Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzzy1718
 Think of it this way, if a team competes at more than one regional, then that team has the ability to get more than one spot in Atlanta. If a team goes to and wins more than one regional, then they are taking spots away from other teams in Atlanta. Also most of the teams, from the midwest at least, that travel to more than one regional already have bought their way into Atlanta.
Don't get me wrong teams should be allowed to go to more than one regional, but if a team is eligible for Atlanta already, or has won an award, then they shold be deemed ineligeable and not be allowed to enter elimination rounds if they have won or have paid their way to Atlanta.
Also in regards to FIRST's response to winning at more than one regional, don't they have a cap on only entering essays for awards at only one regional? So why not carry that same idea into the competiton. Think about it that was put in place so the same teams don't win at all their regionals and so that more teams will be in the running for atlanta, in the case of chairman's.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, if they have such resrictions in one area of the competition, and that is the part that is in the officials' hands, then why not apply it to all parts of the competition.
P.S. My team does compete at 2 events per year, usualy 2 local regionals. Yet, my team is one of the teams that has been subjected to playing quite a few of the teams that win more than one regional, and pay for Atlanta.
You know who you are, and I ask you to please stop stepping on the lower budget teams. |
So, you would rather we went the FLL road? So you want MORE teams coming (if you're a weak regional) just so they can win an award and qualify for the Championships?
I see what you are saying, but I would ask you to remember some things: You are making some generalizations. You're going to have to back those up, and I think you'll have a hard time.
There is a limit on where you can enter for the Regional Chairman's Award and the Woodie Flowers Finalist Award. One regional. However, there is no limit on all the other awards. You want a limit. Very well. YOU can tell the judges that team xxx can't win award yyy because they've already competed, even though they clearly have the best candidacy for it.
(I even know of a case where a team told the judges not to consider them for an award that qualified them, because they had already won it. This was a rookie team. While this is an option for judged awards, there is no guarantee it will work, and it isn't an option for competition-based awards.)
You're also saying that possibly the best robot can't compete in eliminations if they're already going. That's like telling the New England Patriots that they can't even start the playoffs. Or the New York Giants. You get me? Teams that are in the Hall of Fame need to stop competing, because they have already qualified and *might* win and steal a slot from a team that isn't the best? Is that what you are saying? If it isn't, then you need to revise your statements, because that's the impression you convey.
Your statement about teams "stepping on the lower budget teams" is annoying, to say the least. There is absolutely no reason that you can't go out there and build a robot that performs at least that well. It might not look pretty, but it can beat theirs. It's cheaper, but so what? Just go out there, and build a robot that can beat theirs. Anyone could have built 1114's design. No one did. Anyone could have built 330's design, and several did. The execution was what set them apart.
The time you spend on here complaining is time you could be spending figuring out how those teams do it and figuring out how to implement that.