Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?

[skippy178]

What is the feeling about teams who compete at their "home" regional and then go on to compete at other regionals (some nearby, and others far away) ?

FIRST espouses "gracious professionalism", yet as I listened to the Championship webcast, I was amazed at the number of top teams who had won multiple awards at several regionals leading to Atlanta.

Some rookie teams struggle just to field a robot, yet there are veteran teams who are well-resourced and with deep pockets, who are travelling the countryside and beating the local talent on their home turf. What does this really say about the FIRST competition system ?

Does this REALLY encourage new teams to come back again next year when the out-of-towners take all the prestigious awards, and deny the locals a chance to go to Atlanta ?

The more I think about this, the more I keep wishing for FIRST to take some proactive steps to limit teams to entering their "home" regional event (the closest within their region, or if two are equally close, then they must nominate one as the home event) to qualify for Atlanta, and if they enter other "away" regionals, then they can compete, but are not eligible for moving into the elimination rounds, and that goes to the local teams instead.

I'm interested to know what others think about this.

Cheers

J

[BigJ]

This same topic has been made 2 or 3 times this season already, and I think they all had devolved into locked flame-wars.

Teams that do great are just role models, IMO. I know our team strives to be as awesome as many of the "big teams".

EDIT: As far as the "home regional" thing, then realize that certain regionals would be pretty stacked, and the Championship might be a little askew.

[Koko Ed]

If they can afford it there is no reason why FIRST should legislate where teams compete or how many times they compete.
It's just senseless for them to do so.

[Pavan Dave]

Define regional and you have my answer. Change the name, it is very misleading. As for actually competing in qualifying events, I think a reasonable cap needs to be established either by the community (which seems to be 2-3) or by FIRST which is currently 6.

[CarterM]

I kind of agree, due to FIRST calling it a "regional", hey! Why not make it a regional? When sport teams compete at a sectional, are they able to compete at three different sectionals? No. Then again, robotics is much cooler in sports in a way that it is a learning experience, so attending more regionals is a great way to become more involved in the FIRST community. Also, limiting teams to the number of events, is like saying your limiting a kids learning experience...It's just hard to do. Also, this subject has been beaten up a couple of times...search for it. In the end, it truly is a hard topic to come to a final conclusion.

[Alex.Norton]

I'm always very happy when a great team comes to visit my region because I personally don't have the time or funds to travel to other regionals or the championship. I get to see some amazing game play and get to see what that team did to be good.

This year I was very happy to get a chance to see 1625 because I liked there design and wanted to see it up close. The fact that they swept my local regional is a mute point IMO.

[Akash Rastogi]

We always do our home regional even if we are not determined to win in Trenton. After that we are known to go down south somewhere (eg: Palmetto, Chesapeake). And we love going there. So what exactly should be stopping teams from going if say..they are finalists one place and then decide to go somewhere else because they know they will have improved and win?

[Vikesrock]

Originally Posted by BigJ

This same topic has been made 2 or 3 times this season already, and I think they all had devolved into locked flame-wars.

Teams that do great are just role models, IMO. I know our team strives to be as awesome as many of the "big teams".

EDIT: As far as the "home regional" thing, then realize that certain regionals would be pretty stacked, and the Championship might be a little askew.

I agree this issue was covered pretty well here:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...le+regional s

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by skippy178

What is the feeling about teams who compete at their "home" regional and then go on to compete at other regionals (some nearby, and others far away) ?

If they feel that it's the best use of their money, let 'em run.

FIRST espouses "gracious professionalism", yet as I listened to the Championship webcast, I was amazed at the number of top teams who had won multiple awards at several regionals leading to Atlanta.

Part of gracious professionalism is professionalism. I would be severely disappointed in my team if we didn't give it all we had at every competition we attended.

Some rookie teams struggle just to field a robot, yet there are veteran teams who are well-resourced and with deep pockets, who are travelling the countryside and beating the local talent on their home turf. What does this really say about the FIRST competition system ?

Ignoring the rookie and veteran labels used, exactly that: there are teams that struggle to field a robot and deep-pocketed teams. At no point has FIRST said either is a bad thing, so long as there is inspiration afoot.

Does this REALLY encourage new teams to come back again next year when the out-of-towners take all the prestigious awards, and deny the locals a chance to go to Atlanta ?

Yes. In the words of legendary professional wrestler Ric Flair, "to be the man, you gotta beat the man."

The more I think about this, the more I keep wishing for FIRST to take some proactive steps to limit teams to entering their "home" regional event (the closest within their region, or if two are equally close, then they must nominate one as the home event) to qualify for Atlanta, and if they enter other "away" regionals, then they can compete, but are not eligible for moving into the elimination rounds, and that goes to the local teams instead.

Which, in effect, undermines the purpose of the qualification rounds. Consider 2237 at Palmetto, the #2 seed. Do we toss them out of the elimination rounds because they competed at Pittsburgh as well? What would a spectator who isn't as versed in the competition think? What would that do for teams that choose to travel to expand their horizons?

Instead of holding the top teams down, let's bring the bottom teams up. (And if you talk to those top teams, many of them are making great strides to do so!)

[Storcky]

After 6 weeks of such hard work, our team decides that two regionals are more rewarding than one. It means that our students must do extra work for us to go, but once we get there it's amazing and we get to make friends with a lot of new teams. Last year, for instance, we were the only team attending both the Chesapeake regional and the Pittsburgh regional, so we never competed with or against the same robot. Attending two regionals also spreads our image to the community. Instead of only being listed in the paper once, we are listed at least three times: once at the end of build season and once after each competition.

[Zyik]

Each regional a team attends has a greater chance of inspiring them and teaching them something. Why on Earth would you want to limit that?

[skippy178]

My main point is that a team competing in multiple regionals shouldn't be able to take home awards everywhere they go just because they have the $$$ to do so, and at the expense of the smaller-budget teams. Once they go to their first regional competition, it should become "practice only" (non-qualifying) at other events, and that should include being ineligible for the off-field awards too.

If every team could find a way to attend 2 or 3 regionals, especially if they were geographically convenient to home base, wouldn't that give them a much better (perhaps unfair) chance of qualifying for the Championship than if they competed locally, and then sat around for 4-6 weeks waiting for Atlanta (assuming you were pre-qualified) or else were eliminated and had to wait for next year to try again.

What do the top NASCAR / F1 / Indy teams do between races ? They spend time and money on practice, and practice, and more practice, and throw in plenty of workshop time too (without fix-it windows !). But, regardless of all that, they can't go out and add a few extra races to their season to give them more points in their championships.

In professional sports, the teams get a given match / event schedule, and over the course of the season up the finals rounds, each team will play the same number of games.

In FIRST, that's not the case. But, should it be ?

J

[usbcd36]

I'm kind of torn on this issue. On one hand, I love seeing all of the interesting robots made by out-of-state teams (not that the in-state teams don't have interesting robots). On the other hand, it always seems like the top few teams are from out-of-state. Plus, teams at their second regional have had time to work out more of the bugs, which puts them at an even greater advantage.

Overall, I wish that I had pushed for us to go to a second regional. In retrospect, I think we would've been a lot happier to have a second chance, even if we didn't make nationals. Plus, it would keep us from complaining about the other teams who did it.

[sdcantrell56]

I don't see this as a problem at all. If a team has the money to do it why should they be stopped. Think of it as more opportunities for them inspire and help other teams.

Also the idea of FIRST being completely fair is not really valid. It is more like the real world in which some people or teams have more resources, and the other teams have to make do with what they have until they to work to obtain those resources.

[skippy178]

Originally Posted by Zyik

Each regional a team attends has a greater chance of inspiring them and teaching them something. Why on Earth would you want to limit that?

I'm not against "teaching". I am against the idea that a well-resourced team with (relatively) massive amounts of sponsorship funding, mentors and facilities can travel around squashing the "little guys", who are the new rookie teams that Dean Kamen and others so desparately want to attract to this competition.

Whether you realised it or not, you saw it happen this weekend in Atlanta, where the highest ever team number to be a Championship Winner in the finals alliance was team 1114. That means there are over half the teams with numbers above that who have NEVER been to that dizzying level.

Looking at

http://www2.usfirst.org/2008comp/eve...in/awards.html

the Rookie awards were for teams 2352 and 2599, who are 1200+ team numbers AFTER those in the Winners alliance. How many years will it be before we see those teams being part of the winning alliances ?

J