Which robot(s) did you like the best this year?

[MichaelMcQuinn]

Pick upto 4 teams.

[Gregor]

1114
1325
4678
4976

[orangelight]

33
548
1114
118

[BrennanB]

2826
33
118
254

Creative:

1987
1538
1657
330

Simple:

1325
1325
1325
1325

Underrated:

1730
4678
2512

[cad321]

Not on the poll, but my favorite robot this year was by far 2826. Was following their success at their regionals and rooting for them all through worlds. By far one of (if not THE) best robot this season IMO.

[LDiDomenico]

2826
254
1114
987

[Ginger Power]

2826
2826
2826
2512

[Ichlieberoboter]

2826
2826
2512
118

[asid61]

2826 wasn't on the list...
But 1114 and 148 apart from that.

[tindleroot]

I think 254 and 1114 are tied for best, 148 just behind them.
But 2826 is definitely my favorite.

[Chief Hedgehog]

2826 - This was a Garbage man's dream - loved watching this in action!
3130 - Saw this at the week zero event - we knew it was going to be a team to beat.
2512 - The "sail" banners and the Manipulators were awesome...
1816 - Again - loved the sail and the two tote pick-up.

[Abhishek R]

118
2826
1325
1671

Would be my 4 if they were all on the list.

[jajabinx124]

My favs:

148
254
1986
4488

[ice.berg]

Favorite top scoring bots:
118 - 'nauts were just crazy this year
148 - best split robot design, wish the original auto was legal
1114 -best landfill
2826 - best feeder station and auto
987 - can grabbers and ability to cap stacks while dominating the landfill
254 - crazy 6 stack time with the ramp
2056 - universal all rounder

The interesting bots where I liked unique mechanisms or out of the box ideas:
4488 - the way the container claw worked with the internal stacking I thought was interesting and unique
1671- robot on stilts sliding the totes underneath the frame
33 - liked the "stack compressor" to manage the stability of stacks
67 - container manipulator was unique how it flipped it over the top
179 - mecanum wheels on the container claw? Wish it was at worlds so I could have seen it
1241 - dual stacks while also fitting in the transport config. Out of the box thinking
3310 - articulating arm was a work of art, also those can grabbers...
1987 - wall of stacks is a sight to behold
1678 - can grabbers, can grabbers, can grabbers

Favorites from the midwest/regionals I attended:
3130 - dominated their regionals with consistent play
525 - great 3 stack a match robot
876 - consistent improvements throughout their events
2481 - swerve drive with great landfill stacking ability
1756 - great intake and ramp designs enabled quick feeder station stacking
4143 - stackzilla, with the telescoping can grabber and tote elevator
2451 - swerve drive with the universal ability for both areas of the field

[waialua359]

From an engineering standpoint and fun to watch, 971 was my favorite. Too bad they arent on the list.

[MooreteP]

Not the best poll.
Important teams are missing: 1325, 2826. Why? (especially 2826)
How did you generate this list?

Also, the numbers are not sequential.

So I will add 246, Overclocked. Just plain weird and successful.

[Trevor1523]

1023 for reasons of having the ability to make 3 stacks of 6

233 for reasons of pink :)

33 because they had a great strategy this year, as well as a really amazing robot.

4488 because even though they are a 'rookie' team, they're still quite good.

[Anthony Galea]

My favorite to see this year was 246. I saw one match of theirs on Carson, and 254 was on the other side of the field, and even then, I was watching 246 because of how crazy that thing was.

Other favorites:

2826
1023
3683
1114
2056
4976
548
5188

[Dan Petrovic]

It is a tragedy that 2826 wasn't on this poll.

[Richard Wallace]

It is a tragedy that 2826 wasn't on this poll.A dozen others have mentioned Wave's 'bot in this thread -- add me to their fan list. If that machine is a garbage man's dream, then the garbage man is a total geek.

Besides the ones I picked from the menu, 548 and 2054 stand out in my personal (Michigan-centric) 2015 viewing memory; the former for consistency and speed, the latter for solo28auton and for being my team's alliance partner at Kentwood.

I enjoyed watching efficient landfill stacking, so 1114, 33, 987 caught my attention frequently.

[teku14]

I feel like 254 was the best landfill bot altogether this year. They didn't do it that much but it was very fast when they did... even sightly better than 1114

[carpedav000]

My favorite Indiana bots this year were:

For HP performance:
-5188
-1501
-1024
-1747

For landfill performance:
-1741
-868
-71
-3176

For making REALLY cool sounds:
-234
-234
-234
-234

For aesthetics:
-868
-1018
-1741
-4485

[OccamzRazor]

I definitely would vote 2826 as my top choice. The 28 point auto was one of the best strategies we came up with day 1 on our team and tried to perform ourselves. We quickly abandoned it during competition because we could not get an alliance to let it happen and we were very close on size to make it work. To see this idea on Einstein confirms that we knew we made the right choice in our strategy which drove our design (we could also hold 3 cans). I am just glad they found an alliance that would play that auto. The uniqueness of this robot was not to be missed with the curved track claw and the "All the things" mentality.

[Niezrecki]

2826

Wave Robotics.

Best. Auto. Ever. Should be on the poll.

[Knufire]

Another +1 for 2826. Definitely my favorite robot of the year.

[Tyler Olds]

It is a tragedy that 2826 wasn't on this poll.


Yeah, what gives OP? Thanks to the fans for seeing through this! Guess we will just have to perform well at IRI for some respect from OP.

Edit: Where's our other Midwest brothers like 2481, 2338, and 3130? I feel like Rodney Dangerfield down here...

[MichaelMcQuinn]

I TOTALLY forgot about y'all! When I copied the list into here, it skipped y'all. I saw it but forgot to change it.

[Sperkowsky]

2826 hands down

[M1KRONAUT]

I loved 2826's 3-tote auto.

[Mike Marandola]

-1114, the Simbots always make my favorite looking robots and I guess they are pretty good too. :p
-254, they went from a top 10 robot to one of the top two. One of my favorite posts on CD is where Jared explains their process of making improvements between events. This is something that we will be focusing on in future years.
-148, I will never forget the first time I saw the reveal video. It was 4 am after an all night claw painting session and it gave me the energy I needed to finish before our 9 am meeting.
-3310, my favorite robot of the year and one of my top 3 of all time. It was mesmerizing.

[Electronica1]

For making REALLY cool sounds:
-234
-234
-234
-234


Someone should really make a top 25 robot sounds video. Lets be honest, this is the only consistent thing to rank robots from year to year.

[Abhishek R]

Someone should really make a top 25 robot sounds video. Lets be honest, this is the only consistent thing to rank robots from year to year.

118 would win every year

[Electronica1]

118 would win every year

Well, which one of 118's robots would win? I am talking about top 25 of all time, not just of this year. I am a pretty big fan of how their 2014 robot sounded, but maybe there are some others that could take it.

[Knufire]

Well, which one of 118's robots would win? I am talking about top 25 of all time, not just of this year. I am a pretty big fan of how their 2014 robot sounded, but maybe there are some others that could take it.

Not 27 2011.

[Abhishek R]

Well, which one of 118's robots would win? I am talking about top 25 of all time, not just of this year. I am a pretty big fan of how their 2014 robot sounded, but maybe there are some others that could take it.

Personally, I loved hearing their 2012 robot shoot.

[dgilbueno]

1. Why isn't 971 on the list?

They were one of the most creative looking robots of the season as well as very efficient.

2. 1717

Lightest swerve of the season :D ;)

Also loved 1114 and 330. They did well this season like I expected them to.

[John Retkowski]

+1 to 971. One of the most bueatiful mechanisms/robots I've ever seen.

[EmileH]

1114 placing a stack was a sound to behold. The pneumatic "bshoo" sound could be heard audibly in the stands on Einstein and we were in the 400s!

[Dan Petrovic]

1114 placing a stack was a sound to behold. The pneumatic "bshoo" sound could be heard audibly in the stands on Einstein and we were in the 400s!

The field just had to be mic'd because I, like you, was up in the 400's and could hear it very clearly.

[BrendanB]

1519: I remember watching them during Week 1 and was very impressed by how effective and simple their robot was but was concerned how well the robot would scale with the season if they could only make & cap 4 stacks. Those concerns quickly went away when they dominated Umass Dartmouth, Northeastern, and the New England DCMP playing consistently and getting very smart about how they placed and capped stacks. I have a feeling no one has pulled off the 3 tote autonomous more than they have.

195: Went from a poor performance in Week 1 to three event wins and a division finalist. Very incredible machine they built and became the the top stacker on the east coast.

254: Never satisfied with an okay sub-system. Their first regional of the year was impressive but they improved drastically from there on out putting up some of the highest solo contributions in a match.

3476: Their Tesla performance was incredible making 4 stacks (one without RC/noodle) in several matches throughout the weekend.

971: Beautiful and unique machine as always. Loved watching that machine stack and score.

[evanperryg]

where's 2826? Definitely one of the best robots this year, and definitely one of my favorites. Their design goes against every FRC design paradigm I can think of. The entire robot is very creative, and very effective.
1023: okay, so maybe I'm a little biased... but regardless, they were incredibly consistent. I have never seen a team do exactly the same thing in every qualifying match.
624: Their collector is excellent, and I like their aesthetic. It's a design that was calculated and precise.
1671: It's weird, but clever and a fun robot to watch.
148: It takes a very strong understanding of the game to come up with something like that. Good design, good strategy.

[Citrus Dad]

where's 2826? Definitely one of the best robots this year, and definitely one of my favorites. Their design goes against every FRC design paradigm I can think of. The entire robot is very creative, and very effective.


Ditto

[Knufire]

Their design goes against every FRC design paradigm I can think of.

I'd argue the opposite. Their robot is a perfect example of a successful implementation of the strategic design process, and that's why it's also my favorite of this year.

[Bryce2471]

I am very surprised that 1678 is getting so (relatively) few votes. In my opinion, they were by far the best team of the season. They found what was ultimately important very early, and made their season revolve around it.

[George Nishimura]

1114's robot this year sits alongside 1986's 2013 robot as my favourite of all time.

[tickspe15]

I am very surprised that 1678 is getting so (relatively) few votes. In my opinion, they were by far the best team of the season. They found what was ultimately important very early, and made their season revolve around it.

I'm sure that somewhere in Northern California 1678 is wiping their tears with all the blue banners they have amassed.

[evanperryg]

I'd argue the opposite. Their robot is a perfect example of a successful implementation of the strategic design process, and that's why it's also my favorite of this year.

I'd agree with that, but the complexity of it is staggering. I don't think I've ever seen another FRC robot (besides 118) with such complicated mechanisms throughout the entire machine. Their entire design was incredibly ambitious, and incredibly well executed.

Also, I'd like to point out another of my favorite robots this year- 1625. The amount they improved from their first event was very impressive.

[JohnChristensen]

My favorite two teams this year were 2826 and 1986. I thought 1986 was an underrated landfill bot (plus I am always impressed by their robots). 2826 had their obviously amazing auto, but most importantly I think garbage trucks are really cool and picking up three cans at one time is something the drivers for Waste Management can only dream of...

[avanboekel]

1114 was my favorite to watch this year. The way they could drive however they wanted without wrecking their stacks was one of the highlights of this game for me. The speed at which they cleared the landfill was incredible.

Likewise, 2826 set the standard for HP loading. The nature of the game made their playstyle more "boring", but was still one of my favorite robots this year.

[billylo]

WwwwwwAaaaaaaaVvvvvvvvEeeeeeee

[logank013]

I still believe after watching many matches at nationals that 254 had the best robot despite the sad ending for them. 148 definitely had the most interesting design of all and, it was pretty much just as good as 254's bot. I still feel like 254 won slightly between the 2. I also think that 1114 had the best design for a landfill bot but it started to fail them there at the end. Worlds is about whose robot can last the whole season and still be good. Unfortunately, their robot just couldn't last that many matches. 118 had a robot that was almost as good as Simbotics bot but because it held up all the way through worlds, it ending up winning. All in all, here are my ranks.

Human Player:
1. 254
2. 148

Landfill:
1. 1114
2. 118

Overall:
1. 254
2. 1114
3. 148
4. 118

[Sperkowsky]

I still believe after watching many matches at nationals that 254 had the best robot despite the sad ending for them. 148 definitely had the most interesting design of all and, it was pretty much just as good as 254's bot. I still feel like 254 won slightly between the 2. I also think that 1114 had the best design for a landfill bot but it started to fail them there at the end. Worlds is about whose robot can last the whole season and still be good. Unfortunately, their robot just couldn't last that many matches. 118 had a robot that was almost as good as Simbotics bot but because it held up all the way through worlds, it ending up winning. All in all, here are my ranks.

Human Player:
1. 254
2. 148

Landfill:
1. 1114
2. 118

Overall:
1. 254
2. 1114
3. 148
4. 118
Your game robot analysis seems a bit odd. Honestly I wasn't that impressed with 254 this year not saying they didn't make an amazing bot but I never thought they were going to Einstein. 1114, 118, 1678, 2826, 1657, 148, 179, 4488, 4039, 971, and 1538 are just some of the bots that I think had a way better design then 254 this year. I love 254 but I think after 2 years of making the community go crazy they missed their mark a bit.

[logank013]

Your game analysis seems a bit odd. Honestly I wasn't that impressed with 254 this year not saying they didn't make an amazing bot but I never thought they were going to Einstein. 1114, 118, 1678, 2826, 1657, 148, 179, 4488, 4039, 971, and 1538 are just some of the bots that I think had a way better design then 254 this year. I love 254 but I think after 2 years of making the community go crazy they missed their mark a bit.

Every match I watched 254, they were super efficient and consistently made 4 stacks like 148 would. The ramp was a great idea even though it was stolen from 2056 I believe. I thought that they could have been a contender to make it to the semis on Einstein.

[MichaelBick]

Your game robot analysis seems a bit odd. Honestly I wasn't that impressed with 254 this year not saying they didn't make an amazing bot but I never thought they were going to Einstein. 1114, 118, 1678, 2826, 1657, 148, 179, 4488, 4039, 971, and 1538 are just some of the bots that I think had a way better design then 254 this year. I love 254 but I think after 2 years of making the community go crazy they missed their mark a bit.

I'm not sure there was anybody more consistent at making 4 stacks a match capped than 254, especially considering the fact that they were also doing the co-op

[logank013]

I'm not sure there was anybody more consistent at make 4 stacks a match capped than 254, especially considering the fact that they were also doing the co-op

Agreed. I forgot about how they did Co-op too.

[tindleroot]

Your game robot analysis seems a bit odd. Honestly I wasn't that impressed with 254 this year not saying they didn't make an amazing bot but I never thought they were going to Einstein. 1114, 118, 1678, 2826, 1657, 148, 179, 4488, 4039, 971, and 1538 are just some of the bots that I think had a way better design then 254 this year. I love 254 but I think after 2 years of making the community go crazy they missed their mark a bit.

I agreed with this completely...until SVR happened. Since then, 254 has blown me away by their abilities. No team, I repeat, NO TEAM, can score over 200 points BY THEMSELVES as consistently as 254 can. 254, time and time again, has scored 20+42+42+36+36+40=216 (given their opponent completes Co-op), hence their average over 200 at their final events. For them not to make it at LEAST to Einstein semifinals I thought was crazy - until it happened. Regardless, their robot made me "go crazy" after they improved for SVR.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

Your game robot analysis seems a bit odd. Honestly I wasn't that impressed with 254 this year not saying they didn't make an amazing bot but I never thought they were going to Einstein. 1114, 118, 1678, 2826, 1657, 148, 179, 4488, 4039, 971, and 1538 are just some of the bots that I think had a way better design then 254 this year. I love 254 but I think after 2 years of making the community go crazy they missed their mark a bit.

Huh?

[dodar]

Huh?

I read his post then saw you literally had the same reaction as me.

254 built an Einstein caliber robot this year; like they do most years.

[Bryce2471]

Every match I watched 254, they were super efficient and consistently made 4 stacks like 148 would. The ramp was a great idea even though it was stolen from 2056 I believe. I thought that they could have been a contender to make it to the semis on Einstein.
Huh?
I had a similar response to reading this.

I would argue that 254's performance at SVR might have been the most dominant robot performance in the history of FRC. I haven't been around long enough to say for sure, but I can't imagine a robot that would be so much better than the competition.

I also don't have the numbers readily available, but I would be willing to bet that 254's OPR from SVR, put on a scale of standard deviation, would be the greatest outlier in FRC of all time.

[dodar]

I had a similar response to reading this.

I would argue that 254's performance at SVR might have been the most dominant robot performance in the history of FRC. I haven't been around long enough to say for sure, but I can't imagine a robot that would be so much better than the competition.

I also don't have the numbers readily available, but I would be willing to bet that 254's OPR from SVR, put on a scale of standard deviation, would be the greatest outlier in FRC of all time.

From what I've seen from people on here and the few videos around, 71 from 2002 is considered the most dominant. Since you say you've been around since 2007, just as I am, you should remember 1114 from 2008. I would place 254's performance this year behind both of those.

[asid61]

I had a similar response to reading this.

I would argue that 254's performance at SVR might have been the most dominant robot performance in the history of FRC. I haven't been around long enough to say for sure, but I can't imagine a robot that would be so much better than the competition.

I also don't have the numbers readily available, but I would be willing to bet that 254's OPR from SVR, put on a scale of standard deviation, would be the greatest outlier in FRC of all time.

254's performance this year was lower than the level of 71 in 2002 from what I've seen. I don't know how good 1114 did in 2008, but they would be very hard pressed to beat 254 this year.
I remember at SVR, 254 was able to do coop + 4 canned 6 stacks on their own, at least 3 with noodles. Quals 88, in a match where they were against the 2nd, 4th, and 11th seeds. That tops even 1114 performances, to the point where the OPR of 254 at SVR was 160, whereas 1114 was around 130. And third place was much lower than even 1114.
I feel like 254 could have won on Einstein if various stuff hadn't happened in quarterfinals on Carson.

[Bryce2471]

From what I've seen from people on here and the few videos around, 71 from 2002 is considered the most dominant. Since you say you've been around since 2007, just as I am, you should remember 1114 from 2008. I would place 254's performance this year behind both of those.
If you look at my signature, it can be seen that I was in FLL in 2007, so I was not watching 1114 at that time, but I have seen OPR data that suggests 1114's performance this year was greater that that of 2008. I unfortunately know very little about 71 in 2002, but maybe someone with more experience can chime in about that.
Regardless, My real point was that by no means have 254 "missed their mark a bit" this year.

[asid61]

If you look at my signature, it can be seen that I was in FLL in 2007, so I was not watching 1114 at that time, but I have seen OPR data that suggests 1114's performance this year was greater that that of 2008. I unfortunately know very little about 71 in 2002, but maybe someone with more experience can chime in about that.
Regardless, My real point was that by no means have 254 "missed their mark a bit" this year.

71 used this thing called a "file card drive", which was essentially just digging file cards into the floor to get a lot of traction.
The match started, they would fly forward at high speed, slam into all three trailers/ mobile goals and inch forwards to bring them into their zone for victory.
Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eKvva_ZCHw
The counter was to move even faster than them and prevent them from latching onto all three to begin with.
See : https://youtu.be/tQP4IsnIAXo?t=1277

[Arhowk]

I'm surprised at the low rating for 33... Sure maybe it didn't go far in worlds (hit a bump coming into States that they really never recovered from) but the bot is absolutely gorgeous.

[Sperkowsky]

Every match I watched 254, they were super efficient and consistently made 4 stacks like 148 would. The ramp was a great idea even though it was stolen from 2056 I believe. I thought that they could have been a contender to make it to the semis on Einstein.

I'm not sure there was anybody more consistent at making 4 stacks a match capped than 254, especially considering the fact that they were also doing the co-op

Agreed. I forgot about how they did Co-op too.

I agreed with this completely...until SVR happened. Since then, 254 has blown me away by their abilities. No team, I repeat, NO TEAM, can score over 200 points BY THEMSELVES as consistently as 254 can. 254, time and time again, has scored 20+42+42+36+36+40=216 (given their opponent completes Co-op), hence their average over 200 at their final events. For them not to make it at LEAST to Einstein semifinals I thought was crazy - until it happened. Regardless, their robot made me "go crazy" after they improved for SVR.

I read his post then saw you literally had the same reaction as me.

254 built an Einstein caliber robot this year; like they do most years.

Huh?

I had a similar response to reading this.

I would argue that 254's performance at SVR might have been the most dominant robot performance in the history of FRC. I haven't been around long enough to say for sure, but I can't imagine a robot that would be so much better than the competition.

I also don't have the numbers readily available, but I would be willing to bet that 254's OPR from SVR, put on a scale of standard deviation, would be the greatest outlier in FRC of all time.

From what I've seen from people on here and the few videos around, 71 from 2002 is considered the most dominant. Since you say you've been around since 2007, just as I am, you should remember 1114 from 2008. I would place 254's performance this year behind both of those.

254's performance this year was lower than the level of 71 in 2002 from what I've seen. I don't know how good 1114 did in 2008, but they would be very hard pressed to beat 254 this year.
I remember at SVR, 254 was able to do coop + 4 canned 6 stacks on their own, at least 3 with noodles. Quals 88, in a match where they were against the 2nd, 4th, and 11th seeds. That tops even 1114 performances, to the point where the OPR of 254 at SVR was 160, whereas 1114 was around 130. And third place was much lower than even 1114.
I feel like 254 could have won on Einstein if various stuff hadn't happened in quarterfinals on Carson.

If you look at my signature, it can be seen that I was in FLL in 2007, so I was not watching 1114 at that time, but I have seen OPR data that suggests 1114's performance this year was greater that that of 2008. I unfortunately know very little about 71 in 2002, but maybe someone with more experience can chime in about that.
Regardless, My real point was that by no means have 254 "missed their mark a bit" this year.

71 used this thing called a "file card drive", which was essentially just digging file cards into the floor to get a lot of traction.
The match started, they would fly forward at high speed, slam into all three trailers/ mobile goals and inch forwards to bring them into their zone for victory.
Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eKvva_ZCHw
The counter was to move even faster than them and prevent them from latching onto all three to begin with.
See : https://youtu.be/tQP4IsnIAXo?t=1277

I'm surprised at the low rating for 33... Sure maybe it didn't go far in worlds (hit a bump coming into States that they really never recovered from) but the bot is absolutely gorgeous.

forgive me everyone. I was basing my thoughts on their cvr performance. Looking farther their silicon valley performance and worlds performances were much more impressive.

[tindleroot]

If you look at my signature, it can be seen that I was in FLL in 2007, so I was not watching 1114 at that time, but I have seen OPR data that suggests 1114's performance this year was greater that that of 2008. I unfortunately know very little about 71 in 2002, but maybe someone with more experience can chime in about that.
Regardless, My real point was that by no means have 254 "missed their mark a bit" this year.

In addition to asid's response, I was just going to add that 71's robot was dominant in the "unbeatable" fashion (similar to 469 in 2010), since they would win the match if they got all three goals (which they did almost all the time). This year, there was really no match for this, especially since there was no win-loss until finals. The only way a team could really be "unbeatable" this year was if they got ahold of all 4 center bins and made enough stacks. This was stressed all season by CitrusDad and Karthik, among others. Nonetheless, I believe 254 and 1114 were both extremely good this year, and I would equate their performance this year with that of 1114 in 2008. Be careful when you match OPR data between years, since Recycle Rush had higher point matches than Overdrive, simply because of the scoring system of each year.

[Cory]

71 used this thing called a "file card drive", which was essentially just digging file cards into the floor to get a lot of traction.
The match started, they would fly forward at high speed, slam into all three trailers/ mobile goals and inch forwards to bring them into their zone for victory.
Example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eKvva_ZCHw
The counter was to move even faster than them and prevent them from latching onto all three to begin with.
See : https://youtu.be/tQP4IsnIAXo?t=1277

Statistics will never convey how dominant 71 was in 2002, due to the game structure. It was the first "chokehold stragey" and to this day the best implemented chokehold strategy (469 2010 was more beatable, IMO).

It would be foolish to compare our SVR performance this year to 71's 2002 season. One was basically a time trial, the other was flat out domination of the opponent.

[Bryce2471]

Statistics will never convey how dominant 71 was in 2002, due to the game structure. It was the first "chokehold stragey" and to this day the best implemented chokehold strategy (469 2010 was more beatable, IMO).

It would be foolish to compare our SVR performance this year to 71's 2002 season. One was basically a time trial, the other was flat out domination of the opponent.

Thanks for posting. I'm glad that someone who was around at the time could comment on this topic.
I wish I could have witnessed 71 in action.

Happy birthday!

[EricH]

Statistics will never convey how dominant 71 was in 2002, due to the game structure. It was the first "chokehold stragey" and to this day the best implemented chokehold strategy (469 2010 was more beatable, IMO).
Just out of curiosity, who would win, in your opinion, between 71, '02 version, and 71, '97 version? '97 was somewhat of a chokehold, I think--wasn't around but I've heard about it.

[yomega55]

2826 - Super clean reliability.
148 - Great specialization
1114 - I love the landfill clearing (and the harpoons too).
987 - Good all-rounder.

[lpickett]

1987 was an excellent robot after they worked out the kinks. They were a powerhouse with the right alliance. Of course, I agree 1730 was underrated. We could do a solid 3-tote auto with 3 6-stacks with can and noodle. We also just needed a good alliance to be in the 200's.

I also liked 1114 and 254.

[chrisfl]

1. Why isn't 971 on the list?

They were one of the most creative looking robots of the season as well as very efficient.

2. 1717

Lightest swerve of the season :D ;)

Also loved 1114 and 330. They did well this season like I expected them to.

How light was the swerve modules?

[dgilbueno]

How light was the swerve modules?

about 6lbs with sims about 5.5bls without per module

[chrisfl]

about 6lbs with sims about 5.5bls without per module

I'm drawing one during the offseason and I'm missing the mounting plates and motors but the spinning module is just under 1 pound

[AdamHeard]

about 6lbs with sims about 5.5bls without per module

Where did you get those .5 lb CIMs? :rolleyes:

[cjl2625]

Statistics will never convey how dominant 71 was in 2002, due to the game structure. It was the first "chokehold stragey" and to this day the best implemented chokehold strategy (469 2010 was more beatable, IMO).

It would be foolish to compare our SVR performance this year to 71's 2002 season. One was basically a time trial, the other was flat out domination of the opponent.

I've heard all these legends about 71, but from TBA, it didn't look like they were overwhelmingly dominant.
They won the championship, but their record that year was 30-14-4, and their OPR was never particularly high compared to other robots that year.

Is it just incorrect to judge 71 that year based on these statistics?

[tindleroot]

I've heard all these legends about 71, but from TBA, it didn't look like they were overwhelmingly dominant.
They won the championship, but their record that year was 30-14-4, and their OPR was never particularly high compared to other robots that year.

Is it just incorrect to judge 71 that year based on these statistics?

Yes and no. 71 had a fatal flaw that caused them to lose the Western Michigan Regional. If the opponents could push them around at the start of the match so that they were not facing the correct orientation, they were unable to turn back on track.

However, 71 fixed that for (then) Nationals, and they went on to win it in a dominating fashion. Like any year, the best teams aren't always the ones with the highest OPR or the best record. With Hammond in 2002, it's just something you had to see to believe. Many of their videos are available on youtube, I encourage you to watch some (especially Newton SF 1-1), and it becomes readily clear why they were so dominant that year.

[Darkseer54]

Many of their videos are available on youtube, I encourage you to watch some (especially Newton SF 1-1), and it becomes readily clear why they were so dominant that year.

Their full season recap is up on Cory's channel. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuFlA3Pt4HQ) However it is and hour and a half long, so you should probably find a good time to sit down and watch through it. It has some great shots of their robot in action.

[Karthik]

They won the championship, but their record that year was 30-14-4, and their OPR was never particularly high compared to other robots that year.

Is it just incorrect to judge 71 that year based on these statistics?

Yes.

The 2002 game had two very different strategies for qualifying matches and elimination matches. In qualifying teams were ranked based on the sum of losing alliances scores. However, the elims were solely win-loss. 71's chokehold strategy was great at guaranteeing wins, but was a terrible seeding strategy, as it prevented their opponents from getting any Goal or Ball points. As such they didn't always apply their chokehold in quals, which explains the win-loss record that they had.

What they did in the elims at Champs was just unholy. Pure and utter domination. (Also helped by a perfectly created alliance.)

[dodar]

Also, a lot of people say that 71 won that year during build season. They found the biggest loophole in the rules from 2002 and exploited it to the max. And showed how a team can think outside the box.

[evanperryg]

I've heard all these legends about 71, but from TBA, it didn't look like they were overwhelmingly dominant.
They won the championship, but their record that year was 30-14-4, and their OPR was never particularly high compared to other robots that year.

Is it just incorrect to judge 71 that year based on these statistics?

In a game of keepaway, and with a bot whose strategy encouraged high-scoring opposing teams and alliance members to push them around the entire match, I'm not surprised their OPR would be low, if not negative.

Also, a lot of people say that 71 won that year during build season. They found the biggest loophole in the rules from 2002 and exploited it to the max. And showed how a team can think outside the box.
Like Karthik said, there was the inherent flaw in the chokehold that it would ruin your ranking if you did it every qualification match. Although it wasn't the be-all-end-all perfect chokehold from the beginning, it was the closest thing to it. Other teams attempted similar methods, but few (possibly nobody) else grabbed all three goals, and none were as effective as 71.

[Cory]

In a game of keepaway, and with a bot whose strategy encouraged high-scoring opposing teams and alliance members to push them around the entire match, I'm not surprised their OPR would be low, if not negative.


Like Karthik said, there was the inherent flaw in the chokehold that it would ruin your ranking if you did it every qualification match.

It wasn't an inherent flaw. They rarely needed competent alliance partners, so seeding first was not important to them. It wasn't until Championships (and perhaps Einstein) that they were really bailed out by the other talent on their alliance.

[fargus111111111]

What, 2826 is not on this list! Being in the hopper playoffs I was able to see this thing up close on the field and it was awesome! My team was across the aisle from 33's pit and as a result I learned about their automated tote loading system, one of the coolest coding features I saw this year.

[allgoodthehood]

Not only is 2826 missing from the poll, but 987 is also missing.

[jajabinx124]

Not only is 2826 missing from the poll, but 987 is also missing.

987 is on the poll. They are under 148.

[allgoodthehood]

987 is on the poll. They are under 148.

That's only slightly awkward....