2012 Lessons Learned:The Negative

[omalleyj]

Ooops, Forgot my Kinect Rant:

Why was a device made to track humans put in areas where humans (other than the human player) could easily walk through? At every event (we went to 4) we had instances of people including photographers and field personnel walk through or into the Kinect area during hybrid. There needs to be something more than lines on the floor, especially when so few teams utilize the Kinect.

How about "Drivers behind the lines; confused bystanders out of the Kinect areas; 3, 2, 1, GO."

[IndySam]

The Coop award made no sense at all. I bet there was nobody at most regionals that could even explain how it was determined.

[techhelpbb]

Originally Posted by IndySam

The GP award made no sense at all. I bet there was nobody at most regionals that could even explain how it was determined.

Not to sound biased given we got one:

If you've followed our team around for a bit you'd see why other teams would vote to give that award to us, our opinion of ourselves irrelevant.

I'm rarely more proud of my team than when they go all out (including rebuilding other people's robots from scratch with them) doing the right things, not just what it takes to win.

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by techhelpbb

Not to sound biased given we got one:

If you've followed our team around for a bit you'd see why other teams would vote to give that award to us, our opinion of ourselves irrelevant.

I'm rarely more proud of my team than when they go all out (including rebuilding other people's robots from scratch with them) doing the right things, not just what it takes to win.

Sorry I meant Coop.


I love the GP award.

[J93Wagner]

Watching the streams on The Red Alliance was great... Except for one thing. Terrible stream quality due to the lack of good equipment at events. It's minor compared to a lot of things here, except when you're trying to get someone to watch a few matches and it is almost impossible to tell what is going on.

Edit: I guess I got beat to it by Paul.

[Grim Tuesday]

Originally Posted by IndySam

The GP award made no sense at all. I bet there was nobody at most regionals that could even explain how it was determined.

Quoted for truth. I don't think the GP Award could have concrete criteria, or else they would have to make concrete definitions for GP, which is somewhat against the concept. At the same time, it should be about general GP of the team, and not about a single event (though it can be). Also, deciding on it before elims is silly. The greatest case of GP in FIRST tend to happen during eliminations. For example, at Champs this year, I would have given it to all the teams on Einstein for being gracious and professional about the whole ordeal.

The moment that made me realize what GP was about (I'll tell this story any time I get a chance) was in 2010 Philly, where an alliance of 341 and 365 called a time out for our 7th seeded alliance so we could fix one of our robots. We had already used our coupon, and our alliance was the biggest challenger to them. They called a timeout, giving our alliance enough time to make a C-RIO changeout and have a 3v3 match. We ended up losing 7-8 due to a penalty, but that gesture will always stay with me and is a testament to what its like to play against two HoF teams on one alliance.

On the subject of competition this season, I would have to say my biggest complaint is the manual. This years manual was vague to say the least. Glossary. There needs to be one. If the GDC insists that the game is played exactly the way they want it to, we would never see any of the really cool an unique robot designs. For that to happen, teams must have the freedom to know if their designs are legal or not. If the excuse for not giving specific definitions is that they will in Q&A (as was stated at FRC Live), they need to actually give the definitions asked for in Q&A. A second thing that struck me about the FRC Live is that they said that they were simplifying the manual "because some teams don't read it". We shouldn't reward them for not reading the manual, and cater to them at the expense of unique designs.

No internet/power in the stands was a big inconvenience for our team. Would be nice for FIRST to contract with whatever venue they have for internet during the competition.

Suggestion for FIRST: Send a recording device along with each field for archiving events. With their goal of bringing back alumni, it feels like they are forgetting old games relying on teams to record them. I can barely find any media of games before ~2004 or so, and FIRST has a much longer heritage than that. FIRST Official webcasts would be nice too, if their goal is more media coverage, this wouldn't be a bad place to start.

Overall, an excellent season.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by IndySam

The Coop award made no sense at all. I bet there was nobody at most regionals that could even explain how it was determined.

It's the "At Least You Found Your Way to the Field. Here's a Medal" Award.

[Kimmeh]

Originally Posted by IndySam

The Coop award made no sense at all. I bet there was nobody at most regionals that could even explain how it was determined.

Truth. My team won it at the Livonia District in FiM. The other mentors and I had to look it up once we got back to the bleachers.

The Coopertition™ Award celebrates the team that best demonstrates the greatest level of Coopertition™ during the event, based on their performance on the field.

We're not sure if it's based off the number of points one gets or if that's just a factor. For what it's worth, we had the highest coopertition score at the event...

[BigJ]

Originally Posted by Kimmeh

Truth. My team won it at the Livonia District in FiM. The other mentors and I had to look it up once we got back to the bleachers.



We're not sure if it's based off the number of points one gets or if that's just a factor. For what it's worth, we had the highest coopertition score at the event...

Here's the criteria:

Originally Posted by http://frc-manual.usfirst.org/viewItem/8#6.5

To determine the winner of the Cooperition Award, the FMS will rank all teams in decreasing order, using the following sorting criteria:

1st Order Sort 2 x Coopertition Score - Qualification Score
2nd Order Sort Coopertition Score

The team or teams receiving the top ranking after both sorts will receive the Coopertition Award.

[coldfusion1279]

Perhaps I am being pessimistic about the Q&A, but I really don't think it will be easy to answer so many questions efficiently and self-consistently.

The more teams there are-> the more questions will be asked-> the more people they need to answer questions-> the more conference calls they need to have-> more Q&A admins miss meetings-> the longer it takes to answer a question-> more communication break-down-> inconsistency in the Q&A.

If you want more consistent answers, then the Q&A needs to be a small focus group. Answering that many questions in a small focus group would be a full time job, or else the process takes many days. The logistics are tough unless you are on the phone 50% of your day.

Solution: Hire a full time Q&A/Rules focus group, or eliminate the Q&A and go back to the way it was 3 years ago (when there were seemingly less "rule disgraces" at events).

[Racer26]

The way the Coopertition award is sorted results in the team that WON the fewest matches (winning zero matches in the optimal case), while getting Coop points in the MOST matches.

Ex:

Hypothetical teams 5555 6666 7777 and 8888 are playing at an event.

Team 5555 is a powerhouse, and wins all 10 of their matches, and coopertates in every match.

Team 6666 is similarly strong winning their 10 matches, but DOESNT coopertate.

Team 7777 is a weak team that loses every match, but coopertates every match.

Team 8888 is a weak team that loses every match and only manages to coopertate 5 of the 10 matches.

The rankings look like this:

   Team   QS  CP  First Order     Second Order
1. 5555   40  20  ((20x2)-40)=0   20
2. 6666   20  0   ((0x2)-20)=-20  0
3. 7777   20  20  ((20x2)-20)=20  20
4. 8888   10  10  ((10x2)-10)=10  10

As you can see, team 7777 wins, despite being just as coopertative as 5555.

[Debbie]

Originally Posted by torihoelscher

6) The smoking area. (Im sorry, I am allergic to smoke)

I do have to say that my team did not take a team picture by the FIRST flag because of this. While I agree that people need a place to do so if they choose, by the picture op. may not have been the best spot.

[Craig Roys]

Originally Posted by 1075guy

The rankings look like this:

   Team   QS  CP  First Order     Second Order
1. 5555   40  20  ((20x2)-40)=0   20
2. 6666   20  0   ((0x2)-20)=-20  0
3. 7777   20  20  ((20x2)-20)=20  20
4. 8888   10  10  ((10x2)-10)=10  10

As you can see, team 7777 wins, despite being just as coopertative as 5555.

The real kick in the pants is that in your scenario, team 5555 with 20 CP points comes in 3rd in the race for the award...they even fall behind team 8888 who was only able to get 10 CP points. This is the first year I can think of that a team would have to purposely lose matches if they wanted to be competitive for the CP award. Weird.

[pfreivald]

Originally Posted by Kimmeh

We're not sure if it's based off the number of points one gets or if that's just a factor. For what it's worth, we had the highest coopertition score at the event...

It's been a little strange since its inception. We won the FLR Coopertition Award in 2010, and all we did was try to win every game by as much as possible...

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by pfreivald

It's been a little strange since its inception. We won the FLR Coopertition Award in 2010, and all we did was try to win every game by as much as possible...

I guess you must not have been successful at winning every game by as much as possible as that year it was won by winning by the least amount possible. I know our team won it in Seattle that year by specifically going after it. Once we got a fair amount ahead our driver would start scoring goals for the other alliance, that was also good for gaming one of the ranking order of sorts, the 2nd IIRC. It was a very bad way to have both set up, but I read the rules and explained it to the drive team and they agreed it was the "right" thing to do even if it felt wrong.