To start I would like to say that in no way am I attempting to attack any individual teams or people. I am posting because I feel my team is being cheated out of a worlds bid and I would like to share my perspective. I have two issues with incorrect worlds bids being handed out for skills and I will approach them each separately.
First off, my team has finished the season ranked 31 in robot skills and by a mere 1 point. I understand that someone is always going to have to be the last team before the cut off and I realize that this year that someone was me. This is very heartbreaking but I understand that rules are rules and should be followed to the fullest extent, and will never make everyone happy.
But if rules are rules then they need to be followed 100%. In this case there are two different cases that broke the rules which both (if solved) may lead to my team in fact earning a slot to worlds, which is why I feel its important that I bring this up.
In Utah, a competition was held (BATC Skills Challenge) on March 5th, two days prior to the skills deadline. At this event two teams posted scores which made it into the top 30 for robot skills. I completely believe that these scores are legit and have nothing personal against these teams.
I understand that the RECF sent emails out today to the top skills teams inviting them to the world championship. I also understand taking back those emails afterwards is nearly impossible and can not happen. A suggestion I have is give the next two teams a bid to worlds as well to make sure the top thirty scores do get the invite they earned.
The second Issue I have is that the teams ranked 31 and 32 in the programming skills rankings received invites to worlds as well today. I see that those teams have identical scores to the team ranked 30 which may seem fair to give them a bid as well. But if rules are going to be followed 100% then we should look at the tie breaker rules for skills. In the rule book there is a tie breaking flowchart showing how equal skills scores can be separated in determining the winner. There is a reason why the team in 32nd is ranked 32nd and not 30th and is because of those tie breaker rules. I believe it is unfair to offer those teams a slot to worlds for being “close” if they did not truly earn that spot. My personal solution to this is to either revoke those bids handed out or to also include the teams ranked 31 and 32 in robot skills for being “close” in order to equal this out.
My question is what is everyones opinion is on these issues and what should the RECF do to fix these?
Based on what @TheFive2527a has said about the event in Utah, I believe the RECF should do something about it, as the event did not meet the requirements for a real tournament. I don’t think it is possible nor would it be an advisable course of action to revoke worlds spots from teams that have already received confirmation of their qualification for worlds. So I agree with @TheFive2527a that the RECF should give two more spots to ranks 31 and 32 since the two teams at the Utah event that undoubtedly made it in the top thirty, did so at an event that did not have enough teams participating to be considered an event.
This is what I would do if I was in the RECF’s shoes (at a student’s analysis of the situation and assuming I’m not misinterpreting anything…).
3388 was removed because there weren’t enough teams at the skills event they attended.
The rest of the five robot skills and eight programming scores that were removed were from this event in China.
I don’t know why they weren’t counted.
My guess is that they were scored or uploaded wrong since the of how high they all were.
the score all are legit since they are all video recorded (yes, all the runs happen in China needs to be recorded) and i personally saw the video of the 386 prog run. There were also a lot of ppl at that event can prove its legit
It was already discussed on the forum that if a team not in the top 30 had the same score as the team in 30th or above then that team too would receive an invite. The invite was not given to slots 31 and 32 in prog because they were “close”, but because they indeed had the same score. That is why slot 33 in prog was not given a slot. They were “close” and did not have the same score.
I have to agree, at least in principle here with TheFive2527a. I had been talking with members of their robotics club, and they seemed to be working very hard to make sure that their skills competition had a full 16 participation teams. It would not be fair for another team who did not go through that work and meet the requirements for an official score to have their results counted. That’s just my two cents though.
At least 1 team appears to have been removed from the top end of world rankings possibly due to minimum event requirements not being met. Given this I would imagine the RECF have performed some checks to ensure the top 30 are legitimate but your first port of call should be your RECF regional manager.
This is unfortunate and I really feel bad for you OP. However, I have a question about the requirements for an event to be considered “official.” My understanding was that 16 teams have to be registered - not neccesarily “participate.” I have been at skills events where registered teams show up but never put their robot on the field because they are not ready - so do they count as participating or not?
Another issue I have is that if an event if indeed not considered “official” those scores should never end up in the skills database in the first place. Why are scores being removed at the 11th hours? It is really easy to verify that enough teams participated prior to posting the skills scores.