

Welcome to FIRST, the place where you can be competitive in a team. Here people can learn more in one year of FIRST than in four years of high school.  dude__hi [more] 



Thread Tools  Rate Thread  Display Modes 
#106




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Actually, it's more like 5/50. (Rookies have maybe a 1/10 additional, depending on how many rookies.) If you aren't submitted for CA, 4/50.

#107




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Quote:
Quote:
Teams are made up of humans, and therefore have the capacity to embody all of the larger principles of FIRST. Being more than machines, we share a duty to strive for that goal. Back to the main topic. My team has attended two regional events in each of the last five FRC seasons. We do it because we like to meet FIRST people from other places, and because we want to play robots as many times as possible. 
#108




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Quote:
Vivek 
#109




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Quote:
On the initial topic, Life is about the opportunities that you create for yourself. Each team starts with the basics and it is up to them to make the most successful program they can. Multiple regions != powerhouse robot Money != successful robot Lack of resources != team failure Veteran Team != winning team Single Regional != lack of inspiration My team attends multiple regionals or a regional and championships, and our robot has not been in contention for the winners spot for years. Edit  I want to provide some clarification. First, for those not of a computer science background != means does not equal. Second those are my opinions after having been a participant with a team and a event volunteer for a number of years. Last edited by GeorgeTheEng : 05012008 at 03:57 PM. Reason: clarification 
#110




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
I think this entire discussion is a moot point, because every year there's an open signup period for any teams that don't prequalify, who have the money and wish to go, so it's not like anyone is stealing spots from anybody else.
Not to mention the fact that this discussion is being perpetuated against teams under the premise that it's "not about the robots", like these teams should be ashamed of themselves for making FIRST all about winning, since they go to multiple regionals. The irony here is that this argument itself is making FIRST out to be about the robots. 
#111




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Yabbut, you know, George, that pWinning goes up with practice (multiple regionals), money, resources, and experience. How many teams on Einstein were not top teams in all these categories? I believe you are saying that these factors are not sufficient, which I agree with, but it would not be accurate to say they do not have a positive effect on winning probabilities.

#112




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Winning an award and trying to do so has its merits.
It can show where you are at as a program amongst your peers. If at first you dont succeed, you go back and analyze why, coming back better and stronger than the year before. It allows your team to set goals to improve, whether its building a better robot AND/OR building a better program. The reality of winning is that it not only brings glory and celebrates an accomplishment, but it also brings about opportunities for more sponsorship and support by others that may otherwise not notice. Success breeds success. People that make excuses about it not being fair should take a hard look in the mirror and ask themselves, "What are you going to do about it?" Trust me, we have done that many times several years ago trying to figure out how to compete against the highly successful teams in every phase of the program. We didnt make any excuses, instead embraced the challenge, even though we are still doing the chasing. 
#113




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Quote:
First, you assume that each team has an equal chance of winning the game. We'll overlook that for the time being. But each regional is a unique event. If winning is truly random, the chances of winning one are independent of winning another. Therefore 1 regional  3/50 2 regionals  3/50 + 3/50 3 regionals  3/50 + 3/50 + 3/50 etc. 
#114




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Quote:
I think your logic may also be flawed. You're saying that in two events, a team has a 6/50 chance. They have a 3/50 in each (using the numbers we're playing with). However, as I remember probability, you don't add. The odds of x event in two separate cases is multiplied. Your chances of qualifying twice are much smaller than indicated. Assuming, of course, that everything is equal, which it isn't. 
#115




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Multiplying as you suggest will give the probability of winning all the events. Adding the probabilities gives the chances of winning one (or more) of the multiple events, thus qualifying for a Championship invitation, which is what Gary wanted to show.

#116




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Quote:
So then we say, well, the probability of winning at least regional as a function of N, where N is the number of regionals we attend, is: P(N) = 1  (47/50)^N Because (47/50)^N is the probability of NOT winning a regional, and the sum of the probabilities of all outcomes must equal 1. And the result? 1 Regional: 3/50 or 6% 2 Regionals: 11.64% 3 Regionals: 16.95% Note that this is the probability of winning at least one regional. If you wanted to get the probability of winning exactly two, then it would be (3/50)*(3/50)*(47/50). The probability of winning three would be (3/50)*(3/50)*(3/50). So the teams that won three had a 0.022% chance of doing so. Congratulations, 1114 and 1024, you guy beat the odds! Or maybe winning multiple regionals has more to do with robot quality, drive team skill, and a good autonomous than pure luck...though luck certainly is always involved. Thus, it does go up (given that EVERYTHING else is equal, which it isn't) which makes sensemore chances equals more probability, but it doesn't quite scale linearly with regionals. Think about it, if they just added, then if you had a 3/50 shot of winning a regional, then if you went to 17 regionals you would be guaranteed a berth at Nationals, and your probability would be OVER 1.0, which is not really possible. Last edited by Nikhil Bajaj : 05022008 at 10:14 AM. Reason: wanted to put in "at least" 
#117




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Quote:
and besides it isnt just about the winning........ 
#118




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Passion and determination should be figured into all of this as well as hours and hours of practice. Or lack of.
.02 
#119




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
This is an interesting topic of discussion and after reading the comments it is nice to see it has been discussed without attacks and negative comments.
As a team with limited resources we have discussed this amongst ourselves also. I have one point that I did not see in this thread. It might have been there in the 8 pages and I missed it but that was a lot of reading. To me there is one pro to this that outweighs most everything else. It raises the bar for all teams. As a veteran team that does not have the money or the resources of other teams we know we have to excel in other ways because the standards will be very high regardless of what we have/do. 
#120




Re: Is competing at multiple regionals REALLY fair ?
Quote:
Quote:

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  Rate This Thread 


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Winning Multiple Regionals  DanTod97  General Forum  70  04042008 01:27 PM 
Multiple regionals  Armando Gonzalez  General Forum  2  10012007 04:12 PM 
Multiple Regionals  mandraque  Regional Competitions  19  09142006 04:40 PM 
Attending Multiple Regionals  WakeZero  General Forum  11  11192003 03:23 PM 
Multiple Regionals  archiver  1999  55  06232002 09:26 PM 