Quote:
Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery
The inverse of this discussion is important as well. It's entirely possible to be proportionally overrepresented in the regional system. Ontario held several smaller regional events, and as a consequence ended up being the most overrepresented population in FRC at the world championship event.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by PayneTrain
They don't have to do anything, but hypothetically if only 20 out of 110 teams from an area got a bid into championships, while another region got 30 out of 115 bids, someone is going to call BS on misrepresentation based purely on geography, event structure, venue size, etc.
Provided that there are a series of normalizations for the points system, it's probably the best order AFTER you get through the idea of ensuring 6 teams from every regional go, instead of 5 or 4 or 3.
|
For those of you playing along at home, I was comparing MAR to Ontario.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banderoonies
One idea is to have an entire division of rookies (first and second year teams) in one division. you can crown a rookie champion this way. All teams winning rookie award are placed there. rookies that have won a regional can have a choice. just a thought.
|
Am I the only person that remembers we cut the fields down from 100 to 32? You're needlessly cutting out teams like 2013's New London Robotics because I can only assume you'd rather have rookie teams bumming around in their like-tenured squalor so you aren't weighed down by their varying abilities at champs, as other people on this board have thinly veiled this opinion before.
Since the culture changing awards moved to the regional level, there have been some wide fluctuations in robot acumen across those awards, and as the number of regionals grow, the more variation we can get. The district system is allowing this to be solved by curtailing the number of RCA/RAS/REI awards at the R/SCMP level.