Most Dominant Robots By Year

[Yipyapper]

Now, I haven't been in FIRST for more than a few years, but a couple robots that come to mind are 1114 being 2008's most dominant bot and 1717 being 2012's most dominant. Could any seasoned veterans shed some light on other years?

[Billfred]

From 2001 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vsp2LjfJHsA)-2002 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAmAnkYDUQM), the answer was 71.

2006, 25's robot made it through New Jersey, Las Vegas, and almost Saturday morning at Championship without losing once.

2010, 469 had a dominant strategy, and 1114 made it through three regionals undefeated and won all but one qualifying match at Championship. (With the seeding system that year, that "loss" was really how they locked up #1 seed...so you tell me.) They then marched through the Championship eliminations together, not losing a match before being swept in the Einstein finals.

[Joe G.]

2001: 71 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vsp2LjfJHsA)

2002: 71 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAmAnkYDUQM)

2006: 25

2009: 67

2010: 469 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJh_tb9Ox6A)

[Yipyapper]

2001: 71 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vsp2LjfJHsA)

2002: 71 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAmAnkYDUQM)

2006: 25

2009: 67

2010: 469 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJh_tb9Ox6A)

Is 469 the tall one just directing the balls into the corners? Because I could see that give some dominant numbers.

[Akash Rastogi]

2008: 1114 'nuf said. GOAT. Greatest of all time.

[Steven Donow]

Is 469 the tall one just directing the balls into the corners? Because I could see that give some dominant numbers.

Yes it is. It really did, getting the overal high score of 29 that year.


Last year, I would say it's a tossup between 341, 987, and 1717. 987 went undefeated the entire season except for their last qualification match in their division and the two finals matches on Einstein. That's impressive.

I don't know if there's any specific robot that could be considered a dominant robot for 2011...I'm leaning towards 111, 254 or 1114 though. Possibly 1503, considering they totally showed everyone that a robot could be successful WITHOUT picking up off the ground.

[z_beeblebrox]

Is 469 the tall one just directing the balls into the corners? Because I could see that give some dominant numbers.

Yes.

254 in 2011?

[ablatner]

2011 was probably 254. In 2010, 469 was the top offensive robot, but 294 shut them down in Einstein finals and had the best defense that year.

[StAxis]

Certainly agree with everyone on here about who has been most dominant, I know we're still competing, but any thoughts on who will be considered dominant (if anyone) this year? I think 1114, 2056, 254, and 1986 are really the ones in the running right now, just up to championship performances at this point.

[Yipyapper]

Yes it is. It really did, getting the overal high score of 29 that year.


Last year, I would say it's a tossup between 341, 987, and 1717. 987 went undefeated the entire season except for their last qualification match in their division and the two finals matches on Einstein. That's impressive.

I don't know if there's any specific robot that could be considered a dominant robot for 2011...I'm leaning towards 111, 254 or 1114 though. Possibly 1503, considering they totally showed everyone that a robot could be successful WITHOUT picking up off the ground.

That's a perfect example of using something simple to dominate... That is, if the defense doesn't just get in the way :rolleyes:

Loved watching those videos.

[Yipyapper]

Certainly agree with everyone on here about who has been most dominant, I know we're still competing, but any thoughts on who will be considered dominant (if anyone) this year? I think 1114, 2056, 254, and 1986 are really the ones in the running right now, just up to championship performances at this point.

I'd say 254 will probably make the biggest splash at champs; pickup, fastest climber by a good margin and it'll probably have super fast cycles. If only it wasn't climbing in the middle, it could dump for 20 points.

So now...
2001: 71
2002: 71
2008: 1114
2010: 469
2011: 254
2012: 1717

...Seems to be the general consensus, at least.

[lorem3k]

I don't know if there's any specific robot that could be considered a dominant robot for 2011...I'm leaning towards [...] 1114 though.
Did anyone in 2011 have a multi-ubertube autonomous other than 1114?

[Andrew Schreiber]

Did anyone in 2011 have a multi-ubertube autonomous other than 1114?

Quite a few teams did. 33 was one of the first to show it off during Week 1 at Kettering.

[JohnFogarty]

Did anyone in 2011 have a multi-ubertube autonomous other than 1114?

I could swear seeing a video where 233 did it.

[Steven Donow]

Did anyone in 2011 have a multi-ubertube autonomous other than 1114?

A lot of teams did. IIRC in Einstein finals both alliances had it.

[dodar]

I could swear seeing a video where 233 did it.

233 could do 3 ubertubes in auto.

[dodar]

2001: 71
2002: 71
2006: 25
2007: 233
2008: 1114
2009: 67
2010: 469
2011: 254
2012: 1717

[Steven Donow]

233 could do 3 ubertubes in auto.

Wow, I remember that, that was the craziest thing ever.

Found it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTs3b2w_GSw)

[JohnFogarty]

Such good programming.
:|

[Tom Line]

Wow, I remember that, that was the craziest thing ever.

Found it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTs3b2w_GSw)

Absolutely awesome, but I believe you'll find that they didn't post that till after championships, and I don't remember seeing them do it in any competition during the season.

[Akash Rastogi]

Who was GOAT* in 03-05?



*- Greatest of all time.

[Steven Donow]

Who was GOAT* in 03-05?



*- Greatest of all time.

From what I've heard/seen, I believe 111 were one of the top teams in 03.

[I-DOG]

67 was pretty dominant in 2005 if I recall. Then, FRC was like "Nope. Change the rules." 67 changed their robot's base dimensions by shifting their side onto the ground during Hybrid mode. When a robot gets a rule created after it, it's pretty important.

[JosephC]

I'd say 254 will probably make the biggest splash at champs; pickup, fastest climber by a good margin and it'll probably have super fast cycles. If only it wasn't climbing in the middle, it could dump for 20 points.

So now...
2001: 71
2002: 71
2008: 1114
2010: 469
2011: 254
2012: 1717

...Seems to be the general consensus, at least.

Putting a robot in 2012 doesn't really make sense, as there was no "most dominant" robot that year. 1717 had a great robot; however there were other great robots just as good. 987 for example was undefeated until Curie; and they ended up being World Finalists. 341 had 4 gold medals and a division silver. 118 had an amazing robot on Newton, they didn't get as much notice because of some sensor issues on Einstein.

I could keep going, but I think it makes more sense just to leave 2012 blank.

[Deetman]

67 was pretty dominant in 2005 if I recall. Then, FRC was like "Nope. Change the rules." 67 changed their robot's base dimensions by shifting their side onto the ground during Hybrid mode. When a robot gets a rule created after it, it's pretty important.

For reference for those that haven't seen this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFBQdQXIuwY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP6tf4OUvIc

[Navid Shafa]

Absolutely awesome, but I believe you'll find that they didn't post that till after championships, and I don't remember seeing them do it in any competition during the season.

I am fairly certain it was posted before Championships and I remember saying that I thought our single Ubertube was good :P

They had trouble doing 3 though, the last Ubertube often didn't make it, because they were in a rush to put it on.

[Matt Goelz]

Although I wasn't on a team to witness triple play, watching videos of the game I'd venture to say 330 was one of the most dominant in 2005. However, strategy had a lot to do with being successful in 2005. 330 just had one of the simplest robots that year and tremendous strategy (namely, taking away a triple play at the far end that usually are triple plays for the alliance behind that side of the glass) and execution of said strategy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvcZZgU08xA

[Cory]

Absolutely awesome, but I believe you'll find that they didn't post that till after championships, and I don't remember seeing them do it in any competition during the season.

It was not from after champs and they nearly executed it during quals at champs. I remember rushing over to their field to see it the first time they ran it. There was some kind of silly programming or setup mistake they made that caused the 3rd tube to not make it.

[vikesrock777]

An interesting thread similar to this one from long ago can be found here:

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20055&pp=30

From what I've read, it sounds like 47 for 1998 and a tossup between 25 and 47 again for 2000. A better opinion would likely be given by someone who was actually around back then though, all I have is what I could scrounge up on CD as I've only been around FRC since 2007.

Edit: found a photo of 47 from 2000. http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/12954 They are the pioneers of the swerve, first making on in (if my research is correct) 1998.

[TrevorJ]

Putting a robot in 2012 doesn't really make sense, as there was no "most dominant" robot that year. 1717 had a great robot; however there were other great robots just as good. 987 for example was undefeated until Curie; and they ended up being World Finalists. 341 had 4 gold medals and a division silver. 118 had an amazing robot on Newton, they didn't get as much notice because of some sensor issues on Einstein.

I could keep going, but I think it makes more sense just to leave 2012 blank.

I've got to agree. There wasn't a bot that I would really put head and shoulders above the field last season. 1114, 2056, 67, 469, 987, 548, and about a dozen more could all contend for most dominant. 1717 was a great robot to be sure though and a sight to see when everything was going well.

[cmrnpizzo14]

I was not around from 2004 but I remember from match videos that 67 was quite dominant. The other alliance partners with them (1126 & 340, let's go Rochester!) at CMP were picked only to hang for the entire match while 67 did all of the work with the balls.

They weren't special but I remember them as being quite dominant despite not winning.

[J_Miles]

67 was pretty dominant in 2005 if I recall. Then, FRC was like "Nope. Change the rules." 67 changed their robot's base dimensions by shifting their side onto the ground during Hybrid mode. When a robot gets a rule created after it, it's pretty important.

This made me think of the Michigan State Championship in 2010, where FIRST in Michigan (Or was it New Hampshire? Not sure, but my assumption was FiM) played an April Fool's joke:

Dave Verbrugge read a "rule change" during opening ceremonies that would have made it illegal to intentionally redirect soccer balls with any mechanism above the bumper zone (essentially rendering 469's incredibly effective scorer ineffective). I remember feeling sick to my stomach hearing it - I thought that 469 taking a risk in such a design deserved the success they god - but was even further saddened by the cheers and applause heard from so many teams around the arena. It was a sobering reminder that even as many people find dominant performance inspirational, a not insignificant group of people would cheer against such a team...I was quite relieved when Dave came out and said "This document is dated April 1st - April Fool's"

[stuart2054]

This made me think of the Michigan State Championship in 2010, where FIRST in Michigan (Or was it New Hampshire? Not sure, but my assumption was FiM) played an April Fool's joke:

Dave Verbrugge read a "rule change" during opening ceremonies that would have made it illegal to intentionally redirect soccer balls with any mechanism above the bumper zone (essentially rendering 469's incredibly effective scorer ineffective). I remember feeling sick to my stomach hearing it - I thought that 469 taking a risk in such a design deserved the success they god - but was even further saddened by the cheers and applause heard from so many teams around the arena. It was a sobering reminder that even as many people find dominant performance inspirational, a not insignificant group of people would cheer against such a team...I was quite relieved when Dave came out and said "This document is dated April 1st - April Fool's"

I remember the same thing and it was at MSC and that was my rookie year. We did not go to CMP that year so naturally I really only new MI teams at that time but I would vote for 469 being dominate that year.

"Keep in mind my opinion is worth what you paid for it"

[Iaquinto.Joe]

Our team hastily created an anti-469 auto mode in 2010 before one of our elim matches. Our mode involved ramming ourselves into the tunnel to deny 469 access. Well, we forgot that our drive motors were backwards and setting -1 to the victors meant forwards, and flung ourselves across the field.

Here is us running into the wall by accident. (http://youtu.be/J_a_U6aPIOw)

[Andrew Schreiber]

but was even further saddened by the cheers and applause heard from so many teams around the arena. It was a sobering reminder that even as many people find dominant performance inspirational, a not insignificant group of people would cheer against such a team...I was quite relieved when Dave came out and said "This document is dated April 1st - April Fool's"

It's a good thing nobody could hear the plethora of very off color remarks I was making directed at the people cheering at that. Doubly so that they couldn't hear the words I said when they cheered that 469 tipped during a match in the eliminations. Basically, they were very naughty words directed at people who just don't get the point of FIRST.


I would argue 469 was not that dominant due to the fact that they were merely good (95th percentile at least) unless paired with a solid scoring partner.

[MooreteP]

For reference for those that haven't seen this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFBQdQXIuwY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CP6tf4OUvIc

Oh man. Thanks.
This takes me back.

[LeelandS]

I haven't been around for long, but here's what I gathered from some earlier years that aren't as covered:

2003: From what I understand, Wildstand (111) has it for this year. They earned their first of three world championships this year. They had a robot design and strategy that both earned them the most points in the match, and prevented the opposing alliance from doing so by blocking them all off from getting to the top of the ramp for the end game. One of the earlier versions of a choke hold strategy before FIRST started working to phase them out.

2004: 67 was almost definitely the one to note this year. The last year of 2v2, every elimination alliance (which still had 3 teams) was required to rotate all robots around so they all played at least once. 67 played in every elimination match that year, up until their elimination in the first rounds of Einstein.

2005: I believe 67 could be considered the team for this year for a number of reasons. This was 67's 5-banner year (Regional win, Regional Chairman's, Division win, Einstein win, Championship Chairman's win). That's not a feat most teams accomplished. I honestly can't say I know a lot about this year, I just know 67 had a starstruck season.

2006: 25 or 1114 could both be considered for this spot. 25 is a solid pick, having gone undefeated the entire season (through 2 regionals) up until a late qualification match on Newton. And all without floor loading... They won Newton and made it to the finals of Einstein. 1114 was 28-2 in regional qualification matches, winning 3 regionals and being the #1 seed and captain of those alliances twice. The lost one qualification match on Curie and were finalists in their division.

[Chris Hibner]

Here's my list of the most dominant robots every year that I've been involved with FIRST:

1997: 71 (They were a different number back then, but I recall them losing maybe one or two matches all year).
1998: 47 (they won 2 or 3 regionals)
1999: No dominant robot all year. My vote is 71 (2 out of 2 in their regionals)
2000: 47 (maybe the best robot of all (in relation to the rest of the competition)
2001: 71
2002: 71
2003: 111
2004: No teams were dominant.
2005: No team dominated.
2006: 1114 (three regional wins I believe, #1 seed at each regional)
2007: no dominant teams, but 1114 comes close
2008: 1114
2009: 67
2010: 469 (let's be real, their partner getting stuck in their own goal is why they lost, and they almost won despite that. Sorry to my friends on the winning alliance.)
2011: No dominant teams (too many teams that were top tier)
2012: Similar to 2011.

[Dan_Karol]

Here's my list of the most dominant robots every year that I've been involved with FIRST:

1997: 71 (They were a different number back then, but I recall them losing maybe one or two matches all year).
1998: 47 (they won 2 or 3 regionals)
1999: No dominant robot all year. My vote is 71 (2 out of 2 in their regionals)
2000: 47 (maybe the best robot of all (in relation to the rest of the competition)
2001: 71
2002: 71
2003: 111
2004: No teams were dominant.
2005: No team dominated.
2006: 1114 (three regional wins I believe, #1 seed at each regional)
2007: no dominant teams, but 1114 comes close
2008: 1114
2009: 67
2010: 469 (let's be real, their partner getting stuck in their own goal is why they lost, and they almost won despite that. Sorry to my friends on the winning alliance.)
2011: No dominant teams (too many teams that were top tier)
2012: Similar to 2011.

I would say 126 earns the 2004 spot and the 1992 spot.

Alliance picks held them back in 2004, but they quite possibly had one of the most capable robots in a game where you could not do everything. Their hang was also jaw-dropping. It was the equivalent of watching 1114's or 254's this year. That said, this was my rookie year so my knowledge is not nearly as complete as it could have been.

They won 1992

I agree with the cool factor of HOT in '05 but having the rules of the game changed on you doesn't mean that you where dominating necessarily. 190 likes to take claim to several of them (some mid season) but not every robot they produced during those times dominated the competition.


Does anyone have a memory that reaches back far enough to grasp the 90s first scene?

[R1ffSurf3r]

It was not from after champs and they nearly executed it during quals at champs. I remember rushing over to their field to see it the first time they ran it. There was some kind of silly programming or setup mistake they made that caused the 3rd tube to not make it.

It ran perfectly, we just accidentally put the 3rd tube in the wrong spot :o

In all the excitement we aligned the third tube with the center of the rack, instead of on the left. Twas a bummer

[Donut]

Here's my list of the most dominant robots every year that I've been involved with FIRST:

2000: 47 (maybe the best robot of all (in relation to the rest of the competition)
2001: 71
2002: 71
2003: 111
2004: No teams were dominant.
2005: No team dominated.
2006: 1114 (three regional wins I believe, #1 seed at each regional)
2007: no dominant teams, but 1114 comes close
2008: 1114
2009: 67
2010: 469 (let's be real, their partner getting stuck in their own goal is why they lost, and they almost won despite that. Sorry to my friends on the winning alliance.)
2011: No dominant teams (too many teams that were top tier)
2012: Similar to 2011.

I agree with Chris' list with the exception of 2006, which I think goes to team 25. That year they only lost 2 matches prior to making Einstein and both were at the Championship. I can only comment on games after 2000, I've seen hardly any match footage or robots from years prior to that.

I know the 2 teams that seemed to have the most hype coming into Champs in 2007 were 330 and 1114, but I don't think anyone truly dominated that year.

[KSladden1503]

Did anyone in 2011 have a multi-ubertube autonomous other than 1114?
1503 did at 2 tube autonomous at champs! Yup it happened, and we picked up from the floor on Einstein...

[JJackson]

Is it just me or is it getting harder and harder to pick just one dominant bot each year?

[ehfeinberg]

Is it just me or is it getting harder and harder to pick just one dominant bot each year?

It surely is! It's because these past few years there have been more and more dominant robots. First as a whole is improving at an exponential rate.

[Lil' Lavery]

67 was pretty dominant in 2005 if I recall. Then, FRC was like "Nope. Change the rules." 67 changed their robot's base dimensions by shifting their side onto the ground during Hybrid mode. When a robot gets a rule created after it, it's pretty important.

"Flop-bots" existed before, and after, 67 did it in 2005. The most recent that I know of was 16 in 2008. It was a fairly common thing to do in the early 2000s, though. With bumper rules and things like maximum extension dimensions/cylinders, it's no longer a viable design.

[Bdf809]

People seem to be saying that 254 was the most dominant bot in 2011. While 254 was definitely amazing, I'd have to say that 1114 was a better offensive power. 254 seems to be remembered because they won Einstein while 1114 was knocked out in divisional semi-finals due to a less than fortunate seeding and alliance selection (as I recall, they were first pick). So, for recent years, my picks are:

2008 - 1114
2009 - 67
2010 - 469
2011 - 1114
2012 - 1717
2013 (so far) - 1114 or 987 (though 254 is catching up fast)

[JohnFogarty]

254 is ahead of 1114 already in my opinion.

[dodar]

Im sorry, but 2056 is the most dominant robot right now. 51-2, rank 1 at 3 different events, and 3-0 at events this year.

[Yipyapper]

Im sorry, but 2056 is the most dominant robot right now. 51-2, rank 1 at 3 different events, and 3-0 at events this year.

1114 also had a higher OPR at GTR W; the highest OPR in one event this year so far and the only one 100 or above.

[dodar]

1114 also had a higher OPR at GTR W; the highest OPR in one event this year so far and the only one 100 or above.

So because they have a higher OPR at one event(where they were picked by 2056), they are automatically the more dominant robot this year? Dominance should be concluded by on field prowess; thus 2056 should, as of right now, be considered the most dominant robot this year.

[Abhishek R]

I don't think there will be one completely dominant robot this year. Sure 1114 and 2056 have been the best performers, but really with the amount of variety in this game it's hard to judge.

[Yipyapper]

So because they have a higher OPR at one event(where they were picked by 2056), they are automatically the more dominant robot this year? Dominance should be concluded by on field prowess; thus 2056 should, as of right now, be considered the most dominant robot this year.

The point I should've made is that Simbotics will—I guarantee it—be extremely dominant on champs where it counts; OP can pick up off the floor, but many, many teams will be able to do that. The field will be picked clean often, and their feeder station pickup is slower than 1114 since they need to pick it up off of the floor from the station whereas 1114 just lines up and loads.

Also take into account the biggest factor... climb. 2056 can climb for 10, 1114 climbs for 30 razor fast and can dump for 20 more. 1114 is the more dominant bot, and they will make a bigger impression at world champs.

My comment about OPR was because you were referencing wins; wins does not equal absolute dominance over every robot in FIRST, just in those regionals.

As for the most dominant out of everyone, I have no idea. Tons of contenders, probably will be very tough. Please note to everyone that I mean the most dominant, and while that might be thought to be a clear-cut thing to have no dominant bot some years, the point is that it's the most dominant, not the greatest margin of dominance from the next team. It can be very close; it's up for discussion. That's the point of this thread.

[JosephC]

The point I should've made is that Simbotics will—I guarantee it—be extremely dominant on champs where it counts; OP can pick up off the floor, but many, many teams will be able to do that. The field will be picked clean often, and their feeder station pickup is slower than 1114 since they need to pick it up off of the floor from the station whereas 1114 just lines up and loads.

Also take into account the biggest factor... climb. 2056 can climb for 10, 1114 climbs for 30 razor fast and can dump for 20 more. 1114 is the more dominant bot, and they will make a bigger impression at world champs.

My comment about OPR was because you were referencing wins; wins does not equal absolute dominance over every robot in FIRST, just in those regionals.

As for the most dominant out of everyone, I have no idea. Tons of contenders, probably will be very tough. Please note to everyone that I mean the most dominant, and while that might be thought to be a clear-cut thing to have no dominant bot some years, the point is that it's the most dominant, not the greatest margin of dominance from the next team. It can be very close; it's up for discussion. That's the point of this thread.

You can make all the points about how 1114 WILL be the most dominate robot at champs, but as of right NOW it is clear that 2056 is the most dominant robot (out of the two). 2056 has the highest overall OPR, the highest CCWM, the best record, and have been first seed; picking 1114 at all their events.

You can make the argument that 1114 can climb and dump; but 2056 can do a 7 disk auton due to their ground pickup, and to some people, that is more valuable. 2056's auton is not defendable, atleast not without a ton of penalties. 1114 can be stopped from climbing by a robot that can't even climb; albeit it is a very difficult thing to do.


Overall, 2056 has proven themselves the top contender for the most dominant thus far; however with MSC and MAR champs coming up this weekend, and Worlds around the corner, there is a lot of robots that'll give them a run for their money; 469 being one of those that hasn't been mentioned thus far.

[MichaelBick]

You can make all the points about how 1114 WILL be the most dominate robot at champs, but as of right NOW it is clear that 2056 is the most dominant robot (out of the two). 2056 has the highest overall OPR, the highest CCWM, the best record, and have been first seed; picking 1114 at all their events.

You can make the argument that 1114 can climb and dump; but 2056 can do a 7 disk auton due to their ground pickup, and to some people, that is more valuable. 2056's auton is not defendable, atleast not without a ton of penalties. 1114 can be stopped from climbing by a robot that can't even climb; albeit it is a very difficult thing to do.


Overall, 2056 has proven themselves the top contender for the most dominant thus far; however with MSC and MAR champs coming up this weekend, and Worlds around the corner, there is a lot of robots that'll give them a run for their money; 469 being one of those that hasn't been mentioned thus far.

All your metrics are flawed. They are all based on alliance partners for one. Being first seed just means they have been scoring the most auton points while maintaining the very good record.

[Cory]

1114 is going to be more valuable. There are a number of teams with 7 disc auto, but no teams that can score as much as they do, with as quick a climb, and a reliable 20 pt dump

[Yipyapper]

1114 is going to be more valuable. There are a number of teams with 7 disc auto, but no teams that can score as much as they do, with as quick a climb, and a reliable 20 pt dump

Yes, I should've mentioned that 1114 shoots very, very fast cycles; their human player and drivers are so spot on consistently every match.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Also take into account the biggest factor... climb. 2056 can climb for 10, 1114 climbs for 30 razor fast and can dump for 20 more. 1114 is the more dominant bot, and they will make a bigger impression at world champs.


And what clairvoyance told you that this was the most important metric? I seem to recall a thread wherein people are moaning that 50 point dumpers aren't worth it. So it seems that shooting from the floor is more important.

[vikesrock777]

All your metrics are flawed. They are all based on alliance partners for one. Being first seed just means they have been scoring the most auton points while maintaining the very good record.
Emphasis mine.

Though I personally don't know which I consider better between the two, I think the fact that 2056 is playing a game that gets them better seeds is something that needs to be considered in their favor when it comes to dominance. I consider it a design decision that inherently and intentionally benefits them in qualifications, setting themselves up to be a higher seed, which is generally considered to be a recipe for allowing continued dominance through elims.

[MichaelBick]

Emphasis mine.

Though I personally don't know which I consider better between the two, I think the fact that 2056 is playing a game that gets them better seeds is something that needs to be considered in their favor when it comes to dominance. I consider it a design decision that inherently and intentionally benefits them in qualifications, setting themselves up to be a higher seed, which is generally considered to be a recipe for allowing continued dominance through elims.

If dominance is considered winning elimination matches, then isn't 1114 just as dominant as 2056

[vikesrock777]

If dominance is considered winning elimination matches, then isn't 1114 just as dominant as 2056

Thus far, certainly. I just think there is just something to be said for controlling your own destiny going into eliminations, especially at championships, so you don't have something happen like Newton 2006. I think 2056 is just slightly more immune to this occurring than 1114.

[Navid Shafa]

Let's just continue filling in previous years and wait to figure out this year AFTER Championships...

[Anupam Goli]

Let's just continue filling in previous years and wait to figure out this year AFTER Championships...

I like this idea. You need a setting where you see some of these teams compete against each other before you can find out who really is the most dominant, and in some games, it's extremely hard to see who the most dominant bots are. Perhaps we might even have to wait until after IRI for this.

[Yipyapper]

And what clairvoyance told you that this was the most important metric? I seem to recall a thread wherein people are moaning that 50 point dumpers aren't worth it. So it seems that shooting from the floor is more important.

I added afterwards—and it should already be apparent—that 1114 does this very quickly in addition to shooting extremely fast cycles; I remember a match in their 1st regional where they scored at least 20 frisbees. The 50 is like a bonus of sorts, one that is really, really valuable when tagged along with their powerful offense.

[Racer26]

IMO: 1114 built their 2013 robot specifically targetting the #1 alliance first pick position.

I think they (properly) gambled that the number 1 seed will be an 'extra-disk (most likely 7disk) auto' bot, who will want 1114's solid 3disk auto+superfast 50pt climb+4-5cycles.

If they get divisioned with 2056 again, I won't be at all surprised to see a 2056/1114/<3disk auto + FCS or 3disk auto + good defence> #1 alliance in that division. You can easily substitute 2056 here for any of the top 7diskers.

I think 1114 knew that seeding #1 would take a floor pickup (because of how autopoints are the first tiebreaker), but also knew that having the fastest climb+dump around would be what it would take to be the 1st pick. Two robots on an alliance with 7disk autos doesnt help you if they use the same 7. A risky strategy to be sure, but so far its worked. They've got their 5th triple regional win season to show for it.

[Michael Leicht]

For 2003 I would have to say team 111 with there crab drive and ramp system led them to win it all.

[JesseK]

We can't think of 'dominance' with a unilateral worldly respect. Think about this Rock-Paper-Scissors metaphor: it may be the case that the only regionals Rock can attend are those with many Scissors and little to no Paper. All of these teams deserve recognition as Great, but we have to be careful when comparing performance records across regionals.

2013: Given that 1114's cycles are defense-prone (attempted defense, at least), and that they haven't faced many of the traditional defensive powerhouses, I'd reserve any 'dominance' calls for after champs. 2056's ground pickup is pretty incredible, and after seeing first-hand what an active efficient ground pickup adds to a powerful offensive alliance, I almost wonder if 1114 could dominate championships without such a partner. I don't doubt they'll win nearly all of their matches, but what about the one where they face a similar-caliber robot + 1 good defender?

In 2009, didn't 67 practically re-invent their ball shooter prior to champs?

[Chris Hibner]

In 2009, didn't 67 practically re-invent their ball shooter prior to champs?

No, they re-invented it prior to their first event. They were undefeated (never lost a single match) going into their third event. They only lost a few matches all season.

What made their robot amazing was two things:

1) their driver (Nick) was incredible. (I'll have to point him to this comment since we works with me and is currently sitting about 15 feet from my desk - he'll like that).

2) Their floor pickup was flawless. If their shooter missed a shot, their pickup would immediately ingest the ball and shoot it right into the goal. Basically every ball found the goal within 2-3 seconds of them catching a goal even if they missed a shot.

[EricLeifermann]

In 2009, didn't 67 practically re-invent their ball shooter prior to champs?

No, they did it just before their 1st district competition.

[Chris is me]

OP can pick up off the floor, but many, many teams will be able to do that.

Less than 24 teams in FIRST have pulled off a 7-disc autonomous. I think your definition of "many" may be a bit off. I have been to four regionals this year and I have seen 5 floor pickups, none of which pulled off more than one additional disc. The idea that there's a whole flurry of working seven discs is a little misleading. There's a lot more seven-disc autos than there are quick 50 point dumping human loaded shooters, and I think a lot of teams are trying to retrofit their robots to add one, but I don't think divisions are going to be chock full of them.

There's no way anyone can answer this question for this year yet. All we have is grainy video at different regionals, impressions from pre-ship videos, and OPR. Wait until the Championship.

I would say it is totally wrong for anyone but 469 to get the title in 2010, and it's totally wrong for anyone in 2011 to get the title since the year became so even. Even 2012 was very close at the high level.

[Adam Freeman]

In 2009, didn't 67 practically re-invent their ball shooter prior to champs?

No...the ball shooter was re-invented before our first competition. Went from single wide to a double wide shooter.

It was the same throughout all our competitions.

[Mr. Lim]

I will throw this one out there to all the Canadian FIRST historians...

The most dominant robot of 2004 was...

1241

No exaggeration. Rookie year. Best robot in the world in 2004.

[thefro526]

In 2009, didn't 67 practically re-invent their ball shooter prior to champs?

No...the ball shooter was re-invented before our first competition. Went from single wide to a double wide shooter.

It was the same throughout all our competitions.

Maybe Jesse was thinking of 33 in 2009?

IIRC, they rebuilt the ball path portion of their robot into a Hot-Inspired Double Wide Shooter/Dumper/Shumper.

[Andrew Schreiber]

I will throw this one out there to all the Canadian FIRST historians...

The most dominant robot of 2004 was...

1241

No exaggeration. Rookie year. Best robot in the world in 2004.

I remember seeing them that year. They were incredible. I also recall one of the coolest plays during which 67 stuffed a 2x multiplier ball down their robot's throat. Excellent use of game pieces.

[Gaurav27]

Thanks guys,

Yeah we had a great run that year! If anyone would like to watch our matches at the 2004 Championships, I believe team 121 Rhode Warriors' website has video archives of the division eliminations.

I will throw this one out there to all the Canadian FIRST historians...

The most dominant robot of 2004 was...

1241

No exaggeration. Rookie year. Best robot in the world in 2004.

I remember seeing them that year. They were incredible. I also recall one of the coolest plays during which 67 stuffed a 2x multiplier ball down their robot's throat. Excellent use of game pieces.

[Bennett548]

I remember seeing them that year. They were incredible. I also recall one of the coolest plays during which 67 stuffed a 2x multiplier ball down their robot's throat. Excellent use of game pieces.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mq-IpjxkQ50

One of my all-time favorite moments in FRC. I loved 1241, and their incredibly inspirational bot, but seeing them get shut down was just as inspirational.

[LeelandS]

I would say it is totally wrong for anyone but 469 to get the title in 2010, and it's totally wrong for anyone in 2011 to get the title since the year became so even. Even 2012 was very close at the high level.

I feel like a robot that relies on their partners to win shouldn't be called dominant. Yes, 469 excelled at winning. In elimination rounds, when the #1 side snatched them up to complement their scoring. At Cass Tech (their first district event), their average qualification alliance score was 3.69. By comparison, 217, the #1 seed at Cass Tech, had an average alliance score of 6.42. A significant difference between the #1, undefeated team, and their 6-4-2 first pick.

At MSC, where 469 had their highest average qualification alliance score, it sat at a resounding 13.75. Again, in comparison, 1918, the #1 seed, averaged 12.33 in qualification matches. Yes, 469 beats out their captain in this one, but 469's standard deviation was 7.18, while 1918's was 5.5. What that means is, 1918 was more consistent in their scores than 469 was.

Now, I know you can't judge a robot by their alliance scores. But looking at the alliances and results, 469's higher end scores came mostly when paired with another strong robot, such as 67, 33, 217 and 1918. Their average alliance scores in elimination rounds (with the #1 seed at their events) blow their other scores out of the water.

I know it's a very subjective stance, but I find it hard to say 469 was the most dominant team in 2010 when they relied to heavily on their alliance partners.

I guess a difference in definitions is causing a lot of conflict, especially in 469's case. I see a dominant robot as one that not only wins, but continues to win despite the quality of their alliance partners. In other words, a robot that garners a majority of their wins on their own, unaided.

[Chris is me]

You're extremely underrating 469's performance outside of the tunnel. Even if they were the only robot on the field with scoring ability, they could pop out of the tunnel and score from midfield effectively, charging their own cycle. It was not a single purpose robot.

Mathematical analysis of consistency isn't the best way to look at things, because 469 had a bigger target on their back than any team in recent memory. Teams devoted multiple robots and entire matches to preventing them from playing parts of their game.

[Lil' Lavery]

I will throw this one out there to all the Canadian FIRST historians...

The most dominant robot of 2004 was...

1241

No exaggeration. Rookie year. Best robot in the world in 2004.

I contemplated posting this as well. It was between 1241 and 33 for the best 2004 bot, in my opinion. But I am also of the opinion that there wasn't really any truly "dominant" bot in 2004.

The same thing can be applied, to an even larger degree, to 2005 onwards. "Dominance" in the 3v3 era means something completely different than it did in prior eras of FRC. No team can dominate a game the same way that 71 did in 1997 or 60 and 71 did in 2002. It's become "dominance" through plurality. More robots on the field, often sharing the same scarce resources, has led to the demise of true dominance. In many respects, it's because of the increase in parity. Mid-level teams are now competing at a much higher level than they used to, and the number of powerhouses has grown substantially.

The only teams from the 3v3 era that enter the discussion as "dominant," in my opinion, are 1114 in 2008 and 469 in 2010. 469 was dominant in the same fashion that 71 was dominant in 2001. They still needed good partners to compete at 100%, but they did a rare function better than anyone else (and were still plenty good at a number of other things). They were, by far, the best "X factor" in that game. 1114 in 2013 may prove to be similar by the end of Championship.
1114 in 2008 was a much more old school dominant. They were simply better than everyone else. It was 47 in 2000-style dominance. Not a chokehold by any means, but very very difficult to outplay. The game mechanics worked against them, though. Their hybrid scoring was easily the best in FRC, but there were only two trackballs to remove from the rack. After knocking those two off, there was diminishing returns for the rest of autonomous scoring for the alliance (as laps weren't worth as much and their alliance partners couldn't knock off any more trackballs). The game mechanics inhibited them from taking an even bigger lead out of hybrid, something that enabled the other alliance to have a chance against them.

[Racer26]

I remember 2004!

1241 WAS awesome. Their human player, as I understand it, had been plucked from the highschool basketball team (something Rick Hansen SS was much more well known for at the time than robots). He's STILL part of 1241 today as a mentor, and has a job in a STEM field (someone please correct me if I'm wrong).

The only thing 1241 needed in 2004, was an alliance partner with a good auto. At the wonderland invitational (a long-since defunct Canadian offseason) 1241 selected 1075 for our autonomous, and 1114 was our alliance's third pick. The three of us went on to win that event. I still have one of the 5 pt dodgeballs that were the game pieces.

Also: Wow @ 67 in that video from the 2004 GLR. Brilliant play. Love it.

[rmhooks573]

talking about 469 in 2010, my rookie year, made me go back to this right here. A proud moment i must say. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FA0FSXlvf_Q&list=PL0139E1FA8D20EE94&index=4)

[LeelandS]

You're extremely underrating 469's performance outside of the tunnel. Even if they were the only robot on the field with scoring ability, they could pop out of the tunnel and score from midfield effectively, charging their own cycle. It was not a single purpose robot.

Mathematical analysis of consistency isn't the best way to look at things, because 469 had a bigger target on their back than any team in recent memory. Teams devoted multiple robots and entire matches to preventing them from playing parts of their game.

I do realize that 469 wasn't a one-trick pony. I do remember watching them and being astounded at their raw scoring ability, especially when they got their autonomous working and thus the ability to start their own cycle.

That said, 469's most high scoring performances came from using the cycle method with another powerful team. I think a difference in the definition of dominant is making this really difficult. Under my definition, 469 would have continued to have high scoring performances throughout quals and elims at all their competition, despite the quality of their partners or the efforts of their opponents. You seem to have a different definition, as does probably everyone in this thread.

[Don Wright]

I do realize that 469 wasn't a one-trick pony.

Hi LeelandS,

I'm going against my better judgement to post in this thread about 2010 (since it still holds a special joyful and painful place in my heart)...especially since it's a thread with this topic... However, I just wanted to give you some insight that maybe you wouldn't know about our season... This is in no way to change your opinion or anything else, but maybe just to explain...

In basically all of our qualification matches, we had partners that told us they could score and would score and then our job was simple, park in the tunnel and wait for the balls... Of course, maybe this didn't always happen as designed so there we were...parked in the tunnel for many seconds (or minutes) relying on our partners... So, yes, your conclusion is "correct"...however...there were sometimes reasons behind this lower scores that maybe were not under our influence...

Not that any of this means we should be listed for 2010...