[FRC Blog]2017 Updates

[Sperkowsky]

It really stinks that they are getting rid of a lot of north Champs wait list spots. As a team who has 8 waitlist 'tokens' next year our shot at Champs through the waitlist is much much smaller now.

If the goal is really to have more new teams come to Champs shouldn't waitlist slots be prioritized over wild cards?

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

It really stinks that they are getting rid of a lot of north Champs wait list spots. As a team who has 8 waitlist 'tokens' next year our shot at Champs through the waitlist is much much smaller now.

If the goal is really to have more new teams come to Champs shouldn't waitlist slots be prioritized over wild cards?

No, because they're choosing to stop punishing teams in areas who aren't part of districts but are under represented at Championships due to fewer qualifications available at regional events than they'd get through a district championship.

[Karthik]

In 2013, 96 teams made the elimination rounds at the Championship (4 divisions, 8 alliances per division, 3 teams per alliance).
In 2017, 384 teams will make the elimination rounds at the Championships (2 Championships, 6 divisions per championship, 8 alliances per division, 4 teams per alliance).

In essence, this is the approximate equivalent (384/400) of every team from the 2013 Championship making the elimination rounds. Some people will really like this change, some will really dislike this change. An interesting decision to say the least.

(All this assumes that the alliance format stays the same for 2017)

[bkahl]

12 divisions... Sheesh.

We thought finding enough volunteers for 8 was gunna be rough. Now cut the volunteer pool in half and only take away 2 divisions. Then do it again.

Have fun, Jess.

[Taylor]

Originally Posted by Karthik

In 2013, 96 teams made the elimination rounds at the Championship (4 divisions, 8 alliances per division, 3 teams per alliance).
In 2017, 384 teams will make the elimination rounds at the Championships (2 Championships, 6 divisions per championship, 8 alliances per division, 4 teams per alliance).

In essence, this is the approximate equivalent (384/400) of every team from the 2013 Championship making the elimination rounds. Some people will really like this change, some will really dislike this change. An interesting decision to say the least.

(All this assumes that the alliance format stays the same for 2017)

This is an interesting take. I'd put myself in the first group of 'some people' for the simple reason that in 2017, almost 400 teams get to come home to their schools/communities and brag that they were (at least) quarterfinalists at the world championship. This can lead to great press, great community support, great feelings back home in general.

I understand the traditionalist argument of this making the event watered down, and I don't disagree with that. But for the larger goal of changing the culture through grass roots, getting people back home excited about a local's team success goes a long way toward celebrating STEM.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by Taylor

This is an interesting take. I'd put myself in the first group of 'some people' for the simple reason that in 2017, almost 400 teams get to come home to their schools/communities and brag that they were (at least) quarterfinalists at the world championship. This can lead to great press, great community support, great feelings back home in general.

I understand the traditionalist argument of this making the event watered down, and I don't disagree with that. But for the larger goal of changing the culture through grass roots, getting people back home excited about a local's team success goes a long way toward celebrating STEM.

Yup, my letting more teams go to Champs and more teams into the elimination rounds (and more teams with a reasonable shot of making the elimination rounds, you're definitely going to have more happy customers. Of course you'll have those who don't like the further dilution of the product, but numerically that looks to be a minority, albeit a vocal one. (I'm a member if this minority, however I totally understand why FIRST would cater to what I perceive to be the majority here)

--

As a few people have mentioned, VEX has been running a Round Robin since 2013. Here's a link to an archive of the 2016 Round Robin.

http://livestream.com/vrctv1/2016-wo...osing-ceremony (Starts at 17:30)

You'll probably get a better idea of how it flows from watching the full Livestream archive instead individual matches on YouTube. It's taken a couple of years for us to educate the community on exactly how it works and to get them into the action. It is definitely not the most intuitive format, especially when you factor in tiebreakers, to an audience who is used to a standard best 2 out of 3 bracket. When done well, it's the most exciting hour (would take much longer in FRC) of robotics; match after match of the best teams in the world facing off. However to someone who's not robotics junkie, it could drag on, especially if lots of delays/speakers are introduced between matches.

In general I'm a big fan of this format, especially for the strategy that it introduces. I'm sure teams on Einstein will enjoy the opportunity to play against every other alliance. Many time when 1114 was on Einstein, we almost forgot about the alliances we never had a chance to play. In 2010, both us and 2056 were on Einstein, a fact that I forget regularly since we never played them, and were busy strategizing while they were playing.

[Doug Frisk]

Originally Posted by Karthik

Yup, my letting more teams go to Champs and more teams into the elimination rounds (and more teams with a reasonable shot of making the elimination rounds, you're definitely going to have more happy customers. Of course you'll have those who don't like the further dilution of the product, but numerically that looks to be a minority, albeit a vocal one. (I'm a member if this minority, however I totally understand why FIRST would cater to what I perceive to be the majority here)

Just exactly what do you see as "the product"?

Me, I see the product as a generation inspired in STEM by participation. More participation is more inspiration not dilution.

[wilsonmw04]

Originally Posted by DareDad

Just exactly what do you see as "the product"?

Me, I see the product as a generation inspired in STEM by participation. More participation is more inspiration not dilution.

It depends on how you look at FRC. Some look at FRC as merely robotics competition. Some look at it as a change agent. Others look at it as both with various weights on the two sides.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by DareDad

Just exactly what do you see as "the product"?

Me, I see the product as a generation inspired in STEM by participation. More participation is more inspiration not dilution.

I would say that FIRST sells a product (the competition) designed for inspiration. In this sense, diluting the product means diluting the competition. The inspiration derived from the competition, on the other hand, may well increase. It's like the supply/demand curves in economics - supply, demand, and price are all intertwined, to define your profit. Here, it's competitiveness, number of teams, and inspiration per team that defines overall inspiration. Increase the number of teams and you decrease the competitiveness, but you may be able to increase the inspiration... but there might be a "break even" point where increasing the number of teams decreases the competitiveness to a point where overall inspiration actually decreases. I won't even pretend to know where that point is, or if it actually exists!

[BrendanB]

The gap between a district Championship and a division grows again.

[efoote868]

I don't see it, but why assume we'll have the traditional 8 alliance bracket (for 32 / 67 teams), instead of 6 or fewer alliances in division elimination rounds (and perhaps a round robin?)

[logank013]

Can someone please explain to me how the Einstein division will be played out? I've heard round robin but I don't understand how that works. Thanks.

Edit: Also, will round robin only be for Einstein or will it be like that at each regional / district event?

[Jay O'Donnell]

Originally Posted by logank013

Can someone please explain to me how the Einstein division will be played out? I've heard round robin but I don't understand how that works. Thanks.

Edit: Also, will round robin only be for Einstein or will it be like that at each regional / district event?

The round robin will only be for einstein. Basically there will be 6 division winners moving on to Einstein, and 6 doesn't make a single elimination bracket. So each alliance will play a match against every other alliance (so 5 matches each) and the best two records (with some sort of tiebreaker because ties are common with round robins) will move on to a best of three final round.

VEX has done it this way at their "Einstein" for years with 5 alliances, so check out videos on YouTube to see what it's like.

[bkahl]

Tbh I kinda like the round robin.

Every alliance has to play eachother, so it will likely bring more strategic depth to play. I would have loved to see more of this year's Einstein alliances play each other. The two (four) deepest and best alliances will likely be duking it out on (both) Saturday(s).

Also, not only will we have a better idea of when the day will be over, the afternoon will also be shorter than Einstein has been in the past. We all know that's a blessing.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by bkahl

Tbh I kinda like the round robin.

Every alliance has to play eachother, so it will likely bring more strategic depth to play. I would have loved to see more of this year's Einstein alliances play each other. The two (four) deepest and best alliances will likely be duking it out on (both) Saturday(s).

Also, not only will we have a better idea of when the day will be over; the afternoon will also be shorter than Einstein has been in the past. We all know that's a blessing.

The length of the Saturday will most likely depend on how many speakers FIRST rolls out than how many matches they play.