Preparing for the Town Hall Meeting on the New Championships Format

[Siri]

Originally Posted by grstex

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!

I understand that you see this working, but I still haven't figured out how making it a lottery would address the phenomenon of more powerhouse teams signing up to leave one event than the other. Unless HQ develops a way to deliberately control powerhouse swaps, making the selection random doesn't compensate for the bias within the lottery pools themselves. A winning alliance captain is not the same thing in all cases. This isn't meant an insult to any specific team, simply an acknowledgement that different performances are different. It would take concerted and arguably inappropriately specific effort on the part of HQ to even ostensibly enforce equality, with or without a swap program.

I also feel the need to strenuously challenge the term "cool" for engaging in the practice you refer to as opportunistic (personally I'd call it exploitative). This is already possible at a regional level, and I have never seen nor had the desire to apply the word "cool" to it. I usually hear it called exactly (exactly) the opposite. Particularly because most teams do not have the luxury to move even should they wish to do so.

Originally Posted by grstex

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).

I would expect that the Q&A will be, but would personally find HQ waiting until Worlds to publicize these details rather untoward. It's very difficult to prepare proposals without knowing what's legally locked and what's not. I've made a blog comment request for more information already.

Originally Posted by grstex

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.

Sorry, I hadn't meant to imply that you agreed, merely that the comparison was insightful and rhetorically impressive.