Dominant teams who are not as dominant as they used to be

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by EricH

47 can never. 233 has never. Slight difference. You could make the case that 47 won a significant percentage of regionals--but if there are only 6 regionals, and you win 2 of them, versus if there are 60 and you win 2 (that you attend), then you're dealing with a factor of 10 more events, so you can't even attend a significant percentage. 233 just iterates a lot during their first competition event.

I assert dominant is more a perception than anything. Winning 1/3 regionals vs 1/30th is significantly MORE dominant. At least the perception.

Originally Posted by IanW

I dunno, I've been told to "Never bet against the Beast" until they're eliminated.
Regardless of their recent history, I'm going to guess that still holds true...

I still never bet against the BEAST. 11 years and I NEVER bet against them.