Divisions posted

[AlexD744]

They are being posted right now:
https://my.usfirst.org/myarea/index.lasso?page=teamlist&event_type=FRC&event=CMP&year=2009&sort=teamnum

[Jared Russell]

I think Dave saw the prediction thread so he decided to use a completely different order :yikes:

[AlexD744]

I think Dave saw the prediction thread so he decided to use a completely different order :yikes:

I wouldn't bet against it.

[DUCKIE]

Is it a snaking sort?

(364 and 365 are both in Newton.)

I'd check... but no time.

[rees2001]

They are being posted right now:
https://my.usfirst.org/myarea/index.lasso?page=teamlist&event_type=FRC&event=CMP&year=2009&sort=teamnum

woot

[AlexD744]

Why does Galileo have to have sooooo many good teams?

[AlexD744]

217 and 67 have been seperated. Thank Goodness *lets out huge breath of air*

[Jared Russell]

It's either random or else is based on something other than team number. No discernable rhyme or reason that I can see based on the sortable columns on the FIRST site.

You're right, Galileo has a disproportionate amount of low numbers...

[prettycolors91]

217 and 67 have been seperated. Thank Goodness *lets out huge breath of air*

awww dang. I was hoping for another HOT Wings alliance...Oh well Galileo looks pretty insane

[jennifer_1547]

ahh Archimedes has sooo many good teams !

[Travis Hoffman]

A C G N
39 1 11 16
48 27 20 33
61 49 25 85
93 60 40 86
107 68 45 88
118 70 47 102
120 75 56 121
125 79 65 122
155 131 67 126
176 141 71 135
180 175 111 138
201 188 115 148
222 190 151 159
231 217 168 177
280 236 179 191
314 245 203 195
343 247 207 228
353 254 226 233
386 263 230 234
433 271 279 292
488 287 281 339
492 329 303 340
503 337 359 358
533 341 418 360
548 346 435 364
558 375 440 365
573 395 461 368
585 399 494 469
604 499 555 529
624 538 704 578
665 597 708 612
692 668 716 620
714 766 744 768
811 816 753 832
857 830 815 842
868 894 870 846
931 904 932 852
1002 922 967 862
1014 930 971 980
1114 1013 973 1023
1218 1024 987 1038
1266 1089 999 1086
1289 1099 1058 1098
1302 1108 1124 1138
1334 1165 1195 1155
1341 1287 1208 1209
1390 1288 1250 1311
1421 1305 1261 1350
1503 1323 1270 1458
1535 1425 1318 1506
1538 1429 1332 1507
1555 1502 1450 1511
1561 1519 1477 1516
1592 1527 1540 1547
1649 1566 1551 1557
1712 1577 1598 1569
1739 1622 1601 1625
1743 1675 1646 1629
1746 1731 1662 1657
1807 1747 1676 1700
1834 1771 1710 1701
1986 1796 1717 1706
1987 1806 1742 1714
2056 1893 1745 1726
2070 1927 1772 1730
2075 1983 1829 1732
2169 2039 1836 1811
2220 2173 1872 1868
2340 2185 1885 1918
2354 2194 1902 2004
2415 2443 1923 2067
2470 2500 1941 2283
2486 2520 2214 2344
2543 2590 2230 2377
2587 2621 2234 2549
2655 2635 2348 2609
2753 2767 2550 2659
2779 2791 2579 2702
2813 2809 2638 2771
2826 2815 2642 2783
2848 2834 2729 2836
2874 2877 2741 2866
2915 2884 2775 2875
3009 2992 2844 2890
3020 3010 2910 2970
3062 3105 2936 2996
3091 3115 3059 3075

[BT987]

Galileo is stacked again this year!
cant wait to get there:)

[Alex Dinsmoor]

Woot! Medes FTW!!!

And who would have thought they would have sorted it like that!

[Travis Hoffman]

Hmm Pittsburgh vs. GTR in Archimedes.....

I'm looking forward....to TBA updating their site so we can see the regional win breakdown per division (or for someone to post it earlier ;)) .

[Elgin Clock]

A whopping 87 teams in each division!
Wow! :ahh:

[Alex Dinsmoor]

A whopping 87 teams in each division!
Wow! :ahh:

That's a lot of teams for us to scout!

[fredliu168]

Archimedes looks very canadian

[Swampdude]

Galileo = Redonculous :ahh:

[Jared Russell]

Archimedes looks very canadian

That was one of my first thoughts too. I could easily see an all-Canadian alliance taking the divisional banner.

[dodar]

Actually I was thinking more of a Floridian alliance ;-)

[Alex Dinsmoor]

Actually I was thinking more of a Floridian alliance ;-)

I think you mean an alliance composed of a Michigan, a Florida, and a Canadian team ;)

[smurfgirl]

Yay!

[jgannon]

Here are my predictions for two members of each winning alliance, and one of each finalist:

Archimedes: 1114/2056 over 624
Curie: 217/254 over 79
Galileo: 67/71 over 45
Newton: 234/1625 over 148

[lukevanoort]

Woo, time to make a very distant and probably completely inaccurate prediction! Einstein alliances!

Archimedes: 1114 & 2056
Curie: 217 & 68
Galileo: 71 & 67
Newton: 1625 & 121

Galileo vs. Newton determine the champ (leaning towards Galileo)

[Alex Cormier]

Here are my predictions for two members of each winning alliance, and one of each finalist:

Archimedes: 1114/2056 over 624
Curie: 217/254 over 79
Galileo: 67/71 over 45
Newton: 234/1625 over 148

I would say 67/71 and BACOONNN!! 1902

[Jared Russell]

Hmm Pittsburgh vs. GTR in Archimedes.....

I'm looking forward....to TBA updating their site so we can see the regional win breakdown per division (or for someone to post it earlier ;)) .

I counted 40 wins (!) for Curie.

[David Brinza]

I would say 67/71 and BACOONNN!! 1902

Would that be called "HOT Hammond Bacon"??

[James1902]

I would say 67/71 and BACOONNN!! 1902

Sign me up for that!!!

[Aren_Hill]

or Beastly Hot Bacon.....lol

[Dan Petrovic]

Whoever gets out of Galileo isn't going to have an easy time with it. I have a feeling there will be a lot of "breaking up" of good alliances to level the playing field in the division, but it will ultimately hurt the alliance when they get to Einstein.

Curie 2007 was a prime example of this. 330 and 1114 could have gotten together and left Einstein in ruins. However, a team ranked above 330 and kept that alliance from forming. 330 ultimately won the division, but were defeated on Einstein in two matches.

In any case, there are enough very strong teams where they can still defeat the Newton alliance champions on Einstein. Newton isn't nearly as deep as Galileo, but they still carry a lot of weight with 234, 1625, and 148, to name a few. If the right teams rank in the right spots, Galileo may have their second championship in two years.

Losing only one match during the entire Michigan State Championship is incredibly impressive. 217 will probably take the Curie title, and go on to play Galileo in the finals. Who wins from there is all up to whether the right teams rank in the right spots in their respective divisions. I'm going to say Galileo has the favor.

Archimedes has a chance in the semi-finals if things don't go as planned in Curie. Yeah, they have 1114 and 2056. When together, these teams have won every regional.

However, this game is prone to upsets, so who knows exactly what we'll see?

[Herodotus]

Anyone else think that ALL of the divisions are stacked this year? Atlanta is going to be pretty crazy, I think. We'll be watching the webcasts intensely this year.

[jennifer_1547]

how were the divisions chosen this year ?
it seemed so random

[smurfgirl]

Anyone else think that ALL of the divisions are stacked this year? Atlanta is going to be pretty crazy, I think. We'll be watching the webcasts intensely this year.

I completely agree! I'm sad I can't go, but you bet I'll spend three entire days glued to the webcasts with my friends, while other people wonder what is wrong with us. :D

[R.C.]

Anyone else think that ALL of the divisions are stacked this year? Atlanta is going to be pretty crazy, I think. We'll be watching the webcasts intensely this year.

I think so, whatever method they used for sorting teams looks pretty random and pretty level.

[Ryan Dognaux]

You know your division is stacked when every time you look at it, you recognize another powerhouse team you didn't notice before. Yeesh, Galileo here we come :]

[Andrew Schreiber]

I think so, whatever method they used for sorting teams looks pretty random and pretty level.

http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pThjnO_ReGYCtCaOgz4x5Yw&gid=1 is a graph of Teams v Division (Divisions correspond to Archimedes = 1 and proceed alphabetically) I can give anyone access to the google doc used to create this graph or you can copy it and create your own in about the same amount of time anyway.

I cannot see any pattern that jumps out. The possibility of doing a completely random distribution would seem foolish because it could mean that all the low teams end up in one division and the higher teams end up in another. Does this mean FIRST wouldnt do it? Heavens no.

I will continue to look at some numbers, I have a few hunches but I am betting they are fruitless.

Kudos to anyone who can break the formula before Championship :D

[Jared Russell]

The order doesn't seem to have anything obvious to do with team number, location, team name, or order of registration (yes, I checked by looking at the divisions of the last few teams that were added to the list this morning and yesterday ;) ).

So it's either random, or generated by some suitably complex but deterministic function from whose obfuscated nature Dave is undoubtedly gleaning pleasure. :]

[HashemReza]

Tough divisions. A lot of good teams, tons of strategies...

Should be an amazing competition. Don't count any team out though...we all know how easy it is to get into trouble with this game.

[Koko Ed]

The order doesn't seem to have anything obvious to do with team number, location, team name, or order of registration (yes, I checked by looking at the divisions of the last few teams that were added to the list this morning and yesterday ;) ).

So it's either random, or generated by some suitably complex but deterministic function from whose obfuscated nature Dave is undoubtedly gleaning pleasure. :]

It must be a game hint!:P

[Cuse]

It almost seems as if they just randomized the list and went ran the Serpentine algorithm on the random list, or something of that nature. I don't see any readily noticable pattern emerging from this.

[johnr]

Are any regional winners in same division or did they break them up?

[SuperJake]

Are any regional winners in same division or did they break them up?

According to this post (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=847506&postcount=5), the Pittsburgh winners are together (222, 1218, 1743) in Archimedes.

[Greg Marra]

Divisions are up on TBA. 87 teams per division. Team sig banners will regenerate within 24 hours.

[Greg Peshek]

Divisions are up on TBA. 87 teams per division. Team sig banners will regenerate within 24 hours.

If it's not too much trouble, could TBA display the number of wins for each division like it did for the predictions. That would be awesome.

[Rick TYler]

For what it's worth, the distribution of team numbers looks like FIRST made an effort to spread them out pretty fairly:

Archimedes Curie Galileo Newton
Median team number 1302 1108 1124 1138
Mean team number 1341 1267 1192 1229

[The Lucas]

The order doesn't seem to have anything obvious to do with team number, location, team name, or order of registration (yes, I checked by looking at the divisions of the last few teams that were added to the list this morning and yesterday ;) ).

So it's either random, or generated by some suitably complex but deterministic function from whose obfuscated nature Dave is undoubtedly gleaning pleasure. :]

To me it looks like what you would get if you shuffled 4 decks (or suites) of 87 cards into each other once. It is not even close to purely random, the team numbers clump together far too much (Curie has 6 teams in a row from 236-271). It would be simple to implement, just make a program that makes 4 lists and inserts a specified number of "cuts" (to another list). Then take the resulting order (single list) of divisions and apply it to number ordered list of teams.

[Alex Cormier]

Divisions are up on TBA. 87 teams per division. Team sig banners will regenerate within 24 hours.
How about update your predictions site to show the real divisions and do the color scheme?

[BurtGummer]

Archimedes for us. At least 254 or 399 aren't in there to terrorize us, lol. Sure, we could've possibly gotten teamed up, but we usually aren't too lucky, haha. Now the powerhouses in our division will be mysteries.

[R.C.]

Archimedes for us. At least 254 or 399 aren't in there to terrorize us, lol. Sure, we could've possibly gotten teamed up, but we usually aren't too lucky, haha. Now the powerhouses in our division will be mysteries.

You can't forget 1114 or 2056 :P

[fredliu168]

You can't forget 1114 or 2056 :P

Who are they? I've never heard of these teams :p

[Stu Bloom]

So I was wondering ... why 87 teams per division? Does that number seem a bit odd to anyone else?

88 seems like such a nice, even number :confused:

After doing a bit of cypherin' I think I may have figured it out ...

To entirely avoid the need for surrogate matches there would need to be either 84 teams per division, or 90 teams per division. I suppose that for any number of reasons 84 may be too few (only 336 total) and 90 too many (a WHOPPING 360 FRC teams total)? :cool:

Within that range, 87 teams gives the most options to avoid surrogates. Any even number of "rounds" (8, 10 or 12) would yield that same number of plays for each team, while any odd number of rounds would require some teams to play as surrogates for their 3rd "Q" match. Any other number of teams/divison between 84 and 90 would require either 9 or 12 "rounds" to avoid anyone having to play as a surrogate. (I know 6, 14, and 15 fit in there somewhere, but I am staying within a "reasonable" range of matches - not likely to be less than 8 or more than 12 per team)

Am I making any sense??

Anyone have any other thoughts ??

Does anyone really CARE ?? :ahh:

[R.C.]

Who are they? I've never heard of these teams :p

Hmmmm, just some randoms that pwn ;)

[MrForbes]

Anyone have any other thoughts ??

They signed up all the teams that had to be signed up, then let in a couple to round it out to a number divisible by 4 and that's why there are 87 teams in each division.

[David Brinza]

So I was wondering ... why 87 teams per division? Does that number seem a bit odd to anyone else?

88 seems like such a nice, even number :confused:

After doing a bit of cypherin' I think I may have figured it out ...

To entirely avoid the need for surrogate matches there would need to be either 84 teams per division, or 90 teams per division. I suppose that for any number of reasons 84 may be too few (only 336 total) and 90 too many (a WHOPPING 360 FRC teams total)? :cool:

Within that range, 87 teams gives the most options to avoid surrogates. Any even number of "rounds" (8, 10 or 12) would yield that same number of plays for each team, while any odd number of rounds would require some teams to play as surrogates for their 3rd "Q" match. Any other number of teams/divison between 84 and 90 would require either 9 or 12 "rounds" to avoid anyone having to play as a surrogate. (I know 6, 14, and 15 fit in there somewhere, but I am staying within a "reasonable" range of matches - not likely to be less than 8 or more than 12 per team)

Am I making any sense??

Anyone have any other thoughts ??

Does anyone really CARE ?? :ahh:
Stu, I'm sure we all care...

Most likely, there will be 102 qualification matches played in each division. Each team will play 7 matches that count and three teams in each division will play a surrogate match. So for those teams who end up with 8 matches, remember that your third match will not count in the standings (but that doesn't mean the scouts will ignore you!!)

[dodar]

what do you guys mean by "surrogate match?"

[Neal G]

what do you guys mean by "surrogate match?"

It basically means that you have to play an extra match that WON'T count so that everyone else can get in 7 games. But don't blow it off, we will definitely be watching ;)

[Stu Bloom]

Stu, I'm sure we all care...

Most likely, there will be 102 qualification matches played in each division. Each team will play 7 matches that count and three teams in each division will play a surrogate match. So for those teams who end up with 8 matches, remember that your third match will not count in the standings (but that doesn't mean the scouts will ignore you!!)
Not disputing ... but why do you think 7 rounds (102 matches)? Sticking to 6 minute cycle times that would be just over 10 hours of playing time (then divisional elims, then Einstein).

Bumping up to 8 rounds eliminates surrogates and brings the total matches to 116, adding about an hour and a half ... Is that too long?

[jgannon]

Not disputing ... but why do you think 7 rounds (102 matches)?
Every championship since at least 2004 has had exactly seven qualification rounds.

http://www2.usfirst.org/2004comp/events/curie/rankings.html
http://www2.usfirst.org/2005comp/events/curie/rankings.html
http://www2.usfirst.org/2006comp/events/curie/rankings.html
http://www2.usfirst.org/2007comp/events/curie/rankings.html
http://www2.usfirst.org/2008comp/events/curie/rankings.html

[cziggy343]

Not disputing ... but why do you think 7 rounds (102 matches)? Sticking to 6 minute cycle times that would be just over 10 hours of playing time (then divisional elims, then Einstein).

Bumping up to 8 rounds eliminates surrogates and brings the total matches to 116, adding about an hour and a half ... Is that too long?

i guess it is because we generally only have 7 rounds every year.

[David Brinza]

Not disputing ... but why do you think 7 rounds (102 matches)? Sticking to 6 minute cycle times that would be just over 10 hours of playing time (then divisional elims, then Einstein).

Bumping up to 8 rounds eliminates surrogates and brings the total matches to 116, adding about an hour and a half ... Is that too long?
I really wish we could play 8 matches instead of 7, too.

The agenda allows just under 10-1/2 hours of playing time for FRC, so 7 is probably going to be the deal.:(

[Nawaid Ladak]

it usually is seven. and i wouldn't be surprised if it stayed the same. looing at all the field problems and the fact that fields tend to fall 10-15 minutes behind at championships.

i've usually paid attention to maybe 2 fields each year i've been to championships (07' Gali and Curie, 08' Newton and Gali)... looks like this year that's going to change, seeing that all four fields are much more balanced than in years past. Einstein will be amazing

[The Lucas]

I count 347 if everyone qualified from MN registers
323 (now) + 18 (MI) + 3 (NS) + 3 (10K) = 347 teams

If we have 347, then 3 divisions would have to have 87 teams and 102 matches. If both MN teams added 6 teams then we would have had 353 teams, one division would have to have 89 teams and 104 matches.

If we have the pit space (no car show) then we might as well have 360 teams, every division have 90 teams and 105 matches. Then there would be no surrogate matches. If we have the space and teams on the wait list, then why do we let in an odd number and play surrogate (wasted) matches. On the other hand, the last thing we need is another reasons to fall behind schedule, be cutoff by NASA TV and miss half the wrap party again.


Am I making any sense??

Anyone have any other thoughts ??

Does anyone really CARE ?? :ahh:


I care Stu ... I care. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=845997&postcount=9) ;)

I think they went with the closest even (divisible by 4) to the number of qualifiers they had. I think they will run 7 matches like usual and just deal with the surrogates. Anything makes more sense than last year where they had 340 teams (should be 85 teams/division). They put 84 teams in Curie (http://www2.usfirst.org/2008comp/events/Curie/rankings.html) and 86 teams in Galileo (http://www2.usfirst.org/2008comp/events/Galileo/rankings.html) :confused: (like Galileo needed another team :rolleyes: it was already stacked). I know they saved 1 overall match (no surrogates in Curie) but matches run in parallel, and if you are going to do that why not with the other 2 divisions as well?

[Barry Bonzack]

Here are my predictions for two members of each winning alliance, and one of each finalist:

Archimedes: 1114/2056 over 624
Curie: 217/254 over 79
Galileo: 67/71 over 45
Newton: 234/1625 over 148

Woo, time to make a very distant and probably completely inaccurate prediction! Einstein alliances!

Archimedes: 1114 & 2056
Curie: 217 & 68
Galileo: 71 & 67
Newton: 1625 & 121

Galileo vs. Newton determine the champ (leaning towards Galileo)

I would say 67/71 and BACOONNN!! 1902

Why only predict number one seeds? How about trying to predict the entire tournament...

Archimedes
1. 2056, 1114, 1334
2. 39, 222, 1421
3. 503, 201, 548
4. 665, 1649, 2753
5. 624, 488, 1503
6. 48, 2846, 1218
7. 61, 868, 1712
8. 180, 931, 118


1 2
\ 1 /
1-|-2
/ \
4 3


Curie
1. 217, 188, 27
2. 254, 245, 2834
3. 79, 68, 2815
4. 1771, 399, 70
5. 1806, 175, 247
6. 395, 375, 2826
7. 1165, 1675, 1
8. 1024, 190, 904

1 2
\ 1 /
1-|-3
/ \
5 3


Galileo
1. 67, 71, 1646
2. 45, 987, 1902
3. 111, 1717, 418
4. 1250, 744, 2775
5. 40, 25, 20
6. 179, 56, 1923
7. 359, 65, 1332
8. 1208, 494, 1742

1 2
\ 2 /
1-|-2
/ \
4 6


Newton
1. 1625, 234, 233
2. 148, 135, 1511
3. 126, 1155, 86
4. 365, 121, 1732
5. 1918, 469, 2970
6. 85, 1701, 1714
7. 1086, 88, 1726
8. 1038, 368, 832

1 2
\ 1 /
1-|-3
/ \
5 3



I am not sure who plays who on Einstein this year, but this is the order I think is the strongest to weakest alliance. Yep, I'm calling the championship to be won by 3 Canadian teams this year.

Archimedes
1. 2056, 1114, 1334

Newton
1. 1625, 234, 233

Curie
1. 217, 188, 27

Galileo
2. 45, 987, 1902

[GaryVoshol]

This brings up a question that was asked about the Michigan Championship - do we need a full practice day? Couldn't 3 or 4 hours of qualification matches be played on Thursday afternoon?

[Stu Bloom]

So I was wondering ... why 87 teams per division? Does that number seem a bit odd to anyone else?

88 seems like such a nice, even number :confused: ...

...Am I making any sense?? ...


Stu, I'm sure we all care...

Thanks Dave
Every championship since at least 2004 has had exactly seven qualification rounds.

http://www2.usfirst.org/2004comp/events/curie/rankings.html
http://www2.usfirst.org/2005comp/events/curie/rankings.html
http://www2.usfirst.org/2006comp/events/curie/rankings.html
http://www2.usfirst.org/2007comp/events/curie/rankings.html
http://www2.usfirst.org/2008comp/events/curie/rankings.html

i guess it is because we generally only have 7 rounds every year.

I really wish we could play 8 matches instead of 7, too...

it usually is seven. and i wouldn't be surprised if it stayed the same....

I care Stu ... I care. (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=845997&postcount=9) ;)


Thanks guys ... well ... DUH !!

You would think an experienced head ref would know better ... :o
Fact is that after build season I pay much less attention to the logistics of the competitions than to my responsibilities as a referee.

My team competed at two regionals this year and due to reffing obligations I was only with them for one day total. After a Finalist trophy in Cleveland (while I was in Chicago) I think they might prefer it that way :rolleyes:

This brings up a question that was asked about the Michigan Championship - do we need a full practice day? Couldn't 3 or 4 hours of qualification matches be played on Thursday afternoon?That is certainly an interesting idea Gary. By the time a team reaches Atlanta it is not unreasonable to think they could get by with less practice time.

[jmanela]

Why only predict number one seeds? How about trying to predict the entire tournament...

Archimedes
1. 2056, 1114, 1334
2. 39, 222, 1421
3. 503, 201, 548
4. 665, 1649, 2753
5. 624, 488, 1503
6. 48, 2846, 1218
7. 61, 868, 1712
8. 180, 931, 118


1 2
\ 1 /
1-|-2
/ \
4 3


Curie
1. 217, 188, 27
2. 254, 245, 2834
3. 79, 68, 2815
4. 1771, 399, 70
5. 1806, 175, 247
6. 395, 375, 2826
7. 1165, 1675, 1
8. 1024, 190, 904

1 2
\ 1 /
1-|-3
/ \
5 3


Galileo
1. 67, 71, 1646
2. 45, 987, 1902
3. 111, 1717, 418
4. 1250, 744, 2775
5. 40, 25, 20
6. 179, 56, 1923
7. 359, 65, 1332
8. 1208, 494, 1742

1 2
\ 2 /
1-|-2
/ \
4 6


Newton
1. 1625, 234, 233
2. 148, 135, 1511
3. 126, 1155, 86
4. 365, 121, 1732
5. 1918, 469, 2970
6. 85, 1701, 1714
7. 1086, 88, 1726
8. 1038, 368, 832

1 2
\ 1 /
1-|-3
/ \
5 3



I am not sure who plays who on Einstein this year, but this is the order I think is the strongest to weakest alliance. Yep, I'm calling the championship to be won by 3 Canadian teams this year.

Archimedes
1. 2056, 1114, 1334

Newton
1. 1625, 234, 233

Curie
1. 217, 188, 27

Galileo
2. 45, 987, 1902

just out of curiosity, what did you base the predictions on? CCWM, OPR, watching matches?