(Lack of) Value in the Regional Model

[Koko Ed]

Originally Posted by Ross

I for one love the district model, the kids get two competitions and get to go into the second feeling confident. I do have issues with the Director of the organization we are a part of, for the past two years she tells me that she misses Manchester and that the district events just don't have the same feel. She used to attend the regional event but comes for like one day to a district. When I explained this year after doing OK at our two district events that the Regional Championship was a possibility her first response was "No" she was not willing to spend the additional $4000 for us to go, eventually letting us fundraise with a solid "NO" if we qualify for Worlds. We already have a Zero budget, so every year its a fight.

Schools can be such a pain sometimes.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by brrian27

I've never personally competed in districts, so I may be a bit biased. However, I loved the regional model when I competed in high school. My first year we only went to the Orlando Regional and did not make eliminations. The great venue in Orlando helps make it a special and inspiring event. It made it seem like a big deal and helped inspire me to want to be a big part of our team and perform on big stages.

Having smaller events may make sense economically or logistically, but they need to retain their inspiration, or else we're missing the point.

This, or similar to it, is an often cited fear. I had similar fears before I experienced districts. Let me tell you they're virtually unfounded, at least in my experience and the experiences of those I know. Districts are every bit as inspiring as regional events.

[plnyyanks]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

This, or similar to it, is an often cited fear. I had similar fears before I experienced districts. Let me tell you they're virtually unfounded, at least in my experience and the experiences of those I know. Districts are every bit as inspiring as regional events.

Agreed. I was worried about the same thing when New England went to districts, and there has been nothing to worry about. District events have that "in your face feel" many sports teams love about their arena because it's packed to the rafters. You can really feed off the crowd.

It's definitely a different experience than regionals, but nonetheless inspiring. I think the fact there's virtually all positive feedback from teams who have moved to districts (I can't think of one person who has said "I hate it, give me back regionals") says enough.

[rich2202]

Originally Posted by EricH

So there is some room for variance built into the system. All you gotta do is go "hey, we need a tighter cycle time" and/or run a little longer, and hey presto, 1-2 more matches/team. It's not that hard. So it's a really simple fix, comparatively, and we don't even need to see it.

"hey, we need a tighter cycle time" - Easier said than done.

Which would you prefer: 7 minute cycle times where the FTA's have time to help robots connect, or more disable robots in order to stick with 6 minute cycle times?

It is easy to have sub-6 minute cycle times when robots are connecting. When running with 7 minute cycle times, that gives you a few minutes to help a team with a problem when they do come up.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by rich2202

"hey, we need a tighter cycle time" - Easier said than done.

Which would you prefer: 7 minute cycle times where the FTA's have time to help robots connect, or more disable robots in order to stick with 6 minute cycle times?

It is easy to have sub-6 minute cycle times when robots are connecting. When running with 7 minute cycle times, that gives you a few minutes to help a team with a problem when they do come up.

And even on a 7-minute cycle time, a larger event still had an extra match/team... The OTHER half of that statement was to run a bit longer in any given block of time.

I think a 6-minute cycle time is the ideal, given that you've got connecting robots, with 7-minute being more realistic. Smaller events could easily run 8-9 minute cycles, and stick to them, with more matches/team.


But, as part of the "Team Experience" directive from HQ, I think that FTAs should at least consider the effects of running longer on a day, or shortening the cycle time. If there aren't a lot of robots taking the full minute for Transport Configuration, and there aren't any connection issues of a major variety (L.A. had to reboot the field twice, and run a pair of replays, and still finished largely on schedule) then you can get away with more short cycles. Say 6.5 minute times.

I think the better alternative is for HQ to say "Hey, we want X matches/team minimum for an event of Y size, do what you need to do to make it work with the schedule." The FTA then has the flexibility to run faster cycles or longer hours, depending on the event.

[Sunshine]

Really Kevin? Had you played one more match the experience would have been that much better? Really? Why don't you count practice matches? I know our team was on the field on Thursday 6 times. Enjoyed that experience.

I for one do not like the idea of playing in a HS gym. Playing in a large arena is an experience most of our students and their families will never get otherwise.

As mentioned before, be careful what you ask for. The district model is more expensive for those who move on.

I for one do not like playing only with my neighbors. I like meeting and competing with teams from around the country and world. That's why we do Midwest, for the international feel.

I've always felt the Wisconsin Regional was very well run. I like the venue floor, the seating and the downtown atmosphere.

Can't answer your question about judges. I have no idea how many really were there. All I know is that we saw many more in our pit than you suggest. Is it possible that they were around while you were on the field with your team.

As you know, FIRST is more than just building robots. One of the great experiences our kids get involves fundraising and securing sponsors. This allows us to do two regionals. The second one at a location of our choice. This extends the season for our students and enriches the experience. Also gives them twice as many matches. As a side note, doing regionals around the Midwest has taught me just how appreciative I am about the Wisconsin Regional.

Please FIRST, keep both models and let people choose. As a consumer I like choices. I will not choose attending the high school gym. Hate the bleacher environment, FIRST is better than that.

[Kevin Kolodziej]

I am having a discussion about ALL regional events and their value to a team. This has nothing to do with how my team did or performed. This is not a thread bashing the WI regional - I help plan and run it. Any and all comments I have for the event itself will be posted in the appropriate thread, not here.

With regards to the number of plays, as soon as we received the schedule and I saw only 9 matches, I was immediately disappointed knowing that we had more matches last year with the same number of teams. More matches is more chances for the students to show their work, to be under the lights, to feel the rush, to work with other teams. I do not count practice matches as the same experience because the only difference from them and what we do at home is the ceiling height - its not the same as a match with introductions, announcing, cheering, music, strategy, etc. Whether we play 10 practice matches like we did at Midwest last year or 0 like we did this weekend, it doesn't change anything about my opinions of the regional model and match play.

The district model is only more expensive for teams who currently only play 1 event. Quite a few WI teams already do play in two regional events (yours and mine included). Two district events and a district championship for the same $9000 we already pay sounds far better to me.

The district championship is like a current regional in a pro arena or a college arena. Its certainly a step up from a high school gym. While I certainly enjoy giving all students the opportunity to step on the floor of an arena, having them earn it and work to it will make it that much more special.

I agree with you about attending a second event to see new teams and new places. We've taken our kids to Duluth, Minneapolis, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and will be returning home to Chicago in two weeks. Getting to meet people from far away, even other countries as we so often do at Midwest, its an experience the kids (and mentors) will treasure forever. I still do. But eventually, everyone WILL be in districts - but when that day happens, cross district play will be the norm, and these long distance friendships will continue to be forged.

[SoulianPride]

I've been going to districts since it was first introduced in Michigan in 2009 and I've loved it. It does not necessarily isolate you to one region because you can go to regional events and districts in other district systems. It is just that other district systems to not count towards State ranking and neither do regional events. One thing that I love in particular about it is awards. It makes it more difficult to go to the World Championships with Chairmans or EI because you have to win it at a District, then you have to win it again at States. Plus, States limits competition to the best of the best in the state. For Worlds, there is a wait list but States is just pulling from who has the highest rankings. For example, FIM will have the 102 best teams in the state competing there.

The $5000 registration fee covers 2 events and the KoP plus First Choice. Then, each additional district, if I remember correctly, is only $1000 more compared to a regional. Then, States is another $5000 because it is almost kind of like a regional and Worlds is $5000. It might depend on region but after pricing out a possible district event, my team found it closer to $25,000

As for the comment about FIM rookies. FIRST added it up and Michigan has more rookies this year then the rest of the US combined.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Sunshine

Really Kevin? Had you played one more match the experience would have been that much better? Really? Why don't you count practice matches? I know our team was on the field on Thursday 6 times. Enjoyed that experience.

I for one do not like the idea of playing in a HS gym. Playing in a large arena is an experience most of our students and their families will never get otherwise.

As mentioned before, be careful what you ask for. The district model is more expensive for those who move on.

I for one do not like playing only with my neighbors. I like meeting and competing with teams from around the country and world. That's why we do Midwest, for the international feel.

I've always felt the Wisconsin Regional was very well run. I like the venue floor, the seating and the downtown atmosphere.

Please FIRST, keep both models and let people choose. As a consumer I like choices. I will not choose attending the high school gym. Hate the bleacher environment, FIRST is better than that.

IMO, more matches mean the experience is greater and you pay less per match per cost of the regional.
Being in a district model doesnt mean you only play with your neighbors. If that was the case, how did Team 27 play in Duluth and win the RCA there in 2014, eventually winning the CCA? You can still play at a regional.

At IE this year, that was a regular regional, yet we played in a high school gym. Why did that have a cost of $5,000 to participate?

Personally, I dont care if I sit in a high school gym or a stadium....my focus is the experience students and adults get participating in the event.

Overall, I think Kevin is spot on. And while FIRST is still transitioning to moving to more and more district models, they certainly dont have to take forever in immediately changing the price model to make it more uniformly cost effective for ALL that participate.
Furthermore, as a member of a FIRST regional planning committee, I have known about the $250,000 cost for planning committees to come up with to pay FIRST. So can anyone explain how much the IE folks really paid given that the event was held at a high school?

The system is not perfect, I get it. But as the lead director of Team 359 for many many years, I can assure you that I have to be as transparent as possible, explaining to students, parents, and our stakeholders why we charge and spend what we do. Eyes are watching always and people have the right to ensure a fair experience based on goals and objectives, one of which is cost.

[Joe Johnson]

Back when I was young, I thought large competitions were the way to go. But I was an idiot. Smaller competitions are way better. It sort of stinks if the 24th best team (a.k.a. the last team picked by the #1 Alliance) can barely move in the Elims but even that is preferable to fewer matches.

As to the cost of Districts vs. the cost of Regionals, the estimate of 60K vs. 250K may be an average number but I can tell you that there is a lot of variation around both those numbers.

I know a number of Regionals that go way way way over that 250K number and there are a few that are much closer to 100K.

As to the Districts, here in NE, I wouldn't be surprised if the number is close to that 60K number but from everything I have heard about how FiM is running their events, I think most of their Districts are done for a quarter of that number.

Having spent my formative FIRST years in Michigan, I am far from an unbiased observer but, the explosion of FIRST teams in Michigan since going to the District Model seems to point in the direction that less is more at least when it comes to spending on District Events.

Joe J.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by Sunshine

Really Kevin? Had you played one more match the experience would have been that much better? Really? Why don't you count practice matches? I know our team was on the field on Thursday 6 times. Enjoyed that experience.

I for one do not like the idea of playing in a HS gym. Playing in a large arena is an experience most of our students and their families will never get otherwise.

As mentioned before, be careful what you ask for. The district model is more expensive for those who move on.

For its first nine years across three venues, the Palmetto Regional was held in arenas--two primarily basketball (Colonial Center and Littlejohn Coliseum) and one primarily hockey (North Charleston Coliseum). When it moved to the Myrtle Beach Convention Center in 2013, I was very skeptical of the move as other convention center regionals I'd attended hadn't had the same feel, like you state. This year, I had the privilege to work the finals as the game announcer--and lemme tell you, that crowd was hot and it had a big-time feel. A similar phenomenon happens with a good (if smaller) crowd at SCRIW, which has only ever been held in a high school gym. There's a reason an incredible dunk in a high school basketball game can still get thousands of views on YouTube--good product is good product.

The move to Myrtle Beach was also the same time that Palmetto, like so many other events in the area, jumped in team count from the 40s into the 60s (and we still have capacity problems in the region). Like Kevin, I have concerns that this is just too big for a Good Team to feel like they're having a successful, rewarding season. I'm not saying everyone needs a trophy, but you hope that a team doing the right thing and building solid machines will at least make the playoffs or snag an award here and there--having one's faith rewarded helps a lot sometimes. In the three seasons Palmetto has been this size, the seven teams in the Columbia area (two of whom started in 2014, most of whom I've got history with) have combined for zero Palmetto Regional playoff appearances and zero awards. From knowing the teams and seeing the machines, it is disconcerting that our collective not-that-blind squirrels have yet to find a single nut--especially when three of them are one-and-done teams this year and a fourth was for a couple of those years. I remark as such on the event evaluations, but I suspect the only relief we'll see on that is the day South Carolina goes to districts.

Please FIRST, keep both models and let people choose. As a consumer I like choices. I will not choose attending the high school gym. Hate the bleacher environment, FIRST is better than that.

IRI is held in a high school gymnasium. (Okay, it's an Indiana high school gymnasium...) You do not get a team to crate their robot and ship it halfway around the world, get dozens more to arm-twist school districts about a summer field trip, turn away dozens more teams on top of that, and some years get your feed on NASA TV if you aren't running a solid event, no matter how good the teams may be. I love pushing a cart into the big arena as much as the next man, but don't knock it 'til you try it.

[techhelpbb]

I was FTAA at Mount Olive District Event.
The cycle times started slowly but very quickly we waited on the field to connect to the robots.
If the field and the robots connected quicker we could have gone even faster.
Even with that we slowed down on Sunday because we actually were ahead of the schedule once we got the rhythm down.

So to a certain extent the speed is dictated by the field connectivity.
Hopefully there are some ways to accelerate that in the future.

If you watch the video during the match setup I am often on the field waiting for the robots to complete the process which would end just before we would start the match.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by techhelpbb

I was FTAA at Mount Olive District Event.
The cycle times started slowly but very quickly we waited on the field to connect to the robots.
If the field and the robots connected quicker we could have gone even faster.
Even with that we slowed down on Sunday because we actually were ahead of the schedule once we got the rhythm down.

So to a certain extent the speed is dictated by the field connectivity.
Hopefully there are some ways to accelerate that in the future.

IIRC a key to that would be upgrading from the D-Links to the proposed USB dongle that didn't get off the ground this year.

[techhelpbb]

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

IIRC a key to that would be upgrading from the D-Links to the proposed USB dongle that didn't get off the ground this year.

I think there's a bit more to it than that.
We noted that if we restarted the DS software sometimes it would go faster.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by techhelpbb

I think there's a bit more to it than that.
We noted that if we restarted the DS software sometimes it would go faster.

I can't remember the times since I am not a CSA or FTA, but isn't it something like >= 30 seconds for bootup and >= 50 seconds for connection to establish for the router, or are my numbers backwards or totally wrong?