FIRST in Michigan Thoughts/Impressions

[BPetry234]

Originally Posted by rocketperson44

Absolutely not. That's why everyone seems to have liked the system for the most part, and wants it to be implemented elsewhere.

Yeah but look at from someone who isn't in Michigan. Thunder Chickens played in something like 90 matches. That double our number and we went to two regionals and ATL. Explain to me how that is fair. It would be awesome if every state was like that but it's not. Maybe teams shouldn't be able to go to a regional to make it fair. I don't know...

[SamC]

I'm not entirely sure if this question belongs here, but I didn't think the question required it's own thread. [Feel free to move it]

This is by no means a jab at the credibility of the Michigan teams competing, but as talk continues of expanding the district structure elsewhere I'm curious how one aspect of the modified(?) competition rules worked.

Obviously it's been known that teams had to "bag & zip-tie" their robots and bring them to their competition site. But how was this enforced? Was their some way of knowing/checking that a robot in fact stayed untouched between competitions? I assume FIRST instated some method of checking this beyond gracious professionalism, scouts honor, etc. such as unique/not-easily-reproducible ties or stickers that would make it known if the seal had been broken. But I wasn't too clear how that worked.

[Paul Copioli]

Thunder Chickens played in something like 90 matches.

It was 85 matches, but who is counting?

SamC,

The zip ties were extremely unique with recorded serial numbers printed on them. We had a limited amount of zip ties with the serial numbers pre-printed. You had to have someone not associated with your team sign a zip tie in and out. We primarily had 469 sign ours. When you got to a competition, only an inspector could open your bag and seal it up (at least witness the opening and sealing).

Paul

[Jack Jones]

Originally Posted by BPetry234

Yeah but look at from someone who isn't in Michigan. Thunder Chickens played in something like 90 matches. That double our number and we went to two regionals and ATL. Explain to me how that is fair. It would be awesome if every state was like that but it's not. Maybe teams shouldn't be able to go to a regional to make it fair. I don't know...

Consider the rookies from your state whose season consisted of 11 matches each, which is 1/4 the number that Cyber Blue got to play. I can't explain to you how that is fair either. What I can tell you is that it's better to light a candle than curse the darkness.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

Consider the rookies from your state whose season consisted of 11 matches each, which is 1/4 the number that Cyber Blue got to play. I can't explain to you how that is fair either. What I can tell you is that it's better to light candle than curse the darkness.

So there are two guys who are competing to solve a labyrinth.

The first guy pays $20 to enter the labyrinth. The labyrinth is big and scary and he doesn't like it very much. It is dark.

The second guy opens his wallet to pay to enter the labyrinth. Before he walks in, someone says "we're piloting this new program to make it easier on labyrinth solvers". They only charge him $18, and then hand him a candle...

I feel like the first guy, sometimes.

-John

[Alex Golec]

This twisted concept of "fair" truly irks me. Consider this:

There is a team ABC that has everything: collects sponsor money from corporate giants, builds beautiful robots - and practice robots, and dominates in competitions. We are jealous of them, right?

The teams that cry "unfair" and demand justice by doing everything short of tying one arm behind Team A's backs will not improve themselves. They seek to cripple team ABC and call it "fair."

The teams that see team A and ask "how can we achieve this?" will succeed. They will improve themselves and make themselves available to improve others.

Perhaps this comparison is not the best, or even valid, since team structure is (mostly) outside of FIRST's control, but the idea is the same: bringing everyone down to the lowest common denominator does not create growth.

Let's make the world more fair by growing the good elements of this system.

-Alex

[Cory]

Originally Posted by Alex469

This twisted concept of "fair" truly irks me. Consider this:

There is a team ABC that has everything: collects sponsor money from corporate giants, builds beautiful robots - and practice robots, and dominates in competitions. We are jealous of them, right?

The teams that cry "unfair" and demand justice by doing everything short of tying one arm behind Team A's backs will not improve themselves. They seek to cripple team ABC and call it "fair."

The teams that see team A and ask "how can we achieve this?" will succeed. They will improve themselves and make themselves available to improve others.

Perhaps this comparison is not the best, or even valid, since team structure is (mostly) outside of FIRST's control, but the idea is the same: bringing everyone down to the lowest common denominator does not create growth.

Let's make the world more fair by growing the good elements of this system.

-Alex

The difference here is those outside of Michigan cannot participate. We don't have the chance to pay $5000 for two events, instead of $10,000 for two events, regardless of how hard we try.

FIRST is making the rules, and we're all playing the same game, yet one group of people is playing with a different set of rules for a different price.

I don't like the districts very much, but I definitely wish we had gotten over twice the plays for half the money (Especially when you consider that not a single dime of the money you pay FIRST in registration fees actually covers the cost of a district/regional event).

[johnr]

Now that the PILOT program is done, when might we hear what next year will look like? Is there some sort of rough time line? I'm sure teams in michigan and across country would like to know what to expect as soon as possible.

[GaryVoshol]

Then Cory, you need to start a FiC. FiM was not a creation of FIRST, but of concerned people in Michigan who realized there was no opportunity for team growth in the state without a change in the way things were done. It was a way to figure out how to give Michigan teams the opportunity to attend events in their own state. The choice was to create another very expensive regional, or to come up with a new model. There were several reasons why teams from outside the state couldn't enter in this first PILOT year of the model.

The Pros:

• More game play
• Lower costs all around: Lower entrance fees, lower travel fees, lower costs for events, lower costs for robot shipping.
• Less time lost from school and work
• Better opportunities for rookie teams
• Bagging/unbagging rules that replace a day in the pit with a day in your shop.
• Exposure in the communities holding districts. In areas that would never get a regional this is especially important. It was apparent in Traverse City that the organizing committee made sure the community realized this was an event. It was covered by 2 tv stations; I met one man who drove 50 miles to see it because he saw the tv coverage. The mayor and members of the city council were there; one was MC for a day. They said half the city was involved in sponsorship, and I don't think they were exaggerating much.

The Cons:

• Lack of cross-border teams. At our events we missed seeing our friends from ON, IL, IN, and lots of other places.
• Some teams in far-flung areas still have to travel (in Michigan, the Upper Peninsula and the northern part of the Lower Peninsula). This gets back to the issue of fairness: life isn't fair if by fair you mean equal.
• Bagging/unbagging rules that replace a day in the pit with a day in your shop. Yes I know that this was a pro as well. But not enough teams took full advantage of it. We have to get away from the idea that the last day of build season is the first day at the competition. Teams need to have ready-to-go robots in Feb, not March. Especially with the field connectivity issues that can't be solved until you get to the event, there were far too many teams not showing up for one of the few practice rounds, which resulted in robotless trailers in the first few rounds of competition.

The Hazards:

• There are at least 3 things needed for a district model to work:
  1. Concentration of teams (This is an issue in several areas of the country)
  2. Concentration of volunteers (For example, MN has lots of teams, but they are mostly new. How many experienced volunteers do they have to fill key positions such as FTA, lead queuer, head ref, field supervisor?)
  3. An organizing committee (FiM didn't just happen; it took the hard work of a lot of people. People who you have seen around for many years. People who have backups at their home teams so they can work with the committee without their teams folding.)
• Some district events were run much better than others.
• Some district venues are better suited than others. All had pros and cons. Some didn't have enough seating, others had a better arena than I've seen at regionals. Some had sub-par pits. Is there enough parking? Having some events in high schools presents unique challenges: how does the school keep running with all the visitors? One thing that didn't become apparent until at the events was getting the robots and carts through doorways: can the middle barrier be removed to allow a double-wide passage?

The Opportunities:

• Many areas of the country could adopt a district model entirely, provided they have the 3 items of critical mass listed above. Areas that come to my mind are New England, New York/New Jersey, other areas of the Midwest, the Mid-Atlantic states, California (maybe N/S separately), maybe Texas with some surrounding states, maybe Ontario. Harder in the Plains, the Rockies, the Northwest, and the Southeast. Nearly impossible internationally and in places like Hawaii.
• If several more district models were initiated, perhaps there could be cross-border registrations on a space-available basis. Teams could "visit" in other championship areas; teams in the fringes of their own championship area could apply to transfer to a closer or more accessable championship event.
• Most importantly, there are many aspects that could be implemented immediately world-wide. Bagging vs shipping, make shipping optional. Cut down on full practice days, giving more time for more rounds of matches.

It remains to be seen what will happen to the district/championship model. Not all the data is in. Some people may have vehement opinions against it. But those who I spoke with were very supportive.

[Dan Petrovic]

I don't think it's any coincidence that four of the six teams in the finals on Einstein were from Michigan.

The fact that teams can go to more competitions for less money gives a huge advantage to those teams because they get much more exposure to the competition and are at their peak of performance.

[Dan Petrovic]

I don't think it's any coincidence that four of the six teams in the finals on Einstein were from Michigan.

The fact that teams can go to more competitions for less money gives a huge advantage to those teams because they get much more exposure to the competition and are at their peak of performance.

I think the district idea should spread to the rest of the country, but keep regionals going so that teams who want to travel to other places and meet new teams can still do that.

[The Lucas]

Originally Posted by SamC

Obviously it's been known that teams had to "bag & zip-tie" their robots and bring them to their competition site. But how was this enforced? Was their some way of knowing/checking that a robot in fact stayed untouched between competitions? I assume FIRST instated some method of checking this beyond gracious professionalism, scouts honor, etc. such as unique/not-easily-reproducible ties or stickers that would make it known if the seal had been broken. But I wasn't too clear how that worked.

All the rules regarding the "bag & zip-tie" system are in the FiM supplement. To me, the only major advantage here is the 8 hour robot access period during the week of the event.

IMHO 8 hours in your own shop (broken up how you see fit) is much more useful than 12 hours in the pits during practice day. For any other teams it is a rules violation to work on your whole competition robot in your own shop. I am also not sure how <R36> (40Lbs limit for custom fab parts like withholding allowance) applies? (anyone from FiM want to enlighten me) I mean the rule specifically mentions parts brought to an event, so if you add them before an event do they count towards the limit?

As for the more matches for less money, I think a lot of credit has to go to all the FiM volunteers for their extra work to keep the costs down. Hopefully, observations from this program can help create a program that will keep the costs down and matches up in some of the less dense FRC areas.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

The Opportunities:

• Many areas of the country could adopt a district model entirely, provided they have the 3 items of critical mass listed above. Areas that come to my mind are New England, New York/New Jersey, other areas of the Midwest, the Mid-Atlantic states, California (maybe N/S separately), maybe Texas with some surrounding states, maybe Ontario. Harder in the Plains, the Rockies, the Northwest, and the Southeast. Nearly impossible internationally and in places like Hawaii.
• If several more district models were initiated, perhaps there could be cross-border registrations on a space-available basis. Teams could "visit" in other championship areas; teams in the fringes of their own championship area could apply to transfer to a closer or more accessable championship event.
• Most importantly, there are many aspects that could be implemented immediately world-wide. Bagging vs shipping, make shipping optional. Cut down on full practice days, giving more time for more rounds of matches.

Gary, you've already seen my take on putting a district system in CA. I'd have to agree on the bagging/shipping, etc.

Here's a thought, and maybe this could be implemented next year in MI: Should not enough teams register at a given district, instead of opening it up to MI teams to have a third event, open it up to "outside" teams to "visit" with, say, a week or two of "outside only" before "inside" teams can register. If it's a team with districts in their own area, and they choose to attend in a district in a different area, any points earned apply to their home area; otherwise, no points are earned. Just a crazy idea that maybe isn't so crazy.

[MattB703]

Originally Posted by EricH

Gary, you've already seen my take on putting a district system in CA. I'd have to agree on the bagging/shipping, etc.

Here's a thought, and maybe this could be implemented next year in MI: Should not enough teams register at a given district, instead of opening it up to MI teams to have a third event, open it up to "outside" teams to "visit" with, say, a week or two of "outside only" before "inside" teams can register. ....

This is a great idea. I really missed the opertunity to play with visiting teams from Illinios, Indiana, Ohio, and Ontario.

[Raumiester2010]

Originally Posted by MattB703

This is a great idea. I really missed the opertunity to play with visiting teams from Illinios, Indiana, Ohio, and Ontario.

I agree... i missed seeing 1114 at Yippsi (GLR) (yes i will still keep calling it that) and many other of our buddies from over the borders such as the first Chile team. I was bummed about how we only got to see some of our buddy teams at Atlanta and even then they where in different divisions.

I hope that this district program will spread because it is an excellent opportunity for teams to get more playing time with their robots (the reason most of us do this for), it makes competition much more stiff.