2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Here are the results and awards from the 2010 IRI.
We did not do judged awards this year.
We had several scholarships and special recognitions.

CHARITY AUCTION -The response to the multiple charity auctions was awesome.
$4425 - Total
(This wil lbe split between Hunger Inc (food pantry) and the Howard COunty Mental Health Association).
$1800 - Mentor Match
$663 - Mentor Match Ranking Votes
$1962 - Auction Items
If you add in the value of the backpacks (80 @ ~$30 each = $2400) we raised over $6500!

COMPETITION
WINNING ALLIANCE
(Winning alliance has an automatic bid to the 2011 IRI and paid entry fee)
330 - Beach Bots
469 - Las Guerrillas
359 - Hawaiian Kids
399 - Eagle Robotics

SCHOLARSHIPS -
Over $10,000 in college scholarships were awarded!
Technical / Open -
($1000 each)
Charles Wense (148)
Justin Chan (1732)
Kelsey Draus (2949)
Kelli Fultz (234)
Claire Libutdi (217)
Miranda Goelz (234)
Ken Beckwith (45)
Chelsea Antilla (1718)
Carlee Andre (1529)

Marcia Beatty Foundation Teaching Scholarship
($1500)
Patrick Cudzilo (71)

IRI TALENT SHOW
Dane Christianson (2949)

IRI VOLUNTEER OF THE YEAR
Brant Bowen

IRI MENTOR OF THE YEAR
Jim Zondag (33)

IRI - Indiana FIRST Foundations Award
AndyMark - Andy Baker and Mark Koors

MENTOR MATCH
2826 - Wave Robotics
469 - Las Guerrillas
1038 - Thunderhawks

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I'm kind of disappointed that there weren't any engineering awards this year. Please bring them back.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I agree, I would have enjoyed to see some engineering awards at this competition, given out during opening ceremonies on Saturday with the scholarships.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

If nothing else, the technokats spirit of Indiana award.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Thanks to all for helping make the 2010 IRI as great as it was. We always say that this event is great due to the teams and people who help make it great.

As for improvements and changes, please keep the comments coming. We tried something a bit different with omitting the judged awards, and we are definitely interested in opinions, even if they are dissenting.

Sincerely,
Andy Baker

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

What, being invited to play isn't reward enough in itself? :P

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Being invited to play was a huge reward for the work this season. We walked away with the top prize: 100's of ideas for robots, pit layouts, NEMO tasks and so many new friends.

Having our VEX Roboteer Jack win the VEX Swept Away contest was the icing on the cake.

Thanks again!

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I thought that the changes were good. I liked having the awards on Saturday morning and that they were brief. The mentor match was fun for those of us who participated and the format was good. Perhaps having it on Friday evening during dinner, before the talent show would be better?

I know that "Spare" teams really want to play, but I continue to support your process of allowing Alliances to decide which of the four teams play each match.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

With all the ties in the elimination rounds, it was a good thing for teams that had to "hit the road," that there was no awards ceremony after the matches on Saturday.

I've always thought that the number 4 team should be requred to play one match per round, since they are officially a "winner" if their alliance wins the competition. Maybe a compromise would be to require the backup to play the second match of a round, if your alliance wins the first match of the round. These are just my thoughts. There are good points to be made for the current setup, including having your backup "readily at hand" if needed.

This may have been the best IRI ever, as far as the level of competition. There were a lot of very good teams that didn't get picked.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

According to the IRI elimination results, 5 of the 8 backup robots played at least one match. Both the champions and the runner-up's backup robot's played. The #3 alliance backup robot played 3 matches.

This year probably had the highest number of backup robots playing, ever.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Out of curiosity, I notice that the match results for Friday appear to be different between the two .pdf files. (Match 15 goes from 11-15 to 11-16, Match 40 goes from 8-10 to 10-10, among others.) I remember Stu announcing on Saturday that the seeding had changed overnight because of the lack of DOGMA. Did I miss that there was a change in scoring as well, or is one file just off a little? (For the two matches listed at least, I believe the scores displayed at the time reflected the earlier .pdf.)

As for suggestions, I'm a first-timer, but this was the best run competition I've ever been to, on- or off-season. The morning award ceremony was great. I missed most of the afternoon ceremony (not the post-finals one, the one where the VEX award was given out), so I'm not quite sure why some awards were given then instead of earlier. It would have helped our logistics to have just the morning and post-finals ceremony, but if there was a specific reason that's fine. I would have enjoyed having judged awards, but I understand the purpose behind not having them, and it did allow more time for visiting pits.
We were regularly pushed to queue for matches very early (up to 6 or 7 matches ahead), which could cut into repair (not to mention free) time, but who am I to complain when you manage to keep almost 80 teams virtually on schedule for 104 matches? Also, many thanks for the full sized practice field. That was exceedingly helpful!
Other than that, I'd highly suggest a "previously played" list if DJs are going to change that often. I love "I Got a Feeling", but unfortunately not quite that much. :P Overall, absolutely excellent job!

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

If the judged awards were to return to the IRI competition, I would be delighted. It would provide increased opportunity for more teams to garner the valued recognition they deserve. While it is true that many teams come with just a few team members who can not always be in their pit, ready for the judges to interview them - the judges are aware of the constraints and pressures and work with them, hoping to provide the teams the opportunity to shine as they naturally do. I saw and recognized that while queuing this weekend and judging these teams would have been an honor and a privilege.

I also respect the extra costs that are incurred in the judged awards but think that those could be worked with.

With great respect for the 2010 IRI planning committee and the decisions that you made,
Jane

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

It seemed that way to me too. I know you sat out one of your finals matches, and 1086 sat out a match in one of their semis. ...and yeh, Team 51 played three times in their hard-fought semi.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Thanks everyone for an incredible event...as always. I have some more thoughts on how things went, but need to get caught up on work for a bit first...

I posted the videos I took of the elimination rounds we were in if anybody is interested...

Q1.1
Q1.2
SF1.1
SF1.2
SF1.3
F1
F2
F3
F4

As well as the 38-0 match with 910 and 107
Q33

Thanks again for an incredible event!!

Don

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Siri,

Good question.

There were two changes that had to be made to the scoring of some of the matches on Friday evening. DOGMA penalty adjustments were one. The other was to fix the method we were systematically scoring each match, as we were using human scorers AND the sensor scorers. If there was a discrepancy between the two scoring methods at the end of the match, we had to choose one or the other: human or sensors. During the first 60 or so matches, we chose to use the human scorers.

After looking at the system and spending much time discussing this between Mark Koors (the FTA), Stu Bloom (the head ref) and myself, we decided to use the sensor system as the accepted score, unless there was a significant (4-5 balls or more) difference between the two systems. Essentially, if there was a catastrophic error in the sensor scoring system, then the human count would be used. If not, then the human count was not used.

So, we had to make some changes mid-stream. We decided to make this scoring method change after match 60 (or somewhere around there), and we also decided to go back and correct the slight adjustments which were made to some of the system scores between matches 1-60 (we were able to see in which matches these adjustments were made). Due to this, on matches that were close in scores, some of the match results changed. For instance, during matches 40 and 55, these changes resulted in ties instead of wins/losses for the teams involved.

I hope this helps explain things.

Andy

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Last year, 222, 179, 45, 148, and 70 got play time, tying this year.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

What I'm about to suggest is either brilliant or horrible - Take your pick.

Anyone at any event can voluntarily decide to assess some aspect of the teams and machines, and recognize the people/person/team responsible for it.

Teams can vote. A panel of distinguished judges can roam around. Light meters can be used to determine which machine is the shiniest. ...

Maybe someone needs to start a tradition of awarding a "Peoples' Choice Engineering Award" that is given out informally; but is awarded through a process that is rigorous enough to make the award worth bragging about.

This could be done off-the-books so that the IRI folks don't have to add it to their list of chores.

Blake

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I thought the trophy ceremony at the end didn't really work. Since there were no awards, everyone just left. It was at the point where I was at the top of the stands and made it down in time (after everyone) to be right next to the field when 1114 got called. I would have liked there to be something after those trophies to make people stick around in the stands, maybe a scholarship or smething.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Thanks Andy, that makes sense. Thanks to the human counters for playing backup, that must have been a heck of a job!

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Well, if you were scoring for 469, it was rather interesting ;) I didn't think that it was too hard, but it was really easy to become distracted slightly. You kind of have to watch the entire field as well as your particular goal, to make sure that you wouldn't be hit by a stray ball (Michelle was standing two feet away from me when she got a ball to the chest from 1114, and I was also almost hit a few times), and to also know where the balls may be coming from (balls randomly appearing in the goal from across the field are rather shocking). The task itself - keeping a tally on a little sheet of paper - isn't hard, but staying focused and attentive is a bit harder when there are 6 amazing robots moving on the field and doing things that robots should not necessarily be doing (i.e. entanglement, fast blinks, and battery death).

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Some general comments and suggestions for the event.

- A huge thank you to the IRI organizing committee for putting on such an amazing event. The amount of work it takes to pull off an event of this scope is overwhelming, yet the people at IRI make it look easy.
- Don't bring back the judged awards. I for one didn't miss them at all, and actually found myself being thankful that we didn't have to sit through them this year.
- Move the mentor matches to Friday night. This way they if a team damages their robot during the course of these matches, they'll have some time to fix the problem. Also, these matches disrupt the flow of intensity between alliance selection and the elimination rounds. I'd have no problem with this even disappearing completely, but I know many people really enjoy them. Friday evening during dinner sounds like a decent compromise

Finally, the elephant in the room. I waited until now to post this in hopes that someone else would make the point first. Frankly I'm surprised that no one has brought this up yet, considering I talked to at least 10 different teams who felt just as strongly as I do about this. This year's IRI felt too big. The level of play during the qualification rounds really seemed diluted compared to past IRIs. The feel was very similar to what you get at the Championships with many people asking "wait, how did this team get here?". Sure the elimination rounds were amazing as usual, but this was only after the field shrunk to 32 teams. In past years when IRI was smaller, the majority of qualification matches felt like IRI elimination matches. The atmosphere in the building was constantly electric.

I'd love to see IRI go down to about 50 teams and use a qualifying point system similar to what's used in Michigan based on regional and Championship performances. At 50 teams there could be more qualifying matches per team, and the event could regain the intimate feel that it used to have which made the event so magical. I know many teams would even be willing to pay a higher entry fee to make up the budgetary difference.

I know this is a bit of a controversial take, hence the silence about it on these forums despite plenty of this chatter at the event. IRI is was an amazing event at 78 teams this year, but a smaller event with more rigid qualifying rules could make IRI an even more exciting and rewarding competition.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

There was an elephant in the room? I had no idea!

Actually, 10 teams doesn't sound all that much but maybe there are more teams who feel the same way and will provide that information to the planning committee.

If judged awards are gone permanently, that puts the emphasis on the robot and the robot competition and that impact will increase as time passes - which is fine if that is what it is all about. It would make it harder for someone like me to travel to an event like IRI when I see more than the robot and look at the spirit of the team and like to recognize that.

Jane

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

While the issue is far from a simple matter, I agree with Karthik. Rejecting a team from the IRI is something I'm very glad the selection committee has not taken lightly, and I also see the positives to allowing loyal and friendly teams to return year after year. However, I think the balance between maintaining a deep, competitive field and including so many teams that contribute to the IRI year after year may be tilted a bit farther away from the competitive side than I'd prefer. Schedules determine seeding at IRI more than any event I've been to, at least in the past two years that I've attended. Basically, the team that lucks out and gets a schedule full of teams that had world class robots gets the number one seed. Not to take anything away from those teams (330 is one of the top 10-20 robots of 2010 and earned their #1 seed), but I really think a field needs to be both deep and even to make an event like this as competitive as possible.

On the flip side, allowing less teams means more rejections, obviously, and that sucks for those teams. I wish there was a way for those teams to be included in some way. I know members of my team opted to volunteer, and in my case, fielded a Vex robot. Perhaps side events or other similar opportunities could be presented for the IRI loyalists out there? It's not a simple problem with a simple solution by any means, and if a more competitive field is called for I don't envy the people that have to make the tough decisions.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

On the planning committee for IRI, there are now 2 WFAs and there is AndyMark to consider. If an event makes the decision to cater only to the elite in the robotic competition - then that decision has to be weighed very carefully because it sends a very clear message. Eventually, it could evolve into only the elite of the elite. That may take a few years but it would evolve to that. When that happens then things change, including the scope of FRC as applied to an off-season.

What happens to the invited teams that are developing and maturing and have the opportunity to be mentored by the teams who have garnered more experience and awards? Those who have had that opportunity, return to their area or region with that experience, bringing the possibility of helping to strengthen their area or region along with them. They have also established some networking opportunities just as the elite teams have.

On the other hand, if an area decided to implement an off-season that was strictly for the elite at the outset - then the purpose of the event would be known up front and center without the history to clutter its intent. IRI has evolved to this point. They did in recent past, but have continued to be more open to the different levels of experience when extending an invitation.

Jane

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Since it is an invitational event, and the term "elite" could be interpreted many ways, making the event smaller would really put pressure on the folks issuing the invitation to invite the right mix of teams to keep IRI an amazing event. If the only criteria is robot performance or competition wins, then you are going to have pure robot competition on the field. But then that is only one aspect of what makes a great competition.

The trick is to come up with an objective formula that makes an exciting competition.

Maybe this is the formula:

10% is reserved for CCA winners
All Einstein teams are invited
30% reserved for other championship teams
30% reserved for regional finalist and winners
10% for team award winners
10% for machine award winners
10% for RCA winners

Then the number of teams to choose is set, maybe 50 team, maybe 75 and then the formula above is applied.


I also think judged awards could work if the number of the awards is kept small; 2 team, 2 machine awards, possibly award multiples of the small number of awards; 2 quality awards, 2 innovation awards, 2 team spirit, 2 entrepreneur awards. Set the number of judges at 20% of the number of teams, and have the judges work with the teams for the interviews. With the right combination of awards/judges/teams it should be possible to make the impact on the teams minimal. Also streamline the award process, teams send 2 representatives to pick up the awards, get the presentation of each award under 5 minutes and less than an hour is needed for 8 awards.

Food for thought

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

You forgot the Indiana teams.
I've heard and seen (not pointing fingers) that Indiana teams literally get the first picks.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I'm from one of the teams that went to IRI this year but I'm pretty sure that if the event were to be downsized we wouldn't have made the cut. Yes we did win the Xerox Creativity Award for DEWBOT VI's innovative 4-wheel independent pivot drive-train at Philadelphia and were part of the 5th alliance and made it to the semis. But we are not 469 (but we aspire to be!)

When we got the invite the team discussion revolved around "We are going to a knife fight armed with a spoon, what are we going to do about that?" So we spent the 4 weeks before IRI doing upgrades to our kicker, possessor and to our programming code.

At IRI we ended up 31st (34th in Ed Laws rankings). I'm pretty pleased with that result when I factor in the teams that were there. So we must of had one of the sharpest spoons there. :)

The win for me was being able to see teams like 148, 1114, 33, etc. operate both on the field and in the pits. Both Clem (Head Mentor) and I came home with notebooks and cameras full of things to try/build/investigate. Most of our roboteers were inspired by things they saw and want to try to expand on. I think this was the point that Jane was trying to make. We are not all big dawgs, but we are learning.

From an event size view I was stunned. It was hard to imagine that there were almost 80 teams there. There was a ton of space we never felt crowded. Match queues were good with Ed doing his world class robot wrangling. I've said it before, it's the best run FRC event I've ever been to. And I thought the qualification matches were better than the finals at FLR and Philadelphia. I've never been on Einstein, so that may be a whole different world.

I like that it's an Invitational and I'm glad that our team squeaked in the door. I'm good that the Indiana teams get first crack at slots. It would seem silly to deny a team in IRI's back yard a chance to play. Granted it may seem like being forced to take your little sister to play with your friends, but I've found that little sisters grow up and become cool people.

So I'm happy to have gotten a chance to go and if offered will accept a chance to take our team in 2011. It was one of those must do robot experiences. But I also understand that it's an Invitational and a smaller tighter team list may improve the experience and matches for the roboteers there.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

The year I saw the details of the actual selection process, it seemed to be more of an "Indiana bonus" than an absolute guarantee, but the bonus can certainly be sized to have the effect of a guarantee in practice. The committee worked very hard to weight various factors and let an algorithm rank teams rather than rely on subjective opinions.

There has been a repeated call for more Indiana offseason competitions. One effect would be to take the "local" pressure off the IRI and let it be more fully elite.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Thanks for all the input.

All of the comments are good, and will be considered and discussed by the planning team at an August event review.

To clarify a few things, just so people understand.

The only teams that are "automatic" are the previous years IRI champions, and the three host teams. Everyone else is subject to the same ranking criteria for the selection.

The event is not to invite the "elite" and I don't even know how to define that. The intent is to invite the teams that best fit our selection criteria. That includes season performance on the field, some awards, loyalty, special considerations and many other factors. And, teams have to apply, and they have to be able to attend (many teams struggle to travel in the summer.)

And, we are smart enough people to not publish the criteria, because there would be multiple "IRI prediction algorithms" running as soon as the CHP was done. :D

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

While we're still posting suggestions, and on a slightly less serious note...is there any reason why Cotton-Eye Joe hasn't been on the music playlist for two years? There weren't any huge field errors, and I'm sure that you guys are trying to keep everyone focused on the event, but it would have been nice to be able to do some dancing between the elimination matches and during the time outs. One can only do the Chicken Dance, YMCA and the Cha-Cha Slide so many times :/ (also...Cupid Shuffle?)

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Please, please, do not re-add Cotton Eye Joe to the playlist. I was very happy with its absence! :p

Thanks for the clarification about the selection criteria.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I concur. Cotton-eye Joe, YMCA, Chicken Dance....they are on my DNP list. Do not play. For the love of god.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I thought the DJ's mix was awesome and was really happy to hear and sing along to some of the Beatles stuff. It was a perfectly timed pick-me-up during a tired time of the day. Good stuff!

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

As the coach of a team that was likely viewed as a "how-did-they-get-here," I feel I must speak up on my team's behalf.

I haven't looked at the official rankings, but if we weren't last, I'd be terribly surprised. Here's why:
On Thursday several members of the team were at LNHS to help setting up the field and pit area for our 6th IRI. It was a hot July Indiana day, there were no outside windows around, and honestly our thoughts never really turned to weather. I have no idea how long the rain pelted our robot sitting in the back of a pickup truck. All I know is we went outside to get our pit installed and saw the wrath of God coming from above.

We took off and apart all jaguars, victors, and servos and dried them overnight, we changed out the PDB and sidecar (rewiring a robot on Friday morning is no small task, especially when you're in the first match), we re-lubed the gearboxes, but still were having communication problems, mostly on the field that we couldn't duplicate in our pit. Two matches, the robot spent the teleop period rebooting. One match, we had about a 2.5-second delay between sending the drive signals and the robot operations responding. One match, a freshly-charged battery read less than 8 volts (we hooked up a multimeter to it after the match and found it really still had >12V). One match, the entire left side of the robot refused to work.

I've really got to hand it to the students - despite all these setbacks, most of which we couldn't replicate outside of matchplay - they kept their heads up, they kept troubleshooting, and on Saturday our alliances won both matches to bring our final record to 3-5.

When the planning committee extended an invitation to our team, I'm fairly sure they didn't expect to get a waterlogged robot on Thursday.

As far as the call for more midwest offseason events, I submit to you CAGE Match - October 16.

I'm certain the folks that run IRI, and have done it for 10 years now, are much smarter than I am, and it is not my place to question their methods. Obviously they're doing something right.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

It seems like every team has been through an event like that at one point or another in their history. I hope for your teams sake that all the parts were recoverable and you don't incur too much cost to replace damaged controllers.

I hope your team isn't discouraged by these events. Unfortunately these lessons in seviceability and maintainability never come at an opportune time, but I guaruntee someone on your team suggests planning for a similar contigency next year. Your team will shrink wrap your robot well for transit and have very servicable electronics just in case.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Thanks for your words of encouragement. Thanks also to Alan Anderson, Andy Baker, Mark Koors, Chris Mills, and Chris Noble for your help in diagnosing problems.

As a side note, Mr. Lavery was gracious enough to autograph our robot: "See you on Mars Dave Lavery".

I suppose he is very comfortable with the idea of water on Mars. :yikes:

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I'm pretty certain that Dave also empathizes with you on the travails of handling extreme rain/robot interactions at IRI. ;)

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I will agree with Kara here. I agree that the Cotton-eye Joe shouldn't be played more than 2 times in a weekend, but during the two regionals I went to this year the song to play during time outs and field issues was the Chicken Dance and the YMCA and those do nothing to help move the time along.

In general I thought the music could have used some help. Most of it was 80's rock music (no offense to anyone but when it is played softly and they repeat songs 3 LONG songs in one day it makes it monotonous... especially when scouting). But when they did play something it was the same three songs Be My Escape by Relient K, and Alejandro/Telephone by Lady Gaga. Before going right back to the 80's. Even in the eliminations when at most regionals they pull out the "intense music" as one DJ told me, it was the same rock music that was played all weekend.

I'll listen to rock, but after this years IRI I will kill not to hear it again! :P

Other than that it was a great event as always!

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Has anyone given any thought to the idea that maybe our hosts were doing the best that they could given circumstances? Do any of us really know anything about the DJ situation this year and how it came to be or how it worked out? We had good music and I saw lots of folks celebrating and dancing. To my knowledge, no one left the party because of the music or replays.

Just some thoughts,
Jane

P.S. Idea: something that would be productive and helpful would be to start a thread with suggestions for a dynamite playlist for events. I know there have been threads like that in the past - perhaps it's time to make one for the 2010-11 season. That beats the heck out of complaining.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Thanks to all for great input here. We will definitely pay more attention to the song list next year, and even buy some requested songs that we didn't have available. Our DJ for next year is already working on this.

My personal opinion on this would be to strive for variety. This year, we really didn't worry about it too much. With some DJ change over during long days, some songs got repeated. Next year, we will keep a history of what was played and also strive for more variety.

Andy B.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I also wanted to point out that the DJ's song choices at IRI, at least on Saturday when I watched, were pretty good overall. I've been to events where DJs just seem to put either some terribly overplayed stuff on over and over, or once even a single album just played through. Here there was a good variety of songs that mixed basic genres and styles fairly frequently.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

This is the correct answer.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

If it hadn't been for Cotton-Eye Joe
I'ld been married long time ago
Where did you come from where did you go
Where did you come from Cotton-Eye Joe


What amazing lyrics, who couldn't love that?

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

country-techno.
some marriages should never be allowed.
period.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Jane, I completely understand the music situation and I wasn't surprised it was played in the first place. Some off seasons play it because it is older volunteers who grew up in the days of rock and prefer that over newer music of the younger generation; which can become a problem when the competition is aimed towards the younger generation. I don't think that the music choice would even be a pathetic reason to leave the event that would be just plain rude. And I am not saying that 80's/rock is bad or shouldn't be played, there are some songs I love, but some songs were played in excess *2 to 3 times in the course of a day and there wasn't much variety. If there were more different 80's/rock songs I wouldn't have a problem since they would be different and new, but most of the songs played were repeats. If I came out as though I am complaining, I apoligize that is something I can do and not realize I am complaining. :o

I remember at an FLL event I helped volunteer at they had Grooveshark set up (free website with millions of songs) and they used that for their music/song requests to keep cost down and please those who came up requesting songs.

So I would just recommend more variety and fewer repeats.

P.S. Jane, they are looking for areas that could use some work. I wasn't the only one up in stands who commented on the music (a few other students from other teams around us did too).

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I know, thus the suggestion to start a thread with a suggested playlist in mind. I certainly could not put one together; it would be awful. :)

Jane

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

Agreed/guilty!;) My style is everywhere but could probably only contribute a few good songs that I own, most are songs I've heard at competitions and never know the names of! :(

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I like the idea of a thread for song suggestions too. Music must be hard at events like this with people of all ages and from all parts of the country and a few outside of the country. But it seems very important too. I almost think you need a professional at least at the in-season events who can sense the mood of the crowd and energize it when needed. Even songs I don't normally like, I enjoy at the right moment, such as the song playing in the background at the Boston final matchhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wysi3s7h0qA, which seems like the perfect song for that moment.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I rather liked the 80s music... But I would. Glad someone likes the Foo Fighters as much as I do, haha.

A thread for suggesting music isn't bad, but some people hate on songs that others have fun with (Chris, Akash :P ). I wouldn't call myself an Cotton-Eyed Joe fanboy, but playing it once or twice, I wouldn't complain about.

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

New thread - as per suggestion. Questions:

1) To play or not to play - the traditional "canon" of regionals, like YMCA, Cotton-Eye Joe, etc.
2) Repeats - how many is ok (and for what length of competition)?
3) How much thought really needs to go into this?
4) Any good resources/websites? e.g. grooveshark.com, etc.
5) Just in general, what do you want to hear? (why?)

Re: 2010 IRI Results and Awards
 

I did not hear any of this discussion at the event and was surprised when I read about it here. I have been thinking about it over the past week and decided to share my thoughts and perspective.

First I will put my comments in context. I am coming from the perspective of one who has felt fortunate that our team has been invited to attend I.R.I. each of the eight years we've been in existance, able to attend seven of those. Our robot has never been among the best at the competition; our robot's performances have varied year-to-year. I appreciate that the selection committee uses a broad set of criteria and I understand the wisdom of not sharing their criteria ::safety::

Compared to the Championship event, I.R.I. is much more intimate. I don't think that the growth in participation has compromised the intimacy. I think that the excitement of the event and the level of energy has been enhanced by the larger numbers.

I understand that the excitement and outcome of matches can be highly influenced by the effectiveness of each alliance partner. I can't say that I notice a difference in the Qualification Rounds from previous years. However, I know that Karthik is always data-based and accurate in his communication; therefore, I accept it as true.

I offer the following alternative to reducing the size of the event. Create two tiers of teams that compete in different "brackets" during the qualification matches. Add four alliances to the Elimination Rounds (eight from Tier 1 and four from Tier 2 with the top four Tier 1 teams having a bye in the first round).

I understand the additional effort required to manage it and the risk of going over on time in Eliminations. I think that it would enhance the experience of all of the teams attending.