It has been well publicised by RECF that the same organisation can’t win the Excellence Award at worlds if they have won it within the last 3 years. This is written for VRC (HS and MS) in this documents and for VEXU in this one
What does everyone think about the fact that XJTU won for VEXU this year, after winning it last year? I personally would like to know from RECF some more information about this, and why it’s been allowed all of a sudden despite documents saying it shouldn’t be?
Also, just to pre-empt any criticism, I’m not saying XJTU is undeserving - they won both Skills and Tournament for example - they’re clearly deserving.
I am also curious about this. Could REC weigh in on this?
In addition, the team also won design award… It is not usually common for a team to win 2 high placed judged awards like that… Many teams in the VexU divsion were confused on why this happened.
A teams such as XD did not even get a judged award… The XD robot was the most innovative, creative, think out of the box, amazing, and best designed robot hands down. And they did not come back with a single judged award…
Seriously? This leads me to believe there was something off about the way things were judged this year. That robot deserved something. Come on Vex… Please work harder on getting expirenced and knowledge judges in VexU…
The VEX U awards appendix was added for the first time in the in the 2017-2018 season. Not wanting to reinvent the wheel we started with the High School VRC Appendix and modified it as appropriate for the VEX U program. You will see that immediately following the sentence in question is a statement that each team at VEX Worlds will be eligible for consideration for Excellence. The judges did consider each team at the event this year and made their decision based upon the assumption all teams at the event are eligible for Excellence in VEX U. The 2018-2019 VEX U awards appendix will correct this contradiction which was an error we simply did not catch.
I had interpreted the second statement as not a contradiction, but as a way of contrasting it to the second statement in the VRC appendix about eligible teams (for reference, both copied below). It being a copy paste error can be a fair enough reason though.
Also (unrelated to the judging), given that this is the desired operation of the rules, the decision to use the previous year’s winners to present each Excellence seems like a bad choice. It looks a bit bad when an organisation is presenting the award to another one of their teams.
Oh that’s what was going on!
We were confused why they had what seemed to us like random students having to present the award to other teams. Didn’t realize they were the previous winners. Not sure why I didn’t catch that. Maybe we were still trying to catch up with the previous hand-offs between the MCs, Karthik, Grant Cox, and then Dan.