Successful Team Ups By State

[Basel A]

The same teams pairing up successfully several times is pretty rare. It happens less than it seems to, because even if two teams are "above the pack" at an event, they're still more likely than not to be on different alliances. Look at all the factors in play for your question: the two teams have to be in the same state, really good not only over a long period of time but also particularly good in the same years, going to many events, and going to many of the same events, and they need quite a bit of luck.

As a result, there are only 6 pairings that have more than 3 event wins (including cmp & division wins separately). 16 more pairings had 3 wins. The rarity is what makes the 1114/2056 partnership so special; there's nothing even remotely like it.

Team 1	Team 2	Wins
1114	2056	14
67	469	5
254	971	5
1114	1503	5
179	233	4
217	469	4

Interestingly, all these pairings are teams in the same state/province. A few of the 3-win pairings were teams across borders, including 16/148 and 341/2590, or even across a country, like 111/254.

[Navid Shafa]

Originally Posted by Basel A

Team 1	Team 2	Wins
1114	2056	14
67	469	5
254	971	5
1114	1503	5
217	469	4

Thanks for compiling this. This is something I'd love to see on TBA Insight page. I'm still hoping someone will take my idea of mutli-team searching and make it happen. I think it would be really cool to be able to simultaneously search multiple teams on TBA and see all instances that they were in the same match (either with or against each other).

[synth3tk]

Originally Posted by Navid Shafa

Thanks for compiling this. This is something I'd love to see on TBA Insight page. I'm still hoping someone will take my idea of mutli-team searching and make it happen. I think it would be really cool to be able to simultaneously search multiple teams on TBA and see all instances that they were in the same match (either with or against each other).

https://github.com/the-blue-alliance...ce/issues/1018

We're tracking now. Thanks for the suggestion!

[Charles Boehm]

Not a very long history.. but 2175 and 4607 won North Star in 2013, won state together in 2013 and were alliance partners yet again during elims at North Star this year.

Edit -spelling-

[Ginger Power]

Originally Posted by Charles Boehm

Not a very long history.. but 2175 and 4607 won North start in 2013, won state together in 2013 and were alliance partners yet again during elims at North Star this year.

It might not be a very long history relative to the history of FIRST but it is our whole history! Every elimination round that 4607 has played in has been with 2175. I would say 2 wins in 3 attempts is successful and you never know what the future might hold.

[Austin2046]

We (2046) teamed up with 2471 in 2012 and won the Seattle Cascade regional, and then we teamed up again in 2013 and won the Oregon Regional. We first teamed up in 2010 at the Seattle regional but only made it to Semi-finals.

[evanatch]

Rather than two teams, how about three? The alliance of 2996, 1410, and 662 took the finalist spot at the Colorado regional in both 2013 and 2014. Both years they lost to alliances that were comprised primarily of out-of-state teams, so I'd say they count as the most dominant alliance from Colorado for the last two years.

[Qcom]

Originally Posted by evanatch

Rather than two teams, how about three? The alliance of 2996, 1410, and 662 took the finalist spot at the Colorado regional in both 2013 and 2014. Both years they lost to alliances that were comprised primarily of out-of-state teams, so I'd say they count as the most dominant alliance from Colorado for the last two years.

Seeing last week in Utah, It might be a possibility again, but 662 will be the big "maybe" in the equation. 662 this year has a fantastic robot; I'd argue that it is a better one than Gunther (our robot this year). Because of this, they may be the choosers this year if we somehow pair up again. I haven't had the chance to watch 1410 in depth, but they always surprise me with their novel approach to the game. Up-a-Creek robotics (1619) has already won Utah, and will certainly be a major player at the Denver Regional.

[SoftwareBug2.0]

Originally Posted by synth3tk

https://github.com/the-blue-alliance...ce/issues/1018

We're tracking now. Thanks for the suggestion!

Amusingly, I had something that did this but it got broken because of The Blue Alliance API changes.

[stingray27]

Originally Posted by SoftwareBug2.0

Amusingly, I had something that did this but it got broken because of The Blue Alliance API changes.

All you have to do is add a HTTP request and all of your old stuff will still work. Its just minor addition in your code prior to pulling all the data when you initialize a HTML stream or json reader or however you access their api

[SoftwareBug2.0]

Originally Posted by stingray27

All you have to do is add a HTTP request and all of your old stuff will still work. Its just minor addition in your code prior to pulling all the data when you initialize a HTML stream or json reader or however you access their api

Got it working again. The results are attached.

The columns are:
1) team1
2) team2
3) # of times team1 beat team2
4) # of times team2 beat team1
5) # of times team1 and team2 opposed and tied
6) # of times that team1 and team2 were on the same alliance and won
7) # of times that team1 and team2 were on the same alliance and lost
8) # of times that team1 and team2 were on the same alliance and tied

This is all per the Blue Alliance data since 2002. If people are interested I can share the program; there are a lot of knobs you can twist if you're interested.

[Navid Shafa]

Originally Posted by SoftwareBug2.0

Got it working again. The results are attached.

Thanks for posting, it's just a little difficult to work with right now. This appears to include every match in existence, not just event wins together. Would it be possible to filter by multiple wins in a single finals series?

Also, when filtering by most matches won together, the first several thousand results are a team playing with itself. In one strange instance I found that 4543 apparently has both won and lost a match against themselves.

[SoftwareBug2.0]

Originally Posted by Navid Shafa

In one strange instance I found that 4543 apparently has both won and lost a match against themselves.

I think that would be this match: http://www.thebluealliance.com/match/2013mttd_qm47

[orangelight]

Originally Posted by SoftwareBug2.0

Got it working again.

Well... This sums up 548 and 67

67 548 25 3 1 15 4 0

[SoftwareBug2.0]

Originally Posted by SoftwareBug2.0

Got it working again. The results are attached.

The columns are:
1) team1
2) team2
3) # of times team1 beat team2
4) # of times team2 beat team1
5) # of times team1 and team2 opposed and tied
6) # of times that team1 and team2 were on the same alliance and won
7) # of times that team1 and team2 were on the same alliance and lost
8) # of times that team1 and team2 were on the same alliance and tied

This is all per the Blue Alliance data since 2002. If people are interested I can share the program; there are a lot of knobs you can twist if you're interested.

I checked over some of this and I was missing some data from earlier this year. If anyone sees something amiss let me know.