Quote:
Originally Posted by DonShaw
There needs to be a stop build day at some point or teams would enter the last possible events before states ( if a district model) to get more work time in on the robot. Teams that get a week one home event would be impacted by the lack of time.
In real world there are production deadlines at some point.
Just my fifty cents.
|
Every team that attends a week one event will have had the some amount of time to work on their robot. The same goes for a week seven event, every team that attends (a week seven event) will have the same amount of time to work on their robot. The event dates are your production deadlines and at the end of the season you would still have a championship(s) event where everyone has the same deadline.
In Minnesota we use a similar registration system for FTC, yes the later events tend to fill up faster because teams want more time to practice but in the end it doesn't really make a difference. Most of the competitive FTC teams compete in 2 events, one early and one late event - the change in competitiveness from the first event to the last event is huge but each team gets an equal amount of time to work on their robot between events. At the state championship all teams are on the same level and no one feels slighted by attending an early event vs a late event (at least no one has shared that issue with me).
I did have one Minnesota FRC student and family come up to me at the MN FRC State Championship last year that felt the level of competition was unfair. They felt this way because the teams that had attended two Regionals, followed by the World Championship had multiple hours of unbag and practice time vs the teams that qualified at their first and only Regional but didn't qualify for the World Championship. Eliminating the 6-week build season would fix this (somewhat unique) problem.
As for the topic at hand, I would set my stance as neutral-leaning towards eliminating stop build day, that being said I do really enjoy having a six-week build season.