FRC rules around seating need to change.

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

I disagree with your observation completely. I see many more teams saving seats in the central viewing area around each field than not. I see the same thing at the Regionals we attend. I also see a lot of flexibility from almost all of the teams. It's only an issue at the beginning of the day, and when the stands are completely packed during playoffs.

Whether FIRST believes its reasonable is probably irrelevant because they clearly haven't given much thought to the consequences. And given the complete lack of enforcement they reveal that they believe that it's unworkable.

Notably, FIRST saves seats for Einstein teams during the final. If they lived by their words, they would allow any and all teams to sit where ever they wanted during Einstein. Clearly they even recognize that the no saving seat rule is unworkable.

So, again give me a rationale as to why its a good policy other than a tautology that FIRST thinks its a good policy?

Your general argument this whole time has been based around scouts needing seats which I understand. However, this is all thrown out the window come eliminations as scouting is over.

First reserving seats for teams on Einstein is awesome. Its that little special treat teams get for making it. I do not think anyone has a problem with that. Being the team that you are on I am sure you have enjoyed those seats year after year.

I started this thread because I believe some sort of action needs to be taken. However, I disagree that the rule is unworkable. With clear enforcement and harsher repercussions I am sure most issues would be more easily resolved.

[Knufire]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

Your general argument this whole time has been based around scouts needing seats which I understand. However, this is all thrown out the window come eliminations as scouting is over.

Teams do scout during eliminations. Even Einstien.

[evanperryg]

Originally Posted by Knufire

Teams do scout during eliminations. Even Einstien.

Why? Seems frivolous outside of a strategist making observations.

Anyway, more on topic:
We've saved seats. Thursday morning at Archimedes, we had a bus of 60-something kids get caught in nasty traffic, and it was nearly an hour and a half behind. We marked out an area with people and scouting items, and explained our situation calmly and graciously to other teams. They understood, and were happy to oblige. There was one team who needed a few seats for scouters, and we gladly gave them the 8 seats they needed. It wasn't a problem for us, I ended up talking to them for quite a while and learned a lot about them. Did we "break the rules?" Yeah, I guess. Does it matter? Not at all, because it was handled professionally by us, and the teams around us. They were very understanding of our situation, and we were understanding of their situation. When people are nice to each other, they don't necessarily need rules to guide their behavior.

TL;dr: If we were all graciously professional to each other, this whole thing would work a lot better.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by evanperryg

Why? Seems frivolous outside of a strategist making observations.

[tangent] You do want to know what your alliance and your opponents are capable of. Also potential opponents. If you can see that X is vulnerable to defense, and to the tune of Y, while Z barely slows you down, all of that is good to know.

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by evanperryg

Why? Seems frivolous outside of a strategist making observations.

Anyway, more on topic:
We've saved seats. Thursday morning at Archimedes, we had a bus of 60-something kids get caught in nasty traffic, and it was nearly an hour and a half behind. We marked out an area with people and scouting items, and explained our situation calmly and graciously to other teams. They understood, and were happy to oblige. There was one team who needed a few seats for scouters, and we gladly gave them the 8 seats they needed. It wasn't a problem for us, I ended up talking to them for quite a while and learned a lot about them. Did we "break the rules?" Yeah, I guess. Does it matter? Not at all, because it was handled professionally by us, and the teams around us. They were very understanding of our situation, and we were understanding of their situation. When people are nice to each other, they don't necessarily need rules to guide their behavior.

TL;dr: If we were all graciously professional to each other, this whole thing would work a lot better.

Where your post differs from a lot of others is you allowed the 8 scouts to sit there. There is a big difference between saying that that seat is reserved and asking if you could keep that seat.

[Knufire]

Originally Posted by evanperryg

Why? Seems frivolous outside of a strategist making observations.

Data can help make strategic decisions during Einstein. Not the same type of scouting that you would do during qualifications where you're trying to gain an overall understanding of a robot's performance, but recording specific numbers or trends that are important to your strategy. For example, when I was sitting with 469 as an alumnus during Einstein 2014, there were students measuring average cycle time during all the Einstein matches and relaying those numbers down to the strategy team on the field.

[evanperryg]

Originally Posted by Knufire

Data can help make strategic decisions during Einstein. Not the same type of scouting that you would do during qualifications where you're trying to gain an overall understanding of a robot's performance, but recording specific numbers or trends that are important to your strategy. For example, when I was sitting with 469 as an alumnus during Einstein 2014, there were students measuring average cycle time during all the Einstein matches and relaying those numbers down to the strategy team on the field.

Alright, now that two people have said this... I guess I wasn't very clear on what I meant. In elims, you aren't really taking numerical data. It's more about a couple of lead scouts taking notes and building strategies out of the strengths and weaknesses of opposing alliances. It's not as intensive.

I'll reiterate my main point: just be nice to people, and they'll be nice to you. Be understanding of others' situation, and they will be understanding of yours. This entire discussion has become uncharacteristically heated, not just for CD, but for FRC in general. It's interesting, absolutely, but let's try not to leverage age, reputation, or rhetoric to prove each other wrong. Discussion, not fighting.

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

...

Originally Posted by Citrus Dad

...

Originally Posted by gblake

...

[Edxu]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

Your general argument this whole time has been based around scouts needing seats which I understand. However, this is all thrown out the window come eliminations as scouting is over.

Scouting continues in elims spearheaded by the top scouts. However, scouting shifts from data recording to strategy recording and robot analysis.

There are matches all the time where a higher-seeded alliance lost sets because they chose not to adapt their strategy to the playstyle of the opposing alliance, or a weaker alliance was able to exploit a hole in a strong alliance's strategy and clutch out a match.

Real example: In 2014 at Ruckus, 610,1241 and 378, the third-seeded alliance were able to defeat the first-seeded alliance of 1126,1114 and 3951 by exploiting a hole in their offensive strategy.
The first-seeded alliance's strategy was to do a standard cycle of 1126 inbound+truss -> HP to 3951 -> 1114 finish, but our alliance realized that by parking 3951 in the opponent's loading area, 1126 was unable to make their truss shot effectively, winning us the match and the event in the end.



On topic: From my own observations at Canadian events,a few teams all arrive at the venue ~60-90 minutes before the doors open in order to secure great seats for the team and for scouting. Among the first few teams that arrive, there is very little rushing because teams tend to discuss what seats they want, make compromises and everyone ends up reasonably satisfied. This was what happened at GTRE, and a little bit of this happened at Waterloo.

In terms of protecting seats, we're as guilty as anyone other team that fields a large group (45 students, we usually put bags on seats etc), but we've tried to change our "seat culture" recently to offer and encourage non-team members to sit in our stands. In fact, I made a few friends that I still keep in touch with today at CMP because they asked to sit in our stands and we obliged.

I think that we still have room to improve in terms of seat-saving, but as it stands, I'm pretty satisfied and happy with how stands and seat-saving is managed at Canadian FRC events.

[Chinmay]

Originally Posted by Edxu

In terms of protecting seats, we're as guilty as anyone other team that fields a large group (45 students, we usually put bags on seats etc), but we've tried to change our "seat culture" recently to offer and encourage non-team members to sit in our stands. In fact, I made a few friends that I still keep in touch with today at CMP because they asked to sit in our stands and we obliged.

I think this snippet suggests a good compromise that we can hopefully adopt while waiting for FIRST to come up with the miracle cure.

I want to emphasize that team "culture" around the many things, such as how to accept loss, how to be inclusive to all members, what to do with seats in the stands etc. comes from the top down. I have noticed that problems in the stands stem from mentors and senior members telling younger kids to reserve seats, and the younger kids trying to do what their teammates suggested. Usually there is some level of miscommunication, and the rookie team member may end up fighting tooth and nail to save a spot because they think someone wanted them to do that. In reality, the mentor or parent would not have condoned or wanted that behavior to save a seat.

Clearly in some cases team leadership is actually suggesting that members should fight tooth and nail, but I think that is the minority. I dont think people are intentionally trying to be rude, my guess is that there is some level of miscommunication.

Taking a second to think about mindset like Edxu suggests can go a long way. Thanks for maturely handling the situation at champs! I hope teams can have a quick sit down with their members and go over these expectations. I will have that chat with your team at a competition in the stands in front of everyone else, but I'd much rather teams did that on their own time