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

[Beth Sweet]

Originally Posted by JohnBoucher

What did this do to a teams freight costs in Michigan?

In short, for those teams with significant resources, it was beneficial. For teams without access to trucks and trailers, it was somewhat nightmare-ish. I know of teams who had to rent a U-Haul for every competition they attended. There are, contrary to seeming popular belief, teams who benefit from the Fed-Ex shipping.

I wanted to make 1 point in this thread that seems to be overlooked. For those teams interested in having the district system in their area, please be aware that you are required to provide volunteers (kinda takes away the meaning of volunteer doesn't it...) to every competition you attend. Whether you are a team with 100 people, or a team with 5, you must provide "volunteers" if you wish to participate in this system.

In general, I am very disappointed that the BoD has made this decision. I think that it is a big step away from FIRST's values, its mission, and its spoken intentions of the purpose of the program. Many statisticians have quoted you numbers above supporting their invalidations of what I say, I'll leave statistical interpretations up to the individual reading them. The district system invalidates many non-robotic contributions and truly turns this organization into a robotics competition. For many, that's all it has ever been. On a personal note, my contributions in the district system, and what I am able to bring to the table in it are so limited, I will have to seriously consider if I will continue to participate in FIRST.

I wish FIRST the best of luck in its undertaking of this program.

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by Beth Sweet

In short, for those teams with significant resources, it was beneficial. For teams without access to trucks and trailers, it was somewhat nightmare-ish. I know of teams who had to rent a U-Haul for every competition they attended. There are, contrary to seeming popular belief, teams who benefit from the Fed-Ex shipping.

In most parts of the country you can rent a U-Haul or similar truck for less than $50 a day. Even if you need to do that four times a season (to and from two competitions), $200 is a whole heck of a lot less than the true cost of shipping a robot-sized crate with Fed Ex (and remember, you only get one free ship and back). Or, find a nearby team who has a crate and ask them to take your robot too. 217 did this for their neighbors; likewise we brought 365's robot to IRI in our trailer.

Originally Posted by Beth Sweet

I wanted to make 1 point in this thread that seems to be overlooked. For those teams interested in having the district system in their area, please be aware that you are required to provide volunteers (kinda takes away the meaning of volunteer doesn't it...) to every competition you attend. Whether you are a team with 100 people, or a team with 5, you must provide "volunteers" if you wish to participate in this system.

If this is one of the compromises that lets us get twice the plays for less money, then so be it. As it is, most of the volunteers at regionals have/had some affiliation with a local team. Moreover, for larger teams, it is often challenging to find a competition-day job for many students (what should our CAD team and animators do? There is a limit to the useful number of scouts). Event volunteer jobs give these students a meaningful task for the day. As for teams of 5 having to give up a volunteer, I believe that exceptions for these situations could probably be made. Larger teams can more than make up the difference. Just because FIRST accepted the district system doesn't mean that every single rule must never change from the pilot season.

Originally Posted by Beth Sweet

In general, I am very disappointed that the BoD has made this decision. I think that it is a big step away from FIRST's values, its mission, and its spoken intentions of the purpose of the program. Many statisticians have quoted you numbers above supporting their invalidations of what I say, I'll leave statistical interpretations up to the individual reading them. The district system invalidates many non-robotic contributions and truly turns this organization into a robotics competition. For many, that's all it has ever been. On a personal note, my contributions in the district system, and what I am able to bring to the table in it are so limited, I will have to seriously consider if I will continue to participate in FIRST.

I wish FIRST the best of luck in its undertaking of this program.

I, and many other FIRSTers, also agree that culture changing awards deserve fair recognition. Again, who is to say that 2009's point structure is the only way that this will work?

[johnr]

Winning a cultural award at a traditional regional doesn't give you a right to play in that regionals finals or the next one you attend. Why should winning one at a district count for more or am i missing something?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by johnr

Winning a cultural award at a traditional regional doesn't give you a right to play in that regionals finals or the next one you attend. Why should winning one at a district count for more or am i missing something?

Winning a cultural award at a traditional regional gives you the right to play at the Championship. Why shouldn't winning one at a district give you an automatic qualification to play at the State championship ?

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by EricH

Winning a cultural award at a traditional regional gives you the right to play at the Championship. Why shouldn't winning one at a district give you an automatic qualification to play at the State championship ?

I would still counter with what Paul said:

Originally Posted by Paul Copioli

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.

Emphasis mine.

[Chris is me]

It's not a philosophical-only argument for many regions of the country, in my opinion. Just because it was a moot point last year doesn't mean it will be a moot point every year (catastrophic technical failure, strategy misjudge, etc. that don't factor into Chairman's could eliminate a team from the State Championships, and just the possibility of that is something that really bothers me. Perhaps it's motivated by selfishness (being that my team has won RCAs with non-competitive robots before), but all excluding the culture change winners would do is turn FIRST that much more into a robotics competition. What harm would come from including them "for sure"?

[johnr]

Wow, i never knew that you could actually win the most pretigious award in FIRST and not open the kop. After thinking about it, why not give the dca winners a bid. Most of those invites would be given back and used by the next team done the line.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by johnr

Wow, i never knew that you could actually win the most pretigious award in FIRST and not open the kop. After thinking about it, why not give the dca winners a bid. Most of those invites would be given back and used by the next team done the line.

If it took just opening the KoP to qualify for the State Championship, then there would be no need for a points system. Your last line illustrates my thoughts on the matter as contradictory as it seems; it would have little actual effect in most areas but it would just ensure that Chairman's doesn't get excluded.

[Francis-134]

The highlights of the recent Michigan District Event Model survey include:

- 94% of team leaders, mentors and team members rated their District Model experience as “good” or “excellent;”

...

- 80% of prior participants rated their District Event Model experience as the same or better than their experience in 2008 on multiple measures;
- 94% of tournament volunteers reported it was “likely” or “very likely” that they would volunteer next year and were satisfied with the training and support they received;

The statistician in me wants to know if these numbers are at all significant. Was this survey also given out a regional events? If so, are the numbers presented better, worse or about the same as a regional experience?

Just a thought.

With regards to the district system, I am a huge fan of being able to travel to distant regionals. If the district system does not allow for this, I will be greatly disappointed.

[Wayne C.]

Originally Posted by Francis-134

With regards to the district system, I am a huge fan of being able to travel to distant regionals. If the district system does not allow for this, I will be greatly disappointed.

This past spring we at the NJ regional team have been working hard on a model similar to the Michigan model but with our events on weekends at the very start of the competition season window. It might allow travel to distant Regionals in the later weeks. We wanted to implement in 2010 but it looks now like that will not happen.

It is true that teams who normally stay close to home would benefit from the large increase in the playing times and get a bigger bang for their buck from the robot. This appeals to many. FIRST would also see a reduction in Fedex usage- something that overpowered them this year.

I however agree with you that I would find it hard to support a model that took up the entire competition season and disallowed for travel to other regions. Frankly for us it is the travel and playing with new friends in other parts of the country that makes FIRST enjoyable. I would hate to think of being restricted to playing the same teams over and over again because of a restrictive model. No offense to the local teams but we see each other all the time and we do have an extensive off season calendar here in the NE.

The Championships might offer a travel op but I do not have much faith in what I am hearing about locations for the future. Sorry.

Of course the proper way to do all this is to have a much more extensive competition season with a local tier followed by a tier series of regionals and the championship. I cant see that big a change occurring any time soon since it would cost $$$ and lots of time for the volunteer base.

Travel to new regions, especially warm ones after a cold hard build season, can be a great incentive for the team and a goal to work for. And if I wanted to play the locals continuously I would go back to coaching sports.


OK - off the soap box

WC

[Fe_Will]

Originally Posted by Wayne C.

Travel to new regions, especially warm ones after a cold hard build season, can be a great incentive for the team and a goal to work for. And if I wanted to play the locals continuously I would go back to coaching sports.

We feel the same way... March is always a good time to get away from the wet

[IKE]

I hope that FIRST never stops changing things. For almost 2 decades they have been trying and experimenting with different ways of doing things. If you ever get a chance to read some of the old manuals, go check them out. There has been a lot of change, and most of it has been for the better.

One of my favorite stories that the old timers on the team (I personally am a young pup with only 5 years under my belt) is one of the first years our team was involved with FIRST, they had a material mandate. They wanted a net to hold a bunch of balls, and you were only allowed to use certain materials. One poor student spent the entire build season unraveling some rope (allowed) and then re-weaving it into a net (you could not purchase netting).

I am glad that things have changed from those days. I hope things continue to change, and I hope I have the flexibility to adapt to those changes.

[Paul Copioli]

That sounds like 1999. We did the same thing!

[Steve W]

Originally Posted by Wayne C.

This past spring we at the NJ regional team have been working hard on a model similar to the Michigan model but with our events on weekends at the very start of the competition season window. It might allow travel to distant Regionals in the later weeks. We wanted to implement in 2010 but it looks now like that will not happen.

It is true that teams who normally stay close to home would benefit from the large increase in the playing times and get a bigger bang for their buck from the robot. This appeals to many. FIRST would also see a reduction in Fedex usage- something that overpowered them this year.

I however agree with you that I would find it hard to support a model that took up the entire competition season and disallowed for travel to other regions. Frankly for us it is the travel and playing with new friends in other parts of the country that makes FIRST enjoyable. I would hate to think of being restricted to playing the same teams over and over again because of a restrictive model. No offense to the local teams but we see each other all the time and we do have an extensive off season calendar here in the NE.

The Championships might offer a travel op but I do not have much faith in what I am hearing about locations for the future. Sorry.

Of course the proper way to do all this is to have a much more extensive competition season with a local tier followed by a tier series of regionals and the championship. I cant see that big a change occurring any time soon since it would cost $$$ and lots of time for the volunteer base.

Travel to new regions, especially warm ones after a cold hard build season, can be a great incentive for the team and a goal to work for. And if I wanted to play the locals continuously I would go back to coaching sports.


OK - off the soap box

WC

This is an issue that I have with the 2 different models. Why should teams that have the benefit of doing both while other teams cannot. If you are in the one model then you should have to stay there with no crossing over to the other unless both models are open to all teams in all areas.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

... excluding the culture change winners would do is turn FIRST that much more into a robotics competition. What harm would come from including them "for sure"?

While MI had 7 district events last year, they identified 16 geographical areas which might support regions in the future. Giving "for sure" bids to award winners, even biggie awards like Cmn and EI, would have created so many pre-allocated slots that there wouldn't be room at the State Championship for all robot winners. Thus the point system was devised, based on another "scholarship as sports"-type event competition model. In addition, the culture changing awards had special provision that if you won at a district but did not qualify on points, you still would present at State (but without bringing your robot). I had several serious reservations pre-season regarding the fairness of the point schedule, but they all worked out correctly. The only problem I still have is the philosophical discussion regarding the culture changing awards. If awarding or not awarding significant numbers of points for those awards doesn't change the invitation list, then why not award big points for big awards just for the symbolism of recognizing the significance of the awards?

Originally Posted by Francis-134

The statistician in me wants to know if these numbers are at all significant. Was this survey also given out a regional events? If so, are the numbers presented better, worse or about the same as a regional experience?

The survey was distributed the same way other FIRST surveys were: emailed to volunteers and team leaders, with the request to forward it to students. Several of the questions compared the district experience to former regional experiences. Assuming rookies didn't "stuff the ballot box" on those questions, the district model does compare well with previous regionals.

With regards to the district system, I am a huge fan of being able to travel to distant regionals. If the district system does not allow for this, I will be greatly disappointed.

MI teams could travel out of state to other regionals. Assuming the entire country doesn't switch to districts, this would still be available. You crated and shipped your robot as usual, and you paid the regular second-regional entry fee. About a dozen MI teams did this. Other MI teams treated more-remote districts as their travel event. After all, while getting out of the cold is a consideration, part of the travel experience is simply going someplace different and being with your teammates in the hotel. It doesn't matter how long the bus ride is or that you had to fly. Many other MI teams were able to stay close to home and conserve costs by not needing hotels. It was their choice.

One option that could be implemented in the future would be to allow teams to cross "State Championship" boundaries (whatever those events end up being called) and go to out-of-area districts. This could work several ways. A simple one would be to allow teams to schedule a 3rd district event out-of-area on a space available basis; points earned would not count toward their championship. Another would be to allow teams to request transfer to a different area, or request dual-area enrollment. This would allow remote teams like Houghton to request to transfer to the WI/MN area (if one would exist), or to request to play one of their districts in say, Green Bay and the other in Traverse City, declaring ahead of time which Championship event they were trying to qualify for.