[JesseK]

These stats ... make no sense. The ranking of the results attempts to find a level of comparative competitiveness based upon 10 seasons of data in a competition where the only thing which is guaranteed to last 10 seasons are the bigger investments a team has made in tooling, infrastructure or facilities.

The stats don't even take into account groups of teams which keep winning the same Regional, thereby inflating that event's BBQ-ness.

It seems to me like we'd get a more realistic picture by using the trailing 2-4 years of event data for a given event and year, rather than "for all time".