Saving Seats Epidemic

[jvriezen]

Perhaps this should the only approved method of saving seats:
http://www.larknews.com/archives/301

[IKE]

Originally Posted by Aidan S.

What I meant by this is that we send a smaller group (say a dozen) students early (usually around 6am) to get in line and participate in the "race" so to speak, but the remainder of the team still arrives before the doors open. So there is a small group to stake out the ideal section, and when they find one, the entire team will be there to join them and sit there and get started on the day's activities. This allows the students to rotate duty in the early crew.

This is very good stuff to know. I will be certain to have my team of commandos arrive at 5:29 AM to ensure they are ahead of your 6-ish kids.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by IKE

This is very good stuff to know. I will be certain to have my team of commandos arrive at 5:29 AM to ensure they are ahead of your 6-ish kids.

5:28 AM here. Matched and raised.

[MrJohnston]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

5:28 AM here. Matched and raised.

Sorry - My team will not be making hotel reservations in the future. We're simply going to sleep in dark corners at the venue and will be in the prime seats while you two are still scuffling over who's first in line. Not only will be get prime seats, but we'll save a good bit of change on lodging.

[robochick1319]

Originally Posted by ZehP

Hey guys. I'm from 1732. Those are our seat savers. Please let me explain.

I know they're bad. I know you don't like them. WE don't like them.

We simply didn't see any alternatives. As a team sending 84 (!) people down to St. Louis this year, we were unsure as to what our course of action should be. At the Wisconsin and Boilermaker Regionals we kept a general area of seating "reserved" by leaving piles of stuff there, rendering many seats useless, leading to people's things being stepped on, and, inevitable, losing things. We did, in the process, create a space for the scouts, spirit team, parents, mentors, and guests that came along. Unfortunately, we always had people sitting alone. We've struggled with seating for the past few years that I've been on the team, always ending up spread out. As a last resort, and after seeing many other teams to so, we opted for these felt, rubber band, and sticker combinations.

I never saw anyone who wasn't on our team shooed out of one of the marked seats. I remember, possibly the day that photo was taken, giving up entire rows because of the outrage over our seat savers. On Saturday we didn't bring them. We learned our lesson and sent half of the team to the venue really early.

I apologize.

I appreciate you coming forward and apologizing for the seat savers but I don't think you are to be blamed or hated for it. When the whole world is saving seats, what are you expected to do to ensure that your team and team visitors have a place to sit? It was gracious of you to move as you did.

This debate can go on forever but the only real way to solve it is for everyone to agree to not save seats. Unfortunately, that will not happen. Teams still leave signs in the stands when they go to lunch and (regrettably) leave them in the stands when they leave for the day.

There are tons of rules stated by FIRST that are not actually enforced. Best example is this excerpt from section 4.13 of the manual:

We ask that you bring attention to your team in ways that are in good taste and in the spirit of the competition. Please refrain from the following:

Using noisemakers;
Using objects that can damage bleachers or floors;
Wearing inappropriate clothing; and/or
Taping or affixing items or papers to walls, bleachers, floors or other site areas.

How often are these rules broken with innocent intentions? Often.

I think the best solution for FIRST is to limit the competition sizes. Please don't get me wrong, I don't think the number of teams in FIRST should be capped. Instead, we need more regional events and/or a district set up. I'm sorry, but 65 teams in Palmetto and 60 in Peachtree was AWFUL. Not only is saving seats a problem but so is pit crowding and robot transportation.

Alternatively, if you want to have 60 teams in Peachtree, find a better venue to hold them. If the number of teams and team members increase, logic says that the regional venue should change as well.

[Citrus Dad]

Originally Posted by Aidan S.

I don't think it would be feasible to employ a lottery system to allocate seats, simply on the fact that a team's needs differ so greatly at a competition. These points have been brought up previously in the thread, but I wish to re-iterate them. Some teams bring 10 people to an event, some bring more than 100. How can we equally divide up seats when teams do not have equal needs?

An allocation method isn't a lottery--it's systematic. If the formula is well known, teams will shift their needs. Also, setting up a trading system where teams can trade their seating requirements will solve the problem of differing needs.

Originally Posted by Aidan S.

In general, teams don't want to be split up at an event, hence the rush to grab seats at the beginning of the day. But I think most teams are successful in adhering to the rules that FIRST outlines for seating allocation. When we send a crew of students early to sit in the section we would like, we never stop other individuals form sitting there alongside us, rather we welcome them to join us. The main issue here is people not understanding the policy that FIRST has outlined.

You're attitude is great if other teams also had that approach. Unfortunately, that's not the case, as we encountered with several large teams this year. The problem seemed to be the worst with the parents who didn't really have any other role than to spectate or cheer (students were generally more accommodating). It's time to consider splitting up the larger teams at the competition if that's what it takes. It's already inconvenient moving in an out of the stands past these large groups. As far as adhering to FIRST rules, there is no seat saving under current rules, so none of these teams are adhering to the rules.

Originally Posted by Aidan S.

The race for seats in the morning has become an aspect of the competition. The competition starts when the doors to the venue open, not when opening ceremonies start or the first match is played. In St. Louis, the doors opened at 7am, so that's when the entire team arrived.

Since when is the race for the seats another aspect of the competition? FIRST's stated policy is clearly and obviously trying to discourage this.

Originally Posted by Aidan S.

Allocating an area for scouting is unfeasible simply because of the diversity of how teams scout. Some teams take 20+ students to scout an event, some take 2, some take none. Some scout by watching matches, some talk to teams in the pit, some do both. Since the amount and type of scouting a team does is so dependent on the team itself, I doubt that there is an accurate way to allocate the correct amount of seats at an event to accommodate everyone. At some events, 100 seats will be far too much, and at others, 100 seats won't accommodate more than 5 teams.

No team has a 100 person scouting system--those teams would split into a scouting section and a spirit/spectating section. I think an initial allocation of 10 seats per team should be sufficient. As I mentioned above, the allocations could be tradable so smaller teams could give up their seats to teams that need more.

Originally Posted by Aidan S.

You bring up the topic of spirit as a non-necessity of team function. I am going to have to disagree with you on this point. I can only speak for experience from my own team, but for us, there is no distinction between spirit and scouting (or any other division for that matter). On the contrary, our scouts are probably the loudest supporters of our team when they are on the field. Our students take great pride in cheering on our drivers when they are in the midst of a match, and telling individuals sitting in a dedicated "scouting section" that they can't cheer on their team because it is distracting to the other scouts will only result in two outcomes: either the scouts will continue to cheer as they did before, ignoring the new rule, or they will simply choose not to sit in the "scouting section" and join the rest of their team.

Spirit is important for promoting the event, but it isn't important to specific function of a team. Our scouts cheered, but they didn't spend time dancing or fun activities. They were scouting mostly. I'm sorry, but I saw several large teams pursuing the spirit award where most of the members weren't scouting (and in at least one case it was the parents who were spending most of the effort on chasing the spirit award.) I think the spirit award is a fun way to promote the event, but those working on that don't need to be integrated with the scouts. I don't see cheerleaders sitting the press box at a football game with the coaches.

Originally Posted by Aidan S.

Now, I do agree that there needs to be a solution for seating for the general public. I think that this can be achieved by roping off a section of seats for people who are unaffiliated with teams and just want to take in the action. It's generally pretty easy to tell who is on a team and who is a spectator, and this would be easy to enforce.

I don't think its as easy as you might think to distinguish spectators and team members. However, FIRST probably can give spectators tickets for the special section.

Originally Posted by Aidan S.

In short, I believe that we shouldn't allocate everyone the same seating space at events, because, since our needs as teams are so diverse, there is no way to make everyone happy with this type of system. The system we have now works, as long as everyone clearly understands what the rules are.

The point of these posts is that the current system is NOT working. We're trying to propose a better solution. The tragedy of the commons is common, but there's also good solutions. But it means disrupting those who are comfortable with the current system, and they are always the most resistant. As I mentioned above, there's a means of setting up a clearinghouse to trade seat allocations so differing requirements can be accommodated. (And each team could bring a receipt showing that they made the trade.) The bottom line is that not everyone does understand the current rules and those rules are (un)enforced in uneven ways. The fact is that the current rules are impractical due to the extensive scouting that has developed.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

Spirit is important for promoting the event, but it isn't important to specific function of a team. Our scouts cheered, but they didn't spend time dancing or fun activities. They were scouting mostly. I'm sorry, but I saw several large teams pursuing the spirit award where most of the members weren't scouting (and in at least one case it was the parents who were spending most of the effort on chasing the spirit award.) I think the spirit award is a fun way to promote the event, but those working on that don't need to be integrated with the scouts. I don't see cheerleaders sitting the press box at a football game with the coaches.

Did you go up and ask all these teams if they were cheering for the Spirit Award, or are you just assuming that all the cheering teams were cheering for the award?

[Cory]

I fail to see the problem here. You want good seats, get there early. There should be staff in the venue during the mad rush that kick teams out of seats they are trying to occupy with flags, banners, pom poms, signs, whatever. That solves that problem. We had our entire team up extremely early (as did 3-4 others) in order to be one of the first teams in. All our mentors were up past midnight every night too. If you want good seats, that's what you've got to do.

The real problem is that it's a complete madhouse getting in and totally unsafe. Everyone has heard stories of students getting shoved, knocked down, hit, trampled, etc. One of our students may have fractured his foot on Saturday morning due to the mad rush when the doors opened.

This year security actually tried to enforce a line, up until about 6:30-6:45. Right around then the 1 person they had out there was completely overwhelmed by the massive quantities of people showing up and effectively ceased to have any authority. This resulted in the 4 teams who were there hours early getting in first, the people who showed up at 6:45 and line jumped getting in next, and the 20 teams who got there after the first 4 (and stood in line like they were supposed to) getting in about 200 people after they should have. This is completely unfair to those who followed the process but failed to be at the very front of the line.

Solution: more security outside, instead of inside.

Security likes to play the "guess the door" game. Stop being coy about which doors will open. Clearly label the doors that will be opening (and limit it to maybe 2-3 doors at the start) and it will be much easier to enforce the creation of a line. Teams will also have less opportunity to start sprinting once inside. If you got in front of the wrong doors 2 hours early you were just as screwed as showing up when the doors opened. Or teams (again) showed up at 6:45, stood in front of an empty doorway, and then that doorway opened when there had been no previous indication it would do so.

Stop counting down to the doors opening. This is incredibly dangerous as it actively encourages people to start shoving and running once the doors open.


I think some kind of coupon system could be wise. Barricade off the courtyard outside the doors, institute proper lines (maybe by division) and be there at 5:00-5:30 AM to distribute tickets to the first x people in line for maybe 2-3 "zones". When you get to your field, you have to show your tickets to go down in the seats. This wouldn't be terribly difficult to do and only needs to be enforced for the first few minutes. The teams who get there first get the seats they want and nobody needs to run because anyone who jumps them in line won't have the right "zone" tickets.

That still adds complexity to a situation that just needs order outside the doors, though. After 20 years you'd think FIRST could figure out how to make people form a proper queue. If they could do that and have fewer entrances for the first few minutes then everything would get a lot better.

[Aidan S.]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

An allocation method isn't a lottery--it's systematic. If the formula is well known, teams will shift their needs. Also, setting up a trading system where teams can trade their seating requirements will solve the problem of differing needs.

A possible way to implement this could be giving teams each a block of seats (say the average size of a team, around 25) and allowing them to book them in advance, like a sporting event. There will be a pool of extra tickets left over, and teams can indicate how many extras they want/require, and then the organizers of the event can allocate them accordingly. This system is akin to purchasing your seats in advance.

You're attitude is great if other teams also had that approach. Unfortunately, that's not the case, as we encountered with several large teams this year. The problem seemed to be the worst with the parents who didn't really have any other role than to spectate or cheer (students were generally more accommodating). It's time to consider splitting up the larger teams at the competition if that's what it takes. It's already inconvenient moving in an out of the stands past these large groups. As far as adhering to FIRST rules, there is no seat saving under current rules, so none of these teams are adhering to the rules.

I have rarely come across a student who is unaware of the rules with respect to seats, but I think all teams should make the effort to educate all spectators that will be joining them on the rules, so there is no confusion or conflict.

Since when is the race for the seats another aspect of the competition? FIRST's stated policy is clearly and obviously trying to discourage this.

They are trying to discourage a free-for-all from ensuing at events. Nobody wants the opening few moments of a day to look like a scene out of a black Friday sale at a shopping mall. If the teams all entered in a calm fashion, and picked their seats based on the order they lined up in, there would be no issue. the problem stems from people trying to cut in front of others who lined up before them.

No team has a 100 person scouting system--those teams would split into a scouting section and a spirit/spectating section. I think an initial allocation of 10 seats per team should be sufficient. As I mentioned above, the allocations could be tradable so smaller teams could give up their seats to teams that need more.

I agree with the idea of a trading system, I think that if it can be implemented for an entire team, there wouldn't be a need for a strictly scouting section.

Spirit is important for promoting the event, but it isn't important to specific function of a team. Our scouts cheered, but they didn't spend time dancing or fun activities. They were scouting mostly. I'm sorry, but I saw several large teams pursuing the spirit award where most of the members weren't scouting (and in at least one case it was the parents who were spending most of the effort on chasing the spirit award.) I think the spirit award is a fun way to promote the event, but those working on that don't need to be integrated with the scouts. I don't see cheerleaders sitting the press box at a football game with the coaches.

I think that if we do go to an allocation system, it would be relatively easy to create a "quiet zone" in the stands and allow teams to request seats in that area for whatever purposes they desire. Let the teams decide if they want to send their scouts there or keep them with the larger group.

I don't think its as easy as you might think to distinguish spectators and team members. However, FIRST probably can give spectators tickets for the special section.

I was referring to general spectators, who ware unaffiliated with teams. I'd assume that these individuals would not be team clothing from a team at the regional, so it would be relatively easy to distinguish them from the rest. I agree that giving them tickets or visitor's passes would be an easier way to distinguish them.

The point of these posts is that the current system is NOT working. We're trying to propose a better solution. The tragedy of the commons is common, but there's also good solutions. But it means disrupting those who are comfortable with the current system, and they are always the most resistant. As I mentioned above, there's a means of setting up a clearinghouse to trade seat allocations so differing requirements can be accommodated. (And each team could bring a receipt showing that they made the trade.) The bottom line is that not everyone does understand the current rules and those rules are (un)enforced in uneven ways. The fact is that the current rules are impractical due to the extensive scouting that has developed.

There are issues with the current system, I don't disagree. And, like with every solution, there will be people who are for and against it. If there were a way to implement this seat allocation method so that it occurs online before the event, that it would cut down on the work of volunteers and teams needing to coordinate trades on the already hectic days during an event.


Aside: I would like to clarify a point that I brought up earlier. Our team sends our entire group to get in line for seats at an event together early, except the drive team and pit crew. They join us when the doors open to the stadium, and usually go to work in the pits immediately. All the people who would be using seats in the stadium are in line together, and there is no saving of seats by any member of our team. I apologise if my earlier point may have been misleading.

[Grim Tuesday]

Originally Posted by Aidan S.

A possible way to implement this could be giving teams each a block of seats (say the average size of a team, around 25) and allowing them to book them in advance, like a sporting event. There will be a pool of extra tickets left over, and teams can indicate how many extras they want/require, and then the organizers of the event can allocate them accordingly. This system is akin to purchasing your seats in advance.

Why not allocate each team the number of members+mentors they each have? This is information FIRST has available through TIMS every year. The only issue is parents and other visitors that might want to sit with the team. Maybe add an extra 20% to that number in events with lots of seating.


In my home regional event, Finger Lakes, the regulars have been attending for so long that everyone takes the same seats every year. We always sit in the top of the venue, closest to the pits. 1126 sits next to us. 3173 sits beneath us. 1511 sits across from us. In four years I've never seen this change and I'd hate for some sort of assigned seating change it. That said, as long as it was reserved seating like airplanes are, it could work.

[dellagd]

Personally, I like the idea of giving each team a reserved section for 12 members. Thats 2 people per robot and really not many teams go more than that. These seats get the best positions relative to the field.

I've rushed into the arena before, and my real concern is just getting a prime location for our scouts. If the rest of the team isnt as close as possible, or if we're a little spread out, it really isnt the end of the world.

The priority is making sure our scouting can be successful, and that is a big priority. If the cheer-ers, parents, spectators, or whatever you want to call the not-directly-contributing members of the team cant see which discs go into the red top slot clearly, I (and they) wont care so much.

I know getting there really early is not fun, but there really should be a way to prevent the initial mad run. And if a team is there a little later, they shouldnt not be unable to scout because 3 teams of 50 people took up all of the seats in the front rows. Are those the only spots scouting is possible from? No, not at all, but it just doesnt seem right. I have respect for waking up a 5 am, but still, every team should have a good chance to succeed at scouting, I mean, getting those people to watch a hundred match is hard enough as it is!

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally Posted by Cory

After 20 years you'd think FIRST could figure out how to make people form a proper queue.

Setup one of these outside the event with a few security personnel and watch your problems ago away -



Or maybe we should ask the Brits for some advice.

[Mike Marandola]

Originally Posted by Ryan Dognaux

Setup one of these outside the event with a few security personnel and watch your problems ago away -



Or maybe we should ask the Brits for some advice.

Yes, First needs some British volunteers. All will be solved.

[Jaxom]

Originally Posted by Grim Tuesday

In my home regional event, Finger Lakes, the regulars have been attending for so long that everyone takes the same seats every year. We always sit in the top of the venue, closest to the pits. 1126 sits next to us. 3173 sits beneath us. 1511 sits across from us. In four years I've never seen this change and I'd hate for some sort of assigned seating change it. That said, as long as it was reserved seating like airplanes are, it could work.

So, in effect you're reserving seats via tradition. What would the reactions be if a team outside of the area comes to FLR for the first time and unknowingly sits in one or more of these teams' seats? Or if a rookie team in the area does the same thing?

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Jaxom

So, in effect you're reserving seats via tradition. What would the reactions be if a team outside of the area comes to FLR for the first time and unknowingly sits in one or more of these teams' seats? Or if a rookie team in the area does the same thing?

They always exclaim what good fortune it is that the seats at the bottom of the stands are readily available and gleefully sit there. Then they realizes that everyone crowds around the field and learn to sit up higher like everyone else.