Alliance Selection Rules

[Akash Rastogi]

I have never waited for a text. It is instant like it's supposed to be. Also, we never expect the field rep to text back. We only send messages to them, not back and forth. It speeds up selection for us, not sure about others.

[Lil' Lavery]

While I'm somewhat divided on this issue, my instinct is that it should be just the rep on the field with no communication to the stands beyond what everyone else can see/intercept. No cell phones/texts, wifi, etc. Electronic devices without wireless communication, sure. But any communications to outside sources should be of the type that everyone can see/hear (whiteboards, shouting, etc.)

That's my take on the issue, with no real firm grounds to stand on other than my beliefs.

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

I do agree that time is a factor, but I would rather have a 2 or 3 minute limit and allow cell phones/computers/smoke signals/white boards. Having teams shout their team number or having student looking at the screen completely lost on who to pick, does not make anyone look good; just not very professional looking, in my opinion.

If we go with a time limit, it should be more like 45 seconds, not 2-3 minutes. At 3 minutes a pick, you're looking at what could become a 48+ (declines) minute selection process. That's ridiculous.

While I realize there will always be unprepared teams, all teams (with the exception of the #8 captains second selection) need to be ready almost immediately when the MC comes to them. None of these minute+ delays in order to debate, communicate, and deliberate. The alliance selection process should be quick and relatively painless. There will always be 1-2 teams who don't have a list or haven't been keeping good track of who's been picked and slow down the process. There's no need for the teams who actually are prepared to slow it down as well.

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

I'll be honest, I have a ton of respect for you, but I don't appreciate you publically stating we were not prepared for alliance selections when that was not the case.

I do agree that time is a factor, but I would rather have a 2 or 3 minute limit and allow cell phones/computers/smoke signals/white boards. Having teams shout their team number or having student looking at the screen completely lost on who to pick, does not make anyone look good; just not very professional looking, in my opinion.

They do not randomly select which alliance captain selects next. It seems to me like it would've been a non-issue if your AC had gotten a text from the stands while the pick prior to yours was in progress. If you are prepared, surely you could send him a list of two teams, so he/she has a backup in case the first choice got selected by the alliance prior to yours? Is there some other issue that prevents this?

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by Ian Curtis

They do not randomly select which alliance captain selects next. It seems to me like it would've been a non-issue if your AC had gotten a text from the stands while the pick prior to yours was in progress. If you are prepared, surely you could send him a list of two teams, so he/she has a backup in case the first choice got selected by the alliance prior to yours? Is there some other issue that prevents this?

I don't really want to continue to talk about what happened, but since you asked. As the 2nd alliance, after the 6th (or so) alliance made their 2nd selection, we texted our representative (who also had a list) 5 teams in order. The alliance captain wanted a team that wasn't on that list of 5, so our representive texted back "what about XXXXX". I believe we were in the process of texting back when it was our alliance's turn to pick. So, long story short, we were working on the pick before it was our turn, but it was just one of those tough situations that take time. If anyone has any suggestions on how we could have been more efficient, I'm interested in hearing them.

[synth3tk]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

If anyone has any suggestions on how we could have been more efficient, I'm interested in hearing them.

The seconds shaved from instant messaging instead of texting can be a huge help.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

I don't really want to continue to talk about what happened, but since you asked. As the 2nd alliance, after the 6th (or so) alliance made their 2nd selection, we texted our representative (who also had a list) 5 teams in order. The alliance captain wanted a team that wasn't on that list of 5, so our representive texted back "what about XXXXX". I believe we were in the process of texting back when it was our alliance's turn to pick. So, long story short, we were working on the pick before it was our turn, but it was just one of those tough situations that take time. If anyone has any suggestions on how we could have been more efficient, I'm interested in hearing them.

I'm still not seeing the issue here. I'd rather see your team texting back and forth than what I see most teams do- yelling like morons across the arena with the field rep cupping their hand to their ear

Anyway, the point to all teams is this- help those around you learn that they need a list.

[Taylor]

Teams trust one driver to drive the robot.
Teams trust one operator to operate the mechanisms.
Teams trust one human player/analyst/payload spec1al1st.
Teams trust one coach to coach the drive team.

Why the controversy over trusting one student representative, who has had 2-3 days to prepare, to make an alliance picking decision?

No cell phones, no computers, no electronics. Using them during selections is selfish and rude. It sends a message of unpreparedness. If I were in that position, would be mortified to be talking on the phone or sending/receiving texts or playing with a computer while an entire regional (and those watching the webcast) awaits my decision.

One piece of paper, on a clipboard, with your top 23 teams in ranked order. And a pen to cross out those already picked. And a smart, capable student representative. That's all you need.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

Yes. Instead of checking them in and out, the passes are kept, giving access to the floor - not necessarily being used as a media pass but as a free pass to access that the person would not otherwise have. Not cool.

Jane

The guy I saw at the side of the field giving instruction to his team from the side of the field. That is outright cheating and that team should have had their media badge privileges taken away.

[JackN]

Whenever my teams are involved with alliance we give our representative lists of teams with 2-4 different columns ranking teams for several different roles. Last season our rep was given a list with the best scorers from each zone according to our scouting. Also there is a master list given to provide an exact ranking of every team in our estimation.

In the past I have signaled to my representative who to take by holding up a whiteboard or by signaling numbers with my hands. I usually only do this when I am sitting with our partners or potential partners. I know when I was a student I would have liked a group of people telling me who to pick.

[Kims Robot]

I'm glad someone finally brought this up.

We saw this rule for the first time at DC and although I heard the announcement "no electronics on the field"... I sort of assumed it meant no cell phones, as I had seen plenty of teams with laptops at other regionals. Our printer wasn't working and we couldn't get our list printed, so I sent our student with a laptop. The field crew sent the laptop back and we panicked trying to handwrite everything and all the notes... fortunately we ended up in 16th not 12th like we were when we were prepping the student, so it became a non-issue, but it seems unfair. I don't like how much they are discouraging using technology for a technology competition. I get the timeframe thing, and maybe even if people thought it was "rude" to be talking on a cell phone... but using a laptop that was used for all of your scouting and alliance selection work??

Im with those that think it needs to be consistent across all the regionals.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by Taylor

Teams trust one driver to drive the robot.
Teams trust one operator to operate the mechanisms.
Teams trust one human player/analyst/payload spec1al1st.
Teams trust one coach to coach the drive team.

Why the controversy over trusting one student representative, who has had 2-3 days to prepare, to make an alliance picking decision?

No cell phones, no computers, no electronics. Using them during selections is selfish and rude. It sends a message of unpreparedness. If I were in that position, would be mortified to be talking on the phone or sending/receiving texts or playing with a computer while an entire regional (and those watching the webcast) awaits my decision.

One piece of paper, on a clipboard, with your top 23 teams in ranked order. And a pen to cross out those already picked. And a smart, capable student representative. That's all you need.

Unfortunately some teams put either their driver or team captain who has had no interfacing with the scouts/data on the field for selections just because of their role. Depending on the knowledge of that student and if we ever were in that situation I wouldn't trust them to make a good decision, hand me a phone.

I have never waited on a text. I have even waited more time on a captain or two team alliance spending 5 minutes looking through a piece of paper to make a pick. This year at GSR there was an incident where an unprepared captain was told to put their phone away and then had to stare at the screen for both their first a second picks as they had no idea. Another thing is some teams don't prepare in their last few matches as the rankings are finalized and teams slip up into pick position.

[johnr]

If you can't have a laptop with a pick list and you can't have a phone ipod thing-a-ma-jig with text/list why should you be able to have a piece of paper? Just saying.

[nahstobor]

I think the most important thing is that there is no penalty for picking a team using illegal communication. Until FIRST says "If you are caught communicating with someone outside the arena, you are not allowed to select the team that was communicated to you," I don't think things will change. Teams will find ways to communicate picks down to the field.

[BigJ]

As someone posted earlier in the thread, I'd much prefer a time limit rather than banning communication. Something like this (maybe with tweaked numbers):

In each round of alliance member selection, Alliance Captains must invite a team within 70 seconds, minus 5 seconds for each invitation accepted in the round.

The numbers might need to be changed for communication on the 7th/8th alliances 2nd pick.

EDIT: Realized declines do happen and if a mid-seed gets a decline then the timing would be disadvantageous compared to if a 1st seed got a decline. Harder to make fair than I thought.

[Zuelu562]

Originally Posted by BigJ

EDIT: Realized declines do happen and if a mid-seed gets a decline then the timing would be disadvantageous compared to if a 1st seed got a decline. Harder to make fair than I thought.

With that in mind, the decline would reset their pick timer to what it started at, to allow for re-selection(s). Pick 7/8 would always have 10 seconds (and 2/1 on the return trip).

Also, the timer would start as the Emcee (or whoever is talking to the representative) asks "who's your pick".