Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber
They aren't supposed to.
And most of the times judges don't get to watch many of the matches.
|
I had a student complain to me once that since most judges weren't FRC people, they generally didn't know how to objectively judge for awards.
And I just said "That's the point." Having judges do what they do isn't about objectively determining who the "Innovation in Controls" award winner should be- it's about exposing industry leaders who are often judges to these amazing students and exposing these students to industry leaders.
Ex: I talk to Team A and Team B, and Team A's students tell me in detail about their sloppy control system for their mechanism, while Team B wins the regional with their tightly and highly controlled mechanism but can't discuss it with the judges. I, as an FRC person who understands what these students are doing, might still award the award to the winning team, whereas an outsider judge will award it to the team who can talk about what they built better. That is (I think) an intentional part of the system. I place more focus on results, whereas a non-FRC person will place more emphasis on the attempt and the innovation than the results, while also learning about what FIRST-er's do.
I think the main problem with the regional system is when finalists aren't invited to championships or when the second best robot at an event loses in the semifinals because they were on the wrong side of the bracket or something.
What if (bold idea), before week 7, FIRST polls a number of experts on who the best 20 or so teams to not make championships are (
kind of like this, but two weeks earlier) and invites them to the championship event.