Ideas to move in the direction of making FIRST competitions 'fair'

[KenWittlief]

One of the aspects of FIRST that many people have a difficult time grasping and eventually accepting is that the FIRST competition is not fair. We don't try to hide this fact, we have always been very open about it.

There are many reasons why the FIRST competition (the games on the field) are not fair. Teams are not evenly matched. Some teams have vast resources and experience, other have little or none of either.

I believe it was necessary for FIRST to be created this way back in 1992. There were only 32 teams, there was only one competition held, so not much could be done to have teams compete on an equal footing.

As FIRST grew there were only a few regionals, and eventually the 1st national event - still small by todays standards. Any team that had the funds could attend the Nationals (at WDW no less) every year if they wanted.

Now that we are hovering around 1000 teams, with many regionals, some becoming super-regionals, and with 300 teams able to attend the Championship, is it time for FIRST to take steps toward making the competitions more fair?

This issue comes up almost every year. People float ideas for different divisions - big teams, small teams, rookie teams, divisions based on funding, years of experience, 100% student built vs mentor designed and built....

Another issue that comes up every year is "FIRST is about inspiration" vs "FIRST is a competition". Big teams with complex and professionally manufactured robots contend that little teams with plywood robots are inspired by the super-robots, even if the little team is trampled by them on the playfield, and has no chance of placing well on their own merits, much less winning the Championship.

Over the years I have mentored small teams, and I have watched the students enthusiasm drop on their 1st day of their 1st regional, when they realize they have little chance of placing well, and no chance of winning the event. We have all sat in the bleachers as one by one other teams are picked for the playoffs, and I know how dis-heartened the students feel when the last team is picked, and we are left out.

FIRST has taken some steps to keep the smaller teams in the mix. The alliance system, pairing teams at random, gives weak teams the chance to be on the winning side of some matches.

At the same time, as FIRST has grown, winning a regional has taken on more importance than getting a nice plastic trophy, it is also an open door to attend the Championship. Saying that FIRST games are all about inspiration isn't the whole story anymore, if the big successful teams get to attend the Championship every year, and the smaller struggling teams don't.

So I'm wondering, have we grown big enough yet, do we have enough teams and regionals now, to take some steps toward making FIRST fair, like other sporting events? Ways to allow teams to compete on their own level, where they have a reasonable hope that, if they do well, if they try hard and work hard, they could win of their own accord?

I don't expect anything to change this year, but I'm interested in hearing other peoples ideas on the subject of how FIRST could be improved to make the competitions more fair. Please treat this thread as a brainstorming session, and hold your wet blankets and buckets of naysayer-cold water at bay. Let the ideas be presented without shooting them down, and lets see where the ideas might led us?