**FIRST EMAIL**/FIRST Adds District Event Model Alternative to FRC Program

[EricVanWyk]

Originally Posted by EricLeifermann

The opt-in thing is cool i guess, but how about an opt-out? My team is located in the western side of the UP. The closest district last year was 8.5 hours away! We had to travel down state 2 times and it didn't save us any money.

I said it last year and I'm going to say it again, Nobody thinks about logistics! Yes we got 2 comps for the price of 1 but we had to travel farther than anybody else in MI. The farthest anybody in the LP had to travel was what 5 hours maybe? It takes us that long just to get to the bridge! And we have to do it 4 times(there and back 2 times)! Thats alot of miles and alot of money to spend on a bus and hotel's.

I'm all for the district events I just want them to change the lines and allow more than 1 state to be involved, I want to compete against more and different teams!

This sounds like you folk were a special case that could easily be handled with a tiny bit of flexibility. I'd bet that a polite and well written inquiry would make all the difference. The problem would be that FIRST may be afraid that opening the door for you would open the door for other teams' complaints and whining.

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by EricVanWyk

The problem would be that FIRST may be afraid that opening the door for you would open the door for other teams' complaints and whining.

FIRST is a company providing a service for a fee -- this is "customer feedback," not "whining." I think your point would be better made if you didn't take shots at other teams.

[Aren_Hill]

I know there was some idea's being thrown around talking at IRI wanting to get a midwest system setup for "districts" that involved a combo of Illinois ohio indiana and wisconsin (not all obviously)

[EricVanWyk]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

FIRST is a company providing a service for a fee -- this is "customer feedback," not "whining." I think your point would be better made if you didn't take shots at other teams.

Sorry Rick, point taken.

I attempted to use the word "whining" as short hand for "insistence that no team have an unfair advantage over another team, even if this means reducing the benefit to all teams involved". From my limited point of view, I see many instances where fairness is over or under weighted, and this type of request has the definite potential to be one such instance. No particular team would be hurt if EricLeifermann's team played as if they were in Wisconsin, but a Detroit team could use it to insist that they be allowed to play as if they were in Ohio. Rather than tell the hypothetical team to suck it up, the uP team could be penalized with very expensive travel.

I do believe that there are entities in FIRST that are whiny, but I also believe that the hypothetical entities are "whinier" than the real ones.

[Tetraman]

Here is one thing I kinda wonder about: Would it be possible to just pick 8-12 regionals that are around each other and have them be "Districts"? All you'd have to do is set up a "Regional Championship".

[Paul Copioli]

The apparent lack of changes to the points system is upsetting, since then the choice between districts and events also requires planners to factor in how much they want to shift the way awards are valued at events. It seems like what are extremely important issues to at least me (devaluing of Chairman's and EI awards with respect to qualifying, practically no reward for winning FIRST's most important awards, other issues that have been beaten to death) remain unchanged here, so I guess for the intents and purposes of state competition, the state events shift more toward "the best robots and oh here's this other award stuff too".

I was really hoping at least as many points as the winning alliance for Chairman's / EI, or culture changing awards not being completely irrelevant for qualifications. I mean you get what you celebrate, right?

I will start this post with stating that I agree with you that I think the points for the culture changing awards should be 5, just like the tech awards.

However, it is a philosophical argument only. The fact is that 95% of chairman's award capable teams would have qualified under the FiM district point system anyway. In Michigan, all 7 teams easily qualified for the state championship.

In addition (this one will raise some eyebrows), we are trying to change the culture. In order to do that we need to get the random person's attention. Who is going to do that better? A Chairman's award winner like team 27, 33, or 1114 or some team who puts so much energy on the chairman's award that they forget that they have to compete with a robot? Seriously, a chairman's team is well rounded. Well rounded! To me, that means they should be an example in every aspect, not just the ones judged in the chairman's judging room.

Just like it is not all about the robots, it is not all about winning the Chairman's Award.

Paul

[Katie_UPS]

"My name is Paul Coplioli and I make good points"

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Paul Copioli

Seriously, a chairman's team is well rounded. Well rounded! To me, that means they should be an example in every aspect, not just the ones judged in the chairman's judging room.

Just like it is not all about the robots, it is not all about winning the Chairman's Award.

Paul

Well said, Paul. Adam Heard and I were just discussing this yesterday actually. A true Chairmans winner should not only boast confidence & competitiveness off the field, but on the field as well.

[GaryVoshol]

I concur with Paul's opinion, that the number of points granted for awards doesn't have an effect. I did a study on FiM team rankings, adding in points for Chairmans, EI, Rookie AS, in proportion to the points given for Winners, Finalists, Semi-finalists, plus 5 points for all awards whether cultural or technical. While it juggled the positions somewhat, it did not substantially change who would be invited to the MI Championship. The last 3 teams that qualified would have been bumped lower in the order, replaced with teams that under the current structure ended up about 5 or 10 positions below. But because some teams that qualified declined their invitations, all these teams involved ended up at the MI Championship anyway. In fact all through districts, there were people who were looking for a team to serve as a "poster child" to argue the points should have been awarded: Look, here's a team that got XXX super award and couldn't go to the Championship. Didn't happen.

So the counterargument can be made, why not have a point structure that recognizes the importance of awards like Chairmans. It doesn't matter in the overall qualifications to the Championship. It just increases the point totals of some of the teams that qualify. So why not do it, only for symbolism?

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by EricLeifermann

The opt-in thing is cool i guess, but how about an opt-out? My team is located in the western side of the UP. The closest district last year was 8.5 hours away! We had to travel down state 2 times and it didn't save us any money.

I said it last year and I'm going to say it again, Nobody thinks about logistics! Yes we got 2 comps for the price of 1 but we had to travel farther than anybody else in MI. The farthest anybody in the LP had to travel was what 5 hours maybe? It takes us that long just to get to the bridge! And we have to do it 4 times(there and back 2 times)! Thats alot of miles and alot of money to spend on a bus and hotel's.

I'm all for the district events I just want them to change the lines and allow more than 1 state to be involved, I want to compete against more and different teams!

One thing to consider was that last year was special. Many people are resistant to change. If teams were given the option of participating or not participating, less teams would have participated. If enough teams didn't participate, it would have doomed the system because there wouldn't have been the required density of teams. This wouldn't have been because the system wasn't good, but because people were resistant to change.

Now that a vast majority of Michigan has said they like the system, letting a few teams like yours opt-out wouldn't hurt anything. You might get a different response if you bring your objections up to the right people this year.

[Madison]

FIRST is requiring that a registered non-profit organize district-model events in 2011 and beyond. Can someone involved with FiM describe what liability such an organization takes on if they should organize such events and how that compares to current arrangements?

[Mark McLeod]

Can't comment on FiM, but that's how SBPLI and the Long Island Regional has always operated.

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by Mark McLeod

Can't comment on FiM, but that's how SBPLI and the Long Island Regional has always operated.

I believe its also a requirement for those who host FLL and FTC events. IIRC

[BrianT103]

I really like the idea of having district event structures, but I also see the need within the FIRST community to get away from the idea that district events have to be limited within a state boundary.

Having a Mid-Atlantic District Event Structure with Eastern PA, Delaware, New Jersey, New York City and Long Island is perhaps THE most feasible area in the nation to have a district event structure. With less then a 4 hour drive time from the furthest ends of the district boundaries and with a max 2.5 hour drive time to the proposed site of the District Championship (NYC Javits Center), this would be the perfect location to test drive the district event structure. This area already has an extremely strong volunteer base and a very experienced technical crew. The proposed geographical area also would not "leave out" any teams, as the western PA teams still have the Pittsburgh Regional and Upstate New York teams have FLR.


The Mid-Atlantic District would have a multitude of venue locations to chose from, with off-season events already occuring at 25, 222, 341, 365, 75+1403 team's schools.

The only reason why I would not see the Mid-Atlantic district not coming to fruitition would be a lack of communication and/or collaboartion between regional directors. Other then that, the Mid-Atlantic district has everything in order to become a great success.

[IndySam]

Wow I hate to bring up the fairness thing but I can't help myself.

Michigan teams are going to get more plays per team, more bang for their buck while the rest of the country is still shelling out full price. Happy for my MI friends but quite frankly that sucks for the rest of us.

The Boilermaker regional once again will bear the brunt of the burden without the Michigan teams that have supported that regional in the past.

Starting in 2011 we are going really to have a two class system, what will FIRST do to help out the teams not eligible for district events?