Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I have a few thoughts on this. I have been pondering this one for a while now. When our teams first started we only had the money to attend one regional and build a robot. A few years into competing, we got enough money to build the robot and attend both a regional and nationals (championship). And now we have the sponsorship to attend to local events and nationals. (There have been a few years, like this one, where we have attended 3 regionals and championships.) It's all about getting the sponsorship and the funding, and teams should not be limited, if they have the funds, well them let them compete at multiple regionals.

It is in my opinion that if a team has enough money to attend more than one regional and championship then let them. As well I think if a team wants to compete at a different regional out side of their "region" then let them. For some teams, their "home" regional is not within an hour or so of where they are from. Like us, a team from PA, our "home" regional is Jersey, and will always be Jersey. It was the first regional we ever attended and it will always be our home. (Thanks Jersey for making it our home, we love playing with you guys!) Also, for a team like Miss Daisy (correct me if I’m wrong here), they always attend the Chesapeake regional in addition to the Philly regional. Now, Chesapeake is about 3 hours from them and yet I’m sure they feel at home when they go there cause they have been competing their for a while now.

Allowing teams to compete at different regionals every year is all apart of the fun. It opens up a new realm of opportunities and allows teams to compete with teams they may not have competed with before.

Well, that’s my 2 cents and what I think about competing out side of your "home" and "region" and competing at multiple regionals.

P.S. I previously mentioned getting sponsorship and funding to "play the game" in FIRST, so if any teams reading this need help attaining the sponsorship, please drop me a note and we (my team and I) can help you out in that department. FIRST is all about partnership and helping others, and so if you are a team that needs help, please contact us, we would be more than willing to help.

Cass

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

No, I don't think that I have. And for you to make assert such a broad and sweeping misrepresentation of what I wrote is seems just a bit presumptous.

I read exactly the same FIRST mission statements that you read. I attempt to inspire students and instill in them a gut-level understanding of the value of leadership through service to others, excellence for its own sake, expanding an appreciation for the value and role of STEM in our communities, and collaboration right up until the moment of competition.

But - My observation was not about what I or you individually do or do not think or do - My observation pointed out the obvious fact that at the World Championship and at regionals, the audience, teams and the event organizers devote much more time, ceremony and public spectacle to determining which machine/team wins on the field than they do to the competition for the Engineering Inspiration and Chairman's awards. In that way our/FIRST's actioins speak far louder than words.

Those are fine, interesting words; but they are not the words that were used over and over again by announcers, and they are not the words on the banners, and they do not describe the metric that separates the Winners from the Finalists on the Einstein field.

If you want to disagree with my observation, cite some evidence that team make-up and giving back is celebrated (much) more than winning on the competition fields.

I didn't say that makeup/giving isn't celebrated at all or that it shouldn't be celebrated more. What I said was that I disagreed to a large extent with the following assertion and I then cited evidence to back up my claim.
And, again, I didn't say that we shouldn't measure teams by their conduct, etc. I observed that right now, to a very large extent, our actions seem to be attaching more importance to other measurements (i.e. regional and world wins)

I hardly think that you have evidence that justfies saying that I have completely missed the message of FIRST. I think what I have done is noticed how that written message seems to be out of synch with the actual message(s) FIRST tournaments are delivering.

Blake

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I'll agree with the "public spectacle", but I'll temper it by saying that it's because the robot competition is concentrated into brief matches involving very few robots at a time. The other awards have at least as much time devoted to them, it's just spread out much more evenly across both public and private contexts. And if you look closely at the teams who win the Chairman's Award, I'm convinced that you'll find that they put more effort and time into the activities that earned them that award than they do into building and competing with a robot.

Note that the Chairman's Award banner is just as large as the one given to the winner of the final robot match, so the "big banner" observation is irrelevant.

Here's some evidence for you: Chairman's Award-winning teams are installed in the Hall of Fame, and they are invited back to the Championship in perpetuity instead of just for one year.

It is my experience that, with rare exception, teams that consistently embody the larger FIRST principles of inspiration, partnership, leadership, gracious professionalism, etc. are more remembered and celebrated than teams that merely consistently field winning robots.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Dean has said it from day 1, the competition is a vehicle, we are supposed to be able to look at the competition and realize there is more to it than robots running around the field and a champion being crowned.

Alan has already pointed out that the winners of the chairmans award at championships are put into the hall of fame and invited to come back to championships FOREVER. The winners of the whole entire thing? They can come back for 1 year, but thats it. Teams covet a chairmans award. Tell someone familiar with FIRST that you won a regional and they will congratulate you, tell them you won a chairmans award and they will celebrate you.

Its in the eye of the beholder...as mentors it is our job to let our students know that winning a competition is not everything.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Here is the thing:

No matter how many regionals you go to, your overall probability of getting to nationals stays the same.

one regional - 3/50

two regionals - 6/100

three regionals - 9/150

and so on.

-Vivek

(sorry if this was already mentioned)

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Actually, it's more like 5/50. (Rookies have maybe a 1/10 additional, depending on how many rookies.) If you aren't submitted for CA, 4/50.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Word.Consider the robots: being mere machines, they lack the capacity for partnership, leadership, and gracious professionalism. All they can contribute to FIRST is inspiration, though the qualities embodied in their design and construction, and through their winning performance on the field of play. That contribution is very important -- without it FIRST could not be what it is -- but, as Alan points out, it is not enough.

Teams are made up of humans, and therefore have the capacity to embody all of the larger principles of FIRST. Being more than machines, we share a duty to strive for that goal.

Back to the main topic. My team has attended two regional events in each of the last five FRC seasons. We do it because we like to meet FIRST people from other places, and because we want to play robots as many times as possible.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

True, but the point I was making still stands. Competing at multiple regionals is fair because from a raw probability perspective, it doesn't change your chances of going to the championship.

-Vivek

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I'm pretty sure the chairman's trophy is larger then any other trophy FIRST gives (with the exception of the Founder's award and possibly the Woodie Flowers award).

On the initial topic, Life is about the opportunities that you create for yourself. Each team starts with the basics and it is up to them to make the most successful program they can.

Multiple regions != powerhouse robot
Money != successful robot
Lack of resources != team failure
Veteran Team != winning team
Single Regional != lack of inspiration

My team attends multiple regionals or a regional and championships, and our robot has not been in contention for the winners spot for years.

Edit - I want to provide some clarification. First, for those not of a computer science background != means does not equal. Second those are my opinions after having been a participant with a team and a event volunteer for a number of years.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I think this entire discussion is a moot point, because every year there's an open sign-up period for any teams that don't prequalify, who have the money and wish to go, so it's not like anyone is stealing spots from anybody else.

Not to mention the fact that this discussion is being perpetuated against teams under the premise that it's "not about the robots", like these teams should be ashamed of themselves for making FIRST all about winning, since they go to multiple regionals. The irony here is that this argument itself is making FIRST out to be about the robots.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Yabbut, you know, George, that pWinning goes up with practice (multiple regionals), money, resources, and experience. How many teams on Einstein were not top teams in all these categories? I believe you are saying that these factors are not sufficient, which I agree with, but it would not be accurate to say they do not have a positive effect on winning probabilities.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Winning an award and trying to do so has its merits.
It can show where you are at as a program amongst your peers. If at first you dont succeed, you go back and analyze why, coming back better and stronger than the year before. It allows your team to set goals to improve, whether its building a better robot AND/OR building a better program.
The reality of winning is that it not only brings glory and celebrates an accomplishment, but it also brings about opportunities for more sponsorship and support by others that may otherwise not notice.
Success breeds success.
People that make excuses about it not being fair should take a hard look in the mirror and ask themselves, "What are you going to do about it?" Trust me, we have done that many times several years ago trying to figure out how to compete against the highly successful teams in every phase of the program. We didnt make any excuses, instead embraced the challenge, even though we are still doing the chasing.:D

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

It's been a long time since I took statistics. But I think you're logic is flawed.

First, you assume that each team has an equal chance of winning the game. We'll overlook that for the time being.

But each regional is a unique event. If winning is truly random, the chances of winning one are independent of winning another. Therefore

1 regional - 3/50
2 regionals - 3/50 + 3/50
3 regionals - 3/50 + 3/50 + 3/50
etc.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

We assume each team has an equal chance of winning one of the 4 non-submission, non-rookie awards. That is not the case, but we want a best-case scenario here.

I think your logic may also be flawed. You're saying that in two events, a team has a 6/50 chance. They have a 3/50 in each (using the numbers we're playing with). However, as I remember probability, you don't add. The odds of x event in two separate cases is multiplied. Your chances of qualifying twice are much smaller than indicated.

Assuming, of course, that everything is equal, which it isn't.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Multiplying as you suggest will give the probability of winning all the events. Adding the probabilities gives the chances of winning one (or more) of the multiple events, thus qualifying for a Championship invitation, which is what Gary wanted to show.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Let's say that the probability of winning a regional is 3/50, and we want to win at least one regional. Well, then the probability of NOT winning a regional is 47/50. THIS quantity will multiply.

So then we say, well, the probability of winning at least regional as a function of N, where N is the number of regionals we attend, is:

P(N) = 1 - (47/50)^N

Because (47/50)^N is the probability of NOT winning a regional, and the sum of the probabilities of all outcomes must equal 1.

And the result?

1 Regional: 3/50 or 6%
2 Regionals: 11.64%
3 Regionals: 16.95%

Note that this is the probability of winning at least one regional. If you wanted to get the probability of winning exactly two, then it would be (3/50)*(3/50)*(47/50). The probability of winning three would be (3/50)*(3/50)*(3/50). So the teams that won three had a 0.022% chance of doing so. Congratulations, 1114 and 1024, you guy beat the odds! :D Or maybe winning multiple regionals has more to do with robot quality, drive team skill, and a good autonomous than pure luck...though luck certainly is always involved.

Thus, it does go up (given that EVERYTHING else is equal, which it isn't) which makes sense--more chances equals more probability, but it doesn't quite scale linearly with regionals. Think about it, if they just added, then if you had a 3/50 shot of winning a regional, then if you went to 17 regionals you would be guaranteed a berth at Nationals, and your probability would be OVER 1.0, which is not really possible.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

flawed logic- just showing up doesnt give you an equal probability of winning anything. A robot can win multiple regionals due to quality play or be the worst robot at every regional.

and besides- it isnt just about the winning........

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Passion and determination should be figured into all of this as well as hours and hours of practice. Or lack of.

.02

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

This is an interesting topic of discussion and after reading the comments it is nice to see it has been discussed without attacks and negative comments.

As a team with limited resources we have discussed this amongst ourselves also. I have one point that I did not see in this thread. It might have been there in the 8 pages and I missed it but that was a lot of reading.

To me there is one pro to this that outweighs most everything else. It raises the bar for all teams. As a veteran team that does not have the money or the resources of other teams we know we have to excel in other ways because the standards will be very high regardless of what we have/do.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Of course. But the original supposition was that every robot showing up had equal probability of winning. The contention was, given random equality, going to multiple events was of no benefit. While I calculated it incorrectly, Nikhil Bajaj showed that you would have better odds by going to multiple events.

And by fate, that worst robot could even win all it's matches due to help from partners, make brilliant alliance selections, and win the whole thing.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

And, then there are the awards to qualify. CA can be known (Say a 1/7-1/10), Rookie All-Star is about the same as CA, and EI is 1/50. This is assuming that all teams that enter competition for those awards have an equal chance. So your chance may actually fluctuate, depending on how many you enter for. (min 4, max 5)

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Well, the first question would be what, exactly is FAIR?

It is a pretty nebulous concept. If what you are asking is "does competing at multiple regionals give teams a competitive advantage?" then the answer is clearly yes.

Statistically it has been shown (thank you to those who clarified the stats on the previous page) that "all else being equal" you have a greater chance of winning a regional (or an award of any kind, for that matter) the more regionals you attend. But "all else" is not equal.

At Seattle this year we had a huge competitive advantage over teams that had not played the game before, simply because our drive team had three days to practice in Portland, our programmers had three days to refine code, and our build team had a chance to analyze the game video, identify a problem with our "ball knocking" mechanism, and replace it with a more effective mechanism for Seattle.

My advice to teams doing only one regional is to try and find a first or second weekend event if they are concerned about competing on an "equal" footing.

As for fair... well, we all compete under the same set of rules. So that part is fair. Some teams... for whatever reasons... have access to more resources than others. If we are going to start asking if it is fair for different groups of people to have access to different resources, then that is a question much, much larger than FRC!

Jason

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Many of us may also participate in other technological design competitions at our schools. Basically any competition where there is a problem given that you are given limited resources to develop a solution.

One of the many characteristics that sets FIRST apart from the rest of those competitions is that FIRST gives it students the opportunity to modify and redesign their submissions after a single demonstration or regional. We all have the same opportunity to do this through the guidelines that FIRST lays out annually. Competing at multiple regionals is all a part of the real life experience FIRST provides. All professionals are provided with resources, guidelines, and opportunities to develop and present products.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

In my point of view, it's all about luck. Luck being hard work and preperation, matched with dedication.

Cass

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I believe he was just giving a lesson in the proper method of calculating that probability, based on obviously simplified assumptions. So my thanks atleast to Nikhil for getting at least a bit of good math into the thread.

Now then, not to be too crass about such a noble subject as fairness and all that, but I grabbed all the team lists and tabulated a few numbers for regional wins and awards. First and foremost, over 25% of FRC teams attend more than one event. This is not some incredibly small minority of "powerhouse" teams that are taking an extra try at the brass ring. Second, there were 14 teams that won multiple regionals that represent, as should be obvious to anyone that followed this year, 16 total "extra" regional wins. So out of a minimum of 656 regional wins, 2.4% were "extra". So I think at the least, the concern about multiple regional teams taking up lots of regional wins is unfounded.

Now, as groups, 3+ regional attendees received, per team, more regional wins and awards (-RCA, -WFA, etc.) than did 2 regional attendees. Similarly, 2 regional attendees received more wins and awards per team than did single regional attendees. This is not interesting, however, and is probably expected. The interesting bit is the 3+ teams received more wins and awards per team per regional than 2+ teams. And 2 teams similarly did better on a per regional basis than 1 teams. Feel free to interpret this data as you wish, but I find is rather interesting.

Finally, to be as utterly crass and base as possible in a thread about "fairness", it simply doesn't matter whether attending multiple regionals is fair or not. The plain fact is that the 432 extra regional attendances more or less represent about $1.75 million of pure extra revenue for FIRST, since teams receive no extra kits, benefits, or other outlays from FIRST for regional attendances after the first. I think it's fairly certain that FIRST depends heavily on this extra revenue and that no small part of it ends up acting as a subsidy for first regional fees for other teams. Coincidentally, if FIRST prevented teams from attending more than one regional, they'd have to raise the first regional fee to $7000 per team to make up the difference. And recruit something like 60-70 additional teams. So if you're convinced teams attending extra regionals is nothing but bad for FIRST, there's some food for thought.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

As a rookie team this year we found the teams competing in more than one regional a great source of information and inspiration. Our team placed 38th at the LA regional and wished we had another weekend to run our bot. We took it apart when it came home and fixed the bugs, now it works 100% better. :)

The team will make the effort to raise $ for two regionals next year, both somewhat local, just to gain more experience and push their learning curves.

Fairness is the opportunity to learn from the FIRST experience, regardless of a 1st place or 38th place finish. The 2nd or 3rd regional promotes the advancement of knowledge through experimentation and repitition. Seems like a fundamental reason for FIRST to me.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

The reason for my post way back on page 6 is, I'm tired of seeing and hearing about the same teams in Atlanta, year after year, when I know for a fact that they didn't win a regional. I'm tired of the same teams getting to the playoffs at most regionals. Above all elese I'm tired of veteran powerhouses picking one another at regionals and not letting the teams not already qualified to get a chance at going. Why pick one another when all arealready going, pick the people that have never gone or don't "buy their way in every year. Our team has been turned down at a regional because and I quote them "Sorry, but we only pick veteran teams for our alliance partners" Straight to our faces, that is rediculous, esspecialy after we had gotten the highest scoring match at that regional with them. I simply seen that not competeing at multipule regionals as an oppertunity to let less experianced teams get a chance to be in the playoffs. Yes I know that alot of powerhouse teams are in my area, but I'm not worried about my team. I'm more worried about the teams competing with the powerhouse teams when the powerhouse teams get tired of fighting one another, and travel out of state. :ahh: If you notice my team only goes to regionals in our state, we don't go out of state, we have only gone to Atlanta when we qualified once, and we are striving to improve our team. We are not a veteran power house and never plan on acting like a few veteran powerhouses do, not all, but SOME. Do me a favor don't respond to this with "You should be spending your time improving you team and not complaining about others, that is a cop-out answer. You know who you are!!!:ahh: :ahh: :mad: :mad:

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

The following are my own opinions:

I know where you are coming from by stating that vet teams usually pick vet teams. However, if you had the opportunity to pick a vet team that you scouted and knew had a better chance of alliancing with and winning the regional, would you not pick them over any other team (be they rookie or not)? How and which teams choose to select other teams is what I believe to be a privilege that they earn by competing their very best. Personally I don't think anyone has a right to judge why a team picks another certain team: its their shot to call if they earned that top 8 seed.

Also, read the post right above your recent one. I believe that this certain rookie said it best.

I think that's one of the most appealing parts of the NJ regional...

I don't think that the same team has ever won 2 RCA's at Trenton. Am I correct Mr. C?

The new teams look up to the past winners such as 103, 75, 25, and 11 (sorry, but I don't know the other past winners) and strive to win the Chairman's Award here because they know they have a chance and they have great teams to look up to.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

For one thing, you don't have to win a regional to go the championships. You can win Chairman's, EI, or Rookie All-Star. Or you can be a defending champion, a "legacy team" (as in, in FIRST since 1992 continuously), or a Championship Chairman's Award winner.

For another, I'm with lilstogi. It's not your fault if you aren't the best team for a given top-8 team! They might be the best robot for you, and you might not be the best robot for them. It happens. Or they might be there due to an "easy" match schedule and not know what they're doing. It happens.

There are no rules governing how picks are made, save the order and the "if you decline, you can't be picked again" rule. Even more, there are no rules that #x alliance will win. Even if an alliance is formed with three teams who need to win to qualify for Atlanta, there is no guarantee that they will win even one match! You're asking for teams to hurt themselves and others for a gain to some teams that will cost them, too. Tell me this: is it "fair" to pick a team that barely got the money together to enter, built a decent defender from the KOP, and then win the competition with them, thus qualifying them for Atlanta and costing them another $5000 plus travel?

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

This contradicts the other complaint about powerhouse teams denying others the opportunity to win. Which argument would you like to contribute to?

My response to the issue of teams consistently doing well is simple: how do you propose to change the situation? Would you handicap teams having a history of strong performance? Would you prevent teams who earned a spot in the elimination rounds of a regional competition from entering another regional? Would you do something else to penalize success?

Same question.

If you don't want a team to win, play better than they do by playing better. Please don't tell me you want to play better than they do by forcing them to play at less than their best. (An apology follows at the end of my post.)

There's that "buy their way in" phrase again. What do you mean? Everybody pays to play.

I think your point of view could benefit from some tweaking. The TechnoKats don't "get tired of fighting" our friends and look for fights elsewhere. We travel because we want to expand our experiences playing with new teams.

Sorry, too late. I won't unwrite my earlier response.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I'm going to make a huge generalization, but...

A lot of the time older teams have an easier time finding a good strategy for playing the game. They gain experience because they have seen more game types and know what works. Older teams often have more resources than newer teams as well. (I don't mean for this to apply to all teams, there are many awesome newer teams)(I also don't mean to offend anyone by this).

It takes a while to build a good FIRST team. It takes an amazing team to be national competitor quality every year from the beginning. For some teams it can take a few years to get to a highly competitive level. It just takes a lot of dedication and hard work.

In my opinion: hats off to any team that can always be a legitimate threat at regionals and nationals.

Atlanta should consist of the best robots out there, regardless of how often they are there. Getting to Atlanta is a priviledge. If a team is good enough to build a highly competitive robot every year, then they deserve to go to Atlanta every year.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

A perfect example of this is 2056..many teams could learn a lot from them.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Well, life's not fair, as some of us have found out in many occasions.

I have found that attending multiple regionals, and playing teams such as Simbotics and the Chickens have improved the teams that I have been on. In my opinion, the best way to improve your team, is to take a good lickin' and learn how to improve next time. The teams I have been on have learned from loses to such "powerhouse" teams and went on to do better later in the season.

Likewise, I like to play the best of the best. You more then likely will not find a regional having a line up similar to IRI, with what most would call, the best teams in the world. You may have a few here and a few there. But, the teams I have been on want to play the best, every time.

I can see how you can be concerned with discouraging rookie teams, or teams who have a lot of rookies. Going along with the opening line of my post, I think its best to learn life lessons through FIRST along with Science and Technology. There are companies that have more R&D then others, and their final product (I would equate the Championship event to our final product) seems to be better because of their work. I know it costs a substantial amount to attend a second regional, but hey, its life.

This is all just my $0.02.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

First off, are you suggesting that the best teams at the event should pick the robots that don't give them the best chance to win? How is that a good strategy. That would be a form of throwing the competition, in my eyes. When you're on the field, you play to win. This would compromise the integrity of the competition.

I don't want to be mean, but there has to be a reason you weren't picked. The true powerhouse teams that you're talking about know what the heck they're doing. They aren't dumb, or jaded enough to pass over the team that would be their best partner, just because they have a number they'd never heard of before. If you perform on the field, people take notice, and you will get picked appropriately. If you didn't get picked by the top teams, then maybe they just didn't feel like your robot or strategy fit that well with theirs.

Your point that attending multiple regionals should be a tool for diversifying alliance partners, and allowing more unqualified teams to qualify to attend Atlanta is also questionable. Where does it say the goal is for everyone to go to the Championship? A championship implies that it is the best of the best. Everyone who attends should have done so on their own merits, and deserve the right to be competing there (be it robot performance, judged awards, etc). They shouldn't be there because someone felt sorry for them and decided to pick them. Were this to happen to me, I'd be insulted.


I've said it before, and I'll keep saying it. As humans in general we tend to blame others for our problems, when often they are of our own making. Certainly even if it is someone else's fault, blaming them will do no good to resolve your own problem.

If you don't like that your team isn't getting picked as high as you think, go out there and kick so much butt that you're either the one picking, or there's no way the top team won't want to pair with you.

Bringing down the teams at the top is not the answer. We need to bring everyone else up to their level.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Excuse me, but weren't you the #4 Alliance Captain at Detroit and at Great Lakes? And also were a picking team in 2007? Who did you pick? - veterans.

So you're obsessing about something that happened years ago?

I know your posts do not reflect the feelings of most of team 1718. This is a team that can compete with teams that have 2-3 times the experience.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

who are these teams you speak of?
mike d

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Let me begin my response by letting you know that this is not meant to sound mean or harsh in any way. I know it can probably be read in more than one way, but I did not intend for it to sound as if it has a nasty or critical tone.

Your complaint of veteran teams picking other veteran teams doesn't seem completely legitimate to me. Every team has to work their way to the top. If a team, veteran or otherwise, is a top 8 seed, they have earned themselved the right to choose their alliance partners. It is their choice, and they reserve the right to choose who they want as their alliance partners, whether it is based on the merit of the team, or just a friendship. Usually, teams in the top 8 have come up with a strategy and choose other robots which complement their abilities to form a strong alliance, and are consistently effective and sturdy. Often, veteran teams may fit the bill. If you are a top 8 team and you would make the strongest alliance with a veteran team, is it not fair for you to select them as your partners, having earned this right?

Furthermore, veteran teams do not always pick each other. I can speak even just from my team's experience. Team 1124 has been around for six seasons of competition, 2003-2008. We seeded fairly high and were selected by veteran teams to be in the eliminations, both in our rookie year and our third year. In our fourth year, 2006, we were ranked last out of all teams at our regional. We were selected by a veteran team, who wanted to give us a chance, and we ended up winning the regional with them and securing a spot for ourselves at the Championship; it was the first time we had ever gone. Stuff like this happens all the time. Really, most alliance selections are based on how the robot/team complements the picking team and fits into their strategy.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I most certainly do not have a problem with them going out of state. The MN regional this year was won by an alliance of two out of state veteran teams and another rookie team from MN. I would personally love getting the chance to compete with more power house teams. If getting to atlanta and winning is so high on your list of priorities that you would not want to compete with the best teams out there, maybe your list of priorities needs some reorganizing. Besides, it all helps get the kids inspired (you just need to keep the right attitude about it). The really good teams have put a lot of work in to get to where they are and they deserve to be there if they are willing to work hard enough for it.

-Vivek

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

What everyone that has commented on my post fails to relize is I'm not worried about my team, I'm worried about others. All you guys keep saying that I want to bring the veterans down, I don't want to. I simply want them to think of somthing other than a definate win and try to give other teams that same exsperiance. Take 217 abd 469 at the detroit regional this year, they could have taken a team that could play good defense, but they didn't, they picked a team that wasn't great(I mean no harm by this, if I affend someone sorry), didn't have much money, and was a 4 or 3 person team. Yeah they picked one another, but bringing in that third pick was beter than oblitterating everyone. I'm more talking about things like 217 & 469 at detroit. 217 was going to Atlanta already, and more than likely so was 469, so why pick one another??????:confused: That is more what I'm talking about. I don't want teams to throw regionals, but pick teams that aren't going rather than those who are.
To answer other comments, i don't want FIRST to do a thing about this, I want teams to change their outlook and think of something other than winning.
I know that our team has picked veterans the past two years, but our team wasn't already qualified, and neither was our third pick; 2 out of 3 not going, how is that against what I'm saying. Besides last year we said yes to someone who pick us at detroit, 27; we were not going to Atlanta, they were; neither did our thid partner. I applaude them for breaking the mold of a few teams in the area.
As far as the insulted comment "They shouldn't be there because someone felt sorry for them and decided to pick them. Were this to happen to me, I'd be insulted." To be passed up when you are a good competitor, but don't make the cut to be on a STACKED allinace is insulting too. Also to be told that you won't be picked because you are a younger team is insulting and fustrating. I won't name names but this actually did happen to my team. We perfer not to talk about it, but it really did happen. Due to this there is definate hesitation when we come to there number when chosing our alliance list.
As far as my team we don't travel out of state because A we don't have the money and B we have no need we are competeing with some of the toughest teams already. What I don't like is when a team goes to 3 regionalsand one is just to demolish the competition. There is no need to go to that many regionals and I ahve always though that the accepted number is 2 regionals, no more, by most teams' merit standards. If you know your team is great then compete at great regionals, don't go to a regional were there are few veteran powerhouses.
As for buying your way to Atlanta, I mean the teams that choose to go there when everyone is picking their regionals.
You are correct I am by no means speakng for my team, these are my personal thoughts and wish that you not think of my team any differantly after reading any of my posts.
Whoever keeps saying the "Life isn't fair" bit, we know it has been said at least 50 times on this thread. If it is a reply to one of my posts, I understand life isn't fair, but we can try to make it as fair as possible. If you say life shouldn't be fair I would understand where you are comming from, but life isn't has no relevancy.
I have much more to say, but it is late and MARC is tommorow.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

This is probably because you gave a specific account which occurred with your team. It is also because of that specific quote you mentioned.

The only thing I hope is that nobody gives you negative reputation or anything..because others should also remember that they are your opinions to own.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Like I said earlier, you play to win. Were a team to assume they were so good that they don't need to pick the next best robot at the event to take home the gold, it would be a very dumb strategy. You always pick the team that will give you the best chance to win. Always. Doesn't matter if they've got 4 people, 75 people, veterans, rookies, high team number, low team number. None of it matters. Doesn't matter if you're so good that you could win with JVN's fridge on the field (to quote John :)) The only thing that matters is that they are the best team to help you win the event. Doing anything less is a sellout.

I'm sure they picked you both because they thought you represented their best chance at winning-not because you weren't qualified for Atlanta.

As a side note, do most teams even know what potential partners are qualified for Atlanta, and which aren't? It's not one of our criteria, so I've never even paid attention. I just look for the best robots, best drivers, and best strategists.

I'd hate to see the competitions turn into science fairs. I just heard that lots of little league teams don't keep score and don't have winners and losers for fear of hurting the kid's feelings. Sometimes it seems like this is the direction FIRST might be headed. I sure hope not. It's not about the competition, but the competition sure is an important part of what makes FIRST different than so many other activities.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Hmm..I'm not sure if teams look that up, but I try to find out who's going where during pre-scouting before a regiona but only to see their standings at previous regionals and awards they won. But our selections aren't based on if a team is already qualified to go to Atlanta or not.

I kinda do see where fuzzy is coming from although I don't agree that teams should always pick other teams who aren't qualified for the Championships. If it was my team that was selected by a high seeded team merely because we didn't do well at the regional, I would be a little insulted as being a "pity" selection. Oh and fuzzy, you seem to forget that the best of the best do the best scouting. That is what selections should be based on. Scouting and faith in another team (be they rookie or veteran) can take a team very far into eliminations and possibly to a victory.

Sure there are teams who sympathize with teams who deserve a shot at Atlanta, but if that certain team is picked and they don't win with the strong alliance captain that picked them, it won't really make the selected team work as hard next year to improve on their team as it would if the team was not selected because they didn't deserve to be selected.

+$0.02

(hehe, good thing i don't have work tomorrow):P

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

There are alot of things in life that you cannot control. The one thing you can is your attitude. You can choose to be hostile and defensive towards these teams and learn nothing and maintain your stagnant existence or you can close to actually learn from these people if you let them teach you.
First things first. It's not just about the robot or the money. Over the years of watching competition the one thing that stands out about upper echelon teams is their strategy and their scouting. The hit the field with a sense of purpose and an understanding of what has to be done to come out successful. It is astonishing how many teams show up to competition without any clue of what they are going to do or how they are going to do it. Every day is Thursday and they're just out there doing their own thing. It's like they just saw the game animation and just left it at that and never bothered ever reading the rules.
You know why veteran teams pick other veterans? Trust. They know what they are getting (consistency mainly), they know what to expect from them and they know they can count on them when the going gets tough.
In the three team alliance era it is possible for lesser teams to taste victory as well. You don't need to build the "killer ap" to succeed. You just need to fill a need. Think of the qualifying rounds as a job interview and you are selling your services to the other teams to the point where they are going to say "They need you!"

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

If the criteria for picking teams were simply who has qualified to go to Atlanta or not then HOF teams and legacy teams (which we are both) shouldn't even bother showing up for competitions since they are already going. Sometimes competing is about getting better at what you do. When HOT came to FLR they're robot was in pieces and they didn't have much of a Hybrid mode. They made it to the semis. By the the time they got to GLR they won the event and they got to Einstein in Atlanta.
So for Fuzzy to say teams like HOT are wrong for what they did shows that he isn't looking at the big picture neither.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

So why was 440 still available for 469/217's last pick? Why didn't 1718 pick them earlier in the round, if you wanted to give them the experience of competing in the knockouts? BTW, the consensus from 469/217 was that they were lucky 440 was still available for their last pick.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I think you're also failing to understand some of what we're trying to explain, too. Those top 8 teams, veterans or otherwise, have earned the right to choose their partners. They choose the partner that best completes their strategy: in 217's case, 469 complemented their robot so they picked them. Honestly, when I'm strategizing about who to pick, none of it relates to "are they going to Atlanta?" I don't think many teams look at that at all, it's really just "do they fit into our strategy?" Also, by playing both with and against super-alliances of veteran teams, you gain the experience you keep talking about. My first year in FIRST, our team wasn't doing so well, and watching all of the experienced teams go out their with amazing robots and win match after match inspired me, and many of my teammates, to do the same. We raised the bar, and last year and this year were significantly more successful. Let alliance captains pick who they want. If they form awesome alliances, don't think of it as a definite win, but a great learning experience, and there you go.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

The bold highlight is mine.

Your whole argument falls apart because of that statement, because of its obvious bias against successful teams and for teams lacking in resources. You claim teams need to think of other things besides winning, but then you go on to say they should pick teams who somehow "deserve" to win but never do. Thus, your whole argument is about winning.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Then the resolution is simple: refocus on your team. You shouldn't spend so much energy on things that you can not affect, especially if they in turn do not affect you.

It looks like you're asking stronger teams to slack off and let weaker teams have a chance to win. Can you rephrase what you want so it doesn't seem so unreasonable at first glance?

Did you really just say you would feel insulted if your performance didn't earn you a spot in the elimination rounds? Exactly who would be insulting you in that case?

Can you give an example of this happening?

You've consistently phrased things in a way that makes it look like you don't see other teams as anything but enemies. I think you might be missing a large part of what goes on at a FRC competition.

This still doesn't make sense to me. Choosing to attend the Championship does not have anything to do with which regional competitions one picks. Can you explain why you call it "buying your way"? Can you explain how going to Atlanta is relevant to the number of regionals a team competes at?

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

FIRST is based around engineering, but it isn't all engineering. Part of FIRST is fundraising. You don't need to be a high budget team to succeed. If you don't have enough money to do multiple regionals, then your off-season goal should be to raise enough money to be able to compete at multiple regionals.

My team was 5,000 dollars in dept going into the Boston regional last year. We built our entire frame from kit materials. The only things we used that weren't in the kit were a 2 inch wide, 24 inch long pneumatic cylinder, and a couple of small IFI wheels. Despite this we finished second in qualifying. We didn't win the regional but we were a highly competitive team even with an extremely low budget. This proves that low budget teams don't have a huge disadvantage. I always hear people saying simplicity wins, simplicity doesn't have to be expensive. After having a very low budget my team went out and raised a good amount of money in the off-season. After our hard work fundraising, we built our robot without worrying too much about expenses. We hardly used anything from the kit at all. We had this freedom because of the work we did fundraising. After we did this work we felt like we earned the right to go to two regionals.

From this it is obvious that a team can be highly competitive on a very low budget, but a team that is willing to put in the time to fundraise can have some freedom when spending and not be restricted. If teams put in the time to fundraise they have earned the right to attend as many regionals as they can afford.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Forgive me for rambling but this thread has me thinking in too many directions at once. It has made me think about the alliance optimization problem (selection of robots based on optimization of the alliance versus selecting optimal robots) and the trade-offs between flexibility in strategy versus optimization of a single strategy. It has made me think of the essentials of team building and how to streamline the process to fit into a 15 minute time block (because you can’t really predict your alliance ahead of time – unless you are Looking Forward). It has forced me to consider rejection and the disappointment we all feel when our team isn’t picked by the “best” team to join them. And I was struck by the myriad parallel analogies in the world of sports that shed insight on our debate… And while I could probably contribute something useful I learned from thinking about each of these topics, I would rather discuss this statement instead (at the risk of running even farther away from the thread topic):

Perhaps I’m reading this wrong (and it wouldn’t be the first time) but I would say that life itself is perhaps the MOST relevant thing in all these issues. The stated goals of FIRST are to inspire a culture that values science and technology. Inspiration needs Motivation. What motivates people? Competition. Competition is the struggle for survival and I would argue that it is an inherent natural trait as well as a heavily indoctrinated concept (at least in western culture). This need is fundamental to our being (life) and hence why it is such a powerful source of inspiration.

The goal of competition is survival (as has been said many time in this thread already but in another way -- winning). If you aren’t trying to win then you aren’t really competing and most likely missing the key motivator behind the inspiration in FIRST. One byproduct of a competition process is that there is continual improvement in the competitors themselves. This means that every year the competition gets better. This may or may not be encouraging but it can be observed from similar competition structures from sports to economics to war. In nature, we find the consequences harsh: improve or die. In FIRST I would say it is more like: improve or be disappointed (I mean this only with respect to competitive results – you should never be disappointed in the process of stretching yourself personally, being part of a team, contributing to your community and just plain working hard).

In re-reading this before posting, it occurs to me that I really do need to discuss all my thoughts on those other subjects to tie everything together but it would be very long and this post is long enough already.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

"To be passed up when you are a good competitor, but don't make the cut to be on a STACKED allinace is insulting too."


Dude, teams have so many options sometimes they can be overwhelmed too. In Atlanta this year, we picked 71 because we trusted them and they are obviously one of the best performers in Atlanta. Our next choice-we took a risk. 2166 was not the best robot out there but we stuck by our decision in the end. We passed up good competitors there because we wanted to give them a chance. Now, do you think ANY of the other teams were insulted?? No, because they know what that team was scouting for what an they are looking for in that alliance. If you don't fit their alliance's criteria, then frankly IMHO you don't have a right to feel anything about that team's selection.

+0.02

Btw, how exactly can an alliance be STACKED as you say. There is never a stacked alliance because of serpentine selection (that's the whole point of it) Seeding of teams never stopped anyone from taking down the #1 alliance either. Trust me on that one. Just think of the 190 alliance from last year. 8th seed taking down the rest of Newton. Were the other alliances "STACKED?" maybe, but were they unbeatable? Clearly not. It all plays into strategy my friend.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Alan, I think he's talking about teams that sign up for the Championship in the Fall, during the open registration period.

Since every team has equal opportunity to register and pay for the Championship at the same time, this is not a fairness issue. It may be a have/have-not issue, in that teams that don't have the money can't reserve one of the spots. But that is irrelevant to the argument that one of those teams shouldn't compete for a spot. If a team already registered wins a regional event, the spot that was being held for them is made available to teams on the waiting list. No one is harmed if a team pre-registered for Atlanta wins a regional.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

That team which you just insulted (despite your weak disclaimer and apology), Team 440, actually won two regionals this year. So they not as weak as you perceive them to be. From talking to members of Team 217, I know for a fact that this was not a pity pick. They had been scouting 440 all weekend long, and were hoping they would be available in the second round of the draft.

Fuzzy1718,

You can lay out all the disclaimers that you want, but the bottom line is you are representing your team. Every action you make and every word you speak while your team number is attached to you will be perceived as a representation of your team. This is a lesson many individuals have learned the hard way over the years. You should keep that in mind. It may not be fair that people judge a team based on the actions of one squeaky wheel, but it is unfortunately what happens.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I'm not sure, but somehow I feel like the true meaning of FIRST has been completely blindsighted here. FIRST is here, not for us to win regionals. Or go to the Championship competition. It's not a program based around bringing home trophies and medals. Rather, FIRST is about learning life experiences from mentors, coaches, teachers, and even friends. It's about finding a program that helps steer you in the right direction; a program that is there to guide your future. It's about meeting new people, expanding your horizons. And making memories that will last a lifetime in the process.

You don't need to go to the Championship for this kind of experience. You can find it during the regionals. You can find it during build season. You can even find it right here on CD, where FIRSTers all around the world come together and share their information with others, hoping what they say will help at least one other person.

FIRST is a competition, yes. But it so much more than that.

Competing at multiple regionals or Championship events has no bearing on the life lessons you will learn or the unbelievable memories you will have--for that is what FIRST is truly all about.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Fuzzy,
Your points has some merit if true......but should be directed in a PM or meeting instead of posting here on CD.
Some teams simply go to more than one regional to meet new teams and to get experiences that the host city/area has to offer. Are they trying to strategically win at all regionals?? Of course they are! Why would they attend a regional and not try to win at a competition?
As stated earlier, teams that dont have a sense of purpose/focus on strategies, scouting, and teamwork just there to "experience" something, IMO, is more unjust than teams that do, regardless if the end result is NOT giving more chances for a team to qualify to Atlanta.
Remember, every team still has to put a great deal of time, effort and $$$$ to participate in such a great learning experience.
The thing I hate the most are teams that are so unfocused (not strategizing, not show up for a match, make no effort to being prepared) because they screw up opportunities of the other 2 teams that may have tried hard to be successful. Again, that is extremely frustrating.
I know that you didn't mention this, however, perhaps this could be the reason why it seems that the same veteran teams MAY choose friends over another team. They choose their friends because of positive past relationships, there is trust between the teams, or they just simply complement each other well.
I think as a veteran team who has done FIRST the past 9 years, it is almost impossible to select and scout every team perfectly and deeply enough that you can choose the best alliance possible. Sometimes when it comes to that 3rd alliance partner, the criteria for choosing becomes less apparent and you have oh so little time to decide! i.e. 1 hour after the last round of regular competition play.
In the end, I know you understand what's being said here and you have some merit (simply because I wasn't there to experience what you heard). Teams who may feel what you are saying should take the necessary steps to overcome that with communication and a much more positive attitude.

I get more questions about our beaches than interests on what our robot can do every year. :)

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

First off, Fuzzy, I know your team, I know you guys build a solid robot every year. Second, I left 27 for a team that has only competed at the Championship twice in its history and bought its way in both times. Relevant because I know what it is like to be consistently passed over because you aren't one of the big name teams. There are a few ways you can fix this, you can moan and complain on Chief. You could also just accept it and realize that's how it is going to be. Or you could say, what do these teams have that I don't?

I wouldn't want to be picked because another team felt bad for us. That is more insulting to me than anything they could say. 440 was NOT a pity pick. They were among the best lapbots there.

As for teams not picking rookie teams, 2337 comes to mind as a rookie team that was consistently picked high at wherever it played. So the argument that teams only pick veterans really is wrong.

Also, FIRST is not about going to the Championship, its not about the robots, it is about inspiring kids. How can we expect to inspire if we are not allowed to perform at our best? I don't know about you but I am inspired to work harder so that someday I can stand down on Einstein and compete. I go to each competition and compete. I give everything I have because to keep anything back is an insult to your alliance, you opponents, your team, and yourself.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

First off I never said a team with little money can't win, i simply said that the higher budget teams win more often.

An alliance can be stacked even without the 3rd pick, like what has happened at detroit the last few years. 2 or 3 great alliances, stacked is what I call them, and the rest can try as the may, but they are fighting an up hill battle in the rain, and often slip and fall. Usually these alliances consist of veteran power houses picking one another. A simple observation, taken the wrong way by quite a few people. I'm simply saying why pick one another, I understand that first isn't all about winning, in that what better way is there to learn that be picked by a veteran team, see how they operate in the playoffs. From the view point of the veteran it should, in my mind, be a win win situtation; they get to teach other teams and give them a taste of how to get better up close and personal, but they are going to atlanta already so there is no need to win the regional.

We didn't pick 440, because we weren't already going, therefore don't qualify as one of the teams I am talking about.

As far as all the disclaimers, I don't care that you think I'm talking for my team, but if I was then I would start every thing with "Team 1718 feels", and I didn't did I.

As far as the comment about 440, I by no means ment it in a harmful way if you take it that way after what I just repeated then you can hold your grudge, but if they (440) feel that I did them harm by that comment I'm sorry. If they are fine with it I really don't care what others think of the comment. I had no idea that they had won at other regionals, I simply had their performance at detroit to work with. By no means did I mean it was a "pity pick" that is your label, due to not percieving my comment the way I ment.

My posts, besides the first, probably don't belong on this thread, but where would you like me to put my thoughts, om a new thread that no one will respond to due to the subject?? I know what I'm talking about is a hot topic, because of its bias against powerhouse veterans, but something should be said. I have had parents that during there first year with frc thought that signing up for championships is wrong. I took what they say a step further. that is what got me thinking about the subject. signing-up for atlanta has a huge deal to do with how many regionals, if you sign-up for atlanta most teams who aren't high budget go to less regionals. I do think FIRST should get invovled and limit the number of events a team could go to. just like the have for the amount of $$ that you can spend on your robot.

I do understand what you guys are saying about the top 8 earning the right to pick who they choose. I simply want them to change the criteria of why they pick who they do. Do I agree with the top 8 picking amongst one another, no, but what are you going to do. That is one rule that will never be changed, so I'm trying to change teams views, and since in my area the powerhouse veterans do this, I aim it at them.

As far as legacy teams and hall of fame teams I didn't even know that this was a rule, now that I do I really think it should be changed. And no I don't think that they needed to go to Finger lakes, they have regionals here to compete in that are highly competitve, let the teams out there compete in their own regional. It is called a regional for a reason, so the best of a region can represent that region in the championships. I think people have lost sight in this. People always talk about what region is better than others well campionships are the way to sort that out. I understand that FIRST doesn't want the regions at one anothers throats, that is why they split them up in atlanta.

Mentors let me her wha the students have to say I don't care of your opionions, your not the focus of FIRST, your students are.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

With an attitude like that, don't be surprised if no one thinks your opinion matters.

-John

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I'll start this post by saying that I am a freshman in high school.

Teams earn the right to compete at any regional they want. FIRST is a learning experience. You need to learn to work with many different people. If you went to the same local regional every year, you would end up making friends there, and being allied with them all the time (I don't have a problem with this, but it doesn't seem to be what you want).Traveling to different regionals mixes up fields and helps teams make friends from all around the country.

I'll tell you which region is best, it's the Midwest region (this is just based on my opinion, there are many great teams elsewhere).

Teams work hard to get to any level. 99.9 percent of the time they deserve everything they have. They get there through hard work and perserverence. It seems to me that you are trying to bring down teams that have worked so hard to get to where they are. Hard work deserves rewards. Being a legacy team or a hall of fame team takes a lot of work, going to Atlanta is a good reward for that.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Let me ask you a question, if you were number one seed are you going to pick a team with which you can win or a team which hasn't really done anything that would help you? I would say that the team that would help me win would be the best choice. Now if you want to choose the other fine, like you said, you earned that right to choose for yourself. Under no circumstances should another team ever feel pressured to pick a team if they do not want to. So you think we shouldn't pick a team that will help us win, fine, you made your point. I will choose to disagree.

I feel the "powerhouse veterans" are not the problem. I agree that there is an imbalance between the haves and the have nots but such is the way of the world. FIRST is idealized enough, I really doubt that GP exists in the work world. I think that having teams pick teams based on if they are qualified already or not could actually harm FIRST in that it could discourage teams from being all they can be.

I have a few things to say about this:
1) I may not agree with everything you have said but it has all been your opinion up until this point so I have treated it with respect. This goes over the line. Please do not ever disregard someone's opinion. It is rude and often you will miss learning important lessons. I respect what you have to say and I ask that you do the same for me.
2) The line between Mentor and Student does not actually exist, at least in my opinion. A Mentor is merely one with experience, this does not mean one is not still a student, there is always someone who knows more so we should all be students.
3) I agree that students are what FIRST is about but it is also about connecting them with people who can teach them. FIRST is about building a bridge between Industry and Education so as to inspire the students.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

<sigh> Here we go again. Rather than repeat what been said before (but apparently, not quite often enough), I will simply refer you to this post.

-dave

p.s. not to go off on too far of a tangent, but I am compelled to comment regarding the composition and grammar of the originating post. Please refer to this post. A well-written, concise, carefully considered, and well-presented, discussion is one that deserves an appropriate response. Such discussions often generate worthy debate, and may occasionally result in real changes to the system in question. However, a diatribe chock-full of spelling mistakes, grammatical errors, indecipherable shortcuts, and horrid sentence structure basically gives the message "I don't think enough of you to bother giving any real thought at all to my argument or how it is presented." In response, we can only reply, "if you care so little about the presentation of your position, then why should we care at all about providing a thoughtful response?"

Greg Ross, I, and several others, have brought up this concern more than once. We are not doing it just to be old grammar curmudgeons (as much fun as that may be). We do it to make a point. You are evaluated here primarily based on your ability to clearly communicate via the written word. At some point in the future your potential employers will evaluate you, in part, based on that same skill. I know of more than one case where someone has not been hired, or even lost a job, because they could not write clearly. The sooner that you understand that not just your reputation on the Chief Delphi forum, but potentially your future career choices, depend on cultivating that skill, the better prepared you will be for that career.


.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

FIRST has a mission statement that you might find enlightening.

Note especially the mentor-based part.

With that, I will stop short of applying a metaphorical two-by-four and stop trying to reach you, since you explicitly prefer not to be reached.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Where has FIRST ever said that the intent of the regionals is for the best team from that area to win and represent the area at the championship?

FIRST doesn't split up the regions on purpose for Atlanta to "keep them from each other's throats" They sort them at random.

FIRST clearly doesn't care that teams attend out of state regionals. If anything I would imagine they're happy to see it happen, as it's good for the program. Furthermore, they're not going to turn down thousands of extra dollars, which would be exactly what they would be doing by limiting teams to the number of events they attend.

You claim that FIRST is not all about winning, but really you're just saying that it shouldn't be about the good teams winning-it should be about the teams you feel are disadvantaged winning.

Those "big budget" teams (and you have no idea what the budget of any of them may be, since you're not a member of the team and privy to that information) work hard for everything they have. They worked hard to gain sponsors, resources, etc. They work hard to inspire their students, and work hard to make good robots.

There's a reason for their success-TONS of hard work. Nobody can really understand how many hours these teams put in, without having seen it first hand themselves. The reason that these "veteran powerhouses" are so good is because when other teams are taking Sundays off, or going home early, they're hard at work burning the midnight oil, doing everything they can to be the best they possibly can be.

That work entitles them to pick whoever they please. Trying to handicap them and guilt trip them for their own success, and ask them to pick a team that does not represent the best choice is not right. As I said before, if you do any less than your best, you are compromising the integrity of the event.

Let's face it. When you're at the event, it IS a competition, and the best teams deserve to win, regardless of whether or not they are already qualified for the Championship.

Every year any team who wanted to go to the Championship could do so if they wanted to. There's always an open sign up period, and every year there are teams who are able to go who would have no chance of winning an event to qualify. If you want to go, raise the money, and sign up.

Your last line is just ignorant. Without mentors, you wouldn't even be participating in FIRST. Your team wouldn't exist, and FIRST as a program wouldn't exist. If it did, it'd just be another form of a science fair.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Wow. Just wow.
You obviously have some sort of issue with teams that have had success because you just about stomped on each and every single one of them.And insulting the multiple senior FIRST mentors (many who are Woodie Flowers nominees) and blowing off their advice is a really nice touch.
Congratulations.
I'm sure you are very proud.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

A couple of thoughts -

1. Flexibility. To participate in FRC and to be successful as a team requires a respect for flexibility. If we narrow our views, our opinions, and our perspectives, then we begin to set limits. Those limits can develop rigid side effects. That seems counter productive in the areas of science and technology. To continue to develop the programs of FIRST and to continue to inspire students, mentors, sponsors, and the global community in science and technology, we have to remain flexible. That applies to discussions like these regarding teams competing and where they compete.

2. The importance of veteran teams. With new regionals cropping up globally, it is important for veteran teams to reach out and support those regionals during their inaugural year and perhaps longer. Veteran teams that have the resources to compete in more than one regional do hone their skills, as do the younger teams, that is true. What they are also doing in these competitions is sharing their experience, their knowledge, and the way in which they compete, on and off the field. If we are going to talk about elite teams or powerhouse teams, then we have to look at the whole picture and how these teams impact the FIRST community, not just a specific competition. If we only talk about a specific competition, then we are missing a lot, becoming rigid, limiting our own abilities and opportunities to improve.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

He has some valid points, and I understand where he's coming from. I don't necessarily agree, but sarcastic, insulting comments like this aren't helping anything.

As for FIRST being about the students, I have to agree, with conditions. Yes, mentors are a critical part of the process, but why on earth would we need a program like FIRST to inspire engineers already working in the industry? The entire purpose is to inspire students to pursue science/engineering-based fields of study, mentors help make that happen.

Anyway, it seems as though his opinions center around attempting to get as many people to nationals as possible. I'm not actually sure this is possible without teams throwing matches to lower their rank if they're already qualified.

As I understand it now, if a team that is already qualified for nationals wins at two separate regionals, then a space opens up at nationals for any team to register. These registrations are based on who has been waiting the longest amount of time to attend nationals.
This might actually be the best system. It attempts to get everyone to nationals as soon as possible.

The problem with powerhouse teams not picking one another is that in the end, only one alliance goes on to nationals. So some of those deserving teams still loose and still don't move on. Changing every team's selection strategy isn't going to help much. If the current system isn't acceptable then the entire thing is going to need reworking, not just the powerhouse teams' strategy.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Despite the fact that you don't care about what I have to say (since I'm a mentor), I'm going to offer you some advice. I'm probably wasting my time, but I'm in a giving mood today.

You say that you're trying to change the views of teams. It's a noble goal. Unfortunately, all you have done is make yourself look like a jerk. By coming on a forum, with Team 1718 in your username, you have now made Team 1718 look like a bunch of jerks. You complain about your team being overlooked in the past. Have you ever considered that it might be because of actions like these? If this is the attitude you bring forward at a competition, our team would most definitely ignore you. I mean, would you pick a team who had a member come up to you and say "I don't care about your opinion, you're just a <Insert noun here>". Each individual is a representation of a team, and a team is only as strong as it's weakest link. The attitude you have shown in your posts in this thread are what I would classify as weak.

Traits such as tact, courtesy and politeness go a long way in this world. A first impression isn't something you can make twice. Taking heed of this will serve you well in the future.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

My reason for the mentor comment was to the ones that keep repeating the same thing. I ment nothing by it, other than to deter them from posting again. I get what they say, but mostly what they say takes what I said out of context. If you have something new, say it. Otherwise there is no point in repeating what has already been said.

I just don't like seeing so many mentor posts and so few student ones. I understand you want to help, and it is good that you are. I simply want to see more opinions on the matter, from a larger demographic.

I try to spell things right but I am a high school student who is terrible at grammar and spelling. I honestly don't know how I pass english class every year. I try and spell stuff correct, I try to use good grammar, but I have a limit. My computer is too slow to open another window, this also causes "typoes". I'm sorry for that.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

If you're using Firefox, it's actually really easy to spell check anything you type. It'll underline it in red, like MS word, and all you have to do is right click and it'll give you options to change it to.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Sorry internet explorer. Tried firefox, but it slowed the internet down way to much. Dial-up, what can you exspect.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

A lot of these mentors posting have been students on teams once;Karthik, Cory, Brandon Hollyey,Kyle, etc... So, they shouldn't be discounted for being mentors (well, no one should be discounted for being a mentor)

Also many have been involved in FIRST for a very long time ;Koko Ed, Dave Lavery, Cory, Karthik, etc... So They're opinion really should be respected.

Even if you are 100% certain your views are right, when so many well respected people in FIRST are disagreeing with you, it may be a good idea to take a time out and see why.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Wow...so much for that.

And yes, I know they're just dots...:rolleyes: hehe

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I'm not sure why you have so much of a bias against the mentors, or their thoughts and opinions.

Some of the mentors here once were students on FIRST teams, and many more have been involved with FIRST for years and years.

Others first got involved when you may have still been in elementary school (or earlier).

Many spend their vacation days from work with a bunch of high school kids and robots.

Some travel thousands of miles every year at their own expense, just so they can volunteer at FIRST events, with the only compensation being a few free meals and a tee shirt.

Some get their employers to donate money or resources to local teams.

Others drive around their state, enticing new schools to start their own teams, despite the price of gas.


But all of them are dedicated - without these mentors there would be no FIRST. Don't be so quick to shrug off their judgment.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

If I may, I think Josh would like more students to add their thoughts to the topic. It was how he phrased it that caused the firestorm.
There have been discussions that address the have and have-not aspects of FRC teams. There have been discussions regarding different aspects of this thread and probably a great way to search would be to use the word, fair. In those threads there has been a lot of input from students, mentors, parents, alumni. It's a nice mix to have.

Also, Josh, my typos are horrible. I use the edit button multiple times in almost every post. It's handy. Sometimes I write out my thoughts in Word first and then copy/paste into the thread. That has helped as well.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

On attending multiple regionals:

-Going to Atlanta is not necessary for inspiration.
-Winning a regional is not necessary for inspiration.
-Taking part in a FIRST team is a path to inspiration.

Watch my team on TBA. You will see a signifigantly less than great robot. Am I still inspired? Heck Yes!

If a team needs to do extremely well to feel inspired, then there is something wrong.



On mentors:

They are our mentors because they know more than us in their areas of expertise. They have experience. They are not the focus of FIRST, but without them, it wouldn't happen. We all have different opinions on how they should perform their role, or what that role should be. But to shun their opinions because they are probably more informed than ours is quite ridiculous. If you had never encountered a teacher in your life, where would you be now?


EDIT, to post below:

Point taken. The second half of my post wasn't specifically aimed at Josh, or any other one person. The topic has just been on my mind lately, for reasons other than this thread, and it kind of slipped out here. I apologize for any offense caused to anyone.

Now, back to the topic, instead of a "Bash fuzzy1718-fest"

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Please read Jane's post above. I think its what Josh actually meant. Plus, I think that's a topic for a different thread.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Corrected.:p

By the way, Josh, try out IE7Pro it will add the spell checking to ie7. Although I might add that everyone should have a Preview Post button right next to Submit Reply. I would suggest using that and proof reading what you have to say. Just take a step back and say, "Am I really saying what I want to say and am I saying it in a professional manner?"

That being said, Dave, some of us just don't have your grasp on the English language. And the school systems do not teach most of it anymore (least not where I am)

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I really hate to try to break up this kind and sincere debate, but...

This question was asked in the survey from FIRST about future regional setups, so FIRST is definitely thinking about changing things up.

fuzzy1718 brings up some valid points and the people arguing against him also have some valid points.

In my opinion FIRST needs to maintain the open community that it has now, but in order to draw in more schools should make the competitions more local. (similar to highschool sports, state champs )

What if FIRST created both regional competitions and open competitions.

Regional competitions would be locked as per the name "Regional." This would be the event you would be placed in when you register. The winning alliance (along with chairmans, EI, etc.) would qualify for Championships. This event will crown a specific regional title for the country/ region / state / city / whatever the division may be.

Open Events would be more like regionals today. Open Registration keeps the community of FIRST, and possibly creating more competitive events that many crave before championships.

Within 10 years FIRST won't be able to maintain the structure of the regional events. With 3 - 4 thousand teams, many teams will be forced away from local events which would put off someone looking to start a team.

I'm curious what the others think about this. ( new teams, old teams, red teams, blue teams, long standing mentors, new students)

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I don't see FIRST ever getting to the 3-4,000 team level. The economy won't support that many teams. It's already a major struggle for most teams to gather funding.

I think FIRST should stop focusing on expanding FRC, and focus on making FRC it's crown jewel. FTC should be the avenue for expansion. It's simply not realistic for FIRST to expect every school to have a FRC team. Nor could their current infrastructure handle 4,000 teams. They would need 4 times the current amount of events (or 2 fields per event and 2x the events). Either way, you need 4x the volunteers, plus more paid FIRST staff.

At some point they will probably have to either introduce super regionals, or start giving only the winning alliance captain, and the first pick automatic bids to champs (similar to FTC, currently). Or get rid of FLL and FTC at the Championship, and have a FRC only event.

FIRST also has to decide if they want the Championship to be a showcase of their most competitive teams, or a social gathering. To a large extent, this will determine what their possible choices are.

To be honest, I think the odds are better that FIRST will be a shell of it's former self in 10 years, than having 4,000 teams.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I traveled hundreds of miles last weekend to volunteer at an event that this young man's team was participating in. Filling a need that had no volunteer to fill it. I was basically the only person doing the queing (except for this nice young lady whom I never got her name who helped me for a while til she was reassigned).
My thoughts on FIRST being just about the students. The intent may be to serve the students but much like a food kitchen while serving the needy may be the goal to treat the volunteers like they do not matter is a one way ticket to guarantee you won't be getting many more volunteers in the future. FIRST may not be about the mentors but I'll bet you a box of Krispy Kremes it would die a quick brutal death without them. They deserve your respect and admiration for taking time to do something when there are other things clamoring for their time (like families and friends).
You'd do best to remember that.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Fuzzy1718, Cory is absolutely correct. You might not be thinking it, but you're definitely saying it. Try not to get defensive and respond with something like "don't put words in my mouth". His statement here is a straightforward interpretation of the words which you wrote. Regardless of the intent behind them, it's the words themselves which we read.

So if that's not what you meant, rephrase it so that it says more clearly what you want us to read. (If it is what you meant, never mind.)

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Josh, other mentors who have replied to your comments have been very nice about the topic and tried to make you understand, but I am going to be very blunt. I have never imagined that I would hear this phrase from any student in my involvement of FIRST. You bring up valid points in your posts but this sentence just threw me off. I am very insulted and I have no pity for you or your team for that matter. The interest I would have to walk into your pit and check your robot and team out has been demolished by your comment. I hope one of your mentors/teachers check your posts out in this thread and help you understand where all the other mentors are coming from.

Now about your concerns, The teams that feel that they aren't doing "too well," and "not getting picked;" ask them to build a robot that will be dominant on the field. I am sure they will get picked.

Teams who are low on funding should look up to veteran powerhouses who travel to quite a few regionals every year and earn their golds. The reason they are able to accomplish such things is because of their sponsors, mentors, parents and their students who spend countless hours making their team what they are. They don't only strive for new corporate sponsors, they know how to keep their relationship with them.

If you ever get a chance, stick around with a "veteran powerhouse" for a regional competition and see how they function throughout the event. I am very sure that your opinion on many things will change.

Below are two things I would like to share with you.

There has been one mentor who has been posting in this thread. Their robot is gorgeous and it's functionality blew everyones' mind away this past season. I have spoken to him throughout the build season and I know that he spent at least 10 hours everyday in the machine shop with his students machining parts for the robot. Without him, the team probably wouldn't perform as well as they did. It's the mentors who show you the right path and show you the path of solution when you are stuck.

Last week, I was up in NJ at the J&J headquarter with all the FIRST teams that are sponsored by J&J. There were teams from Brazil and Puerto Rico who attended this 6 hours event to show their appreciation to all their mentors and their sponsor. During that event, I was talking to a team leader (student) of a local team from Florida. He is great and a smart kid. He wants his team to be a student ran team. I had a conversation with him about how mentors can help him. At first, he was hesitating on mentors helping with the robot or the team for that matter, but after an explanation of how students and mentors can work together to build a dominating machine; he put his hand out to shake my hand and invited me to join his team and asked me to find him local mentors who would be able to help them.

You are nothing without a mentor/teacher. I thought I knew everything when I was a sophomore in high school and I thought I could design a better gearbox and a robot than the mentors could. Heck, half the designs I have done were revised by some of the mentors who posted in this thread. There have been times when I got mad because my mentors didn't listen to me. As I grew up, I saw where they were coming from and how right they were. I wouldn't be able to be a mentor if I didn't idolize them and follow certain things that they have done.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

What I mean by that is something that FIRST has obviously thought about in qualifying by adding match points. A regional isn't all about going out there and blowing other teams out of the water; it is about going out there and seeing who has the better robot. All I'm saying by that is I would like to see teams pair up to make the playoffs more of an unknown. The fact that right after alliance selection, at the regionals that we have attended, I could tell you who was in the finals and be right 2/3 times, tells you something. I have only been around FRC for 2 years, so it isn't like I have watched these teams a ton.

Is it better to go in knowing that you are going to win or being evenly match with your oponent?

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Okay, quick message to all who think it isn't fair:
Who cares? FIRST is about preparing us for life in the future. In all honesty, life isn't fair. I believe that it is more accurate and better preparation, if FIRST isn't fair. If you have to work even harder to have a chance at winning, that is a good thing. Anyone who wants it, can have the easy life. I want the life worth living.

Quick message to all who think it is fair:
Who cares? It doesn't matter if someone believes that it isn't fair. All that matters is that you are learning from FIRST. If a company does extremely well, people look into it for foul play. Some will dislike a company just because it is doing well and because it is putting other companies out of business.(Think Wal-mart) This is exactly what is happening in FIRST. You (or other teams) are doing well, and are getting questioned for it. It happens, as long as there isn't any foul play to find (as I'm sure there isn't) then there is no reason to worry or debate.

Overall summary to all:
Who cares? It doesn't matter whether it is fair or not for whatever reason.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

So, would you rather have random partners for eliminations? Or go back to the old days, where, as I understand it, your first partner was chosen for you? How about unlimited declines? Or how about 2003, where if you won the first elimination match by enough, you didn't have to win the second, because you had victory in the bag?

If the "better robot" blows "other teams out of the water", then what are you going to do about it? "Go build a better robot!" is my answer. Yours seems to be "Break up any chance for them to do well."

And remember, anything can happen in eliminations. A chain breaks, a robot tips, penalties... Anything could knock the best team/alliance out of contention.

Incidentally, I've been in/around FIRST for about 10 years now, and I can tell you two or three teams that will be in the L.A. regional eliminations next year if they go, right now, and most likely be right. Does that mean anything? No. All it means is that I know which teams are dominant in my area. Which teams are looked up to...copied...imitated...asked to pick team xyz that's having a bad weekend...all that sort of thing. These teams are also some of the most helpful in the area, sharing know-how, shops, and abilities with other teams. Funny that the dominant teams are apparently trying to lose their dominance, don't you think? Yet somehow, they never do.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

One thing I might add please:

It is also up to the lesser performing robot's team to show the higher seeded and dominant team how they would be an asset to an alliance. The robots aren't always they greatest thing out on the field, but a lot of teams get picked because of their ability to cooperate with other teams and strategize in order to win. A lot of teams I know don't know how to showcase those specific abilities, which, in my mind, is also a huge component in making a winning alliance. Take 177 on Archimedes and 1124 for example. 1124 trusted 177 even though their robot wasn't the best out on the field because 177 knows how to work with other teams and how to communicate as a highly competitive alliance. Basically, what I'm trying to say is that its not just up to the top 8 seeds to select their partners, it is also up to the lower seeded teams to "sell" and market their team to those certain top 8 teams. Just something to think about...

+$0.02

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

It seems to me like this thread has turned toward the 'you say' 'I say' kind of debate so I am not going to further that, however I will offer fuzzy some advice.

Fuzzy,
I am in my 8th year of "FIRST". My first 4 years were in high school, and the latest 4 have been through college as a mentor. I have been looking on these forums from sophomore year of high school on. There are some people on here who I have more respect for than anyone else in this world. I "grew up" reading the wise things these people had to say and the advice they offered to younglings like myself. Some of these very people are the ones you have been arguing with, and the ones opinions whom you have been dismissing. Try not and take these arguments personally (some of these great people can argue like its their job) and just stick to the facts. It is great to see you have so much passion for FIRST, but I really think you need to step back and analyze what is really angering you. As cory stated before, you are using what you are arguing against as support for what you are arguing for.


Hope it helps,
Brando

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

The fact that you can't be right 100% of the time tells me two things. First, the seeding rounds are not adequate to guarantee that the best robots are ranked highest. Second, there is more to winning elimination rounds than sheer robot goodness (teamwork, strategy, and luck all play a large part).

What it does not tell me is that high-ranked teams ought to be handicapped to make the outcome of the competition less predictable. I don't want every team at a regional to have a good chance of winning. I want that chance to go only to those teams who put forth the necessary effort. Winning an FRC tournament is something you must work at, not something you deserve.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

That sounds suspiciously like an argument for a serpentine draft during alliance selections.

I will let you argue that one out with Paul Copioli. I will just sit back and watch.

And sell tickets. :)

-dave


.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Mentors may not be the direct focus of FIRST, but they are just as involved as students are. They play a pivotal role in the success of FIRST and of the success of every team. They are just as important as the students, so their thoughts, comments, opinions, suggestions, and words of infinite wisdom are just as important as the students' thoughts, comments, opinions, suggests, and words of infinite wisdom.

I hope you see the importance of the mentors in FIRST. Just take a moment to look back on this past year and think about where you would have been without your mentors.

Yes, the main focus of FIRST is to teach students about the fields of science and engineering. But, if there are no mentors or engineers, where does that leave the divine "Focus"?

Mentors have just a right to let their opinion be known and have it be heard and acknowledged just like you do. Unfortunately for you, a poor sentence caused a lot of people to look at you in a bad light.

When you post here, remember that you are representing your team. Disclaimers wont save your team's reputation if you post something people get upset about.

I hope you take the time to realize that mentors are essential for the continued and growing success of FIRST.

You could have even said that sentence with a bit more grace. Rather than bashing the mentors, kindly ask for student opinions. It's not that hard to look back at your post to make sure it wont offend anyone.

Now to comment on your actual topic. Here is a student opinion:

Of course it's better to be evenly matched. It makes for more exciting finals. It might be more nerve-racking for the finalists, but the winners feel a better sense of accomplishment. However, finals that are evenly matched are very rare. Boston 2007 is an example of evenly matched finals where the outcome was determined, literally, at the buzzer. It's much more exciting.

The problem is that there is no way to insure that there are evenly matched alliances facing each other in the finals at every competition. It doesn't even happen on Einstein. It doesn't happen at IRI.

So... I don't know what else to say.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

There's a lot of truth in this statement. The interactions between teams, the exchanges of information, the honest marketing of the teams can generate interest and potential partnerships/alliances.

Jane

*goes off to find Andy Baker to tell a little marketing story from the OKC Regional*

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

From my earlier post I still say that the question should be "Is competing in 1 regional REALLY fair to the students?" Our team is blessed to have a solid sponsor that gives us enough support to do some extra events. This helps immensely in improving. Experience makes your team better.

If you only have enough money to do 1 regional, try to get into as many off season events as possible. They are relatively cheap (usually 10% the registration price of FRC regionals), and the events are usually great experiences. The entry fee can be raised for the price of a "carwash", and most places have campgrounds nearby.
Some post season events are invite only. This is where GP plays a big part. Nobody wants to deal with a poor sport, so upsetting persons that make those events is a bad idea.
If you can't compete at one of these events, go be a volunteer. This is a little known secret, but Powerhouse teams often volunteer at regionals. This gives you an up close personal veiw of what works and what doesn't. Doing field set-up, you can often listen in on strategy and see how teams work together. If I hadn't volunteered at the Rookie regional I would have underestimated Das Boot from the Enginerds 2337.
I said it before on page 6, but I think it bears repeating. 1718 has produced a couple of top notch machines the last two years. Next step is figuring out how to turn Good into Great. As frustrated as you are in that position imagine some of the teams that are still working on producing a good machine. Your team has figured out how to get past that step and that is not a small hurdle. Many vetran teams are still working on that. Some vetran teams were great, but as teams got better they stayed the same.

One demographic that FIRST really inspires is the "Do More" kind of people. Many of these same people find it insulting when you ask them to "Do Less". A couple of our kids figured out how to do a post season event on their own as all the mentors were busy. Seeing them succeed (yes making it to the semi's is a big success) without us (mentors) is one of the highlights of my season. It tells me that we (mentors) did a good job during the regular season preparing them.
Go Bees!

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I don't have the answer to this subject but i personally I enjoy going to two regionals. I feel that this it is a greater award for all our hard work. It also gives me a chance to visit places that I haven't been before. Finial i feel that there is nothing better then being at FIRST regional event so if you can afford it why not compete twice.

Matthew Simpson
Team 75 Driver

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Meaning in every regional event you have been competing in (2 each year), your team has been an alliance captain. OK, I'm done with you now.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

The 2008 FRC season had many great experiences and stories. For me, one sticks out from Oklahoma City. Jane and I reffed together there, so she got to experience this with me. Here's the story:

Friday was a rough day for team 2369. Actually, it was a difficult day for many teams, as 27 of the 38 competing teams were rookies to FRC. Penalties were frequent, but diminished as the teams gained experience.

Team 2369 is one of those teams with a handful of students and one lead teacher, Modar Abuljebain. This team worked hard with little resources to create a herding robot, aiming to be the best at what they did. Each qualification match introduced another round of bad luck for 2369. They ended the day 0-6. As head ref, I noticed that their robot would do well each time, but their alliance lost each match. Every time, they would have a working hybrid mode, and they did their job. One match, they even got 4 lines in hybrid.

After the award ceremony on Friday, a few of us were hanging out around the field. Modar from 2369 and the lead students asked to talk to me. They were very discouraged by their last-place standing. They did not like depending on other robots who did not perform as well as theirs. All of them were very frustrated.

Remembering that they had a good hybrid mode, I encouraged them to market themselves and tell teams about their assets. I also kept track of penalties per team (on a tally sheet) and pointed out that they only had one penalty over their 0-6 day. This was one of their points of contention, since their partners got many penalties during their matches.

They never thought about the marketing aspect and alliance selection, and wondered how to do that. I gave them examples of what other teams do, by creating summary sheets, team buttons, and give-aways to advertise their teams. Instantly, I saw light bulbs appear above the team members' heads as hope re-appeared to their faces. They thanked me for the insight and went on their way.

The next morning, I was checking on some things in the pits and the students and Modar from team 2369 stopped me. They handed me a card, showing a picture of their robot on it and some key assets for their robot performance: "4-line hybrid mode", "only 1 penalty in 6 matches", and a couple other simple truths. They said that they were going from team to team in the pits, telling others why their team can help an alliance be better. One highly-seeded team even told them to be quiet about it. This team wanted to pick 2369 and didn't want other teams to learn about their hybrid mode.

2369 ended the qualification rounds by going 2-1 on Saturday morning. They were a 1st round pick in the elimination rounds. They lost in the 1st round of the finals, but they competed very well. On Saturday, they held their heads high as they realized that they were one of the top teams in Oklahoma.

I caught up with Modar and the guys after the competition was over, and asked them to autograph their marketing card. Their quick action and response to a difficult situation was an inspiration to me, and a great experience I will not forget.

Instead of giving up, MTC Robotics realized their accomplishments and worked hard at putting a marketing plan into action in a short amount of time (they didn't sleep much Friday night). This helped their team turn a frustrating season into a very successful rookie year.

Thanks to 2369 for being an inspiration to many.

Sincerely,
Andy B.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I usually do not reply to these sorts of threads (I try to stay in the technical or strategy forums as much as possible), but since my team was specifically mentioned I think I should clear things up.

First and foremost: team 217 always picks teams based on the ranking we give them Friday night and Saturday morning ... always. We use a numerical based system that counts their scoring ability and defensive ability.

Second, we were not the pickers, 469 picked us. We probably would have picked them or 27 if we were the number 1 seed (we were 3).

Third, team 440 was number 16 on our list ... number 16! They should have been long gone before we had a chance to pick them. We should have only been able to get the 23rd or 24th ranked team. We considered them a gift. They consistently did 10 laps in the eliminations and did 11 twice. We didn't want them to play defense because we wanted their points. They were in no way a pity pick. They were picked based on their ranking alone.

As for comments regarding team 1718 I can only say this: I know many of the mentors and some of the students on this team. I have even personally given them a tour of FANUC Robotics. I have a great deal of respect for this team and the mentors and students I know. The attitudes of fuzzy1718 are, to my knowledge, not the prevailing attitude on 1718. Anyway, I just thought I should clear things up.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

So, ignoring the other controversy... The topic, and original controversial idea is that teams shouldn't come to competitions and "blow other teams out of the water". Additionally, it would be generally "better" if alliances were more evenly matched, teams didn't pick the same top teams every year, and the elimination rounds weren't so predictable.

Over the past few years I've gone to competition with teams all over the spectrum. I've been around a team that has won regionals since they were formed. I've also been on a team who's season consisted of only the few qualification matches they were scheduled for (some of which they missed because they had a broken robot). If you've been with a teams that has always been lucky enough to attend multiple events, it's important to appreciate the disappointment of having your whole competition season end in 7 short matches.

When on a team that isn't picked for eliminations it's easy to blame the teams that didn't pick you. It's also easy to blame the out of state teams that seemingly have endless amounts of money to travel and "squash" the little local teams. I think it's good having teams that are powerhouses at competitions, it sets the bar high and give other teams something to strive for.

I've seen a team that grew up from not being strong enough to be consistently picked in elimination rounds, if at all. They have been consistently improving their reputation for having competitive robots. By doing what? By building better robots. They have worked their way up from having mediocre robots to having better robots that make them a consistent first round pick alliance partners, if not alliance captains themselves. They have built stronger, more effective robots and have managed to be "that team" that gets picked despite very low rankings after qualifying matches.

My point? I don't think teams that don't make the elimination rounds need to have higher ranked teams step aside to let them win. Team's grow up from year to year. Teams A, B, and C may be strong powerhouses this year but there's nothing saying that teams X, Y, and Z won't be proving that they are forces to be reckoned with in the years to come. There are plenty of teams who have stepped up their game over the span of a couple years and it's not because other teams felt sorry for them and picked them as alliance partners. Saying that teams need to improve themselves isn't a copout, it's the way things work. It is really less inspiring in giving weaker robots a handicap and "free ticket" to Atlanta than it is to give teams with weaker robots something to strive for in years to come.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Our team has been around for 11 years. Since 2000 when we finally had enough money to go to 2 regionals a season we have attended an away regional and our home regional in Philadelphia. We did go to Nationals twice but we did not get picked up because our robots were not that good. We have won 3 regionals, 2 away and once in Philly. We are now on a roll winning two away regionals in 2006, 2007, and a were finalist in Philly last year. We never go to the same away regional twice so we have been to a lot of places, at great regionals, met great teams, and got to see many different solutions to the same problem. No one ever said please don't come to our regional. In fact they were all gracious and helpful.

We are not a public school so our students pay tuition. We get some sponsors but our students work hard to help raise the money to do this. If we go to an away regional the students pay for just their food, that is it.

What can anyone suggest is unfair?

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

1st off sorry 217 for the mix-up. I racked my brain for who picked who and eeven tried going to TBA to see, but my computer disconnected just as I got to TBA (dial-up:( ) so I said to myself "I'll pick 217 they won another regional, and were on fire that weekend". I ment no harm by it, if it seemed like I was I'm sorry. It is hard for me to use examples and not sound negative, it is simply my personality; always finding what is wrong and never what is right, ask anyone on my team they will agree. If I could change I would.

For those keep who commenting about what I said about mentors, read my post after the first comment, I wasn't talking about me not respecting all that they have done. I didn't want their answers to be the same that they have been, that is all. I am very grateful for everything that they have done, all their information and help. Koko ed, at MARC after the competition, I wanted to shake your hand and thank you, but you weren't at the door anymore. I seen the X-cats' name on the back of your board, did a double take and thought, "Wow, he came a long way." By no means was my comment ment to be direspectful, if it sounded that way sorry; I just wanted more than the same few mentors responding.
I am a mentor of an FLL team, I donate my time at the county ISD to put on a lego robotics camp, I know what it feels like. If some one on an FLL team said "I don't care for your opinoin" I wouldn't react like you guys have. I would walk away and think "one of many", not yell at the kid to make him feel bad.

Those of you who keep saying the words "pity pick", those by no means are mine, and not what I ment. I also never said that I want the veteran powerhouses to make themselves lose, just to encourage them to chose others that aren't going to Atlanta. All I can say is read what I said and jude that alone, a lot of what others have said is not what I ment, if it sounds like it is to you then, well I don't mean it that way.

If people think that I'm a sophmore in high school, who think he knows it all, I'm not that way and I don't mean to sound that way. I just wanted to stir up some thoughts of the veteran teams, while they are making their alliance selection list. If the mentor comment makes you think that way, I have told you my resoning behind that many times, but some still comment like they haven't read what I have said.

Yes, I have only been here when my team has had the opertunity (I think that is how you spell it) to pick during alliance selection, but I wish that my team would put themselves in others shoes while picking. You are right this is by no means the majority view of my team and I'm suprised that no one on my team has asked me to remove these posts.

The top 8 not being able to pick amongst themselves, my reasoning is plain and simple, GLR this year. It was a lot more fun and interesting with all the upsets, and 3rd matches (sometimes 4), I believe due to the top (I think it was) 6 being unable to pick one another. i don't know what happened any where else in the country, but that had to be the most interesting and most fun regional we have attened, that is the majority of my team talking.

The reason for the 2/3 comment was because everything I say is what happens the majority of the time, not always. I know that there have been examples that don't follow what I have said, but I can only go on what I have seen and experianced.

Most of what I say, yeah could apply to my team, but that is not why I am posting it. I am the kind of person who doesn't think of just himself, our team in this case. If it sounds like I do I don't mean to.

Now you can start the "bash fuzzy1718fest" again, but how you can take offense to what I just said, I don't know.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

While I can see how it was fun and interesting I found it just as interesting as any of the other 3 competitions I went to/worked at. I prefer to see a team that works well together and has the best possible partnerships as opposed to one that picked whoever they were "allowed to". I also thought this caused teams that were the best there not to win which is wrong regardless of how many times they are qualified for Championships. The team put the time and effort to build a dominant machine and to raise money to compete, they deserve to win.

Please talk to Craig about this, he has been involved in FRC for years and is very knowledgeable. I think maybe he can help explain why things are done the way they are. Baring that, if I know Craig (or almost any FRC mentor) he will be willing to discuss it with you. I really hope we can get some of your concerns addressed and I hope you can look past FIRST's faults (perceived or real) and see that overall it is a good program.