Can someone explain to me the how some teams that qualified for the MSC received some of their points for the state ranking? I have seen three teams with 10 points added on under the “Other” category and one team with 35 points added on. The only description is “Directors Discretion” and I have never seen that before.
I know rookies and second year teams get 10 and 5 points added. Not sure about the 35 point add though, perhaps an error on FIRST side for adding district points.
7769 was 1st Pick Winner at Walled Lake, but it was their third event so didn’t count for points.
Director’s discretion might mean they deserve to go to States, but didn’t qualify, so they got some points added to get them in. To me this situation is analogous to a Regional team needing a third event to make Worlds, which has happened a few times. Glad I don’t have to make those calls myself.
1 Like
This seems…wrong. I hope that this isn’t the case.
15 Likes
Coming from only what I have heard from others: They talked to someone about something (robot wiring/FMS/robo rio issues??) and were able to get into walled lake last second. FiM seems to have let this count as their 2nd district points wise. I have not dug deep enough yet to see if they dropped their first or second district points. But we 100% know that their walled lake points (3rd district) are counting towards their state ranking.
-Ronnie
3 Likes
From my understanding, 7769 at Troy had major issues with the FMS that FIRST verified was an FMS issue, not with the team, so they were allowed to allow Walled Lake to count as their second district event. edit: I am not with 7769. This is all just what I’ve heard behind the scenes and if this is incorrect, i hope someone corrects me.
For the other three teams (5166, 5193, and 7109), at the Midland district event in quarterfinals 4 match #3, the ball counters stopped working after the red alliance reached 24 points. My understanding is they went to the question box, appealed to the head ref, and were not allowed a replay, so they contacted HQ after the event and were able to get credit for the 10 points that they would have received had they won the series due to not receiving the replay
Match in question:
10 Likes
I thought it maybe something along those lines but have just never seen it before and just was wondering. I am glad that they do that on a case by case basis it just threw off my predictions a little bit and I know I am going to get questions from my team on that.
1 Like
Thanks for filling in the backstory; understand you guys don’t have all the details, but this gets to the heart of the issue. Director’s discretion is the way to edit-in a third event when that has been pre-approved as a way to compensate for the kind of problem you described.
6 Likes
It looks like they are adding all three events for the total district points, but subtracting points at the third event to get the current points, 38 points for a 1st pick and winning is just above half of what it should be. End of the day it all worked out.
4 Likes
In FIN, we had 1 team (8232) that received double district points for their first event. They only attended 1 district event this season, so I assume there was some conflict that HQ sympathized with.
I wonder how that worked out since they attended a second event (albeit a regional).
1 Like
Based on the FRC Event Webpage, they just doubled the points for their first event (16+5points for age)
The issues at the Troy event were limited only to 7769’s robot; therefore, it was probably not a field issue. I was told that they replaced their Robo Rio for Walled Lake, which further indicates that they believed that the problem was with their robot. This sets a bad precedent. Other teams’ chances to qualify for the championship were affected by 7769’s issues, namely their alliance partners in the matches where their robot malfunctioned. Why were these teams also not given special consideration to qualify for the championship? I know of at least one team that would have likely qualified for the championship, without having to compete in a third event, had it not been for 7769’s issues. To me, this decision is contrary to the ideals that First promotes.
2 Likes
The decision to allow 7769 to compete at a third event for points was a decision that came down from HQ based on their findings after a thorough look at the issues that plagued the Crew at Troy. This was supported and corroborated by the FTA at Troy as an issue that was beyond 7769s control.
In talking to several members of 7769 this past weekend I am fairly confident in saying that they did not “believe that the problem was with their robot” as you so accuse.
I do not speak for 7769, I am not affiliated with them, and I am not privy to all of the details of the decision. However rather than speculate and throw out baseless accusations I actually went and talked to them to understand what was happening, something that is woefully missing from many conversations on this website recently.
Not to go off on a tangent but I’m getting exhausted with all of the passive aggressive and accusatory rhetoric being used on this site recently and I would be remiss if I didn’t do my part in attempting to quash that kind of behavior. It’s not a good look for any of us.
26 Likes
I did not make any accusations. I am not making any passive-aggressive statements and I resent that comment. I am merely stating that HQ did not handle this situation fairly. I did do my research, and stating that my “accusations” are baseless is a baseless accusation in itself. You have no idea what I know or don’t know. Members of my team spoke with 7769 during the Troy event and after it, and there was never any mention of the problem being with the field. We actually consulted with them about their issues during the Troy event . If they thought that the problem was with the field, they decided this after the Troy event. If HQ then thought that this issue was serious enough to warrant special consideration for 7769, they should have looked beyond 7769’s robot and consider the other teams that were also affected by 7769’s inability to perform at Troy. It would have also been appropriate for 7769 to consider the impact on other teams when they filed their challenge. If other teams knew of their issue, they too could have filed their own challenge for special consideration.
1 Like
We actually have no idea who you are. Because you don’t want us to know.
I’ll go out on a limb here and posit that you are not a FiM FTA, or that if you are one and your identity is discovered, you won’t be in that role much longer. It is the job of the FTAs to determine whether the issue 7769 had at the Troy event was within their control, or whether a field issue was involved. You have no basis for the claim that “The issues at the Troy event were limited only to 7769’s robot; therefore, it was probably not a field issue.”
9 Likes
You are right that I do not want you to know who I am. I knew that this would be a controversial topic, and posting to this site for the first time, I did not want to directly involve my team in any potential controversy. Your personal attack of me for my posing a legitimate question of how this was handled justifies my concern. If you think that hiding my identity makes me somehow unworthy of being taken seriously, that is your decision.
My statement that it was not a field issue was based on our conversations with 7769 on Saturday and the assumption that they were not lying to us when they told us that they thought that they had a bad Robo Rio. They also said that they had some loose electrical connections that they repaired. If it was later determined that the issue was with the field, I do not have a problem with that decision.
If 7769 thought this was a field issue, why did they not disclose it to teams that were scouting them on Saturday for upcoming matches and playoff selection? When we spoke to 7769 they said that the problem was with their robot and they had fixed it. Either they suspected that the problem was with the field and didn’t disclose it or they later decided that the problem was with the field. I will assume the latter.
My problem again is with how this was handled. If the problem was with the field and HQ decided that it unfairly hindered 7769’s ability to compete, why did they not consider the other teams that were affected in their alliances? This sport is supposed to be about alliances and teamwork. If one robot was unfairly hindered from competing, every alliance that they competed with was similarly affected. Given that this issue with their robot only occured on Saturday, the number of affected alliances was limited to only a few matches and the playoffs. HQ could have easily looked at the match replays to see what teams were affected and reach out to them. 7769 could have also let the other teams know about the situation, but they chose to just handle it privately and get their own special dispensation.
Our team also asked to compete in a third event this past weekend, but only for experience and fun. We were not seeking another chance to qualify for the district championship because we thought that the rules were clear regarding only the first two events counting toward qualification for the championship. We were denied because all of the events were “full.”
2 Likes
I’d love to hear the process they took to contact HQ and convince them to get the 10 points.
Why 35 points? Over the last 12 years I can’t recall a team earning points after the season ended.
How do we determine fairness in a cutoff for Houston when a team has artificially been bumped up 143 spots in the state rankings?
If they felt the need to give a spot at MSC due to an FMS problem so be it, but why is the adjustment so large?
1 Like
It’s the difference between the district points they received at Troy (28) and Walled Lake (63).
(The 63 isn’t particularly easy to find, but TBA has it calculated here.)
3 Likes