Future First Championship News

[cgmv123]

Originally Posted by meg

Sadly, there would still only be 3 matches. After all of the tie breakers in a match comes the "random" selector so FMS would just arbitrarily pick a winner. Who wants to see how random their random function actually is?

Originally Posted by Game Manual Section 5.4.3

There are no tie breaker rules awarding additional MATCH points during Final MATCHES. If after two (2) MATCHES the ALLIANCES each have a win, a third MATCH will be played. Additional matches will be played if needed.

No tiebreakers this year. In previous years, a match tied after tiebreakers was considered a 'true' tie and replayed.

(I am absolutely not advocating for this. I think we, the community, need to find a way to resolve these issues without interfering with the students learning.)

This. I will be very disappointed if the Einstein matches are anything but the best matches of the FRC season.

[cgmv123]

Originally Posted by Siri

Though I'm not personally as appalled as the thread standard (but I get it), I found myself wondering what this would've actually looked like. With all the talk of who you will and won't be able to play with, here's the last two year's worth of Division Winners and Finalists by which Half-World Championship they would've been at. ...Sort of. It's a rush job off TBA that relies on my geography skills. There are quite a few borderline teams--I gave PNW to Houston and was pretty random about our friends in Missouri-ish areas.

It won't be strictly geography. There will be an attempt to balance attendance numbers at both events.

[pastelpony]

I can honestly see this model taking the same route the Roman Empire did when it was partitioned into two empires; one decent entity split into two for the sake of "ease" with both resulting entities eventually severely declining into nothingness (though Byzantine took much longer to completely dissolve).

[pwnageNick]

[Cory]

Originally Posted by cgmv123

It won't be strictly geography. There will be an attempt to balance both events.

Where do you see that?

It says an attempt will be made to balance the number of teams at each event. That has nothing to do with competitive balance.

[Anupam Goli]

Originally Posted by pwnageNick

I would watch this.

[George Nishimura]

Originally Posted by cricket66

International teams have to decide north or south competition.

I think international teams would be assigned geographically as well, or used to balance the numbers.

This has not been thought through very well.

It's almost certainly the opposite. A calculated decision that prioritises the number of teams over the sporting and cultural significance of the event.

[Nemo]

Please, no FRC Super Regionals.

Three Championship level events in one month is too many. It's too much of the following:

• Adult helper vacation days
• registration fees
• trip payments by families
• general exhaustion

3 Tiers is good:
Districts --> District Champs --> Worlds

[cgmv123]

Originally Posted by Cory

Where do you see that?

It says an attempt will be made to balance the number of teams at each event. That has nothing to do with competitive balance.

His post had most teams going Detroit. Obviously, that won't be the case. (Post edited for clarity)

[jman4747]

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman

Atlanta is #6.

Hay now... I mean come on? How about that airport though right? #6 is better than #1-2!

[Carl C]

Originally Posted by Nemo

3 Tiers is good:
Districts --> District Champs --> Worlds

My thoughts as well. As more areas move to the district system, many of the issues this change is trying to address will likely be less of a problem.

[KeeganP]

Originally Posted by cgmv123

His post had most teams going Detroit. Obviously, that won't be the case.

That post shows the winners and finalists of each division, and what region they would likely be assigned, had there been 2 venues in 2014 and 2013. There may well not be an even distribution of the winning teams from last year at the two venues -- but there would be an even distribution across the entirety of both championship events.

What the post shows, is that the strongest teams last year would have all been at Detroit, and thus the Detroit event would have been a stronger event than the Houston event.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by cgmv123

His post had most teams going Detroit. Obviously, that won't be the case. (Post edited for clarity)

But you can only balance it with fringe cases. You can't split half the Michigan teams between Houston and Detroit. You'd have to pick teams that are on the border of right between the two locations. You are going to see a competitive difference between the two events, at least until more locales get districts to help them improve that way.

While we're talking venues, the new Levi's Stadium in Santa Clara is awefuly nice...

[smistthegreat]

Originally Posted by Cory

But you can only balance it with fringe cases. You can't split half the Michigan teams between Houston and Detroit. You'd have to pick teams that are on the border of right between the two locations. You are going to see a competitive difference between the two events, at least until more locales get districts to help them improve that way.

I, for one, welcome our new Ontario CMP "North" overlords.