Attending Multiple Regionals

Alright, I am not usually a poll starter… but this has been bothering me a little more each year now. Should teams be allowed to compete in more than two regionals?

With qualification for Nationals being so dependent on Regional performance, it’s no question that the more regionals you attend the better chance you have to attend Nationals. Going further, I think it would be safe to say that not all teams can afford to go to three or more regionals, but there are a few teams out there that are able to.

Seeing as that Regionals are filling up far more consistently and faster then previous years, I would like FIRST to implement a Two Regional cap for teams. What are all of your thoughts?

If all the rookie teams have spots, then why not??

I think three regionals is fine, so long as they keep in place a system like there is now, that lets everyone have a chance at two regionals before anyone is allowed to go for a third.

I like the system that FIRST put into place which allows teams a legitimate shot at their first choice regional. This seems to fix any logistical problems with teams signing up for multiple regionals.

If teams can afford it, they should be allowed to register until all regional spots are filled up. This is a good thing, as it creates full regionals, which make for better competition.

As for the qualifying issue, FIRST could fix that by requiring teams to declare which regional is their qualifying regional, sort of like with the regional chairman’s award.

If you can afford it and if rookies havea spot, why not?

*Originally posted by Andrew *
As for the qualifying issue, FIRST could fix that by requiring teams to declare which regional is their qualifying regional, sort of like with the regional chairman’s award.

The problem with that is then there would be no teams qualifying from the first round of regionals, because teams will want to use the first regional they attend to work out the bugs. Teams will use the later regionals to qualify so they have a better chance once all/some of the bugs are worked out.

*Originally posted by kpugh *
**The problem with that is then there would be no teams qualifying from the first round of regionals, because teams will want to use the first regional they attend to work out the bugs. Teams will use the later regionals to qualify so they have a better chance once all/some of the bugs are worked out. **

This may not always be true.

If a team knows they have a solid, consistent robot (finished in week 3, lots of driver practice), they might choose a week 1 regional. The learning curve is a lot steeper early on, if you know what you are doing in week 1, you can do fairly well, without much effort against teams that still don’t have a clue.

John

Don’t forget, as you have time to improve so do the other teams. This could make it harder to win at later regionals. I do like the declaring of regionals ahead of time to balance teams abilities to advance to Championship.

Thought: You don’t declare a regional and win. The ones you do declare you don’t win any points. Will you be bitter and call for a change in the way FIRST run things?

how can students on a team afford to take off wed/thurs/fri for 3 or more weeks from school

to attend 3 or more regionals?

seems like after your 2nd competition, there is little more to gain from the experience

unless you have somehow gotten the mistaken idea that FIRST is some kind of robot building contest.

I think you should only be allowed two regionals especially since its so much harder to get to nationals…

I think three events is fair, whether it’s two regionals and Nationals or three regionals. For many teams, three events is standard.

I think attending multiple regionals is a good thing… I mean, you meet more people, there’s better competition, and the teams-individually and among eachother-get closer. What’s not to love?

FIRST has made it so everyone has a shot at at least one before anyone gets seconds (kinda like the buffet line!) so DIG IN!!!