What would the California District look like in 2019?

#1

After an interesting side conversation on the What did Texas think of the first season of Districts? thread, I got curious about what the “two years away” California District system would look like. All of this is speculative and some of it might even be plain inaccurate (but I tried!)
Here’s some numbers:

In 2019, 308 California FRC teams competed in 21 regional events around the US and Canada. 12 of those events were here in California. Were it to become a district, we would be the second largest district in FRC (larger than NE’s 203 teams, smaller than FIM’s 538). Moving to districts, we would likely be looking at around 18-20 district events.

Looking at the sizes of various districts vs. the size of their Championships, larger divisions accept a smaller percentage of teams to DCMPS. With a basic linear regression, it looks like the California DCMP would be taking in somewhere around 100 teams. At that size, we’re looking at two divisions, similar to Ontario.

Because I was already this far down the rabbit hole, I decided to see who would actually qualify for our DCMP. To do this, I pretended that all of the regional events we competed at were actually district events, and calculated district points for them per the rulebook. I did not count backup teams in this calculation. Not out of spite, but out of laziness. This could potentially have changed things by a good margin, if a team was subbed in early and proceeded a ways through playoffs.

The top 5 7 point earners are:

  1. 1678 (150 pts) - By a landslide! Congrats @Michael_Corsetto and company
  2. 1323 (146 pts) - My bet for 2019 world champion
  3. 4414 (145 pts) - Everybody’s favorite not-rookies
  4. 971 (145 pts) - The suckiest robot in California
  5. 330 (145 pts) - One heck of a grand finale
  6. 254 (138 pts) - Never heard of them.
  7. 3647 (138 pts) - Never won a single award before 2019, currently making up for lost time.

Here are the full rankings with one caveat: I am not resolving tiebreakers here. Tied district points are just ordered by team number.

District Points Ranking
Rank Team Points
1 1678 150
2 1323 146
3 330 145
4 971 145
5 4414 145
6 254 143
7 3647 138
8 973 132
9 1868 123
10 4415 119
11 5499 117
12 1671 115
13 604 114
14 649 114
15 846 114
16 2073 112
17 3128 109
18 3309 109
19 3476 108
20 2659 107
21 2102 100
22 2839 100
23 294 98
24 4276 94
25 5012 94
26 115 92
27 1072 91
28 7663 90
29 5199 89
30 599 88
31 5026 86
32 597 82
33 7419 82
34 114 80
35 1700 80
36 4738 80
37 5818 80
38 207 79
39 8 75
40 253 75
41 687 75
42 2584 75
43 696 74
44 1836 74
45 2658 73
46 5507 73
47 3598 72
48 5104 71
49 6560 71
50 2485 70
51 2551 70
52 3255 70
53 4201 70
54 4486 69
55 5419 69
56 7667 69
57 399 68
58 1662 68
59 4913 68
60 1160 67
61 6418 67
62 6814 67
63 6822 67
64 1388 66
65 5700 66
66 2543 65
67 4135 65
68 701 64
69 702 64
70 1197 64
71 3250 64
72 3863 64
73 2085 63
74 3859 63
75 4 62
76 1538 62
77 5802 60
78 6072 60
79 812 57
80 1515 57
81 4079 56
82 192 55
83 1138 55
84 2637 54
85 5089 54
86 6060 54
87 1452 53
88 5124 53
89 7308 53
90 589 52
91 972 52
92 1572 52
93 3495 52
94 4698 52
95 5805 52
96 2710 51
97 2984 51
98 3303 51
99 4159 51
100 4501 51
101 7413 51
102 691 50
103 1159 50
104 199 49
105 3256 49
106 3512 48
107 6039 48
108 6506 48
109 2813 47
110 5817 47
111 6474 47
112 6995 45
113 7042 45
114 5496 43
115 6695 43
116 2643 42
117 5137 42
118 5940 42
119 6804 42
120 581 41
121 4990 41
122 5458 41
123 6904 41
124 7887 41
125 1622 40
126 2429 40
127 5285 40
128 5669 40
129 6934 40
130 100 39
131 1967 39
132 2367 39
133 3953 39
134 4669 39
135 5851 39
136 7447 39
137 3045 38
138 3925 38
139 4123 38
140 7327 38
141 5171 37
142 7137 37
143 2135 36
144 3473 36
145 4322 36
146 5678 36
147 1458 35
148 1661 35
149 2489 35
150 5025 35
151 6918 35
152 2493 34
153 6036 34
154 6241 34
155 766 33
156 3952 33
157 6884 33
158 668 32
159 840 32
160 2144 32
161 670 31
162 1351 31
163 4904 31
164 7468 30
165 2035 29
166 3965 29
167 4160 29
168 5477 29
169 5510 29
170 841 28
171 2473 28
172 3257 28
173 3749 28
174 4014 28
175 7607 28
176 1266 27
177 3759 27
178 4643 27
179 4984 27
180 5430 27
181 6657 27
182 867 26
183 980 26
184 4583 26
185 4973 26
186 5500 26
187 585 25
188 968 25
189 3482 25
190 3669 25
191 5474 25
192 5857 25
193 7230 25
194 751 24
195 3501 24
196 4186 24
197 4763 24
198 5869 24
199 6305 24
200 6962 24
201 6821 23
202 299 22
203 3408 22
204 3970 22
205 4470 22
206 5027 21
207 4171 20
208 4255 20
209 5102 20
210 5924 20
211 6981 20
212 3328 19
213 7245 19
214 7455 19
215 7528 19
216 3189 18
217 7157 18
218 1422 17
219 5274 17
220 6059 17
221 6662 17
222 7415 17
223 7445 17
224 7871 17
225 852 16
226 1280 16
227 2404 16
228 2854 16
229 3021 16
230 3341 16
231 4578 16
232 6665 16
233 256 15
234 848 15
235 2496 15
236 3704 15
237 4765 15
238 4964 15
239 5627 15
240 6000 15
241 3295 14
242 5966 14
243 6238 14
244 4139 13
245 4711 13
246 5107 13
247 5136 13
248 6174 13
249 6553 13
250 580 12
251 1759 12
252 5250 12
253 5634 12
254 5852 12
255 6398 12
256 7323 12
257 7777 12
258 1972 11
259 4161 11
260 6220 11
261 6619 11
262 6960 11
263 2204 10
264 3993 10
265 4619 10
266 4999 10
267 5134 10
268 6515 10
269 6644 10
270 6668 10
271 6711 10
272 6764 10
273 6883 10
274 7057 10
275 7401 10
276 3491 9
277 4056 9
278 4141 9
279 5514 9
280 6659 9
281 6692 9
282 6885 9
283 7847 9
284 2827 8
285 5728 8
286 5810 8
287 7185 8
288 7441 8
289 7482 8
290 7686 8
291 2141 7
292 6535 7
293 6658 7
294 7324 7
295 606 6
296 4919 6
297 5835 6
298 6938 6
299 7326 6
300 4114 5
301 4616 5
302 6499 5
303 6718 5
304 7229 5
305 4019 4
306 6410 4
307 6612 4
308 6926 4

Based on our 100-team championship, any team that earned more than 53 points or won an RCA (DCA?) would get an invite to CA DCMP. In addition, teams 7871, 7528, and 7607 would get to compete for Rookie All-Star, and 585, 2429, and 5857 get to compete for EI at the District Champs.

Invite List

4
8
114
115
207
253
254
294
330
399
589
597
599
604
649
687
696
701
702
812
846
971
973
1072
1138
1160
1197
1323
1388
1452
1515
1538
1622
1662
1671
1678
1700
1836
1868
2073
2085
2102
2485
2543
2551
2584
2637
2658
2659
2710
2839
2984
3128
3250
3255
3309
3476
3512
3598
3647
3859
3863
4079
4135
4159
4201
4276
4414
4415
4486
4738
4913
5012
5026
5089
5104
5199
5419
5499
5507
5700
5802
5805
5818
6060
6072
6418
6474
6506
6560
6814
6822
6995
7308
7413
7419
7447
7663
7667
7887

As a validation of the district model, this thread lists 15 California teams that “should have made it to Champs but didn’t”, 12 of which are on the DCMP list.

If anybody would like a breakdown of their team’s hypothetical district points, has questions about this, or would like to correct some of the mistakes that I’m sure I made: fire away.

Special congrats to 1622 and 2485 for winning both an RCA and an EI this year, to 7663 for ranking 14 in the state as a rookie, and to 1678 for collecting enough blue fabric to wallpaper a room.

37 Likes

#2

Really cool; thanks for pulling this together! What would be the expected number of the CA DCMP teams that would qualify for Champs in the district model?

0 Likes

#3

Nice bit of work!

Do you plan to extend it? Possible next steps:

  1. simulate California DCMP

  2. use results to determine which California teams qualify for Houston CMP

  3. plot Elo, OPR, or other metrics of simulated qualifying teams and compare with the same metrics for California teams that actually qualified this year

  4. how do the two sets compare?

I expect they will be nearly identical at the top end. I also expect that the bottom end of the simulated qualifying list will be significantly stronger than the bottom end of the actual list.

2 Likes

#4

It looks like the percent of teams that goes to Champs from districts varies significantly, but using a linear regression of district size to district slots, we would send about 51 teams.
(R^2 of .347 on that trendline, so take that with a grain of salt)

These are good ideas, and I might follow up on them. My match prediction kind of sucks, but I could do a basic red ELO vs blue ELO and see what happens.

2 Likes

#5

Why is 5199 so low on the points list? Being only 39th? We had a poor Del Mar losing in quarters, but we have 2 regional wins and winning awards at LA and Ventura in addition to being the #1 seed at both events, ahead of teams such as 4414, 330, 3476, and 3309, all of whom rank very high. Out of the next 20 teams ahead, most haven’t won an event. So why such the low rating?

1 Like

#6

It’s probably due to the fact that in districts it’s the first 2 events you played at.

15 Likes

#7

I love the description of us. We did have a long history of the quarterfinal curse.

6 Likes

#8

How/does the data change when considering the possibility of a split California district? In the original California Districts Whitepaper by @Michael_Corsetto (among others), I remember that a split district was encouraged due to the logistic difficulty of coordinating DCMP among the NorCal teams and the SoCal teams.

0 Likes

#9

This kinda of just makes me more sad about cali not being in districts. If we had districts we would be comfortably in champs along with the 3 other teams who I had mentioned in the teams that should’ve made it to champs thread. Hopefully one day the “2 years away” will actually be 2 years away.

3 Likes

#10

@kaliken is right. District points are calculated using your first two events. DMR was rough for you guys (we were next to you in the pits). In your 3 events, you had 16 points, 68 points, and 68 points. If it were calculated based on your best two events, you’d be at 136 (tied for 6th with 1323). Of course, that would change up rankings elsewhere, too. By the way, congrats on killing it this year.

Your showing this year has been completely amazing. I’m proud of you guys.

A lot, I assume. Waaaaaay too much work to calculate it though.

There’s a lot of teams in that camp. MVRT is the name that stands out to me. They’re #25 in the state (top 8%) but their season is wrapped up already.

3 Likes

#11

You can click the little gear icon then click > Hide Details

Alternatively, use this BB code:
[details="Summary"]
This text will be hidden
[/details]
to yield this:

Summary

This text will be hidden

2 Likes

#12

CA sees the value of split districts (CIF does as well).

HQ hates the thought, and I would not assume that CA is split. There is exactly one state that is split by districts: Pennsylvania. And HQ is openly considering combining the un-district side of that with an existing district (much to the wrath of the surrounding states).

Regardless, if CA goes district, I give it <1 year for there to be a de facto split between North and South as teams play close to home.

9 Likes

#13

It’s a “when not if” on Districts, but our volunteer base is still pretty thin. Not just in terms of KV roles, but everywhere in event support. I see the same volunteers showing up everywhere, every weekend. Its fun to see y’all, but y’all, we can’t just clone ourselves to make districts happen, we have to train more folks up.

My guess is the roadmap is add Regionals and add volunteers until we can transition over in a more reasonable fashion. Right now we’re at 2 events per weekend, and Districts means 3+…

4 Likes

#14

I’m interested in hearing why HQ seems to hate the split district idea. Do you have any insight into their rationale? Is it really that much of a logistical nightmare? Although I suppose if New Mexico + Texas can form one whole district, then California can be one district too…

Edit: Regarding the amount of travel that teams do within a district, I’ve noticed that some of the more well-known teams like 148 regularly are traveling to one district event that’s across the state. However, it seems that the vast majority are attending local events. Given the urban concentration of Texas on the east, it did not seem to be an inconvenience to have such a large district given that DCMP was in a relatively central city, Austin.

However, I am not convinced that this is applicable to California, since we have two large urban centers of approximately equal populations in the Bay Area as well as Los Angeles. This is not to say that Texas does not have large cities on its eastern border. There are fifteen combined teams from El Paso and New Mexico, and I would like to hear from them to see to see how their districts’ size affected how their competition season played out. This is a smaller number of teams compared to Northern California, but I still believe it is valuable to see their perspective regarding the geographic size of their district.

0 Likes

#15

Some of us are doing this for fun, not out of desperation. Two of the five events I volunteered at this year (LA North, LA) were moderately to very short on volunteers. However, two of the events (OC and AVR) were okay on volunteers and SVR was overrun with a surplus of volunteers. I volunteer to help but also because I enjoy it.

The reason you see me almost every weekend in California is not because I’m being compelled to do it (most of the time) but because I want to.

In my opinion, there isn’t a shortage of personnel. I do think we need people better trained and equipped to recruit and maintain volunteers. Several VCs I worked with this year have never done it before or it was one of their first events. Those people need training and oversight.

I know it sounds trivial but I only received a genuine thank you note from one of the five events I volunteered at and a haphazard “thanks and also…” email from another. To a new volunteer, this might be off putting. If volunteers don’t feel appreciated, they may not return. And if volunteers don’t feel equipped to succeed in their roles, they might not return, either.

The way I see it, we do not have a shortage in volunteers and magically having a database of names won’t solve any problem. We need to train and apperciate our volunteers more so that they want to stay. All of this starts at the top.

Usually, when you hear “FIRST” and “pyramid scheme,” your mind will go to the Chairman’s Award. I think the greater pyramid scheme, though, is making volunteers love volunteering so much that they come back and recruit more volunteers and start going to more events. We don’t want to burn anyone out but I’m sure as hell not going to stop anyone who is able, willing, and enjoys volunteering at several events per year.

9 Likes

#16

Simple, hold CADCMP at the midpoint. Everyone travels to Madera! :wink:

Whoaaaa buddy, not the vibe I was trying to put out there. I’m there working for the same reason you are. I’ll try to throw an edit on it in the morning…

0 Likes

#17

I figured as much but the cynic in me couldn’t resist. It is an important note though that many people tend to “feel bad” for volunteers or view “too much” volunteering as a problem with the system but indeed it is out of the good-nature of the volunteers.

0 Likes

#18

I’d be curious too. I suspect they think it’s going to be easier to get funding etc. if it’s a whole-state thing. However, I’ve noticed that people not from Out West (and I’m putting that line at the Appalachians, not the usual places) have a completely different state-scale perspective. See, folks from NE and much of the rest of the (l)East Coast seem to think that states are these small things. Not areas it can take much of the day to drive across. New Englanders figure you go a couple hours, you’re 2-3 states away. Californians know that if you want to go to another state, you need to allow 2 hours just to get to near the border; it’ll take 4 hours to get anywhere, and that’s if you time it right.

@s-neff: Bakersfield. It’s equally a pain for NorCal and SoCal teams to get to, and I don’t recall that they currently have any teams in that area.

2 Likes

#19

I think an interesting solution would be to have one district with two district championships. Allow each team to state a preference between Northern and Southern District Champs. After district play wraps up, go down the rankings, giving teams an invite to their preferred DCMP if there is room, and if there isn’t and there’s room at their second choice, give them that.

3 Likes

#20

Before anyone says “that’s not how states work” note that teams 4643 and teams 5627 are over nine hours apart, all within California.

5 Likes