[FRC Blog] Two Championship Survey Results and Path Forward

[Taylor]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I've seen this or similar opinions raised in a few places, including multiple times recently in this thread. For those in Michigan, New England, PNW, and Indiana, how close are your DCMPs to the championship experience? MAR honestly isn't even close, in spite of the fact the on-the-field competition is incredibly high. Don't take this the wrong way, I love MAR Champs, but it's not remotely comparable to Championship. The production value is much more akin to a district event than even a regional competition. There aren't any of the conferences or presentations available to teams (I know FiM has some of these). The scholarship and sponsor availability is minimal. There aren't any of the outside/after hours festivities/community building that's part of Championship. You don't necessarily need all of these things for "the Championship experience" (however we end up defining it), but MAR Champs feels like a bigger district event more than it even feels like a regional competition. It completely lacks the grandeur and ceremony of a Championship.

I would agree with most of this.
With the caveats that the Indiana State Championship was an inaugural event, so we were looking for survival rather than a spectacle. We also host conferences in October, so there's not a real need to duplicate that at this level.
But, yes, the spectacle was roughly equivalent to a regional event. However, if we work closely with HQ and their resources, it could certainly rise to the occasion.

[Qbot2640]

These are the kinds of questions that should have be asked:

Originally Posted by northstardon

...Do you favor one championship if it means that there eventually won't be room for the CA, EI, and RAS teams?

Yes (for me at least). But there are more options that are possible. I would like to see chairman teams continue to go, but if six teams from every regional is what caused the need for two championships then find ways to reduce the six to five or possibly four...or less if that's what is necessary.

Originally Posted by northstardon

Do you favor two championships if nothing is done to bring the two winning alliances together to crown one true champion?

No regardless (again, for me). Bringing the two alliance together is irrelevant to my championship experience unless I'm one of those winning alliance teams. Otherwise, I have still attended a championship with only half of the teams that inspire me.

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I've seen this or similar opinions raised in a few places, including multiple times recently in this thread. For those in Michigan, New England, PNW, and Indiana, how close are your DCMPs to the championship experience? MAR honestly isn't even close, in spite of the fact the on-the-field competition is incredibly high. Don't take this the wrong way, I love MAR Champs, but it's not remotely comparable to Championship. The production value is much more akin to a district event than even a regional competition. There aren't any of the conferences or presentations available to teams (I know FiM has some of these). The scholarship and sponsor availability is minimal. There aren't any of the outside/after hours festivities/community building that's part of Championship. You don't necessarily need all of these things for "the Championship experience" (however we end up defining it), but MAR Champs feels like a bigger district event more than it even feels like a regional competition. It completely lacks the grandeur and ceremony of a Championship.

So are you disagreeing that DCMP's can be similar enough to a "championship experience" or just stating that the respective DCMP's have some work to do to get to the level where they might be able to replicate a "championship experience"?

[Libby K]

Originally Posted by Kevin Leonard

So are you disagreeing that DCMP's can be similar enough to a "championship experience" or just stating that the respective DCMP's have some work to do to get to the level where they might be able to replicate a "championship experience"?

I certainly can't speak for Sean, but IMO, the DCMPs can & should serve as the "championship experience" in their regions, and it would be to FIRST's benefit to do what they need to make sure all of the districts they work with end up looking at least as consistent across the country as regional events do.

[BrennanB]

Originally Posted by Rman1923

It's not only about people watching it, but more about finding out who the winners of the world are. I feel like just out of curiosity, invitational events would pit the winners of both champs against each other, to see who wins. That would be cool and fun to watch. When I say they will be the real champs, I mean that we'll find out the best alliance in the world at these events.

A closer representation of the best alliance in the world? Sure. Best alliance in the world? No. Many top tier teams don't attend IRI or cheesy champs.

I would hope that a "two winning alliances" event is televised and hyped for that.

[dag0620]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I've seen this or similar opinions raised in a few places, including multiple times recently in this thread. For those in Michigan, New England, PNW, and Indiana, how close are your DCMPs to the championship experience? MAR honestly isn't even close, in spite of the fact the on-the-field competition is incredibly high. Don't take this the wrong way, I love MAR Champs, but it's not remotely comparable to Championship. The production value is much more akin to a district event than even a regional competition. There aren't any of the conferences or presentations available to teams (I know FiM has some of these). The scholarship and sponsor availability is minimal. There aren't any of the outside/after hours festivities/community building that's part of Championship. You don't necessarily need all of these things for "the Championship experience" (however we end up defining it), but MAR Champs feels like a bigger district event more than it even feels like a regional competition. It completely lacks the grandeur and ceremony of a Championship.

In New England, but especially when it was in Boston, our two DCMPs have felt like mini championships. High production value, a ton of side events (conferences, alumni events, exhibitions from other programs, etc.), and the overall grand feeling. They also served as a great event that brought New England FIRST together, just as Championship really brings FIRST together. It's a model for DCMP I like, and hope stays in NE as well as becoming the standard for DCMPs.

Obviously the consistency isn't there however, and it needs to happen. As Libby said, DCMPs should be held to at least Regional consistency that they were supposed to be as originally envisioned, if not at a higher value.

[Deke]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

I've seen this or similar opinions raised in a few places, including multiple times recently in this thread. For those in Michigan, New England, PNW, and Indiana, how close are your DCMPs to the championship experience? MAR honestly isn't even close, in spite of the fact the on-the-field competition is incredibly high. Don't take this the wrong way, I love MAR Champs, but it's not remotely comparable to Championship. The production value is much more akin to a district event than even a regional competition. There aren't any of the conferences or presentations available to teams (I know FiM has some of these). The scholarship and sponsor availability is minimal. There aren't any of the outside/after hours festivities/community building that's part of Championship. You don't necessarily need all of these things for "the Championship experience" (however we end up defining it), but MAR Champs feels like a bigger district event more than it even feels like a regional competition. It completely lacks the grandeur and ceremony of a Championship.

This is just my opinion on this, take it as you please. Champs was a let down from MSC for these reasons:
- There were so many fields I had little to no insight to how all the other teams were doing. At MSC with two fields, I knew how most people were doing and how the rankings were shaping up.
- Competition was fierce through the top 75% of teams at MSC, when it was only fierce around the top 25% at champs. Granted champs had more elite teams, MSC was deeper.
-Televised commentary from Dave and Dan was fantastic and awesome shots from the boom cameras at MSC, footage at champs missed the mark.

Champs did have a little better production/viewing experience for people in the stands. But you could only see your fields action.

I might be a little biased based on where I'm from, so maybe an outsider can chime in that attended MSC. I absolutely think district champs would be the perfect thing to replace the championship feel, and it's scaleable.

[Loose Screw]

Originally Posted by Libby K

I certainly can't speak for Sean, but IMO, the DCMPs can & should serve as the "championship experience" in their regions, and it would be to FIRST's benefit to do what they need to make sure all of the districts they work with end up looking at least as consistent across the country as regional events do.

I've thought of the competition at FiM champs to be very close to worlds. If you take 2011 for example, the #1 alliance was defeaded by the #8 at MSC. The meta changed durring eliminations and teams had to adapt to stay competitive. Everyone was at their best, and you had no idea who would win. Worlds that year, teams died and got stuck on the field. As soon as that happened, you knew who would win.

I find this year to be similar. Yes, the #1 alliance at MSC had the highest scores in Octo/Quarter/Semi, but any alliance there could have beat them if they made a mistake. If the blue alliance had grabbed that one RC 1711 spent the entire match trying to get, they would have won. The can wars wasn't as intense as it was on Einstein, but I feel like that made it more exciting to watch. The winners weren't determined in the first second of the match. Einstein, however, was determined by the can wars. Every alliance there could score 250+ points (some even 300+), but you knew who would win 5 seconds into the match.

TL;DR
DCMP's can be just as competitive and exciting to watch as Einstein.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by Infinity2718

This is just my opinion on this, take it as you please. Champs was a let down from MSC for these reasons:
- There were so many fields I had little to no insight to how all the other teams were doing. At MSC with two fields, I knew how most people were doing and how the rankings were shaping up.
- Competition was fierce through the top 75% of teams at MSC, when it was only fierce around the top 25% at champs. Granted champs had more elite teams, MSC was deeper.
-Televised commentary from Dave and Dan was fantastic and awesome shots from the boom cameras at MSC, footage at champs missed the mark.

Champs did have a little better production/viewing experience for people in the stands. But you could only see your fields action.

I might be a little biased based on where I'm from, so maybe an outsider can chime in that attended MSC. I absolutely think district champs would be the perfect thing to replace the championship feel, and it's scaleable.

Some good points in here.

The 2014 and 2015 NEDCMPs were the best events I attended over the past two years. Why? Because there was a level of production value but as you hinted to above the field at a DCMP is more competitive than a division. You really feel like you take a step back when you are on your division after experiencing your DCMP a few weeks prior. Yes there are powerhouses and even teams from your district on the field but it doesn't start topping some of the districts until further in the elimination rounds and Einstein.

[EricDrost]

Originally Posted by Loose Screw

I've thought of the competition at FiM champs to be very close to worlds.

I would entirely agree with you for FiM. This doesn't necessarily translate to every DCMP event, however.

I'd love to see MAR CMP reach the production quality of MSC, but as of now, it feels more like a large district event than a championship, or even a regional.

[Loose Screw]

Originally Posted by BrendanB

Some good points in here.

The 2014 and 2015 NEDCMPs were the best events I attended over the past two years. Why? Because there was a level of production value but as you hinted to above the field at a DCMP is more competitive than a division. You really feel like you take a step back when you are on your division after experiencing your DCMP a few weeks prior. Yes there are powerhouses and even teams from your district on the field but it doesn't start topping some of the districts until further in the elimination rounds and Einstein.

Plus one thing that I like that DCMP's do that Worlds doesn't is have a single pool of teams to pick from. I know that system would be impossible at worlds, but a guy can hope.

I personally love the way MSC handled things this year. They had 102 teams compete, so to keep everything on time they went to the FTC-style system of having two fields. This and the Octo-finals made this event better than champs to watch IMO. There was only one team at MSC that didn't have an average above 100.

Alliances at MSC were the best alliances at MSC, while alliances at worlds were the best alliances according to who was randomly paired together. Could you imagine if worlds had one single pool to pick from for eliminations?

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by Loose Screw

Could you imagine if worlds had one single pool to pick from for eliminations?

I'd rather not. Sounds like a logistical and scouting nightmare!

[Loose Screw]

Originally Posted by BrendanB

I'd rather not. Sounds like a logistical and scouting nightmare!

True, but if the size of worlds was the same size of MSC, it would be a bit easier. I was aiming for a pool of the best 100, not a mix of all 600. That would be hell for everyone attempting to scout.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by BrendanB

Some good points in here.

The 2014 and 2015 NEDCMPs were the best events I attended over the past two years. Why? Because there was a level of production value but as you hinted to above the field at a DCMP is more competitive than a division. You really feel like you take a step back when you are on your division after experiencing your DCMP a few weeks prior. Yes there are powerhouses and even teams from your district on the field but it doesn't start topping some of the districts until further in the elimination rounds and Einstein.

I'll back up MAR for this. Our production values (and location) leave a lot to be worked on, and we're certainly not FIM, but in terms of competitiveness I prefer MAR to Divisions. People might like some of the numbers I ran on this issue: attached is a percentile plot of qual match scores for this year at CMP Divisions and DCMPs. Probably no surprise to those of us in Districts, but the Regional folks may find it interesting.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by Siri

I'll back up MAR for this. Our production values (and location) leave a lot to be worked on, and we're certainly not FIM, but in terms of competitiveness I prefer MAR to Divisions. People might like some of the numbers I ran on this issue: a percentile plot of qual match scores for this year at CMP Divisions and DCMPs. Probably no surprise to those of us in Districts, but the Regional folks may find it interesting.

Don't have permission to view that page.