[FRC Blog]2017 Updates

[Zebra_Fact_Man]

How has nobody yet commented that 400 ISN'T EVEN DIVISIBLE BY 6!!!

Furthermore, with 6 divisions, each division having 400/6=66.7 teams, 48% of all teams will participate in a division playoffs. Maybe that's what FIRST HQ wants (more inspiration for everyone!!!), but there are going to be some pretty mediocre picks at the tail end of selections.

Not that anyone in FIRST HQ really cares about my opinion, but I would propose if they want to increase divisions,
only run 5 divisions/championship.

A) 400/5= 80 teams/division (very similar to the current 75, AND there shouldn't be as extensive of a field reset)

B) increase of 2 divisions is a much more reasonable expectation to staff.

The one setback of 5 vs 6 would be having less Einstein matches:
Current QF/SF = 12-18 matches
6 Alliance Round Robin = 15
5 Alliance Round Robin = 10

More talking between each match -> longer intervals of not playing.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

How has nobody yet commented that 400 ISN'T EVEN DIVISIBLE BY 6!!!

This really doesn't matter. They will let in 396/402/408 teams. 400 isn't a hard cap.

[Chris is me]

One advantage to more smaller divisions is that there will be fewer teams fighting for limited seating in the new pit fields we get to play in all weekend! The Dome is only for Einstein teams in the 2Champs era of FRC, so having fewer teams in a division makes supplying adequate field seating much easier.

[bdaroz]

Ok, so I decided to quantify this a bit....

Google Spreadsheet

Pulling data from TBA and the FRC Pre-Qual list (methods listed on the 2nd tab), and ignoring Ontario (going districts), here's what I get:

Under 2016 rules 57 teams were awarded wildcards. Under the 2017 rule that would jump to 88, an increase of 31 teams.

Another interesting point... 17 regionals would not have gained a wildcard under the 2017 rules because they either ran out of finalists, or they were pre-qualified otherwise. Some of those regionals (I've yet to dig deep enough to quantify it, yet) surely have "burned" wildcards under the 2016 rules as well.

[GeeTwo]

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

How has nobody yet commented that 400 ISN'T EVEN DIVISIBLE BY 6!!!

That's only a problem if you assume that divisions will have a natural number of teams, a team will only play in one division, and will play a natural number of games. None of these is necessarily the case. For example, there could be 75 matches in each division, two alliances consisting of 3.6 teams each, each team playing 13.5 matches (9 in their "main" division, 4.5 in their "alternate" division).

[Akash Rastogi]

Nice, my favorite part of the Championship event is watching sub-par teams competing in uneventful matches for most of the week.

This is a great change for people who love this same aspect of the CMP as me!

[Jessica Boucher]

Originally Posted by Zebra_Fact_Man

AND there shouldn't be as extensive of a field reset)

Just a quick thing here - field staff size depends on the game, not the divisions. Divisions are merely the multiplier.

It's difficult to come to the correct amount of volunteers for the Champs fields during the season - different regions run leaner than others, and the decision for the field staff size comes early, usually in week 1 or 2, so we can give food counts to HQ.

Although I personally prefer to run leaner events (back in the early 00s I was challenged - and succeeded - to run entire regionals with double digit volunteers), the final number tends to skew to the higher side to give comfort to the regions who run larger and to cover drop outs.

Stronghold was the first year we had more than 100 volunteer slots on reset alone (14 reset slots / field, if you're curious). This doesn't count DCs, or any one else on the field. Additionally, a volunteer slot does not equal a person, as we have many partial-weekend volunteers, so we're probably closer to the 150 range in terms of actual people needed for the entire event.