[FRC Blog] Frank Answers Friday: Championship Slots

[mwmac]

A couple of comments:

1. One of the most striking issues I find is that no one has mentioned the problem of awarding Championship slots to districts based on their proportion of the FRC population in a post-Championsplit world. Using 2015 figures, and assuming them to remain constant for this discussion, Michigan (not picking on MI, just the easiest to make the point) teams comprised 11.86% of registered FRC teams which corresponds to roughly 71 slots for St. Louis. The same should hold true for 2016. However, beginning in 2017, Michigan's 345 teams will represent either 11.86% of the overall FRC teams or 23.73% of the corresponding Championsplit pool. Given that both Championsplit venues will host 400 FRC teams, will Michigan teams comprise 47 slots or 95? Clearly, something has to change with respect to the awarding of Championship slots on a proportional basis to district participants.

2. I have posted previously about the need for there to be a single set of consistent and fair qualification criteria for Championships. This post by BMSOTM looks like a potential solution, (assuming a return to W-L-T). The district point system has always served as a comprehensive way of separating wheat from chaff and advancing quality teams to Championships.

Originally Posted by BMSOTM

Are you familiar with the district point system? It's an excellent system for ranking based on the criteria you suggested:

• 2 points per qual win, 1 per tie
• 0-16 based on alliance selection
• 10 per round of playoffs won (0 for quarterfinalist, 10 for semifinalist, 20 for finalist, 30 for winner)
• 10 for Chairman's Award, 8 for Engineering Inspiration, 8 for Rookie All-Star, and 5 for all other judged awards

In the closing paragraph of his blog post, Frank states that he is "not closing the door on this forever. I'm willing to take a look at any specific proposal anyone has on this, or any other concern."

Glad to see Frank is keeping an open mind on this issue as I believe the application of a district scoring model to the FRC population as a whole is a potential solution rather than a complicating factor. In 2015, we implemented average scores. Could apply the same methodology to account for teams attending 1 or more events with the top 400 teams advancing to their corresponding Championsplit venue. On the minus side, teams near the cut-off point face uncertainty in the closing weeks of the season but how does that differ from the current system used by districts?

Such a change would not necessarily address under-representation of geographic areas at Championships but would level the playing field to the greatest extent possible.