What percentage of FRC teams should attend championships?

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Caleb Sykes

There is no need to attack me personally. I posed a question because I wished to gain a better understanding of others' viewpoints on this topic. Dean, Woodie, and Dave would be among the first to say that being inquisitive should be lauded. I am very happy with the results of this poll and thread, it has already helped me to gain insight on this subject.

No need to think I was attacking you personally.

I took the time to strip your user ID out of the quotation, and I bemoaned that once again someone in the large group that believes they know better than FIRST's founder(s), what FIRST is supposed to do and be, was contradicting what those founders have said.

I didn't write that you should be singled out as a special member of that group. I instead intended to write about the entire group.

I did not intend to attack you or anyone personally; but I did and do intend to reject the notion that FRC exists to put robots into matches, or to select "champion" robots-plus-drivers (and pit crews and scouts and ....). Putting robots into matches is something FRC does; but it simply is not why it exists.

I don't know how FIRST, it's founder, or it's "elders" (is there a better term?) could possibly be more clear about this than they already have been. The matches exist to put on a good show and get some adrenaline flowing. The matches exist to show cultures that the result of investing in STEM is something worth celebrating. But... FRC doesn't exist to put on competition matches.

Blake

[George Nishimura]

I think it's more important that the top robots are at a Championship rather than that the top robots are the only robots at a Championship. At a 400 team Championship, only 25-30% need to be the "best" robots.

I am however struggling to come up with a solution that evenly distributes Chairman's and HOF award winners, which would be the ideal scenario of a split.

[gblake]

Originally Posted by Caleb Sykes

That is an insufficient response. You will at least need to specify the number of venues for this sentence to mean anything.

Nope

It is a perfectly fine response. What it means is that the question, in the sense/context it was posed, is nearly irrelevant.

It means that instead of thinking of the Championship(s) as an event that filters out unworthy teams; one should instead think of a Championship(s) as an event that brings in as many teams as is possible.

How many teams attend the FIRST Championship(s) should depend on how many teams can be accommodated by the venue, the number of conference speakers, etc; and not some arbitrarily chosen threshold of match-worthiness.

FRC includes competition matches, but FRC's purpose is not competition matches.

YMMV

Blake

[Ginger Power]

Originally Posted by gblake

Nope

It is a perfectly fine response. What it means is that the question, in the sense/context it was posed, is nearly irrelevant.

It means that instead of thinking of the Championship(s) as an event that filters out unworthy teams; one should instead think of a Championship(s) as an event that brings in as many teams as is possible.

How many teams attend the FIRST Championship(s) should depend on how many teams can be accommodated by the venue, the number of conference speakers, etc; and not some arbitrarily chosen threshold of match-worthiness.

FRC includes competition matches, but FRC's purpose is not competition matches.

YMMV

Blake

I think what Caleb is saying is that not every regional can be called a championship. You have to distinguish the number of "championships" it takes before you no longer consider the event a championship. Most people draw the line at one event. In other words, having more than 1 world championship takes away the meaning of "world championship". Others are much more lenient when it comes to drawing that line, and are therefore ok with having multiple, or even many, world championships.

FRC is a competiton. It's purpose is to serve as an outlet for inspiration for FRC teams. It's means of doing that is by providing a competiton. There would be no inspiration without this competiton.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by mrnoble

I don't at all get what people are talking about when they say that kids would do well to go and not compete.

It looks like AngelBotics has never been to the FIRST Championship. Have you ever been there yourself? It's hard to imagine someone helping to run a team in FRC who wouldn't understand how just being there can be extremely inspiring after having experienced it.

[mrnoble]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

It looks like AngelBotics has never been to the FIRST Championship. Have you ever been there yourself? It's hard to imagine someone helping to run a team in FRC who wouldn't understand how just being there can be extremely inspiring after having experienced it.

Fair enough. No, I've never been. We qualified once, in 2008 I think, but didn't go, and like I said, we turned down our wait list position this year. I have talked to mentors and students who have been plenty of times, and to be honest, I haven't heard stories of the experience that convince me that taking a team to CMP is life changing. Am I missing something? We love the FRC experience (I've been coaching the team since we started in 2004, why would I stick around this long otherwise?), but two regionals is exhausting and both a financial and academic drain. We have been more competitive since 2013, and this year reached our goals, which included captaining an alliance. Next year our goal is to win a regional. Who knows? If we win, we will go to CMP. Otherwise, we will take our mandatory tests and get our grades up.

[Taylor]

Question to those who are more knowledgeable than I:
In order to gain the Championship Experience, must a team/member be there for the entire Wednesday-Saturday time?

I've never personally attended CMP as a competitor, but this week will be my fourth as a spectator. Last year I was there Thursday-Saturday (my school administrators let me go early because I was in the running for WFA*); we've also been there Friday-Saturday, and this year we'll be there Saturday only.
Our out-of-pocket costs will be well under $1k. Will we get the full experience? No. Will we see #friendswithrobots and be inspired, moreso than watching on thebluealliance? Yes.

As with others, I firmly believe that students - at least once in their time on the team - should experience a high-level competition as a competitor. Right now, that high-level competition is The World Championship. In the future, it will be One Of The World Championships. Possibly further down the line, it will be A SuperRegional or SuperDistrict Championship. For my team this year, it was INCMP.

*a laughable premise but I'll take what I can get

[Sunshine]

Well, I may not be more knowledgable but I'll take a stab at it. It's an affirmative "it depends". The World Championship is a combination of many things IMHO. It's part Super Bowl, convention, show case, family gathering, inservice and annual reconfirmation. It's one or all of the above.

For me, just knowing that thousands of educators, students and FIRSTers are all gathered for one common goal is exciting. I always learn a great deal. Whether it's from competing, rubbing elbows, attending workshops, talking with HOF folks or just watching the best bots in the world in awe.

As a team, we explain to students that there are jobs to do. They are our ambassadors, drivers, scouts and pit crew. But they are also expected to take in the great opportunities offered. Students always get empowered by more knowledge and inspiration.

We have been fortunate to attend 5 times in our 9 year history. (As far as our district is concerned we need to "qualify" to attend). The list of "take aways" is endless and well worth the expense and time away from the classroom.