Divisions 2012

Originally Posted by CalTran

I'm thinking so as well. My prediction? 469+1717 vs. 67+2056.

Agreed. And Newton's gonna win.

[xSAWxBLADEx]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

Agreed. And Newton's gonna win.

NOOOOO...67+2056 is an unstoppable alliance

Originally Posted by xSAWxBLADEx

NOOOOO...67+2056 is an unstoppable alliance

Unstoppable until Einstein. Unfortunately, while I love those teams, looking around there are very few things unique about them. As the championships come closer, I think we'll be seeing a lot more of the 5/6 ball autons, the extremely high scores, everything. What's going to stand out is any obvious advantage over the other team, and what's going to win is an unobvious advantage over the other team. 67 and 469 know each other well. I think with the two of them against each other, we're going to see massive strategies unfold, and it will rely on their alliance partners to unbalance the equal skill between the two. I'd go as far as to say 1717 equals 2056 in scoring, and bridge balancing, so it's up to the third partner.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

Agreed. And Newton's gonna win.

They aren't. Not because 67/2056 is unstoppable (remember, 469 and 1114 was unstoppable in 2010), but because the odds of the stacked division winning are low.

It happens every year: The division lists come out, some division is quickly pegged as stacked, and predicted to win it all. Sometime on Einstein, that alliance loses two, and they don't win it all. This may be due to the epic battles royale in the divisional eliminations, or the breakup of really, really top teams, or something else entirely.

The only thing more predictable is Curie not winning it all.

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by EricH

They aren't. Not because 67/2056 is unstoppable (remember, 469 and 1114 was unstoppable in 2010), but because the odds of the stacked division winning are low.

It happens every year: The division lists come out, some division is quickly pegged as stacked, and predicted to win it all. Sometime on Einstein, that alliance loses two, and they don't win it all. This may be due to the epic battles royale in the divisional eliminations, or the breakup of really, really top teams, or something else entirely.

The only thing more predictable is Curie not winning it all.

The "stacked" division won both in 2008, 2009, 2011.... That's 3 of 4 recent years.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

The "stacked" division won both in 2008, 2009, 2011.... That's 3 of 4 recent years.

After not winning in a BUNCH of other years. 2007, Curie. 2005, Archimedes, IIRC (might be another, but not Newton). I want to say it was Galileo in 2004--Archimedes won. I don't remember the stacked division in 2006, but it might have been Newton with the 254/968 twins. (I don't remember which division won.)

2004, 2005, 2007, 2010, stacked didn't win.
2008, 2009, 2011, stacked won.
2006 needs more research.

I think that's a bit more odds against the stacked division winning than 25%...

[jwfoss]

Originally Posted by EricH

2006 needs more research.

Newton 2006 was IMHO the most stacked division I can remember in my 10 years in FIRST.

Newton ended up being finalists...

[Kim Masi]

Originally Posted by jwfoss

Newton 2006 was IMHO the most stacked division I can remember in my 10 years in FIRST.

Newton ended up being finalists...

Yup, I agree. And 176's strategic alliance-breaking alliance selection was one of the more brilliant moves I've seen in my FIRST memory.

[nuggetsyl]

Originally Posted by Kim Masi

Yup, I agree. And 176's strategic alliance-breaking alliance selection was one of the more brilliant moves I've seen in my FIRST memory.

thank 111 for that

[jwfoss]

Originally Posted by nuggetsyl

thank 111 for that

I respectfully disagree. Although we couldn't have been happier with 111 as our alliance partner.

[nuggetsyl]

Originally Posted by jwfoss

I respectfully disagree. Although we couldn't have been happier with 111 as our alliance partner.

Just ask Raul how it went down. It was a great strategic move.

[stundt1]

I think this year has been a bunch of upsets and with the co-op points affecting seeding heavily this year. I believe there will be upsets this year as there has been all season.

But there is a high chance this year that a robot could get a good schedule and end up seeding high maybe breaking up powerhouses. Like the 2056/1114 breakup.

I do think arch is my prediction to win.....

[JB987]

Originally Posted by EricH

The only thing more predictable is Curie not winning it all.

Maybe the Curie winners should just concede their Einstein matches and pack it up...no way to break a curse, right? (Insert missing sarcasm Smile)

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by EricH

The only thing more predictable is Curie not winning it all.

I can't wrap my head around this statement. Is it a foregone conclusion that the best team in each division will seed #1, choose the 2nd best team as their partner, and advance to Einstein scoring exactly in line with their current, pre-Championship OPR? It's anybody's ball game.

[Tom Ore]

Two new teams: 2851 in Archimedes and 1178 in Newton. Now 400 teams total.