FrankAnswersFridays: October 25, 2013: Safety at Championships

[Pat Fairbank]

I think the fairest system, and the one requiring the least amount of work to implement, is the one that many teams (including my own) try to follow now -- you show up early in the morning with as many people as seats you want to claim, and stand in line.

Where this fails right now is that there is often not a clear indication of where the line starts (i.e. which door(s) will be opening) and no effort to enforce that teams respect the line (other than teams' GP, which sadly often goes missing at this point in the competition). This is easily and inexpensively solved with signage and crowd control barriers.

Edit: Having one such line for each division, at its own set of doors at the four corners of the dome, would also go a long way towards decreasing the safety hazard of people pushing or running in different directions after they get in.

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by Pat Fairbank

I think the fairest system, and the one requiring the least amount of work to implement, is the one that many teams (including my own) try to follow now -- you show up early in the morning with as many people as seats you want to claim, and stand in line.

Where this fails right now is that there is often not a clear indication of where the line starts (i.e. which door(s) will be opening) and no effort to enforce that teams respect the line (other than teams' GP, which sadly often goes missing at this point in the competition). This is easily and inexpensively solved with signage and crowd control barriers.

Edit: Having one such line for each division, at its own set of doors at the four corners of the dome, would also go a long way towards decreasing the safety hazard of people pushing or running in different directions after they get in.

Also giving the pit an obviously separate issue would be nice.

[Jim Giacchi]

I agree with everyone who mentioned crowd control barriers. If you have a line that zig zags and is cordoned off, it will preventi people from pushing through the doors because they will be funneled into the line. No one will be able to cut in either because barriers would prevent it. It would go a long way towards relieving a lot of the problem. I also cannot stress enough the fact that people just don't listen. I was verbally abused two years ago by a woman when my team and I "stole" empty seats. She accused me of not understanding the spirit of FIRST despite clearly not ever reading the rules herself. You can't prevent stupidity nor ignorance, but what I would suggest is that you can prevent teams that are clearly saving seats, by having volunteers explain the rules to them when they see a team using signs and tape to block sections off.
Also more doors should be open. We are filling the lower portion of the stadium to capacity. They size the arena and the doors to handle it, but when you close doors, you are not using the building as designed and are most definitely asking for a problem. Even if you only open the doors during the first hour, it would go a long way to making the event safer.

[MechEng83]

Originally Posted by Jim Giacchi

I was verbally abused two years ago by a woman when my team and I "stole" empty seats. She accused me of not understanding the spirit of FIRST despite clearly not ever reading the rules herself. You can't prevent stupidity nor ignorance, but what I would suggest is that you can prevent teams that are clearly saving seats, by having volunteers explain the rules to them when they see a team using signs and tape to block sections off.

Jim,
I wonder if you had a run-in with the same woman who did that to me and 2 of my students when we found some empty seats right before opening ceremonies in 2011. Another mentor from her team did come stop her because she was making a scene yelling at the several groups who sat in the seats, and her entire team ended up using about 2/5 of the "saved" seats.

---------------------

More doors, please. Separate pit entrance, please. More humorous rhymes from the safety glasses attendant, please.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Pat Fairbank

I think the fairest system, and the one requiring the least amount of work to implement, is the one that many teams (including my own) try to follow now -- you show up early in the morning with as many people as seats you want to claim, and stand in line.

Where this fails right now is that there is often not a clear indication of where the line starts (i.e. which door(s) will be opening) and no effort to enforce that teams respect the line (other than teams' GP, which sadly often goes missing at this point in the competition). This is easily and inexpensively solved with signage and crowd control barriers.

Edit: Having one such line for each division, at its own set of doors at the four corners of the dome, would also go a long way towards decreasing the safety hazard of people pushing or running in different directions after they get in.

I'm 100% in agreement with Pat here. If lineups were clearly marked and enforced each morning, there would be absolutely no issues. There's no need to implement a complicated solution for what is a relatively simple problem to solve.

[Bald & Bearded]

Lots of good discussion and constructive idea being presented here.

As someone who walked it many times the last two years there really does need
to be an entrance on the other side for the pits. We often try to do a picnic lunch and it really slows things down that everyone basically has to walk from one side and around the dome to the other side.

Different entrances for each division would also make things more orderly.

I am not sure if designated scouter seats will work but I think it is an idea worth trying. As we all know, the first attempt will not likely be right but it would be a place to start.

In the end, GP is the big requirement. Sometimes I believe it is not deliberate non-GP behavior but the lack of a framework that encourages GP. The current mass rush just does not work. Take ideas from concert venues and amusement parks they have been solving this problem for years.

Two stages, in the door and bag/box checks, followed by well defined queuing areas. Multiple entrances for different sections.

The idea of tickets for team seating has problems unless we tie it to some other purchased element. Maybe base it on hotel rooms purchased (4 tickets for each hotel room purchased) since Steel Meetings is given a monopoly on the hotel rooms.

[Chris is me]

I like Pat and Karthik's thoughts on this matter; a simple and easy to implement solution to the problem. Not everything would be perfect (teams would still run once past the doors unless the "line" continued inside) but it would be far better than what's going on now.

I do wish to add that as much as teams should be GP, as much as we want to instill those values, teams are going to run in the mornings if they have a good reason to. We can't go "teams need to be more GP" and then do nothing about the problem. It doesn't remove the incentive to sprint, push, and shove.

Similarly, more volunteers telling students not to run isn't going to make them stop running. The benefits of running ahead (good seats for the day) are far higher than the costs (someone might ask you to stop running). I'd never endorse the behavior of these students, but I understand why it happens. Tired, stressed students whom have been awake for 3 hours are being rushed / cut by people that showed up 20 minutes prior to doors. These students felt they worked hard for the right to sit first and hate to see it taken from them by other people running ahead, so they have in their mind no choice but to do the same.

Hence why an ideal solution to get people to stop running is to ensure an orderly line that can proceed in that order all the way to the entrance to the stands. Anything short of that creates an opportunity for students to run / push / shove / cut.

[PayneTrain]

Adding on to all of this, you would have to, in advance of the competition, mark on a map a specific set of doors that open early and have these 4 separate lines that we talked about. Second, you need to have a few people there early in the morning (floaters, maybe even queuers?) to control the entry. I think you open these special doors for field access only 10 minutes before each other door, and have each division go at one time and escorted to the entrance of that division. The free for all is bound to happen eventually, but trying to mitigate the initial rush would go a long way in establishing a precedent of fair and sensible seating.

Also since a lot of people who are serial seat savers (ie non-mentoring parents) are not likely to ever read the admin manual, could FIRST put a couple more coins into signage that quotes the rule around each seating area? I know FIRST likes to dump a lot of cash on signage for the whole event, what's a few more banners around each division to maybe cut down on the issue just bit more?

[AdamHeard]

Lotteries, etc... are silly and resource intensive.

We just need a better system to handle the first come first serve. Also, reducing the "sprint distance" would help.

In 2011, the line for pit was allowed to go inside, and right up to the pit doors. Thus, when the doors were opened there was no incentive to sprint... you were already there. 2012 and 2013 had a dangerous 500' sprint.

I'd be nice (but I'm less familiar with the dome layout) to do the same thing for the 4 divisions. Form a line right at the entrance to the seats themselves, so that minimal sprinting could even happen. This also makes what is currently one massive line, 5 smaller lines.

[Justin Montois]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

Lotteries, etc... are silly and resource intensive.

We just need a better system to handle the first come first serve. Also, reducing the "sprint distance" would help.

In 2011, the line for pit was allowed to go inside, and right up to the pit doors. Thus, when the doors were opened there was no incentive to sprint... you were already there. 2012 and 2013 had a dangerous 500' sprint.

I'd be nice (but I'm less familiar with the dome layout) to do the same thing for the 4 divisions. Form a line right at the entrance to the seats themselves, so that minimal sprinting could even happen. This also makes what is currently one massive line, 5 smaller lines.

I agree with most of this. However it doesn't address the problem of a team sending a 1 or 2 people to save 30 seats or more.

While a lottery may be "resource intensive" it solves both issues. There's no running, and everyone has a set amount of seats.

Also, to prevent teams from saying they have 50 people just to "be safe" it may be a good idea to have a system in place that the bigger the team is, the less likely they get seats up front.

I'm all for simple solutions but at the same time I don't want to half solve the problem.

[Ryan Dognaux]

Originally Posted by Justin Montois

I agree with most of this. However it doesn't address the problem of a team sending a 1 or 2 people to save 30 seats or more.

Am I the only one who just explains that you can't save those seats and continues to sit in them? Not trying to be a jerk but if your 30+ member team is represented by 2 team members and some jackets, then I'm going to still take the seat.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by Ryan Dognaux

Am I the only one who just explains that you can't save those seats and continues to sit in them?

There are more than a few of us who will happily claim an unoccupied seat. If challenged, I'll just as happily offer to vacate it upon the return of the team member it's being "saved" for.

I even followed through on that offer the one time a team member did need the seat before I left. :-)

[aryker]

I think one of the major issues with seating was how little seating in the facility was made available for people--the Championship is held in a huge stadium, and yet what the staff seemed most concerned about was the fact that everyone stayed on the first level of seating. It seemed like 60 percent of the seats in the facility were unused! Maybe the crowd would thin out a bit if teams were allowed to make use of all the available seating, rather than just a small portion!

[Kevin Leonard]

I think FIRST should take a look at how well the scouting section at the GTR Regional (I can't remember which one) that is being held at 610's school. If the whole "Scouting Section" business runs efficiently there, I see no reason why they shouldn't attempt something like it at championships. Especially if they could find a space to set up a full-field view.
This would alleviate the problem in the stands immensely by moving scouts who need priority seating out of the stands and into a scouting section.
I think they find four relatively large areas in the convention center to run these sections. Preferably a relatively quiet area. This might also encourage collaboration between teams that are scouting.


Another thought: What if they used the high-up seating that is unused above a section to facilitate the scouting section? Would it be difficult to set up a projector there? It also has the benefit of being close to the actual seating and field.

The reason I'm so concerned about this is that our scouting operation is intense. We run six scouts, a head scout, a paper filer, and a data entry person. We also collaborate with other teams for our scouting. And anyone who knows FRC knows that scouting wins matches, and good scouting wins regionals.
So whatever solution is presented, I want to make sure that scouting is considered as a high priority item.
I have no doubt that most of you understand this, but it's something that could easily get thrown under the bridge in the name of organization.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Thunder910

Another thought: What if they used the high-up seating that is unused above a section to facilitate the scouting section? Would it be difficult to set up a projector there? It also has the benefit of being close to the actual seating and field.

Given the option I don't think there's a single team that would rather watch the match on a screen rather than live when it comes to scouting.