View Single Post
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 23-06-2015, 12:17
notmattlythgoe's Avatar
notmattlythgoe notmattlythgoe is offline
Flywheel Police
AKA: Matthew Lythgoe
FRC #2363 (Triple Helix)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Newport News, VA
Posts: 1,721
notmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond reputenotmattlythgoe has a reputation beyond repute
Re: FIRST Chesapeake Districts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber View Post
I guess the TL;DR - I don't care about 2 regional teams when they complain that they have to travel to their second district since the OVERWHELMING majority already have to travel and their costs for the part of the season that everyone gets (districts) will likely go down approximately $4000. I've included 2014 data backing my claim that a large percentage of teams attending only one event and incur travel costs already.

Of the 1258 (46%) teams that attended only one regional in 2014[1] (2709 total teams), 577 (~46% of the 1258) traveled more than 40 miles and thus likely incurred some sort of travel cost (likely hotel stay) for their first event. The big thing I'm trying to get at is that for many teams a single event is ALREADY incurring travel costs and we should be trying to locate districts to minimize that number when locating events.


Edit- I'm more than willing to provide json dumps of my data should you want to recreate it/play with it.

Edit2 - In case anyone is curious, there ARE who attend 2+ regionals and were within 40 miles of both, here's your list: [333, 353, 369, 371, 623, 907, 1230, 1389, 1796, 2421, 2964, 4456, 4464]

[1] This is the last year I have data handy for.
I 100% agree with you. My point was, using cost-per-match to say that districts are cheaper is incorrect. However, I think we can both agree that you can use the cost per match to evaluate the value of a district event. Even if you can only afford to go to a single district event you get more value from the event than you do from travelling to a single regional.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankJ View Post
Georgia is also going to districts. Highly likely for 2016. Near certainty 2017. This is going to make it extremely difficult for our southeast friends that are not going to the district model to attend 2 events. It also means regional in SC & NC will be sort of land locked surrounded by districts. Sorry for the semi off topic semi rant.
I believe I've heard that NC is in talks to go to districts in a similar fashion to Indiana.

Last edited by notmattlythgoe : 23-06-2015 at 12:19.
Reply With Quote