Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Not a dime of your registration fee goes towards the regional event--the event is responsible for raising enough money to cover the cost of the regional, without help from FIRST.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

I've served on the Davis Regional Committee for years now - And will re-emphasize Cory's point - NOT A DIME from your reg fees goes towards the events cost!!

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

I stand corrected. As a student, I have no idea what goes on behind the FIRST name, except what they ask of us.

The volunteer judges have a tough time on the field. They have to keep track of 10 moving objects at the same time. As the personnel standing closest to the field, I agree that with calls such as impeding, g22, bumping to pass, bumping while hurdling, etc. are totally up to them and will accept them as they are given. I commend them for doing their best at the difficult task.

However, the concern of confusion and "did I see that?" does not apply to rule g14 and other end of game rules. All end of game conditions are easily analyzed by looking at the field at the end of the game. Therefore, it should just be up to reading the rule book word for word, which isn't ambiguous.

"<G14>When the MATCH ends, each TRACKBALL that is at least partially supported by the OVERPASS and not in contact with any ROBOT of the same ALLIANCE will earn a 12-point bonus. If a TRACKBALL is in unrestrained motion (i.e. not in contact with another ROBOT) when the clock reaches zero, its contribution to the score will be based on when it comes to
rest. "

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

That's not entirely correct. At least, it's not correct that the regional sees zero benefit from registration fees. The fees go primarily to pay for kit of parts and FIRST staffers in NH. You know, the high up knowledgeable FRC officals that are present at every event representing FIRST corporate and presumably empowered to make important decisions affecting the outcome of the event.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

FIRST has enough money if they decided to pay the referees. If you look at the annual reports from previous years you can see that their "cash" account has increased by about a million dollars each year.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

True--but the RD and such are being paid regardless of whether they're at the event, so I wouldn't really call that an event specific cost.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

*coughs*
Not ALL the RDs are paid.
*coughs*
And I'll note that I didn't include RDs in my list of NH staffers paid by reg fees..

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Personally, I don't believe paying the refs is the answer. This doesn't guarantee good calls. What would help, however, is making sure the refs are people who have been a part of FIRST in the past, or have strong feelings for what the teams do and how much we put into this, so that they will make certain that the calls they make are the right ones, and will leave nobody (or, as few as possible) scratching their heads over why the rules weren't followed. Now, I don't know what kind of people the refs are (old team members, mentors, etc.), but to me, this seems like the best bet to avoid another SVR like this one.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Just as an FYI it has taken approx 1day 6h for this thread to double in length about 120 new posts, or a post every 15 min day and night. Is that a CD record?

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

I don't think <G14> is complex, and it's one refs shouldn't ever get wrong. Things like <G22> are "in the heat of the moment" calls, and should not be second-guessed. It's either a ball or a strike, and the umpire makes the call, likewise for impeding and crossing the plane.

Some of the posts here make it sound like there are an infinite number of obsessed, thoughtful, excited adults just hanging around eager to volunteer to serve at a tournament. Not true. The people who you really want are not going to be seduced by $50, $100, or even $250 paid to be a referee. They aren't going to miss work to go to New Hampshire for training, and they aren't going to be use up more of their vacation either (I'm not going to Boy Scout camp for the first time in nine years because I'm taking 3 days off work to volunteer at Seattle). No offense intended, but youth generally have no idea what sacrifices adults make to volunteer with youth organizations. I've been on the organizing committee for FIRST Washington for a year now, and I can tell you for sure that having too many volunteers is not a FIRST problem.

As for adding four scorekeepers (you would still need the two we already have at each event), that would be another four smart, dedicated volunteers who are already in such short supply.

Here's a suggestion -- each team is required to provide an adult volunteer for each event they attend. This volunteer will have attended two days of training for their job, and will have attended a series of conference calls. If the team's volunteer does not pass a 100-question exam on their volunteer job, the team is not allowed to attend the regional. That would certainly provide some motivation.:]

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Maybe, but it would need to deal with the game hint threads to get the record.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Doesn't this bring in some huge conflict of interest issues?

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Personally I place more blame on the game itself than the refs. This game relies too much on rules and penalties to force teams to play the game the way it was meant to be played. There need to be rules to avoid unimaginative and dominating strategies, but the rules in this game penalize teams for minor missteps far more often than score changing infractions. The refs certainly have a more difficult job than they ever had in the past.

I think 2004 was a good example of an adequate, but not excessive, number of rules. There were rules preventing goal-tending, blocking both corrals, purposeful tipping, and pinning that enforced the intended style of play without causing numerous accidental penalties.

I won't comment on who deserved to win since I'm biased, but considering how close it was, how large a role minor rule violations played, and the ref mistakes I think FIRST owes it to the blue alliance to let them go to Atlanta.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

I however can say who i thought won San Jose Regional championship seat. It was red alliance (254, 100, 115). That was the most intense finals set i have ever seen, but they came out on top, and i say that with no hard feelings and no remorse. Blue alliance put up fierce competition all the way through, and there should be no further negative comments. To the poofs: you have a great robot and a great team, and im personally honored to have played against you for so long. After getting the opportunity to talk to some of your students and mentors i have come to realize that you are a great team which continuously pushes the limits of what FRC robots can do. Unfortunately too many bigoted people dont have the guts to go up and talk to you and therefore just talk trash. All six teams should be proud of their accomplishments. I look forward to following all the teams progress this season and in the future. Thanks to all the teams and members for making this a great year.

Re: Silicon Valley Regional 2008
 

Jay, I agree that the refs have a hell of a job this year. I don't envy them at all.

I'm just as biased as you are about who deserved the win. But you know what? It doesn't matter. You guys won it. Cognratulations. You built an amazing robot, had a great alliance, and in the end, gave us more than we could handle.

I also agree with S. Bertsch. Finals were intense, you won, and we're very proud of the fight we gave you.

Hope to see you all in Atlanta.