Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?

[Protronie]

I sat back and read this gibberish long enough...In the words of Popeye,"I've had all I can stand..." if your team can't afford to go to more than one regional...maybe you need to look at how the team is ran.

If you need help fund raising... speak up, there plenty here willing to offer ideas and ect.
Need more sponsors... get them. Why you think race cars have all them stickers on them.
Yes some teams have been blessed with sponsors with deep pockets... and some have whole machine shops at their beck n call.

If you look you'll see these powerhouse teams do spread their wealth,be it by forming other teams or mentoring to others. They too were small and poor once. With a lot of hard work, and yes a little luck they have grown to where they are now. Even with golden spoons the kids on these team work hard... why should they be held back cause a smaller poorer team fells left out.
A lot of teams build two robots... should that be not allowed too?

I bet I could give a rookie team a blank check and a full machine shop and they still won't win champs. Winning on Einstein take experience, team work, and luck. It takes time for a team to develop the winning elements

A violin player once ask a man how you get to Carnegie Hall, the man said, thats easy... practice, practice, practice.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by skippy178

Should there be a purely rookie-focused championship series (in addition to the existing Championship) where only new teams of 1-2 years standing in FRC are eligible to compete ? Multiple competition tiers in FRC would be similar to what is found in baseball with the major/minor leagues and also in other sports.

Actually, there was a regional this year that was only open to rookies at Kettering University. The idea was to try out a low-cost event plan and give the rookies a little extra competition. I would support continuing this--bring the bottom up, not the top down. Some rookies don't need it. Most do. Even some veterans do.

[jasper.s.jacobs]

an all rookie competition sounds like a pretty good experience for the rookie teams, but I am concerned that it would just turn into a lapbot-fest that would be less than exciting to say the very least. Sorry for sounding harsh, but I think it might be pretty boring to be in, and much more boring to watch, thats why atlanta is so great, ever single match is full of action. Regardless it is probably a good enough idea to entertain, and try to develop.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by skippy178

I think I also feel strongly that FIRST needs to figure out how to allow newer teams (and mine is NOT in this category, so this isn't some sort of self-fulfilling barrow I'm pushing) to be recognized for their efforts across ALL categories, not just Rookie Inspiration / All-Star / Highest Seed.

There's no prohibition on rookies winning any award, save Chairman's. Consider 1398 (Imagery Award, Peachtree 2004), 1959 (Website Award, Palmetto 2006), 1114 (Xerox Creativity Award, Canadian Regional 2003), or 1002 (Johnson & Johnson Sportsmanship Award, Peachtree 2003).

Should there be a purely rookie-focused championship series (in addition to the existing Championship) where only new teams of 1-2 years standing in FRC are eligible to compete ? Multiple competition tiers in FRC would be similar to what is found in baseball with the major/minor leagues and also in other sports.

Again, no. 1618 may have competed for four seasons now, but the vast majority of the team was new this season. We got just as much enjoyment playing the old-timers as we did from the newbies. (I draw a distinction between that idea and giving rookies a chance to get their feet wet through techniques such as the Kettering rookie pilot and hosting pre-rookies at off-season events a la Brunswick Eruption, though.) If you're looking for multiple competition tiers, try FTC and (J)FLL; some teams find fielding a JV team for their freshmen (or a feeder system with FLL) to be rewarding.

[DanTod97]

lol@this thread

and people seemed to think that my views were so audacious, I guess im not completely alone after all.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by skippy178

I think I also feel strongly that FIRST needs to figure out how to allow newer teams (and mine is NOT in this category, so this isn't some sort of self-fulfilling barrow I'm pushing) to be recognized for their efforts across ALL categories, not just Rookie Inspiration / All-Star / Highest Seed.

I don't believe teams automatically deserve to be recognized for their efforts. They should be recognized for their accomplishments. Billfred pointed out that FIRST already "allows" any team, rookies included, to receive every award except Chairman's.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by skippy178

Maybe I've been hung up on the term "regional", and as others have pointed out, the word "invitational" maybe seems a better fit for the way the current FRC competition operates.

NCAA basketball "Regionals" - I rest my case.

Originally Posted by EricH

Actually, there was a regional this year that was only open to rookies at Kettering University. The idea was to try out a low-cost event plan and give the rookies a little extra competition. I would support continuing this--bring the bottom up, not the top down. Some rookies don't need it. Most do. Even some veterans do.

Originally Posted by jasper.s.jacobs

an all rookie competition sounds like a pretty good experience for the rookie teams, but I am concerned that it would just turn into a lapbot-fest that would be less than exciting to say the very least. Sorry for sounding harsh, but I think it might be pretty boring to be in, and much more boring to watch, thats why atlanta is so great, ever single match is full of action. Regardless it is probably a good enough idea to entertain, and try to develop.

You do realize that one of those rookies at Kettering was the 2nd seed on Curie, right? Most probably the Enginerds didn't "need" a rookie-only event, but it certainly didn't hurt - they went on to win the Rookie All Star at Detroit, and were in the top 8 in both Detroit and West Michigan. While the pace of the competition at Kettering might not have been equal to that at Atlanta, it was exciting (except for the 4-hour field delay). And I dare say that there were some matches at regular regional events that were not as exciting either.

[colin340]

what about the amount of $$$$$ your take from you sponsor or your communit
,in many case you could start a new team on the $$$$ you could save but my team would really love to go to a second regional but we can see who we would be hurting

[robochick1319]

Here's the thing about multiple regionals:

For six weeks straight you spend all of your time, energy, and efforts to build a fantastic machine. For six weeks straight you go to bed thinking of new strategies and ideas for the games. For six weeks straight you sit under flourescent lighting with a bunch of cranky, sweaty, and tired people. For six weeks straight you dedicate every waking moment to reading Chief Delphi and passing notes in class about new drawing ideas.

Now that you done ALL THAT for six weeks straight, why would you only want to go to 1 regional?!?!?

I can understand if money is the issue because that is something you cannot prevent. But if you CAN go you SHOULD go.

And believe me, it is possible. In 2006 we went to the Florida Regional, the Purdue Regional, the Palmetto Regional, AND Nationals!! That was the best season EVER for me because (even though I had a mountain of schoolwork) I really got enough time with my team and my robot to feel like those six weeks paid off.

If you can't count that was 3 regional events AND Nationals. Boy was I tired!!

So for all those people who disagree about attending multiple regionals all I can say is so what? If we can raise the money then I am sure y'all can. And if morality is the issue (not money) then I hope you have fun at your 1 regional.

But as for me, the more competition the better!! =)

[billbo911]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

(Full disclosure: Team 45 always goes to multiple regionals. We rarely fail to compete in the elimination rounds. We won the last National championship to be awarded to a single team. I might be so far removed from Skippy's situation as to be completely unable to understand his viewpoint.)

This is one of the most honest and telling statements I have seen in a long time. It is one I MUST salute!

You see, I find myself and my team on the opposite side of the spectrum. We look longingly, and jealously, at the "other side". Although, we acknowledge, they have earned it. It was not handed to them. It took time, tears, sweat and work to get to the place the are in, and we expect nothing less for our selves.

Teams like 45 and people like Alan are an awesome example of what is possible if you are willing to do the work. They are indeed a rare breed. All I can ask is that you remember where you came from and understand that those on this end have a daunting task to even try to compete with you.

(Yes, I understand that this is not about the competition, it is about the inspiration. But you must admit, because we play a "game" every year, it will inherently breed competitiveness. That is human nature.)

[DanTod97]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

That you use the word "competition" instead of "program" is a good clue to your mindset here. Try to broaden your goals to include the stated mission of FIRST, rather than focusing on winning medals. Does it sting to be beaten by a powerhouse veteran team? You bet. Does it make me want to pout and go home? No way! It makes me want to do better next time. It inspires me to do better next time.

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

I don't believe teams automatically deserve to be recognized for their efforts. They should be recognized for their accomplishments.

To me, these two ideas contradict each other.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by DanTod97

To me, these two ideas contradict each other.

Since elaboration wasn't provided, I'll ask: How do those two ideas conflict? I can't find any disconnect, but more explanation would be beneficial for the enlightenment of the group.

[GaryVoshol]

I see no contradiction. Accomplishments include much more than winning.

[Bobwhite2337]

Originally Posted by jasper.s.jacobs

an all rookie competition sounds like a pretty good experience for the rookie teams, but I am concerned that it would just turn into a lapbot-fest that would be less than exciting to say the very least. Sorry for sounding harsh, but I think it might be pretty boring to be in, and much more boring to watch, thats why atlanta is so great, ever single match is full of action. Regardless it is probably a good enough idea to entertain, and try to develop.

Team 2337 competed at the Kettering Rookie event, and while it seems like a lifetime ago now, at the time it was anything but a boring event. While understandably not at the same level as Atlanta, it was definitely exciting for those competing. There were some robots that were purely lappers, but we saw that at all of the regionals and the Championship as well (and what is wrong with that anyway??). There were also several hurdlers, both shooters and lifters.

For us, it was a very valuable experience. Having never been to a regional event, we got a chance to run our robot under game conditions. But more importantly, all of the teams learned just how a tournament runs, including alliance selections and eliminations, so that when we got to our first "real event", we had some idea what was going on.

I hope FIRST expands this program next year. We are already hoping to volunteer at the Kettering event next year, to help out those rookies coming up behind us.

[Bob Steele]

My reaction to this thread includes our perspective as a 2nd year team.

Our first year we did not get a NASA grant... we got busy and raised enough money for 2 regionals anyway.... We came to CD for help and we got it...
We ended up at our "local" Regional (in Portland) and at a distant regional (Las Vegas)

We received the Imagery award in Portland and we went to Las Vegas and BECAUSE we got picked by an Oregon team with experience (1425) and a powerhouse team (254) we won a regional. We also got Rookie All Star and got talked into going to Atlanta. We would NEVER have gone if we hadn't gone to a second regional. We scraped up that money too somehow... primarily on the backs of the parents and the PTA.

We got valuable experience in this which we parlayed into more fundraising this year.

If 254 and 1425 had not been in Las Vegas... or we had not been... we would probaby have not gone to Atlanta last year and this year would have been much more difficult.

We were INSPIRED by teams like 233 and 254 that attended Vegas... We came back with a desire to emulate them.... to become better....

This year again we had no NASA grant... but we started fundraising earlier...we were determined to be a better FIRST team... We worked offseason... we worked in season... We built a practice field for the region... We helped with a workshop and mentored FLL teams and had an FLL regional...

This year we were lucky enough to be 3rd seeded in our new Seattle Regional and to pick two terrific partners and to win it. We also got the EI award here and we won two more awards at Portland. On Galileo this year we were the 5th seed and played in the quarterfinals with some incredible teams.

I am not boasting here but we SAW what good teams were like in Las Vegas and in Portland... and in Atlanta....We came back energized... ready to take on a challenge.... We feel that we are well on our way to be a good FIRST team....

Without those big teams coming to small regionals ... rookies and local teams never get to see anything to aspire to.... Please keep them coming...

And that's all I have to say about that....