Re: The Divisions...
 

Perhaps assign regionals to specific divisions? This could stay static from year to year but would allow teams to choose their divisions.

The downside would be that it would lock teams that had won an event together. Hmm, thinking more about it, this is probably a bad idea. Maybe it will spark some other ideas though...

Re: The Divisions...
 

I like this idea however it seems overly complicated, yet more fair.

Re: The Divisions...
 

I really like this idea. My first year ('05) we were in Archimedes and I was told this was the "best" or the "hardest" division mainly because of Beast (correct me if i'm wrong they one 3 Championships in and short period of time from Archimedes). However each year we switched divisions. It turned out, until last year, that only Archimedes and Newton (or Galileo i could be wrong) had won on Einstein. The divisions need some sort of consistency so they can build a "history."

sorting by region would not be very fun, you'd just see the same teams again.

My idea on how to qualify to have a permanent division:
Division Champion
Division Finalist Alliance Captain
Chairman's Winner at Championships (chooses their division)
Any team over 5 years old can request a certain division, but not guaranteed with older teams getting priority.

what do you think?

Re: The Divisions...
 

Here's a thought that I haven't completely thought through but it seems to have possibilities.

How about a format where you are randomly assigned a field, you compete for x matches (Thursday) and then separated by ranking and maybe each field is quartered up into different fields....i.e. top quarters from each field go to the same field.

Competition resumes and after x matches (Friday) then the field is re-quartered. Saturday, normal qualifying matches, alliance selections and playoffs to the big show.

Would this not result in the top Thursday teams from each division sorting out themselves on Friday and being redistributed to each field to result in a somewhat fair cross-section in each field? Perhaps the re-distribution each time should be counting off, 1, 2, 3, 4, in order of ranking to determine which field you move to?

I'm probably way off but it is late, I am tired and I can't quite stumble through it tonight. I will re-look at it in the morning. :confused:

Re: The Divisions...
 

I like the idea of a draft. It would be fun to watch some of the experienced mentors (and aspiring students) try to snatch the best up and coming teams.

Re: The Divisions...
 

Kind of like this: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...49&postcount=8

Re: The Divisions...
 

I would absolutely positively hate that system. I can't imagine having to play every year against 27, 33, 45, 51, 67, 68, 70, 71, 111, 469 etc year after year. Point of fact, we already get to see enough of the Michigan Teams! Don't force me to go through them all again in a division at Nationals!

Re: The Divisions...
 

very VERY good question Joe

In the world cup, we don't remember which team was in which group, but we remember which teams were in the "group of death". I think FIRST sort of has to employ this strategy, Galileo in 2008 and 2009, Curie in 2007, Newton in 2006 Archimedes in 2005 etc. etc. could all qualify as "divisions of death". Those teams faced the toughest challenges in their division that year. and they should be appreciated. it's just the general FIRSTer needs to understand his/her history.

if FIRST was to classify divisions to a particular strategy, I would suggest one of two methods.

Location: have each division represent one segment of the United States, East, South, West and Midwest (Canada = MW, Israel = West). and let the champions duke it out so we can know which region of the country is truly the best.

ie

East 11(NJ), 20(NY), 25(NJ), 40(NH), 41(NJ)
South 16(AR), 79(FL), 86(FL), 108(FL), 116(VA) etc.
West 100(CA), 115(CA), 159(CO), 192(CA), 254(CA) etc.
Midwest 1(MI), 27(MI), 33(MI), 45(IN), 51(MI) etc.

Awards: classify divisions by the four Robot Awards given out at regionals,

Creativity 1153(NH), 1683(GA), 51(GG), 343(FL), 20(WOR) etc.
Engineering Excellence 40(NH), 1466(GA), 1912(LA), 1625(KC), 1538 (SDC) etc.
Industrial Design 78(NH), 25(NJ), 2377(DC), 1379(GA), 1622(SDC) etc.
Quality 1073(NH), 1727(DC), 63(ROC), 1515(OR), 1717(SDC) etc.

make the regional judges classify each team in one of these categories to make this system work.

Re: The Divisions...
 

I never saw the original thread back then, but man, that has got to be the best idea I've read all season!
Imagine the hype for championships!!

Re: The Divisions...
 

I definitely like the idea of a draft.

The popularity of drafts for professional sports has been skyrocketing in the past couple of years. Whether it was randomly assigned (out of a hat) or chosen by "captains" of sorts doesn't really change much. I think the idea of making an event out of the division selections would be very cool to do.



I also really like the idea of winners being frozen into one division. It would be really cool to know that perennial powerhouses need to "defend" their title year to year. There would certainly be some pride knowing your a team who has been locked into a division because of your performance.


-Brando

Re: The Divisions...
 

Don't let teams know whether they were "picked" or randomly placed and I'm all for it.

Re: The Divisions...
 

I hate the idea of being placed into divisions geographically. I want to play with all the teams we never get to see, not all the teams we ALWAYS see.

Re: The Divisions...
 

For any given year, let the previous four Championship Chairman's Award Winning teams serve as Division Captains for a draft. It's an added bonus for the CA winners and there would be rotation through the years as to who is Division Captain...

Re: The Divisions...
 

This may seem odd...

But, what if division were by major sponsor type. Like what if there was aerospace, automotive, military, construction, uncategorized, etc. It could get interesting; plus, it might be a way to get sponsors more involved...just a little competition perhaps? I think it would definitely give some sentimentality to the divisions. Think of all the hype. You might get completely GM alliances. Or perhaps the Big Three might join up. I think that would make the Championship very exciting.


There would have to be a process for teams with more than one type. Some sort of lead sponsor status or something. Also, some teams might go into an uncategorized category if they have lots of small sponsors.


just a concept.

- Jamie

Re: The Divisions...
 

To be fair, I've been to Atlanta once... so I'm probably not as fired up about this as those for whom it is an annual spring ritual.

However when I went, I had no problem knowing who I wanted to cheer for on Einstein. It had nothing to do with their division, and everything to do with the team and their machine. So, based on my one experience there, it seems to be that there are lots of great solutions here... but I just don't seem to see that there is a problem.

FIRST tried a few years back to play around with the match scheduling algorithm for regionals, reducing the randomness by pre selecting qualifying alliances based on team number.

I think we all agreed after that, that randomness was a good thing. So I'd be very careful about reducing randomness in Atlanta.... even a little bit.

Jason