Top 5 robots in each state

[HolyLandBrand]

Since the season is over, what were the top 5 robots in your state during Recycle Rush?

[AlexC]

I live in Ohio and from what I have seen the ranking is:

1. 379
2. 5413
3. 48
4. 120
5. 4269

Fair warning I am associated with 5413 so there may be some bias

Attached is the ranking data for Ohio based on the Michigan District ranking system.

[Trevor1523]

Not sure about northern Florida teams but I can account for those that attended Orlando and South Florida regionals

I'm not sure about the rankings but I'd probably say the top five in no particular order are:

744
1523
2383
179
Probably 1592 or 2556

(Can't account for 233 because I never saw them actually play, but they're usually stellar.)

[MikLast]

based from here:

PNW:
1983
4488
955
2250
2471

WA:
1983
2471
1318
1595
2930

OR:
4488
2550
1510
2990
2635

[Dunngeon]

Originally Posted by MikLast

based from here:

PNW:
1983
4488
955
2250
2471

WA:
1983
2471
1318
1595
2930

OR:
4488
2550
1510
2990
2635

Hey,

Just wanted to let you know that, contrary to popular opnion, we do exist in a state (OR)! Not just the PNW

[Joseph DeRoest]

Originally Posted by Dunngeon

Hey,

Just wanted to let you know that, contrary to popular opnion, we do exist in a state (OR)! Not just the PNW

Yeah, that was bugging me, too! You guys totally deserve to be on that list!

[MikLast]

Originally Posted by Dunngeon

Hey,

Just wanted to let you know that, contrary to popular opnion, we do exist in a state (OR)! Not just the PNW

I blame band. It will be fixed, my bad!

EDIT:
Or... not, as i have seemed to lost the privilege to do so on that post...
You should be second, i just cant change it. Do i need to be on the computer i posted it on?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by MikLast

I blame band. It will be fixed, my bad!

EDIT:
Or... not, as i have seemed to lost the privilege to do so on that post...
You should be second, i just cant change it. Do i need to be on the computer i posted it on?

Nope, you just need to be faster to get to the edit button. There's something like a 24-hour limit on edits.

[MikLast]

Originally Posted by EricH

Nope, you just need to be faster to get to the edit button. There's something like a 24-hour limit on edits.

missed it a while ago, heh. didnt know that, thanks for telling me.

[nikeairmancurry]

Michigans top 2 are both 1s..

1A- 1023
1B- 548
3- 33
4- 3641
5- Fill in any one of 10 different robots here

[RonnieS]

Originally Posted by nikeairmancurry

Michigans top 2 are both 1s..

1A- 1023
1B- 548
3- 33
4- 3641
5- Fill in any one of 10 different robots here

I agree with the top two....but 3 and 4 are questionable. I see it more as this as long as we are looking at this from a season over view standpoint. The top two were just good throughout, 314 had struggles but was fairly consistent with 3 stacks for a large part of the season...you can't deny 3 wins as number 1 seed. 33 was seen at its best doing 3 stacks, it seemed to be more of a 20 point auto and then 2. The 5th bots are hard, we had 68 doing 3 at its best plus starting to throw out more totes but had some consistency issues when their ramp was not perfectly aligned. 3641 started along the same lines with picking up in stack count as the season went on. 107 was for sure a dark horse for many people. Their 20pt auto and 2 stacks was pretty killer. If I recall correctly they started their 3rd often? Maybe I am thinking wrong on that one, someone correct me if so. I don't think that any of these teams are bad and are better than a majority of FRC.

1-1023
2-548
3-314
4-33
5-68/3641/107

-Ronnie

[Kevin Leonard]

Originally Posted by RonnieS

I agree with the top two....but 3 and 4 are questionable. I see it more as this as long as we are looking at this from a season over view standpoint. The top two were just good throughout, 314 had struggles but was fairly consistent with 3 stacks for a large part of the season...you can't deny 3 wins as number 1 seed. 33 was seen at its best doing 3 stacks, it seemed to be more of a 20 point auto and then 2. The 5th bots are hard, we had 68 doing 3 at its best plus starting to throw out more totes but had some consistency issues when their ramp was not perfectly aligned. 3641 started along the same lines with picking up in stack count as the season went on. 107 was for sure a dark horse for many people. Their 20pt auto and 2 stacks was pretty killer. If I recall correctly they started their 3rd often? Maybe I am thinking wrong on that one, someone correct me if so. I don't think that any of these teams are bad and are better than a majority of FRC.

1-1023
2-548
3-314
4-33
5-68/3641/107

-Ronnie

Michigan had a ton of absolutely killer machines.
67 was two feeder stacks, a tote stack auto, and some of the fastest can grabbers. 1918 and 2137 were similarly good, but without the tote stack auto. 2054 was killer early on, and their autonomous routine was insane. 70 and 494 were unique machines that could pull two stacks from anywhere and hit a tote stack auto. 217 and 1718 were interesting niche picks with good can grabbers that each made division finals. 85 at their best was making three capped stacks of 5 in Carson qualifications, and they also had a one can grab. 27 had a crazy year, making it to both MSC and Galileo finals. 2959 and 4967 were two other great landfill machines from Michigan, who generally made about 2 stacks in a match. You also can't forget 503, who had some of the other fastest can grabbers out there.

I think the only two machines you could for-sure put in the MI top 5 are 1023 and 548. 3rd has to be 33, because they were byfar the best landfill robot in Michigan, and one of the best in the world, as well as the 4th overall pick at IRI.
Next could be any of 27/67/68/70/107/314/503/1918/2054/2137/2959/3641/4967 depending on what attributes you value more and what competitions you look at.

By performance at worlds:
27- Division Finalist
67- Division Finalist
68- Division Quarterfinalist
70- Division Semifinalist
107- Division Quarterfinalist
314- Division Semifinalist
503- Division Semifinalist
1918- Division Semifinalist
2054- Division Quarterfinalist
2137- Division Finalist
2959- Division Quarterfinalist
3641- Division Quarterfinalist
4967- Division Quarterfinalist

Basically beyond your top 3 teams, there's extreme parity among the rest of Michigan's elite.

[RonnieS]

Originally Posted by Kevin Leonard

Michigan had a ton of absolutely killer machines.
67 was two feeder stacks, a tote stack auto, and some of the fastest can grabbers. 1918 and 2137 were similarly good, but without the tote stack auto. 2054 was killer early on, and their autonomous routine was insane. 70 and 494 were unique machines that could pull two stacks from anywhere and hit a tote stack auto. 217 and 1718 were interesting niche picks with good can grabbers that each made division finals. 85 at their best was making three capped stacks of 5 in Carson qualifications, and they also had a one can grab. 27 had a crazy year, making it to both MSC and Galileo finals. 2959 and 4967 were two other great landfill machines from Michigan, who generally made about 2 stacks in a match. You also can't forget 503, who had some of the other fastest can grabbers out there.

I think the only two machines you could for-sure put in the MI top 5 are 1023 and 548. 3rd has to be 33, because they were byfar the best landfill robot in Michigan, and one of the best in the world, as well as the 4th overall pick at IRI.
Next could be any of 27/67/68/70/107/314/503/1918/2054/2137/2959/3641/4967 depending on what attributes you value more and what competitions you look at.

By performance at worlds:
27- Division Finalist
67- Division Finalist
68- Division Quarterfinalist
70- Division Semifinalist
107- Division Quarterfinalist
314- Division Semifinalist
503- Division Semifinalist
1918- Division Semifinalist
2054- Division Quarterfinalist
2137- Division Finalist
2959- Division Quarterfinalist
3641- Division Quarterfinalist
4967- Division Quarterfinalist

Basically beyond your top 3 teams, there's extreme parity among the rest of Michigan's elite.

You do not receive any extra points for using the landfill that I am aware of? so please explain how 33 can be better than teams that could stack more from human player station just because they were the best Michigan LF bot(which I am not arguing)? Yes they had a 20pt auto, but without noodling a majority of their stacks(they had alliance partner noodle one at champs and they did the first one) I don't see the same and we can agree to disagree. Now 67 as a two stack machine...I don't think it happened as much as the season wen't on but yes they had fast grabbers. This is all opinion and we can go on for days going on about it. I just would not go as far as "extreme parity" when comparing a team that does 126 points versus a team that does 84/104 with auto.

-Ronnie

[Brian Maher]

I took a look at the FIM District Rankings:

1) 1023 384
2) 548 380
3) 2197 307.5
4) 33 287.5
5) 68 286.5

[asid61]

Originally Posted by RonnieS

You do not receive any extra points for using the landfill that I am aware of? so please explain how 33 can be better than teams that could stack more from human player station just because they were the best Michigan LF bot(which I am not arguing)? Yes they had a 20pt auto, but without noodling a majority of their stacks(they had alliance partner noodle one at champs and they did the first one) I don't see the same and we can agree to disagree. Now 67 as a two stack machine...I don't think it happened as much as the season wen't on but yes they had fast grabbers. This is all opinion and we can go on for days going on about it. I just would not go as far as "extreme parity" when comparing a team that does 126 points versus a team that does 84/104 with auto.

-Ronnie

There were many more effective HP stackers than landfill stackers, so running out of HP totes is a real issue. A good landfill stacker mitigates that issue, and so is valued more in my eyes, at least.
If you have 2 3-stack HP stackers on your alliance, you will run out of totes. And the third robot becomes useless (apart from grabbing/flipping cans) if they can't landfill.