Criteria for Rookie All-Star Award

Hello,

My team has more or less successfully completed its first build season. We are a small yet very committed team that has a vision for advancing STEM in our school community.Since we have our first regional coming up in a week (Alamo) we were thinking about making a push for the rookie all star award. In your experience, what factors make a rookie team stand out? How can we present ourselves well for judges? Is performance at your regional a criteria in the determination of the award?

I posted here and had the team I’m mentoring read through it.
https://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=163840

You can find the criteria here: https://www.firstinspires.org/resource-library/frc/awards-based-on-team-attributes

As it’s described as a “Chairman’s Award team in the making”, The Chairman’s criteria may be useful as well: https://www.firstinspires.org/resource-library/frc/submitted-awards

Essentially, it’s all about how you talk to the judges. It’s not about the robot, but about your community relationships and outreach efforts. Show the judges that you’ve built a strong team that really “gets” FIRST!

For us what worked in 2014 was 23/58 rank and a great business plan and story of starting the team, had students that new the business plan inside and out in the pits at all times. Our bot was unique on of the few defenders.

We were not the best performing rookie that year, good enough and the business plan is what impressed them.

Always have someone in the pits that can tell your story and anything unique to tell about your team and your story. Do the best you can in game, good luck. We are not (yet) a Chairman’s style team rather spend our time more on performance based 6 week building not year round in the last couple years.

I suspect it had a lot more to do with your business plan as the Rookie All Star team needs to demonstrate their sustainability.

Hopefully your ranking did not enter into the justification for the award.

As others have said, communicate to your judges the impact you have on students and your community. Show them you are sustainable. Give them evidence of how you have worked with your school and your team to support STEM. Learn how to communicate these concepts to the judges in 5 minutes or less. Practice what you want to say, document what you have done and give it to the judges (succinct and brief documentation, they don’t have time to read a book of accomplishments)

Good luck!

I 100% agree with this… There’s already an award for Highest Rookie Seed, and on-field performance isn’t mentioned in the criteria for RAS. My team’s rookie year we seeded 9th, got Highest Rookie Seed and Rookie Inspiration, but lost out on RAS to another deserving team. So ranking high shouldn’t have an affect.

On an interesting note, I just went to TBA to see who won RAS that year at our event, as I couldn’t remember. After much confused looking, I realized that TBA didn’t take into account surrogate matches back then. The team that won RAS had one more match than us, and it must have been one of the matches they won - they were 6-3, we were 5-2-1. So ignoring the surrogate status of one of their matches, TBA shows them ranked higher than us… but take that win out, and we rank higher. It’s pretty interesting to see what sort of junk data is out there from the days before the FRC Events API, when sites like TBA were stuck trying to scrape FIRST’s webpages!