Round Robin on Einstein

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by tennispro9911

Can anyone think of a truely fair tiebreaker?

That would be a concern.

Also, I know no alliance would ever tank a match or anything like that, but you also can create the situation where one alliance is up 2-0 and guarenteed a spot in the finals, and another is down 0-2, and already eliminated. You make it so that a match (or two) could be played that doesn't have any chance of affecting the standings.

For that reason, the last two group matches are played simultaneously in the World Cup. This came about several cycles ago when the last match scheduled didn't mean anything if the teams tied, but if one of them won, a team watching from the sidelines would advance. Both teams playing that last match were content to bunker down for the tie. While we might say that GP would never allow this to happen, why tempt it?

If those two problems could be addressed, I'd be interested.

Another alternative would be a double-elimination tournament:
Round 1
- A beats C
- G beats N
Round 2 ("loser's bracket")
- N beats C
Round 3 ("winner's bracket")
- G beats A; G advances to finals
Round 4
- N beats A
Finals
- N plays G. N must win twice to take the Championship; G would only be required to win once.

No team is eliminated until they lose twice. The only variable is if the finals go to one match or two.

Edit: A double-elimination scheme would work for regionals and the division finals as well.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

It's not the fault of the competition itself. It's the endless parade of people giving speeches, which kills me because people have been complaining about too many speeches going on for too long for years! So what's FIRSTs response? Get more speakers! Way to know your audience guys!

Do you really believe you are the target audience? I have a feeling I'm not.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by JVN

Do you really believe you are the target audience? I have a feeling I'm not.

Ed may not be the target audience, but he certainly isn't the only one I've heard complaining either. To nobody's surprise, high schoolers would much rather watch robots than people talking. I like most of the speeches, and I think they're very important, but increasing the ratio of talking versus robots when the students are already fidgety does demonstrate a lack of understanding of the audience.

[JaneYoung]

Originally Posted by jgannon

but increasing the ratio of talking versus robots when the students are already fidgety does demonstrate a lack of understanding of the audience.

The speeches are an opportunity for those whom FIRST develops partnerships with to be in the spotlight for a bit. That time in the spotlight is like the sponsor name on the robot.

There are no easy answers in managing the time.

[Elgin Clock]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

The speeches are an opportunity for those whom FIRST develops partnerships with to be in the spotlight for a bit. That time in the spotlight is like the sponsor sticker on the robot.
There are no easy answers in managing the time.

The root of that problem is that only 2 times a year in FRC is the event given to a global audience with the soapboxes at each leading to a lot of talking.
Kickoff, & The Championship Event.
(I know some other events are webcast, but none get as much viewing time as these 2 I'm willing to bet anything on that.)

To solve this, maybe FIRST or the general community can organize a suppliers/sponsors/supporters summit to be broadcast to the FIRST community as a quarterly broadcast, or even in e-mailed video format to alleviate some of the speaking during the big show.
Youtube & many other media oulets exist, let's use them for their educational purpose & throw some speeches up there for example.

I know The Championship Event & Kickoff, & the program is not "all about the robots", this is certainly true, but what draws us in to the FRC program, and the Kickoff, & the Championship Event?
Not the promise of hearing a speaker talk (no matter how great they are) but the promise of some exciting matches on the competition playing field, & the possibility of seeing your own team make it to the big show & go all the way. (of course all while being inspired by science & technology)

I guess what I'm trying to say here, is let's not criticize any speakers, or the time of their speeches, or their failure to "reach the intended audience", because they deserve to be there as much as we do after all the support they give the program, but let's strive to find a nice balance of speaking & competing while not favoring one over the other, but also knowing that each has it's place in the grand picture & try to find how the two have in the past & refine how they may be able to compliment each other in the future.

If a moderator wants to move all the posts in here referring to speech vs. robot time discussion to another thread since we've strayed from the original round-robin format proposal here, feel free to do so.

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by JVN

Do you really believe you are the target audience? I have a feeling I'm not.

I mean the kids, John.
Parading an assortment of adults in front of over stimulated kids while anchoring then to the seats with the promise of even further excitement and then talk at them for long periods of time has not proven to be a popular choice amongst the masses.

[smurfgirl]

Originally Posted by tennispro9911

Ties. Matchups matter a lot. Matchups mean everything especially because of defense. A beats B which beats C which beats A. With close matches, this will happen a fair amount. I'd bet at least every other year you are going to have a tie, which means you need to be able to break the tie.

Can anyone think of a truely fair tiebreaker?

I have to agree with this. I love the idea- I think it would be more fun to play in a tournament structured like that, and more fun to watch it as well- but I was wondering what exactly would have to be done about the ties. As tennispro mentioned, certain methods seem more appropriate for certain games- maybe there would be a different tie-breaker method each year that the GDC thought would work best with the game?

[smurfgirl]

Originally Posted by Koko Ed

I mean the kids, John.
Parading an assortment of adults in front of over stimulated kids while anchoring then to the seats with the promise of even further excitement and then talk at them for long periods of time has not proven to be a popular choice amongst the masses.

Koko Ed is right, once again. I don't think I've ever seen anyone stay excited through all of the awards and the closing ceremony- in fact, I've seen a lot of people who have fallen asleep. It not that the kids don't respect the people speaking or have zero interest in what they say, it's just that they've been running around for three days between two buildings, staying up too late at night, and have been intensely involved in something they are very passionate about which is just about to get more exciting... and then someone who is presenting an award gets up and goes off on what is a tangent from the excitement on Einstein, a 20 minute speech with a bit of a political agenda, which keeps sounding like it is going to end but continues anyway. I've enjoyed some of the speeches I've heard, but it really is hard to have your robot ready to go on Einstein and forget about all of that excitement and adrenaline so you can sit patiently and focus on someone giving a long speech.

[Elgin Clock]

Originally Posted by smurfgirl

I have to agree with this. I love the idea- I think it would be more fun to play in a tournament structured like that, and more fun to watch it as well- but I was wondering what exactly would have to be done about the ties. As tennispro mentioned, certain methods seem more appropriate for certain games- maybe there would be a different tie-breaker method each year that the GDC thought would work best with the game?

That's an interesting proposal. As if I didn't already have a love/hate relationship towards the GDC & the rules after all the crazy rules in the 8 years I've been involved, what if they decided that in the event of a tie the rules were changed up a bit for that tie-breaker?

For example, in the event of a tie this year, we could have had a rule that said the tie breaker game would have added an additional trackball into the mix for each team (ala' Beantown Blitz this year).
(Just as an example).

The change for the tie-breaker would have to be something that would swing the game in favor of an alliance who understood the game completely, because with a tie you've already proven you are (so far) equally matched playing it "regular style". (Ever get bored playing a competitive racing video game in the normal way, so you challenged an equally matched friend to race the course with you backwards for example & see who could handle the change?)

In this idea, you would throw in some leverage for the alliance who knows the game inside & out & would see who the best is by seeing which alliance could prove themselves & play it (even more) strategically than the first 2 matches.

[dlavery]

After hearing about the passing of Randy Pausch earlier today, I spent most of this morning re-reading "The Last Lecture" (I suspect a lot of other folks have been engaged in similar pursuits - www.thelastlecture.com with the video of his lecture has been swamped all day long). As I was reading through, one chapter in particular made me think of this discussion. The chapter refers to an incident in which his wife manages to back one of their vehicles into the other, impressively denting both. Then follows a discussion about the value of things, and how we perceive what is important. The chapter closes with the following admonition:

"Not everything needs to be fixed."

-dave






.

[Elgin Clock]

Originally Posted by dlavery

After hearing about the passing of Randy Pausch earlier today, I spent most of this morning re-reading "The Last Lecture" (I suspect a lot of other folks have been engaged in similar pursuits - www.thelastlecture.com with the video of his lecture has been swamped all day long). As I was reading through, one chapter in particular made me think of this discussion. The chapter refers to an incident in which his wife manages to back one of their vehicles into the other, impressively denting both. Then follows a discussion about the value of things, and how we perceive what is important. The chapter closes with the following admonition:

"Not everything needs to be fixed."

-dave






.

Are you referring to the tournament structure, the time at events that the speakers take, or both?

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by Elgin Clock

Are you referring to the tournament structure, the time at events that the speakers take, or both?

One of the wonderful things about Pausch's treatise is that each person sees something in it a little differently than others. They learn from it that which they are able to glean, and take away from it what they can.

What do you think was meant by the quote?

-dave



.

[rees2001]

I try to get us back on topic & keep us off topic.

As for the round robin tournament, it could work if there wasn't 20 minutes of speeches in between each match. People would lose track of who beat who & who has to play who. And just think of trying to explain this to somebody who is only has a slight understanding of the current elimination structure. But it is much more likely to provide the best 2 alliances in the Finals. I guess you have to look at the problem you are trying to solve. Is the best alliance not winning the Championship? No. So I guess it comes down to getting the recognition for being the second best alliance. For all we know the second best alliance could have been the one the eventual champs faced in the finals of their division.

Now for the speeches. For those of you that have a DVR. Next January when the NFL Super bowl is happening, pause the game for twenty minutes every time there is a TV timeout. While your at it you could read a few pages from Oprah's book of the month. Or for those of you that feel too educated to watch football, set down your book and watch football for 20 minutes every other page you turn.

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by rees2001

I try to get us back on topic & keep us off topic.

If you read the posts above carefully, you may realize that we have never strayed off topic at all.




.

[R.C.]

Originally Posted by rees2001

Now for the speeches. For those of you that have a DVR. Next January when the NFL Super bowl is happening, pause the game for twenty minutes every time there is a TV timeout. While your at it you could read a few pages from Oprah's book of the month. Or for those of you that feel too educated to watch football, set down your book and watch football for 20 minutes every other page you turn.

I agree, I have fell asleep every year. I don't do it on purpose and I am not trying to disrespect the sponsors and spokesmen of FIRST. But it just happens.