Go to Post remember kids, never listen to Big Mike.... - Mike Schroeder [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 7 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #31   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 02:26
Rachel Lim Rachel Lim is offline
Registered User
FRC #1868 (Space Cookies)
Team Role: Student
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Moffett Field
Posts: 242
Rachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Warning: very long post ahead. These are the issues I can see that will come up organized as well as I can at 11pm. (And I thought I was done with pros/cons list after build season...)

Issues FIRST tried to resolve:
Size:
There are currently about 3000 teams competing in FRC[1], and that number isn't going down. If each team went once every four years (which seems to be FIRST's goal so that every student that joined a team as a freshman and stayed got a chance to go to worlds), that would be 750 teams/year. Then there are teams that definitely going to be going more often than that (prequalified teams as well as top teams). Not to mention that the number of teams has been going up every year. An 800 team event may work for the next few years, but not forever. At some time, either champs has a smaller percentage of teams, or it splits.

Location:
Finding a location that can deal with 800+ teams is difficult, specifically:
- A building that has enough rooms for all the fields and pits
- A city that has enough hotels for all the teams (and restaurants, other activities, is easy to get to (i.e. a airport hub nearby), etc.)

Time:
AP testing starts in early May[2], so all competitions need to be ready by then. Week 7 events end in mid-April. That gives about a two week period to fit in champs / split-champs / super-regionals / other competitions.

Cost:
Many teams are already unable to get the funding to travel to champs. Having district events -> district champs -> super regionals -> champs is unrealistic in my opinion. Having super regionals replace champs may be one option--teams will get the opportunity to compete with more teams than they would otherwise, and hopefully it's closer than champs--but for teams that eventually qualify for champs, that may again be an issue.

Distance:
As I said above, doing district champs / super regionals and champs will be two events that are likely not nearby. Even for the top alliance(s) that will have to travel to another location to finish competing, more traveling = not good.

Inspiration:
FIRST wants every student to get a chance to go to champs in their 4 years in high school. It's a method to inspire them, to make them feel like they've succeeded, to let them see the best (even if just part of it), to make it easier to explain to everyone what they're spending time on, to justify to schools about time missed, and to use to help get sponsors. They're trying to aim this to as many teams as possible, which is generally the average teams that don't normally get to champs.

I'm sure they know that mentors on powerhouse teams wouldn't like this idea. But it appears that they've decided to aim this not at the top, but at the average team. Whoever is presenting needs to keep this in mind. Ideally there will be students/mentors from non-powerhouse teams to explain that they too dislike this new idea and so that FIRST understands that it's not just "top team" problem. (Or maybe it is...or a "CD problem"--it's hard to know exactly how most teams think about this)

Other possible solutions:
Splitting FLL+FTC and FRC:
Have FLL+FTC champs at one location and FRC champs at the other.
Pros:
- Deals with an expanded champs for the short term
- Allows all FRC teams to see each other (and FLL/FTC to do the same)
- Allows for a single set of winners
- Doesn't require extra traveling / time away from school
- Everyone has the opportunity to see the final matches for the competition in person
- Uses both locations that FIRST has

Cons:
- FLL/FTC can't see FRC and vice versa (counterpoint: have "outreach" teams--teams that didn't qualify / can't afford to travel / etc. display at the other event)
- FIRST can't have their 25% of teams at champs (counterpoint: see district champs / super regionals)
- Mentors/students who work with teams competing in both events will not be able to help/watch both
District champs / Super Regionals:
Have all areas convert to districts to have a smaller percentage of teams at champs, and have district champs or super regionals be the event more teams can attend (25%+)
Pros:
- Deals with the expanding size of FRC
- Gives teams who won't qualify for champs a chance to meet more teams
- Easier for those teams to get to (likely nearer)
- Already sort of exists as district champs, and a few districts could merge theirs into super regionals so it doesn't add another competition
- Both keeps a single champs and gives everyone an opportunity to compete at a higher level
- Depending at what size champs is kept to, it could leave FTC/FLL with FRC
- Could be held at multiple locations including the ones already booked
- Teams can be inspired at this level too
- Possibly even more teams can get to this than would get to champs otherwise

Cons:
- Some teams will get to champs (actual champs) very, very infrequently
- Will require more traveling for those that do qualify
- Will require teams who are not in an area that is likely to convert to districts to either travel far for two events (this one + champs) or have another way to qualify
- May still have to be combined with the previous idea to keep a champs to a size that a city can support and to a percentage of teams that can qualify so it's not just a very small elite group
Final matches for Houston vs St Louis:
Pros:
- Keeps the split champs
- Could be expanded for more areas later if needed
- Allows for FTC/FLL/FRC to be together
- Less missed school / traveling for most teams

Cons:
- Most people can't watch final matches in person (which is arguably the most inspiring part of champs)
- More missed school / traveling for those teams
- Would require another competition, another location, and more volunteers
- Extends competition season even more and starts cutting into AP / finals time
- If areas are geographical, it may end up as Canada+Michigan+east coast vs Texas+south+west coast always...
My opinion:
I'm personally in favor of both splitting FTC/FLL and FRC, as well as converting all of FRC into districts and then having district champs / super regionals as that intermediate level. Champs should be able to support 600 teams, or even possibly 700-800, which will probably work for quite a while more. Districts could either just have their own district champs, or combine with other one to get super regionals, just ideally not both.

If they're doing the second idea, they can either do several (~7?) that are just a few states together (e.g. CA+NV+AZ (+HI?), OR+WA+ID (+UT?), TX+OK+NM, LO+AR+MO+MS, etc.) or fairly large areas (west coast, east coast, south, midwest)

It would mean that most teams would get the chance to see the elite teams in their area fairly frequently and then have that to push towards, with champs being the ultimate goal for everyone. It would add more competitions, but probably not much more than what districts are already having. If there are teams willing to be "demo teams" for FLL/FTC, that could solve that issue. If the two events are already booked for different weeks, it gives the opportunity (and unfortunately this is the point that I don't know how to address properly) to travel to both, although it would be very inconvenient.

I hope this gets resolved somehow.

[1] Wikipedia
[2] College Board
Reply With Quote
  #32   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 02:37
Andrew Lawrence
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

I see a lot of people shooting down ideas because of less than ideal trade offs. This is an engineering challenge, and in engineering you have to deal with trade offs. The hand we're dealt is two championship events in two different places. While we'd like to have it a different way where there is no downside, that's simply not the case. Sometimes you gotta make some sacrifices to play the best hand. This may involve splitting up a team's FRC and FTC teams, or limiting the reach of inspiration by separating FLL and FRC students (or dare I say it, including less teams in the championship). If you want to build a strong proposal, you need to recognize what trade offs you're going to be making, accept that sacrifices will need to be made, and provide sound and valid justification as to why these sacrifices are the best course of action for the program overall.
Reply With Quote
  #33   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 07:52
philso philso is offline
Mentor
FRC #2587
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 938
philso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunshine View Post
I'd like to see the actual numbers on how many this would really effect.
So would I. Other posters on this thread have also mentioned this issue. Depending on the real numbers, such a split may be acceptable or not.

My position comes from watching Chairman's Award videos and reading Chairman's Award presentations from around the country. Most of these were from HOF teams. It also comes from my observations of the Houston FIRST scene. I see many of the same faces at the FLL and FRC events, including many of the key volunteers that make these events possible. I suspect that this split will affect the larger, more established teams the most. The driver for a Houston area team that has won 3 regionals this year was a co-coach for his younger brother's FLL team. They run one of the best FLL events in Houston and sponsor something like 5 FLL teams. A team member from a past World Championship team is one of the mentors for an FLL team going to the World Festival this year. A third local powerhouse team, that has also won 3 regionals this year, used to run some of the FLL tournaments until they switched to VEX-IQ as their feeder program.
Reply With Quote
  #34   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 08:12
philso philso is offline
Mentor
FRC #2587
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 938
philso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Lawrence View Post
I see a lot of people shooting down ideas because of less than ideal trade offs. This is an engineering challenge, and in engineering you have to deal with trade offs. The hand we're dealt is two championship events in two different places. While we'd like to have it a different way where there is no downside, that's simply not the case. Sometimes you gotta make some sacrifices to play the best hand. This may involve splitting up a team's FRC and FTC teams, or limiting the reach of inspiration by separating FLL and FRC students (or dare I say it, including less teams in the championship). If you want to build a strong proposal, you need to recognize what trade offs you're going to be making, accept that sacrifices will need to be made, and provide sound and valid justification as to why these sacrifices are the best course of action for the program overall.
I have heard the FIRST programs called "engineering competitions". Lets do some engineering.

Those of you who are practicing engineers probably have to make difficult choices between several less than ideal solutions in your day job. You probably also have to deal with less than ideal initial conditions, resources, constraints, etc. Sometimes you can turn those less than ideal starting points around and end up with a superior result. Often, putting aside one's emotions to look at the numbers and the facts leads one to arrive at the superior solution, a solution that one's emotions would lead one to reject.

I am not happy with the direction that FIRST seems to be taking but they have said that they are open to dialogue. It is also likely that FIRST is not happy with some of the choices that they have had to make so far.

What is inspiring to me and many students is seeing the many ingenious solutions to the same problem (game) that many of the great teams (and some rookies too) come up with every year, even if we only see them in a video. As a community of some of the brightest and best minds, we should use this opportunity apply the same ingenuity to make these programs better than they were.
Reply With Quote
  #35   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 12:01
MrRoboSteve MrRoboSteve is offline
Mentor
AKA: Steve Peterson
FRC #3081 (Kennedy RoboEagles)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Bloomington, MN
Posts: 572
MrRoboSteve has a reputation beyond reputeMrRoboSteve has a reputation beyond reputeMrRoboSteve has a reputation beyond reputeMrRoboSteve has a reputation beyond reputeMrRoboSteve has a reputation beyond reputeMrRoboSteve has a reputation beyond reputeMrRoboSteve has a reputation beyond reputeMrRoboSteve has a reputation beyond reputeMrRoboSteve has a reputation beyond reputeMrRoboSteve has a reputation beyond reputeMrRoboSteve has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Generally, you'll want to avoid making logical fallacies in your argument. Good decisionmakers (Dean, Don, and the board fall into that category) are adept at sorting fallacies from facts.

Instead, you should say "when trading off goal A vs goal B, I think B is more important, and here are my reasons." That recognizes A as a valid option, and presents an argument on why B is better, all along admitting that the choice is based on your value judgment. That's the best route to persuading people to come to your point of view.

Rachel Lim's post is well though out, does a good job of examining the tradeoffs, and is persuasive. Others thinking about making a proposal should read hers carefully and emulate her style.

Please don't take my feedback below as "your proposal is bad," but more "here are questions or facts that you need to consider to make your proposal better, or observations about your persuasive arguments." Well-argued proposals based on facts will be the most effective way to adapt this decision to team needs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Siri View Post
I'm not directly arguing for the proposal, but isn't 2017 also the deadline to roll out more Districts?
2017 is a goal, not a deadline. There are a bunch of conditions (e.g., volunteer base) that must be present to transition.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny View Post
I believe the community as a whole DOES NOT want to have 2 World champs
You'll need some data, gathered from the complete base of teams (i.e., not those who participate in a poll on CD) to be persuasive on this point. Otherwise Frank and others will hear "I think everyone agrees with me," which won't go very far. This is the "anecdotal" or "bandwagon" logical fallacy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gblake View Post
I'll bet a cold Mountain Dew that China jumps into FRC with both feet very soon
China is very suspicious of NGOs. It's probably more likely that China will create a new China Robotics Competition, patterned on FIRST but located domestically.

If you will switch to cold Dr. Pepper, I will take you up on the bet ;>)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel Lim View Post
Location:
Finding a location that can deal with 800+ teams is difficult, specifically:
- A building that has enough rooms for all the fields and pits
- A city that has enough hotels for all the teams (and restaurants, other activities, is easy to get to (i.e. a airport hub nearby), etc.)
You should also address the availability of volunteers, as it's often a bigger constraint that facilities. For larger events, normal volunteers, not key volunteers, are the constraint.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel Lim View Post

Splitting FLL+FTC and FRC:
Have FLL+FTC champs at one location and FRC champs at the other.
Pros:
- Deals with an expanded champs for the short term
You should provide some evidence that the Houston or Detroit locations could support FRC events with >400 teams.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel Lim View Post
- Doesn't require extra traveling / time away from school
You should address teams that run FLL, FTC, and FRC programs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel Lim View Post
- FIRST can't have their 25% of teams at champs (counterpoint: see district champs / super regionals)
I would phrase this more that "fewer teams have the opportunity to participate." FIRST's goal is not about FIRST's growth, it is about growing the opportunity for teams to participate.

I have a thought exercise for you. Your team has attended champs based on merit in 9 of the last 10 years (congrats on Chairman's this year, BTW!), has a larger than normal membership, is from one of the wealthiest areas in the US with average family incomes well above the national average, and has a dream list of sponsors, so you're going to have an unusual perspective, compared the more common team profile. It can be hard, but please try to think about this from the perspective of a team without your resources and track record of success. Look at the record of this team (randomly picked as about halfway between 0 and the highest team number on TBA), and think about what your statement means to them. Imagine making a presentation to them, justifying your statement. That is what the leaders of FIRST will be thinking and doing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel Lim View Post
Champs should be able to support 600 teams, or even possibly 700-800, which will probably work for quite a while more.
This statement is unsupported by facts. Posters that are proposing 600 or 800 team single location FRC events should consider these important facts:

1) the only people who know today whether a 600 team event is going to work in St. Louis are those at FIRST

2) the people "in the know" felt so strongly that the event needed to be split that they proposed something they knew would be very controversial. Specific facts that support this statement:

a. They added a location to St. Louis in 2017. That is likely the earliest date that they could engage another venue, and in the convention business is a fairly short lead time for our size of event.
b. The announcement is signed by Dean, Don, and the co-Board chairs -- the top decision makers in FIRST. A trial balloon would be a blog post by Frank. This is not a trial balloon -- it is a decision.
c. It is accompanied by an announcement video, which only accompanies big announcements.
d. It was done 2 weeks before champs, so that they would have an opportunity to talk to the community face to face about the change and why they think it is necessary.
__________________
2016-17 events: 10000 Lakes Regional, Northern Lights Regional, FTC Burnsville Qualifying Tournament

2011 - present · FRC 3081 Kennedy RoboEagles mentor
2013 - present · event volunteer at 10000 Lakes Regional, Northern Lights Regional, North Star Regional, Lake Superior Regional, Minnesota State Tournament, PNW District 4 Glacier Peak, MN FTC, CMP
http://twitter.com/MrRoboSteve · www.linkedin.com/in/speterson
Reply With Quote
  #36   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 13:18
gblake's Avatar
gblake gblake is offline
6th Gear Developer; Mentor
AKA: Blake Ross
no team (6th Gear)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: May 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Virginia
Posts: 1,934
gblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond reputegblake has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboSteve View Post
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by GBlake
I'll bet a cold Mountain Dew that China jumps into FRC with both feet very soon
China is very suspicious of NGOs. It's probably more likely that China will create a new China Robotics Competition, patterned on FIRST but located domestically.

If you will switch to cold Dr. Pepper, I will take you up on the bet ;>)
...
My hunch is based on strong Chinese student/team participation in the VEX Robotics Competition, and on the presence of those new Chinese FRC teams putting their toes into the water.

Dr Pepper if you win? - Agreed

Blake
__________________
Blake Ross, For emailing me, in the verizon.net domain, I am blake
VRC Team Mentor, FTC volunteer, 5th Gear Developer, Husband, Father, Triangle Fraternity Alumnus (ky 76), U Ky BSEE, Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, Kentucky Colonel
Words/phrases I avoid: basis, mitigate, leveraging, transitioning, impact (instead of affect/effect), facilitate, programmatic, problematic, issue (instead of problem), latency (instead of delay), dependency (instead of prerequisite), connectivity, usage & utilize (instead of use), downed, functionality, functional, power on, descore, alumni (instead of alumnus/alumna), the enterprise, methodology, nomenclature, form factor (instead of size or shape), competency, modality, provided(with), provision(ing), irregardless/irrespective, signage, colorized, pulsating, ideate
Reply With Quote
  #37   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 14:04
Kevin Leonard Kevin Leonard is offline
Professional Stat Padder
FRC #5254 (HYPE), FRC #20 (The Rocketeers)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 1,248
Kevin Leonard has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Leonard has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Leonard has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Leonard has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Leonard has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Leonard has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Leonard has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Leonard has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Leonard has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Leonard has a reputation beyond reputeKevin Leonard has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billfred View Post
This is what I've been advocating since the announcement. You can do two FLL/JrFLL events without any strife, because winning a championship tournament never was a golden ticket to World Festival. Some years, you are playing for a bid to an Open. So we'll roll with that.

Make one city the FRC Championship, make one city the FTC World Championship. At the FTC site, you hold the Good Guy Frank Invitational with 60-100 FRC teams. Some will opt to do it because it's closer, or the date works better, or they've got FTC teams that want to go, or maybe we invite some teams whose district points bubble burst--but you hold a full-fat, top-flight event there so you've got all four programs represented there. Do the same back for the FRC Championship, and you have an undisputed champion and four healthy programs with room to grow.
This is my favorite proposal so far. One event is the undisputed FRC Championship with 600 FRC teams, as well as an FTC Open Tournament and an FLL Festival, and the other is the undisputed FTC Championship with however many FTC teams, with an FRC Open Tournament and an FLL Festival.

This is not a perfect proposal whatsoever- teams with world class qualifying FRC and FTC teams have to choose which of their programs deserves the true championship, and which gets the lower tier Open tournament.

However I think this is byfar better than both programs getting a lower quality championship.
__________________
All of my posts are my opinion only and do not reflect the views of my associated teams.
College Student Mentor on Team 5254, HYPE - Helping Youth Pursue Excellence
(2015-Present)
Alumni of Team 20, The Rocketeers (2011-2014)
I'm attempting a robotics blog. Check it out at RocketHypeRobotics.wordpress.com Updated 10/26/16
Reply With Quote
  #38   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 14:22
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is offline
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,621
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Quote:
Originally Posted by AGPapa View Post
Personally, I believe this is the wrong point to discuss during the meeting. The issue isn't that they're two championship alliances, but rather that the whole FRC community will be split. I think the focus of the meeting should be see if there is a way to have only one FRC championship at one of the locations, and have the other be for FTC.
Agreed. While the "two champions" thing is a valid complaint, it's not like the problem is solved if everything is the same except for one "ultimate championship" match between these two alliances. Ultimately, it's the permanent fracturing of the FRC community that is the biggest and most obvious problem with this plan.
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
...2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
---
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
...2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design
...2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
...2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
...2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 Minnesota 10,000 Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
Reply With Quote
  #39   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 17:36
grstex grstex is online now
Registered User
no team
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 56
grstex is just really nicegrstex is just really nicegrstex is just really nicegrstex is just really nice
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billfred View Post
This is what I've been advocating since the announcement. You can do two FLL/JrFLL events without any strife, because winning a championship tournament never was a golden ticket to World Festival. Some years, you are playing for a bid to an Open. So we'll roll with that.

Make one city the FRC Championship, make one city the FTC World Championship. At the FTC site, you hold the Good Guy Frank Invitational with 60-100 FRC teams. Some will opt to do it because it's closer, or the date works better, or they've got FTC teams that want to go, or maybe we invite some teams whose district points bubble burst--but you hold a full-fat, top-flight event there so you've got all four programs represented there. Do the same back for the FRC Championship, and you have an undisputed champion and four healthy programs with room to grow.
I know this is a popular compromise being discussed, but but please consider how this will be perceived by the host cities. They (along with the FIRST sponsors based in those cities) likely spent lots of time and money bidding to an FRC Championship. I suspected that all cities bidding to host championships also knew there would two championship events. Suddenly changing course and giving one city the FRC Championship and the other and FTC/FLL championship with an FRC invitational is not what these cities bid for.

If you were in their shoes, and invested time, money, and political and business connections attract such a big event, and got something very different than what was promised, would you not be upset? (Honestly, in typing this, I realize this is likely what many commenters feel has happened to them with this announcement.) To be blunt, reshaping this agreement and awarding only one city the championship that both cities were promised will leave the other city snubbed.* That will ruin the reputation of FIRST, and make it that much harder to negotiate with other cities in the future (if you don't think this type of thing would be spread by mayors, tourism chiefs, etc., you're wrong).

I really think allowing qualifying teams to opt in to a "swap lottery" has a lot of potential. It allows for cross pollination, gives qualifying teams a special privilege that they earned, and would protect against stacking one Championship at the expense of the other. The host cities involved would also likely welcome a more diverse pool of teams traveling to their cities.


*To be clear, calling an FTC/FLL championship a "snub" is NOT meant to disparage these programs. It's just obviously not what either host city signed up for.
Reply With Quote
  #40   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 18:03
JesseK's Avatar
JesseK JesseK is offline
Expert Flybot Crasher
FRC #1885 (ILITE)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Reston, VA
Posts: 3,632
JesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond reputeJesseK has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

FTC should have more than 1 Championship, most definitely. FTC itself isn't so competitive on a national level that I don't think teams care which event they go to in order to claim "champions".

Question 1
Could FIRST split up champs with FRC/FTC and FTC/FLL? The FRC-based FTC competition would have the FTC teams which are part of larger programs and/or have older students. The FTC competition at the other event would be for FTC-only programs and/or younger students.

I think this type of split would better-serve the types of teams which would wind up at either event given the criteria above. The teams would probably more likely have more in common from a team management, funding, and goals side than is at the typical FTC championship. It also gives FLL teams something to aim for. FLL teams who have nearby FRC teams are probably inundated with demos already, so I don't think there's much inspiration lost if they attend a FLL/FTC-only Champs. It may also open the event up for even more FLL teams.

Question 2
What data is FIRST looking to gather in order to support any changes? Is FIRST looking for flow and 'feel' of a 600-team champs, are they trying to figure out what the multi-venue split will do this year, etc? Is FIRST looking to gather specific data on alumni, local politics, or other region-centric data which will help them decide geographic boundaries (etc)?

Question 3
As is the case with district implementation, there may be a few fringe cases where it doesn't make sense to do the 'new' thing since it is entirely counter-productive to how the team is managed, located or few-year forecasts the team has done. Will FIRST allow these fringe cases to be handled on a case-by-case basis, or are the boundaries going to be as strict as districts? (Note - my team is not currently and would not become one of these fringe cases)

Question 4
Be honest: is the 4-tier "super regional" still the long-term plan? (P.S. my wife doesn't yet know there are 4 potential events next year under the district system. I seriously doubt she'll get on board with 5 events unless one of them is in Vegas or somewhere tropical. Houston doesn't count, at least I don't think it does. No offense Houston )

Last edited by JesseK : 11-04-2015 at 18:07.
Reply With Quote
  #41   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 18:10
Siri's Avatar
Siri Siri is offline
Dare greatly
AKA: 1640 coach 2010-2014
no team (Refs & RIs)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,603
Siri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via ICQ to Siri
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Quote:
Originally Posted by grstex View Post
...If you were in their shoes, and invested time, money, and political and business connections attract such a big event, and got something very different than what was promised, would you not be upset? (Honestly, in typing this, I realize this is likely what many commenters feel has happened to them with this announcement.) To be blunt, reshaping this agreement and awarding only one city the championship that both cities were promised will leave the other city snubbed.* That will ruin the reputation of FIRST, and make it that much harder to negotiate with other cities in the future (if you don't think this type of thing would be spread by mayors, tourism chiefs, etc., you're wrong)...
Yes, and it's worse than that. As has been discussed elsewhere, it's quite possible/likely that the contracts specified FRC, or at perhaps specified requirements that can only be met via FRC. That's one of the (many) reasons we've asked Frank to explain exactly what's going on. Hopefully he can clarify what parts of the press released information is set in stone and what isn't.

And, Re: "Honestly, in typing this, I realize this is likely what many commenters feel has happened to them with this announcement." — hear, hear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by grstex View Post
I really think allowing qualifying teams to opt in to a "swap lottery" has a lot of potential. It allows for cross pollination, gives qualifying teams a special privilege that they earned, and would protect against stacking one Championship at the expense of the other.
Emphasis mine. I like the swap idea too (not to claim that it does much for the big picture), but I wouldn't count on it preventing stacking one event or the other. In fact, it could well do the opposite. If one event ends up being considered perennially "stronger" pre-swap (which it will*), it's likely that few powerhouses will want to leave it and many will want to come in. (At least if the discussion here and the existence of IRI are any indication.) Assuming there are still some teams at the "stronger" event that want to travel elsewhere, you'll see a net inflow of strength rather than outflow. How large the change would be is unclear. However, one might expect that the more unequal they are and the more they're opened to swapping, the more one of them will attract strong teams and thus the fewer strong teams already there will want to leave.

*This isn't necessarily a comment on team geography, just the statistical likelihood of two quantities like this being equal. However, you can examine the historical geography of Worlds Division finals.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #42   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 20:07
Denise Bohnsack Denise Bohnsack is offline
Registered User
FRC #1902
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: United States
Posts: 30
Denise Bohnsack is on a distinguished road
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Quote:
Originally Posted by Billfred View Post
This is what I've been advocating since the announcement. You can do two FLL/JrFLL events without any strife, because winning a championship tournament never was a golden ticket to World Festival. Some years, you are playing for a bid to an Open. So we'll roll with that.

Make one city the FRC Championship, make one city the FTC World Championship. At the FTC site, you hold the Good Guy Frank Invitational with 60-100 FRC teams. Some will opt to do it because it's closer, or the date works better, or they've got FTC teams that want to go, or maybe we invite some teams whose district points bubble burst--but you hold a full-fat, top-flight event there so you've got all four programs represented there. Do the same back for the FRC Championship, and you have an undisputed champion and four healthy programs with room to grow.
Yes. A solution such as this. After reading through every post on this subject, this idea seems a worthwhile suggestion, which could use more investigating and tweaking. FTC and FLL teams are very inspiring, and as well as FRC, any city should be thrilled to host them. Yes, there will be some situations where a FLL/FTC team mentored by a FRC team will not be able to stay together, but surely there are some good solutions the FIRST community can create together. I would add that I would like to see whichever city to host the FLL/FTC group be the more kid friendly, safer city. I will leave it to others to say which is better for the younger group.
Reply With Quote
  #43   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 20:12
Rachel Lim Rachel Lim is offline
Registered User
FRC #1868 (Space Cookies)
Team Role: Student
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Moffett Field
Posts: 242
Rachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboSteve View Post
You should also address the availability of volunteers, as it's often a bigger constraint that facilities. For larger events, normal volunteers, not key volunteers, are the constraint.
First, I wanted to say thanks for all your comments. I definitely know that there are gaps in my logic, and your questions/comments were very helpful.

I agree that finding volunteers is an issue FIRST has, but I'm slightly confused as to how having two "split" events requires more volunteers than two "mixed" events. If anything, this will allow volunteers who only can/want to help with one event focus on purely that (e.g. if you want to volunteer with FLL, now you don't have to pick one)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboSteve View Post
You should provide some evidence that the Houston or Detroit locations could support FRC events with >400 teams.
I'll admit that I'm making a huge assumption now, but aren't the Houston / Detroit locations currently going to support ~300 FRC teams (half of the 600 this year) plus FTC and FLL? Are there really only 100 FTC teams that qualify for champs each year (and same for FLL)? (Or 200 teams assuming that FRC teams are much larger than other ones)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboSteve View Post
You should address teams that run FLL, FTC, and FRC programs.
There are a few ways I could see this being approached:
- How are these teams currently doing it? Do they have a lot of overlap between the programs or have separate groups of kids/mentors?
- District champs / super regionals could have multiple or all programs together
- For teams that don't qualify / can't afford to go to one, there can be a demo section for FRC in the FLL/FTC and vice versa

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboSteve View Post
I would phrase this more that "fewer teams have the opportunity to participate." FIRST's goal is not about FIRST's growth, it is about growing the opportunity for teams to participate.
I agree. I just used 25% because that seems to be the number that FIRST wants (or was it just created on CD?)

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboSteve View Post
I have a thought exercise for you. Your team has attended champs based on merit in 9 of the last 10 years (congrats on Chairman's this year, BTW!), has a larger than normal membership, is from one of the wealthiest areas in the US with average family incomes well above the national average, and has a dream list of sponsors, so you're going to have an unusual perspective, compared the more common team profile. It can be hard, but please try to think about this from the perspective of a team without your resources and track record of success. Look at the record of this team (randomly picked as about halfway between 0 and the highest team number on TBA), and think about what your statement means to them. Imagine making a presentation to them, justifying your statement. That is what the leaders of FIRST will be thinking and doing.
Yes, this is why I've said multiple times in various threads that as long as this is seen as a "top team" problem or "CD members" problem, FIRST won't be listening. They're marketing this at the average team. But will the average team care as much about whether it's "world champs" (assuming the split champs keep that name) or "district champs" or any other name? Will having events closer to team make it easier for them to travel to it, or will not being able to say "we're going to world championships" make it harder to convince schools?

The one aspect of this split champs that probably won't directly affect my team is who wins worlds. We've played in elims once, 5 years ago. I'm writing this as a student on a team that won't feel like we won "half a championship," because the chances we'll win is basically zero. But if I dislike that, what is the chance that an average team will dislike some part of this?

But in general, yes, remember this is aimed at the average team--the teams who are not represented here. Having posters here argue against it is like having mentors on top teams say mentor-run teams are inspiring to students, or strategists on top teams say cheesecaking is beneficial to everyone. It may be true, but it's not that convincing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboSteve View Post
This statement is unsupported by facts. Posters that are proposing 600 or 800 team single location FRC events should consider these important facts:
[snip]
Isn't St Louis going to have 600 FRC teams, plus more FTC and FLL teams? I don't know how to find the numbers for FTC/FLL or get estimates for how many people those teams have on average, but there currently is a way to host more than 600 teams in a city. Or at least they think there is; I guess we'd find out soon. Beyond that, I'll need to find out more about how FTC/FLL work in with FRC at champs (I've never seen it, and I can't find information on it easily) to say anything else. However, I did want to reply to this point:

Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRoboSteve View Post
2) the people "in the know" felt so strongly that the event needed to be split that they proposed something they knew would be very controversial. Specific facts that support this statement:
[snip]
I think that's part of the issue. FIRST hasn't explained their goals. Even Frank's follow up blog post, as good at it was, didn't explain why they think a split champs is necessary. Maybe they have a reason that it is necessary and there aren't any other alternatives, but maybe there aren't. Unless they tell us, we won't know why they decided to go forward with this.
Reply With Quote
  #44   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 21:03
Dunngeon Dunngeon is offline
Pumped
AKA: Ryan
FRC #0973 (Greybots)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: Cal Poly San Luis Obispo
Posts: 299
Dunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond reputeDunngeon has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rachel Lim View Post
I'll admit that I'm making a huge assumption now, but aren't the Houston / Detroit locations currently going to support ~300 FRC teams (half of the 600 this year) plus FTC and FLL? Are there really only 100 FTC teams that qualify for champs each year (and same for FLL)? (Or 200 teams assuming that FRC teams are much larger than other ones)
Just wanted to point out that each event will host 400 teams, meaning that there are 800 FRC teams total attending a World Championship.
__________________
(2015-?): 973
(2012-2015): 955
Reply With Quote
  #45   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-04-2015, 21:19
grstex grstex is online now
Registered User
no team
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 56
grstex is just really nicegrstex is just really nicegrstex is just really nicegrstex is just really nice
Re: Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

Quote:
Originally Posted by Siri View Post
Emphasis mine. I like the swap idea too (not to claim that it does much for the big picture), but I wouldn't count on it preventing stacking one event or the other. In fact, it could well do the opposite. If one event ends up being considered perennially "stronger" pre-swap (which it will*), it's likely that few powerhouses will want to leave it and many will want to come in. (At least if the discussion here and the existence of IRI are any indication.) Assuming there are still some teams at the "stronger" event that want to travel elsewhere, you'll see a net inflow of strength rather than outflow. How large the change would be is unclear. However, one might expect that the more unequal they are and the more they're opened to swapping, the more one of them will attract strong teams and thus the fewer strong teams already there will want to leave.
That's why I think it should be a swap (qualifying team for qualifying team) lottery (random). Those trying to reach the "stronger" championship will have to rely on qualifying teams from the other region also entering the lottery. even then, it would be a random switch. Heck, the lottery algorithim could even stipulate that it's an "even swap" (winning alliance captain for wining alliance captain, etc.). Even so, There will at least be some opportunistic teams aiming to swap to the "weaker" championship to increase their chances of winning. It opens up all sorts of interesting choices with risks and tradeoffs! THAT is cool!


Quote:
Originally Posted by Siri View Post
Yes, and it's worse than that. As has been discussed elsewhere, it's quite possible/likely that the contracts specified FRC, or at perhaps specified requirements that can only be met via FRC. That's one of the (many) reasons we've asked Frank to explain exactly what's going on. Hopefully he can clarify what parts of the press released information is set in stone and what isn't.
In that case I'd recommend requesting a Q&A session be a major agenda item at the town hall. I think FIRST's goals with split championships were pretty clear based on the press release and blog post, but anything that will help teams better understand this decision and the motivation behind it will ease the tension (as long as things are kept civil).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Siri View Post
And, Re: "Honestly, in typing this, I realize this is likely what many commenters feel has happened to them with this announcement." — hear, hear.
With all due respect, I acknowledged and understood the sentiment, I didn't agree with it. As a FIRST alumni and active volunteer, I've been... "disappointed" by some of the comments on other threads.

Having said that, I look forward to seeing an enlightening and constructive town hall that embodies the values of FIRST. Lets aim toward that goal.
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 22:50.

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