View Full Version : toughest regional in 2011?
unionylibertad
30-01-2011, 23:46
which regional do you think will be the hardest to win in 2011?
AdamHeard
30-01-2011, 23:54
San Diego deserves a mention.
I would say the same for Florida. Also for a mention, even as a 1st year regional, Smokey Mountain has an amazing list of teams. Florida has 79, 86, 103, 179, 233, 341 1251, 1902 and SMR has 34, 48, 71, 79, 234, 931, 1024, 2775
I'll second that...the BBQ rating for San Diego should be impressive!
Chris is me
30-01-2011, 23:58
Michigan State Championship doesn't count.
Midwest is HUGE. Top tier: 16, 45, 71, 111, 118, 1625, 1732. Second tier: 135, 2041, 2410, 2704, 2826, 2949. Depth few regionals could match and one of the few where the bottom half of the bracket might be an actual advantage.
San Diego is strong. 254, 399, 968, 973, 987, 1388, 1538, 1622, 1717 is one hell of a top tier.
Mike Schreiber
30-01-2011, 23:58
Michigan State Championship. No explanation needed.
Toronto. There's a reason I didn't specify which Toronto event. (Well, two reasons, actually, one per event. Both have respected numbers. Both were on Einstein last year.)
Vegas will also be a battle to win, with 359 jumping in late to join 987, 60, 1726, 399, 1266, 4, and 166.
Chris is me
31-01-2011, 00:10
Toronto. There's a reason I didn't specify which Toronto event. (Well, two reasons, actually, one per event. Both have respected numbers. Both were on Einstein last year.)
Under that logic wouldn't Waterloo be the harder event to win?
big1boom
31-01-2011, 00:15
Midwest is consistently one of the most competitive regionals. And with it falling in Week 4 this year several of the major players will already have a regional under their belts.
One thing that is interesting is the number of teams that are doing Wisconsin and Midwest this year. I guess it helps that they are 2 weeks apart this year.
Midwest/Wisconsin overlap teams:
111
1091
1625
1675
1732
1781
2022
2041
2826
3197
Under that logic wouldn't Waterloo be the harder event to win?
With those two teams separated, it's wider open, making it harder (but that is a relative term) for either to win. By that token, they'll fight harder. Makes it tougher on all the other teams.
In Waterloo, the way to win is to be above them in seeding, or to be better than one of them to the other one, who is hopefully higher in the standings. Not so terribly difficult, now, is it? ;)
nikeairmancurry
31-01-2011, 00:32
Hardest Event to win.. MSC... 64 top teams.. yes its all michigan teams.. yes you have to quailify, but still to win it, its tough... Good teams are left out of elims every year...
Hardest Regional to win Midwest..
TECHNICALLY MSC is a regional. It just sends way more teams to the CMP than any other.
Anyway, it's the only regional for which it takes more than fingers and toes to count all the really good teams. How was 2834 the final pick in eliminations last year? First and 2nd overall picks at ATL divisions were ranked 8th and 9th at MSC (respectively). Multiple other proofs here.
Besides, MSC (and districts, a few of which are loaded as well), I'd have to agree that Midwest is again very strong. San Diego is powerful as well. Those are two regionals I'll have to watch.
Michigan State Championship doesn't count.
Sure it does, don't hate on us.
robodude03
31-01-2011, 01:17
Michigan State Championship doesn't count.
Midwest is HUGE. Top tier: 16, 45, 71, 111, 118, 1625, 1732. Second tier: 135, 2041, 2410, 2704, 2826, 2949. Depth few regionals could match and one of the few where the bottom half of the bracket might be an actual advantage.
San Diego is strong. 254, 399, 968, 973, 987, 1388, 1538, 1622, 1717 is one hell of a top tier.
Absolutely agree with your post. Midwest will be very interesting to keep tabs on. As for San Diego, one of the reasons we wanted to attend this event was for the sheer amount of top tier teams that are attending. Each of these teams has regional, division or world championships under their belts. This will definitely be a regional to watch (as MSC always is :P).
The reason the MI State Championship doesn't count is because it's a championship, not a regional. If the MI teams are going to take MSC as a regional, then I'll go ahead and take the Archimedes, Curie, Galileo, Newton, and Einstein--especially Einstein--"regionals" as toughest.
Oh? You have a problem with including events that you have to qualify to get into as regionals? Well, then, MSC is not a regional.
The MI districts are tough, though. I think those should be counted as regionals; they're as large as or larger than some of the smaller regionals, and the competition level is as high or higher, especially once you get past the first event for some teams.
Akash Rastogi
31-01-2011, 01:39
Definitely San Diego. While Midwest is always strong, the San Diego teams try to one-up their level each year. Especially in the case of teams like 973, 1538, and 1717 who dramatically improve each year.
Hardest to Win: Waterloo
Toughest: Midwest or San Diego
Yes there is a difference between which are the hardest to win and which ones have the toughest competition :p
Justin Montois
31-01-2011, 01:42
Midwest.
Midwest Elims are a great look at what you should expect in St. Louis.
If 359 was going to San Diego that might have tipped it though.
The reason the MI State Championship doesn't count is because it's a championship, not a regional. If the MI teams are going to take MSC as a regional, then I'll go ahead and take the Archimedes, Curie, Galileo, Newton, and Einstein--especially Einstein--"regionals" as toughest.
Only being absolutely technical is MSC a regional. It just has a much more difficult registration process. :P Divisions don't count because they're officially part of the CMP.
Anyway, if we're doing districts, then Kettering and Traverse City take the cake.
Kettering has two-time defending world champ 67 and divisional alliance captains 33. As for divisional first-round picks, we have 27, 51, 67, 70, and 2337. These are just those teams that excelled at the CMP. How about MSC Champs 2834, or alliance captains of their upset district 1243? Plenty of other teams deserving recognition, like 494, 70's twin, or 3450, the remake of 397.
11 of last year's 24 MSC elimination teams came from Kettering.
By BBQ, it was the toughest week 1 event by far.
This year, due to space restriction, a few strong out-of-area teams were forced to move elsewhere, making Traverse City another strong location.
MSC Champs as captains 1918, Archimedes 2nd overall pick 201, and Newton 3rd pick and Kettering Champs 910 headline this event, but there's several other strong contenders. 830 and 2009 CMP champs 247 seek to come back from uncharacteristic lows last year. Sophomores 3357 are coming off an Einstein appearance. Newton and MSC first-round picks, twice district finalists (as captains no less), 2619 is hungry after coming up short time and time again in 2010. 2771 broke out last season, alliance captain at MSC.
Note that these are the best of the Michigan teams. Many other teams would be major contenders at most out-of-state events, but the teams I've mentioned are the ones that make it in the toughest place to play: Michigan. Some of the other Michigan events are more than loaded compared to most regionals, but Traverse City and Kettering are the toughest of the 9.
Only being absolutely technical is MSC a regional. It just has a much more difficult registration process. :P Divisions don't count because they're officially part of the CMP.
All right, I'll take the entire CMP. 340+ teams, 4 fields, option for open registration (and then qualifying anyway), definitely a tough regional.:p
Actually, on second thought, I'll take IRI...:p:D Only 80 picked teams compete there, what's not to like? Oh, wait, not an official event
I'd say that any "compete-to-qualify-to-enter" event should be excluded from consideration for toughest regional. If you're there, it's because you're good anyway. Those events get their own category: Toughest of the Tough Events. (Eligible: MSC, CMP, IRI, other qualification/selection-based entry events I'm not aware of.) Of those, it's a tossup between MSC and IRI, but I'll take IRI (more teams, larger area that they hail from, and the insane amount of elimination ties last year). MSC for official event, with Einstein Field at CMP being tougher but not quite large enough for its own event.
All right, I'll take the entire CMP. 340+ teams, 4 fields, option for open registration (and then qualifying anyway), definitely a tough regional.:p
Actually, on second thought, I'll take IRI...:p:D Only 80 picked teams compete there, what's not to like? Oh, wait, not an official event
I'd say that any "compete-to-qualify-to-enter" event should be excluded from consideration for toughest regional. If you're there, it's because you're good anyway. Those events get their own category: Toughest of the Tough Events. (Eligible: MSC, CMP, IRI, other qualification/selection-based entry events I'm not aware of.) Of those, it's a tossup between MSC and IRI, but I'll take IRI (more teams, larger area that they hail from, and the insane amount of elimination ties last year). MSC for official event, with Einstein Field at CMP being tougher but not quite large enough for its own event.
By technical, I wasn't creating a definition of regional, but rather using FIRST's working standard. By FRC, MSC is a regional. I tentatively assume their definition is something along the lines of "Event that directly qualifies teams for the Championship," but this doesn't consider that district results plays into who goes from MI.
Regardless, I would agree with you otherwise. I'd go with Einstein, then IRI, the MSC. Einstein is a bit easier because you only have to win 4 matches though :P
I go to alot of regionals every year and of the six events I am going to this year Midwest should be stronger than FLR by a slight margin.
I expect improvements from Midwest in quality of competition this year (there was a huge drop off in quality after the top level teams at the event last year) with no other Midwestern regionals to dilute the pool at the event like it did last year. If 1114 came back there would be no question which was the strongest regional.
FLR is good at attracting solid Canadian teams and is one of the few regionals that can still attract teams from the Michigan to come. Teams from the mid Atlantic and the midwest often come as well. It is stronger in the middle of the pack than the Midwest which makes it more competitive during qualification. Being a week 1 regional hurts FLR as it will most likely be plagued by bugs while Midwest should have no such problems by week 4 and many of their teams should be doing their second regional.
gorrilla
31-01-2011, 06:53
Florida is going to be really intense this year.
Chris is me
31-01-2011, 09:49
MSC isn't a regional for this discussion because it doesn't have open registration. The event is aiming to be the strongest event of the year by design and thus restricts invitations to the best. All other events, including Championship to an extent, have open registration.
You know what's weird? One of the following teams won't win Midwest this year: 16, 111, 71, 1625. To win that event you'll have to pick one of those teams or get through an alliance of two of those. Not even factoring in the other teams, is that something you can accomplish?
Lil' Lavery
31-01-2011, 10:27
The regional with the most elite teams is rarely the toughest to win.
Patrick Seeney
31-01-2011, 11:09
Any regional featuring 469 is going to be tough :P ...we got some tricks up our sleeves that will be revealed at our first district event!
nikeairmancurry
31-01-2011, 11:24
Any regional featuring 469 is going to be tough :P ...we got some tricks up our sleeves that will be revealed at our first district event!
Whips sweat from forehead... Can't wait to see it at MSC...
Chris is me
31-01-2011, 11:57
Any regional featuring 469 is going to be tough :P ...we got some tricks up our sleeves that will be revealed at our first district event!
What year does this comment not apply to?
thefro526
31-01-2011, 12:29
The regional with the most elite teams is rarely the toughest to win.
There is wisdom in this post.
In a field with a lot of depth like many that are being listed; San Diego, Midwest, Florida, MSC give you a better opportunity of being with strong alliance members, if you're a strong team yourself.
Personally, I find it hardest to do well when you're a strong team in a field of weaker teams, since it's harder to get with another strong team, and usually if two strong teams get together they walk right through the eliminations unopposed.
Personally, I find it hardest to do well when you're a strong team in a field of weaker teams, since it's harder to get with another strong team, and usually if two strong teams get together they walk right through the eliminations unopposed.True that. L.A. 2008, 330 and 1717 made everyone else play for second place right from the get-go. L.A. 2010, the same two teams had to fight a lot harder, against the eventual World Champion team 294.
Chris is me
31-01-2011, 13:52
Isn't that disproving his point though? That's an example of more powerhouse teams making a regional harder to win.
thefro526
31-01-2011, 14:03
Isn't that disproving his point though? That's an example of more powerhouse teams making a regional harder to win.
It really depends on who's asking the question. I guess it's different depending on how good your machine and robot is.
Arefin Bari
31-01-2011, 15:41
Any regional featuring 469 is going to be tough :P ...we got some tricks up our sleeves that will be revealed at our first district event!
Again?
The 469 statement applies to the usual suspects who always make it to Einstein. Most of them don't say much of anything on CD they just build excellence and silently wait to deploy their creation on the unsuspecting masses come competition time when it's too late to do anything about it.
Andrew Schreiber
31-01-2011, 22:44
3450, the remake of 397.
I appreciate the mention but I have to correct this false statement since I know I will be hearing this repeated if I don't quash it now. Team 3450 is a distinct and unique entity that is not related to 397. 397 was put on hiatus as a team due to lack of student interest. Several of the mentors, myself and brother among them, worked together to form a new team. We accepted the 3 students from 397 who were still interested (within the limit of 5 returning students for rookie teams) and moved to a different school. This was accomplished with a ton of help from our sister team 314, Big Mo. To say that 3450 is just 397 remade is like saying that Top Gear US is just like Top Gear UK. Some of the elements are there but I think you will find that they are drastically different. All of the mentors who came over from 397 have agreed that it is a completely different team this year.
Anyway, thank you for the mention, we will try not to disappoint you.
PS. Sorry for the off topic post, I have heard several people make this statement (not on CD) and felt that it was important to clear up any misconceptions about our team and our motives. If you have further questions feel free to PM me or stop by our shop (PM for address and times).
I appreciate the mention but I have to correct this false statement since I know I will be hearing this repeated if I don't quash it now. Team 3450 is a distinct and unique entity that is not related to 397.
Ah, my apologies, Andrew.
Andrew Schreiber
31-01-2011, 23:02
Ah, my apologies, Andrew.
Not a problem, I can see where that misconception would come from.
pfreivald
31-01-2011, 23:41
The toughest regional that matters is the one you're in!
Hellfeier675
01-02-2011, 01:19
Silicon Valley.
Dargel1625
01-02-2011, 01:30
What year does this comment not apply to?
When it comes to 469, what year doesn't this apply to? ;)
ratdude747
01-02-2011, 01:48
When it comes to 469, what year doesn't this apply to? ;)
i find it ironic that someone from winnovation is saying that... you guys aren't exactly low-par yourselves... your team seems to defy physics some years... only you would think of 6 wheel crab.
i find it ironic that someone from winnovation is saying that... you guys aren't exactly low-par yourselves... your team seems to defy physics some years... only you would think of 6 wheel crab.
How is it ironic? Admiration is universal, it does not exclude those who have achieved past success. Learning from the innovations of others is part of what makes FRC great, regardless of your own teams accomplishments or lack thereof.
delsaner
01-02-2011, 08:51
In my opinion, there are two different definitions of toughest when it comes to a regional. Level of difficulty with teams, and level of difficulty in regards to winning the competition.
Teams: A tough regional in this case is one with a lot of powerhouse teams, Midwest in this case. It is not necessarily difficult to win in the regional, as there is a lot of variability when it comes to elimination matches, considering a good sum of the alliance will have at least one alliance.
Competition: A tough regional to win is a regional with about 2-3 powerhouse teams, assuming your team is average. It will be very likely that one of the powerhouses will become #1 seed, and its also very likely that that team will choose the other powerhouse team. I am not saying that this will happen every time, but it is a likely possibility.
$0.02
This ought to be an interesting year.
2056 is registered for 3 regionals for the first time. The rookie sensation, thats by no means a rookie anymore is on their quest to make it the drive for 11 consecutive regional wins, winning every regional they've ever competed in. They're looking to join that small but powerful group of teams that have won 3 in the same year.
2010 GTR represented their 8th time at the top of the podium since their first time there in 2007 at Waterloo. Can 2011 FLR, Waterloo and GTRWest be numbers 9, 10 and 11? We'll have to wait and see.
I'm excited for this year as its 1075's first attempt at 3 regionals in one year as well. We will be attending FLR, GTREast and Waterloo.
Waterloo will be tough to win. With 1114 and 2056 scheduled to attend, and the disappearance of strong teams like 1503 and 1565, its difficult to predict anything but either 1114 or 2056 seeding #1 and selecting the other. That being said, the 3 robot entry from one school in MI could be interesting (teams 216, 244, and 288)
Chris is me
01-02-2011, 10:11
I dunno - Waterloo still has 1305, 1310, 2200, and 2609 to mix things up. It'd take one hell of an upset to get to the #1 seed but it could happen.
thefro526
01-02-2011, 10:16
I dunno - Waterloo still has 1305, 1310, 2200, and 2609 to mix things up. It'd take one hell of an upset to get to the #1 seed but it could happen.
Even if 1114 and 2056 got on the #1 Alliance, any two of the teams you listed could pull off an upset with enough skill, strategy and luck.
Its definitely possible for 1114 and 2056 to be upset, as 2009 GTR Finals (188, 610, 1305 v 2056, 1114, 2185) very nearly demonstrated. Easily one of the most fantastic Finals I've watched in years, if a bit controversial.
Both of them play a top notch game, and they've proven time and again that outseeding both of them is a task not easily accomplished. Looking forward to competition season, I want to see what robots everyone's come up with.
Nick Lawrence
01-02-2011, 10:42
Toronto.
No questions asked.
-Nick
Anybody up for running the BBQ/SAUCE numbers for 2011 Regional entry lists?
Ok, I've heard people talking about this stuff for years now. When people talk about a regionals BBQ number do they mean like their OPR or past experience for all teams attending or what?
Akash Rastogi
01-02-2011, 13:14
Ok, I've heard people talking about this stuff for years now. When people talk about a regionals BBQ number do they mean like their OPR or past experience for all teams attending or what?
The best BBQ will be at the Smokey Mountain regional! I wish I could go! :D
/obligatory
iVanDuzer
01-02-2011, 13:32
I dunno - Waterloo still has 1305, 1310, 2200, and 2609 to mix things up. It'd take one hell of an upset to get to the #1 seed but it could happen.
It's definitely possible: 2609 seeded first in Waterloo 2009 over 2056 and went on to become regional champs. Last year, 1310 and 1305 teamed up in Waterloo and only lost to an alliance with 2 Einstein robots by 3 points in the finals. A week later 1305 did the same thing in the GTR semifinals (except by 4 points), with the score actually being even until the endgame.
(1305 also became semi-finalists on Galileo last year, upsetting 1717's alliance in the quarters)
The Canadian regionals are often overlooked but are tremendously competitive all the same (2009 GTR Finals, anyone?). I'm glad that they're getting a lot of publicity now.
That being said, I'm particularly looking forward to Midwest and Silicon Valley south of the border.
Ok, I've heard people talking about this stuff for years now. When people talk about a regionals BBQ number do they mean like their OPR or past experience for all teams attending or what?
BBQ = Blue Banner Quotient
SAUCE = Sextuple Advancement Uniform Counting Era
A regional's BBQ is The number of blue banners earned by all teams in attendance, divided by the number of teams in attendance. It is intended to be a gauge by which to measure the power of the teams in attendance at a given regional.
A regional's SAUCE only counts blue banners earned since 2005, when 3v3 play started.
Blue banners are earned for Regional Chairman's Award, and Regional Champion teams. Each regional awards 4 blue banners per season (5 if the winning alliance called in a backup bot). The CMP Divisions award 3 banners each, for Division Champion, and CMP awards 3 blue banners for einstein champions, and 1 for Championship Chairmans. I'm unsure of how banners are awarded in MI's district model (mostly regarding CA's)
If my counts are correct (i fixed a couple errors in FIRSTs data):
Waterloo BBQ: 44/30 = 1.46667
Waterloo SAUCE: 39/30 = 1.3
Teams:
216: 1 Blue Banner
244: 0 (Non-rookie new team)
288: 0
610: 2 Blue banners (0 since 2005)
781: 1 Blue banner (0 since 2005)
843: 1 Blue banner
854: 0
865: 2 Blue banners (1 since 2005)
907: 0
1075: 0
1114: 21 Blue banners (20 since 2005)
1219: 0
1241: 2 Blue banners
1305: 4 Blue banners
1310: 0
1312: 0
1325: 0
1334: 0
1535: 0
1846: 0
2056: 9 Blue banners
2200: 0
2361: 0
2609: 1 Blue banner
2625: 0
2702: 0
3161: 0
3396: 0
3683: 0 (rookie)
3756: 0 (rookie)
Its worth noting that 1114 represents more than half of Waterloo's SAUCE.
Silicon Valley:
BBQ: 56/56 = 1.0
SAUCE: 40/56 = .714
I say......
BOILERMAKER REGIONAL! =DDD
I wish.
EagleEngineer
01-02-2011, 15:01
i have to agree that San Diego is going to be one of the top competitions in the world. 987 is going to have a world championship robot, considering they won in 2007, and 254 is going for a world championship win this year. :eek: It going to be a tough competition. :eek:
GTR BBQ/SAUCEs
East:
BBQ: 38/36 = 1.05556
SAUCE: 33/36 = 0.91667
188: 4 Blue Banners (2 since 2005)
296: 3 Blue banners
467: 1 Blue banner (0 since 2005)
886: 0
907: 0
919: 0
1006: 3 Blue banners (2 since 2005)
1009: 0 (returning after a FIVE YEAR hiatus)!
1075: 0
1114: 21 Blue banners (20 since 2005)
1241: 2 Blue banners
1246: 0
1404: 0
1482: 0
1503: 3 Blue banners (all from 2006, w/1114)
1514: 0
1815: 0
2198: 0
2200: 0
2609: 1 Blue banner
2625: 0
2626: 0
2670: 0
3040: 0
3117: 0
3360: 0
3379: 0
3386: 0
3527: 0 (rookie)
3530: 0 (rookie)
3532: 0 (rookie)
3544: 0 (rookie)
3560: 0 (rookie)
3563: 0 (rookie)
3698: 0 (rookie)
3705: 0 (rookie)
West:
BBQ: 23/36 = 0.63889
SAUCE: 19/36 = 0.52778
610: 2 Blue banners (0 since 2005)
771: 2 Blue Banners (not 3 as frclinks.com/t/771 might suggest - Thanks Karthik!)
772: 0
781: 1 Blue banner (0 since 2005)
854: 0
865: 2 Blue banners (1 since 2005)
1053: 0
1219: 0
1221: 0
1305: 4 Blue banners
1310: 0
1325: 0
1334: 0
1547: 3 Blue banners
1835: 0
1846: 0
2056: 9 Blue banners
2076: 0
2386: 0
2634: 0
2809: 0
2852: 0
2935: 0
3161: 0
3382: 0
3387: 0
3531: 0 (rookie)
3533: 0 (rookie)
3541: 0 (rookie)
3543: 0 (rookie)
3550: 0 (rookie)
3571: 0 (rookie)
3590: 0 (rookie)
3664: 0 (rookie)
3710: 0 (rookie)
3739: 0 (rookie)
with a combined 18 rookies making up 25% of the field, this should be interesting. According to BBQ and SAUCE, the EAST should be the harder of the two halves, but once again, 1114 accounts for more than half the BBQ and nearly 2/3rds of the SAUCE.
And in case you were wondering:
Combined GTR:
BBQ: 61/72 = 0.84722
SAUCE: 52/72 = 0.72222
EDIT: a side note: it seems to me there a significant number of vets missing here. 2505 comes to mind right off the bat.
Lil' Lavery
01-02-2011, 16:12
Too much hyping of your own regional going on in here.
big1boom
01-02-2011, 16:13
After manually going through the FIRST data ( I might have missed a couple)
MIDWEST
BBQ 1.653846154
SAUCE 1.192307692
Team Number Blue Banners since 2005(pre2005)
16 5(6)
45 5(4)
71 10(8)
101 0
111 9(4)
118 6(2)
135 0
896 0
1091 0
8th year
1367 0
7th year
1625 8
1675 1
6th year
1732 2
1739 0
1781 0
1850 1
5th year
1987 3
2022 0
2041 2
2115 0
2136 0
2151 0
2171 2
2194 2
4th year
2338 0
2358 0
2410 1
2432 0
2462 0
3rd year
2704 0
2709 0
2725 0
2769 0
2781 0
2803 0
2826 1
2949 0
3061 0
3067 0
3110 0
2nd year
3135 0
3177 0
3197 0
3352 1
3416 0
Rookies
3488 0
3494 0
3595 0
3612 0
3646 0
3695 0
3779 0
EDIT:
Updated team 16
Meredith Novak
01-02-2011, 17:07
After manually going through the FIRST data ( I might have missed a couple)
Midwest BBQ=1.519
Midwest SAUCE=1.115
Team Number Blue Banners since 2005(pre2005)
16 4(3)
Team 16 has 11 total banners including 5 since 2005. So 5(6) would be correct.
The reason the MI State Championship doesn't count is because it's a championship, not a regional. If the MI teams are going to take MSC as a regional, then I'll go ahead and take the Archimedes, Curie, Galileo, Newton, and Einstein--especially Einstein--"regionals" as toughest.
In the last two years, the Michigan State Championship has seemed more competitive than the four divisions at the World Championship to me :rolleyes:
Honestly though, there are a ton of teams at the world championship that do not qualify, and do not perform as well as the top teams. (I remember because they make scouting a pain)
Any regional featuring 469 is going to be tough :P ...we got some tricks up our sleeves that will be revealed at our first district event!
Again? O.O
big1boom
01-02-2011, 17:54
Team 16 has 11 total banners including 5 since 2005. So 5(6) would be correct.
Thanks for the correction. If anyone else notices a correction, please post or PM me.
MIDWEST
BBQ 1.653846154
SAUCE 1.192307692
Total overall in parenthesis.
I counted EI which is a banner award.
FLR BBQ:1.705
FLR Sauce: 1.295
73 = 0 (1)
145 = 0
156 (rookie)
174 = 4
188 = 2 (3)
191 = 2 (4)
211 = 0
217 = 17 (18)
229 = 1 (2)
250 = 1
340 = 7(11)
578 = 0 (1)
639 = 1
716 = 1(2)
843 = 1
1075 = 0
1126 = 3(6)
1153 = 0
1405 = 0(1)
1450 = 1
1511 = 8
1518 = 0
1528 = 0
1551 = 1
1559 = 0
1585 = 0
1591 = 0
1640 = 0
1765 = 0
2053 = 0
2056 = 9
2228 = 0
2340 = 0
2852 = 0
2994 = 0
3003 = 0
3015 = 0
3157 = 0
3173 = 0
3181 = 0
3613 (rookie)
3799 (rookie)
3838 (rookie)
3842 (rookie)
Chris is me
01-02-2011, 18:42
I counted EI which is a banner award.
As of last year this isn't true.
As of last year this isn't true.
Considering that it earns you a trip to the championship it should still count as a Blue Banner award.
Henry Williams
01-02-2011, 18:48
As of last year this isn't true.
Yeah, I wish it was but no banner for 461 last year...
big1boom
01-02-2011, 18:52
So for the BBQ/SAUCE, blue banners are
1) Regional Winner
2) Regional Chairmans
3) Division Champion
4) World Champion
5) Championship Chairmans
Anything else?
XaulZan11
01-02-2011, 19:03
Assuming that we are talking about toughest regional to become Regional Champion, does it make sense to include chairmans or any other non-regional/divison/world championship blue banner?
Chris is me
01-02-2011, 19:04
Considering that it earns you a trip to the championship it should still count as a Blue Banner award.
Rookie All Star also does not give you a banner.
The BBQ is defined as things that give you a Blue Banner - I don't see why it should be less simple than that.
BrendanB
01-02-2011, 19:09
Rookie All Star also does not give you a banner.
The BBQ is defined as things that give you a Blue Banner - I don't see why it should be less simple than that.
Because it is almost like second place Chairmans and is still not an easy task to achieve!
Chris is me
01-02-2011, 19:11
Neither is Rookie All Star, or Regional Finalist...
The metric is named "Blue Banner Quotient" - using something other than blue banners with it is inaccurate and confusing.
XaulZan11
01-02-2011, 19:16
Question: Are we talking about toughest regional to win on the field with your robot, or toughest regional to win chairmans? If it is the former, using all blue banners is not the best idea. I think giving 2 points for winning regional and 1 point for finalist (or something similar) would lead to much more accurate results instead of counting something (chairmans award) that is completely illrelevent.
BrendanB
01-02-2011, 19:17
Neither is Rookie All Star, or Regional Finalist...
The metric is named "Blue Banner Quotient" - using something other than blue banners with it is inaccurate and confusing.
But they were a blue banner which is still counted in the 2005-2009 season.
Chris is me
01-02-2011, 19:22
But they were a blue banner which is still counted in the 2005-2009 season.
There was no blue banner for EI in 2007 - for sure as well. I don't believe it ever has been awarded a blue banner.
Assuming that we are talking about toughest regional to become Regional Champion, does it make sense to include chairmans or any other non-regional/divison/world championship blue banner?
If that's the case then you might as well go with straight up won/loss record over the last five years.
There are cases of teams winning championshps that have a losing record. Does that make them a strong team?
BrendanB
01-02-2011, 19:35
It is going to be extremely hard to determine which regional is the hardest. FIRST isn't a sport, the game, strategy, robot, and team changes each and every year.
Midwest is full of powerhouse teams, but if they are all extremely good and everyone else is mediocre than the competition lies between only those good teams.
What about the regionals that are full of good teams?
It is going to be extremely hard to determine which regional is the hardest. FIRST isn't a sport, the game, strategy, robot, and team changes each and every year.
Midwest is full of powerhouse teams, but if they are all extremely good and everyone else is mediocre than the competition lies between only those good teams.
What about the regionals that are full of good teams?
Even Michigan doesn't have that. Not until the MSC.
Even Michigan doesn't have that. Not until the MSC.
You could argue that even MSC doesn't have it either, but it's the closest any event gets, perhaps even compared to IRI.
Andrew Schreiber
01-02-2011, 20:49
Anybody up for running the BBQ/SAUCE numbers for 2011 Regional entry lists?
I'll see if I can dig my old scripts out, can't run them right now though because I have a bad internet connection at school and no internet at home. I'll post em if I find em so someone else can run them.
BrendanB
01-02-2011, 20:58
Even Michigan doesn't have that. Not until the MSC.
I was thinking more of a regional like GSR with no super team who always wins although 121/78 have made it to the finals for the past 3 years, but it is full of good teams who when you look at the list you know they will have a competitive robot that can sway a match.
20,40,58,69,78,126,175,1058,1073,1519,1772,and 1922. If all of these teams stuck with their previous standards, that is 12 of 53 good robots who can make for a very interesting finals before the third picks.
I'm not saying GSR is the hardest, but sometimes such events are harder to win.
You could argue that even MSC doesn't have it either, but it's the closest any event gets, perhaps even compared to IRI.
Even IRi has the occasional soft spot (though I haven't seen a true sacrificial lamb alliance yet).
team388girl
01-02-2011, 21:04
i would have to say that the Virginia Regional would be hard because of of 64 teams that compete there, anyone from there agree :)
Tyler Hicks
01-02-2011, 22:40
Michigan has a great championship event, and I do believe it's classified as a Regional. I'm looking forward to TC and WM districts! I have a feeling it's going to be a very interesting season.
MarkoRamius1086
01-02-2011, 23:05
How about this... Can we identify the "Hardest Regional" by week, and then decide from there? Otherwise this is a free-for-all. I would say do Weeks 1-6... and a seperate division for the Michigain Districts and Champs (No offense... and if anything that is a compliment to your competitiveness!)
Week 1:
Granite State --- New Jersey --- Finger Lakes --- Alamo
Week 2:
San Diego --- Florida --- WPI --- Lake Superior --- Greater Kansas City --- Pittsburg --- Wisconsin --- New York City
Week 2.5:
Israel
Week 3:
Arizona --- Sacremento --- Peachtree --- Boilermaker --- Bayou --- Chesapeake --- St. Louis --- Oklahoma --- Lone Star --- Seattle Olympic --- Seattle Cascade
Week 4:
Washington DC --- Waterloo --- Los Angeles --- Hawaii --- Midwest --- Long Island --- Oregon --- Palmetto
Week 5:
East Toronto --- West Toronto --- Silicon Valley --- Connecticut --- 10000 Lakes --- North Star --- Las Vegas --- Smokey Mountain
Week 6:
Colorado --- Boston --- North Carolina --- Buckeye --- Philadelphia --- Dallas --- Utah --- Virginia
Michigan:
Week 1:
Traverse City --- Kettering University
Week 2:
Waterford
Week 3:
West Michigan --- Detroit
Week 4:
Ann Arbor --- Niles
Week 5:
Livonia --- Troy
Week 6:
Michigan Champs
Best of luck this season!
Petrie
Close, but Kettering over TC, Detroit over WM, AA over Niles, and Troy over Livonia.
xSAWxBLADEx
01-02-2011, 23:19
Close, but Kettering over TC, Detroit over WM, AA over Niles, and Troy over Livonia.
agreed :)
Alpha Beta
01-02-2011, 23:33
Close, but Kettering over TC, Detroit over WM, AA over Niles, and Troy over Livonia.
I don't think these are pre-listed in order of strength. It is unlikely that Colorado will be more competative than Dallas in week 6, although we will try our best to make it as competative as possible.
I manually went through FIRST's data, so I could be missing some, but here's San Deigo.
Format: Blue Banners since '05 (Total Blue Banners)
BBQ - 70/59 = 1.1864
SAUCE - 53/59 =.8983
254 - 13 (23)
294 - 4 (8)
399 - 3 (3)
585 - 1 (2)
589 - 0
599 - 0
687 - 0
702 - 0
812 - 3 (3)
968 - 4 (5)
973 - 1
980 - 2 (3)
981 - 0
987 - 8 (8)
1160 - 0
1266 - 1 (1)
1372 - 0
1388 - 0 (1)
1538 - 2 (2)
1540 - 4 (4)
1572 - 0
1622 - 1 (1)
1717 - 4 (4)
1967 - 0
1972 - 0
2029 - 0
2090 - 0
2102 - 0
2193 - 0
2339 - 0
2348 - 1 (1)
2439 - 0
2477 - 0
2485 - 0
2493 - 0
2543 - 1 (1)
2658 - 0
2827 - 0
2839 - 0
2984 - 0
3021 - 0
3128 - 0
3195 - 0
3226 - 0
3255 - 0
3341 - 0
3453 - 0
3470 - 0
3476 - 0
3477 - 0
3480 - 0
3486 - 0
3491 - 0
3500 - 0
3647 - 0
3704 - 0
3749 - 0
3794 - 0
3849 - 0
Florida BBQ/Sauce
BBQ: 89/61=1.460
Sauce:22/61=.361
21:1(0)
79:8(3)
86:4(0)
103:8(4)
108:2(2)
168:1(1)
179:4(0)
180:4(3)
233:18(4)
341:16(3)
386:2(1)
597:3(0)
665:0(0)
744:0(0)
801:1(0)
945:1(1)
1027:1(0)
1065:0(0)
1251:4(0)
1523:1(0)
1543:0(0)
1557:1(0)
1592:2(0)
1604:0(0)
1612:1(0)
1649:2(0)
1875:0(0)
1902:4(0)
2023:0(0)
2152:0(0)
2383:0(0)
2425:0(0)
2556:0(0)
2564:0(0)
2757:0(0)
2797:0(0)
2916:0(0)
3149:0(0)
3164:0(0)
3242:0(0)
3332:0(0)
3376:0(0)
3410:0(0)
Rookies:18
I don't think these are pre-listed in order of strength. It is unlikely that Colorado will be more competative than Dallas in week 6, although we will try our best to make it as competative as possible.
Oh, I was only ranking the districts. I don't know enough about the out-of-state teams to rank the other events. Plus, you never know until you get there. TC could easily be tougher than Kettering this year. Every year, obscure teams come of the mist with great robots, or there's a rookie sensation. FRC has a huge season-to-season variability, besides some teams that seem to always excel.
I'm not putting Autodesk Oregon into the running, but I was curious to see what our other regional was looking like, as well as to provide a comparison between what's reputed to be a top-flight regional (San Diego) with a more average one (Oregon). The difference is quite interesting (at least to scouting geeks like me :cool: ).
Here are the numbers:
BBQ:
San Diego - 1.1864
Autodesk Oregon - .5667
SAUCE:
San Diego - .8983
Autodesk Oregon - .4833
Tyler Hicks
02-02-2011, 09:00
TC could easily be tougher than Kettering this year. Every year, obscure teams come of the mist with great robots, or there's a rookie sensation. FRC has a huge season-to-season variability, besides some teams that seem to always excel.
Agreed. And not to mention, have you seen the team list for WM? It's going to be very competitive.
I know I'm the one that suggested the return of the BBQ/SAUCE metric. I'm wondering if theres a better way to judge regional difficulty.
I say this, because the BBQ/SAUCE method of assessing such will always show regionals at which teams like 1114, 2056, 217, 148, 254, 1625, and so on are in attendance as markedly harder to win. Teams with a disproportionately high number of banners will skew any regional they attend (as has happened with Waterloo and GTR East thanks to 1114.)
Any ideas for a better method?
pandamonium
02-02-2011, 10:03
IMO this whole blue banner thing is a wash. What if teams don't submit chairman's at that regional? In general I feel that FLR is undervalued, I am not saying that it is the best. Beeing week one hurts the competition in general. a large # of teams also going to the Rochester Rally preseason event counters this and helps it seem less like a week 1.
pfreivald
02-02-2011, 10:38
IMO this whole blue banner thing is a wash. What if teams don't submit chairman's at that regional? In general I feel that FLR is undervalued, I am not saying that it is the best. Beeing week one hurts the competition in general. a large # of teams also going to the Rochester Rally preseason event counters this and helps it seem less like a week 1.
2009 saw the worst-performing robot that 1551 has ever put together. Neat design, just didn't play the game for squat.
2010 saw us picking 217 and 174 to join us in the top-seeded alliance.
So now we have a blue banner, but I don't think we're a fundamentally different team than we were in the past. We nailed the strategy for last year's game (though not as well as 469), and built a robot that excelled at enacting that strategy (at least on the first-week regional level... it kinda took a beating and decided to fall apart repeatedly at Championship). Yet there were other teams there that consistently do very well that last year were not all that impressive on the field.
My point being that the BBQ might not be all it's SAUCEd up to be -- sometimes teams are very surprising in both good and bad ways. Some teams are consistently awesome every year, teams to look up to and to aspire to be. Some teams are consistently middle-of-the-road in terms of robot performance, but can break out and do great things or break down and do poorly (on the field) in one particular game.
A further reason that BBQ might be skewed is that a single robot winning multiple regionals in one year can net a team multiple Blue Banners, while a team that has a robot as good or better that only wins one regional gets only one Blue Banner. Being tournament champions four times in one year, methinks, means a lot less than being tournament champions once for four separate years.
It's an interesting metric, but I'm not sure it's a good one for determining regional difficulty... And that's ignoring the fact that the number of data points are so small that if you tried to do any meaningful statistics on them, you'd get GIGO.
Andrew Schreiber
02-02-2011, 12:10
IMO this whole blue banner thing is a wash. What if teams don't submit chairman's at that regional? In general I feel that FLR is undervalued, I am not saying that it is the best. Beeing week one hurts the competition in general. a large # of teams also going to the Rochester Rally preseason event counters this and helps it seem less like a week 1.
Got a better way of numerically ranking events? I'm listening and will do my best to implement it into my scripts.
pandamonium
02-02-2011, 13:19
well if you really want to put in the work look at karthick's power ratings for each team at each regional
xSAWxBLADEx
02-02-2011, 13:43
2009 saw the worst-performing robot that 1551 has ever put together. Neat design, just didn't play the game for squat.
2010 saw us picking 217 and 174 to join us in the top-seeded alliance.
Just like 247
2009 saw us at Einstein with 217 and 68
2010 saw us having a mess of a train train and not even getting into the elims at states (for future reference dont use belts if your planing to get into a pushing match :/)
every year is different
Got a better way of numerically ranking events? I'm listening and will do my best to implement it into my scripts.
I'm thinking a better way might be to count event wins as 2 pts, and event finalists as 1 pt, divide by number of teams.
This is because a regional being hard to win has little to do with CAs EIs or anything else. How well the teams "Get FIRST" has very little to do with how awesome their robot is. I'm not denouncing the validity of these awards, just discounting their merit for the purposes of measuring difficulty.
We could call it WAFER: Winner And Finalist Equalizing Rank.
You could split it at the 2005 3v3 era, i'm just not sure this has much merit either. Pre-2005 alliances still had 3 teams on them, just 2 on the field.
Andrew Schreiber
02-02-2011, 14:55
well if you really want to put in the work look at karthick's power ratings for each team at each regional
Describe the algorithm and a good way of harvesting data for it and I'll do my best. (After my hw of course)
xSAWxBLADEx
02-02-2011, 15:08
I think the rookie factor kills everything like 3357, and the two from Canada...so lets wait til we are sitting in the stands watching the compitition to see what the "toughest" regional is :) What you guys think? I think its a good idea
Andrew Schreiber
02-02-2011, 15:15
i think the rookie factor kills everything like 3357 and the two from Canada so lets wait til we are sitting in the stands watching the compitition to see what the "toughest" regional is :) what you guys think i think its a good idea
We try to find the hardest regional purely for fun. Realistically the numerical rankings mean next to nothing to anyone.
As a side note, I'm really struggling to understand what you are saying with this post. I would strongly suggest utilizing the English language when trying to communicate on these boards. Capitalization and punctuation would also help.
Tetraman
02-02-2011, 15:18
IMO this whole blue banner thing is a wash. What if teams don't submit chairman's at that regional? In general I feel that FLR is undervalued, I am not saying that it is the best. Beeing week one hurts the competition in general. a large # of teams also going to the Rochester Rally preseason event counters this and helps it seem less like a week 1.
I think FLR is different than any other regional, it's a miniature World Champs with all sorts of high and low caliber teams in heavy and friendly competition.
Anyway, A better way of ranking regionals would be to average out the winning and losing scores of each match each year, getting a Regional Average for both winning and losing. You'd want a good look at which regional scored the highest losing scores. Teams that scored 50 points and lost > Teams that scored 30 points and lost, and then see which regional scored the highest average points.
You'd have to do this for the past 2-3 years as each year's scoring ratio is different.
i think the rookie factor kills everything like 3357 and the two from Canada so lets wait til we are sitting in the stands watching the compitition to see what the "toughest" regional is :) what you guys think i think its a good idea
I can only assume that one of the "two from Canada" is 2056, known around here as the "Rookie Sensation". Nowadays, they're no rookie, but are poised this year to become the sole holders of the record they currently share with the Cheesy Poofs (254). They have won their first 8 consecutive Regionals. They have never competed in a Regional event that they didn't win. 2007 was their rookie season, and they swept WAT and GTR with 1114's help. 2056 has been regional champions at Waterloo and Greater Toronto every year since 2007. 7 out of the 8 times they've won, 1114 was at the top of the podium with them (exception being 2009 WAT). The two teams have excellent programs, and are leaders in their communities.
You're right. You can't account for the rookie factor. We can only assess regional difficulty in a numerical form by assessing the past performance of the teams in attendance by one metric or another, and no matter what metric you use, you're bound to be surprised at some point.
xSAWxBLADEx
02-02-2011, 15:22
We try to find the hardest regional purely for fun. Realistically the numerical rankings mean next to nothing to anyone.
As a side note, I'm really struggling to understand what you are saying with this post. I would strongly suggest utilizing the English language when trying to communicate on these boards. Capitalization and punctuation would also help.
Im just saying that with as much time as most people spend on trying to predit the toughest regional, I think they should be trying to make the toughest robot
pandamonium
02-02-2011, 15:28
Perhaps look at highest seeded teams as I feel it is more impressive to win qualifications and lose the regional than get lucky as a 3rd pick team by the 2nd alliance. Although luck also plays a factor in this but if 7 teams with an average qualification ranking over the past 4 years of 2 are all attending the same regional you better bet money that it will be competitive!
Tetraman Totally agree with your post as well. FlR is different and the wining and losing scores would be a good indicator!
Describe the algorithm and a good way of harvesting data for it and I'll do my best. (After my hw of course)
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/papers/2383
Do this for every team at an event, and then do some stats for the event. Highest top 2 deviation from number 3 should be a good indicator of how tough it would be to win the event (assuming you are not 1, 2, or lucky number 24).
Averaging the values would give a pretty good idea of how tough it would be to compete at an event.
Looking at the average of the top 24 will give you a pretty good idea of how competitive elims will be.
Yes, this will give a ranking advantage to teams that compete at more events, but they are generally more competitive teams anyway.
Rookies would be wild-cards.
After the season is done, it is really good to look at things like OPR (if OPR is a reasonable metric for that year). Going into the championship, it was pretty reasonable to predict that the highest seeding score match would come from Archimededs.
Alpha Beta
02-02-2011, 15:40
If a regional doesn't have alot of teams traveling to it, or if those teams do not visit other regionals to any large extent, then success in that event does not mean much in comparison to the rest of the world. Someone has to win regardless of how great or poor the competition is. Could we instead see what percentage of the teams in each regional get picked up for elims at Champs? Maybe weight 1 point for being picked up in elims, 2 points for semis, 3 points for division finals, 4 points for making it to Einstein and 5 points for a world championship? Divide all of that by the number of years of experience so that a successful rookie last year doesn't penalize the regional for not having years of data.
indubitably
02-02-2011, 15:43
I think the only way to do a decent regional ranking would be to utilize, in some way, every bit of statistical data that is widely available for every team.
A regional win could be weighted high, a regional finalist would be considered but not weited as high. Seeding from previous regionals should also be looked at.
I just feel that basing it off of just blue banners or seeding ranks is not accurate enough. In many cases, the last picked team can win a regional. Also, in 2009, we seeded like 50th in the Midwest regionl only because we were consistently paired with bots that either didn't show up, or didn't move. We ended up making it to finals that year, which just shows that seeding can be completely off; although getting that unlucky doesn't occur very often.
Chris is me
02-02-2011, 15:47
Ultimately, the reason BBQ is effective is because, for discussing the hardest regional to win, it doesn't matter how well you do unless you won.
Don't construe the above statement as "winning is all that matters" - but when we're talking about difficulty of winning, all that is in the discussion is winning - catch my drift?
That's why a regional with 2 powerhouses and otherwise completely terrible robots will be just as hard to win as a very deep event. Strength of the top is what will ultimately stop you from winning overall - unless you can assemble a quality alliance of 3 second tier robots. This alliance may beat 2 top tier robots and a box on wheels.
pfreivald
02-02-2011, 15:49
Ultimately, the reason BBQ is effective is because, for discussing the hardest regional to win, it doesn't matter how well you do unless you won.
Is it effective? That is to say, how well does BBQ correlate with future wins?
How well does 2007 BBQ rankings relate with 2008 wins? 2008 with 2009? 2009 with 2010?
Does anyone know the answer to that question? Anyone care to do the work to find out?
klmx30302
02-02-2011, 16:22
I'm not sure why anyone hasn't mentioned granite state regional yet. It is tough for 2 reasons: 1. It is a week 1 competition so unless a team has attended a week 0 competition no one has any had any practice with other bots on a field (unless they have 2 practice bots). 2. GSR has some of the oldest teams in FIRST, this year there are about 10 teams attending with a rookie season of 1996 or earlier, just to name a few: 20, 126, 151, 166, 131, 61. I know that just because they are some of the original teams does not make them the best but the competition up here can be really intense (and exciting to watch).
Joe Ross
02-02-2011, 16:33
If 2056 never existed, how much would Waterloo or GTR's BBQ or SAUCE change? Probably not at all.
Every regional gives out the same number of blue banners. If 2056 didn't exist, other Canadian teams would have won 8 of those 9 blue banners (excluding the championship division winner from 2010), and the Canadian regionals BBQ and SAUCE would hardly change. However, the Candian regionals would be easier regionals, since 2056 wasn't there.
The same does not hold true for 1114. 1114 has blue banners from many events (Waterloo, GTR, Midwest, Pittsburgh, Long Island, and the Championship). If they never existing, American teams would have won Midwest, Pitsburgh, and Long Island, and there would be a net loss in BBQ and SAUCE for the Canadian regionals, and both regionals would be easier.
Thus BBQ and SAUCE reward regionals that can attract successful teams from outside their area. That's why Las Vegas has done well in this category in the past, because they get teams from all over the country.
Last year, 33 did not win any regionals, while 330 won 2. However, had we swapped positions, 33 would have easily won the Arizona and Los Angeles regionals, while 330 would not have won the Kettering and Troy Districts, because 33 was better then us.
While BBQ and SAUCE are convenient, I wouldn't use it for anything other then a talking point. Any method that only uses regional results will fall victim to this.
To evaluate how strong regionals are, I would probably compare teams performance at a regional compared to that same teams performance at the championship, against teams from all regionals. However, this is much harder to do, both for data collection, and computation.
Nawaid Ladak
02-02-2011, 16:45
Florida BBQ/Sauce
BBQ: 89/61=1.460
Sauce:22/61=.361
...
Rookies:18
If my memory serves me correct. You receive a Blue Banner for winning a division. 179 won Archimedes with 233 and 71 at the 2007 Championship Event.
Got a better way of numerically ranking events? I'm listening and will do my best to implement it into my scripts.
A regressive formula that calculates winning percentages from prior years? ie: a win in a match from 2008 counts less towards your total score than a win last year.
Also, the toughest regional is usually the one your playing in.
P.S. Michigan State Championships will be the toughest "regional". if you don't count that. then i'd prbobaly say Midwest or Finger Lakes.
Joe Ross
02-02-2011, 16:49
2009 saw the worst-performing robot that 1551 has ever put together. Neat design, just didn't play the game for squat.
2010 saw us picking 217 and 174 to join us in the top-seeded alliance.
So now we have a blue banner, but I don't think we're a fundamentally different team than we were in the past. We nailed the strategy for last year's game (though not as well as 469), and built a robot that excelled at enacting that strategy (at least on the first-week regional level... it kinda took a beating and decided to fall apart repeatedly at Championship). Yet there were other teams there that consistently do very well that last year were not all that impressive on the field.
My point being that the BBQ might not be all it's SAUCEd up to be -- sometimes teams are very surprising in both good and bad ways. Some teams are consistently awesome every year, teams to look up to and to aspire to be. Some teams are consistently middle-of-the-road in terms of robot performance, but can break out and do great things or break down and do poorly (on the field) in one particular game.
A further reason that BBQ might be skewed is that a single robot winning multiple regionals in one year can net a team multiple Blue Banners, while a team that has a robot as good or better that only wins one regional gets only one Blue Banner. Being tournament champions four times in one year, methinks, means a lot less than being tournament champions once for four separate years.
It's an interesting metric, but I'm not sure it's a good one for determining regional difficulty... And that's ignoring the fact that the number of data points are so small that if you tried to do any meaningful statistics on them, you'd get GIGO.
A previous look at year to year seeding showed there was very little correlation between year to year performance. This is obviously not the case for some small percentage of teams (1114, 67, etc) but your experience is the norm.http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56631
pfreivald
02-02-2011, 17:02
A previous look at year to year seeding showed there was very little correlation between year to year performance.
I thought so.
XaulZan11
02-02-2011, 17:22
A previous look at year to year seeding showed there was very little correlation between year to year performance.
Thats cool, but I have yet to see a regional where the top 8 seeds were actually the top 8 teams. I think the lack of a correlation is more of an indication on how poorly teams are ranked with only a couple of qualification matches. I'd be interested in seeing correlations between selection order, but then you get into teams being biased and picking the famous teams.
XaulZan11
12-02-2011, 21:33
I'm not saying this is the hardest regional, but Wisconsin is probably one of the most underrated regionals. Overal, I think Wisconsin was comparable to Midwest last year, even though Midwest gets the attention and no one really talks about Wisconsin. Midwest had the edge at the top (16, 71, 111, 1625, 1732) but it wasn't that far off of Wisconsin's (111, 706, 1714, 1732, 2481). But Wisconsin had the huge advantage after the top tier as 537, 1018, 1306, 2062, 2194, 2202, 2338, 2826, 3362 were all really solid scorers and would have been 1st round picks at Midwest.
Wisconsin has all those teams returning (besides 2481 and 1018), but gets 81, 135, 234, 279, 868, 1625, and 2041 to attend this year. I always expect comeback seasons from 93, 1652, 1736, 2039 and 2506, after a disapointing last year. There is no doubt in my mind that Wisconsin will be very deep, leading to some potentially wild elimination rounds (in my opinion, the best alliance as only won 1 time in the last 4 years, while the #1 seed as won only once in the history of the Wisconsin regional).
Trying to gauge performance based on win/loss records (or banners or anything else) is next to useless in FIRST. Even supposing that teams are ranked after qualification rounds according to their individual performance, the alliance selection process will mean that weaker teams will be "winners" over better performing teams.
I think the question to ask is "Which regional will have the most awesome/best performing robots?"
The idea of these regionals being more or less competitive depends entirely on which teams you are allied with.
-Mr. Van
Coach, Robodox
A side note: I think it would be much easier (and more accurate!) to predict the outcome of regionals appearing later in the schedule (wk 4,5,6) based on the outcomes of earlier regionals, and correlating the results of known teams, and the strengths of similar teams.
(Ie. 148/217 had identical robots in 2010. Predicting 148's future success based on 217's past success is a fairly valid comparison.)
Andrew Schreiber
14-02-2011, 14:41
(Ie. 148/217 had identical robots in 2010. Predicting 148's future success based on 217's past success is a fairly valid comparison.)
494/70 have identical robots and compete at identical events and they have drastically different records. Drive team has a huge impact on performance.
I am aware of this fact Andrew, was merely making the point that if there is a dominant robot belonging to a set of identical robots, the likelihood of the other robots in the set ALSO being dominating is significantly increased.
Kims Robot
22-02-2011, 11:11
Looking at the factors that could possibly rank/determine regional performance... (just for fun :) & in NO particular order)
1. Regional Rank (especially 1-10)
It often takes some skill/strategy to get to the top, I think teams that are consistently there get the most weight... a team that is "chance carried" there by alliance partners will not get as much weight as those that make it there on their own consistently.
2. Robot Blue Banners (Regional Champion & Finalist)
Winning says a fair amount. Even if you are a third pick, you in theory learn a thing or two from your alliance partners.
3. Selection Order
I would give more weight to the teams selected 2nd or 3rd (etc) than the teams actually ranked in 2nd or 3rd... This is thrown off a bit by teams that end up in the top 10 that don't have good alliance selection lists, but often the top 8 selected teams are fairly predictable with a good list.
4. Stability
More weight should be given to recent years than past years. Plenty of teams lose critical mentors, sponsors, etc and can "fall" in the ranks due to lack of structure or support. I think this is kind of what the BBQ/SAUCE does. You could take it a step further and say the last 3 years get highest weight, up to six years next, all past next...?
5. Win-Loss Record
This is probably the lowest of my weights, but there is something to teams that "know how to win". But then again its very heavily dependent on your partners & opponents, so its not as much of a predictor. And 2010 week 1 would have to be thrown out of this since winning didnt really "matter" to all teams. But it still could be a criteria
6. Rookie Startup
This is probably the hardest to figure into the numbers, but you can sometimes tell the caliber of the Rookie team by where it came from... the FRC team that is mentoring it, or the "family tree" if you will. 1511 stood a pretty good chance because it had 7 years of FIRST family tree driving it... plus was in a region with teams like 340, 191 & 1126 and could learn from them (just as an example :)). But in general, it would probably be easiest to just omit rookies from the factoring.
I'm not exactly sure how to gather all of this data, or even exactly how to rank all of these against eachother, but I would bet with all of these metrics we could come "closer" to predicting
I didn't factor Chairmans or EI in, as I think the "awards" are a whole different "game", and that there is much less of a correlation between winning CA/EI and winning the robot part of the competition :) So in that case I sort of disagree with the BBQ/SAUCE method.
Ehh just some ideas to throw on the pile :)
akoscielski3
22-02-2011, 11:21
Considering 2056 has never lost a regional Greater Tornot Regional West will probably be the hardest. however they have always been with 1114 during this compeltitiona nd 1114 is in the EAsty regioankl this year. They are together in The Waterloo regional though. :eek:
davidthefat
22-02-2011, 20:20
So I hear, San Diego is pretty tough. Eh...
NC GEARS
24-02-2011, 23:20
Did I hear the Michigan State Championship? Winwin
xSAWxBLADEx
24-02-2011, 23:44
Did I hear the Michigan State Championship? Winwin
Yes you did, MSC all the way
nikeairmancurry
24-02-2011, 23:44
Did I hear the Michigan State Championship? Winwin
*presses like button*
548swimmer
24-02-2011, 23:47
Did I hear the Michigan State Championship? Winwin
I second that.
Yeah, you heard that it isn't being counted, simply due to being a qualify-for event. Those are inherently tougher than any normal regional. We went over that a while ago...
Need proof? Einstein, IRI, and to some extent the Championship divisions. Oh, and MSC itself. ;)
Well, Troy district goes neck-and-neck with the top regionals in the country, and Kettering district is head and shoulders above everything else.. Or does having to be from Michigan count district competitions as "qualified" events? :P
xSAWxBLADEx
25-02-2011, 00:34
Well, Troy district goes neck-and-neck with the top regionals in the country, and Kettering district is head and shoulders above everything else.. Or does having to be from Michigan count district competitions as "qualified" events? :P
i think thats what they are saying ;)
Well, Troy district goes neck-and-neck with the top regionals in the country, and Kettering district is head and shoulders above everything else.. Or does having to be from Michigan count district competitions as "qualified" events? :P
Nah, they're open other than the MI restriction (which, personally, I think should be lifted in the event of extra spots at an event and everybody already being signed up for two). Districts count; MSC doesn't.
Akash Rastogi
25-02-2011, 00:36
I know it doesn't happen every year, but Philly looks top heavy too.
56
103
341
357
365
395
816
xSAWxBLADEx
25-02-2011, 00:40
Kettering University District event
1
27
33
51
67
70
326
494
703
2337
Traverse City FIRST Robotics District Competition
66
85
123
141
201
247
901
1918
3357
Detroit FIRST Robotics District Competition
1
51
123
201
217
469
503
Travis Hoffman
25-02-2011, 00:44
It's not *the* toughest, but I'm tossing Pittsburgh into the ring for honorable mention:
www.frclinks.com/e/pit (http://www.frclinks.com/e/pit)
For a 39-team event, it's going to be really competitive. I'm looking forward to it.
Nathan Streeter
25-02-2011, 02:49
Personally, I'd say the three toughest competitions are:
Traverse City
Granite State
Troy
Three toughest regionals:
Granite State
Finger Lakes
Midwest
Three toughest districts:
Traverse City
Troy
Detroit
Yes, I know what you're thinking... Granite State?! Traverse City?! Certainly Midwest, San Diego, and Kettering have those beat out! Well, that's what I would've thought too...
Being a bit of a scouting statistics fan, I decided the best way to figure this out was to compile OPR's for the top regionals. So, I averaged the 2010 OPR (multiplied by 8 to adjust for typical scoring difference) and 2009 OPR for each team at the regionals, then averaged those to find the competition average.
To reduce the error resulting from rookie teams not having data yet, I calculated a "composite" of the competition average... the average of the "including rookies average" and the "excluding rookies average."
Now, I'm not saying that this method is perfect; however, I do think it's a better indicator of competition strength than BBQ or SAUCE... I attached the excel file for those who are intrigued by the results. I only took the time to include the regionals that have already been proposed as being the top ones.
I think the reason why GSR has essentially passed under the radar on this thread is that it doesn't have as many of the "top tier/top 50" teams that other competitions have. Simply put though, it does have a tremendous wealth of second tier teams! I think the level of competition is less about a few teams standing head-and-shoulders above all, and more about the competitors as a whole being skilled. For this reason I was happy to see GSR and Traverse City at the top...
Honestly though, I just love watching the powerhouses play! If I could watch any webcast, it'd be the one with the most powerhouses... if I could attend any competition, it'd be the one with the best field as a whole.
Many thanks to Team 2834 (and by extension 1114), for their awesome scouting database from which I took these numbers! :-)
Considering 2056 has never lost a regional Greater Tornot Regional West will probably be the hardest. however they have always been with 1114 during this compeltitiona nd 1114 is in the EAsty regioankl this year. They are together in The Waterloo regional though. :eek:
Not true.
2009 WAT, 1114 was NOT in attendance. 2609 (a rookie!) seeded #1, chose 2056, and proceeded to win together, without 1114's help.
BrendanB
25-02-2011, 13:46
Personally, I'd say the three toughest competitions are:
Traverse City
Granite State
Troy
Three toughest regionals:
Granite State
Finger Lakes
Midwest
Three toughest districts:
Traverse City
Troy
Detroit
Yes, I know what you're thinking... Granite State?! Traverse City?! Certainly Midwest, San Diego, and Kettering have those beat out! Well, that's what I would've thought too...
Being a bit of a scouting statistics fan, I decided the best way to figure this out was to compile OPR's for the top regionals. So, I averaged the 2010 OPR (multiplied by 8 to adjust for typical scoring difference) and 2009 OPR for each team at the regionals, then averaged those to find the competition average.
To reduce the error resulting from rookie teams not having data yet, I calculated a "composite" of the competition average... the average of the "including rookies average" and the "excluding rookies average."
Now, I'm not saying that this method is perfect; however, I do think it's a better indicator of competition strength than BBQ or SAUCE... I attached the excel file for those who are intrigued by the results. I only took the time to include the regionals that have already been proposed as being the top ones.
I think the reason why GSR has essentially passed under the radar on this thread is that it doesn't have as many of the "top tier/top 50" teams that other competitions have. Simply put though, it does have a tremendous wealth of second tier teams! I think the level of competition is less about a few teams standing head-and-shoulders above all, and more about the competitors as a whole being skilled. For this reason I was happy to see GSR and Traverse City at the top...
Honestly though, I just love watching the powerhouses play! If I could watch any webcast, it'd be the one with the most powerhouses... if I could attend any competition, it'd be the one with the best field as a whole.
Many thanks to Team 2834 (and by extension 1114), for their awesome scouting database from which I took these numbers! :-)
I agree with you on GSR. Some regionals have the top 5 teams in the nation and then a lot of lower tier teams to fill the other 19 elimination slots! For a week one event GSR has some heavy hitters that lead to 57 points scored in last years four final matches! Out of the 6 robots in the finals 5 of them made it to ATL and all of them played in the eliminations. I'm not saying it is one of the top regionals, but it belongs up there every year!
Nathan Streeter
25-02-2011, 13:50
Not true.
2009 WAT, 1114 was NOT in attendance. 2609 (a rookie!) seeded #1, chose 2056, and proceeded to win together, without 1114's help.
It sounds like he meant that 1114 and 2056 have always been together at GTR, not at Waterloo. 2056 is a phenomenal team and has been highly competitive without forming an alliance with 1114... That said, when the two play together on an alliance at a tournament like GTR or Waterloo, they're essentially unstoppable!
2056 will also be attending FLR, I believe.
As always, I'll be eager to see what both teams have produced! :-)
Tetraman
25-02-2011, 14:11
I just did Finger Lakes and Midwest, as they are well known as top tier regionals.
2010 Finger Lakes Regional (74 matches):
Total points scored by winning/tied teams in qualifying matches: 295
Average: 4.10
Total points scored by losing/tired teams in qualifying matches: 102
Average: 1.40
Difference in match points: 2.70
2010 Midwest Regional (70 matches):
Total points scored by winning/tied teams in qualifying matches: 327
Average: 4.70
Total points scored by losing/tired teams in qualifiying matches: 93
Average: 1.30
Difference in match points: 3.40
Midwest obviously had much more high scoring robot alliances yet at FLR the matches were tighter in scoring.
I just did Finger Lakes and Midwest, as they are well known as top tier regionals.
2010 Finger Lakes Regional (74 matches):
Total points scored by winning/tied teams in qualifying matches: 295
Average: 4.10
Total points scored by losing/tired teams in qualifying matches: 102
Average: 1.40
Difference in match points: 2.70
2010 Midwest Regional (70 matches):
Total points scored by winning/tied teams in qualifying matches: 327
Average: 4.70
Total points scored by losing/tired teams in qualifiying matches: 93
Average: 1.30
Difference in match points: 3.40
Midwest obviously had much more high scoring robot alliances yet at FLR the matches were tighter in scoring.
I went to both regionals last year and FLR was better top to bottom but Midwest had better teams at the top.
Judging the best regional is really an objective thing beforehand.
It sounds like he meant that 1114 and 2056 have always been together at GTR, not at Waterloo. 2056 is a phenomenal team and has been highly competitive without forming an alliance with 1114... That said, when the two play together on an alliance at a tournament like GTR or Waterloo, they're essentially unstoppable!
2056 will also be attending FLR, I believe.
As always, I'll be eager to see what both teams have produced! :-)
2056 is at FLR, WAT, and GTRW
1114 is at PIT, WAT, and GTRE
1075 is at FLR, WAT, and GTRE. I'll be watching with excitement to see what 2011 has in store for them.
1114 has shared 7 of 2056's 8 victories (2009 WAT being the exception). I've had the pleasure of watching all of them first hand.
Both teams put out astounding robots each year, and as you say, when put together, they're nearly unstoppable.
2009 GTR, when 188, 610, and 1305 won Finals 1 against 1114, 2056, 2185, but then had a robot malfunction on 610, and 188's robot missed coming back from their timeout in time to be on the field for Finals 2 was the closest anyone has come since 2007.
Chris Fultz
25-02-2011, 21:36
So, what did we decide? :)
Actually, regardless of where it is, I think a week 1 regional is toughest to win.
Nobody really knows how to play the game. No one knows for sure what strategy will play out, because you cannot know what other strategies will be tried. All of the kinks still need worked out with the fields, the scoring, calling penalties, etc. A brilliant plan today could be turned to mush in 2 weeks. A team that has really hit the design and strategy can walk away with a win, but that is tough to do.
There is a huge level of learning that week 2+ teams get from watching week 1 events.
The toughest regional is the one you're competing in.
Joe Ross
25-02-2011, 22:05
The toughest regional is the one you're competing in.
We've never won a regional that we didn't compete in.
BrendanB
25-02-2011, 22:09
We've never won a regional that we didn't compete in.
Wow you guys have an amazing recipe for success! :eek:
The toughest regional is the one you're competing in.
X2
We're really at the point where it's ALL objective and any regional is a tough one.
Grim Tuesday
27-02-2011, 13:57
Alamo seems pretty hard this year with 16, 148, and 118 all there...
theshortkid229
27-02-2011, 22:08
Good to see some love for FLR, it's always a fun regional.
(Hate, HATE, the stands though. Soooo static-y)
I'm pretty sure I read all the thread, but since I jumped around pages, I'm not certain. Has anyone posted the BBQ/SAUCE numbers for EVERY regional in one post? Or are the numbers all still scattered throughout?
Anywho.
Team 639 is (read: I am) looking to go to Nat'ls this year.
donnie99
27-02-2011, 23:00
Northwest Utilities regional in hartford, CT always produces team that go to championships and go far, Uberbots, and last year's champions Bobcat Robotics!!!
Joe Ross
28-02-2011, 10:21
Northwest Utilities regional in hartford, CT always produces team that go to championships and go far, Uberbots, and last year's champions Bobcat Robotics!!!
Since 2006, 177 has won two world championships, and been to Einstein 5 times. In that same time, they've only won the Connecticut regional once, and in the other years, never made it past the semi-finals. That either means that Connecticut is significantly harder then the world championship, or that 177 has continued to improve significantly every year after the Connecticut regional.
Peter Matteson
28-02-2011, 11:20
Since 2006, 177 has won two world championships, and been to Einstein 5 times. In that same time, they've only won the Connecticut regional once, and in the other years, never made it past the semi-finals. That either means that Connecticut is significantly harder then the world championship, or that 177 has continued to improve significantly every year after the Connecticut regional.
I believe if you look at the data you we see 177 lost to the eventual champion in the last 2 CT regionals in the semis as well as both regionals we competed at in 2007. In 2008 we didn't make the elims, deservedly because we were awful at Hartford.
We have also done only one regional the last 3 years and the generally and it takes the time at the regional to figure out what we got wrong and correct it within our witholding allowence for the next event. If we stopped improving we wouldn't have done what we've been able to the last 5 years.
I walked away from FLR thinking it was actually a little down this year (it was still pretty bottom heavy) but they have set the standard for every other regional to match with 8 triple digit scores (four of them did come in elims). It might be because defense is starting to show up a little more this week as well.
I walked away from FLR thinking it was actually a little down this year (it was still pretty bottom heavy) but they have set the standard for every other regional to match with 8 triple digit scores (four of them did come in elims). It might be because defense is starting to show up a little more this week as well.
Wisconsin also had 8 triple digit scores.
Wisconsin also had 8 triple digit scores.
That doesn't surprise me.
As the competition went on Florida started getting more triple digit scores as was San Deigo.
One vent that I have huge expectations of because it's a week six event and has only two rookies and many many competitive teams is Philadelphia. Many regionals have alot of teams that don't belong in the elims, to be blunt, but there will probably be double digit teams who deserve to make the elims and will miss out in Phili due to the level of competition there.
rcmolloy
13-03-2011, 20:16
I know it doesn't happen every year, but Philly looks top heavy too.
56
103
341
357
365
395
816
I agree with Akash on that one. Philly is brings great competition year in and year out. There are many good teams and it is going to be pretty difficult to win.
I have to say that Troy district will be very hard this year. By the time that comes around it will be everyone's 2nd comp and for 7 of those teams it will be their 3rd and for 3 it wil be their 4th comp.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.