View Single Post
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 31-08-2009, 21:58
GaryVoshol's Avatar
GaryVoshol GaryVoshol is offline
Cogito ergo arbitro
no team
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Royal Oak, MI
Posts: 5,738
GaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond repute
Re: **FIRST EMAIL**/FIRST Adds District Event Model Alternative to FRC Program

I concur with Paul's opinion, that the number of points granted for awards doesn't have an effect. I did a study on FiM team rankings, adding in points for Chairmans, EI, Rookie AS, in proportion to the points given for Winners, Finalists, Semi-finalists, plus 5 points for all awards whether cultural or technical. While it juggled the positions somewhat, it did not substantially change who would be invited to the MI Championship. The last 3 teams that qualified would have been bumped lower in the order, replaced with teams that under the current structure ended up about 5 or 10 positions below. But because some teams that qualified declined their invitations, all these teams involved ended up at the MI Championship anyway. In fact all through districts, there were people who were looking for a team to serve as a "poster child" to argue the points should have been awarded: Look, here's a team that got XXX super award and couldn't go to the Championship. Didn't happen.

So the counterargument can be made, why not have a point structure that recognizes the importance of awards like Chairmans. It doesn't matter in the overall qualifications to the Championship. It just increases the point totals of some of the teams that qualify. So why not do it, only for symbolism?
__________________
(since 2004)
Reply With Quote