View Full Version : Highest Score 2011
kjohnson
04-03-2011, 10:23
I guess its about time to get this thread started for the 2011 season. Whats the highest score you've seen so far?
Highest Alliance Score: New Jersey Match 6: 80 points by 1089, 2016, 2729
Highest Total Score: Granite State Match 11: 115 points - Red 49, Blue 66
Highest Alliance Score: Finger Lakes Q3: 84 points by 191,156,2056
Highest combined score: GSR Match 4, total of 124 (47-77).
Lil' Lavery
04-03-2011, 11:38
I guess its about time to get this thread started for the 2011 season.
We're less than three hours into the season. No, I don't think it's about time for this thread.
Highest Alliance Score: Alamo Regional Q-11 148 3778 2936 - 94 :: 922 3035 2880 - 2
kjohnson
04-03-2011, 12:22
We're less than three hours into the season. No, I don't think it's about time for this thread.
I'm sorry you feel that way, but there are plenty of scouts looking for this information. If it wasn't time for this thread yet, no one else would have posted score updates...
Not an official match, but FLR Practice match 5 was 112-5
(217,211,2056 over 3799, 843, 2228)
frcfms #FRCROC TY P MC 5 RF 5 BF 112 RE 3799 843 2228 BL 217 211 2056 RB 0 BB 50 RP 0 BP 0 about 19 hours ago via FMS
Lil' Lavery
04-03-2011, 13:07
I'm sorry you feel that way, but there are plenty of scouts looking for this information. If it wasn't time for this thread yet, no one else would have posted score updates...
Some people are just a bit eager to "contribute." Information is worthless without context. We don't have that context yet. The information being outputted now is just going to make this thread messy and harder to distinguish the useful information.
Some people are just a bit eager to "contribute." Information is worthless without context. We don't have that context yet. The information being outputted now is just going to make this thread messy and harder to distinguish the useful information.
^ agree ^
If I'm not in a week 1 regional, and all I have is the data from FRC-Spy (for example) then I think I'd rather pick a category of analysis that would better benefit me than "who has the high score". For example, I might watch the NJ Regional scores of the 4 (5?) teams that are coming to the DC regional. Or I might watch to see teams who have good minibots and how they use them (so far 148 hasn't had a climb yet, 1:14PM). Another interesting note is that (from glancing over) about half of the matches have several penalties in them.
"High Score" allows for bragging rights, but that's about it.
Though I do admit, it feels really nice when the high score for a regional belongs to an alliance you were part of :cool:
kjohnson
04-03-2011, 13:32
For example, I might watch the NJ Regional scores of the 4 (5?) teams that are coming to the DC regional. Or I might watch to see teams who have good minibots and how they use them (so far 148 hasn't had a climb yet, 1:14PM). Another interesting note is that (from glancing over) about half of the matches have several penalties in them.
And I'm watching NJ for the teams that will be attending VA. I have a full page of notes on the teams I'm specifically looking for, but that doesn't mean I'm not paying attention to other teams.
Sean is right in saying that a score as a number means nothing if we don't know how those points were scored. Were 1 or 2 minibots deployed, and what places did they finish in the race? How many complete logos were scored? :confused:
"High Score" allows for bragging rights, but that's about it.
Though I do admit, it feels really nice when the high score for a regional belongs to an alliance you were part of :cool:
I've been through a Week 1 regional where my team's alliance held the highest score on the very first day of competition. It was an excellent feeling.
And Jesse, 148 just played again. 54 points (60 - 6 penalty points), still no minibot.
My contribution: I like knowing "what is a 'high score' in Logomotion?", and knowing the real-world maximum value is a first step towards knowing how high the scores can go. Obviously it'd be better to have a full histogram of scores, but that won't be forthcoming for a little while.
Don't know why anyone is getting worked up over the existence of this thread. It's several times more useful than the "post the next number" thread or any of the other "for fun"-type threads. It isn't strictly useful, but it is entertaining.
Highest alliance score: FLR Q20: 3181,3015 and 1126 scored 97.
Alan Anderson
04-03-2011, 13:40
I'm sorry you feel that way, but there are plenty of scouts looking for this information.
If people are serious about scouting, they'll be looking at all of the match results. I don't believe they'd find anything particularly useful in the scattered and cherry-picked information posted here.
If it wasn't time for this thread yet, no one else would have posted score updates...
FIRST is posting score updates. http://www2.usfirst.org/2011comp/events/ROC/matchresults.html, for example.
Highest alliance score: FLR Q20: 3181,3015 and 1126 scored 97.
3 minibots went up in that match. Looks good.
The problem with starting the thread too soon is that you'll inevitably miss data because it's updating so quickly.
GSR Q14: Score: 100 - 131, 836, 1831 (3 minibots went up as well)
GSR - Match#14 Red(131, 836, 1831) - 100 to Blue(885, 61, 562) - 26
Don't know why anyone is getting worked up over the existence of this thread. It's several times more useful than the "post the next number" thread or any of the other "for fun"-type threads.
Ditto that. If you're not interested, you don't have to read the thread.
Cyberphil
04-03-2011, 16:35
Don't quote me on this, but I believe I just saw a 122-48 match in FLR. I was in shock.
kjohnson
04-03-2011, 17:01
Don't quote me on this, but I believe I just saw a 122-48 match in FLR. I was in shock.
122 (340, 217, 1126) to 19 (1405, 1153, 1559) in match 47.
Looking forward to tomorrow's FLR match 67
217 + 3015 + 2056 vs 1126 + 174 + 1518
Mike Starke
04-03-2011, 20:24
122 (340, 217, 1126) to 19 (1405, 1153, 1559) in match 47.
Yepp! That was such a fun match!
Looking forward to tomorrow's FLR match 67
217 + 3015 + 2056 vs 1126 + 174 + 1518
This is gonna be a great match for both alliances!
Looking forward to tomorrow's FLR match 67
217 + 3015 + 2056 vs 1126 + 174 + 1518
I feel bad for the Sparx.
They have a great robot and are doing a great job this weekend but overcoming two great robots and a pretty good robot is asking an awful lot of them.
GCentola
04-03-2011, 23:43
Thank you, Ed. I hope we can pull together and put out a good match. It certainly will be a tough one!
MagiChau
04-03-2011, 23:45
FLR: high score of 122!
I want to see the video for that round, qualification match #47.
I know it's not a high score but 148 just won a 101-0 match at Alamo
Ian Curtis
05-03-2011, 11:45
Just saw Logomotion like it is supposed to be played. 40, 836, 238 over 78, 509, 138 at BAE with a score of 84-81. 1 minibot per alliance.
Andrew Zeller
05-03-2011, 13:42
Match 003 of the quals at BAE Systems/Granite State Regional deserves a mention (811,1058,3074) 100 vs (3566,61,166) 18
Attached is a screenshot.
Back-to-Back Elims in NJ winning alliances had 124(national high score) and 122!!!
Andrew Zeller
05-03-2011, 13:58
Here's another high one at BAE:
New Total High Score:
(3157, 1126, 340) 107 - (166, 61, 3556) 65
Jersey tied it's high score on Semi-Finals 1 with 124 again.
Alexa Stott
05-03-2011, 14:56
Just saw Logomotion like it is supposed to be played. 40, 836, 238 over 78, 509, 138 at BAE with a score of 84-81. 1 minibot per alliance.
Uh...pardon? How exactly is Logomotion "supposed" to be played? That score is 40 points lower than the last reported national high score. :confused:
Andrew Zeller
05-03-2011, 15:12
This looks like one of the highest so far: 117 to 82 at BAE
The first 124 was 1923 25 and 1860
Closely followed by the same score from 1676 2016 and 303
jason701802
05-03-2011, 16:56
148, 16, and 3481 just got a score of 135 in the finals in Alamo
We're less than three hours into the season. No, I don't think it's about time for this thread.
It is nice to see the high scores as they happen. Post away.:) :o
There were a lot of high scores, but It looks like match 019 at BAE is the highest combined score of 199!. Let's see if there are other combined scores as high, or higher.
Norman J
06-03-2011, 10:08
Highest Kettering score was 114 (33,2137,1) to 79 (3322,67,326).
Sorry, missed Kettering & Traverse City, but GSR was the highest COMBINED score of all the week 1 regionals.
rajikurbaj357
06-03-2011, 13:31
Does anyone have video of the match in alamo where an alliance got 135 points? I'd love to see it!
Ian Curtis
06-03-2011, 13:48
Uh...pardon? How exactly is Logomotion "supposed" to be played? That score is 40 points lower than the last reported national high score. :confused:
At the time it was the highest combined score in the country, and I'd rather watch two darn good alliances duke it out in a close high scoring match than watch 148 steamroll three toasters. (Watching 148 was certainly impressive though)
FWIW, GSR Match 019 was actually FM 1-1. There were good qualifying matches, but nothing quite that good.
16, 148, and 3481 got scores of 92, 112, 122, 105, 135, and 114 in the Alamo Regional finals. Probably the highest overall scores for any alliance, plus the top alliance score for Week 1.
Meredith Novak
08-03-2011, 22:25
I'd rather watch two darn good alliances duke it out in a close high scoring match than watch 148 steamroll three toasters.
148 didn't steamroll anyone and our fine opponents were certainly not "toasters."
Ian Curtis
09-03-2011, 00:00
148 didn't steamroll anyone and our fine opponents were certainly not "toasters."
I think 'steamroll' gives the wrong impression, :o but they certainly played in qualifying matches in which they won, overwhelmingly. More power to them, its incredible to watch them (and your entire alliance in elims) play. As a spectator though, I find it more exciting to watch closely matched opponents.
Not everyone builds an extremely competitive robot every year. And there were certainly some closely fought battles at the Alamo. I don't mean to imply that 148, or 16, or anyone at any event puts a big chunk of aluminum on the field to squash the competition. Every single robot on the field represents thousands of person-hours of work, and every team deserves recognition for that. :)
Does anyone have video of the match in alamo where an alliance got 135 points? I'd love to see it!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpQU1v6-Lig
Btw maybe someone can help me with the count:
one logo on top with 2 ubertubes = 30
one logo on top = 18
2 logos on the middle = 12 X 2 = 24
1 blue on the bottom = 1
minibots in 1st and second place = 50
this sums up to 123
where am i wrong?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpQU1v6-Lig
Btw maybe someone can help me with the count:
one logo on top with 2 ubertubes = 30
one logo on top = 18
2 logos on the middle = 12 X 2 = 24
1 blue on the bottom = 1
minibots in 1st and second place = 50
this sums up to 123
where am i wrong?
one logo on top w/ 2 ubertubes = 42. Thats where you lost that extra 12
Kristian Calhoun
09-03-2011, 15:59
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpQU1v6-Lig
Btw maybe someone can help me with the count:
one logo on top with 2 ubertubes = 30
one logo on top = 18
2 logos on the middle = 12 X 2 = 24
1 blue on the bottom = 1
minibots in 1st and second place = 50
this sums up to 123
where am i wrong?
You forgot to add in the Autonomous score. Each of the scored Ubertubes on the top row is worth 6 points. So 123 + 12 = 135, which was the final match score.
twetherbee
12-03-2011, 18:57
987, 254, and 3704 also scored 135 in QF1-3 at the San Diego Regional. They missed 137 in Semi 1-3 by about 1/4-sec.
525, 1730, 1984 vs. 1098, 2410, 2345 in Quaterfinal 1-2 @Kansas city was 109-92 making a combined score of 201. Atleast two top rack logos for each team with 2 uber tubes per team and 4 minibots on the towers made for an exciting match.
Highest combined posted so far, probably won't last for long though.
San Diego SF 1-3 3704, 987, 254-131 1717, 3477, 2102- 76 =207
We got up there for highest total at Florida. Our 4th seed alliance played one of the toughest alliances in the regional at their 5th seed.
103-86-945 v 801-1592-744
Match 1: 88 - 84
Match 2: 82 - 85
Match 3: 102 - 93
Last one isnt the highest total, but it was up there and these were still a toughhhh set of matches.
Florida high score goes to winners 179-233-108 over our alliance at 112.
That was probably the greatest set of elimination matches that have been played so far this year. I am just curious to know who holds the record for most tubes scored in a match by a single robot? Our robot had the record for the Florida Regional with 8 tubes scored in tele-op. If you wanna count autonomous too we would have 9.
RE; Highest score 2011. I am compiling a spreadsheet with the highest combined scores, plus a highest single alliance score. I will put it out after the last Regional & then again after the Championship. Good luck to all.
Jaine Perotti
13-03-2011, 14:54
We got up there for highest total at Florida. Our 4th seed alliance played one of the toughest alliances in the regional at their 5th seed.
103-86-945 v 801-1592-744
Match 1: 88 - 84
Match 2: 82 - 85
Match 3: 102 - 93
Last one isnt the highest total, but it was up there and these were still a toughhhh set of matches.
Florida high score goes to winners 179-233-108 over our alliance at 112.
The 179-233-108 alliance had four consecutive matches in finals/semifinals with scores over 100 points... it was impressive.
I believe that 158 is the highest possible score by an alliance. So, 135 out of 158 is pretty good for early regionals.
How often do we think a score of 158 will happen this year? Will it happen before elims at Championship or IRI?
I believe that 158 is the highest possible score by an alliance. So, 135 out of 158 is pretty good for early regionals.
How often do we think a score of 158 will happen this year? Will it happen before elims at Championship or IRI?
My guess is it will never happen at a regional but it will happen at elims at world
Jim Zondag
13-03-2011, 19:57
If you are in a position to get a 158, it means you have 3 Uber tubes on the top row. This makes the top row worth 72, row 2 worth 24, and the bottom row only 12. Because there are still 50 points at risk on the towers, will anyone actually bother with the last 6 tubes on the bottom row? Maybe, but is seems a little unlikely. It would be nice to do for bragging rights, but probably will not be done as part of a required winning strategy in any match. We shall see. It will likely depend how good our human players get.
nikeairmancurry
13-03-2011, 19:59
If you are in a position to get a 158, it means you have 3 Uber tubes on the top row. This makes the top row worth 72, row 2 worth 24, and the bottom row only 12. Because there are still 50 points at risk on the towers, will anyone actually bother with the last 6 tubes on the bottom row? Maybe, but is seems a little unlikely. It would be nice to do for bragging rights, but probably will not be done as part of a required winning strategy in any match. We shall see. It will likely depend how good our human players get.
I suspect the top score we will see will be around 150.... Thats just a lot of tubes to place with 2 minutes and having three good scoring robots... It will be very tough...
MagiChau
13-03-2011, 20:08
Could be possible if human players manage to precisely throw every single one of their tube into their scoring zone giving plenty of time for robots like 1918 with a 4 second or less time on average to floorload and cap.
I believe that 158 is the highest possible score by an alliance. So, 135 out of 158 is pretty good for early regionals.
How often do we think a score of 158 will happen this year? Will it happen before elims at Championship or IRI?
Possibly during quals at MSC. With every team playing at least their 3rd event, MSC has experienced enough drivers to do what needs to be done, and stay out of the way of others. That being said, 12 of those 158 points requires a whole lot of work, and 50 of those points will require split second timing.
In 2007, our drive team could hang 9 tubes in under 2 minutes during practice, but usually hung 6 or fewer during actual matches (defense or preparing ramps). Hanging 18 tubes is possible for 2 good bots to do (with the help of a 3rd), but it will be very difficult. I wouldn't be shocked if no one ever got the 158 during regulation play.
Vikesrock
13-03-2011, 20:12
As a reference, the closest to a full rack that has been accomplished so far (as far as I know) is 4 full logos + 2 bottom pieces. 254 + 987 did this at least once at San Diego and I know it had been done at least once before that as well.
If at Champs or MSC, 3 solid scoring robots get together in a quals match I think a perfect 158 may be possible.
In one of our matches at Florida, our drivers were 1 tube short of filling up an entire side of the alliance station by themselves but were cut short by losing comm with about 20-25 seconds left.
chris1592
13-03-2011, 22:05
In one of our matches at Florida, our drivers were 1 tube short of filling up an entire side of the alliance station by themselves but were cut short by losing comm with about 20-25 seconds left.
10-15 Secs left good sir :D
BrendanB
13-03-2011, 22:07
In one of our matches at Florida, our drivers were 1 tube short of filling up an entire side of the alliance station by themselves but were cut short by losing comm with about 20-25 seconds left.
Any videos? I would love to see that!
As a reference, the closest to a full rack that has been accomplished so far (as far as I know) is 4 full logos + 2 bottom pieces. 254 + 987 did this at least once at San Diego and I know it had been done at least once before that as well.
If at Champs or MSC, 3 solid scoring robots get together in a quals match I think a perfect 158 may be possible.
3 scoring robots is probably detrimental to a perfect score. It's difficult sometimes for 2 robots to keep out of each others way. It would probably be more efficient for a third bot to be pushing tubes to the other 2.
One thing I did notice at San Diego is the robots that are good at scoring quickly on the top two rows have a lot of trouble scoring on the lowest row.
Maybe one of those rookie teams that can only score on the bottom row might be a good partner to hang logos while the two offensive robots are deploying mini bots
nikeairmancurry
14-03-2011, 01:12
If this game was played with last years ranking system and you could score for your opponent, wed see lots of 158-0
sportzkrazzy
14-03-2011, 09:29
We got up there for highest total at Florida. Our 4th seed alliance played one of the toughest alliances in the regional at their 5th seed.
103-86-945 v 801-1592-744
Match 1: 88 - 84
Match 2: 82 - 85
Match 3: 102 - 93
Last one isnt the highest total, but it was up there and these were still a toughhhh set of matches.
Florida high score goes to winners 179-233-108 over our alliance at 112.
This was only with one mini bot =) Smoky mountain regional here we come. In all seriousness you guys where one tough alliance.
BrendanB
14-03-2011, 11:01
Maybe one of those rookie teams that can only score on the bottom row might be a good partner to hang logos while the two offensive robots are deploying mini bots
Skip to 1:21 secs, we had a slow start.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pziGUXx8r54
Teams 27, 141, and 2054 just tied the World High Score of 135 at West Michigan. 4 logos, two ubertubes, one bottom logo piece, first two minibots!
Team Hero
19-03-2011, 23:40
At the Bayou Regional the highest scoring game was a 121! Are there any scores out there that beat that?
xSAWxBLADEx
19-03-2011, 23:43
135 is the highest (happened in michigan at west michigan and texas at alamo)
davidalln
19-03-2011, 23:44
At the Bayou Regional the highest scoring game was a 121! Are there any scores out there that beat that?
We scored 128 today during quarterfinals (one triangle away from topping the record...), and I've heard that an alliance in Michigan reached 135 again.
A thread (www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=93197) already exists for this purpose, with all three scores of 135 already posted...
I'm doing a spreadsheet & so far and I only show 2 single high scores of 135. I am missing St Louis & Seattle Cascade due to the fact that FIRST hasn't post the finals on their website. The highest combined score was San Diego with 207. I will update. Here is the latest so far.
RayTurner1126
20-03-2011, 11:49
the highest so far was 135, the highest at FLR was 122, which included us, (1126) 340, and 217!
your data is wrong. Lake Superior had a Finals match that scored 95-50.
I'm doing a spreadsheet & so far and I only show 2 single high scores of 135. I am missing St Louis & Seattle Cascade due to the fact that FIRST hasn't post the finals on their website. The highest combined score was San Diego with 207. I will update. Here is the latest so far.
My apologies, I was thinking of the 132s at Wisconsin.
Carry on!
Edit: Guess I was right.. lol
West Michigan, Alamo, and San Diego!
EagleEngineer
20-03-2011, 12:25
woah, woah, woah. dont forget about the san diego quarter finals match, I believe, when team 254 and 987 scored 135. :cool:
we (201) scored 126 in a qualifications match at Wayne with 1023 and 903 :cool:
DonRotolo
20-03-2011, 14:31
your data is wrong. Lake Superior had a Finals match that scored 95-50.
DESPITE the title of the thread, so far everyone seems to be referring to a single team score, not combined score.
DESPITE the title of the thread, so far everyone seems to be referring to a single team score, not combined score.
No, I know. But his data in his spreadsheet has the Lake Superior data wrong.
No, I know. But his data in his spreadsheet has the Lake Superior data wrong.
OK, Lake Superior, I'm pulling data straight off USFIRST. I will correct it. I gladly accept help on this, but don't make it sound like it is a crime. OK, I have corrected the figures & thank you for spotting the error. There are other ways of correcting people with making them sound inferior. Remember Gracious Professionalism.
I'm not making anything sound like a crime, I have nothing in from that regional directly related towards me. Just saying that from my FRC Spyder app it says that the overall total and highest single total for Lake Superior is different than what you have.
The highest scoring "game" I remember was in 2001. That "game" had an alliance put up 710 points. Pretty impressive. ;)
-John
The highest scoring game I remember is 1997 when Sri Lanka put up 952 runs against India for only 6 wickets before declaring.
(JVN started it!)
nikeairmancurry
21-03-2011, 00:42
The highest scoring game I remember is 1997 when Sri Lanka put up 952 runs against India for only 6 wickets before declaring.
(JVN started it!)
Hmm. The highest scoring "game" I've seen was in 1999, when "this" alliance put up 3,333,360... A perfect score at a Hollywood, Florida, fun center.. =D
Today I'm a follower lol..
Bharat Nain
21-03-2011, 08:33
I merged "Highest Score 2011" and "Highest Scoring Game" into this one thread since they were the same topic.
stingray27
21-03-2011, 15:11
There's an error in your spread sheet (MarcD79 in post number 79). For the highest score for a single alliance at West Michigan, Teams 27, 2054 and 141 achieved the highest score there with 135.
OK, Lake Superior, I'm pulling data straight off USFIRST. I will correct it. I gladly accept help on this, but don't make it sound like it is a crime. OK, I have corrected the figures & thank you for spotting the error. There are other ways of correcting people with making them sound inferior. Remember Gracious Professionalism.
Also, at Chesapeake, the highest single alliance score was achieved by 340, 836, and 549; 2199 was on the losing side.
Thanks everyone. I will double check all the data. It does get confusing.
There's an error in your spread sheet (MarcD79 in post number 79). For the highest score for a single alliance at West Michigan, Teams 27, 2054 and 141 achieved the highest score there with 135.
West Michigan & Chesapeake are corrected. Pls, If I made a mistake, just let me know & I will correct as soon as possible & repost the spreadsheet.
jason701802
22-03-2011, 00:06
Seattle Cascade scores have been updated. The highest score was in Q38; 2471, 948, and 2122 got a score of 94.
Thanks for putting this sheet together.
I know that at the Greater KC Regional the total combined score of 201 points by 525, 1730 and 1984 vs 2410, 2345, 1098 was a really exciting match. You can watch it at MORE.net.
It was an all offense match with great autonomous, great throw ins, great teamwork and exciting minibot races.
Hope that all these teams can play again in St. Louis!
Thanks for putting this sheet together.
I know that at Greater KC Regional that the total combined score of 201 points by 525, 1730 and 1984 vs 2410, 2345, 1098 was a really exciting match. You can watch it at MORE.net.
It was an all offense match with great autonomous, great throw ins, great teamwork and exciting minibot races.
Hope that all these temas can play again in St. Louis!
I loved it too! Thinking about it further, I think we coulda scored more. 2410 would traverse the field at ~30 seconds to "defend" 1730 or 525 from getting to the tower. They were both too well driven for us to defend (kudos on that), and we ended up wasting our time with it. With 40 seconds and an open field, We probably could have completed a mid rack logo too.
It wouldn't have been enough to edge by the #1 alliance, but would have made this match the highest combined.
http://www.more.net/content/2011-first-robotics-quarterfinal-matches match 5
The highest score I saw was 126-50
Ty Tremblay
26-03-2011, 14:08
3756, 1114, and 2056 just put up 147 in Waterloo.
flippy147852
26-03-2011, 14:12
3756, 1114, and 2056 just put up 147 in Waterloo.
147!!!!!!! :eek: Close up this thread, there ain't nobody that's gonna beat that :eek:
Norman J
26-03-2011, 14:22
1114, 2056 and 3756 just beat their own record. 150. We just might see a full rack sometime this year.
Congrats 2056,3756 & 1114 for breaking the world record again with 150 points.
MagiChau
26-03-2011, 14:25
Congrats 2056,3756 & 1114 for breaking the world record again with 150 points.
Too bad 2056 had to spend some time putting that bottem rack triangle back on. Might've been able to get that last white tube on if that didn't happen.
Congrats 2056,3756 & 1114 for breaking the world record again with 150 points.
They still have another match at least to get it right :)
MagiChau
26-03-2011, 14:43
They still have another match at least to get it right :)
They still got einstein to get it right :p
nikeairmancurry
26-03-2011, 15:15
Too bad 2056 had to spend some time putting that bottem rack triangle back on. Might've been able to get that last white tube on if that didn't happen.
There werent any white tubes.. lol
They still got einstein to get it right :p
Very true. The alliance did score 152 in their 2nd semi-final match but also got a penalty for G34 herding while possessing which is hard to avoid when moving so fast through a crowded field.
A very impressive and dominant performance by all three members of the alliance.
The latest spreadsheet is up. It's no surprise that 1114 was undefeated in ALL their rounds, both Quals & Elims. There might have been higher scores than what you see here, I am listing official results, not top score prior to penalties.
jason701802
27-03-2011, 02:27
Where can I find the videos the Waterloo matches? I want to see the high score
O'Sancheski
27-03-2011, 07:55
Where can I find the videos the Waterloo matches? I want to see the high score
Look on YouTube in a few days. Let people get home from the regional so they can upload it. Most people have regional flu when they get home. So just give it some time.
Team3337_mentor
27-03-2011, 10:20
150 points, semifinals (if I am not mistaken), the 1114 alliance, Canada. yesterday March 26.
1114, 3756 & 2056, match 13 semi-final 1-1 150 to 54. Also check theredalliance.com & thebluealliance.com for updates. Here is the updated weekly high scores with Hawaii added in.
MagiChau
27-03-2011, 11:20
Where can I find the videos the Waterloo matches? I want to see the high score
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/13579393
Skip to 1 hour 20 mins or 1 hour 36 mins to see 1114's high scoring semifinal matches.
OK, here is the latest spreadsheet on highest scores. I was FTAA in Hartford & had a blast watching the robots up close scrambling to score points.
http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/13579393
Skip to 1 hour 20 mins or 1 hour 36 mins to see 1114's high scoring semifinal matches.
... O_O... I think we have a winner...
Anybody think we'll see 1114/2056/3756's 152 (before penalties) or 150 (after penalties) fall in Week 6 or at CMP?
synth3tk
05-04-2011, 09:38
Anybody think we'll see 1114/2056/3756's 152 (before penalties) or 150 (after penalties) fall in Week 6 or at CMP?
If I were a betting man, I'd go with CMP being the ultimate record-breaker. While we may see some nice scores and maybe even a new record set in Week 6, the best-of-the-best will be at Championships. I wouldn't be surprised at all if a qualifying match is the one that does it.
Don Wright
05-04-2011, 09:48
Depends on the schedule at MSC... You could easily get an alliance (or even two alliances) with three high caliber teams like 67, 217, 33, 1918, 548, 201, 245, 1718, 2337, 2137, 51, 2054, 27, 1023, 3539, 494........ Without turning this into another "How good Mi teams are" or "How good the MSC will be" thread...I think due to the qualifying nature of the MSC, it has a better chance of happening there than at the FRCC (FIRST Robotics Competition Championship).
So, my opinion, if not at MSC, then it won't have a chance until IRI.
Depends on the schedule at MSC... You could easily get an alliance (or even two alliances) with three high caliber teams like 67, 217, 33, 1918, 548, 201, 245, 1718, 2337, 2137, 51, 2054, 27, 1023, 3539, 494........ Without turning this into another "How good Mi teams are" or "How good the MSC will be" thread...I think due to the qualifying nature of the MSC, it has a better chance of happening there than at the FRCC (FIRST Robotics Competition Championship).
So, my opinion, if not at MSC, then it won't have a chance until IRI.
The only reason I disagree is because at the MSC, every team plays smart, which (sorry out-of-state FRC) isn't true at the CMP. That means, at the MSC, if there's an alliance of the caliber to break 150, the opposing alliance should have both the strategy and the talent to counter such an attempt.
This could similarly result in lower scores at the MSC than would be expected for the level of the teams competing.
(On second thought, it could happen in the eliminations if one alliance tries to go all-out on the tubes and attempt to simply out-score, perhaps in a Semifinal 1)
synth3tk
05-04-2011, 12:07
Hm, I'm apparently still very unfamiliar with Michigan's system. If it's as tough as you all make it sound, then it's possible we could see something happen in Week 6. But that still doesn't mean CMP should be ruled out entirely.
BrendanB
05-04-2011, 12:08
The only reason I disagree is because at the MSC, every team plays smart, which (sorry out-of-state FRC) isn't true at the CMP. That means, at the MSC, if there's an alliance of the caliber to break 150, the opposing alliance should have both the strategy and the talent to counter such an attempt.
This could similarly result in lower scores at the MSC than would be expected for the level of the teams competing.
(On second thought, it could happen in the eliminations if one alliance tries to go all-out on the tubes and attempt to simply out-score, perhaps in a Semifinal 1)
Very good point here! Tube starvation at MSC will really play into the scores at such an event. You can get 6 of the best teams out there but if they both are starving tubes you won't have too high of a score.
That being said though MSC is looking very, very tough based on the teams attending. Don just listed out 16 scary opponents in a normal match and who knows how strong they can make an alliance combining together and adding a third partner!
CMP shouldn't be rules out either if. How many upper 20/low 30 point matches were there in Atlanta last year both before and after penalties?
gyroscopeRaptor
05-04-2011, 12:10
Special notice deserves to be given to the alliance of 1730 at North Star for scoring 114 points after penalties in quarterfinals with only two robots playing for their alliance, 2225 was experiencing problems.
Don Wright
05-04-2011, 12:26
Very good point here! Tube starvation at MSC will really play into the scores at such an event. You can get 6 of the best teams out there but if they both are starving tubes you won't have too high of a score.
But I guess I disagree slightly. Because they are playing smart, all the teams know that it's going to come down to your win/loss record AND ranking points. To get ranking points, you can't starve the other alliance... So, I am not sure the tube starvation strategy in quals is going to be as common and that all out scoring (especially with two strong alliances against each other) might rule out. Everyone is going to think they can outscore the other alliance and of course ;) they have the faster mini-bots...
But, I could be wrong...
Jack Jones
05-04-2011, 12:35
...
But, I could be wrong...
But you're not!
BrendanB
05-04-2011, 12:46
But I guess I disagree slightly. Because they are playing smart, all the teams know that it's going to come down to your win/loss record AND ranking points. To get ranking points, you can't starve the other alliance... So, I am not sure the tube starvation strategy in quals is going to be as common and that all out scoring (especially with two strong alliances against each other) might rule out. Everyone is going to think they can outscore the other alliance and of course ;) they have the faster mini-bots...
But, I could be wrong...
Yes I do see what you mean. Our team used such a strategy in Qualifications 65 RED: 3451,176,3467 vs 175, 885, 40 and the final score was 75 to 62 with our robot (3467) being dead for half of the match when we could have been defending 40. If was going into a match against 67, 217, 27, 1918, etc I would tell our HP's to throw little too no tubes because the more tube there are the more they can score. The more time it takes them to get a tube due to a lack of tubes the less they will score.
Richard Wallace
05-04-2011, 13:25
But I guess I disagree slightly. Because they are playing smart, all the teams know that it's going to come down to your win/loss record AND ranking points. To get ranking points, you can't starve the other alliance... So, I am not sure the tube starvation strategy in quals is going to be as common and that all out scoring (especially with two strong alliances against each other) might rule out. Everyone is going to think they can outscore the other alliance and of course ;) they have the faster mini-bots...
But, I could be wrong...Jack is right, Wright is not wrong! :rolleyes:
You just described the situation in Q48 at Smoky Mountains Regional, perfectly.
48, 79, 1747 against 71, 931, 3861. Result: 87-114. Faster minibots prevailed.
Chris Hibner
05-04-2011, 13:32
If was going into a match against 67, 217, 27, 1918, etc I would tell our HP's to throw little too no tubes because the more tube there are the more they can score. The more time it takes them to get a tube due to a lack of tubes the less they will score.
Good human players might eliminate the effectiveness of this strategy in some matches. I've seen numerous human players at the Michigan districts that can throw all the way to the scoring zone. I know ours, 217, 469, and 1250 (I think) can do it regularly.
nikeairmancurry
05-04-2011, 13:38
Good human players might eliminate the effectiveness of this strategy in some matches. I've seen numerous human players at the Michigan districts that can throw all the way to the scoring zone. I know ours, 217, 469, and 1250 (I think) can do it regularly.
1250 can, but hold alot of tubes because of not being able to ground load
I don't know if this is special or not but round 8 or something like that (my teams first round) at SVR was a 70-70 tie. It was pretty high for a tie, at least I thought it was.
pwnageNick
05-04-2011, 18:50
After looking over your spreadsheet, I noticed an error (I think).
For the Midwest Regional, I believe in Qualification Match 50, our team along with 71 and 2410 scored a total of 111 points.
Unless I have my numbers wrong...
I'm resubmitting corrected scores, thanks to eagle eyes out there. As always, I welcome messages sent to me about corrections.
After looking over your spreadsheet, I noticed an error (I think).
For the Midwest Regional, I believe in Qualification Match 50, our team along with 71 and 2410 scored a total of 111 points.
Unless I have my numbers wrong...
Although that was hella fun (props to both 2949 and 71), that was the highest in qualifications, but is nothing compared to the 143 that 1625, 2826 and 1367 put up in the elims (this score is on the sheet).
pwnageNick
05-04-2011, 22:12
ah, I see. I didn't realize the Qualification high scores he had was combining both alliances. That makes more sense. And that match was a lot of fun :D
The scores have been crazy at MSC, including what appears to be the highest losing score: Q25 2767 326 68 vs 1528 3539 1718 109-106 (!!) I have no idea if this also breaks the record for the highest combined score, but it's pretty impressive.
The scores have been crazy at MSC, including what appears to be the highest losing score: Q25 2767 326 68 vs 1528 3539 1718 109-106 (!!) I have no idea if this also breaks the record for the highest combined score, but it's pretty impressive.
Crazy indeed! Every match so far (33 of 128 total) has had a combined score of 65 or more, with only 4 with a combined score of less than 100. Incredible...
Kestin Goforth
07-04-2011, 21:37
In the Greater Toronto East Regional, in Quarters 1 Match 1, team 1503, 1114, and 1482, scored 147-0.
Patrick Seeney
07-04-2011, 21:45
In the Greater Toronto East Regional, in Quarters 1 Match 1, team 1503, 1114, and 1482, scored 147-0.
That is an incredible feat...but I think the thing we overlook is the goose egg. While the win is nice, you get no RP's out of that. The match mentioned above where 106 was the losing score...that is HUGE for RP's.
nikeairmancurry
07-04-2011, 21:45
Crazy indeed! Every match so far (33 of 128 total) has had a combined score of 65 or more, with only 4 with a combined score of less than 100. Incredible...
Yes, I believe so... 215 is the highest combined, done now three times (once at Troy).... We've done it twice in two matches... The match we played in before was 118-97... Only at the Michigan State Championships can you score over 90 and lose....
Yes, I believe so... 215 is the highest combined.... We've done it twice in two matches... The match we played in before was 118-97... Only at the Michigan State Championships can you score over 90 and lose....
Only at MSC can you score over 100 and still lose!
I guess I'll have to post some extra scoring on the spreadsheet. Should be interesting doing the championships! I'll split up between the quals & Einstein fields.
Richard Wallace
09-04-2011, 22:56
Only at MSC can you score over 100 and still lose!Only at MSC can you score over 110 and still lose!
Your alliance proved it, 111-112 in round 1 of the finals today.
Congratulations to the #2 alliance 33, 67, and 70 on a very hard fought MSC win, and to the #4 alliance 27, 245, and 1023 for making them put up ridiculous scores to earn it.
Only at MSC can you score over 110 and still lose!
Your alliance proved it, 111-112 in round 1 of the finals today.
Congratulations to the #2 alliance 33, 67, and 70 on a very hard fought MSC win, and to the number #4 alliance 27, 245, and 1023 for making them put up ridiculous scores to earn it.
Thanks a ton! Thanks mostly to Teams 27 and 245 for picking us! That match was extreemly frustrating (we lost by 1!). We had a tube in our possesion and were just about to score it when the 4th minibot went up, ending the match. Had we placed that tube, we would have had it! Oh well though, congrats to teams ##, 67 and 70 on the win
The Cyborg
09-04-2011, 23:22
Qualifying match 111 at the Michigan State Champions had a score of 147-68, with the winning teams being 70, 2337, and 2054. It was amazing, especially since they were 11 points away from the maximum possible score. :ahh:
Also, it looks like they were just a mere 3 points away from a tie with 1114's 150.
Richard Wallace
09-04-2011, 23:30
Was SF1-1 a new record combined score?
#8 alliance (RED) 74, 548, 3098 vs. #4 alliance (BLUE) 27, 245, 1023 -- result, 143-106. Wow!
Well, since we are talking about high scores, here is the latest tally.
Norman J
10-04-2011, 10:14
Your alliance proved it, 111-112 in round 1 of the finals today.
After squeaking through that match and getting crushed in the next one, I was unbelievably nervous for the final match.
Congratulations to 27, 245 and 1023 for an amazing run at the most competitive regional event in the world, and coming so close to winning it all.
Also to 67 and 70 for being absolutely amazing alliance partners. Couldn't have done it without you!
If we exclude the Michigan State Championship which is a very different event, and limit ourselves to Regionals, then the highest combined score of the regular season was Semi-Final 1-2 at the Boston Regional.
224 points were scored in a 116-108 nail-biter between the #1 (88, 78, 1099) and #5 (1100, 1059, 241) alliances.
It's a sign of a very competitive Regional where an alliance can score 108 and still be knocked out of the eliminations.
Here is a screen scrape of all the matches at all regionals. The only one not posted was LI. This was a quick pass so there may be some mistakes.
David Cherba
Team 3234
Mentor
WZ8T
Top sum from both alliances in preliminary rounds from all regionals
where when match red 1 red 2 red 3 blue 1 blue 2 blue 3 r-score b-score sum
GL 9:49 AM 38 2337 27 74 2000 308 1023 134 102 236
GL 9:44 AM 108 280 1918 217 469 308 3234 119 104 223
GL 12:49 PM 64 3098 3688 3539 1 308 3547 120 102 222
GL 4:43 PM 89 1250 1684 1941 830 302 1918 105 116 221
GL 10:20 AM 43 1250 68 201 3098 245 217 79 140 219
GL 2:57 PM 74 2959 67 3539 33 74 494 106 112 218
GL 5:51 PM 20 1504 2054 910 326 1250 1718 97 118 215
GL 6:23 PM 25 2767 326 68 1528 3539 1718 109 106 215
GL 10:07 AM 111 70 2337 2054 3539 1941 1322 147 68 215
CA 4:20 17 330 1515 1717 399 2339 294 124 87 211
SJ 3:36 15 1538 751 254 1622 295 971 125 85 210
GL 11:14 AM 121 2137 70 1023 3688 2959 68 129 78 207
IL 3:31 16 1987 3067 16 1625 2826 1367 100 106 206
GL 10:54 AM 118 1718 67 3098 2145 247 469 116 89 205
GL 12:23 PM 60 226 201 302 33 2137 2834 96 108 204
GL 11:26 AM 123 3234 2337 1918 245 548 3620 103 101 204
GL 4:01 PM 3 1718 548 573 3548 70 74 123 80 203
GL 11:20 AM 122 51 2246 74 1 1684 1243 81 122 203
GL 2:02 PM 66 2000 1718 141 2474 201 217 79 123 202
GL 3:03 PM 75 66 1684 1023 70 469 226 92 110 202
IL 2:29 13 118 3494 111 45 71 1732 94 108 202
CA 3:40 13 330 1515 1717 2339 294 399 121 80 201
GL 3:36 PM 79 2145 51 67 548 2054 2604 118 83 201
TN 3:27 PM 48 1747 48 79 931 3861 71 87 114 201
GL 10:41 AM 46 494 51 1528 85 2619 2474 128 72 200
GL 5:45 PM 19 302 469 573 2337 1528 2000 121 78 199
GL 5:10 PM 93 3542 2612 1243 67 70 1528 79 120 199
GL 4:37 PM 88 2619 3234 1023 201 2767 2054 84 114 198
WAT 11:48 AM 15 1114 3683 3396 2056 1305 1334 108 90 198
GL 5:39 PM 18 141 2145 3547 27 1918 33 71 126 197
GL 10:27 AM 114 2619 2000 245 910 1243 33 92 105 197
IL 2:55 15 3494 111 118 71 45 1732 135 62 197
David Cherba
Team 3234
Mentor
WZ8t
Qualifying match 111 at the Michigan State Champions had a score of 147-68, with the winning teams being 70, 2337, and 2054. It was amazing, especially since they were 11 points away from the maximum possible score. :ahh:
Also, it looks like they were just a mere 3 points away from a tie with 1114's 150.
where when match red 1 red 2 red 3 blue 1 blue 2 blue 3 r-score b-score sum
GL 9:49 AM 38 2337 27 74 2000 308 1023 134 102 236
It's crazy to think that our robot was a part of the highest Qualifications match total score AND the second highest single-alliance score so far this season, if these numbers are correct.
Those qualifications score totals really show how powerful Michigan teams are, and that the depth of the field at MSC rivals even the Championship event :eek:
Qualifying match 111 at the Michigan State Champions had a score of 147-68, with the winning teams being 70, 2337, and 2054. It was amazing, especially since they were 11 points away from the maximum possible score. :ahh:
Also, it looks like they were just a mere 3 points away from a tie with 1114's 150.
Keep in mind, because of the diminishing returns, that 3 point gap means at least 1, and as many as 3 tubes.
Keep in mind, because of the diminishing returns, that 3 point gap means at least 1, and as many as 3 tubes.
I believe that match was four logos, three ubertubes, one game piece on the bottom row on one side, along with the first- and second-place minibots.
techvikesmom
13-04-2011, 13:05
It was amazing!! Great alliance partners make it happen!!! Great job to all 3 teams #70, #2337 and #2054. For the record Team #2054 was part of the alliance high score of 135 points at West Michigan Regionals. Another great alliance at West Michigan Regionals with Teams #27 and #141.
And therefore, would have required placement of at least 2, if not 3 more tubes to gain 3 more points.
1114/2056's 150 was 4 complete logos, 3 ubers, 1-2 minis and the triangle and square up on each of the bottom row logos.
Their 149 (152 pre-penalties) was 5 logos, 3 ubers, 1-2 minis.
OK, here are the latest & final scores for official matches on Archimedes, Newton, Curie & Galileo, then Einstein. These are only the highest combined & single scores. There were way too many matches to show other than my original highest. Of course this doesn't reflect on what the real competition was like. I only wish I could have been there.
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.