Frank Answers Fridays: Expanded Championship Qualification

[MooreteP]

Unfortunately, there is a conflict between continuing the idea of a World Championship for FIRST, and "having s team in every high school".

How many High School sports have a National Championship, let alone a World Championship?
Why do we want to believe it is possible to pull this off?

Do the math.

The FIRST experience practices project management with technology.
It's a time and motion study to coordinate the creation, competition and ultimate arbitration (Einstein).
To keep growing, the four month window should to be doubled to a September start.

If you had to pick just one of these goals, Growth vs. No World Championship, which would it be?
(check your ego).

[cadandcookies]

Originally Posted by MooreteP

Unfortunately, there is a conflict between continuing the idea of a World Championship for FIRST, and "having s team in every high school".

How many High School sports have a National Championship, let alone a World Championship?
Why do we want to believe it is possible to pull this off?

Do the math.

The FIRST experience practices project management with technology.
It's a time and motion study to coordinate the creation, competition and ultimate arbitration (Einstein).
To keep growing, the four month window should to be doubled to a September start.

If you had to pick just one of these goals, Growth vs. No World Championship, which would it be?
(check your ego).

I don't see the conflict between having a world championship and having a team in every high school. Can you explain with some facts (not unsubstantiated rhetoric) why you believe that to be the case?

I'm not sure how the lack of a national championship for most high school sports means FRC can't pull it off-- for one, if I remember correctly most sports aren't completely vertically and horizontally integrated like FRC is-- they don't have a national/world governing body that issues guidelines to teams from elementary to high school on starting and competing as a team in the broader sense of robotics. FIRST fills that role for us-- sure they partner with local organizations, but the advancement criteria are defined by FIRST.

I also don't see how increasing the build season length would increase growth, perhaps you could explain this to me?

Also, regarding your question, which, if I read it correctly, looks like I can have growth and a world championship or no championship or growth, which seems contrary to your point.

The fact is there is always an opportunity cost. Right now, if what you are saying is that the cost of having a world championships is too high, I completely disagree with you. Perhaps my mind may change in the future (the future is such a funny place), but right now I don't see FIRST outgrowing a championship event in the near future.

[Dragonking]

Next year we will have 600 teams at champs representing about 3000 teams. If all high schools had a team there would be 30000 just in the US. How would a 6000 team world championship work.
I do agree that if anyone could pull it off it would be FIRST- a unified organization run by engineers.
There are ways to do it but if we get to the point where there are so many teams, it makes it extremely difficult to have a world championship that includes both the elite teams and the rookie/lower tier teams.

I also don't see how increasing the build season length would increase growth, perhaps you could explain this to me?

I think he's talking about increasing the length of competition season which would be necessary and has already been happening as FRC grows.

[MooreteP]

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

I don't see the conflict between having a world championship and having a team in every high school. Can you explain with some facts (not unsubstantiated rhetoric) why you believe that to be the case?

Can you give me a substantiated example of a High School "World" Championship? Football, Baseball, Basketball, Soccer, Lacrosse, et al...?
Track and Field has "National" Championships, but they are conducted by many different organizations.
The only real "World Championships" are of Olympic proportion.

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

I'm not sure how the lack of a national championship for most high school sports means FRC can't pull it off-- for one, if I remember correctly most sports aren't completely vertically and horizontally integrated like FRC is-- they don't have a national/world governing body that issues guidelines to teams from elementary to high school on starting and competing as a team in the broader sense of robotics. FIRST fills that role for us-- sure they partner with local organizations, but the advancement criteria are defined by FIRST.

"completely vertically and horizontally integrated like FRC" is unsubstantiated rhetoric, and hyperbolic as well. Have you seen the variety of teams in FRC?
Nonetheless, if anyone can do it, we can do it.

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

I also don't see how increasing the build season length would increase growth, perhaps you could explain this to me?

This V

Originally Posted by Dragonking

Next year we will have 600 teams at champs representing about 3000 teams. If all high schools had a team there would be 30000 just in the US. How would a 6000 team world championship work.
I do agree that if anyone could pull it off it would be FIRST- a unified organization run by engineers.

There are ways to do it but if we get to the point where there are so many teams, it makes it extremely difficult to have a world championship that includes both the elite teams and the rookie/lower tier teams.

I think he's talking about increasing the length of competition season which would be necessary and has already been happening as FRC grows.

Math! Release the game in October, Build until End off Year Break, Six weeks of District/State/Province/Nation High School competitions in January/Feb. "Regional" competitions in March, World Championship in April.

Math! Hello Mentors / Volunteers. This will strain the organization.
High Schools will need to buy more deeply into this program to make a longer season work.

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

Also, regarding your question, which, if I read it correctly, looks like I can have growth and a world championship or no championship or growth, which seems contrary to your point.

I was asking people to prioritize. I do not like to think of this tradeoff.
I prefer both, but this thought has been bothering me.

Originally Posted by cadandcookies

The fact is there is always an opportunity cost. Right now, if what you are saying is that the cost of having a world championships is too high, I completely disagree with you. Perhaps my mind may change in the future (the future is such a funny place), but right now I don't see FIRST outgrowing a championship event in the near future.

I disagree with me too, though not "completely".
The future is a harsh mistress. TANSTAAFL

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by MooreteP

High Schools will need to buy more deeply into this program to make a longer season work.

Agreed. In preparation for the 2015 FRC season, I've already worked 180 hours, and it's not even August 2014 yet. School boards typically see a year long class as about 180 hours, and they have difficulty wrapping their head around paying teachers/coaches/advisors for more than that. In some cases, it can become an equity issue with teachers in other extracurricular programs.

As the schedule currently stands, it already takes far more than 180 hours per school year to run a comprehensive successful FRC team. If it expands to much more than currently, you're going to see two things happen: the quality of the program will fall, and adults will drop out because the time commitment required.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Why does FIRST have to ensure proportional representation from all areas?

They don't have to do anything, but hypothetically if only 20 out of 110 teams from an area got a bid into championships, while another region got 30 out of 115 bids, someone is going to call BS on misrepresentation based purely on geography, event structure, venue size, etc.

Originally Posted by Justin Montois

I'm not sure why a FIRST-wide points system based on the standard district model points system wouldn't work....

Top 600 teams in the world go to champs.

Provided that there are a series of normalizations for the points system, it's probably the best order AFTER you get through the idea of ensuring 6 teams from every regional go, instead of 5 or 4 or 3.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

They don't have to do anything, but hypothetically if only 20 out of 110 teams from an area got a bid into championships, while another region got 30 out of 115 bids, someone is going to call BS on misrepresentation based purely on geography, event structure, venue size, etc.



Provided that there are a series of normalizations for the points system, it's probably the best order AFTER you get through the idea of ensuring 6 teams from every regional go, instead of 5 or 4 or 3.

To your first point, I dont agree with that on the basis of it depending on the qualification structure. If everyone was in the same points structure as say FiM, then if one region had 20/110 and another had 30/115, then that just meant that that other region had better robots.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by dodar

To your first point, I dont agree with that on the basis of it depending on the qualification structure. If everyone was in the same points structure as say FiM, then if one region had 20/110 and another had 30/115, then that just meant that that other region had better robots.

What if the region who had fewer bids than the other was locked in under FIRST's system, while the one with more bids had more regional competitions that are nearly as difficult to enter for a majority of FRC Teams out of the area as a district?

[Shrub]

Originally Posted by MooreteP

"completely vertically and horizontally integrated like FRC" is unsubstantiated rhetoric, and hyperbolic as well. Have you seen the variety of teams in FRC?
Nonetheless, if anyone can do it, we can do it.

Not to misinterpret what cadandcookies meas, but I'm pretty sure he means that every FRC team is organized under, well, FRC. This allows for champs, no matter what the location and variety of the teams (or whether its regional/district). The reason sports can't do this like FRC can (besides at the Olympic level) is because they don't have an international organization linking teams around the world together. It's difficult to do that with more common sports due to varying interest levels and the ways teams can be organized at different tiers.

Originally Posted by MooreteP

Math! Release the game in October, Build until End off Year Break, Six weeks of District/State/Province/Nation High School competitions in January/Feb. "Regional" competitions in March, World Championship in April.

Also, as much as I love a longer competition season, what happens when high schools that have both and FRC and FTC team, or mentor an FTC team, start build in October? That would be two kickoffs within a month with roughly the same build time and (again, roughly) the same days for competition. I know FTC is a lot smaller compared to FRC, but it could possibly make an impact on bot quality for the teams involved.

edit: If a state (ie: Minnesota (a very popular state in this thread)) runs on regionals, what do you mean by "regional" competitions? Does that mean that the teams that compete in regionals don't do anything for six weeks, or that smaller competitions are held that lead up to a limited amount of teams going to "regional" competitions based on performance and/or awards (that then merit going to champs)? Because then there would be a problem on giving out awards and whether they count for going to champs or not. But it's a cool idea!

[dodar]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

What if the region who had fewer bids than the other was locked in under FIRST's system, while the one with more bids had more regional competitions that are nearly as difficult to enter for a majority of FRC Teams out of the area as a district?

You totally didnt read my post. I stated my point under the premise of everyone being under a singular point structure like the one FiM had.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by dodar

You totally didnt read my post. I stated my point under the premise of everyone being under a singular point structure like the one FiM had.

I was responding to two different arguments in my first post, and you connected them without me noticing. Sorry.

Still doesn't fix how you have to normalize a team who goes through an 8-match qualification circuit at a regional or a 36-round battery of qualification matches over 2 districts and a R/S CMP.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by MooreteP

Unfortunately, there is a conflict between continuing the idea of a World Championship for FIRST, and "having s team in every high school".

How many High School sports have a National Championship, let alone a World Championship?
Why do we want to believe it is possible to pull this off?

Do the math.

If you had to pick just one of these goals, Growth vs. No World Championship, which would it be?
(check your ego).

FIRST has never said they want a FRC team in every high school in the country. They've only said they want a FIRST team in every school in the country.

It's not logistically possible to have a FRC team in every high school. It's too expensive, too much of a drain on teachers, requires too many mentors, and too many competitions. No matter what spin you put on it, it's simply not possible.

If you extend down to FTC (or VEX) it's a lot more plausible that every school in the country could have a robotics program, since it costs and order of magnitude less to participate.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by MooreteP

Unfortunately, there is a conflict between continuing the idea of a World Championship for FIRST, and "having s team in every high school".

How many High School sports have a National Championship, let alone a World Championship?
Why do we want to believe it is possible to pull this off?

Do the math.

The FIRST experience practices project management with technology.
It's a time and motion study to coordinate the creation, competition and ultimate arbitration (Einstein).
To keep growing, the four month window should to be doubled to a September start.

If you had to pick just one of these goals, Growth vs. No World Championship, which would it be?
(check your ego).

I agree with what you're saying; there's a large trade off that has to be made. However, when looking at any high school sport, they have very different goals than FIRST. For example, the goal any high school volleyball organization is not to promote the game of volleyball and change culture such that volleyball is more accepted. The goal is simply to provide students with a place to play volleyball. FIRST on the other hand has multiple goals. They want to provide teams with a program that allows them to participate, but they are also trying to create a massive shift in culture. The World Championship is a huge part of this shift, as it's the stage FIRST needs to get the type of large scale publicity that's needed to achieve the culture change they're going for. Yes, there are other models that could achieve the same goals that FIRST is striving for, but as it stands right now, the World Championship is central to FIRST achieving their current mission.

[Justin Montois]

Originally Posted by MARS_James

Because of Chairman's, Engineering Inspiration, and Rookie All Star, plus it would mean waiting until the last possible week for all 600 teams to make their plans to go to Champs.

I think that most teams would be able to make travel plans after their regional when it becomes obvious if they will qualify or not. For example, there would be a theoretical maximum points a team can achieve at their event. Say they go undefeated, win the event and win chairman's. That level of points should put them in the Top 100 and therefore for all intents and purposes qualify them for worlds as a fall from 100 to 601 most likely isn't plausible. Now let's say you have an average event, win half your matches, get knocked out in quarters and win the imagery award. If that puts you in the 1000ish range then you probably aren't going to qualify. If anything I think it would allow more teams to make travel plans sooner because it's easier to track your chances of qualifying. This system would also make wildcards very easy to hand out. 403 can't go, 601 gets in and so on.

Granted this system places a premium on performance and I know a lot of people, myself included, like the thought of rookies going to champs based of the RAS, simple way to handle that is to give the RAS (Also Chairman's) a decent amount of points but not quite an auto qualification. Say you need to win x amount of matches as well or something along those lines to also keep the level of competition high.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by Justin Montois

Granted this system places a premium on performance and I know a lot of people, myself included, like the thought of rookies going to champs based of the RAS, simple way to handle that is to give the RAS (Also Chairman's) a decent amount of points but not quite an auto qualification. Say you need to win x amount of matches as well or something along those lines to also keep the level of competition high.

I really like this idea, and I think it solves a lot of the problems people have with the district system. It requires a certain base competitive level to qualify, but certainly rewards teams who win the culture changing awards.