Winning Multiple Regionals

[Michael Corsetto]

I just did a little research on the blue alliance, and I saw that your team lost to teams 40 and 20 in the Boston Regional finals this year. Both of these teams won another regional before Boston. Is this the reason why you don't think teams should be allowed to compete in more than one regional? You feel robbed of something that would of been yours had 20 and 40 not been there? Are you proposing that teams 20 and 40 are ungracious because they beat you? You honestly think it would be more inspiring to limit the talent at your competition in order for you to win, rather than play 3 hard fought matches and lose in the finals, knowing you gave some great teams a run for their money? Thats not very competitive at all. I'm just trying to imagine how you would be proud of your "win" in that case. It would be like saying "Yeah, we really didn't have the better robot, but lucky for us, the better robots aren't allowed to compete at our regional, so we won!" Just getting to the finals is a feat that my former team was only able to accomplish once in its 11 year history, you should be proud of what your team was able to accomplished this year, and not take away from what other teams accomplished either.

Mike C.

[Cory]

It saddens me to see that people want to dumb down the competitions.

For crying out loud, you are talking about a COMPETITIVE sporting event. This is not pinewood derby. This is not a science fair. This is a sport, and in sports there are winners and losers.

Before I joined 254 I was on a team that did not enjoy much success on the field. While I was on 100 we had a good robot, a couple mediocre-average robots, and one god-awful robot. We made the eliminations only 3 times in my 4 years. Statistically speaking our best season was my senior year, when we were Silicon Valley Finalists, despite having one of the worst robots I have ever laid eyes on.

Even when I was on 100 I wanted to play with or against the big boys. How do you make yourself better if you aren't practicing and competing with/against the best of the best?

I'd have been angry if we weren't able to play with and against those teams because they had already won an event. What's the fun in knowing that the field of teams is being handicapped?

It's easy for me to say this now, as my team has won two regionals per year all three years I have been a mentor, but even now I am continually inspired by teams like 1114 who construct machines which totally dominate.

Sometimes it is shocking how simple some of the top machines are. For example, 90% of FIRST teams could build robots similar to 330's. They really are very simple, yet they perform better than 90% of the robots out there. This tells me that all teams have something they can learn from the elite teams, and apply to their own robots without much difficulty.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by DanTod97

Not that they dont deserve to have that feeling of accomplishment, but three times in one year? each time taking that oportunity from an equally deserving team. If they think that them having that three times as oposed to as many deserving teams as possible having that accomplishment, then not to say I think its un GP, but I think its un GP.

If the other team was equally as deserving, why didn't they win? Why didn't they beat the team that had already won once?

I don't see what you are asking the successful team to do. Once a team wins a regional, then the only way they can avoid winning another is to either withdraw from subsequent regionals, or throw matches in their next regional so as to deliberately lose. The latter would be incredibly uninspiring, ungracious and unprofessional, especially to the alliance partners in those matches who would also be losing the games.

Please re-read Beth's message #8 - she said it much better than I could, and rep is coming her way.

Edit: It appears others had the same thoughts as I. And I see in a later post that you advocate teams only being allowed to attend one regional. Following this logic, Tiger Woods should be allowed to enter one single golf event all season long, and only if he wins that event, would he be allowed to go to the Masters (or whatever other tournament is decided as the championship for golf, I don't follow it that closely) to play against other champions from the rest of the golf tournaments that year. That would be seriously uninspiring for golf fans. The same thing would happen if FRC teams were limited to one event - although if the program continues to grow, that might become real eventually, but I digress. I feel a bit less inspired this year because GLR and GTR were on the same weekend, and I didn't get to see 1114 in person. I suspect my inspiration will be restored in Atlanta.

Have you ever talked to any of these super teams? Have you ever asked them for help? 1025 is around today only because of the tremendous help we got from a super team, the ThunderChickens, for an entire year. Team 903 was able to compete in Detroit only because of the help they got from multiple teams (many of them super teams) to rebuild their robot to comply with 2008 rules, and then they went on to be an alliance captain at West Michigan. The help the super teams give is inspiriing on its own, beside the inspiration they provide on the field.

You might also be interested in this post: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...559#post729559

[Rich Kressly]

Originally Posted by DanTod97

So because they can, they should. because thats apparently the way FIRST does things.

If these teams were spending all of their time and resources on ONLY winning events, there might be a grain of validity to what you are alluding to here. However, these teams and many more like them who are perennial "winners" spend an awful lot of their time helping other teams out (mine included) all year long.

And let's look at the big picture. FIRST doesn't exist for it's own sake at all. Students carry skills and life experiences into school/job interviews, not trophies. We exist to try and provide a better future with an understanding of how technology, innovation, and invention can be utilized for creating more win-win scenarios in the world today. How on earth are we going to prepare the next generation to solve the world's most difficult problems in a socially conscious way by artificially setting the bar lower?

Woodie Flowers himself, perhaps the only person on the planet who has the kind of perspective required to really make these kind of "gp judgements" (although you'll never catch him doing it) says flat out that what we do is "not sticky sweet," instead he admits it's "...really, REALLY hard."

[cziggy343]

as being part of what could be called a "power team" i feel like when we go to a regional, i can feel that teams look up to us. when someone comes up to us and says "Gosh you have a great robot!" that excites us and keeps us going, and it makes us want to build a better robot year after year.

our team has not won multiple regionals in a season since 2002. we won peachtree this year and then went to palmetto. team 342 picked us to be on thier alliance. we already knew that we got to go to atlanta, but they picked us because THEY wanted to go to atlanta. we did not only play for ourselves and make our team look better, we played so that we could try and help out our alliance partners get the same winning feeling as we had at peachtree.

so what do we tell the teams that want us to help them win? "No thanks, we already won a regional"? i dont think that that is graciously professional to not help another team because you have already won.

[DanTod97]

Originally Posted by Rex114

I just did a little research on the blue alliance, and I saw that your team lost to teams 40 and 20 in the Boston Regional finals this year. Both of these teams won another regional before Boston. Is this the reason why you don't think teams should be allowed to compete in more than one regional? You feel robbed of something that would of been yours had 20 and 40 not been there? Are you proposing that teams 20 and 40 are ungracious because they beat you? You honestly think it would be more inspiring to limit the talent at your competition in order for you to win, rather than play 3 hard fought matches and lose in the finals, knowing you gave some great teams a run for their money? Thats not very competitive at all. I'm just trying to imagine how you would be proud of your "win" in that case. It would be like saying "Yeah, we really didn't have the better robot, but lucky for us, the better robots aren't allowed to compete at our regional, so we won!" Just getting to the finals is a feat that my former team was only able to accomplish once in its 11 year history, you should be proud of what your team was able to accomplished this year, and not take away from what other teams accomplished either.

Mike C.

I wasnt aware that team 40 had also won one. People have brought up this point of jealousy many times, and as I said before I dont beleive ive made any of these topics personal at all, I havent spoken of my team once, im doing my best to speak from a completely outside point of view. But since you must, my team did great anyways, the finals was as far as Ive ever gotten, so Im happy.

edit: (outside, not objective, I am taking a stance on the situation)

[N7UJJ]

We competed in AZ where team 39 dominated. We knew we would meet them again in Las Vegas. We were on the opposite side of the field in a qualifying match. Although our robot can score "pretty well", we knew we would lose in a shoot out with 39, so we played defense and won the match.

In the final match we were opposite 39 and undefeated 987 and 1013. We could not shut down two high scorers. Even our scouting program's match simulator predicted a defeat for us.

We would have been disappointed if we didn't have a match up with some of the best robots of this year. Winning a regional where the best were not allowed to compete would be a lesser victory. Our varsity team does not want a victory in a competition where the best were excluded. We want to compete with the best, because if we ever win a regional, we want want to know that our alliance beat the best alliance.

We went to three regionals this year, but at the Los Angeles regional, we only took our girls. Multiple regionals mean more opportunities for more members to drive, work the pits, etc. Same robot, different team. More experience for more people.

FIRST will never be a equal-for-all competition. That's the fun of it. Someday we may beat the "best".

Allan

[DanTod97]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

If the other team was equally as deserving, why didn't they win? Why didn't they beat the team that had already won once?

I don't see what you are asking the successful team to do. Once a team wins a regional, then the only way they can avoid winning another is to either withdraw from subsequent regionals, or throw matches in their next regional so as to deliberately lose. The latter would be incredibly uninspiring, ungracious and unprofessional, especially to the alliance partners in those matches who would also be losing the games.

Please re-read Beth's message #8 - she said it much better than I could, and rep is coming her way.

Edit: It appears others had the same thoughts as I. And I see in a later post that you advocate teams only being allowed to attend one regional. Following this logic, Tiger Woods should be allowed to enter one single golf event all season long, and only if he wins that event, would he be allowed to go to the Masters (or whatever other tournament is decided as the championship for golf, I don't follow it that closely) to play against other champions from the rest of the golf tournaments that year. That would be seriously uninspiring for golf fans. The same thing would happen if FRC teams were limited to one event - although if the program continues to grow, that might become real eventually, but I digress. I feel a bit less inspired this year because GLR and GTR were on the same weekend, and I didn't get to see 1114 in person. I suspect my inspiration will be restored in Atlanta.

Have you ever talked to any of these super teams? Have you ever asked them for help? 1025 is around today only because of the tremendous help we got from a super team, the ThunderChickens, for an entire year. Team 903 was able to compete in Detroit only because of the help they got from multiple teams (many of them super teams) to rebuild their robot to comply with 2008 rules, and then they went on to be an alliance captain at West Michigan. The help the super teams give is inspiriing on its own, beside the inspiration they provide on the field.

You might also be interested in this post: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...559#post729559

If it was teams that dont normally win going to three differne tones and having an amazing year, then thats a good accomplishment they should be proud of. But there are some teams that they KNOW they are good and they KNOW chances are very high for them to win, and they know theyve had numerous wins in the past, so I dont see why its necessary for them to plan on going to multiple regionals, wiht it being understood chances are very high that they are going to win probably more than one of them.

and THANK YOU to all those who give me bad rep for a having a different opinion than yours, very, very nice. love it.

[greg light]

Is that fair for a team to win multiple times and let other teams stand in second place. I believe if you win one regional you should not be allowed to win a second one. That way everyone can compete fairly. If they want to compete again go to the finals or world championship.

[Chris27]

Originally Posted by DanTod97

I wasnt aware that team 40 had also won one. People have brought up this point of jealousy many times, and as I said before I dont beleive ive made any of these topics personal at all, I havent spoken of my team once, im doing my best to speak from a completely outside point of view. But since you must, my team did great anyways, the finals was as far as Ive ever gotten, so Im happy.

edit: (outside, not objective, I am taking a stance on the situation)

So you really think that If it was your team that had won three regionals, if your team was in the position of a team like 1114, that you would still hold this position and this thread would even exist? Regardless if you haven't explicitly mentioned your team or not, our own experiences have a great deal of an effect on our viewpoints. You wouldn't be complaining (objectively arguing?) If your robot was the one winning three regionals, thus it is not unreasonable to come to the conclusion that to some extent, your arguments stem from jealousy, whether you want to admit it or not. It is not a bad thing to be jealous of the accomplishments of other teams, but instead of trying to bring them down by claiming they are being unfair or unGP (sure thats a word ), like I said before, you will get much more satisfaction out of finding out why those teams are so successful, (just ask them, I'm sure they will be glad to tell you), and emulate their successful model which will likely lead to success of your own team that you can take ownership of. It comes down to a choice of whether to look at these teams as a source of inspiration and an opportunity to learn, or to take a negative viewpoint and tear them down. These viewpoints extend beyond FIRST and to the real world. At CMU, I have had the opportunity to listen to some very inspiring speakers and they have shared their sources of pride, joy, and happiness. Guess which viewpoint they held.

I suggest listening to this.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...31505846055184

[mschmidtbauer]

Here's my take on the subject I do not think that teams should be able to compete in two or more different regionals. From what I saw some teams, who are already are going to nationals, still compete and then win (again). I believe that there are several possible advantages to the teams that do this:

1. More practice time with the robot
2. More time to implement new ideas/code
3. More chances to win/move on to nationals

I think we should limit teams to only one regional, or if a team wins at a regional and is moving on to nationals they should not be allowed to compete in another regional. Also I believe that even if you announce that any team can attend any number of regionals that will give the more experienced/older teams a better advantage because they have time to more fully develop a strong budget to accommodate travel expenses.

[cziggy343]

Originally Posted by DanTod97

If it was teams that dont normally win going to three differne tones and having an amazing year, then thats a good accomplishment they should be proud of. But there are some teams that they KNOW they are good and they KNOW chances are very high for them to win, and they know theyve had numerous wins in the past, so I dont see why its necessary for them to plan on going to multiple regionals, wiht it being understood chances are very high that they are going to win probably more than one of them.

and THANK YOU to all those who give me bad rep for a having a different opinion than yours, very, very nice. love it.

dont underestimate how hard winning a regional is. i dont think anybody should go into a regional and say that they are going to win it. a lot more goes into winning a regional than the individual robot performance. banking on being able to win the one regional you go to is a risk that most teams wont take if they can help it. 67 and 1114 were supposed to run away with GLR last year, and they lost in the finals. arguably the best two robots at the regional were together and still lost. both teams would have been dissapointed if that was the only regional that they got to compete in because of the amazing robots both had.

EDIT: please stop giving DanTod a bad rep just for a differing of opinion... thats not cool. even if they are just dots.

[JaneYoung]

I'm missing something, y'all help me out.

a. why does FIRST have to be fair?
b. if it has to be fair, where do we start?

- do we make sure every team has a trailer to haul their robot?
- do we make sure every team has a well equipped shop?
- do we make sure every team has funding for travel or has equal access to funding and sponsors? How do we do that?
- do we make sure that the teams are the same size?
- do we make sure the teams all do the same outreach?

I genuinely want to know why and how but my opinion in this without knowing those answers is that when we go for the fair thing, we start setting limits. Those limits start setting boundaries. Those boundaries start denying access. Lack of access starts impacting development, growth, and innovation.

Like I said, I'm missing something.

[DanTod97]

Originally Posted by Chris27

You wouldn't be complaining (objectively arguing?) If your robot was the one winning three regionals, thus it is not unreasonable to come to the conclusion that to some extent, your arguments stem from jealousy, whether you want to admit it or not.

It is an unreasonable conclusion. Its like your trying to tell me how I feel which im pretty sure is not possible, and all it does is attempt to lower the significance of my opinion.

[DanTod97]

Originally Posted by JaneYoung

I genuinely want to know why and how but my opinion in this without knowing those answers is that when we go for the fair thing, we start setting limits. Those limits start setting boundaries. Those boundaries start denying access. Lack of access starts impacting development, growth, and innovation.

I believe some well thought out limits can actually benefit devopment, growth, and innovation.

And no FIRST does not absolutely have to be fair, but I think if it is as much as possible without putting harmful limits, it can only add to the fun of the competition.