I have always enjoyed seeing what unique things teams came up with or went through to be selected for a judge’s award.
This year I saw something slightly different at the Los Angeles Regional. Both judges Awards were presented the second day, which I had not seen before, I am not sure how each regional does it. Both of the awards went to great teams but the reason that the judges choose to merit recognition seemed oddly familiar to a very prestigious award…
The teams were specifically recognized with the judge’s award for community involvement, fund raising, and team development. Does this seem familiar now? The judges seemed to have turned the judge’s award into a mini chairman’s award for the teams that were great but did not quite measure up to the chairman’s winner.
Now I completely understand that these awards are at the judges discretion, but I do not believe that the award lived up to it’s name in Los Angeles.
2 weeks before, I was at the San Diego Regional. This has become my favorite regional. There, the award lived up to it’s name. In one particular case, a team lived through the closing of their school and still made it to the competition with a competitive robot.
These little inspirational stories and other achievements that are clearly not defined under any other award are what this award stands for. This award has always been very special and I am disappointed that the Los Angeles judges were unable to find something more special to reward.
I agree. However, the things that win teams the chairman’s award deserve recognition too. I feel that there should be two awards, one a judges award defined more strictly as what you feel it should be, and one as more of a runner up chairman’s award, but leave it more open ended, to allow for it to be shifted to more community-type-things based, or more robot-based, depending on what happens at the tournament.
However, keep in mind that something like the school closing you mentioned dosen’t happen at each tournament.
The Judge’s award is meant to be completely open ended. Yes it is great that teams with closed schools still compete, but as rocketperson44 said this doesn’t happen every regional. Teams who do these chairman’s worthy activities don’t always receive recognition, and maybe don’t qualify for EI, if the judge’s felt the team deserved recognition then I’m sure they did. Besides it’s good that no one’s school closed
I’m just using that as an example. There really should be a runner up chairman’s award, that would make more sense. All I am trying to point out here is that the judge’s awards at Los Angeles fit into the category of another award. And it is clearly stated that it is the intent of the judge’s award to award teams that have done something that does not fit into any award category.
There is many teams that deserve to be recognized for the impacts they have on their communities, but there is already an award for this.
I just feel the judges award should not be subbed in as a runner up award, it should be something of its own category like it’s original intent.
5.18 JUDGES’ AWARD
During the course of the competition, the judging panel may encounter a team whose unique efforts, performance, or dynamics merit recognition.
No mention of any intent that these awards must be for something outside the bounds of other award categories.
Often a judges award is for an “against all odds” team, one that persevered against obstacles thrown in their path and came through.
I’ve also seen the award given for a team that is strong in a variety of areas, so the judges wanted to recognize them. Since this award is so free-form, it could also be used as a “second-place” for one of the other award categories, even Chairmans.
This is my second year with FIRST so I could be wrong about this but I thought the Engineering Inspiration award was sort of a runner up for the Chairman’s Award. Please correct me if I am wrong.
I also think that that judges award can go for anything. So if they thought that they had great candidates that should be recognized they were within their power and did fine.
EI is definitely not 2nd place Chairmans; rather it is the 2nd highest award given. All teams at the regional are eligible for EI, not just those that present Chairmans. Some of the criteria are similar between the awards, so a team that has a strong Chairmans presentation is definitely in the running for EI. But there is no direct correlation.
