Go to Post There's a fine line between insanity and healthy obsesion with FIRST ... and sometimes I wonder which one I'm on - srawls [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > Rumor Mill
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-08-2013, 23:14
Nathan Streeter's Avatar
Nathan Streeter Nathan Streeter is offline
FIRST Fan(atic)
FRC #1519 (Mechanical MAYHEM)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Merrimack, NH
Posts: 667
Nathan Streeter has a reputation beyond reputeNathan Streeter has a reputation beyond reputeNathan Streeter has a reputation beyond reputeNathan Streeter has a reputation beyond reputeNathan Streeter has a reputation beyond reputeNathan Streeter has a reputation beyond reputeNathan Streeter has a reputation beyond reputeNathan Streeter has a reputation beyond reputeNathan Streeter has a reputation beyond reputeNathan Streeter has a reputation beyond reputeNathan Streeter has a reputation beyond repute
Standardized District Point Model

So, based off a newsletter that went out to New England teams today, it's confirmed that FIRST is planning on standardizing the district system point model for 2014... so, what do you think?

First off, do you think it should be standardized? Should each region be able to choose how they qualify teams - in something akin to "States' Rights?" Or would it be silly for FIRST not to choose how awards and accomplishments are rewarded?

Second, what do you want to see in the point system? At least a dozen threads exist about exact point models... so while I'm not opposed to talking about details, I'd also like to talk about the "philosophy" and various approaches.

I'll start it off with some of my own thoughts...

While I do think regions certainly should be able to make some decisions about how they do things, I don't think FIRST can afford to allow every region to have it's own system. It could easily be a big source of contention for teams who just miss the cut in their own region (but would've made it under region __'s system)... and FIRST really does deserve to be able to decide how teams qualify for their events.

In terms of philosophy, I think the point system should do the best to advance the best teams. That means the best robots, the best teams, and those who bring a strong balance of each. I like that NE FIRST has tried to add emphasis to some of the other awards... however, I don't feel an award like Engineering Excellence should be equal to the Safety award or Team Spirit (both of which, while awarding good attributes, sometimes end up having to be awarded based on more superficial actions at events). That said, the Michigan/MAR system of assigning points based on alliance selection is critical to rewarding strong teams who have a tough qualifying schedule or elimination set.

I'm not a fan of the auto-bids. I'd like for everything to be assigned points... partly because of the scalability that Jim Zondag emphasized in his Q&A on the Michigan Districts... and partly because then it puts all the awards and accomplishments on the same level. FIRST can compare Chairmans' apples-to-apples to Regional Wins. Also, it gets rid of some of the little loopholes... With the proposed New England points system, winning Chairmans' at a district event autobids you to the DCMP... but it doesn't add to your point total to help you qualify for CMP.

While I'm not a huge fan of the auto-bids, I would like for teams' that win Chairmans', Engineering Inspiration, or Rookie All Star to be automatically eligible to send their judging team to the District Championships... that way the best teams for each award are being judged at DCMP.

Also, I think to help make the various judges' jobs easier, I'd like for teams to have to choose to be eligible for an award at an event. Judges for each award struggle to get much time with each team; however, if only the teams who are interested in winning a particular award apply for it, then the judges should be able to spend more time with each eligible team. It seems like judges have a nearly impossible job really determining the best team for an award with how little time they have... perhaps this could make it easier? Teams wouldn't need to be limited to a number of award applications at an event, or applications for a particular award at multiple events... but they could be if preferable. Personally, I'd rather teams not be limited to applying for an award at only one event... that way teams are less likely to "luck out" or get hung up by teams primarily applying for that award at one event or the other.

What do you think?
__________________
"If you want to build a ship, don't drum up men to gather wood, divide the work, or give orders. Instead, teach them to yearn for the vast and endless sea." - Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"The fight is won or lost far away from witnesses - behind the lines, in the gym, and out there on the road, long before I dance under those lights." - Muhammad Ali
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication." - Leonardo da Vinci


Student: 2006-2010 (#1519)
Mentor: 2011-Present (#1519)


Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-08-2013, 23:48
Steven Donow Steven Donow is offline
Registered User
AKA: Scooby
no team
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 1,335
Steven Donow has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Donow has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Donow has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Donow has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Donow has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Donow has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Donow has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Donow has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Donow has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Donow has a reputation beyond reputeSteven Donow has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Standardized District Point Model

In terms of moving towards a total remodel of the FRC Event/Championship/District/Regional/SuperRegional structure, this is definitely a step in the right direction towards unifying FIRST to a new era of event structure, and I definitely expected this to happen, especially with the addition of two district systems this year.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan Streeter View Post

I'm not a fan of the auto-bids. I'd like for everything to be assigned points... partly because of the scalability that Jim Zondag emphasized in his Q&A on the Michigan Districts... and partly because then it puts all the awards and accomplishments on the same level. FIRST can compare Chairmans' apples-to-apples to Regional Wins. Also, it gets rid of some of the little loopholes... With the proposed New England points system, winning Chairmans' at a district event autobids you to the DCMP... but it doesn't add to your point total to help you qualify for CMP.

While I'm not a huge fan of the auto-bids, I would like for teams' that win Chairmans', Engineering Inspiration, or Rookie All Star to be automatically eligible to send their judging team to the District Championships... that way the best teams for each award are being judged at DCMP.
Did the NEFIRST email say that EI and RAS get autobids to DCMP? I'm not trying to sound condescending, but in MAR and (I assume) FiM, the RAS and EI teams both get to send judging teams to MSC/MAR Champs(in fact at MAR Champs this year, one of the EI winners, 321, was there judging-only, as was the RAS winner, 4637)

I'm gonna disagree with you on this though, and say that if FIRST wants to consider Chairman's the most important award, they should continue to grant teams that win it the same opportunities as teams with incredible robots. For some teams, if they have a strict administration, it might be hard to convince administrators to allow the trip to DCMP if there's no robot going-unfortunately, I'm sure this is true.

However, in two years of MAR, all teams that have won Chairman's have otherwise been in a pointswise position to make it to MAR Champs. I believe the same is generally true for FiM(one of them can confirm or deny; my memory of viewing spreadsheets tells me there have been one or two), but remember: generally, teams that win Chairman's usually have pretty good robots.

Now, I had started researching an analysis to see how the teams that won Chairman's in NE regionals this year and last year would have qualified based off their robot performance using these rankings, but then I realized that it contains the original NE point proposal. Has anyone applied the FiM/MAR ranking style to NE for last year?
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-08-2013, 01:42
Mr V's Avatar
Mr V Mr V is offline
FIRST Senior Mentor Washington
FRC #5588 (Reign)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Maple Valley Wa
Posts: 994
Mr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Standardized District Point Model

I believe it is a good thing that FIRST is implementing a standardized points system.

Frank said it pretty well in his blog post from the June 7th.

Quote:
Our intention is to evolve the existing District system to allow for cross-District competition. We have begun work on a standardized points ranking system, and a standardized way in which teams will advance from District Championships to the FIRST Championship. As we grow, it’s important for us to maintain consistency between Districts. In addition to helping us maintain the quality of the FRC experience, this will give us the best chance of evolving the system to the point of allowing cross-District competition.
In addition to the reasons Frank mentioned this will make it easier for the move to districts across the US. It removes one more item for district organizers to plan for and worry about.
__________________
All statements made on Chief Delphi by me are my own opinions and are not official FIRST rulings or opinions and should not be construed as such.




https://www.facebook.com/pages/Team-...77508782410839
Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-08-2013, 08:54
Kims Robot's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
Kims Robot Kims Robot is offline
Onto a New Chapter...
AKA: Kim O'Toole Eckhardt
no team
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Framingham, MA
Posts: 1,467
Kims Robot has a reputation beyond reputeKims Robot has a reputation beyond reputeKims Robot has a reputation beyond reputeKims Robot has a reputation beyond reputeKims Robot has a reputation beyond reputeKims Robot has a reputation beyond reputeKims Robot has a reputation beyond reputeKims Robot has a reputation beyond reputeKims Robot has a reputation beyond reputeKims Robot has a reputation beyond reputeKims Robot has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Kims Robot
Re: Standardized District Point Model

Quote:
Originally Posted by DevenStonow View Post
Now, I had started researching an analysis to see how the teams that won Chairman's in NE regionals this year and last year would have qualified based off their robot performance using these rankings, but then I realized that it contains the original NE point proposal. Has anyone applied the FiM/MAR ranking style to NE for last year?
Lot of discussion in a bunch of different threads... the short answer is yes, I & others have looked at applying the FiM model to NE teams... (one of the models I looked at included applying the FiM points)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kims Robot View Post
This depends on the model that is used. As it is possible/likely that FIRST will be standardizing the system across the districts, and its hard to tell what the final result will be. Using several points model simulators (ie the ones in this thread), of the 5 NE winners, only one was even close to the cutoff of the 53/60 line in one model I've seen (and easily made it in several others). Yes if you add 4 more, there is a slight possibility that the robots will not be as high in points, but in general, I think the District points wont produce as wide a variation as the CA performance at Worlds correlation.
Back to the general topic, I am all for the standardization... it's one less thing for the District Organizers to worry about, and it will get us much more quickly to a system that will allow for cross district play.

My only hope is that FIRST does (or involves the people that have done) countless hours of simulation on whatever model they come up with to help prove that compared to past years this new model will send the "right" teams to Championship based on whatever philosophy the group deams appropriate. (ie I want to know that someone "did the math")

And I agree with some of the previous suggestions that Im not a huge fan of the Auto-bids, but I do think CA & at least winning captain, possibly EI & RAS too should end up with high enough points that its almost no question they get into DCMP. Now the award winners shouldn't be slackers on the robot side. I wouldnt expect to see a CA robot that was 39th/40 and didnt make elims at both their district events have a robot at DCMP or even WCMP, but looking at the past data, CA teams seem to have relatively strong robots. I'm ok with EI or RAS teams only getting to "present" at DCMP... but if they then get to bring their robots to WCMP... they end up with a disadvantage at WCMP as they have had fewer plays than everyone else. So I think whatever model is adopted for Districts would likely have to be applied to WCMP as well... or maybe have a 5th Division that allows all these teams to play at WCMP, but doesn't qualify them for Einstein?? I dunno... plenty of ideas/discussion to kick around there.

At any rate, I'm excited to see what FIRST comes up with (and secretly happy to not have to deal with it at the NE level! ).
__________________
~kim~
Kimberly O'Toole Eckhardt <3
Principal Systems Engineer & Program Manager
History - Team 176, Team 229, Team 1511, FIRST Volunteer!!
My new FIRST Photography Hobby & Angry Eric's Fan Page
Excellence - is the result of caring more than others think is wise, risking more than others think is safe, dreaming more than others think is practical, and expecting more than others think is possible.

Last edited by Kims Robot : 02-08-2013 at 12:10. Reason: clarifying what I "looked at" :)
Reply With Quote
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-08-2013, 10:08
Brandon Holley's Avatar
Brandon Holley Brandon Holley is offline
Chase perfection. Catch excellence.
AKA: Let's bring CD back to the way it used to be
FRC #0125 (NU-TRONs, Team #11 Alumni (GO MORT))
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,590
Brandon Holley has a reputation beyond reputeBrandon Holley has a reputation beyond reputeBrandon Holley has a reputation beyond reputeBrandon Holley has a reputation beyond reputeBrandon Holley has a reputation beyond reputeBrandon Holley has a reputation beyond reputeBrandon Holley has a reputation beyond reputeBrandon Holley has a reputation beyond reputeBrandon Holley has a reputation beyond reputeBrandon Holley has a reputation beyond reputeBrandon Holley has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Brandon Holley
Re: Standardized District Point Model

I definitely welcome a standardized point model- even though it may take away some of the flexibility and customization some people were looking forward to with a district model.

I believe it is important to maintain qualification and performance based on the same metrics wherever we can. As someone stated above- I could see a huge point of contention being slight differences district to district that cause teams to qualify/not qualify for whatever reason.

The task force (I assume there is one) that is currently trying to bake up a standardized points system does not have an easy job, and I do not envy them. I do feel however, this work will go a long way to 'reconnecting' the districts into the mainstream of FRC by tying them (loosely for now) to each other.


-Brando
__________________
MORT (Team 11) '01-'05 :
-2005 New Jersey Regional Chairman's Award Winners
-2013 MORT Hall of Fame Inductee

NUTRONs (Team 125) '05-???
2007 Boston Regional Winners
2008 & 2009 Boston Regional Driving Tomorrow's Technology Award
2010 Boston Regional Creativity Award
2011 Bayou Regional Finalists, Innovation in Control Award, Boston Regional Finalists, Industrial Design Award
2012 New York City Regional Winners, Boston Regional Finalists, IRI Mentor of the Year
2013 Orlando Regional Finalists, Industrial Design Award, Boston Regional Winners, Pine Tree Regional Finalists
2014 Rhode Island District Winners, Excellence in Engineering Award, Northeastern University District Winners, Industrial Design Award, Pine Tree District Chairman's Award, Pine Tree District Winners
2015 South Florida Regional Chairman's Award, NU District Winners, NEDCMP Industrial Design Award, Hopper Division Finalists, Hopper/Newton Gracious Professionalism Award
Reply With Quote
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-08-2013, 10:58
Rosiebotboss's Avatar
Rosiebotboss Rosiebotboss is offline
2015-16 Divisional LRI - Archimedes
AKA: Dana P. Henry
FRC #0839 (Rosie Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Agawam, MA
Posts: 853
Rosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond reputeRosiebotboss has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Rosiebotboss
Re: Standardized District Point Model

As a member of the NE FIRST point model team and without naming names (because it would be a diservice to them to have them personally under the scrutiny of this community and added pressure and possible inundation of PMs) I have seen the list and I am completely confident in the abilities of each and every committee member. They represent all 4 current districts, 2 districts "to be", WFAs, CCA reps as well as FIRST staff.

Just for a point of reference, we in NE, during our discussions, ran several iterations of our point model (based on 2010 Karthik scouting data) and the differences in outcomes were minimal. (The columns in the spreadsheet were labled FiM, MAR, NE 1, NE 2, NE 3 so we could see changes real time) In other words, the top 20 teams, regardless of algorithm, stayed top 20, the middle 20 stayed middle 20, the bottom 20 were the only ones effected. And that effect was 7 or 8 teams dropped out and 7 or 8 teams got in. There was movement within each sector, but the general rankings stayed pretty consistent.

Hang in there, the road may be rocky, but FIRST will be better coming out the other end.
__________________
Co-Founder/Mentor FRC Team 839 / JrFLL Team 137/Rosie Robotics/Agawam HS
Winner NEF District WPI 2016
Regional CA-08 Boston, 12 WPI, Eng'g Excellence, 12-15 UL Safety, 15 Motorola Quality
KPCB Entrepreneurship 04, 05, 06, 07, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16
Rookie All Star and Top Rookie Seed 2002
Paul Harris Fellow, CMP Inspector 05-16, Head LRI NE FIRST JTB 1944-2008 "What did you do with your dash?"
Reply With Quote
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-08-2013, 11:36
IKE's Avatar
IKE IKE is offline
Not so Custom User Title
AKA: Isaac Rife
no team (N/A)
Team Role: Mechanical
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 2,148
IKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond reputeIKE has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Standardized District Point Model

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosiebotboss View Post
As a member of the NE FIRST point model team and without naming names (because it would be a diservice to them to have them personally under the scrutiny of this community and added pressure and possible inundation of PMs) I have seen the list and I am completely confident in the abilities of each and every committee member. They represent all 4 current districts, 2 districts "to be", WFAs, CCA reps as well as FIRST staff.

Just for a point of reference, we in NE, during our discussions, ran several iterations of our point model (based on 2010 Karthik scouting data) and the differences in outcomes were minimal. (The columns in the spreadsheet were labled FiM, MAR, NE 1, NE 2, NE 3 so we could see changes real time) In other words, the top 20 teams, regardless of algorithm, stayed top 20, the middle 20 stayed middle 20, the bottom 20 were the only ones effected. And that effect was 7 or 8 teams dropped out and 7 or 8 teams got in. There was movement within each sector, but the general rankings stayed pretty consistent.

Hang in there, the road may be rocky, but FIRST will be better coming out the other end.
Underline emphasis is mine...

Having good values and measurable deltas at the cut points are crucial. Pay close attention to those areas. While who is #1 is important from an inspirational point, who is one above and one below your cut point is the biggest deal.
Reply With Quote
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 02-08-2013, 13:20
Tristan Lall's Avatar
Tristan Lall Tristan Lall is offline
Registered User
FRC #0188 (Woburn Robotics)
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,484
Tristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Standardized District Point Model

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan Streeter View Post
So, based off a newsletter that went out to New England teams today, it's confirmed that FIRST is planning on standardizing the district system point model for 2014... so, what do you think?

First off, do you think it should be standardized? Should each region be able to choose how they qualify teams - in something akin to "States' Rights?" Or would it be silly for FIRST not to choose how awards and accomplishments are rewarded?
One of the biggest problems with a real "states' rights" regime is that it gives states licence to do things out of self-interest, without regard for everyone else. It's not as big a deal when the scope of the state's power prevents them from significantly affecting anyone else—but realistically, that's a rare scenario in the real world.

On the other hand, one of the most convenient aspects of decentralized federalism is that each state can function as a (poorly-constrained) experimental group, to test the propositions embodied in their various laws. It's not perfect, but if there's genuine controversy over an issue, one way (but certainly not the only way) to solve it is by letting the chips fall where they may.

In our case, I'm not strongly opposed to regions having their own models, as long as there is an opportunity to discuss whether there will be far-reaching effects, and then an obligation to mitigate those effects unless consensus is reached with the other regions and FIRST.

Overall, I think I'd still prefer it if FIRST built the system at a national level—but I am concerned about their capacity to handle the implementation. (Though FIRST's current directorship does increase my confidence that they'll handle it well.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nathan Streeter View Post
Second, what do you want to see in the point system? At least a dozen threads exist about exact point models... so while I'm not opposed to talking about details, I'd also like to talk about the "philosophy" and various approaches.
It's worth clearly defining what each Championship (world, regional, etc.) is meant to be: Are they strictly tests of the best on-field performers? Or should they include the outstanding award-winners? Or the best overall teams by some combination of criteria? Some specific guidance from the top would be a nice addition to the conversation—or, if the FIRST leadership isn't certain, or if the community does not accept their reasoning, then maybe we need to settle that question before getting too invested in any particular point systems.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:39.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi