is not too far off.

With alliances of 3, the winners and finalists get to go to the nationals at Epcot = 6x40=240

All of the Chairman's Awards people get to go= 20 (someday)

The remaining slots are filled by teams winning awards OF ANY TYPE during the season. No awards count more than others. This would work by having all teams getting put on a list according to when they first register- first come, first served. At the end of the season the awards are tallied and pointed and the list of invites would consist of teams who won multiple awards first and also registered for FIRST first. Overflow positions are offered further and further down the list until all are filled. I figure we are looking at about 400 teams here, not all of which will make it.

Would this knock out rookies?- probably quite a few. But it would also insure that at least the 80 best ones (top rookie seeds) would have a shot. FIRST could offer more rookie based awards. It would also encourage teams to be active more in the off season preparing so they can register and pay up as early as possible.

It would also be fair to all in that EVERYBODY would have to deal with the nightmare of last minute arrangements. Only the regional winners would have any advantage over the pack by winning early. But hey- they DID win.

Of course the Championship could also be staged later or the building phase be staged earlier so there is a larger gap between the two for making travel arrangements.

Either this is a Championship or it isnt? If it is, ALL of the champions should be able to go. I propose this idea for 2004.

WC with my $.02