|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#28
|
||||
|
||||
|
I was one of the scoring system volunteers at the Philadelphia Regional. Most of the time, including during the entire alliance selection process and the elimination rounds, the head scorekeeper (another volunteer, not me) did everything except the real-time scoring display. When he went on breaks, I took over operation of the scoring system. Allow me to describe the complexity of the job.
During Practice Rounds on Thursday, all we had to do was to depress the space bar when the announcer said "GO!" to start the match. Did we get that right 100% of the time? With a task so simple, you might think the answer would be yes, but everyone who was there the full day knows better. Prior to the Elimination Rounds on Friday the true complexity of this year's official FIRST scoring system were revealed as the head scorekeeper went over the process with the rest of the scoring volunteers. On Friday afternoon, he needed a break and turned over operation of the scoring system to me. I was glad my son was by my side to call out each instruction to me. To say it is not a simple process would be the understatement of the year. Even so, it involved entering instructions into only one computer. During the Alliance Selection process, I watched from the side as the head scorekeeper frantically tried to correct the errors on the display (125 was not the only team listed in error, and one of the other teams that was listed in error WAS subsequently picked). To correct the erroneous listings that were automatically introduced by the FIRST software, the head scorekeeper had to enter data on one computer and then enter instructions on another computer. He was totally focused on correcting the errors and getting the correct information displayed on the big screen. I really don't think that the full ramifications of what the incorrect display of a team number would or would not have on the alliance selection process was in the forefront of his mind. He just knew that displaying incorrect information was not what we wanted to do. Members of my team who work closely with me know that I am a consummate perfectionist. I have worked with computers my entire 30 year career and know from first-hand experience that the old adage "computers don't make mistakes -- people do!" is absolutely true. Did FIRST write the software for the scoring and alliance selection system? No. A FIRST volunteer did. A volunteer who could not start writing the software until after the game was announced. In writing this software, did this volunteer do everything they could to make sure you had the best possible experience as a participant or spectator at a FIRST Regional Event or The Championship Event? Yes. Is this software completely error free? No. Can this software ever be completely error free? No, not even if a paid professional were contracted to write it. FIRST has very few paid professionals. One of them is Michael Robbins, hired just three weeks ago as their Director of Operations. He and I discussed the problems inherent in the complexity of this year's scoring system on Friday afternoon. He already was aware of these problems and we both agreed that there was not much that could be done about them at this point. But to his credit, he pledged to find a better way to run the scoring system for next year. I believe that Mr Robbins is a man of his word, and here's why. When I subsequently told him of the simple but effective scoring system that I wrote for last year's Duel on the Delaware invitational tournament, he was very interested and asked me to send a copy to him. Even though I protested that it was only a simple PowerPoint presentation linked to a set of linked Excel spreadsheets, he still was very interested in seeing it. I believe that he will make sure that next year's scoring and alliance selection software and display system will be much simpler than this year's. So, what is the point of all my rambling? Just this. There were mistakes made, both before and during the Philadelphia Regional. These mistakes were made by volunteers, of which I was one. I am disappointed that some members of team 125 felt that the incorrect display of their team number during the alliance selection process cost them the chance to be picked by one of the alliances. The Philadelphia Regional was run by a lot of volunteers who did their best to make sure that everyone had the best experience possible. I think they should be thanked, not criticized. |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|