The Rest Of The Best

[O.S.S. King]

I believe that at each regional the highest scoring robots in the scoring categories should be allowed to attend championships. Categories like Hybrid Points, Tele-op points, and endgame points. having a balanced selection of bots at championships would be the best in my opinion.

[JohnSchneider]

Originally Posted by O.S.S. King

I believe that at each regional the highest scoring robots in the scoring categories should be allowed to attend championships. Categories like Hybrid Points, Tele-op points, and endgame points. having a balanced selection of bots at championships would be the best in my opinion.

Sadly all of these values are still calculated as a group and not individually. Youll still get those guys with lucky schedules taking these spots.

We need a way of keeping track of individual scores and points before you can implement such a system

[Mark Sheridan]

Originally Posted by dcarr

I admit that I am relatively new to FIRST, and when I first learned that there were so many ways into the Championship *other* than winning a regional, I was surprised. It seems to me that the Championship should be reserved for only those teams that have shown that they have what it takes to win in a given year, not based on legacy reasons or those who can afford to "buy in." Clearly there is a lot more to it than that, but the Championship is already quite large as it is. If/when my team makes it to Championship, it will be because we won and not gotten in another way, and it would be nice to know that all the other teams there followed the same path.

Just to clarify, no one actually "buys in." There is a gigantic wait list. I remember someone posting last year that the wait list is sort of merit based. Can anyone confirm this is true? I was given the impression that FIRST tries to reward good teams but with such a huge wait list, its still a lot of luck involved.

[Lil' Lavery]

An interesting thought inspired by Jesse's post. What if the wait list spots were prioritized to go to teams who attended the same event as teams who earned multiple bids?

For example, since 2056 grabbed four championship bids (three regional wins and a RCA), the three spots created for wait list teams would be awarded to teams that attended the same regionals as 2056 (GTR-E, GTR-W, Waterloo). It could be done via a points system or simply by first to register (as it is now).

In essence, this is accomplishing a similar feat to the District championship point system, allowing a set number of robots from each event to attend the championship. It also opens the door for teams that are perennially "stuck" behind high end competitors that dominate events.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

An interesting thought inspired by Jesse's post. What if the wait list spots were prioritized to go to teams who attended the same event as teams who earned multiple bids?

For example, since 2056 grabbed four championship bids (three regional wins and a RCA), the three spots created for wait list teams would be awarded to teams that attended the same regionals as 2056 (GTR-E, GTR-W, Waterloo). It could be done via a points system or simply by first to register (as it is now).

In essence, this is accomplishing a similar feat to the District championship point system, allowing a set number of robots from each event to attend the championship. It also opens the door for teams that are perennially "stuck" behind high end competitors that dominate events.

That is actually a really interesting idea. That would seem to solve alot of teams' problems for not being able to come.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by dodar

That is actually a really interesting idea. That would seem to solve alot of teams' problems for not being able to come.

An "Award" policy, in effect, could also be interesting. The multi-slot winners could nominate another team of their choice to get into a slot. They could award to the finalist captain, a really good team that didn't get in, anything.

[tim-tim]

Originally Posted by animenerdjohn

We need a way of keeping track of individual scores and points before you can implement such a system

I disagree. FIRST is not out there to celebrate individual robots. It is about competing and working with others, not who has the best robot. The winners are the teams that make up the best alliance.

FIRST does celebrate individual teams through Chairman's, EI, etc...

[Anupam Goli]

I think the District's point system is pretty good, but of course there needs to be some way so that those teams that can only afford one regional, but do very well can be compared to those that do well in multiple events.

That being said, the teams that enter Championships currently do deserve it. EI award winning teams are great inspirations on how to run and function as a team. There's the argument that the third alliance partner shouldn't move on, but that third alliance partner can be, and is often, essential to the victory. I'm pretty sure everyone here saw the Finals Matches for the famous GTR-west regional this past weekend. If you haven't seen it, here's a link: http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/21501483

2200 and 4001 didn't seem like stellar bots, but they really did make it possible for the Blue Alliance to win the regional. Their defense and their place in the strategy made it possible, and their unique and key role in the winning strategy deserves a spot in CMP.

That being said, there are teams like 118 that deserve a spot in CMP as well. Look at their OPR. It's a solid 33.9, ranked 6th in all of FRC. This is higher than 1986, 148, and 16, who've all won 2 regionals already. 118 has been amazing, and had bad luck as the only thing preventing them from moving on. If anyone watched the CT regional, 118 had comm issues in their semis, which was arguably the only thing preventing them from moving on.

[pfreivald]

Originally Posted by EricH

The multi-slot winners could nominate another team of their choice to get into a slot. They could award to the finalist captain, a really good team that didn't get in, anything.

Putting on my cynic hat for a moment, I can just see this idea blowing up in resentment, accusations/insinuations of favoritism, ticket-buying -bartering or -collusion scandals, etc, etc. The very last thing we need is teams deciding which other teams get a golden ticket, and which don't.

I think that a better way to go about it would be for each regional (or other qualifying even) to have a certain number of tickets to CMP, and that these tickets are all given to different teams -- so if a Regional Champion is also a RCA winner, then the extra ticket(s) flow down a pre-determined, known, objective hierarchy of teams. (Depending on what you're trying to accomplish, it could go to the Finalist captains, then the finalist first pick, then the finalist second pick... Or it could go to the top-seeded non-qualified team. Or to the winner of a particular award... Depending on the number of tickets you'd need a list of five or six (or as many as ten in later regionals) spots to take duplicate tickets).

As an off-the-cuff idea I'm sure there are some devils cavorting in the fiery details, but even so I'd be much more comfortable with a 'spread-the-wealth' system that doesn't give the prerogative to the team that won extra golden tickets.

[PayneTrain]

There was a thread similar to this in the CMP subforum, but this one has caught fire so I find it necessary to share my thoughts on this here:

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

The change over to super-regionals/state competitions feels inevitable, but I feel like an extended discussion of this would be very good after this competition season wraps up.

For now, I'll touch on some of my ideas.

Since CMP slots are in such high demand, they should be distributed more evenly geographically. There are around 360 spots every year for what is now over 2300 teams. Only the 14% of teams not already in because of long-term pre-eligibility (HoF, Originals, Major Winners from prior year) get a spot. That means unless your team has merit or luck, students will graduate without going to CMP now (you're reading something from one of those who is at-risk for the moment).

I don't think the field orientations and the sheer number of required pits will provide for the addition of another division, at least through next year. St. Louis maps looked pretty packed to me (but I wasn't there).
I've had trouble determining exactly who controls the MAR/FiM event structure, the traditional structure, and CMP. For the sake of my plan, I'm saying that regional boards run not-CMP as authorized by FRC, while FRC conducts CMP.

For CMP, FIRST gets to take a bite out of the pool of slots before the regional boards: legacy teams, hall of fame teams, and last year's major winners are all going through these FIRST HQ owned slots. FIRST, in this scenario, would not leave at-large CMP bids out on TIMS all willy-nilly for one with fast data speeds/fingers to grab. That's important, and necessary.

Then FIRST HQ would distribute the slots to these remaining 326 (and shrinking because of HoF) regional boards to use at their discretion, with a few exceptions (i.e. the six traditional blue banner awards given at competition must be in your slots, unless FRC demotes RAS and eliminates RIA). It's like good, old-fashioned apportionment in governing bodies. So MAR, who has 100 teams this year (right?) would have 8 spots to work with however they wished after the 6 Blue Banner awards got their bids. They could give them to the next 8 teams in the rankings. They could send more RCAs or EIs or RASs. They could let teams register for the slots like we do now, or they could institute some sort of lottery a team is drafted into after their 3rd year away from CMP. Michigan would have 21 slots to distribute after the six BBAs. However, if 51 won MSC or 103 won MAR or 16 won GKC, they wouldn't be sucking away a spot from their competition and giving it to another random team. It would go to a team that performed very well over the year and earned a spot not needed by a team slightly stronger than them.

The goal of this is to encourage a wide range of talented teams from across the country. I don't have a real beef with teams that have superior preparation winning competitions they deserve, but if you already earned a spot at CMP, we should be giving the one you don't need to a team that fell a little short of winning the competition on the field, not the competition of registering in TIMS.

When we move over to this oncoming system, it will likely never be a 100% thing. I can see California keeping LAR and New York City keeping their events because international teams would get solid rates from flying into those cities. Those areas are also full of great nearby teams that could enter their robot in if they wanted to. Israel and Hawaii aren't moving over to districts either. Yet the change to district system is necessary, inevitable, and important. Just think, we would be composed of 20 or so massive gatherings of strong teams.

Also, realize that this inability to cross regional lines to take spots from teams in that region are mostly gone, with the exception of a few traditional events. Even the Mid Eastern Atlantic Conference gets as many guaranteed bids into the NCAA tournament as the Big East. I know that region x and y are far superior to region z an it's harder to get in if you're in those regions, but hey: build a better team so you can build a better robot and improve your area, or increase the number of teams in your area and benefit your region by adding slots and spreading FIRST.

TL; DR: The 20 or so regional boards have to send those six representatives to CMP. However, if the region chooses to send more RCAs, EIs, or RASs as their representatives after their prescribed six, that's their choice. I'm not saying Michigan could use their remaining 21 spots for RCA representatives, but they could put a heavier focus on using their bids for those awards than sending high-ranked teams or lottery bids.

Like I said, having to deal with a system that involves getting the best possible showing of 360 out of 2341 teams is not something you can cobble together in an hour. I'm sure (hoping) that HQ has been trying to iron out a solution for CMP since they picked up their toys in Atlanta and moved out west, and realized "Hey, when did this program, like, double?"

These are very, very rough ideas, and I actually have been working on developing my thoughts on this to discuss after the season is over with and my mind has calmed just a bit.

I've been looking at the North Carolina Regional roster, and I'm sad. I'm sad that no more than 6 great teams will make it out with a bid to St. Louis. Some like 1311, 587, and 435 already have their spots, but what of 1086, 1519, and in my biased opinion, us, 422? We were one forced tip-over away from winning the finals, and we have little to show for it. 346, our alliance captain in VA had the best robot, imo, and came away from DC with squat. 1541 had the second best robot, and their season ended when our robot was tipped. No offense to 384, but they took up two spots from VA, when a deserving 346 or 1541 could have had instead of xxxx from the waitlist. That's a problem we need to fix now.

Change is necessary, and it should be coming. The East Coast, West Coast, and Texas are thick with teams and we're still cobbling together this ancient regional model and allowing the fastest fingers to sign up for CMP.

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by tim-tim

I disagree. FIRST is not out there to celebrate individual robots. It is about competing and working with others, not who has the best robot. The winners are the teams that make up the best alliance.

FTC is part of FIRST and does not automatically advance the entire winning alliance.

Teams will advance to the next level of competition in the order indicated below according to the number of spots available. The advancement criteria will be applied to teams advancing from Qualifying Tournament to Championship Tournaments and from Championship Tournaments to the World Championship Tournament.

In the event that the team listed has already advanced or there is no team fitting that description (as in 2nd team selected at smaller events), the advancement will continue in order.

Qualifier Host Team (NOTE: Assuming that the team competes at one other tournament within the region and has met the criteria set forth by the Affiliate Partner in the agreement. This applies to qualifying tournaments only.)
Inspire Award Winner
Winning Alliance Captain
Inspire Award 2nd place
Winning Alliance, 1st team selected
Inspire Award 3rd place
Winning Alliance, 2nd team selected
Think Award Winner
Finalist Alliance Captain
Connect Award Winner
Finalist Alliance, 1st team selected
Rockwell Collins Innovate Award Winner
Finalist Alliance, 2nd team selected
PTC Design Award Winner
Highest Ranked Team not previously advanced
Motivate Award Winner
Highest Ranked Team not previously advanced

[Justin Montois]

Originally Posted by Clinton Bolinger

Personally, with the growth that Michigan has had in the 4 years of the District model we should get more then 3 regionals worth. The same thing applies to our Chairmans and Woodie Flowers.

2009 - 132 Teams - 3 Regionals - 3 Woodie Flowers - 3 Chairmans
2012 - 190 Teams - 3 Regionals?! (it should be 4 Regionals) - 1 Woodie Flowers - 3 Chairmans

Isn't this why we do the math?

-Clinton-

The reason I put 15 teams was because it seems that the District Model replaced West Michigan and Great Lakes. Given your growth, it's possible that by now you would have one more regional, perhaps 2.


Also, nothing prevents Michigan teams from playing outside of their district. If you feel the need to qualify more Michigan teams than they are more the welcome to sign up at a regional and compete for one of those spots.

[KrazyCarl92]

Personally, I think the way to go is to do away with the wait list as the primary source for allowing teams into championships after qualifying. If teams who have already qualified qualify again at an event by winning, getting an RCA, EI, etc., then they should have some way of looking to the next best teams at the event and offer them a spot at Championships rather than immediately going to the wait list. Then if these teams cannot make it, by all means use the wait list as a fall back plan! They could choose to use either seeding or even OPR as a metric for this.

For example:
This years qualifying teams from the Connecticut Regional were 694 for RCA, 1511 for EI, 4055 for Rookie All Star, and the winning alliance of 195, 181, and 20. Of these 6 teams, 2 of them had already qualified for the Championship (181 with their Chesapeake Regional victory and 20 with original and sustaining status). With these 2 spots that are now open, FIRST should invite the next highest seeded teams to the Championship or the next highest OPR teams to Championship rather than resorting directly to the wait list. If these teams cannot go, then fine go to the wait list. If you go by highest remaining seed, 2168 and 177 would get the additional bids. If you go by highest remaining OPR, 118 and 558 would get these bids, and 177 would have gotten a bid earlier in the year at WPI because 190 already qualifies with original and sustaining status and won the event, and they have the next highest "adjusted OPR" according to Ed Law and Team 2834's scouting database.

So to summarize: if you go by seed 2168 and 177 would have qualified, with 118 still having an even greater chance of getting a bid next week given that many of the teams there have already qualified. If you go by OPR, 118 and 558 would have gotten the bids at CT, and 177 would have already received a bid from WPI. If any of these teams could not make it or raise funds for the Championship, then by all means, the wait list is reasonable.

As for those who argue that the less competitive teams should be able to go to the Championship for inspiration, I wholeheartedly agree! But there are other ways to get there. Many regional winning alliances are comprised of 2 highly competitive teams and a less competitive team (not saying this is always the case, just a trend). The Rookie All Star award, RCA, and EI awards offer another avenue for less competitive teams to earn their way to the Championship. Also, these less competitive teams who earn their way in will also happen to be the ones who will best be prepared to implement what inspires them at the Championship in subsequent years and become competitive.

I'm saying this because having teams like 118 and 177 this year miss out on the Championship DOES NOT, in my opinion, best achieve the mission of FIRST. There can be better criteria in place to ensure that deserving teams such as these are very likely to be at the Championship when they perform as they have this year. However, everyone must understand that no matter what system FIRST has in place, there will always the remain the possibility that a deserving team is left out.

[Nuttyman54]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

An interesting thought inspired by Jesse's post. What if the wait list spots were prioritized to go to teams who attended the same event as teams who earned multiple bids?

For example, since 2056 grabbed four championship bids (three regional wins and a RCA), the three spots created for wait list teams would be awarded to teams that attended the same regionals as 2056 (GTR-E, GTR-W, Waterloo). It could be done via a points system or simply by first to register (as it is now).

In essence, this is accomplishing a similar feat to the District championship point system, allowing a set number of robots from each event to attend the championship. It also opens the door for teams that are perennially "stuck" behind high end competitors that dominate events.

I was going to suggest this. Getting off the championship waitlist is something that's kind of a black box. As it stands, we know it's not based entirely on performance, but it's not entirely random nor is it entirely in the order of signup (at least so I and several other people have been told/have personal experiences with). While it's too late in the season for a true points-based, awards-based or performance based system to be put in place, it might be very easy to implement a simple system that would reward top-performing teams on the waitlist with championship berths. I do like the idea of berths being given to teams at events where the champions already qualified in some manner, but I don't think this is enough because teams at Week 1 events could get shafted like this. IE, teams A competes in week 1, seeds #1 but loses in the semi-finals. This was their only event. Team B is also competing at the same week 1 event and wins. They also proceed to win a second event later on in the season. If you're going by the re-qualification metric, Team A would never be given a chance to qualify, because Team B "re-qualifies" at their second event, so a team from their second event would be given the berth.

I don't like the idea of "selection" by the re-qualifying teams, because this invites a biased system. I'm not saying teams are dishonest, but many teams may prefer to select their friends to go for several reasons, when by the pure performance numbers a lesser known or rookie team might deserve to go.

A system like this would allow great teams and robots like 177, 1983 and 3256 to qualify for championships with their phenomenal robots. We all know 177's story. They haven't won a regional since 2006 but they made 6 straight trips to Einstein, and they've clearly built one of their best robots to date this year. It would be a shame not to see them go.

1983 has been #3 and #1 seed are their two events, and finalists both times. The second instance was largely due to massive lag of both 1983's and 488's controls systems in match 2 of finals (having won match 1) resulting in neither team being able to use their camera targeting systems. While they still have another chance to qualify, they clearly are deserving of a championship berth (currently #6 overall OPR I believe) regardless of what happens at Spokane.

3256 reached the finals at both Sacramento and Silicon Valley, losing to 971 both times. They were the 2nd overall pick at SVR and very very good. It's also noted that all 3 top seeded teams (971, 1868 and 254) had already qualified for championships as regional winner, RCA and HoF teams respectively.

These are just a few stories of many, but the point is that it would be really great to see a transparent method put forth by FIRST that would reward currently CMP waitlisted teams with a spot at the championships who are most deserving of going, for whatever reasons may be.

[JackS]

Originally Posted by KrazyCarl92

Then they should have some way of looking to the next best teams at the event and offer them a spot at Championships rather than immediately going to the wait list....

This years qualifying teams from the Connecticut Regional were 694 for RCA, 1511 for EI, 4055 for Rookie All Star, and the winning alliance of 195, 181, and 20. Of these 6 teams, 2 of them had already qualified for the Championship (181 with their Chesapeake Regional victory and 20 with original and sustaining status). With these 2 spots that are now open, FIRST should invite the next highest seeded teams to the Championship or the next highest OPR teams to Championship rather than resorting directly to the wait list.

In the case of 181, which regional should the teams be taken from to fill that spot? Chesapeake or Connecticut? If it is the second event the team qualified at, then isn't there a significant advantage to attending week 5 and 6 events?

EDIT: Nuttyman beat me to it. Darn.