Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I can admit that today our team has opportunities that other teams might not have; however I can remember the day when we were getting squashed by the competition and had to work our way up. Back in 2000, we idolized Chief Delphi, HOT, the BEAST, TechnoKats, and several other teams. We were often in their way during matches and had to learn how to be a better team. We used these teams as role models and outstanding examples of how to do it the right way.

Obviously, money helps, but it takes time and not money to inform your community about FIRST in order to raise funds. We posted our business plan on the forum and have taken much time and effort developing our program over the years...it did not happen over night, and we needed to be shown by veteran teams who "invaded the regionals" that hard work will eventually pay off.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

accusing teams of attending more than one regional only to 'steal' the awards from the local teams is the only unfair statement here. A team who does this is just as apprehensive about winning anything as the team who attends the local regional, and in no way are the 'bullies' of FIRST. Rather, they are the ones who are there to inspire, always coming up with an effective design for the current game.
If teams would take the time to learn from such excellent teams instead of trying to find a way to impede their ability to do well (aka restricting them to one regional), then maybe the bar would raise itself?



complaining about the good teams in an effort to cut down their success is definitely not one of the ideals of FIRST, nor should it be in the real world.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I would love for any caliber team to come to my home regional prove to all of us "locals" that their design is truly better than ours.

If 330 showed up on our doorstep at VCU, I would have been pretty happy to be able to see such a great team in person. The same goes for 254, 67, 1565, 1114, or any other team with a simple or unique design. To me, it doesn't matter that their design beats mine: what does matter is that I get to see it and learn from the ingenuity of it. Sure, it's frustrating that some awards are won over and over by the same team (meaning we go back to sponsors with almost nothing to show for measured success) but to be honest, competition for awards is not the point of FRC. Most sponsors understand that.

Every veteran team has the opportunity to sign up for a sort of lottery every other year to go to the championships. There is no reason any team that sustains itself for a few years should complain about not being able never making it to the championship. Be patient, save some money, and go when you can: it is very worth it.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

In addition, how will limiting the amount of regionals that powerhouse teams attend increase the number of teams over 2000 that end up on einstein. The powerhouse teams will still end up in the championship. Maybe a few more teams over 2000 will get in but for the most those teams will not be ranked highly at regionals anyway ( I know some are like 2056). Additionally we were on Archimedes this year and there were a good amount of teams over 2000; however, most are not good enough to be selected for an alliance and certainly not to win the division ( I know there are exceptions). Increasing the amount of high number teams at the championship will only make the competition more boring as many of those teams function quite poorly and simply cannot stand up to the elite teams.

Also, we are team number 1771, a high number, and we were one of the top hurdling robots in the entire championship. Just goes to show that high numbered teams can get into, and do well at the championship.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

The attendance of multiple regionals is not only fair but it should be encouraged.

Our team, a veteran team, typically has been attending 2 regionals and the Championships since 2000. We work all year to raise the funds for the travel to these events and they are an intricate part of how our team operates.

reasons for multiple regional attendance include-
1. exposure of the team to new opponents- after many years of competing at our home NJ regional we have pretty much seen the same teams annually and we know them well. So every year we try to visit some other region where we would meet new challenges and make new friends.

2. rewards for our workforce- Frankly it is no treat for my hard working mentors and team to spend a weekend in Trenton, NJ. But if I can arrange a trip to Vegas or Hawaii it rewards the elders for all their hard work and motivates them to work even more for the following year.

3. contribution to the local regional- One tenet of our team is that we believe in contribution to the local regional (NJ) and we volunteer there, work on recruitment, etc. THAT is where the local involvement should be more encouraged. At distant regionals my crew that worked at NJ get their chance to have some fun.

4. Motivation- the work required for travel to a distant regional requires the team to gear up and continue the FIRST experience all year round. If the team wishes to do the work why shouldnt they be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor? Right now we are fund raising for the 2009 travel regional.

5. Fairness- The easy response is "who said anything is fair?". Hard work SHOULD get rewarded but obviously not all teams can attend multiple events. I personally believe that if a team sincerely believes in a goal and they work to get it they will be successful. But nobody ever said it is easy.
The only fairness issue I would insist on is that EVERY team be welcome in their home region as first priority. Second regional teams should never be able to bump teams that have nowhere else to go and I know that FIRST tries to insure that they cant.


Now my rant on FAIRNESS at regionals-

Chairman's Awards should not be awarded the same team at the same region two consecutive years in a row. If the team is truly worthy that should be evident to judging panels at more than one region and they should apply in different regionals. And at a given region the monopolization of the award by the same team annually makes the CA seem unattainable to the other teams and defeats the motivational incentive behind the award. Multiple CA's- sure. But the same regional year after year? Aren't there other teams at that regional worthy of something too?


Something to chew on...

WC :cool:

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Arizona no longer has to worry about that one...:D Since 2004, I think 842 has won every RCA there. Now, they can't win it there or anywhere. Problem solved!

In all seriousness, I think this might or might not be a good idea. It would motivate teams to go to multiple regionals. However, sometimes a RCA winner can't afford to go to more than one regional a year, so they need to go to a farther-away regional to compete for it again. And it would show just how good a team is.

Hmm...Interesting side discussion, Wayne. I'll have to think about it a bit more.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Three important lessons your team might not get without going to more than one regional-

1. Importance of robust and reliable design and fabrication
2. Understanding of how strategy evolves with each week (shared learning)
3. Adaptation to new and different circumstances

Three important factors that having regional winners at more than one event MIGHT make it worth the risk to a smaller or newer team-

1. “David vs. Goliath” factor- They might take down the big guy
2. “Rocky” factor- They might go the distance against the big guy
3. “Tiger Woods” factor- Everybody loves watching that guy’s game

Alternatives, such as an elimination process where regional winners only play regional winners by design EXCLUDES more teams than it INCLUDES (not from competing but from competing with the really strong teams). I'd be afraid we all would loose the opportunity to share in a pretty amazing community.

When my dad started a rookie team, they couldn't and still can't afford two regionals, but there are alternatives, such as WATCHING TOGETHER the live or recorded feeds of other regionals and COMPETING in off-season events...two relatively inexpensive ways to get some of those same benefits.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

There are a few ways to look at this,

1. The local teams are not getting chances to represent their area, and since they are truly not "regionals" it is kinda unfair for an area not to compete within itself.

2. Then again, you have those teams who may not get in through one regional but they win another one. Last year we lost Peachtree Regional but I am confident that had we gone to another regional, we could've won.

So I think there is no SOLID answer. Another debate.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I will add my voice to those who say that inspiring the "little guys" is a better thing than holding back the well-resourced teams.

That you use the word "competition" instead of "program" is a good clue to your mindset here. Try to broaden your goals to include the stated mission of FIRST, rather than focusing on winning medals. Does it sting to be beaten by a powerhouse veteran team? You bet. Does it make me want to pout and go home? No way! It makes me want to do better next time. It inspires me to do better next time.

(Full disclosure: Team 45 always goes to multiple regionals. We rarely fail to compete in the elimination rounds. We won the last National championship to be awarded to a single team. I might be so far removed from Skippy's situation as to be completely unable to understand his viewpoint.)

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

why would a rookie team ever even expect to do well in their first competition anyway? Would they expect to do really well, when the majority of the time they get destroyed? Wouldnt there be a Huge problem with First if rookie teams had it easy? Why would Rookie all star teams want to go to Atlanta if they knew they would get destroyed?
The answer is simple, new teams are not started with the hope of doing very well their very first years, they start for the overwhelmingly positive First experience which they most certainly get.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Yes, yes it is

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Traveling to multiple events is an exceptional way to spread the FIRST message through the visitor team and the visitee team (is that a word?).

We have competed in two regionas for several years, and try to pick different places to travel, not in an attemt to crush the local teams but to see other parts of the country, meet the teams we read about and see from a distance, and enjoy the different ways regions play together (there are differences, but that is another thread). I am always amazed at several robots and several teams that we meet when we are on the road.

As a team, we have been to Phoenix, Orlando, Kennedy Space Center, Houston, Cleveland, Grand Rapids, Chicago, Richmond, and Long Island, plus our 'local' event at Purdue. We have traveled to off season events in other states. Each place has its' own unique atmosphere. The volunteers are great to meet and talk to. We invite others to come to Indiana.

For many of our students, it is their first trip out of the state. It might be their first time to fly and see a very unique part of the country.

I am excited about some of the new regionals - I am looking forward to Oklahoma City and Washington DC in the coming years because i think they will be cool events, and they are cities with exceptional histories.

There are lots of reasons to travel to far away events and multiple regionals.
If you think most teams do it just to beat the locals, i think you are grossly underestimating those teams and their motivations.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Really this arguement is big guys vs. little guys. big guys want to pwm (pun) and little guys don't want big guys to pwn...

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

I can only speak with the knowledge that I have with our team. Team 188 has been around a long time. The first year that I was involved with the team was 2003. I believe that that was the first year that we had done multiple regional events. The last event we went to was West Michigan and this was the first regional we had won. To this day we have attended 2 or 3 regionals a year and have come close but we have yet to win a second regional. Our team is competitive and we always seem to make the elimination rounds but we still have not won.

Working hard to raise money we have earned our way to multiple events. We are always competitive but we also don't put everything into winning. Our team is always willing to help any team that asks. We share what supplies we have, invite teams to our school to build, spend time at events helping others. We are also a team that does not have a lot of equipment. Come by our school and you will see our students with normal hand tools and some mentors cutting with the table saw. We have no engineers (yet, come on Shawn) on the team but we have experienced mentors with varying skill sets. The students are amazing. They see what others have and instead of complaining work hard to be just as good as other teams.

We also draw from the experience of other teams. Our drive base is based on that of team 25 who graciously sent us their plans and gave us their blessing with our project. Some of our best friends (and team 188 alumni) are from team 1114. Even though we seem to continually get beaten by them we strive to prove ourselves better. We also have no problem sharing with them or any other team. This is what makes FIRST so great. Having money does not mean that you will win. Going to multiple regionals doesn't mean that you will win. But I will tell you that the more regionals that you attend, the more friends you will make, the more inspiration you will receive and the the more chance that you will see that you have been winning all the time, you just didn't notice.

Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
 

Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread.

Let me state a few things about my perspective of FRC.

I am a relatively new mentor at Team 178- I had a lot to do with our team for FRC 2007Rack'n'Roll (my first year of FIRST), but then very little to do with it this year (a lot to do with my personal schedule at home and workload at work).

Last year, the team took home the EIA in Atlanta, but this year, our team seemed to struggle a bit, and really didn't seem to have as much momentum going into our local regional and to Atlanta. The ever-changing team dynamic as old members move on to college and new members come into the team is definitely something that forces FIRST teams to have to find new ways of re-energizing themselves on a regular basis (and definitely this is different to the business world I live in daily).

I have no sour grapes against teams who have competed in multiple regionals, nor with those teams who out-designed, out-programmed, and out-lasted the team I've been involved with. You guys, gals, gents and ladies have done everything in your power, and within the current rules of FIRST, to attain those goals - the programs you initiated to start new FLL, FTC and FRC teams were innovative, as were the robots themselves, and also the many other ways that teams reach out to their communites, educators, and legislators to put science and technology on the same pedestal as sport is often viewed. All of these are good things that come out of FIRST.

Maybe I've been hung up on the term "regional", and as others have pointed out, the word "invitational" maybe seems a better fit for the way the current FRC competition operates.

I think I also feel strongly that FIRST needs to figure out how to allow newer teams (and mine is NOT in this category, so this isn't some sort of self-fulfilling barrow I'm pushing) to be recognized for their efforts across ALL categories, not just Rookie Inspiration / All-Star / Highest Seed.

Should there be a purely rookie-focused championship series (in addition to the existing Championship) where only new teams of 1-2 years standing in FRC are eligible to compete ? Multiple competition tiers in FRC would be similar to what is found in baseball with the major/minor leagues and also in other sports.

As an added wrinkle for 2009, I think the new control system has the potential to exacerbate the gap between veteran, well-resourced teams, and those who are new or struggling to attract mentors who can assist the teams to program the new control system (whether that's in LabView or C/C++). Personally I am excited about the possibilities, but in a 6 week FRC build season, it will be a challenge to really learn how to wring maximum performance out of the new system and make the most out of it - hopefully we'll get enough time in the pre-season period to familiarize ourselves with the hardware and software, and enough on-field time to iron the bugs out (again, it seems that the ability to compete in multiple regionals may really enhance the performance of those teams who can do this)

J