Chief Delphi - Best Robots by Age

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)

- General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - Best Robots by Age (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=84722)

Re: Best Robots by Age

I have to agree with putting in 4967 for 2014 consideration. I know, I am probably completely bias as this is one of my teams, but here's some information, from The Blue Alliance:

Gull Lake District 2nd Seed
16-2-0
Rookie All Star
Winner
Highest Rookie Seed

West Michigan District 4th Seed
12-5-0
Highest Rookie Seed
Rookie Inspiration
(beat out in Semifinals by eventual Event Winners)

Overall
28-7-0
Rank 2 in Michigan (as of post-Week 4)
Rank 53 in World according to Joe Ross' spreadsheet. (as of post-Week 4)

Re: Best Robots by Age

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nemo (Post 1364028)

111 is a 1996 rookie, not 1992.

Yes and no. Half of what would become 111 was indeed a team in 1992. And IIRC it was Motorola sponsored. It didn't make it to 1993/4/5 though.

Re: Best Robots by Age

Going to nominate Code Orange (3476) for 2011. Deciding between them and 3539 is hard.

Re: Best Robots by Age

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knufire (Post 1365622)

Going to nominate Code Orange (3476) for 2011. Deciding between them and 3539 is hard.

Thanks for the mention. Our 2011 robot was, frankly, pretty terrible. The only thing that worked properly was the mini-bot. Perhaps you mean 2012? That year we got a new engineering mentor who helped us to step up our game and win the San Diego regional with 4161 and 3255. ;)

Re: Best Robots by Age

Quote:

Originally Posted by gren737 (Post 946757)

The earlier years are fuzzy in the records because team numbers didn't come out until 97 for the first time, then in 98 they re-numbered everybody.

But in 1995 team 131 Chaos was the team to beat along w/the Sunny D team who is now defunct.

In 1996 I remember the bobcats 177 being pretty awesome along with the X cats 191 and also the Tigertrons 222 who won the whole thing.

In 1997 Beatty 71 was unstoppable and won the whole thing that year, ChiefDelphi 47 and Rhode Warriers/Airstrike 121/78 were also scary.

The sunny d team, is now known as team 144 I believe, or at least our current mentor had a role in it. Sunny d is on display at P&G, last I heard. However, poor brute is no longer operational.

Re: Best Robots by Age

I thought I'd necro this thread because it's a fun one. The question is this, which team from each rookie class has been the strongest over their history? The last time CD came to a consensus was mid-2014 for the following. Things have definitely changed since then.

Right off the bat, I'd suggest 2481 for 2008, and 3990 for 2012. Thoughts?

2013: 4451
2012: 4294
2011: 3539
2010: 3138
2009: 2826
2008: 2337
2007: 2056
2006: 1717
2005: 1625
2004: 1477
2003: 1114
2002: 987
2001: 494
2000: 469
1999: 254
1998: 48
1997: 67
1996: 71
1995: 177
1994: 144
1993: 151
1992: 111

Re: Best Robots by Age

Quote:

Originally Posted by Basel A (Post 1586969)

While Motorola and Wheeling HS was at the 1992 tournament, WildStang's official rookie year is 1996 and they don't claim otherwise. Now, does that knock 71 off their perch for 1996? Four world titles and a Championship WFA vs. three world titles (two in the 3v3 era), a Championship WFA, and a spot in the Hall of Fame, and a Championship Volunteer of the Year? WildStang, I think I love you.

The 1992 battle really comes down to 148 vs. 45 (with a special shoutout to 191 for doing what nobody else can do now). Before the 148 afterburners really came on in 2007 or 2008, this would be an easy decision for 45. But in the years since, the momentum has shifted greatly--15 of 148's 16 regional wins (and all four trips to Einstein) have been in 2008 or later, while 5 of the TechnoKats' 9 district and regional wins came during the same time period. 45's best counterargument would be culture-changing awards--three WFFAs and a Championship WFA (vs. 2 and 0), three RCAs (vs. 1), and two EI awards (vs. 0). I think the nod still goes to 148, but it's not an early-round knockout.

Re: Best Robots by Age

48 has added to their impressive resume since this list was last discussed, but I'd still like to throw our hat into the ring as representatives of the rookie class of '98.

https://www.thebluealliance.com/team/180/history

Re: Best Robots by Age

3476 has now added two Einstein appearances and multiple regional wins to their resume since 2014. I think that pushes them above 3539.

I also agree that 180 has had more success than 48.

For 2010 rookies, I would like to suggest 3015, who has been very strong since 2014.

4039 has also been an excellent 2012 (?) rookie.

For a 2014 rookie, 5254.

Re: Best Robots by Age

48 doesn't particularly care about or for popularity contests such as these, so we don't mind one bit if other teams wish to pursue such arbitrary mantles of distinction.

Have at it, 1998 teams. :)

Re: Best Robots by Age

Quote:

Originally Posted by Travis Hoffman (Post 1587008)

48 doesn't partucularly care about or for popularity contests such as these, so we don't mind one bit if other teams wish to pursue such arbitrary mantles of distinction.

Have at it, 1998 teams. :)

Clearly :P

Re: Best Robots by Age

Quote:

Originally Posted by Basel A (Post 1587010)

Clearly :P

Well that was coming off a very productive year in the hardware department.

Re: Best Robots by Age

Quote:

Originally Posted by A_Reed (Post 1587011)

Well that was coming off a very productive year in the hardware department.

Clearly an aberration. We promise it will never happen again.

Re: Best Robots by Age

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris is me (Post 1586993)

For a 2014 rookie, 5254.

We appreciate that, but there are other 2014 rookies who have had better results than us, for example 5172, 4967, and 4911.

Re: Best Robots by Age

4488 for 2013. 5803 for 2016. Echo 3476 and 2481.

Not sure for 2012 btwn 3990 and 4039, both are very accomplished teams.

5406 for 2015.
4967 seems like a decent choice for 2014.

4294 doesn't exist anymore :(

1678 may have a legitimate claim over 1625.