I’m a little bit curious about why FIRST allows teams to sign up for a third regional. I would assume this is a somewhat localized thing to areas where there are a lot of teams, like my own state, Michigan.
Anyway, why is this allowed? What was the spirit of the creation of this provision?
I ask because my team is going to a week 6 regional (Bedford if you’re curious) where 27 or 28 of the teams registered have already had 2 competitions. One look at the teams list would lead someone with knowledge of FiM to see that it will be an AMAZING competition with some very strong competitors. This got me thinking, however, about why third events are allowed and whether situations like this are really the most appropriate thing. Obviously this is something of an extreme case that is highly unlikely, but it is conceivable that the 27/28 teams whose performance at Bedford will not affect their standings in the state could contribute all 24 of the robots in eliminations. That just doesn’t sit well with me. It seems to me that in a situation like that, where a significant number of teams competed in eliminations but received no points for it when other teams could have received those points, it’s kind of cheating those other teams out of an event…if that makes sense?
I totally understand that there are reasons that so many teams are having their 3rd event at Bedford (the reasons why really aren’t very important to me, I’m just using Bedford as an example because that was what sparked my thinking about it) and I want to emphasize that I am really just looking to understand the spirit of the law, so to speak, as it pertains to teams getting a third event.
Thanks in advance, and please don’t get all angry or overly argumentative over this…
A10: One of our primary goals is to increase FRC team participation wherever possible. In pursuit of this goal, we feel that offering vacant slots to teams who want them serves the goals of FIRST and FiM better than leaving them empty. While this does give additional playing time to some teams, all teams who wish to play at an additional event are free to enroll in the annual lottery for these available slots. All teams have equal opportunity for these lottery slots.
Also, if we left these spots empty, we would be giving additional advantage to any team attending a partially unfilled event. Mathematically, the system is fairer overall if the events are all fully attended. We want all events to have the same statistical significance in our system.
We add events in units of 40 slots. Growth forces us to add events each time we add 20 new teams. Usually the number of teams/40 leaves a remainder of 15-20 spots open. We prefer to fill these for event balancing.
Because they can? If a team wants to maximize the time and effort put into a season why should they be limited to 1 regional/district or 2 regionals/districts? FiM and MAR cant really be used as a way to argue against teams going to more competitions because the price is so much lower to register, travel, house, and the vicinity is close enough to allow teams to more easily attend events. I know you arent arguing against teams being allowed to do this, but this topic has been thoroughly covered before; try searching the forums before posting.
FIRST has always allowed teams to sign up for as many regionals as they want to attend (that number currently being a maximum of 7 due to the impossibility of the same team competing in two events during the same week).
As for the 3rd District event question, Jim Zondag just put up a whitepaper with the answer at http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/2804. If you haven’t read it, you might want to, as this is one of the FAQs for FiM.
Whether or not there should be a limit to the number of events a team can attend other than the calendar limitations, and how a district system allowing more districts than the number counted should deal with a number of teams in eliminations who can’t get points (and are presumably blocking out others who need the points to get to State/Region Championships), are currently wide open questions.
How would you feel if you were one of those teams and someone told you that they would rather leave slots empty than let you in because you had already competed twice?
It might be a little depressing to attend a district with only 12 teams competing (I say this as one of the teams attending Bedford as our 2nd district). As previously noted, Jim’s whitepaper covers the mathematical reasoning. The 3rd district lottery is the best solution to filling open spaces at districts. I suppose it would be ideal if the 3rd district teams were a bit more spread out between events, however I imagine there isn’t much the FiM staff could do about that as the actual number of teams in the state didn’t seem to be finalized until well after initial registration, by which time most teams had already been sorted into events and rearranging them to spread out the 3rd event spaces would have been logistically challenging.
In 2011 at the stl regional, there were under 30 teams. It was a very fun regional and everyone got to know each other very well, but there wasnt much diversity. Nearly every team was within a 2 hour radius. Something that is interesting at small regionals is that nearly every team is on an alliance for eliminations. This is good for rookie teams because they get an extra feel for FIRST, but also not the best because there will be a lack of competition.
Just look at the scores:
95-6
112-24
107-55
50-4
but I guess there are a decent amount of examples where an alliance has no competition…case in point: finals of galileo of 2011: 101 - 0.
I want to clarify that fact, since I was playing on the alliance that won that match (Final 1-1). We won the match because of a red card called on team 254 for an incursion into our protected scoring zone (it was a very complicated call though, as the incursion wasn’t the sole reason for the card, just the start of the sequence of events that lead to the red card). The original score of the match had the blue alliance of 254-111-973 beating the red alliance 469-610-188 by about 10 points (the score was around 111-101). The blue alliance rallied back to win the next two matches, move on to Einstein, and claim the 2011 title in four very well played and impressive matches.
The vast majority of zero scores in eliminations are the result of a red card and not because of an alliance that can’t score.
I apologise for going off topic from the original post, I just wanted to point out that that specific match was very close with two strong alliances, and the only reason we won by such a large margin was because of a disqualification, not because the other alliance was not competitive. The two championship blue banners won by that alliance prove how strong they were. This match was the only loss that this alliance took on their outstanding championship run, and it was not a true loss, rather the result of a red card from an unlucky position that 254 got into. The alliance of 254-111-973 was the closest thing to a perfect 10 match championship elimination win in recent memory, such an exceptional alliance and set of matches.
Sorry for the confusion about districts/regionals. The distinction has never been clear to me.
^This is more my question. I tend to think that if Bedford were my second regional and all or most of the teams competing in eliminations were ineligible for earning the qualifying points from it that I would feel a bit cheated, because aside from the awards (which I would never want to minimize), it would be akin to competing in only one regional.
Is my logic flawed? Am I insane? Should I just shut up and accept it? I am just curious and looking to understand it a little bit better.
You raise good points which my team has only begun discussing. We are in MAR not FiM. When we chose our 3rd District event we were thinking mainly about being able to compete a 3rd time for only an additional $1K. We often have a tight budget and this is quite a bargain for an extra 12 matches.
Unlike your situation I believe we are the only team that is going into its 3rd district (unless others registered after I last looked). The 3rd one we signed up for fell between our other 2, and it still had 9 open spots when we played this past weekend.
Just setting the background, the potential ethical issues remain. We are currently 32nd in MAR and likely to reach the MAR championship, but there are many teams behind us that have played once and are competing with us at the final MAR event next week. It would obviously be to our advantage for the teams behind us to stay behind us; while it is very unlikely that 20 odd teams will gain enough points to pass us I can’t say its mathmatically impossible. There may even be times in our 3rd event where losing may be more to our advantage than winning. This situation has cropped up before for some teams at some regionals, and was sometimes a factor in coopertition in previous seasons.
There is only one ethical way to handle things when you are in this position: play as hard as you can to win at all times. This is really the essence of all sport (and life): play hard, fairly, and honestly at all times. Ignoring that karma often comes back to bite those who don’t play fairly, personal honor must always be valued above personal gain.
I don’t think you are crazy, you have honest concerns. All you can do is go out and do your best, trust others will do the same, and let the chips fall where they may.
From Samurai to Klingons to GP Robotic Teams its a good day to die, as long as you do so with honor.
Sorry, got all geeky there for a minute.
You are not the only team going to a third district in MAR, there are three: 303, 1279, 3314.
However this brings up an interesting point; there are only three teams attending a third district in MAR, but over twenty-seven in Michigan. Why? Is it because the third Michigan district is only $500 while it is $1000 in MAR?
Are there usually this many teams signed up for a third Michigan district?
It’s a combination of fewer extra event slots in MAR combined with local teams’ preference for going to out-of-district regionals that leads to less MAR teams doing local districts. I don’t think price is the issue since teams are paying 5 times as much to compete elsewhere.
I believe part of why there are so many teams this year is because there are over 200 teams in Michigan this year, but only just (205 or 206 I think). So if every team gets 2 district events with 40 teams each, that leaves those 5 or 6 teams outside the traditional 10 districts we’ve had in the past. So Bedford was added relatively last minute to accommodate the teams that needed it, but since there were so few it allowed a lot of space for extra teams to sign up for a third event.
This is much more than usual, in the past there have usually been 10 or less teams that got a third event.
Hopefully that all makes sense and somewhat answers your question.
Not sure if its the extra slots, 9 were open at Lenape (a great event btw). I suspect its mostly playing ‘for nothing’, you can’t qualify for the MAR championships. Teams with more resources may prefer non-MAR regionals We’ll do them when we are able, we miss the friends we’ve made in NY, DC, etc…
But I am very surprised that more teams, especially rookies or newish teams don’t take advantge of the extra experience. (and fun, and days out of school )
There are also teams that do three regionals. At the Smoky Mountain regional this weekend, there will be two teams attending their third regional. Team 1319, Flash, has also been to Palmetto and Peachtree. Team 3196, SPORK, has also been to Palmetto and North Carolina.
I’m worn out with 2 myself - I 'm looking forward to seeing these teams that are crazy enough to go to 3 regionals!!
I think the “days out of school” factor is more likely to keep teams from going to another competition than it is to encourage them to attend. District events do only eat up a Friday, but getting even one more day off work isn’t always easy for mentors.
We chose to register for the Bedford District due to our two districts both being in West Michigan and less than an hour away. We wished to have at least one “travel” experience with the team staying overnight at a hotel after a Friday of competition. This is our first time attending three districts since the inception of the district system. We have not accumulated enough points to attend Michigan State Championship so this would be the only overnight event for the team.
Regarding your concern with the points that are stolen it is definitely an issue. There are a lot of good teams going that will probably snatch up a lot of points. However, on the other extreme is a 12 team event. How will FiM ensure these teams gets points fairly because every team is guaranteed to be in the semi-finals which normally gives points. Also, scheduling for qualification matches would be a mess since there needs to be 6 teams in every match. I cannot think of any solution that does not involve teams registering for a 3rd event and playing. Maybe one day they will be a better solution but for now it is the best solution.
I believe his team’s concern is that they may on the edge of qualifying for the state tournament. The teams on their 3rd districts may receive points that will take away valuable points from the other teams on their 2nd events trying to qualify. Understandable point on his end.
