|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
Guys, don't worry. All of these teams will be in next year, plus a couple hundred more. See, good change, right?
</sarcasm> Last edited by cmrnpizzo14 : 14-04-2015 at 15:27. |
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
1987, when working at optimal performance, this robot was intimidating...
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
1731
The only continuous chain hook elevator I've seen to solve stacking and capping 6 with the same mechanism. |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
1287 was impressive. They had a really solid landfill stacking robot that worked since week 1.
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
Champs Team List: https://my.usfirst.org/myarea/index.lasso?page=teamlist&event_type=FRC&sort_team s=number&year=2015&event=cmp
Out of the teams we've played with not attending champs: 4655, 2194, and 2077 are all champs caliber IMO. |
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
I'm not sure if you are being sarcastic or not. Personally instead of expanding waitlists I favor expanding the district system so teams that have potential and under perform at their first events can do well at the District Championship and qualify. Districts do a pretty good job of sending the best robots to Champs via the point system.
|
|
#7
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
This will be a strange Championship without team 25.
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
I concur. Team 25 is a solid team that has a good robot. I can't believe that with the expansion of Championships that they would be overlooked. I know a lot of us are still hoping they get in.
|
|
#9
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
456 (siege robotics, from Vicksburg) built an incredibly consistent machine this year. They always made 2-3 capped stacks of 5 per match, from the HP station. They captained semifinalist alliances at Orlando and Smoky Mountains, and were the #2 seed at Bayou. They lost F-2 by only 2 points.
179 was also amazing, very creative can grabber and a really attractive robot. |
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
Looks like 25 just got added from the wait list.
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
Actually the declines have finally been updated in the system, so teams from NE, MAR and FIM are getting added as teams above them decline their invitations.
Looks like 3 declines in MAR, 7 in NE and 1 in FIM. |
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
Quote:
EDIT: I stand corrected. Last edited by Link07 : 14-04-2015 at 20:00. |
|
#13
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
4285 also declined their invite
|
|
#14
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
That's great news. They had a really unique and awesome robot this year.
|
|
#15
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Best Robots Not To Qualify for Champs
1987's robot can make 5 stacks of 6, but not capped. If they get picked from the wait list and are put in a division with a team that can consistently cap 6 stacks, noodle or no noddle, and can grab containers from the step. They will be a terrifying alliance to compete against. Especially if they can also get a team that is a landfill bot and can create several uncapped stacks on the platform not used by 1987.
Another amazing team that isn't going to worlds is 67. If I am not mistaken. They were knocked out of Quarter-finals at the Michigan District Championship. After winning both of the District Events they attended. And an average score of 126.83. That is the sad thing about Districts. Amazing teams that deserve to go to worlds have a harder time getting there, as they have to score high in the point system to make it to the championship then they have to either win, get chairman's or get E.I. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|