Re: GP? I think not.
 

I just think its rediculous that people actually consider teams going through and winning sometimes three seperate regionals, what on earth is going through their heads as they take that third win? I just dont see how that can be helpful or inspiring in anyway, even if you want to argue that it can be inspiring to some people, I think there are much better ways to inspire people than to dominate them after completing 6 weeks of hard work. Its just unnecessary.

Edit: this is almost a seperate argument, its unnecessary weather it has to do with student mentor ratio or not.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

This is a completely separate argument. If this is what you wished to convey in the first place, then may I suggest that a moderator split this post off and start a new thread?

Re: GP? I think not.
 

Split as per your request.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

Well you all have made me realize that is actually two seperate issues I have presented, turns out I am not completely stubborn.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

Teams that win 3 regionals one after the other in a single season are probably some of the most inspiring teams I've known. One such team is 1114, who by far built the most dominant robot in this years game, winning 3 regionals, going undefeated in the last one, not scoring less than 98 points in a match, having a consistent 36 point solo autonomous mode and winning the CA and WF awards on top of a few others. One of my favorite experiences last year at the Championship Event was going to 1114's pit and getting to ask one of their members all about their robot, how its arm worked, how the ramp unfolded (which was a work of art by the way) and needless to say I was blown away. If that wasn't inspiring I don't know what is. And if you wish your team could be like that, guess what, this team that is "dominating" you has posted a detailed document on the in's and out's of their program is run and how they experience the "success" that they do. I'm referring to Karthik's powerpoint presentation on how 1114 is run, which can be found here. Lots of amazing ideas and ways to improve any FIRST team are in this presentation, thanks a lot Karthik!

Mike C.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Attending and winning over three regionals has nothing to do with inspiring. If anything, it raises the bar and inspires others to be just as successful.

As Billfred said in a previous topic, I can only admire these teams and hope that one day, I can help a team get to that point.

If a team can raise the money to attend three regionals and the championship, while at the same time, build a successful machine that wins, I don't see a reason why they shouldn't use it.

You also have to consider the amount of support that teams (3 regional attendees) give to the FIRST community. 1114 comes to mind. They have started and helped out numerous FRC teams as well as find the time to mentor teams in FTC.

These teams should not be bad talked, they should be celebrated. I love watching teams do well. It makes no sense to lower the bar to accomodate other teams when we can instead, raise the bar and help those teams get better as well.

FIRST is a competition. That is why it's so much fun. I have nothing but respect for teams like 1114, 1024, 1503, 47 who continue to raise the bar. There is a reason FIRST has gotten huge in Canada and Indiana... these teams do nothing but aid in that progression.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

I was typing up a HIGHLY similiar post about 1114, but this conveys exactly what I was trying to. Winning IS inspiration (especially when the winning team is full of welcoming and nice people)

Re: GP? I think not.
 

I do hope that you aren't indicating that it is anti-GP or uninspirational to win. If that is the case, please see my post here

If you are not inspired by excellence, are you thus inspired by mediocrity or inferiority? You're saying that it's bad to go to 3 regionals and win them. Is it problematic to go to 3 regionals and lose them too? Would you say that "good/superpower teams" should not be allowed to go to multiple competitions because they may win? I don't understand how you cannot be inspired by the best.

I'm gonna take a long-shot and give you a sports reference. There are a lot of kids who play football from a young age. Most of them want to play 1 position: quarterback. And who do these people look up to? Brett Favre, Peyton Manning... the best.

You ask what is going through their heads as they take their 3rd win. I was on the HOT team in high school. We won a lot back then, from awards to regionals. What goes through your mind when you win that regional? "Ahhhh! All of that hard work, blood, sweat and tears, they've all paid off!!!"

As to your opinion on the student-mentor ratio, thank you for sharing it. Please note, it is your opinion. It is not right, it is not wrong, because until FIRST clarifies their position on the ratio, there will be no correct answer. I'm sorry that you feel that another team is doing things wrong. I normally try to be polite, but in this case I'm going to be frank; get over it. There is no ratio. This is not a science fair. The entire reason that FIRST is what it is, is that we have mentors to work with. Whether that means the work is split 50-50 or any other percentage, it's all legal and legit. I've seen kids who had 0% in the building of the robot. They gave ideas and drove the robot. And guess what, that convinced them to go to college and get off of the streets in the inner-city. I've seen teams that are 100% student built. They also had excellent inspiration of their students.

Inspiration works differently for different people. Please, I beg you, open your eyes and look at other viewpoints. Your way may work best for you. Other ways work best for other teams. Please, do not degrade the accomplishments of another team because their business plan does not suit your standards. What they are doing is not violating any requirement, nor any rule. Look through learning eyes, not through jealous eyes, it makes the whole FIRST experience better.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Well I think this topic is 100% opinion based.

Edit: agian the mention of jealousy, not seeing where thats coming from, I said nothing of jealousy just how I felt about this happening

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

I've been on both sides here. I'm an alumni of a team that can and does go through a local event undefeated or with one loss and win or take finalist. I mentor a team that has yet to make regional eliminations.

From the "dominating" team's perspective, it is inspiring--but not as inspiring as the build season. It's just icing on the cake (and a chance to continue the streak of not missing a Championship in 11 years).

For the team I mentor, it's inspiring to some extent. The team I graduated from is an inspiration to us. We just don't have the resources they do. We had fun at the regional both teams attended. We were a little disappointed with how we did on the field, but that gives us something to improve on for next year.

I think the inspiration works on both teams; it works in different ways on different teams.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

Not that they dont deserve to have that feeling of accomplishment, but three times in one year? each time taking that oportunity from an equally deserving team. If they think that them having that three times as oposed to as many deserving teams as possible having that accomplishment, then not to say I think its un GP, but I think its un GP.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

My rookie year in FIRST was 1998, with Team 188. Our robot was not very good. A lot of hard work went into it, but it just wasn't up to par with many of the other robots that year. That season there was one robot that was dominating everyone, Team 47. They had the first ever swerve drive in FIRST, and when the moved around that field, it was like poetry in motion. They won three regionals that year, being the first team to ever do so. How did this make me feel? Utterly and completely inspired. I wanted to be able to create something like that amazing Chief Delphi robot.

There are those who see dominance as discouraging. There are others who see it as inspiring. I fall into the latter camp. In every aspect of my life, I am inspired by those who excel. They give me a goal to strive for, and a model to embellish. Why be discouraged by the best, when you can learn from them, and try and become the best yourself. With some effort and enthusiasm, it really can happen.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

i agree with Karthik. we can all aspire to be as good as the teams ahead of us, which in turn give us something to be inspired about. the teams that make your jaw drop are the teams that everyone wants to immulate, and everyone wants to be like. i do not believe that GP was intended to be "roll over whenever you get a regional win" because FIRST is indeed a competition. if you are going to pay the entry fee, you can fight as hard as you want to for the win.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

To play devils advocate, if the other team were equally deserving, they would beat the 3 time winner. Being good does not mean that you should have to have less fun. What you're saying is that if you bring a robot that doesn't win to 3 regionals, that it's fine, but if you bring a robot capable of winning, you should only go to 1 competition. Does that make sense in your mind? Because to me, it doesn't compute to punish success by limiting their allowed participation... Or would you suggest that they intentionally not win? Please clarify whether you're suggesting punishing talent or encouraging match throwing for teams who excel

Re: GP? I think not.
 

What do you propose teams who have signed up to go to more than one regional and win their first one do? Throw matches so that they will lose? Not preform up to their ability, dragging all the teams that they are allied with down? Regionals are not won by one robot - they are won by an alliance of three. Are you proposing that if a team ends up in an elimination alliance in their second regional, having won their first, they should let the other two teams on their alliance down by intentionally losing matches, to let three other "deserving teams" as opposed to themselves and the two other robots on their alliance?

Maybe what's going through their head when they win their second or third regional is "we're so glad we helped these other two deserving teams on our alliance qualify for championships - we're going to have so much fun there."

Or, are you proposing that the team who won their first regional decline to participate in the other regionals they are signed up for, limiting their students to only one event, rather than the two or three they have paid for, have been excited for so that they can meet and work with new teams, and have been working towards all build season?

Maybe what's going through their head when they win their second or third regional is "wow, we're so glad that these students and sponsors and supporters who couldn't come to our first regional got a chance to see us perform to the best of our ability."

Somehow I don't see how either of these are a better option than a team winning multiple regionals.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Even if I'm an individual who chooses to dislike a "dominating team at a third regional," can I control the fact they are registered for the same event as my team attends? No, I can't. Even if I wish it was against the rules for them to be there, is it? No, it's not.

Can I control how I measure success with my team? Yes, I can. Should it all be about winning matches and events? No, not even close. Are you listening to your founders on this one? I hope so.

47, 1114, 1503, 1024 are model organizations. Multiple Chairman's Awards and a slew of other accomplishments are represented there. The cool thing is they're all rather generous and share quite a bit. So, in the end I don't get the point at all. What is there to be upset about?

Re: GP? I think not.
 

So because they can, they should. because thats apparently the way FIRST does things.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

Yes, if you are capable and competent, you should make effort to the best of your ability. Doing anything less is poor work ethic.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

And thats just where I disagree, they have already done they're best during build season.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Teams should work at being more competitive than having FIRST try to make everything level. Instead of saying they shouldn't be allowed to dominate that many regionals, maybe someone should make a robot that will STOP them from dominating. This is how competition works, it makes you better.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Well thats supposedly one of the goals every build season, but its easier said than done.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

Past this I'll bring it to PM discussion, but there's more to FIRST than the build season. Things such as strategy, scouting, on field driving... the all demand excellence. Strategy is one of my favorite parts of FIRST, it makes the kids think more than any other aspect. Heck, it makes the adults think!

If there were not value in both parts, if there were not "their best" being demanded during the competition season, it would not exist.

If we want to discuss this out more, PM me.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

I don't think any of us expected to win the regionals we went to.
Being a winner means you probably know how many things must
work in the right way at the right time with the right alliances
on both sides of the glass to make it happen.

If there is such a thing as a "super team" you must means the ones
like 1114 and 1024. Walk into our pit and ask for Qbranch and he won't
stop telling you about how to fix your autonomous. He will have a laptop
under his arm and be in your pits right until the last call before our
matches. I have seen 1114 at Midwest completely take a team
under their wing to help them in every way.

There are no super teams just good people having great things
happening to them. Believe me Karthik and his team as well as ours
can look back on a lot of good fortune to make the three in a row happen.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

Whoa, there! So what you're saying is do your best during build season and then STOP? What message is that sending?

If I interpreted what you just said correctly, then I don't know what to say other than: is that professional? Or gracious?

Re: GP? I think not.
 

I'm really confused. Say a team wins their first regional, what would you have them do? Not attend any further events? Stop trying? I'd like to hear your proposed solution.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

I was just making a point that if there comes a point when youve done your best, and youve proved your capable, beating a dead horse maybe? something along those lines.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

If people had this kind of attitude, would science or technology ever advance? If you can do it, then why not do it? You are only as limited as your will and efforts.

About teams winning more than one regional...
Teams choose regionals before they ever start building their robots. They do not choose regionals just to rub it in everyone else's face that their robot is better. A champion team is a team that competes to the best of its ability and performs excellently in the heat of competition.

Should a team throw a regional after they have won a previous regional? NO That's just unsportsman.

I am sorry that you may feel like you were ripped off of a champion win because a team there was better. Instead of complaining about that team, looking towards next year and seeing how you can try doing what they did to make your robot better would be more beneficial. It's good if a team has three regional championships. Three times as many teams get to see what a winning robot is made of and get inspired by that.

And yes...ANYTHING is easier said than done. It is those than stand up and take the challenge who are on their way to being champions.

Good luck and hope your next season is better.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Again dont know where this is coming from.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

No, if you are signed up to attend an event doing your best requires you to compete in that event to the best of your ability. Doing your best does not have a line where it is okay to stop, doing your best is not something you do when you feel like, doing your best is not something you do because others are watching. Doing your best is a way of life, it cannot be checked at the door.

If 1114 were at MN instead of GTR this past weekend and they left the A-team at home or put them up in the stands because they had already won 2 regionals I would have been disappointed and embarrassed. I would have been disappointed because everyone in that arena would be missing out on the opportunity to be inspired by the "simplicity on the other side of complexity" exhibited by their machine. I would be embarrassed (and maybe even angry) because such a team's respect for the level of their competitors at the event is so low that they feel their winning is a foregone conclusion unless they bench the "starters".

I fully expect any team that shows up to any regional I am at next year to compete to the best of their ability whether they have already won 2 or 3 regionals that year or if they are looking for the first in their team's history.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

I would love to play against a team that won three regional. My team (1629) actually did this year (1024 in buckeye). We beat them in our first semi-final match and i must say it was one of my proudest moments. Beating a team that has beaten everyone else, even if it is only once, is an awesome experince. I consider it an honor to get to play with these teams. I also have yet to meet a team that plays with a "win at all cost"mentality. Also think about this. How satisfying would it be to win only because the superpower stopped trying?

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

I have been lightly following this thread and its parent (it is time consuming to follow it in depth). One word keeps coming to mind when reading the arguments but I haven't heard anyone say it. I searched that word in both threads and no results. The word I am thinking of is:

parity

If I can just steer the discussion ( aka threadjack;) ) a bit and ask:

Do we need parity of competitive skill in FIRST?
If we need it, how would we go about achieving it?

I'll hold my opinions on those questions for a bit because I'm interested in other people's opinions on this. Here are a few of my subjective observations on parity. Parity does seem to vary significantly by game. The 2005-present 3 robot alliances seems to increase parity over the 2 robot alliances.

The NFL believes it needs parity for its fanbase, does FIRST need parity for inspiration?

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Not necessarily for its inspiration but why does everything about the way its run have to soely be about inspiration? I think this program no matter how its run is going to be amazing for inspiration, but then once inside theres no reason things like this cant change for other reasons.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

I couldn't disagree more. I guess you can either feel jealous about those teams and mope about or you can consider why these robots are good, and try to make one of the same caliber the following year, or even modify your current robot if you are competing at another regional. At times I've shared similar feelings that you have had, where I felt that our robot lost and our run was cut short by an unfair playing field. If you want, I have a somewhat infamous post you can dig up. A few years ago, I believed that overly defensive teams were ruining it for the offensive teams that really put their heart and soul into meeting the games challenge, which at the time I interpreted as scoring the most points. However, my team did not stop looking forward and compensated for our weakness with a modification we called "the magic foot". We learned the valuable lesson that defense is part of the game, to deal with it, and to not skimp out on the drive train (now we have an awesome swerve drive). My team was fortunate enough to make it to the championship our rookie year. Our team was also fortunate to get our asses handed to us on a silver platter (If I recall correctly we ended up dead last in our division). We got to see what the pro's did and what it took to compete. Without this experience, I don't think we have built the bot in this match
http://youtube.com/watch?v=z7fep3iJ5e8. (We are the fridge, ugly yet effective :))

Instead of complaining about the unfairness of the playing field, it would be much more productive to find out what you have to do to beat these super teams. Trust me, It can be done. Even if you don't succeed, well Isn't the privilege of getting to play with these teams enough? Your attitude determines your enjoyment and what you get out of the competition. Why focus on the negatives? And this is coming from a pessimist...

Re: GP? I think not.
 

...

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

The teams that have inspired me the most have been 1114, 71, 111, 47, 1024, 1503/1680, 217, 148, 233, 93, 118... etc...

What do they all have in common? They are GOOD teams. They win regionals. They take a challenge and they complete it to the best of their abilities. They are the guys that make me continue and that encourage me to try new things.

Not only do they challenge me because they are good, but when 1114 transforms from a robot into a ramp, 71 wins a match in the first 10 seconds, 111 shoots balls with near perfect accuracy while being pushed sideways in autonomous, and 118 swerves around the field with insane mobility and control, it inspires me to try to emulate there actions or better yet, try something even better.

Regionals are won by effective designs. Effective designs are cool. And cool inspires. Seeing a team win three regionals only makes me want to strive for a better robot, better sponsorships, better team organization, and in the end, I am a better person for it.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Considering this is a very opinionated topic there is not much way to argue it either way except to state scenarios and feelings about them, which will not get very far at persuading anyone either way. So unless anyone has something radical to say, I dont see this topic going much further.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

One thing I am curious about and have not seen you answer is what your proposed solution is to this proposed problem.

Would you like to see teams restricted to one regional event per year?
Would you like to see teams withdraw from other regionals after winning one?
Would you like to see teams show up, but purposely "dog it" and then decline any alliance selection?

Without looking for solutions, constructive criticism is really just whining.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Thats what ive been trying to come up with. The whole concept of a regional IS you only go to one, in which if you win you move on to the nationals. On the other hand FIRST isnt a normal competition, but I guess I would have to say yes, restriction to one seems to be the best solution. Most will disagree with that since weve alreayd figured out we dissagree on the part about if FIRST is meant to be fair or not. The way I see it is its a competition, if its not meant to be fair then it should not be one to begin with, perhaps we can just have extremely large robot party's.

I also see fairness going along with equality and equality going along with gracious profesionalism, I dont see anything being gracious without being fair.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

The neat thing about regionals, is that they ARE big robot parties!

My older son (college student) and I finally went to a regional where we weren't competing, it was a blast

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

I think there might be a problem with the terminology here. Whether it is fair, GP, inspirational, or fun to win more than one regional.

I have fun at regionals and my team has never won any award nor anything past the semi-final rounds of the competition.

I feel inspired by seeing some of these "super-bots" that look like a professional team of engineers made them (very few are completely mentor-designed, but that's a different topic). Talking to the students who made these and seeing how they did it is a great part of the competition. Seeing how clever some of the mechanisms on some of these bots are amazes me. The inspiration comes from simply looking at the robots and seeing how they preform, not necessarily how they do competition-wise.

I can see where the OP is coming from, because it's never a really good feeling when you know that there's no way you're going to win against one of these "super-bots". But I don't think that makes them any less inspirational.
I wasn't particularly thrilled to know that the alliance I was on was going to have to beat winnovation to move past the semi-finals, but I'll eat my hat (the black one that says "FIRST" and has the red/white lightning over it, if you were at the CO. regional, you probably saw it) if anyone can convince me that their robot isn't inspirational. (And I did have fun playing against them).

On the other hand, we must ask "Is it fair or gracious for one team to win more than one regional and thus prevent other teams from making it to nationals?"
I can see both sides to this argument.
If one team has the resources and ability to win more than one regional, they should be allowed to do so.
However, to reach nationals teams should not be required to be the best robot out of every entry at 3 different regionals. After all, aren't the national competitions for determining the best robot out of every entry?
Also, I think FIRST wants as many people to attend nationals as possible which is why they fill empty spots in nationals with teams who have not attended nationals.

Personally, I'd like to see teams only win one regional, but I don't think this is likely to happen and it would restrict teams from competing in the elimination matches at secondary regionals, which isn't necessarily something I'd like to see.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Restriction to one event...Fairness...Equality...Hmm. I see something here. Before I get to that, I think it's fair to warn you that you aren't going to like what I am about to say.


Fairness first. The world isn't fair. I know, it's a cliche. But, it's a fact of life. Live with it. FIRST is already trying to level the playing field.

Equality second. This goes with fairness. A legacy team =/= a rookie team. There are rookies that play like veterans and rookies that play like rookies. You probably aren't going to get this either.

One other thing before I proceed: You don't have to win your way to the championship. If my team wanted to go and there was a slot available, we could plunk down our $5000 plus travel and go. It's been that way time out of mind. In the early days of FRC, you didn't even have to attend a regional to go to the championship (known then as nationals).

Back to the main topic: Restriction to one regional. There are teams that are right smack in the middle of two or three regionals that aren't the same weekend. None of them is really their "home" regional. And they're all in their "region". (E.g. what Easterners often think of CA--there are FOUR regionals in one "region", plus two more in the area. West Coast teams think differently.)And you say they should be restricted to one. There are going to be some very annoyed teams out there. Or you get the teams with no regionals in their area. should they not be allowed to compete, or should they choose the closest one?

What I'm saying is, you need to think a little bit more. At this point, it'll be hard to change.

Back to fairness for a moment: Is the NFL fair? Yes? Well, then, why do some teams DOMINATE the NFL? Why are some teams never heard of except in their own areas or when they play those teams?

It is possible to be gracious without being fair. I could, in the most gracious manner possible, tell you that a match that you lost due to my bad calls (which are final) will not be rescored or replayed. That isn't fair to you...but I would be gracious. (I would, however, not be professional.) I think the term you were looking for is actually "just".

One further point about a one-regional restriction. Let's look at college sports for this one. There are conferences within college sports--Pac-10, Big 10, etc. Those are like the regionals of FIRST, correct? But every team in every conference plays outside the conference for at least half the season, right? And those are competitions, right?

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Attending three regional and being able to win each one is pretty cool. Our team has attended three regional before and use those opportunities to give the members on our team the chance to gain the ability and confidence to be able to do what they want to do. While being able to do this we still try ourselves to win at the regional we attend. This whole competition, this whole program is about changing the culture, changing the way people think about science and technology. FIRST isn't about the robot it's about learning how to be a team, a leader, the confidence to do anything you want.

So if a team like 1114 attends more than one regional I would have to say I am very happy for them. They give there members the chance to experience the excitement and acknowledgement of what it is like to be part of the team that works together as one. I think any team would take up that opportunity if given the chance.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Im just curious what you would want someone to do about winning multiple regionals... you want a team who built an excellent robot be punished for winning... if they go to multiple regionals you want them to be eliminated from the finals?? i feel that if they can let them do it and everyone could/would/should look up to those teams and try for the same in the future!

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

By the way, FLL has this same rule. You can only qualify to go to the next level at ONE event. (Barring Local Events only, as those aren't for qualification.)

Some people weren't happy when the rule wasn't clear at the start.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

I just did a little research on the blue alliance, and I saw that your team lost to teams 40 and 20 in the Boston Regional finals this year. Both of these teams won another regional before Boston. Is this the reason why you don't think teams should be allowed to compete in more than one regional? You feel robbed of something that would of been yours had 20 and 40 not been there? Are you proposing that teams 20 and 40 are ungracious because they beat you? You honestly think it would be more inspiring to limit the talent at your competition in order for you to win, rather than play 3 hard fought matches and lose in the finals, knowing you gave some great teams a run for their money? Thats not very competitive at all. I'm just trying to imagine how you would be proud of your "win" in that case. It would be like saying "Yeah, we really didn't have the better robot, but lucky for us, the better robots aren't allowed to compete at our regional, so we won!" Just getting to the finals is a feat that my former team was only able to accomplish once in its 11 year history, you should be proud of what your team was able to accomplished this year, and not take away from what other teams accomplished either.

Mike C.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

It saddens me to see that people want to dumb down the competitions.

For crying out loud, you are talking about a COMPETITIVE sporting event. This is not pinewood derby. This is not a science fair. This is a sport, and in sports there are winners and losers.

Before I joined 254 I was on a team that did not enjoy much success on the field. While I was on 100 we had a good robot, a couple mediocre-average robots, and one god-awful robot. We made the eliminations only 3 times in my 4 years. Statistically speaking our best season was my senior year, when we were Silicon Valley Finalists, despite having one of the worst robots I have ever laid eyes on.

Even when I was on 100 I wanted to play with or against the big boys. How do you make yourself better if you aren't practicing and competing with/against the best of the best?

I'd have been angry if we weren't able to play with and against those teams because they had already won an event. What's the fun in knowing that the field of teams is being handicapped?

It's easy for me to say this now, as my team has won two regionals per year all three years I have been a mentor, but even now I am continually inspired by teams like 1114 who construct machines which totally dominate.

Sometimes it is shocking how simple some of the top machines are. For example, 90% of FIRST teams could build robots similar to 330's. They really are very simple, yet they perform better than 90% of the robots out there. This tells me that all teams have something they can learn from the elite teams, and apply to their own robots without much difficulty.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

If the other team was equally as deserving, why didn't they win? Why didn't they beat the team that had already won once?

I don't see what you are asking the successful team to do. Once a team wins a regional, then the only way they can avoid winning another is to either withdraw from subsequent regionals, or throw matches in their next regional so as to deliberately lose. The latter would be incredibly uninspiring, ungracious and unprofessional, especially to the alliance partners in those matches who would also be losing the games.

Please re-read Beth's message #8 - she said it much better than I could, and rep is coming her way.

Edit: It appears others had the same thoughts as I. And I see in a later post that you advocate teams only being allowed to attend one regional. Following this logic, Tiger Woods should be allowed to enter one single golf event all season long, and only if he wins that event, would he be allowed to go to the Masters (or whatever other tournament is decided as the championship for golf, I don't follow it that closely) to play against other champions from the rest of the golf tournaments that year. That would be seriously uninspiring for golf fans. The same thing would happen if FRC teams were limited to one event - although if the program continues to grow, that might become real eventually, but I digress. I feel a bit less inspired this year because GLR and GTR were on the same weekend, and I didn't get to see 1114 in person. I suspect my inspiration will be restored in Atlanta.

Have you ever talked to any of these super teams? Have you ever asked them for help? 1025 is around today only because of the tremendous help we got from a super team, the ThunderChickens, for an entire year. Team 903 was able to compete in Detroit only because of the help they got from multiple teams (many of them super teams) to rebuild their robot to comply with 2008 rules, and then they went on to be an alliance captain at West Michigan. The help the super teams give is inspiriing on its own, beside the inspiration they provide on the field.

You might also be interested in this post: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...559#post729559

Re: GP? I think not.
 

If these teams were spending all of their time and resources on ONLY winning events, there might be a grain of validity to what you are alluding to here. However, these teams and many more like them who are perennial "winners" spend an awful lot of their time helping other teams out (mine included) all year long.

And let's look at the big picture. FIRST doesn't exist for it's own sake at all. Students carry skills and life experiences into school/job interviews, not trophies. We exist to try and provide a better future with an understanding of how technology, innovation, and invention can be utilized for creating more win-win scenarios in the world today. How on earth are we going to prepare the next generation to solve the world's most difficult problems in a socially conscious way by artificially setting the bar lower?

Woodie Flowers himself, perhaps the only person on the planet who has the kind of perspective required to really make these kind of "gp judgements" (although you'll never catch him doing it) says flat out that what we do is "not sticky sweet," instead he admits it's "...really, REALLY hard."

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

as being part of what could be called a "power team" i feel like when we go to a regional, i can feel that teams look up to us. when someone comes up to us and says "Gosh you have a great robot!" that excites us and keeps us going, and it makes us want to build a better robot year after year.

our team has not won multiple regionals in a season since 2002. we won peachtree this year and then went to palmetto. team 342 picked us to be on thier alliance. we already knew that we got to go to atlanta, but they picked us because THEY wanted to go to atlanta. we did not only play for ourselves and make our team look better, we played so that we could try and help out our alliance partners get the same winning feeling as we had at peachtree.

so what do we tell the teams that want us to help them win? "No thanks, we already won a regional"? i dont think that that is graciously professional to not help another team because you have already won.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

I wasnt aware that team 40 had also won one. People have brought up this point of jealousy many times, and as I said before I dont beleive ive made any of these topics personal at all, I havent spoken of my team once, im doing my best to speak from a completely outside point of view. But since you must, my team did great anyways, the finals was as far as Ive ever gotten, so Im happy.

edit: (outside, not objective, I am taking a stance on the situation)

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

We competed in AZ where team 39 dominated. We knew we would meet them again in Las Vegas. We were on the opposite side of the field in a qualifying match. Although our robot can score "pretty well", we knew we would lose in a shoot out with 39, so we played defense and won the match.

In the final match we were opposite 39 and undefeated 987 and 1013. We could not shut down two high scorers. Even our scouting program's match simulator predicted a defeat for us.

We would have been disappointed if we didn't have a match up with some of the best robots of this year. Winning a regional where the best were not allowed to compete would be a lesser victory. Our varsity team does not want a victory in a competition where the best were excluded. We want to compete with the best, because if we ever win a regional, we want want to know that our alliance beat the best alliance.

We went to three regionals this year, but at the Los Angeles regional, we only took our girls. Multiple regionals mean more opportunities for more members to drive, work the pits, etc. Same robot, different team. More experience for more people.

FIRST will never be a equal-for-all competition. That's the fun of it. Someday we may beat the "best".

Allan

Re: GP? I think not.
 

If it was teams that dont normally win going to three differne tones and having an amazing year, then thats a good accomplishment they should be proud of. But there are some teams that they KNOW they are good and they KNOW chances are very high for them to win, and they know theyve had numerous wins in the past, so I dont see why its necessary for them to plan on going to multiple regionals, wiht it being understood chances are very high that they are going to win probably more than one of them.

and THANK YOU to all those who give me bad rep for a having a different opinion than yours, very, very nice. love it.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Is that fair for a team to win multiple times and let other teams stand in second place. I believe if you win one regional you should not be allowed to win a second one. That way everyone can compete fairly. If they want to compete again go to the finals or world championship.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

So you really think that If it was your team that had won three regionals, if your team was in the position of a team like 1114, that you would still hold this position and this thread would even exist? Regardless if you haven't explicitly mentioned your team or not, our own experiences have a great deal of an effect on our viewpoints. You wouldn't be complaining (objectively arguing?) If your robot was the one winning three regionals, thus it is not unreasonable to come to the conclusion that to some extent, your arguments stem from jealousy, whether you want to admit it or not. It is not a bad thing to be jealous of the accomplishments of other teams, but instead of trying to bring them down by claiming they are being unfair or unGP (sure thats a word :p), like I said before, you will get much more satisfaction out of finding out why those teams are so successful, (just ask them, I'm sure they will be glad to tell you), and emulate their successful model which will likely lead to success of your own team that you can take ownership of. It comes down to a choice of whether to look at these teams as a source of inspiration and an opportunity to learn, or to take a negative viewpoint and tear them down. These viewpoints extend beyond FIRST and to the real world. At CMU, I have had the opportunity to listen to some very inspiring speakers and they have shared their sources of pride, joy, and happiness. Guess which viewpoint they held.

I suggest listening to this.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...31505846055184

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Here's my take on the subject I do not think that teams should be able to compete in two or more different regionals. From what I saw some teams, who are already are going to nationals, still compete and then win (again). I believe that there are several possible advantages to the teams that do this:

1. More practice time with the robot
2. More time to implement new ideas/code
3. More chances to win/move on to nationals

I think we should limit teams to only one regional, or if a team wins at a regional and is moving on to nationals they should not be allowed to compete in another regional. Also I believe that even if you announce that any team can attend any number of regionals that will give the more experienced/older teams a better advantage because they have time to more fully develop a strong budget to accommodate travel expenses.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

dont underestimate how hard winning a regional is. i dont think anybody should go into a regional and say that they are going to win it. a lot more goes into winning a regional than the individual robot performance. banking on being able to win the one regional you go to is a risk that most teams wont take if they can help it. 67 and 1114 were supposed to run away with GLR last year, and they lost in the finals. arguably the best two robots at the regional were together and still lost. both teams would have been dissapointed if that was the only regional that they got to compete in because of the amazing robots both had.

EDIT: please stop giving DanTod a bad rep just for a differing of opinion... thats not cool. even if they are just dots.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

I'm missing something, y'all help me out.

a. why does FIRST have to be fair?
b. if it has to be fair, where do we start?

- do we make sure every team has a trailer to haul their robot?
- do we make sure every team has a well equipped shop?
- do we make sure every team has funding for travel or has equal access to funding and sponsors? How do we do that?
- do we make sure that the teams are the same size?
- do we make sure the teams all do the same outreach?

I genuinely want to know why and how but my opinion in this without knowing those answers is that when we go for the fair thing, we start setting limits. Those limits start setting boundaries. Those boundaries start denying access. Lack of access starts impacting development, growth, and innovation.

Like I said, I'm missing something.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

It is an unreasonable conclusion. Its like your trying to tell me how I feel which im pretty sure is not possible, and all it does is attempt to lower the significance of my opinion.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

I believe some well thought out limits can actually benefit devopment, growth, and innovation.

And no FIRST does not absolutely have to be fair, but I think if it is as much as possible without putting harmful limits, it can only add to the fun of the competition.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

You keep stressing that you aren't jealous, but that just points to something else that you seem to be missing out on. It's not just what you do that should be inspiring you. It's what others do as well. Am I jealous of the Simbots? You bet I am! I don't just want my team to beat them. I want my team to be them.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

But being them, and being an amazing team, doesnt mean you have to win multiple seperate regional competitions in one year.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

indeed it does... or at least winning one (depending on how you view success)

Re: GP? I think not.
 

Synopsis:
If you don't have a "good" robot, you can go to more than one regional.
If you have a "good" robot, you can only go to one regional.

You call this "fair"?

I'm from a team that goes to three regionals every year, yet has never won a single one. If we happened to make a 1114 status dominant robot with a lot of hard work and a lot of luck, and we win our first regional, then we forfeit our right to play in the other two regionals? Or since we didn't have a "history of dominance" we can still compete in the other two regionals?

Honestly, If I had a robot I loved to watched compete, and I knew if I won the first regional, I wouldn't be allowed to compete with it again at the other regionals, I wouldn't try to win. I'd probably make it to the finals and then give up, because I know I could win, but playing again will be a lot more fun than getting a little trophy and ending our season early.

Mike C.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

Ok, I'm going to yet again try to keep this solutions oriented. What types of limits would you like to see (if any other than a 1 regional limit)?

Also so that I add something to the thread, I'm going to share a little anecdote about teams attending multiple regionals. My team attended the MN regional last weekend. There were a number of teams there that had already competed (including 1 that had won and 3 that came close). One such team was Team 93, N.E.W Apple Corps. All weekend their pit was practically empty. There was always a person or two inside to give you a part if you asked (I often wonder if their tool chest is magic). Where were all their students you might ask? They were in other pits working on other robots for practically the entire weekend. I noticed similar behavior from most of the other veteran teams that had already competed. These "powerhouse" teams have much to share and limiting the number of regionals they can attend also limits the number of people they can help and I think that does limit development and growth.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

Winning two regionals in a year is exceedingly rare. This year 14 teams did (less then 1% of all teams). In fact, there are only two teams that won 2 regionals this year, and also won 2 regionals any time in the previous three years (254 and 1114).

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

For the sake of argument, let's say that you do limit dominant teams to one regional. Who does this hurt?

1. The students on that team. Why should they be denied the opportunity to get just as much inspiration as those on other teams?

2. The students on non-dominant teams. Those student would all of a sudden not be able to benefit from the help of the dominant teams. They would never be given the jump start that they need to better themselves and their team.

3. The students on all other teams. When a team comes up with something innovative, everyone in the program should have the right to see it up close and in person.

4. FIRST itself. Something special happens when more than one dominant team is on the field. The game is played as it is supposed to be played, and the matches become extremely exciting. Teams (dominant or not) will play to the level that they need to in order to win. When playing against someone that's better than you (in anything), you inherently make yourself better. This is just a fact of life. Ratcheting this bar up year after year benefits everyone. Imagine a person off the street walking in and seeing 6 boxes on wheels spinning in circles. Personally I'd be pretty bored and would give up on it quickly.

5. The mentors on all teams. I can't think of a single mentor that has shared the opinion that you bring up in my 7 years in FIRST. Most mentors thrive on being able to see cool designs brought forth by dominant teams. Why? Because cool designs are inspirational and key to making your own designs better.

The list can probably go on and on.

A lot has been said in this thread and I don't want to rehash anything, but take a deep breath and think about it from all perspectives. Successful teams are needed for any sporting event to work. Successful teams are needed in FIRST to better everyone. Limiting or diminishing their roles is both disrespectful to the team and detrimental to the program.

Re: Winning Multiple Regionals
 

1. I dont see how winnig multiple regionals is needed for inspiration to take place.

2. There are planty of other teams that can help at any given regionals, they dont have to have already won one.

3. Either way everyone is not going to see every robot, nor do they need to.

Im not saying teams shouldnt play teams they are better than, they jsut dont need to go to and win multiple regionals.

Even with teams not going to different regionals, im sure there are plenty of cool designs at each competition for the mentors to see.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

So a team is supposed to evaluate whether or not they are 'good'?

"Hey guys, I think we're pretty awesome this year. We'll probably win everything. Let's just not go to another regional since we're going to dominate anyway, okay?"

The truth is that NO team - I don't care how long they've been in the competition or how well they've done during their tenure - knows what is going to happen until they put their robot on the field for the first time at their first event. How egotistical and selfish do you take these teams to be?

Out of the list of robots that has been quoted over and over here as being some of the elite teams in FIRST, I can name a season for each of them where their robot was mediocre or sub-par. That's just how it works. Nobody can be 'on', all of the time. The repeat years you're talking about where a team may win more than one regional or where a team wins Championship more than once is luck and ingenuity - it takes practice, it takes time, and it takes a group of students who are willing to really work to make it happen.

No problem. It's not judging your opinion - you've long passed the line of what could be considered your opinion. Your logic is flawed. Your logic is what they're neg repping - because you've contradicted yourself repeatedly, argued the fine points of what has been beaten to death previously, and made your team look like sore losers (regardless of whether you mention them in these threads, you're representing them on this forum whether you like it or not).

If a student of mine came up to me and expressed these opinions, we'd have a long talk together about why they are in the FIRST program, what it means to them, and what they hope to accomplish while on the team. We'd talk about what it means to be a gracious competitor and how to act professionally both on and off the field.

Here's the point - everyone seeks inspiration in different ways. It appears that FIRST is not giving you the inspiration you seek, based on the opinions and logic you have attempted to express here. Walk away from the keyboard, sit down, and think about what you've said and what others have said before you post again. Posting from emotion is getting you little to nowhere, and giving people a negative impression of whom I'm sure you are. Yes, you have points. Yes, we understand them. However, in trying to talk to you about them, you're throwing up defenses.

Think about what I said. And if you have nobody to talk to about the conversation I detailed above, I'd be happy to give you a call and let you vent. Really.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

I completely disagree with this and am going to take it as an insult because thats clearly what it was meant for.

Re: GP? I think not.
 

And that calls for this thread to be closed too. It will re-open once people have a chance to read all of the responses, gather their thoughts, and come up with some new content to add to the discussion.

Let's keep the discussion of this topic in this thread .. so please do not create another thread to talk about winning multiple regionals.

Moderators: unlock no earlier than Sunday, please.