|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
#61
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
TechFire 225 is planning on and looking forward to MAR champs! See you all there!!
|
|
#62
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
Ok, everything should be updated - did most of the tiebreakers for the bubble down to the ~70's ranked teams.
Everyone with 51 points or more is currently qualified, along with team 433 (48 points, CA qualifier). https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/...FE&usp=sharing I'll update the sheet as teams are registered for MAR CMP. Feel free to post here and/or PM me if you know a team that will/won't be attending MAR CMP, and I can update the cutoff/sheet as appropriate. For fun: points in MAR from 2012-2014, teams ranked 1-55. ![]() Last edited by scottandme : 30-03-2014 at 18:09. |
|
#63
|
||||
|
||||
|
Hey,
I am a little upset after reading that teams that qualified for spots outside the district model take away spots from teams who only compete inside the district model. What is the point of the district model if the MAR Championship rewards teams to travel outside of the district, and punishes those teams that only compete inside the district? To me, albeit I will be competing for those now depleted 6 or so seats, this is ridiculous. Why should we as a third year team, who reached the MAR Championship after winning a district event, should be punished and forced to do even better to win less slots. To add to that, teams who have already "clinched" are also competing in this event. Why should we stay in the district model at all? When we could instead travel to the Pittsburgh Regional and compete in Regional events instead of playing in the district model. The district model IMO is great, however when teams are rewarded for bypassing the district and punish teams who competed in district matches alone, why even hold the MAR Champs when most of the teams awarded spots will not even need their robot to compete. For example Chairman's, Rookie, & Ei now occupy about the same amount of non-winning alliance spots left. I know the idea of scrapping the MAR Champs itself is beyond ridiculous. However to me this feels like an unjust dilution of the reward for even attending MAR Champs. Add to that many of the spots clinched were clinched through awards, not winning an event. Why should a team at the MAR Champs be punished if a team wins an award outside the district? My rough solution to this problem (or at least causation) would be to let those teams who qualified outside the district, compete in the MAR Champs, but if they are to win any other seats, skip them and keep the same amount of open slots to Worlds open to other teams. This is not to discredit anyones hard work or achievements just to point out a flaw in the way MAR distributes it's seats to Worlds Disclaimer: My opinions do not reflect in anyway the opinion of my team or sponsors, nor am I claiming all facts 100% true. |
|
#64
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
The logic (I believe/IIRC) in 'taking away' spots for outside qualifications stems from the idea that once district systems become more and more widespread, the amount of qualifying spots (ie. excluding O&S, HoF, Championship Winners, Championship EIs, etc...) should remain proportional to the number of robots at Championships and that district system's population vs all of FIRST.
|
|
#65
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
Quote:
1 - FIRST decides how the distribution works. Don't whine at MAR, call Frank at FIRST. While you are on the phone talking to Frank discuss how much money they take from the regional organizations. (*) 2 - If a team has the desire, support and money to attend another regional and the skills to win it, YAY THEM. We have a MAR team that traveled to Hawaii and flat out won. We should be impressed, try to learn from them and loudly applaud their accomplishment. Oh wait three other teams traveled away and also proved that MAR isn't a group of little toddlers, we build and compete with AMAZING robots. YAY THEM!!! 3- MAR and the others have done a huge amount to improve the robot cost per match. Regional teams get far more plays for their dollars than any other teams. In the future with the growth of FIRST (yes! more teams) everyone will be in regions. It will take some time, but the balance will occur. We are doing competition robotics, more competition and more inspiration is what we are working towards. (*) No disrespect intended. I'm a huge Frank fan, he seems to be the guy that would finally be willing to talk to you if you have issues. Last edited by Foster : 30-03-2014 at 19:40. |
|
#66
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
Quote:
|
|
#67
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
Quote:
|
|
#68
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
2495 & 2729 are flipped, we have more alliance selection points (tiebreaker) and should be in 55th (as reflected in the official rankings)
Quote:
Last edited by Brandon_L : 30-03-2014 at 20:17. |
|
#69
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
11 and 193 do intend on attending the MAR championships at this time.
|
|
#70
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
As a preface, this is probably most relevant to MAR (as opposed to FiM, NE, PNW) as we have a few unique characteristics that exacerbate the problem.
1. We have a good number of teams that continue to travel to outside events, and qualify via those outside events. 2. We have a comparatively small number of slots to award, being the smallest district (though in the same rough proportion as FiM, NE, PNW). 3. We have the largest % of slots devoted to "awards" at our region championship, and losing any number of slots has a bigger impact on remaining "point" slots. I haven't been able to find the distribution for FiM/NE/PNW for this year - if anyone has those, it would be helpful. Quote:
It doesn't hold up to scrutiny too well though. 1. As districts become more widespread, there will be fewer regionals to attend/earn slots at, reducing the significance of the problem. The Regional to District transition is a long way off for many regions, if it ever happens at all. Doesn't really make sense to be solving a problem that doesn't exist yet, unless it doesn't cause any unwanted side-effects. 1a. That explanation only "fixes" the problem for the district region. The outside Regional is not compensated in any way for an "outside" team coming in and winning a bid - same as it ever was. So that undermines that particular explanation. 2. FIRST hasn't (to my knowledge) made an effort to make CMP slots proportional to any particular locale/community. No value judgement there - depends what you think the purpose of WCMP is. If it's to give every region a fair shot at attending, the slots should be proportional. If it's to showcase the best robots - we should have way more slots for Michigan and Ontario teams. This has previously caused teams to flee highly competitive regions for less competitive ones, and who can blame them. Ontario is to thank for the current wildcard system, which is a pretty good band-aid to make Regionals more "District-like". 3. It reduces the efficacy of the point system in awarding the District Champion and Point slots. One of the main benefits (IMO) of the district point model is that it allows high-performing but unlucky teams to advance, and reduces the number of low-performing but lucky teams that advance. As far as I remember, that was a primary focus of the Michigan teams & mentors who designed the system. Worst case, a district championship will give a "winning" bid to the 24th best team in the region (out of 110 to 200+ teams). Much better than the 24th best team at a 30+ team regional. 3b. It distorts the balance of slots awarded by the district. Slots can be lost by any method, but they are only removed from the "points" slots. Fewer of those high performing but unlucky teams get to attend WCMP. MAR will effectively award 3 slots via Chairman's award, 3 slots via Engineering Inspiration, and another 2 slots via winning events. So instead of 5/18 slots being awarded for RAS/CA/EI, we're now at 7/18 slots (39%). Pretty big jump. For reference, Michigan gave 5/27 slots for those awards last year (19%). See point 3 from the top. Again, this is all through the lens of my personal preference for the district model to reward more of those high performing but unlucky teams, instead of giving out an excessive % of culture awards. I think I'm in line with the initial FiM perspective on that point. Our team has been honored to win DCA awards the last 3 years running - before eventually losing to other very worthy programs at our Region Championship. Would I turn down a bid to CMP if we ended up winning RCA at an outside regional? No, but it makes sense to let the District sort out the most competitive applicants and send those teams to WCMP on their relative merits. As for solutions? If the intent is truly to evenly distribute slots to WCMP - then don't allow District teams to qualify via outside Regionals. Exclude them from the CA/EI/RAS judging process, as they will still have the ability to compete for those within district (don't even need the robot at DCMP to win those). If they win the event, open up a wildcard slot for a Regional system team. The only disadvantage that remains is the lateness of qualifying for Worlds, but I don't think there's a good solution for that with the current District structure. Gives all district teams an equal bite at the apple, with the ability to still travel out of region. |
|
#71
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
Fixed, I didn't bother sorting you guys initially since you were above the cutoff.
|
|
#72
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
Quote:
Edit: Scott has a good summary of things. Thanks! Last edited by Akash Rastogi : 31-03-2014 at 17:01. |
|
#73
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
I don't see it mentioned anywhere in the district rules, but I'm assuming if a team that already is qualified for worlds (say 225) were to rank high enough to take one of the remaining points slots they would be passed over instead of the slot vanishing correct?
|
|
#74
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 2014 MAR Standings
Quote:
|
|
#75
|
|||
|
|||
|
How many points does a team gets for winning a match at MARs?
![]() |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|