The threepeat
 

I would just like to extend my congratulations to team 341 who has done it again! GREAT JOB guys, winning chairmans at Cheasapeake! This is the third year in a row! You guys rocked hard.

how many other teams have won chairmans multiple times?
~Aaron

Re: The threepeat
 

Team 191, the X-Cats, won the national chairman's award twice and is the only team to have done so.

Re: The threepeat
 

Team 79 won it at UCF this year, making it the third year in a row.
Team 236 won it at UTC this year, also making it their third year in a row.

Re: The threepeat
 

957 has won the Pacific NW Regional Chairman's two out of the last 3 years, we were told last year that you couldn't win two years in a row at the same regional but several teams have done it. 103 I believe won J & J Regional Chairman's twice in 2002 and 2003 and won the Championship Chairman's Award in 2003 also.

Re: The threepeat
 

Warning, This may offend you but please try and keep an open mind and carefully read ever thing I am saying and provide me with some reasons why or why not the system should or should not be changed.


In all honesty I think a 3rd win by a team in 3 years is a big slap in the face to all the other teams competing there.

Now I know I'm going to catch some flak for this one, but that was just my first thought when I heard 236 won at UTC. I love team 236 and all, but wow.. just wow.. Shouldn't we give someone else a chance?
(And for the record, my team was not at UTC so this is an unbiased opinion)

I know that The Chairman's award is the most prestigious award in FIRST, but this brings up a point.

Should last years awards be a considering factor when deciding a winner for non technical award from year to year or even event to event in the same year?
For us, we won the Radio Shack award this year at both Rochester, and NJ, which was quite a shock within itself, but the judges for these technical awards go by the results of one Regional, so that shouldn't be changed in my opinion.

I know that know one can not win chairman's in 2 regionals in one year if I am not mistaken, but why can they 2 or 3 years in a row. Should there be a limit before you have the honor to submit one the next time around?

There are a lot of teams that inspire and change the culture, and I think for this year at least the way things worked out, that the winner of the Championship Event Chairman's is going to be really hard to determine and I wish the judges the best of luck.

I'm not trying to say that the teams that won the Chairman's this year for the 2nd or 3rd time in a row are not deserving of it, but like I said.. I just saw it as a slap in the face to all the other well distinguished teams at UTC when 236 won it for the 3rd time in 3 years.

I don't know... This post may be deleted at a future time, but I just want to see what everyone thinks about it.

Re: The threepeat
 

79 has won the Chairmans Award 3 years in a row but not all 3 were at UCF. Last year they won it at the Colorado Regional. Heatwave (312) won it at UCF last year.

I do however agree with Elgin that more teams should be recognized. Maybe FIRST should do what they are doing with the Woodie Flowers award that a team can update their submission directly to the Championship the next year.

Re: The threepeat
 

The Chairman's recognizes sustained and continued growth in programs, and so just because you win one or two years in a row does not mean you have an 'automatic' for the next year. The teams change, the presenters change, and the judges change. I would expect that the teams that have won multiple times have continued to grow and expand their programs or they would be repeat winners.

Although the process is not perfect, I think the process works and I do not think the Championship judges could review 30 2005 regional winners and look back at 29 2004 winners and be able to determine a Chapionship Chairmans winner. It is different from the WFA due to the length of the submissions and the interview process.

Re: The threepeat
 

each year the chairmans award is given to the team the judges think deserve it the most, for that year.

How can it be any other way?

Would you not allow a team to win the regional two years in a row? If they won the previous year, should they be forced to sit out the playoffs, and let someone else have a turn?

To win three years in a row a team has to really be on fire, really doing something incredible year after year. Isnt that what the award is for?

Re: The threepeat
 

Two points I have to make on this.

1) A Chairmans award is yes the highest award a team can be honored with, but I also think that when a team wins it 2 or 3 years at the same regional then it is telling all of the other teams that they have to be better than that one team who is "on fire" as you put it. Some teams we know are great in spreading the message of FIRST. They win awards, they host mini comps, and they mentor FLL teams. No question that they are great.

But for another team's perspective one view is that they should just give up on Chairman's since this team is unstoppable.

Now, the other hand is the perspective of seeing this unstoppable team and striving to be as good as they are. (Same thing happens in the actual competitions to some rather well known teams who have won regionals and The Championship events multiple times)

2) Another thing I noticed, but I think the FRC judges are biased towards teams who mentor FLL teams and hold FRC mini comps. Every team does not have the resources to do these things even though they have been around for many many years. If that is a requirement then state that in the awards submission rules in the manual, if it isn't.. then I don't know..
But it just seems to be.

<Maybe I will see if all the teams who won Chairman's this year has mentored FLL teams or Run a mini comp. It would be an interesting study and prove a bias if one exists..>

No, and I think this is a bad comparison for one reason.
The game changes from one year to the next, but the main goal of FIRST is the inspiration of Science and Technology and that doesn't change from one year to the next.

BUT... I believe when a Team is deemed a Chairman's team then you are in fact giving them ammunition to go back to the community and spread the message even further. If that you give the same that ammunition every year, it kind of loses it's effect across the board to inspire Science and technology but in that one area where that team is from.

I just had a thought, but what if a Chairman's award winning team came with responsibilities. Just like a Miss America Pageant is not really a Beauty contest but rather a scholarship pageant and the message of the winner is to spread their goal across the nation (world peace, cure for a disease, etc.) FIRST should be a Inspirational contest and not all about the robots.
To do this, Chairman's award winners should be required to spread the message even further. Public Appearances, and everything else. When you win Chairman's this also gives you the ammunition to go to sponsors (new or old) and give them a proven strategy to help change the world.

Re: The threepeat
 

well

congrats
congrats
congrats

i also agree with elgin (not very often :p )

Re: The threepeat
 

I noticed this prior to the threads beginning and choose to not impose my opinions, because no matter what, all in all, there were judges somewhere at some point in time that chose X team over all other teams to be the Regional Chairman's Award Winner in year ####. It is above all, an amazing honor, and congratulations to all of them, as working with the students this year on my team, it is a long ... long process.

Elgin, in addition, if you pursue that, it would be amazing to see how many of them mentored other teams - more specifically "Rookie" teams.

Re: The threepeat
 

I completely disagree with the notion that a team should not win Chairman's more than one year in a row at a regional event. Chairman's is about what a team has done over their entire history as a team, and it should be awarded to the team that has done the best job at it, regardless of if they did the best job the previous year. Any team can when a regional championship year after year, it just means they play hard and build good robots, well, a team should be able to win chairman's year after year if they really do the best job at it, at the regional level.

Another point, Many teams competition for chairmans are working to win it at a national level, or at least that is how it is with the robonauts, and the only way to qualify to compete for nationals chairmans award is to win it at a regional. This rule was implemented in 2003. So if the best regional teams won the award in 2003 and went on to compete at the national level, but only one of those teams won it at nationals. The next year in 2004 at the regional level, the previous years regional winners would be less likely to win the award based solely on the fact that they had one it the year before(this going by the thoughts of some people on this thread and some judges). The winning team at the regional would be the 2nd best chairmans entry because the best had won it the year before, so now at the national competition for chairmans there is the second best teams competition instead of the nations best, discluding the teams like 79 that went to a different regional to enter chairmans with the sole purpose of having a better chance to win at a different regional than one that they had one at a year before. Taking all this into account this year in 2005, i would imagine that the 2003 winners will make there return after the torch was passed to someone else during 2004, and now they are once again fully considered not by if they won the year before, but by what accomplishments they have made as a team.

In summary, i feel that at the regional level, it is completly legit and fair for the same team to win year after year as long as they truely are deserving of the award, so that the nation's best teams may be represented at the national level, and compete for the national chairman's award.

Re: The threepeat
 

I think making formal rules saying that you may not win the regional chairmans two years in a row is unfair. It would encourage the most effective and powerful teams to slow or stop their work for an entire season and this would not be beneficial to the FIRST community.

However after winning a regional chairmans maybe next year that team should have to submit to another regional. Short of the regional in Israel...most of the time the regional chairman's winner is a team that attends multiple regionals or one that easily has the ability to. Moving to a different regional gives teams from the local regional a new chance at the award and also gives the winning team a chance to compete. Besides...it is always exciting to see a new face at regionals. :)

Re: The threepeat
 

I know that 234 tries to submit in different locations every year---winning 2003 in Phoenix, 04 in Chicago, and submitting 05 at UCF---

Should teams have to? No. Because to win a chairman's doesn't mean you have to have a lot of money. If you can only make it to one regional due to money, there isn't a lot you can do about that.

Don't really know where I'm going with this.

Congrats to ALL the winners...the students.

Re: The threepeat
 

Yes that is true but I think a lot of teams geographically have the ability also to just attend a different regional as their main regional.

Re: The threepeat
 

I couldn't imagine FIRST ever making a rule that you had to go somewhere else to compete for chairmans if you've won it before. Prior to this year, the robonauts have always only attended one regional and we have one chairmans there. It'd be an awkward position if we knew the only way we could continue to compete was if we went somewhere else, almost like we aren't wanted in our home regional.

When i hear the word Regional i think about the region that a team is from. It is my personal belief that with chairmans a team should represent there region when competing at a regional for that award. Traveling to another regional for robot competition is a different story, as it makes more competitive bots.... but traveling to another area of the country for the advantage of having a better chance to win regionals chairmans award seems very unprofessional and almost unfair to the native teams of that region. Here in Texas theres alot of open plains and areas where it is much harder to promote robotics education just because some communities are... behind... the technology curve, but teams still prosper, yet it is harder for them to reach out to other communities because things are so spread out and funding is harder and so on, but in Michigan huge industrials centers and a much larger number of sponsors and other teams, so a team coming from Michigan to compete against the Texas chairmans teams at the same regional isn't a fair competition. You should be awarding the best team in that region based on the conditions of that region, and leave it to the national level to designate which team has the best job across the whole country. Again this is only my personal belief.

Re: The threepeat
 

what about the teams from brazil?

Re: The threepeat
 

An exception could be made for them, seeing that they have no local regional. However, they usually attend one competition each year and that would determine where they apply for those awards.

Re: The threepeat
 

Congratulations to all multiple Chairman's award winners!

This is proving to be an EXTREMELY interesting thread...

We won the Regional Chairman's award in 2002 at the former Canadian Regional. As the first Canadian team, co-founders of the Canadian Regional, and provider of directors, mentors, volunteers, and many other positions required for FIRST to exist in Canada, I believe we were a well-deserving recipient of the award back then. Even today, you would be hard pressed to find Canadian teams and regional events who haven't had some kind of contact/relationship with Team 188 alumni. Just dropping names like: Mark Breadner, Ian Mackenzie, Karthik Kanagasabapathy, Lloyd Burns, Tristan and Jonathan Lall - should be enough of an example.

After 2002 however, our Chairman's award submission became a clean slate. Our Chairman's team actually doesn't use any material that appeared on our winning 2002 submission. It's as if our accomplishments from 1998 to 2002 never existed.

I've been VERY happy with the Canadian Regional Chairman's Award winners in 2003, and 2004. Both of those teams contributed huge amounts to FIRST in Canada, and were VERY deserving of their awards. Our Chairman's award submissions for those years were minimal at best, since we chose not to use any material pre-2002.

I'm not saying we would have won additional Chairman's Awards in 2003 or 2004 had we re-submitted our achievements pre-2002, but it would have changed the complexion of our submission dramatically.

Now are we doing it right? Or are we doing it wrong? Our team seems content in re-building it's Chairman's status from scratch post-2002. We now mentor other FRC teams directly, as well as 6 Lego League teams, and are continually producing alumni who move on to mentor other teams. We might be one of the only teams who's had an alum start a company and come back and sponsor the team... It sounds like we're making good progress!

But the question remains: Are we doing it right? Or are we doing it WRONG?

YMTC!

-SlimBoJones...

Re: The threepeat
 

So, Team Redabot wins Chairman's at the Magnolia regional in '04. They were well deserving of it because they had accomplished many things though out their history and spread the FIRST message. They host off-season comps, mentor FLL teams, 2 rookie FRC teams, volunteer at a retirement home, and teach a teach a science course at their local elementary school.

They didn't, however, win the Championship Chairman's in '04. So in '05 they re-submit to the Magnolia regional. How is any team supposed to compete with them? If they were given the award because of their outstanding team history, they will always have a year up on everyone else. As long as they keep up their program, they will always be ahead of everyone.

Team Blueabot also does a great job spreading FIRST by helping rookie FRC teams, helping FLL teams, and doing community service. Team Bluebot doesn't have the resources to host an off-season comp, or travel to another regional. How are they supposed to compete with Team Redabot? Until Redabot wins the Championship Chairman's, it seems almost hopeless for Blueabot.

Re: The threepeat
 

I need to throw in my own $.02 in this issues since we are a new chairman's winner this year.

Personally, if a team wins chairman's 10 years in a row, it doesn't matter, every team needs a chance to win champs. Sure, if they sit on their butt and keep bringing out the same old history, they shouldn't get it, but continued growth and development should be recognized.

Re: The threepeat
 

Yah I agree totally on that one. We won Chairmans last year and are going for it again this year at a different regional. We have continued to spread the message of FIRST and we can't just "coast" off of the previous two years. If a team continues their initiatives and continues to spread the message of FIRST, sure they can win year after year, just not at the same regional.

Re: The threepeat
 

this thread has taken a strange turn, given that the Chairmans award is there to recognize the team that is doing the most in the spirit of FIRST

this is starting to sound like a T-ball league (everyone hits a homerun, nobody strikes out)

Re: The threepeat
 

I urge everyone who has an opinion on the awards process to bring it to the end-of-year FIRST team forums.

The point here is not that the repeat winners shouldn't be rewarded for their efforts, on the contrary, they should, and deserve to, win a Regional Chairman's Award as long as they are building on their program each year. The point is that FIRST is now accomplishing one of their goals; that there are more and more teams who are of CA-winner caliber. They are out there emulating CA-winning teams. There may be numerous teams who are of that level "competing" for that award at a Regional. And the award process has some flaws.

Unlike the robot competition, which has rules to follow (the robot alliance which best achieves the goal of the game scores the most points and wins), the awards competition is subjective. You don't have rules to follow (in many cases the Award description is rather vague), you don't know who you are competing against, you don't see the submissions of the other teams so you can learn what is being done in your area and so you can learn from them, you can't sit in on the judges' interviews.

Perhaps there is a different way to recognize teams that are accomplishing FIRST goals - maybe by having one team chosen to be the Regional winner but also recognizing other outstanding teams from that Regional as well, "Regional Chairman's Award Finalist" or something.

I would welcome anyone with ideas for improving the process to e-mail me through Chief Delphi.

Re: The threepeat
 

The Chairman's award is an award to recognize the team at a regional that has done the most outstanding job of promoting robotics education and the spirit of FIRST. It's an award for the best and therefore I feel if redateam continues to work as hard as they can and expand there robotics outreach, they should deserve to win the chairmans award in 05 at the magnolia regional even though they won it the previous year. Its unfortunate for Blueateam because they are always at a finnancial and historical disadvantage when compared to redateam. FIRST does have other awards that recognize teams for there efforts in this field, such as Engineering Inspriration and Judges Awards... I'm sure blueateam would be dissappointed not winning chairmans year after year, but just like in all competitions somebody has to win the big prize, and somebody wont win it. It's a let down yes, but if Redateam deserves to win based on their outreach, they should win, regardless of past year's awards.

Re: The threepeat
 

Each year is a whole new year, just like there is a new game for the robots to play in there are new teams for Chairmans. Some teams who win chairmans at a regional in 04 and submitted to it in 05 didn't win, because there was a better team there. 341 won 2 years in a row at Philly, they deserved to win it both years they are an awesome team. They are not submitting to Philly this year, they did it at Chesapeake and Won because they are still an awesome team. If they did submit at Philly I think they could win there too ,since they are an awesome team, again as long as they are the better team. I hope they win it next year and the next year and the next year, if they don't win it at Nats. Just as long as they keep doing the great job they are doing of spreading the message of FIRST
So in the end i want to say, Congrats to 341 and the best of luck to you at Nats.

Re: The threepeat
 

Wow, this thread has changed from what I started it as, however I digress. I think that FIRST lets us win multiple years so everyone spreads the good word of FIRST and engineering and trys to do more and more each year. That is what chairmans is all about, getting out there and teaching and reaching like my good friend Bob Marley once said, Each one Teach one. I have no clue if this relates to anything , but whatever.
~Aaron

Re: The threepeat
 

I heard some organization use to give out a 'humility award' pin

and if you pinned it on your lapel, it dissolved into nothing

the chairmans award is sorta like that, if you set out to win the chairmans award, you wont

but if you do everything you can to promote the mission of FIRST, you will.

and if your only concern is to promote FIRST, it doenst matter if you win or not

right?

Re: The threepeat
 

1108 just won it's second chairman's. 2004-Lonestar, 2005-Purdue.

There is four regionals "near" us. The closest being 4-5 hour drive (St. Louis) and the furthest 14 hours (Houston). So we are not in a real specific region. Winning chairman's in Texas is part of the reason, besides distance, cost, and just developing new bonds with teams, that we went to Purdue. With the chairman's award as one of the qualifier for nationals it was our ticket to go this year. So eliminating that would eliminate a chance for our students to go to Atlanta.

We are a fairly young team..only 3 years. We have a good history but not compared to some like the robonaut (118) and some of the teams we competed with both at Houston and Purdue. I think judges must judge teams on a year to year basis and I think for the most part they do a great job.

Re: The threepeat
 

Why shouldn't a team win 10 times if they deserve it? Cyber Blue won in Phoenix in 2003, and then at Midwest in 2004. After submitting at UCF and falling defeat to KRUNCH, they was a strange aura about the team. Being a junior, this was the first year i had seen the team not win a Chairman's...but, I was incredibly proud of what our team had accomplished that was written in the Chairman's. Teams shouldn't do community service to write a Chairman's, but write a Chairman's to show off their hard work and service. Team KRUNCH is an amazing team, and congratulations in the three-in-a-row, you guys deserve it. I was on the interview team for 234, and I know how much everything that we do means to me. Why does a team need to win a chairman's to be happy with what with they do, with how they help? I would imagine that in a spirit of graciousness, a team wouldn't stay a regional too long to just keep winning, or wouldn't continue to enter in that regional...I think maybe we underestimate the heart that FIRST teams have.

Re: The threepeat
 

You may look at my team number and think this is a biased post, and maybe it is, but here's my honest opinion.

1.) The Chairman's Award is the greatest thing to happen to FIRST, period. By definition, the award goes to the team that embodies the spirit of FIRST and displays qualities that other teams should emulate. As the most prestigious award in FIRST it is the most coveted (or should be, in my opinion). The concept behind it is genius. You have 29 regional winners trying to catch up to the national winner and countless other teams trying to catch up to the regional winner. In the end, FIRST benefits. The Chairman's Award (and the concept of FIRST, of course) is the reason for the tremendous growth of the program. If teams really want to win the award, they will continue to do more to further FIRST, which helps get more kids invovled in the program, helps FLL, helps the disabled, helps the world, which is what FIRST set out to do. And if you look at the CA this way, the threepeat champs are good for FIRST. Teams will continue to strive to beat the perennial winner.

2.) Prohibiting the number of times a team can win the award goes against the spirit of FIRST. If these teams are continuing to win, it means they are continuing to improve. Why should a potential national champion be denied the opportunity to win it all just because they won a regional the year before? If this rule took effect, the eventual winner might not actually be the best in FIRST.

3.) Repeat winners are not just resting on their laurels. I can tell you from experience that there is no way we would have won a second or third Chairman's Award if we could not prove that we had done more over the past year. As the writer of our submission, I agree with the Canadian poster. Our 2005 and 2003 submissions are very different. We won in 2005 because of what we did over the past year, not our '02-'03 accomplishments. The body of work is impressive, but one must continue to build upon it.

4.) Winners are acting like pageant winners. I'm willing to bet that most champs are using their status to get more sponsors and give more presentations. Since winning for the first time, I know that our team has done so, and I think the others have to, because to win they must have the qualities to do so.


Sorry for the long post and sorry if I offended anyone.

Re: The threepeat
 

Purdue was great. the boilermaker regional was very well organized and very efficient. thanks to teams 1272, 1038, and 554 for helping us out in the finals. 1038 and 93, it was a lot of fun cheering with you. hope to see everybody in Atlanta!
-curtis shirk

Re: The threepeat
 

Almost, but no. 103 won in NJ only in 2003. Team 175 won in 2002 and also won the biggie that year.

Re: The threepeat
 

These two outreach efforts are awesome, but biased judges? Not true. Look at the Hall of Fame members:
103, 175, 191, 151 (and probably others) - no mini comp
Also 103's involvement in FLL was minimal in 2003 and was only one small blurb in a CA entry filled with "other stuff"
341 - a threepeater, runs a mini comp, no FLL, but you should see all of their other outreach efforts - many that don't require many resources.

Re: The threepeat
 

Right. Trophies and awards are very nice external motivators, but the real winning is in the effort. Always was and always will be. Inward satisfaction, in the end, is all that we can "control" anyway. We all learned that stuff in grade school, we just forget sometimes.

I'm glad so many care about the positive culture change. Congrats to ALL winners. Maybe you have medals and maybe you don't, but you know who you are and we thank you for your efforts. :)

Re: The threepeat
 

I encourage all who submitted an entry, and especially those teams who win the Regional CA competition, to share your accomplishments (see this thread) so other teams can learn from yours. I've been amazed at the wonderful things teams are doing!

Re: The threepeat
 

Maekin Magic has won the Peachtree Regional's Chairman Award twice and I think its good for them because they can get more community support. :)

Re: The threepeat
 

Team 74 won the Chairman's Award in 2001 and the following two years we submitted to Chicago because we didn't want to make it look like we were trying to dominate the West Michigan Regional, which is what I'm guessing many people are worrying about in respect to consecutive repeat Chairman's recipiants.
But the thing is, once you win, that doesn't mean you just halt all efforts to promote FIRST. Even if there was a limit to the number of concsecutive wins, that doesn't mean that a team just puts their entire promotion of FIRST on halt for a year, that would actually almost be counterproductive.

Re: The threepeat
 

Even teams that have won the award should never cease their efforts to promote FIRST because you are now ambassadors of the program and you should want to see the program grow stronger. Just because you made it to the mountaintop doesn't mean you don't want to reach higher and share the incredible feeling with everyone else.
I think all the Chairman's finalists should have their submissions on display at the Hall of Fame so people can get an idea who will take a spot next to the Chessy Poofs next year.

Re: The threepeat
 

OK here goes my opinion.

I feel that gracious professionalism has a lot to do with winning CA more than once at the same regional. I am not saying that the team that did win are not professionally gracious, on the contrary they very much are. I am just saying that if a team knows they did everything they could and will probably win but they have won before, they should let some other team try for it. For example, last year we were certain that we would win the CA for SoCal but we dropped out to give another team a chance. That coincidentally won us the Judges award but whatever. Thats just my honest opinion.

Re: The threepeat
 

It seems to me that this award is not as east as repeating last year so anyone to win multiple years deserves credit. If a team wins multiple years in a row then great for them if they win a regional multiple years in a row then they still have things to fix and make better since they didn't win the national award. They should continue to work harder because they just set them selfs up to the national level and should try to make the most of it. Any team resting on their laurels will be knocked down sooner or later by another team that is showing to the judges how they are year after year spreading the FIRST message. Just because a team has a great year or two does not make them a contender for the award. Also some teams are required to summit the award for funding (NASA Teams) and if they have won a regional they should not just quite since they already have to summit. If they are gonna submit they might as well put the effort into it.

Re: The threepeat
 

Okay. Well now that nat's has been over for about 2 weeks. I believe it is ok to win it multiple years in a row. This is for the best team there is. It is like the BEAST, they have won the Nationals Championships like 5 or 6 times. It would be pretty dumb if they were no longer allowed to win it because they had won it before.

Plus, if a team won it many years in a row, it is ony because they deserve it. And it would motivate my team to work a lot harder on outreach and spreading the word of FIRST.

Infact it has happened. The past 2 years, we have won the Peachtree Regional Chairmans Award (hoping to win it again to complete the 3peat). In 2004 we recieved an honorable mention for National Chairmans but nothing this year.

This has only motivated us to break through and make a huge push for winning th National Chairmans. This is after 2 years of work and not winning the National Chairmans. (This is no one's fault but our own, for not doing enough, and the winners Chesey poofs and The Hot Team for being so freaking amazing.) But this has kinda inspired our team to break through that low number mold and win this thing, so watch out for us next year.
I don't think any team really feels a slap in the face but infact it motivates them to do more and try the next year.

Re: The threepeat
 

Well, if a team hasnt won the "ultimate prize" (the championships chairman) but they do have success at the regional level, why should we say you cant compete this year for your larger goal because we want to give the other regional teams a chance? That would be just as unfair to the big shot as the little. I mean, sure 341 has won 3 straight regional chairmans, but they havnt won the championship. The last two years they have been a finalist, an honorable mention. That shows how good, and how close they are coming. But for us to say to them, "sorry, you cant make it all the way this year, wait 'til next" is just a bit cruel. I mean, what about the seniors who dont have a shot at winning that year?
Plus, the chairmans isnt a guaranteed award. You dont have to be a huge team to win it. Just because you have a big sponsor, lots of cash, hold an off-season, sponsor 10 lego leagues, and mentor 30 teams doesnt mean your going to win. In 2003, team 388, who is from a little town in the very southern tip of Virginia, and who isnt exactly a rich team, won the NASA/VCU regional chairmans. They dont hold an off-season. They dont do many of the things a larger team does, but they did show outstanding gracious professionalism, amazing role model characteristics, prepared well, and did the rest of the things the chairmans award is for. That proves anyone can win it. This year, they won Engineering Inspiration at NASA/VCU.
There have been plenty of repeat or threepear chairmans winners, but with the current rule of once you win championships, you cant enter again, you wont see a team win a regional every year for more than maybe 4 or 5 years, AT MOST. By then a team should be able to break through to the championship level. And even if they dont, if they can best exemplify the qualities of FIRST, dont they deserve the chairman's award?
Isnt the chairmans award about showing role model characteristics that other teams can emulate to better acheive the goals of FIRST? If you want to compete with a multi-chairmans winning team, why dont you emulate them? I mean, their characteristics obviously work, so why dont you blend them with yours? They win the award for a reason, so follow their lead, and become a better team because of it. Team 116 does that. We have adapted characteristics of the reports, presentations, and the teams of championship and regional winning chairmans teams, and this year we were labeled "Strong Contenders" in Annapolis (where we lost to 341), and last year we also came close judging from the single comment on our paper and full marks in all but one category in VCU.

Re: The threepeat
 

I agree with most everything else you said except for the quoted part. I believe that we will see a lot of top notch teams win regionals year after year. With the growing number of regionals and only one championship award, we see more teams win the regional award than can win the championship award. 30 regionals this year, so it would take 30 years for all of the regional winners this year to win the championship award. Many teams are going to continue to do great things and win on the regional level, but if there are 30 teams like any of the ones that have already won the championship award, then it will take a long time before they can all win it.

Re: The threepeat
 

But not all of those 30 teams are the teams that win a regional every year, so they would not be a valid point in this discussion. Ill clarify my statement a bit.
Of the teams that win regional chairmans every, or almost every year, you shouldnt see them win more than a few regionals before they finally manage to break through to the chairmans level. There are plenty of team with the capability to win one year, but do not have as solid an entry as the next. Each team may not rest solely on its past laurels. The other teams that register an entry at each regional will have worked over the past year, so the "defending" team must be able to work hard and fend them off. Not many teams have that ability to be the best every single year. And of the few that do, they should eventually merit a championship chairmans award.

Re: The threepeat
 

Wow - what a thread. I know the CA is the ultimate award, but don't forget its all about having fun and inspiring students. We're a small team of 15 students with very little funding, and yet did a lot of outreach this year like starting and mentoring two new teams, helping to host a local kickoff, and volunteering / tutoring in the local Jr High and Elem schools. We attended only one regional and submitted a CA entry. The students were very proud at what they did - unfortunately the feedback from their entry was that we do not have enough students, mentors, and funding. Sadly, the students were very bummed out - I think they forget that what they did was still amazing regardless of whether they win the CA or not. We will continue to strive our best, having fun, and doing the most with what we have.

I'm tempted to agree that multiple CA's not be allowed, but that's not right - those teams have earned it - and should be recognized especially if they continue to do so much year after year.

I'm just waiting for a Division A/B system to open up for some of these Awards (like what they do for Academic Decathalons). It's just hard to imagine that we'll ever be a huge team with lots of funding.

Re: The threepeat
 

There have been many threads this year about what it takes to win Chairman's. I have generally kept quiet on the topic, but I thought I would finally reply here.

There are certainly plenty of amazing teams that have yet to win Chairman's and I think their day will come. The point I would like to make below is that you can do this in a variety of ways, but that you must be driven by internal motivation.
To be a Chairman's team requires a look inside yourself before you move out into the community. I emphasize with my team to focus on the INTERNAL rewards of helping others, learning and having FUN!!! Every thing we do has to pass the "FUN TEST". Every project that we undertake has to help others or simply be for fun. We won't do something that does not meet these two simple criteria. If a team does this, then the external rewards, like Chairman's, will follow.
Our off-season competition Ramp Riot is an excellent example. We started in 2000 with an idea. We simply wanted to keep on playing when the season was over. The first year we had 7 teams in an empty gym. Our sponsor at the time, told us that they thought off-season events were not a good idea and therefore would not fund it. But we didn't give up because it was meaningful and FUN.
If you come to Ramp Riot, this November, you will find 28 teams and a completely STUDENT-RUN event that raises thousands of dollars. This is not because we are a big team, but because we had students that would not give up on a great idea. This is what legendary hockey coach, Herb Brooks called sacrificing for the "unknown ". You must do this on daily basis to be a Chairman's team.

Each Fall we step into a room of 40 students with almost zero in the bank and a whole lot of BIG IDEAS!!. What we do each year is take hold of these big ideas and find a way to make them happen.

So I guess my message is to think big, work hard, but do it because it is meaningful to you and will help others. That way when you look back on your year, you will never be disappointed.

Best of luck to all in the off-season!!

Al Ostrow

Re: The threepeat
 

I agree with Elgin Clock. My team, 342, has won the Chairman's Award at the Palmetto Regional for the past two years running. While I am very proud of my team for this accomplishment, I was very surprised that we won a second time in a row. Although I recognize that we may very well have been the best Chairman's Award team there, I cannot believe other teams like 343 and 415 did not also have entries as strong. If I were leading FIRST, I would institute a policy where teams could not win more than twice in a row at a particular regional. They could submit once a year wherever they want, but would not win at a regional that year if they had already won Chairman's the two previous years.

Re: The threepeat
 

The problem with that is that a team doesnt always have the money to attend another regional to submit the award there. And not allowing them to compete in chairmans at all is totally unfair, as I have expressed above. If you say a team cant compete at the same regional, it would mean they would have to travel elsewhere to submit it there, and not all the teams have the money to attend multiple regionals, or further away regionals. Especially if they plan to attend the championship event as well. And to ditch a regional you've had sucess at is a very tough decision. 116 was very hesitant to not attend VCU this year.

Re: The threepeat
 

Concise opinion:

If you are doing chairmans for simply the award, it is for all of the wrong reasons. The best people change the world without expecting immediate gratification.

Re: The threepeat
 

I would never even think about doing something like any community outreach just for chairmans or have that be the reason for me being at an event. When we travel to an elementry school and get to sit down with the kids who are staring at you in wonder and awe (i know it's cliche but eh) It puts everything in perspective, one of the greatest joys of being on 341 is goings to demonstrations and explaining the "brain" of the robot and how it works and watching the kids laugh with joy as they drive miss daisy. It is so awesome to see the little ones learning and being so interested with robotics, and I know because I joined the team because of a demonstration they put on and I was there as a youngster in middle school. We never do something to win an award and even if we dont win any awards it doesn't detur us and make us stop we keep on doing what we do because it is FUN and it is cool to see the kids so excited with something that is not as mainstream as sports or video games. I love demonstrations, for the reward you feel inside, no trophy can ever replace that feeling, ok I know this all seems cheesy but anyone that knows what I am talking about would agree

Re: The threepeat
 

Yes I know, but when a team deserves a trophy they should get one. Like I mentioned above, what about the seniors, for whom that year would be the last chance for them to get that award. Your not doing it just for the award, but the chairmans helps recognize your sucess. And it helps your team, and often FIRST as a whole. People are attratced to sucess. People want to join something they can win. And if you have won FIRST's highest honor, you are certainly a sucessful team. If you have that trophy/banner to show off at your outreach, in your school, or to potential sponsors you are more likely to get them involved in FIRST.
Visual attractivness is a key part of an outreach effort, and trophies are certianly eye catching and attractive.

Re: The threepeat
 

Any time a team does outreach they at the very least get their team name better known to the community. While yes trophies are cool and shiny, they have to be earned. I mean if a team such as my own which is "A Strong Contender" for the award at a regional going up against 341, this is to me motivation to really push to break past the "Strong Contender" to a Regional Winner. I think that doing things for the Chairmans award is fine. Isn't that why the judges give feedback sheets? So that a team can improve on their weaker points. Yes this coming year is my last year, and I am more determined than ever to get this, but at every event that I have gone to for outreach when I see people excited I want to do it again. I think Aaron is right in saying that seeing the impact is the motivation and fuel. (Most likely why 641 does so well every year). Also visual attractiveness is key in doing outreach, it doesn't have to come from trophies and banners they do help. There are other ways of being visually attractive but when a team is being successful and have tangible object people tend to give more credit to the team.

Re: The threepeat
 

we (1002) have won Chairmans the past 2 years (2004+2005) at the peachtree reigonal...

Re: The threepeat
 

I think recogniition of other strong contendors would be very good. Like the honorable mention of the teams who din't win national chairman's.
The idea that a 3peat shouldn't be allowed kinda make me think of it as this way, the Bulls won 3 basketball championships in a row (twice), therefore they shouldn't be allowed ot compete anymore. Or the Patriots created a Football dynasty with the 3 wins of 4 years, therefore they shouldn't be able to compete for it.
The Judges pick who they believe deserves the award. To me the award is an added bonus to the satisfaction you already recieve from inspiring kids to study in and pursue careers in science. I believe that a team should be able to win the chairman's award as many times in a row as they can. It is an award, It is given to the best. You just can't give that up to another team who probably did a superb job in their attempt to win the award but wasn't the best, because that wouldn't be fair at all for the team that was the best.
But I do concur with aaronD341. the work shouldn't be done with the intent to win the CA award.

Re: The threepeat
 

As a teacher/mentor of a repeat winner of the Chairman's Award at the Peachtree Regional I have decided to comment.

The Chairman's Award is about the changing of culture, being the team that others strive to be and making an impact on the future of not only younger children but your peers as well. If everyone would understand the real meaning of the Chairman's Award they should find themselves motivated by repeat teams. I know for a fact that teams at the Peachtree Regional have contacted me to see what we have done to earn the award for two straight years. I shared with them the work of the team so that they could work to compete against us. It is competition that makes you rise to the next level. We welcome the challenge of others trying to (knock us off) rise to the level that we have set for teams in our region. I do agree that this should be a region issue. We feared the possibilities of submitting our entry to the Peachtree again this year, but we felt that it would be a slap in the face of the team that does win that year. When you set a level of expectation and others are striving to meet or beat it you owe them the opportunity to be compared to you. By not submitting our 2006 entry to Peachtree we would only taint the victory of the possible winner and for that we did submit again to Peachtree for the third straight year. There are many wonderful teams that have raised the level of play for the Chairman's at Peachtree and this is how the repeat winners affect the culture. The Peachtree Regional ended last night and I was sick to my stomach about the chances of a third straight CA at the same regional. Knowing that some great teams had submitted this year (116, 1102, 1261, 1414, 807, 1648, and others) I was excited about the level of competition this time. We knew that teams were making great changes in their communities and that this might be the hardest year for a CA yet. During the awards I was nervously sick to my stomach as they got closer to the announcement of the CA. I heard them honor many teams that had worked hard this past year in their outreach and growth of FIRST and that just made me worst. At the presentation of the EI award they were making the remarks and I knew that the judges job this year was difficult. They awarded 1102 with the EI award for the second straight year (way to go 1102) and then I went into tunnel hearing. As Dave Lavery read the script for the CA I heard nothing else in the arena. The students had worked thousands of hours for this moment and as he read I waited with baited breath. As he started the part about what the judges said, I started to go weak and when he announced 1002 I jumped with excitement and then got dizzy and emotional knowing that the students had been rewarded for all of their work. This is why the CA is the most prestigious award and why repeats need to continue. I await the calls from the teams to find out what they need to do for next year so that again they can challenge us next year as we all raise the bar for the CA at the Peachtree Regional. And yes I will submit at the Peachtree again next year, I will not abandon my region and those who strive to challenge us.

sorry for the length

Re: The threepeat
 

Team 65 has won regional chairmans at Great Lakes in 2003 and 2005.