Pit Politics

[Alexander McGee]

Hmm.

I can't help but agree, and disagree.

First of all, i believe that placement in the pits is, infact, a major aspect of decision in choosing alliances. If you are next to someone, you get to see, in detail, what works and what dosnt work with their robot. You also get to see there scores (if they have a score board). You also get an important look at the overall morale of the team.

1. Who really built that robot? You can tell very easilly. If there are students working on it, then that is a huge bonus.
2. Is that robot working? Can it even move? Is everything operational?
3. Is everyone sulking around? Has the pain of defeat gotten them down? This shows not only a lack of confidence in their abilities, but a lack of enthusiasm as well. Not generally a good thing.
4. Is there even anyone in the pit? If so, are they there to greet other teams, and explain their robot? Greeters are very important. It allows you to show off all of the hard work that you have done.

But I also have to say that performance on the field is extremelly important. A really talented driver can beat the best designed robot on the field.

Attitude is vital as well. Teams with a crummy attitude towards other teams is one of the factors that can make a potential picking team decide they would not work well together from practice on thursday.

Just an observation.

[Chris Hibner]

If you ran statistics relating partnership to distance from pit location, it wouldn't surprise me to see a small correlation. However, I don't know if it would be huge. Whatever relation there is is most likely due to the fact that teams generally notice how the teams around them are doing.

I would encourage your team to formulate a sales plan to get teams interested in your robot.

Let's get one thing straight - no sales plan is going to get your team picked if your robot is no good. First and formost, you have to have a good robot and a good team.

However, you can have the best robot in all of FIRST and still not get picked if no one sees you compete. It has happened to us many times when we approach teams to talk to them about our robot, and they're not sure that they've seen it. We then talk to the right people (the people doing the picking) to try and get them excited about going to a match to watch our robot compete. The biggest thing is to make them take special notice of you during that match.

I don't know if I would create a sales pitch that makes people want to pick you sight unseen. However, you need to be sure you make them want to come see you play - then let your performance speak for itself.

-Chris

[Rich Kressly]

"Pit Politics" or "Knowing People"?
Each team impliments it's own "system" in the end

Proximity of pit location helps at times and it's safe to say that if teams are close in team number, then they came into FIRST about the same time and are more likely to know one another.

Scouting, for us at 103, and for many, is paramount. As a few people alluded to earlier, scouting includes knowing people as well as knowing robots. It always astounds me to see huge scouting efforts going on that include little or no information about people. The robot design and capabilities are huge (who wouldn't love a chance to drive Wildstang 2003, etc.), but the overall performance comes down to those programming, maintaining and controlling the robot as well as the demeanor of the field coaches, drivers, and human players.

This is a competition and some perform better than others under pressure. Some carry more experience to the driver station than others. Some strategize in more knowledgable and collaborative ways than others. No robot, no matter how awesome, has ever won a match by itself. In this sense, what some consider to be "pit politics" others would call "knowing people" as a part of scouting and/or past experience.

[Joe Ross]

Several regionals don't do placement by increasing team number, but by a system that tries to put a vetran team next to a rookie team. It would be interesting to see if there would still be a correlation.

[KenWittlief]

this is an interesting question, and a good topic for a little bit of engineering analysis

the 'requirement' that we pick teams 'next to us in the pits' as alliance partners (putting this in engineering system terms) is somewhat vague and fuzzy

lets look at the data :c)

how many teams are 'next to you' in the pits?

2? Id say no. unless you are against a wall there is a team to your left and right, a team across the isle from you, two teams diagonally across the isle from you, and 3 teams behind you - thats 8 teams 'next to you' that you could take out if you were a king on a chess board

if there are 40 teams at the regional, then you have an 8 out of 40 chance of allying with one of your neighbors (1/5 = 20%) on the first pick, and a 20% chance on the second - these are accumalative odds, not exclusive, so your odds are somewhere around 40% just by placement alone.

add to that the fact that when you or or neighbor needs help in the pits, or have a break and are idle, the people you are mostly likely to interact with are your neighbors - so you get to know each other, and your machines

so even though a neighbor may not have performed well in the seeding matches, you will know which one of those 8 neighbors have a great machine inwhich the bugs have been worked out - better than you will know the other 32 machines in the pit area.

given all this, the conclusion appears to be valid - in fact, you would expect it

BTW - great observation into what professionals call 'networking'. getting to know the people around you, their skills abilities and weaknesses.