Ungracious professionalism at internationals?

[Bryce Paputa]

THIS IS MY OPINION, NOT MY TEAM'S.

tl;dr: 1538 may have picked 217 over us to increase their chance of winning chairmans.
There is another factor not being considered, chairmans. I personally believe that 217 told the first seed alliance not to pick them, and did it strongly. 217 was 2 and 6, in 81st place, there was not much reason (that I can see) to pick them, however they ended up picking them anyways. They had 2 amazing floor pick ups and a great climber, they needed someone to get discs to them quickly, likely a FCS. The curie high score was set by 1538 and us, a FCS. They picked 217 for their FCS, in the one match i watched, they got 15 discs out and made 4 of them. I personally (not my team's opinion, just mine) think that they may have chose them over us because of chairmans, if they had picked us, we would've likely won the division, and possibly more. We have a very strong chairmans team, but this year and quite a few prior, we have not been anywhere near as good robot-wise as 1538, 1114 and the prior winners. If they had picked us, and we had got to Einstein and further, the chairman's award would've been even closer than I'm sure it already was. I have no idea if this was actually their logic, but I can't find another reason for them to pick 217 over us. Anyways, Thanks for that fun 8th match, 1538.

[nikeairmancurry]

Originally Posted by Bryce Paputa

THIS IS MY OPINION, NOT MY TEAM'S.

tl;dr: 1538 may have picked 217 over us to increase their chance of winning chairmans.
There is another factor not being considered, chairmans. I personally believe that 217 told the first seed alliance not to pick them, and did it strongly. 217 was 2 and 6, in 81st place, there was not much reason (that I can see) to pick them, however they ended up picking them anyways. They had 2 amazing floor pick ups and a great climber, they needed someone to get discs to them quickly, likely a FCS. The curie high score was set by 1538 and us, a FCS. They picked 217 for their FCS, in the one match i watched, they got 15 discs out and made 4 of them. I personally (not my team's opinion, just mine) think that they may have chose them over us because of chairmans, if they had picked us, we would've likely won the division, and possibly more. We have a very strong chairmans team, but this year and quite a few prior, we have not been anywhere near as good robot-wise as 1538, 1114 and the prior winners. If they had picked us, and we had got to Einstein and further, the chairman's award would've been even closer than I'm sure it already was. I have no idea if this was actually their logic, but I can't find another reason for them to pick 217 over us. Anyways, Thanks for that fun 8th match, 1538.

I don't see a Chairman's issue as the award was probably decided before eliminations.

[connor.worley]

Originally Posted by Bryce Paputa

THIS IS MY OPINION, NOT MY TEAM'S.

tl;dr: 1538 may have picked 217 over us to increase their chance of winning chairmans.
There is another factor not being considered, chairmans. I personally believe that 217 told the first seed alliance not to pick them, and did it strongly. 217 was 2 and 6, in 81st place, there was not much reason (that I can see) to pick them, however they ended up picking them anyways. They had 2 amazing floor pick ups and a great climber, they needed someone to get discs to them quickly, likely a FCS. The curie high score was set by 1538 and us, a FCS. They picked 217 for their FCS, in the one match i watched, they got 15 discs out and made 4 of them. I personally (not my team's opinion, just mine) think that they may have chose them over us because of chairmans, if they had picked us, we would've likely won the division, and possibly more. We have a very strong chairmans team, but this year and quite a few prior, we have not been anywhere near as good robot-wise as 1538, 1114 and the prior winners. If they had picked us, and we had got to Einstein and further, the chairman's award would've been even closer than I'm sure it already was. I have no idea if this was actually their logic, but I can't find another reason for them to pick 217 over us. Anyways, Thanks for that fun 8th match, 1538.

To my knowledge, Chairman's is decided Friday night and only egregious behavior from a team on Saturday would change the decision. Don't quote me on that. I can say for certain, however, that we did not take Chairman's into account when picking 217.

[Bryce Paputa]

Originally Posted by nikeairmancurry

I don't see a Chairman's issue as the award was probably decided before eliminations.

That's quite possible, but nobody other than the judges actually know when deliberations are over.

Originally Posted by connor.worley

To my knowledge, Chairman's is decided Friday night and only egregious behavior from a team on Saturday would change the decision. Don't quote me on that. I can say for certain, however, that we did not take Chairman's into account when picking 217.

Thanks for dispelling that possibility.

[dcarr]

Edit: the above beat me to it

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally Posted by Jon Jack

Having 2439 as the backup robot was an insurance policy that eased our mind about picking 217.

Was there a reason you elected to keep 217 in instead of swapping for 2439 once 217's issues began to arise again?

From a data / scouting performance standpoint, I didn't think 217 was a good pick. I've seen this happen in years past as well, i.e. 'Team 1234 has been here before and knows how to win.' I've never drafted using that logic and I guess I just don't understand it. I'd like to hear more on how that thinking has influenced other team's draft picks at other events, or at this year's Championships.

[Bryce Paputa]

Originally Posted by dcarr

Does this make any sense to anyone? You do know Chairman's is not about the robot and is completely separate from on-field performance right?

No it isn't.

Has the team explained/demonstrated why/how it should be a role model for other FIRST teams to emulate?

Why would a team want to emulate a poorly performing team? Until a judge says differently, I'm going to assume (maybe a bad idea) that there is a robot performance cut off as part of the award, that could very easily be being picked for division eliminations or being semi finalists, etc. In FTC and FLL (in michigan at least), you must be in the top 10% (maybe a different number, not completely sure) of robot performance to be considered for the Inspire/Champions award, FRC is probably similar.

[nikeairmancurry]

Originally Posted by Bryce Paputa

No it isn't.

Why would a team want to emulate a poorly performing team? Until a judge says differently, I'm going to assume (maybe a bad idea) that there is a robot performance cut off as part of the award, that could very easily be being picked for division eliminations or being semi finalists, etc. In FTC and FLL (in michigan at least), you must be in the top 10% (maybe a different number, not completely sure) of robot performance to be considered for the Inspire/Champions award, FRC is probably similar.

Well if you know based on MSC points that DCA aren't always the best performing robots. As 5 of them did not qualify for MSC based on points, let alone were close to the cut off.

[connor.worley]

Originally Posted by Bryce Paputa

No it isn't.

Why would a team want to emulate a poorly performing team? Until a judge says differently, I'm going to assume (maybe a bad idea) that there is a robot performance cut off as part of the award, that could very easily be being picked for division eliminations or being semi finalists, etc. In FTC and FLL (in michigan at least), you must be in the top 10% (maybe a different number, not completely sure) of robot performance to be considered for the Inspire/Champions award, FRC is probably similar.

At this point I can only offer speculation, but I believe strong robot performance is important to a well-rounded program. Whether or not you get picked or win your division or win Einstein probably doesn't matter- performing well in qualifications at CMP is an achievement in itself.

[Bryce Paputa]

Yeah, At regionals, districts and MSC/MAR, there are many fewer robots qualifying for elims and the tournaments in general, it probably isn't much of a factor at them, however, at worlds you have 96 teams in elims. Has there ever been a chairman's winner not in division elims?

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Bryce Paputa

Yeah, At regionals, districts and MSC/MAR, there are many fewer robots qualifying for elims and the tournaments in general, it probably isn't much of a factor at them, however, at worlds you have 96 teams in elims. Has there ever been a chairman's winner not in division elims?

236 won the Championship Chairman's Award in 2009 and was not selected to play in the Curie eliminations.

[kaliken]

This has been an interesting read...

I myself am not surprised at the ability to fix a robot post quals and before elims. Heck in 2011, 1114 and 294's pit crews completely ripped off 294's mini bot deployer, attached 1114's backup deployer. rewrote deployment code and got reinspected... so amazing feats like this are the best part of working with amazing teams in crunch time. So given that I am sure 217 and the Cows could have pulled off a minor miracle.

But back to the point I wanted to make. Since my team wasn't there pretty much all the information I have seen is coming from CD. But one very interesting point that I can infer from this discussion is that the real crux of what seems to be the problem is the fact that the information given to all the teams was not interpreted the same. So even though Paul in all good faith was trying to tell each team the same thing. Not everyone interpreted it the same. Essentially Paul was saying "X" Some teams inferred "Y" But the Cows inferred "Z". Its a classic communications gap.

So not saying Paul is in the wrong, but one of that hardest things to do is providing all the teams an accurate state of 217's robot. From what I have been able to read on CD just by saying "take us off your list we are broken.. or automatic backup robot", this in and of itself generates ambiguity. It does not answer the key question that many teams may have. Namely.
1) Will you decline if picked?.
2) Can we try to fix you if we pick you?
Rather it was left for teams to infer that either they were broken or not pickable. This I believe was the cause of frustration, especially since the Cows reasoned to a different conclusion.

So given all of this. I actually think the true lesson is (in case you are in the unfortunate position that Paul was put in) the message needs to be extremely clear. Essentially.. "We are Broken and will decline all invitations", "we are broken, but are willing to help the alliance if picked. Please come and look at our robot so you can see the extent of our damage so you can make an assessment" (letting other people see allows for clear and open discussion)

Bottom line. A very tough position for 217 and Paul to be in. I am sure he did his best to convey to everyone the same message. It is a bummer that people felt bad about what happened.

[Tungrus]

This thread is just driving me nuts.... now I feel like going back to mentoring FLL, just let your team do the best and be content with it...win or lose its your own doing.

BTW if the alliance had won the division, everyone would be praising the alliance captain 1538 for their gutsy move. They took a chance and it did not pay-off. Even if the had picked the best team available, was their any guarantee that their robot will not breakdown in the first match? PLEASE give a break to this alliance.

[fuzzwaz]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

236 won the Championship Chairman's Award in 2009 and was not selected to play in the Curie eliminations.

Yes, this is very possible and I know of zero instances where robot preformance has ever been an issue with regards the a regional chairmans award. To bring 1538 into question here has no ground.

On behalve of our robot, Bryce, I am sorry but we did not make the selection process this year. This happens! It has nothing to do with awards or because we wear green or anything like that. Our robot just simply did not fit into everyone's strategy and the teams on the field did not seem to have a need for us. As simple as that. 217 has proven at the MSC that their robot is capable of winning championships and if other teams choose to recognize it than that is just good scouting on their part.

[rsisk]

Chairman's Awards at Regional or Championship levels have nothing to do with robot performance.

Also, by the time Division elimination rounds happen, CCA is decided.