[Tim Delles]

Newton Division Winners:

330 - 67 - 503 (2005)
968 - 233 - 60 (2008)

Archimedes Division Winners:

245 - 217 - 766 (2005)
1124 - 1024 - 177 (2008)

Galileo Division Winners:

56 - 254 - 64 (2005)
1114 - 217 - 148 (2008)

Curie Division Winners:

175 - 33 - 108 (2005)
67 - 16 - 348 (2008)

This shows that there has been an increase in the average team number of the divisional winning alliance... (if you look at all the divisional winners since say 2000 i believe this would hold true as well)

Now taking a loot at how many teams above 1000+ where involved in the eliminations we get:

Newton: 10 (2056, 1574, 2016, 1251, 1625, 1502, 1714, 1086, 1806, 2591)
Archimedes: 8 (2166, 1124, 1024, 2081, 1218, 2335, 1598, 1771)
Galileo: 8 (1114, 1717, 2340, 1450, 1983, 2046, 1089, 1503)
Curie: 8 (1592, 1126, 1511, 2337, 2171, 1071, 1649, 2344)

so that is 34 teams out of 128 teams were numbers 1000+, considering these teams have only been in first since 2003 (so this would be there 6th year).

Also looking at the teams we have:

the #1 alliance on curie was made up of ALL teams being over 1000.
the #2 alliance on curie was led by team 2337
of the 8 alliances made on curie 5 of them were led by teams over 1000.
of the 8 alliances on newton 6 of them were led by teams over 1000
the #2 alliance was led by a 2nd year team
the #3 alliance was led by team 1574 (on of the Israel teams)
the #5 seeded alliance on archimedes was made up entirely of teams above 1200.
the #1, 2, and 3 alliances on Galileo were captained by teams over 1000 (1114, 1717, and 2340)


In all honesty i think that teams over 1000 are doing exceptionally well for being as new as a lot of them are. and its part of the challenge right?


As for being able to go to multiple regionals i'd say that that is perfectly fine... there was a statement made that 1114 went to 3 regionals, won them all and took awards home. Honestly if i was to attend a regional that was suppose to be dominated by a team it would give me that much more drive to beat them.