Team CMP Assignment 2017

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto

We fly and rent a van.

Thank goodness for split champs.

Now we'll get to fly and rent a van.

-Mike

Why the van? I definitely see the need for 1 rental car since it can save a bit of money for the team food-wise, but big vans are expensive.

Maybe I'm spoiled since we've stayed within walking distance every year.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

A large part of the rationale FIRST laid out for the dual Championships was saving travel costs. A purely random assignment of teams between the two Championships undoes that.

For instance, there is a MASSIVE population of teams in Southeast Michigan, Ontario, Indiana, and Ohio within an easy drive of the Detroit Championship. Many of the Southeast Michigan teams could even do it as a daytrip (potentially on schoolbuses), slashing the travel costs to near zero. If 50% of these teams end up assigned to the Houston Championship, the costs savings rationale is completely out the window.

Now I realize that for a large portion of FRC, the cost of travelling doesn't really change all that much. We've seen plenty of comments reflecting that from west coast teams. Ultimately a large portion of these teams, especially those that qualify in-season, are going to want to go to the later of the two championships for logistic reasons*.

*The exception being where one championship may interfere with state or AP/IB testing preparation, prom, etc.

Really? I thought the main reason was due to CMPS being too small in the near future, enough that it had to have 2 CMPS. I highly doubt its due to a cost savings......unless you're referring to how teams are assigned to which specific split championship.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by JesseK

Why the van? I definitely see the need for 1 rental car since it can save a bit of money for the team food-wise, but big vans are expensive.

Maybe I'm spoiled since we've stayed within walking distance every year.

Yes they are! Especially when you need 2 or 3 of them every year for each FRC event we do. This is after we get killed by airfare expenses to get to the rental car facility.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by waialua359

Really? I thought the main reason was due to CMPS being too small in the near future, enough that it had to have 2 CMPS. I highly doubt its due to a cost savings......unless you're referring to how teams are assigned to which specific split championship.

Yes, they openly stated as much in the initial announcement and the town hall.
http://www.usfirst.org/aboutus/2017-...p-announcement

Originally Posted by Frank Bossi

In addition, by hosting Championships in multiple cities, we seek to reduce the travel distances and associated travel expenses for a significant number of our teams.

http://wiki.team1640.com/index.php?t...l_Slides-2.jpg

Originally Posted by Town Hall slide #2

Enable more teams to participate in the FIRST Championship by reducing travel distances and transportation costs for a significant number of teams

[mwmac]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

Yes, they openly stated as much in the initial announcement and the town hall.
http://www.usfirst.org/aboutus/2017-...p-announcement

http://wiki.team1640.com/index.php?t...l_Slides-2.jpg

Sean, you are correct that reducing team travel costs was one of the stated objectives of the championsplit decision. So here is a proposal to help even more teams attend the championship, (which is clearly the primary goal) implement a sliding registration fee schedule that is directly related to the distance a qualifying team is from their respective championship venue...

[Jared Russell]

1. Assign all pre-qualified teams to the nearest CMP

2. For each Regional or District Championship, assign qualification slots to the nearest CMP.

3. All teams are assigned to the first CMP that they qualify for during the season (in the event that a HOF team in the Detroit CMP bucket wins a regional in the Houston CMP bucket, etc).

4. After qualifying for CMP, any team may place their team number on a list indicating a desire to swap places with a team at the other CMP. Teams may add themselves every week if they wish as long as they haven't been swapped, but once a team has been swapped, it is no longer eligible to be swapped back.

5. Once a week, all of the teams on the shorter of the two swap lists are switched to the other CMP. An equal number of teams on the longer list are drawn at random to be switched back (so if the numbers are equal on both sides, all teams get swapped).

6. (Optionally) If wait lists are still a thing, each non-qualified team can choose their first and second choice CMP (which might just be one event if the team cannot reasonably travel to the other, etc.) Teams are drawn (how doesn't really matter) from the wait list and assigned their first or second choice depending on availability until all spots are filled. Alternatively, wait list teams can be "drawn and swapped" according to their preferences if there are leftover teams that wish to be swapped to the other CMP.

This system maximizes cost reduction out of the box, guarantees equal numbers at both championships, allows teams to change their CMP for any reason (or guarantee that their CMP is fixed and therefore book travel), and treats all teams as equals (early qualifiers do have more opportunities to switch championships, but this helps to make sure there is enough "liquidity" for later teams to have someone to switch with...and with districts, the majority of teams qualify in the final week anyhow).

[Mr V]

Originally Posted by mwmac

Sean, you are correct that reducing team travel costs was one of the stated objectives of the championsplit decision.

While that may be a stated objective the fact is that the amount of time between purchasing the tickets and their travel date has a much bigger influence than the distance traveled when air fare is involved. The popularity, number of flights and carriers serving a particular air port also has a greater influence on the cost than distance in most cases.

For example I did a quick look at costs to travel to Portland OR and Los Angeles CA from Seattle.

Seattle to LAX is showing as "from $205" while the driving distance is noted as just over 1100 miles.

Seattle to Portland is showing a "from $211" and it's driving distance is showing as 166 miles.

Both are based on traveling Oct 14th-18th.

Adjusting the dates for Portland to leave on Thur bumps that price up to $381. No certainly you can find flights to LA that are more expensive than to Portland if you play with dates and carriers to find the flight that is almost booked for Portland and a flight that is still relatively empty for LA on the same day but in general this does represent the fact that distance is a minor part of the cost of travel by air and other factors have more influence on price.

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by Mr V

While that may be a stated objective the fact is that the amount of time between purchasing the tickets and their travel date has a much bigger influence than the distance traveled when air fare is involved. The popularity, number of flights and carriers serving a particular air port also has a greater influence on the cost than distance in most cases.

For example I did a quick look at costs to travel to Portland OR and Los Angeles CA from Seattle.

Seattle to LAX is showing as "from $205" while the driving distance is noted as just over 1100 miles.

Seattle to Portland is showing a "from $211" and it's driving distance is showing as 166 miles.

Both are based on traveling Oct 14th-18th.

Adjusting the dates for Portland to leave on Thur bumps that price up to $381. No certainly you can find flights to LA that are more expensive than to Portland if you play with dates and carriers to find the flight that is almost booked for Portland and a flight that is still relatively empty for LA on the same day but in general this does represent the fact that distance is a minor part of the cost of travel by air and other factors have more influence on price.

I think the goal has more to do with making it so fewer teams have to fly than making it closer to fly. It is helps if it is now close enough that a team doesn't need to rent a charter bus either.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by notmattlythgoe

I think the goal has more to do with making it so fewer teams have to fly than making it closer to fly. It is helps if it is now close enough that a team doesn't need to rent a charter bus either.

However, any uncertainty regarding which Championship venue you're travelling to will drive up flight costs for teams that need to fly.

[InFlight]

Since we are stuck with lovely Detroit, and Houston. FIRST should have some captive area (teams within 600-800 miles by road distance) that are automatically enrolled in those events. Those qualified teams outside the captive areas should be able to select which city to attend based on travel costs/logistics/attractions/and safety considerations.

The remaining non-qualified openings could then be awarded on a space available basis in the two cities. (The Pseudo Championship Experience)

[Rangel]

Why not have enough slots for champs reserved for teams that are within driving distance of the event to be able to go to their close championships but also give them the option to give up that reservation if they really want to go to the other championship. Then allow teams that are far from both championships to pick which one they go to. Or to keep things balanced, have the regional winners pick their preference and assign the teams based on that. If too many pick one championship as their preference, the system will try and balance it out based on captain/1st pick/2nd pick to keep it simple unless they are already on a rating system like districts.