2016 Minnesota State Champs

[Ginger Power]

Originally Posted by DareDad

I agree, if you spend 15 minutes on your Chairman's essay/presentation/video no one will care about it. Or at least no one will care for it.

But you'll still get your 10 state qualification points and you'll still take up judges time and energy

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by hutchMN

This really needs to be fixed, 2175 and 3130 both deserve to go. This happens every year, and it's time to fix it. We can't call it a state championship if it doesn't have the best teams in the state.

I'm open for recommendations on how to fix it - any you send me will be presented to the rest of the RPC. We've looked at it from every angle we can think of, analyzing what the changes would be if we counted second events (as an average with the first event), analyzing the differences between teams that earn a spot at States versus those that earn a spot at Champs... We haven't found a better way that's fair to every team.

Counting a second event simply gives an unfair advantage to those teams that can afford more events. And for the record, that's 42 teams out of 208 this year - 20%. Allowing those 20% to count their second event gives them a benefit over the other 80% of teams in the state. This is the same decision that was made in districts - there, they count a team's first two events, because every team gets two events. If you sign up for a third? Well, that's some more practice and experience for you, but it doesn't count towards your ranking.

2175 and 3130 did really well at North Star, it was fun watching them play. But that was their second event. It's tough, but that's the only fair way we've found to make it work.

[Ginger Power]

Another interesting question relating to the state qualification system is should Chairman's team qualify automatically? The fact that my team qualified via CA and wouldn't have otherwise doesn't change my opinion on this topic, because I haven't formed an opinion as of yet. I've heard good arguments from people on both sides. Those arguments always boil down to:

If you qualify CA winners, you have to have some kind of overall CA award or recognition, something. It wouldn't necessarily have to be MSHSL sponsored which would obviously be ideal.

If you have no such award/recognition, why qualify the teams?

Obviously the Chairman's Award is the most significant in FIRST, but should that mean they qualify to compete in a competition designed to determine the best robots? It does for champs, but they compete to become Hall of Fame teams there.

I'd love to see something done with CA at the state championship, even if it isn't MSHSL sponsored.

[BumblingBuilder]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

I'm open for recommendations on how to fix it - any you send me will be presented to the rest of the RPC. We've looked at it from every angle we can think of, analyzing what the changes would be if we counted second events (as an average with the first event), analyzing the differences between teams that earn a spot at States versus those that earn a spot at Champs... We haven't found a better way that's fair to every team.

Counting a second event simply gives an unfair advantage to those teams that can afford more events. And for the record, that's 42 teams out of 208 this year - 20%. Allowing those 20% to count their second event gives them a benefit over the other 80% of teams in the state. This is the same decision that was made in districts - there, they count a team's first two events, because every team gets two events. If you sign up for a third? Well, that's some more practice and experience for you, but it doesn't count towards your ranking.

2175 and 3130 did really well at North Star, it was fun watching them play. But that was their second event. It's tough, but that's the only fair way we've found to make it work.

I'm very much on the fence about this issue. I really wouldn't mind whether or not a second event is factored in, but I really like defense Jon provides here.

One of the arguments for counting a second regional is that it rewards teams that took the time to improve their bot. But doesn't that still inherintely and indirectly hurt teams that can only afford one event? This improvement ideology still hinges on the fact that teams with more money are given an advantage. We'd be fooling ourselves if we thought teams that can't currently afford two regionals do not want to improve their robot. Factoring in a second regional rewards the opportunity to improve the bot, not the actual action of doing so. Every team would strive to improve their robot for their second regional if they could afford it. Sometimes the opposite happens (our first day at North Star this year for example, and us in 2008), but regardless, factoring in a second regional is more of a reward for the opportunity to improve the robot rather than a reward for the drive and motivation of doing so.

[NoahB4536]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

I'm open for recommendations on how to fix it - any you send me will be presented to the rest of the RPC. We've looked at it from every angle we can think of, analyzing what the changes would be if we counted second events (as an average with the first event), analyzing the differences between teams that earn a spot at States versus those that earn a spot at Champs... We haven't found a better way that's fair to every team.

Counting a second event simply gives an unfair advantage to those teams that can afford more events. And for the record, that's 42 teams out of 208 this year - 20%. Allowing those 20% to count their second event gives them a benefit over the other 80% of teams in the state. This is the same decision that was made in districts - there, they count a team's first two events, because every team gets two events. If you sign up for a third? Well, that's some more practice and experience for you, but it doesn't count towards your ranking.

2175 and 3130 did really well at North Star, it was fun watching them play. But that was their second event. It's tough, but that's the only fair way we've found to make it work.

My idea for a fix would be to count the first regional in the team's home state. So if a team went to their first regional in another state and went to their second regional in their own state the regional they had in their own state would count. Of course if a team only had a regional in another state, then that regional would count. This structure would mean that the teams you competed against to get to your state championship would be teams in your state. The teams that have been mentioned previously as deserving to go to state didn't go because the we're competing mostly against teams who were not from their state.

[BumblingBuilder]

2169 congratulates all the teams that qualified for the state championship! Minnesota had some great bots this year, some of which are sadly unrepresented (especially 3130 and 2175).

I actually found it quite comical seeing our placing.
"KING TeC close"

[maxnz]

Originally Posted by youngace89

Congrats to 2823 and 2855 for making it, and I wish you good luck representing St. Paul.

Despite the unfortunate absences of 2175 and defending state champion 3130, who won North Star together last weekend and certainly are two of the top teams in the state, I'll be making the short trip over to Minneapolis to watch, as this competition is still full of great robots and should be very competitive.

Thank you. It means a great deal to us to be able to go to MN Champs this year.

Also, 3130 is ranked #32, so they probably will make it in replacing a team that is unable to attend.

[northstardon]

Originally Posted by maxnz

Also, 3130 is ranked #32, so they probably will make it in replacing a team that is unable to attend.

Looking forward to this weekend's competition...does anyone know if a team or two moved off the bubble? I didn't see a finalized list of teams on the MSHSL web page.

[Ginger Power]

Originally Posted by northstardon

Looking forward to this weekend's competition...does anyone know if a team or two moved off the bubble? I didn't see a finalized list of teams on the MSHSL web page.

All 30 teams accepted and will be participating to my knowledge.

[Whatever]

Is there going to be a live stream? I have out of state relatives asking me for information.

[Mr.Paulson]

According to Mark Lawrence the webcast must be done by www.prep45.com as it is a Minnesota State Championship. I'm not sure if you will need to pay to watch it because of that or not...?

Mark provided this link in one of his recent emails:

http://mnfirst.us13.list-manage.com/...e= 5d103023fc

[jajabinx124]

Originally Posted by Mr.Paulson

According to Mark Lawrence the webcast must be done by www.prep45.com as it is a Minnesota State Championship. I'm not sure if you will need to pay to watch it because of that or not...?

Mark provided this link in one of his recent emails:

http://mnfirst.us13.list-manage.com/...e= 5d103023fc

I believe you have to pay around $5 to watch the stream.

[Whatever]

Thank you for the information, I will pass it along.

Does that imply that the tournament may get some coverage during "MN Prep Spotlight" on Sunday at 9:30?

[maxnz]

Any idea if the match videos will be archived in any way? Also, does anyone know if the FMS reports will be available (after or even during) for review and/or upload (e.g. to TBA)?

[ATannahill]

Originally Posted by maxnz

Any idea if the match videos will be archived in any way? Also, does anyone know if the FMS reports will be available (after or even during) for review and/or upload (e.g. to TBA)?

What FMS reports are you specifically wanting? Are you wanting something besides the outcome of the matches and the rankings?