Pacific NW District (Official)

[jeser#1772]

some other region will adhere to the district system in 2014 or 2015?

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by jeser#1772

some other region will adhere to the district system in 2014 or 2015?

The plan is for a lot of the largest/densest regions will be supporting the district system by 2015.

I was expecting PacNor to have districts by 2015, but I wouldn't be surprised if they implement it all over the summer while other parts of the continent are hesitant to take the leap until the end of the next competition season.

-PNW is debating a point reset for State Champs, unlike FiM.

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Michigan does a points reallocation system where they weight points in district play at a split of something like 65/35 in favor of their CMP.

[Hallry]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Michigan does a points reallocation system where they weight points in district play at a split of something like 65/35 in favor of their CMP.

In MAR at least, point values awarded at the Regional Championships are tripled from the normal District Event point values.

[Littleboy]

Points at MSC are worth 3 times what they are at other FiM events (ie: a win is 6 pts).

[lemiant]

Well this sucks for us. Where we hade 4 regionals within driving distance this year with this new district even a second event is out of the question.

[jeser#1772]

Originally Posted by lemiant

Well this sucks for us. Where we hade 4 regionals within driving distance this year with this new district even a second event is out of the question.

the same goes for us, probably in 2017 we can only compete outside the U.S., but until then we will have regionals in Mexico and Brazil, working for it!

[Mr V]

A few important clarifications.

It is not yet official that the PNW district will exist for the 2014 season. The intention is to go to the district model but there are many details to work out before it is official.

Northern ID and western MT teams have been invited and are encouraged to participate while southern ID and eastern MT teams will likely continue attending traditional events for the time being. Many of those teams have not traditionally played at the PNW events the district is replacing but they are certainly welcome to join the district.

The goal is to have at least one of the events in OR be outside of the greater Portland metro area.

The goal is to try to have all district events have the capacity for 40 teams but if necessary there may be events with only up to 32 teams. Having 32 team events, depending on the number of teams that participate, could require more than the 10 district events that are currently under consideration.

There is a national committee that is discussing a unified points system for the long term, but that does not mean that the system will be used for all districts for the 2014 season.

Some people in the PNW region have suggested restarting points for advancement to CMP at the district championship but it is far from being debated at this point.

Criteria for advancement to CMP is still under consideration as is the number of teams that will advance. It is likely that the two runner ups for the District Chariman's Award will advance but that has not be finalized yet.

We definitely do need many more volunteers and sign up for that will be through the organization commonly known as FIRST WA. If you are interested in being a key volunteer you can apply here. http://firstwa.org/Volunteer/KeyVolu...plication.aspx general event volunteers can sign up here http://firstwa.org/Volunteer/VolunteerOverview.aspx You will also need to sign up in VIMS however that system is not fully functional at this time and we need your information on a local level sooner rather than later.

The Girl's Generation events in OR, held by The Flaming Chickens FRC 1540, and WA, held by Bear Metal FRC 2046, will be used as an opportunities for training volunteers. We do hope to hold at least one week zero scrimmage, to practice set up of the season's field and FMS and as another volunteer training opportunity, but again that is far from finalized.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Michigan does a points reallocation system where they weight points in district play at a split of something like 65/35 in favor of their CMP.

Originally Posted by Mr V

Some people in the PNW region have suggested restarting points for advancement to CMP at the district championship but it is far from being debated at this point.

As mentioned by others, FiM and MAR triple the point values of any achievements at the FiM/MAR championship events, creating a "60/40" split in points between the championship and districts. The logic behind this is that, while district performance still plays a factor in advancing to the FRC Championship event, it's mathematically impossible to advance to the FRC Championship without attending (and doing well at) the FiM/MAR Championship.

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

The plan is for a lot of the largest/densest regions will be supporting the district system by 2015.

I was expecting PacNor to have districts by 2015, but I wouldn't be surprised if they implement it all over the summer while other parts of the continent are hesitant to take the leap until the end of the next competition season.

FIRST wanted the PNW district to start for the 2013 season but we were not confident that it could be done at the quality level desired in that time frame. A number of people from the area attended a FiM district event in the 2012 season and scouting for suitable locations for district events has been on-going since then with dozens of locations considered and visited. As I mentioned above it is highly likely that we will do the district model for the 2014 season but there are still a number of details to be worked out and is still not official.

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

As mentioned by others, FiM and MAR triple the point values of any achievements at the FiM/MAR championship events, creating a "60/40" split in points between the championship and districts. The logic behind this is that, while district performance still plays a factor in advancing to the FRC Championship event, it's mathematically impossible to advance to the FRC Championship without attending (and doing well at) the FiM/MAR Championship.

I am aware of this. I was making the point that restarting the points at the district championship was something that was just brought up recently and is not yet being debated, as Navid indicated initially.

[Madison]

I'd like some clarification from folks who are more familiar with FiM and MAR than I am regarding how teams playing in a third+ district event affect point distribution.

Currently, teams accrue points at only the first two events they attend; they may compete in a third event, but any points that would be earned seem to disappear into the ether. Since there are a finite number of points available for teams to earn per event, the presence of one or more teams that are competing at a third event has the effect of shrinking the number of points available to the other teams. If a team attending its third event seeds first, for example, and wins the event, that's 46+ points (or so) that disappear.

How does this affect teams competing in their first and second events in later weeks? It seems to me that, given that they're competing against more experienced teams, they're likely to not perform as well and will receive fewer points than did the the teams that have already completed their two 'real' district competitions. This has the effect of lessening their chance of attending the district and world championship.

Is this tinfoil hat stuff? What is the argument against taking a team's two best performances for point accrual?

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Madison

I'd like some clarification from folks who are more familiar with FiM and MAR than I am regarding how teams playing in a third+ district event affect point distribution.

Currently, teams accrue points at only the first two events they attend; they may compete in a third event, but any points that would be earned seem to disappear into the ether. Since there are a finite number of points available for teams to earn per event, the presence of one or more teams that are competing at a third event has the effect of shrinking the number of points available to the other teams. If a team attending its third event seeds first, for example, and wins the event, that's 46+ points (or so) that disappear.

How does this affect teams competing in their first and second events in later weeks? It seems to me that, given that they're competing against more experienced teams, they're likely to not perform as well and will receive fewer points than did the the teams that have already completed their two 'real' district competitions. This has the effect of lessening their chance of attending the district and world championship.

Is this tinfoil hat stuff? What is the argument against taking a team's two best performances for point accrual?

There are very very few MAR teams who compete at a third district event, making it essentially a non-issue for MAR. Granted, there are numerous teams who opt to compete at another regional competition (especially in 2012, when teams where still skeptical about the district system or had already planned on attending particular events). I understand third district events are more common in Michigan (though still the exception rather than the rule).

This was one of the questions addressed by Jim Zondag in his FiM/district FAQ he posted earlier this year. Here are the related questions:

Q10: “Why do you allow some teams to play a third district, isn’t this an unfair advantage?”
A10: One of our primary goals is to increase FRC team participation wherever possible. In pursuit of this goal, we feel that offering vacant slots to teams who want them serves the goals of FIRST and FiM better than leaving them empty. While this does give additional playing time to some teams, all teams who wish to play at an additional event are free to enroll in the annual lottery for these available slots. All teams have equal opportunity for these lottery slots.
Also, if we left these spots empty, we would be giving additional advantage to any team attending a partially unfilled event. Mathematically, the system is fairer overall if the events are all fully attended. We want all events to have the same statistical significance in our system.
We add events in units of 40 slots. Growth forces us to add events each time we add 20 new teams. Usually the number of teams/40 leaves a remainder of 15-20 spots open. We prefer to fill these for event balancing.

Q11: “If teams play at 3 district events, why can’t they use the results from their 2 best events, rather than using the results of the first 2 events?”
A11: One of the core concepts of the FRC build season is the “tools down” concept surrounding bag day. The intent is that the robots are done at the end of the build season. For this reason, all teams are on equal standing relating to available build and upgrade time at their first and second events. This is not true at the 3rd event. For this reason, as long as FRC continues to have machine access restrictions, we will continue to use only the results from the first 2 events played in our ranking system.

For the most part, I agree with his reasoning and decision. You'll find that a majority of teams make significant progress from their first district to their second (the unbagging period after seeing your robot compete for real is a godsend in this regard). While teams competing later in the season are often at a disadvantage compared to teams who competed earlier in the year, this is true in the traditional regional format as well. Allowing teams to use their two best results rather than their first two creates an inordinate advantage to the teams lucky enough to gain access to a third district.

[MikeE]

Originally Posted by Madison

I'd like some clarification from folks who are more familiar with FiM and MAR than I am regarding how teams playing in a third+ district event affect point distribution.

Currently, teams accrue points at only the first two events they attend; they may compete in a third event, but any points that would be earned seem to disappear into the ether. Since there are a finite number of points available for teams to earn per event, the presence of one or more teams that are competing at a third event has the effect of shrinking the number of points available to the other teams. If a team attending its third event seeds first, for example, and wins the event, that's 46+ points (or so) that disappear.

How does this affect teams competing in their first and second events in later weeks? It seems to me that, given that they're competing against more experienced teams, they're likely to not perform as well and will receive fewer points than did the the teams that have already completed their two 'real' district competitions. This has the effect of lessening their chance of attending the district and world championship.

Is this tinfoil hat stuff? What is the argument against taking a team's two best performances for point accrual?

This problem will exist to some extent if you allow teams to attend more district events than they can accrue points from, whether accrual comes from best 2, first 2 or anything else.

However the loss of district points from the system is clearly minimized if point accrual is from a team's best 2 events.

[KevinRo]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

As mentioned by others, FiM and MAR triple the point values of any achievements at the FiM/MAR championship events, creating a "60/40" split in points between the championship and districts. The logic behind this is that, while district performance still plays a factor in advancing to the FRC Championship event, it's mathematically impossible to advance to the FRC Championship without attending (and doing well at) the FiM/MAR Championship.

As we start adopting the model, we are going to work with the other regions to settle some key details that really should be uniform across the country. Since PNW and New England represent the next two going into this model, I believe there is enough critical thinking and experience that FiM,MAR,NE, and PNW should be able to settle a thoughtful and well reasoned set of guidelines. What we don't want is for each district that comes into existence to form their own rules. That isn't good for the FRC eco system. There will differences of opinions on some details, but I think a mass of 4 groups will be able to come to a solution.

My overall goal is for all of us doing the District Model to adopt a common point system so that the advancement is uniform across the country. There will be talks on this over the next month. I think all of the district regions have a similar idea, so we will make this happen. There will be a few points that will have to be negotiated, but honestly I think we can get this close.

My hope is that if we share a common point system that somehow we can derive a way to share teams in the future so our FRC community can start travelling between districts and still maintain a rational way to score. This will be part of the discussion.

I am open to well reasoned and helpful suggestions on things we should consider during such discussions.

Kevin

[rsisk]

Link to EWCP podcast on districts with Jim Zondag....

http://recordings.talkshoe.com/TC-98466/TS-569023.mp3

[dtengineering]

Originally Posted by lemiant

Well this sucks for us. Where we hade 4 regionals within driving distance this year with this new district even a second event is out of the question.

I have a great deal of faith in the PNW organizers... they have always been gracious, welcoming and inclusive. I don't think a district system will change that.

Jason