FRC Championship Size Sustainability

[fb39ca4]

What about teams that qualified in the same way multiple times? There were teams this year that won three regionals.

[plnyyanks]

From above:

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

How do you handle teams that qualified multiple ways? for example, a team might win the competition AND earn Chairman's, or a Hall of Fame team might also be regional winners.

Originally Posted by Kris Verdeyen

From the paper description.

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by fb39ca4

What about teams that qualified in the same way multiple times? There were teams this year that won three regionals.

Now there's an interesting question. Same way, multiple times is double-counted (or triple-counted, etc.), except in 2013. I pulled the 2013 data separately (used data I already had from weeks ago). And apparently removed duplicates. I don't know why I did that. A corrected graph is attached. The primary difference is the number of Regional Winning teams, which is about 7% higher. This shows even more emphatically the effect of more regionals on the sustainability of the current qualification model.

P.S. Corrected data for 2013 has been added to the CD-Media page.

[PVCpirate]

Now that you've done that, I can clearly see the effect of adding new district systems on the regional winners. The only times that percentage goes down are 2008-09 and 2011-12, when MSC and MAR started, respectively.

[Basel A]

Today, I updated the data in the paper referenced above. The trends shown make it abundantly clear that FIRST didn't have much of a choice in their recent decision to expand the CMP. The new graph is attached to this post.

I attached a second graph (qualification methods grouped) because it shows another interesting trend. Up until two years ago, there were about as many culture-changing teams as teams that qualified using their robot. In the past two years, the % of "robot teams" at the CMP has quickly outpaced "culture teams." The causes for this are obvious, but the effect is quite dramatic.

[M. Lillis]

Originally Posted by Basel A

I attached a second graph (qualification methods grouped) because it shows another interesting trend. Up until two years ago, there were about as many culture-changing teams as teams that qualified using their robot. In the past two years, the % of "robot teams" at the CMP has quickly outpaced "culture teams." The causes for this are obvious, but the effect is quite dramatic.

Culture teams are those who got in off of EI, RAS, and Chairman's, correct?

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by M. Lillis

Culture teams are those who got in off of EI, RAS, and Chairman's, correct?

Yeah. They're grouped pretty logically. The only real judgement call was putting HoF teams in History rather than Culture.

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by Basel A

Today, I updated the data in the paper referenced above. The trends shown make it abundantly clear that FIRST didn't have much of a choice in their recent decision to expand the CMP. The new graph is attached to this post.

I attached a second graph (qualification methods grouped) because it shows another interesting trend. Up until two years ago, there were about as many culture-changing teams as teams that qualified using their robot. In the past two years, the % of "robot teams" at the CMP has quickly outpaced "culture teams." The causes for this are obvious, but the effect is quite dramatic.

Are you counting teams that qualified on total district points among the "robot" camp? Points come from both on- and off-field sources.

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by Jared Russell

Are you counting teams that qualified on total district points among the "robot" camp? Points come from both on- and off-field sources.

It's mostly robot. I'm calling it robot.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Basel A

Today, I updated the data in the paper referenced above. The trends shown make it abundantly clear that FIRST didn't have much of a choice in their recent decision to expand the CMP. The new graph is attached to this post.

I attached a second graph (qualification methods grouped) because it shows another interesting trend. Up until two years ago, there were about as many culture-changing teams as teams that qualified using their robot. In the past two years, the % of "robot teams" at the CMP has quickly outpaced "culture teams." The causes for this are obvious, but the effect is quite dramatic.

And, because I was playing with a new toy and needed a data source, I created an interactive version of this. I wanted to see how much of CMP got in solely on culture awards. But clicking on the various methods toggles them on or off.

http://bl.ocks.org/schreiaj/raw/3ddda18edcd4044c1c6e/