Remember that thread? [11-11-04]: Multiple Regionals

[Ken Leung]

Hi Everyone :-).

Now that registration is open, there have been a lot of discussions about which regional teams are attending, and how many they are going to. It sounds like lots of wonderful people are working very hard to put up extraordinary events for you. Good luck teams! Good luck regional committee's! Good luck off-season events! ( )

This week's "Remember that thread?" spotlight a very relevant discussion back at 99' regarding # of regionals teams should attend. In this inspiring debate, Chris Hibner (Coach on team 308) started out by comparing FIRST regionals with open wheeled racing, argued how unlimited practice sessions benefited racing teams who can afford to go to them, and how FIRST teams with huge amount of resources will have the same advantage over poorer teams who cannot afford to go to multiple regionals. Others quickly rebutted by saying these big teams are raising the bar for their team to shoot for and pointed out the benefits of regional competitions.

This thread lasted till its 56th post with nothing but pure quality in it. After re-reading this thread, only one though lingers in my mind the rest of the week: I am not worthy… I am not worthy…

Without further delay, in this week's “Remember that thread?” I present:

Multiple Regionals - Posted by Dave, Student on team #308, Walled Lake Monster, from Walled Lake Schools and TRW.
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=9639

[Chris Hibner]

Jeez Ken, you had to go pull up that mess.

That was an interesting time. I remember that thread so vividly. I was really trying hard to play devil's advocate, but anyone that knows me knows that I am generally so non-confrontational and I hate to rock the boat (no one that knew me from that thread could have guessed!). I felt awful for days surrounding that thread since I felt like I was stirring up a hornets nest (as Joe put it) and making people angry, and I really hate to do that. However, I was trying to do something different at that time - I later decided to go back to my normal, more reserved self since it caused me a lot less anxiety.

To be honest, I was hoping that thread would stay lost forever. However, after going back and reading it, it was a great discussion. Oh, how I long for the days when the forums were so simple. But such is progress; and looking back only causes you to veer off the road.

[Wetzel]

Joe called this right.

There is a ton of work done on these robots, using them more is a better use of the equipment. I think that it is in the long-term interest of FIRST to develop into a season of events rather than one or two events.

Wetzel

[Chris Hibner]

Originally Posted by Wetzel

Joe called this right.




Wetzel

Yes he did. This is one thing from this thread that has always stuck in my mind (and I agreed with from the get-go, even though I may not have mentioned it in the thread).

I think I re-brought this up in a thread that was started by Ken Leung this past year (or maybe I just thought about it in my head and didn't write about it - everything is a blur these days). Basically we discussed weekly, no-frills competitions at a local high-school gym in an effort to provide many competitions while keeping the costs very low. I think this is the eventual future of first, but it may be a long way off.

[Franchesca]

I agree with Daniel from team # 192:

I look at these wealthy teams (delphi, wildstang, etc.) and I see a goal, not a threat. It gives us something to work towards, because one day, I want to be able to have a team that CAN go to multiple regionals like Delphi or Wildstang.

For our team winning the Peachtree Regional was almost unreal (being our first year and all). However, when we got to the Championships, obviously being quite different than the regionals, we didn't do as well as some people in the team would've liked but still we did ok. I know that after doing so well in the Regional and because of some complications at the Championships ... most of us were a bit disappointed because we felt like we could do better than what we did.

Ultimately, though, being able to go to the Championships our first year was quite an experience for us and it gave us (or at least me) a renewed goal. When you go the competitions and you see all these amazing teams (the "big budget teams") its not just about how many competitions they go to, to me every aspect of these veteran teams is something that I think my team can look up to and aspire to be like that. I left Atlanta with a desire to do everything that I can for my team so that we can also perform at the same level that these teams do. I can honestly say that "big budget teams" present a goal rather than a threat. And thankfully, this year we can also go to more than one regional!!

Great discussion! Good points on both sides!

[Ken Leung]

Originally Posted by Chris Hibner

To be honest, I was hoping that thread would stay lost forever. However, after going back and reading it, it was a great discussion. Oh, how I long for the days when the forums were so simple. But such is progress; and looking back only causes you to veer off the road.

Haha Chris, sorry for digging old dirt up. I had no idea that thread caused you such anxiety. I believe as a community we've come such a long way since 1999 that this topic wouldn't make people as angry as it used to be. Many times have we debated how money isn't the only resource for teams. By now most would agree that you don't need huge amount of money to be successful in FIRST, while they will still agree that going to multiple regionals give teams a bigger advantage than teams who don't.

I chose this thread because 1. it seems appropriate as people started talking about going to multiple regionals, and 2. it was an incredible discussion.

At one point I heard/read someone saying that in an argument even though the answer seems obvious, through the debate people might learn to see the flip side of the argument, and if not, then they learn to support the answer that much better. To me, that thought blew my mind. In a good argument, is it possible that even if people cannot agree with each other, they are still better off than if they didn't participate in the argument in the first place? Well, this thread is the perfect example that yes, it is possible.

The truth is, I've tried to stand my ground just like you did, Chris, and many times I've backed down from it, and didn't continue for the sake of the discussion. I probably made less people angry about what I said, but we didn't learn as much from the discussion as we could've. Joe J. said it best in his post:

Originally Posted by Joe Johnson

I admit that I don't completely understand folks who have expressed the opinion that such frank discussions are an indication that we all can't get along. Far from it, I think everyone will be able to get along BETTER because we have had a relatively open and frank discussion rather than secret tongue clicking and finger wagging among various factions in and around the pits.

So, it might've caused some negative thoughts back in the days, but now, that thread as a whole have greatly inspired me about how high the level of discussion can be in the Chief Delphi Forum. If even just one more person share my view, than it is worth digging up this mess ;-).

It's too bad you don't poke as much holes as you used to, Chris. There would be much more interesting discussion to read.

Thank you to whoever participated in this thread back at 1999. I am not worthy... I am not worthy...