Winning Multiple Regionals

Teams should work at being more competitive than having FIRST try to make everything level. Instead of saying they shouldn’t be allowed to dominate that many regionals, maybe someone should make a robot that will STOP them from dominating. This is how competition works, it makes you better.

Well thats supposedly one of the goals every build season, but its easier said than done.

Past this I’ll bring it to PM discussion, but there’s more to FIRST than the build season. Things such as strategy, scouting, on field driving… the all demand excellence. Strategy is one of my favorite parts of FIRST, it makes the kids think more than any other aspect. Heck, it makes the adults think!

If there were not value in both parts, if there were not “their best” being demanded during the competition season, it would not exist.

If we want to discuss this out more, PM me.

I don’t think any of us expected to win the regionals we went to.
Being a winner means you probably know how many things must
work in the right way at the right time with the right alliances
on both sides of the glass to make it happen.

If there is such a thing as a “super team” you must means the ones
like 1114 and 1024. Walk into our pit and ask for Qbranch and he won’t
stop telling you about how to fix your autonomous. He will have a laptop
under his arm and be in your pits right until the last call before our
matches. I have seen 1114 at Midwest completely take a team
under their wing to help them in every way.

There are no super teams just good people having great things
happening to them. Believe me Karthik and his team as well as ours
can look back on a lot of good fortune to make the three in a row happen.

Whoa, there! So what you’re saying is do your best during build season and then STOP? What message is that sending?

If I interpreted what you just said correctly, then I don’t know what to say other than: is that professional? Or gracious?

I’m really confused. Say a team wins their first regional, what would you have them do? Not attend any further events? Stop trying? I’d like to hear your proposed solution.

I was just making a point that if there comes a point when youve done your best, and youve proved your capable, beating a dead horse maybe? something along those lines.

If people had this kind of attitude, would science or technology ever advance? If you can do it, then why not do it? You are only as limited as your will and efforts.

About teams winning more than one regional…
Teams choose regionals before they ever start building their robots. They do not choose regionals just to rub it in everyone else’s face that their robot is better. A champion team is a team that competes to the best of its ability and performs excellently in the heat of competition.

Should a team throw a regional after they have won a previous regional? NO That’s just unsportsman.

I am sorry that you may feel like you were ripped off of a champion win because a team there was better. Instead of complaining about that team, looking towards next year and seeing how you can try doing what they did to make your robot better would be more beneficial. It’s good if a team has three regional championships. Three times as many teams get to see what a winning robot is made of and get inspired by that.

And yes…ANYTHING is easier said than done. It is those than stand up and take the challenge who are on their way to being champions.

Good luck and hope your next season is better.

Again dont know where this is coming from.

No, if you are signed up to attend an event doing your best requires you to compete in that event to the best of your ability. Doing your best does not have a line where it is okay to stop, doing your best is not something you do when you feel like, doing your best is not something you do because others are watching. Doing your best is a way of life, it cannot be checked at the door.

If 1114 were at MN instead of GTR this past weekend and they left the A-team at home or put them up in the stands because they had already won 2 regionals I would have been disappointed and embarrassed. I would have been disappointed because everyone in that arena would be missing out on the opportunity to be inspired by the “simplicity on the other side of complexity” exhibited by their machine. I would be embarrassed (and maybe even angry) because such a team’s respect for the level of their competitors at the event is so low that they feel their winning is a foregone conclusion unless they bench the “starters”.

I fully expect any team that shows up to any regional I am at next year to compete to the best of their ability whether they have already won 2 or 3 regionals that year or if they are looking for the first in their team’s history.

I would love to play against a team that won three regional. My team (1629) actually did this year (1024 in buckeye). We beat them in our first semi-final match and i must say it was one of my proudest moments. Beating a team that has beaten everyone else, even if it is only once, is an awesome experince. I consider it an honor to get to play with these teams. I also have yet to meet a team that plays with a "win at all cost"mentality. Also think about this. How satisfying would it be to win only because the superpower stopped trying?

I have been lightly following this thread and its parent (it is time consuming to follow it in depth). One word keeps coming to mind when reading the arguments but I haven’t heard anyone say it. I searched that word in both threads and no results. The word I am thinking of is:


If I can just steer the discussion ( aka threadjack;) ) a bit and ask:

Do we need parity of competitive skill in FIRST?
If we need it, how would we go about achieving it?

I’ll hold my opinions on those questions for a bit because I’m interested in other people’s opinions on this. Here are a few of my subjective observations on parity. Parity does seem to vary significantly by game. The 2005-present 3 robot alliances seems to increase parity over the 2 robot alliances.

The NFL believes it needs parity for its fanbase, does FIRST need parity for inspiration?

Not necessarily for its inspiration but why does everything about the way its run have to soely be about inspiration? I think this program no matter how its run is going to be amazing for inspiration, but then once inside theres no reason things like this cant change for other reasons.

I couldn’t disagree more. I guess you can either feel jealous about those teams and mope about or you can consider why these robots are good, and try to make one of the same caliber the following year, or even modify your current robot if you are competing at another regional. At times I’ve shared similar feelings that you have had, where I felt that our robot lost and our run was cut short by an unfair playing field. If you want, I have a somewhat infamous post you can dig up. A few years ago, I believed that overly defensive teams were ruining it for the offensive teams that really put their heart and soul into meeting the games challenge, which at the time I interpreted as scoring the most points. However, my team did not stop looking forward and compensated for our weakness with a modification we called “the magic foot”. We learned the valuable lesson that defense is part of the game, to deal with it, and to not skimp out on the drive train (now we have an awesome swerve drive). My team was fortunate enough to make it to the championship our rookie year. Our team was also fortunate to get our ■■■■■ handed to us on a silver platter (If I recall correctly we ended up dead last in our division). We got to see what the pro’s did and what it took to compete. Without this experience, I don’t think we have built the bot in this match (We are the fridge, ugly yet effective :))

Instead of complaining about the unfairness of the playing field, it would be much more productive to find out what you have to do to beat these super teams. Trust me, It can be done. Even if you don’t succeed, well Isn’t the privilege of getting to play with these teams enough? Your attitude determines your enjoyment and what you get out of the competition. Why focus on the negatives? And this is coming from a pessimist…

The teams that have inspired me the most have been 1114, 71, 111, 47, 1024, 1503/1680, 217, 148, 233, 93, 118… etc…

What do they all have in common? They are GOOD teams. They win regionals. They take a challenge and they complete it to the best of their abilities. They are the guys that make me continue and that encourage me to try new things.

Not only do they challenge me because they are good, but when 1114 transforms from a robot into a ramp, 71 wins a match in the first 10 seconds, 111 shoots balls with near perfect accuracy while being pushed sideways in autonomous, and 118 swerves around the field with insane mobility and control, it inspires me to try to emulate there actions or better yet, try something even better.

Regionals are won by effective designs. Effective designs are cool. And cool inspires. Seeing a team win three regionals only makes me want to strive for a better robot, better sponsorships, better team organization, and in the end, I am a better person for it.

Considering this is a very opinionated topic there is not much way to argue it either way except to state scenarios and feelings about them, which will not get very far at persuading anyone either way. So unless anyone has something radical to say, I dont see this topic going much further.

One thing I am curious about and have not seen you answer is what your proposed solution is to this proposed problem.

Would you like to see teams restricted to one regional event per year?
Would you like to see teams withdraw from other regionals after winning one?
Would you like to see teams show up, but purposely “dog it” and then decline any alliance selection?

Without looking for solutions, constructive criticism is really just whining.

Thats what ive been trying to come up with. The whole concept of a regional IS you only go to one, in which if you win you move on to the nationals. On the other hand FIRST isnt a normal competition, but I guess I would have to say yes, restriction to one seems to be the best solution. Most will disagree with that since weve alreayd figured out we dissagree on the part about if FIRST is meant to be fair or not. The way I see it is its a competition, if its not meant to be fair then it should not be one to begin with, perhaps we can just have extremely large robot party’s.

I also see fairness going along with equality and equality going along with gracious profesionalism, I dont see anything being gracious without being fair.

The neat thing about regionals, is that they ARE big robot parties!

My older son (college student) and I finally went to a regional where we weren’t competing, it was a blast