2015 Champs Predictions

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by MrJohnston

The fact of the matter is: That first pick in alliance selection is, in all likelihood, going to be the fastest and most accurate can grabber available. With countless teams developing grabbers right now, it is impossible to know who that will actually be.

It's not quite so simple. Let me give the example from MSC. 1023, a HP bot, seeded first and had three realistic choices:

• 33 - Best landfill bot
• 548 - Most consistent 2-can grabber, very capable HP stacker
• 469 - Arguably a better can grabber than 548 when functioning, similar speed for 4 cans. Caveats: only used once in a match, takes a bit too long to set up

No single team, even with a little help, can put up enough points to win, no matter how many cans are available. Picking the team with the best can grabber available might have worked at MSC, because a team like 1023 plus 469 (not that great a stacker) plus the last pick of the draft could probably have put up enough points. But 1023 made the obvious choice in picking an arguably worse can-grabber but better stacker in 548, because 2 cans is enough if you can put up the stacks.

Fast-forward to CMP, there's no guarantee a great stacker seeding 1st will have a 548 available to them (except in Hopper, I suppose). Picking a dedicated can-grabber could work if there's a good enough stacker coming back around, but the last picks at MSC were higher quality than they will be at CMP, and even at MSC this was barely a viable strategy*. Maybe they'll be able to rely on one stack from their 3rd bot.

But a top alliance knows they need to win their division before they win Einstein. Picking a can grabber that can't do much else will result in that alliance doing neither, because one team, with a little help, simply can't create enough stacks to win.

tl;dr Even can grabbers need to score stacks if they want to be picked first


*573, as the 5th captain, took a big gamble picking 27, a dedicated canburglar/capper, as their first pick. But it paid off like crazy because they were able to get a phenomenal 3rd bot, 3098 (Watch them score 20 totes). It should not have worked, 3098 should've been picked way earlier.

[Loose Screw]

Originally Posted by FIMAlumni

Can you explain to me why you would split the RCs 2-2? If I have the faster can grabbers, I'm going to grab all 4 to lower your alliance score even if I can only score two of them. This elimination structure is brutal and 1 bad match by 2 teams in the QFs (from my alliance stealing the RCs) is two less teams I have to beat to move on. By splitting the RCs, you may move on to the SF while I'm stuck trying to find a good seat for the next round.

If you can beat that alliance so easily, wouldn't you want to play against them in the finals? If you help an alliance that you know you could beat advance, then they're knocking out an alliance that could beat you.

Using rock-paper-scissors as a guide;

You (rock) could easily beat scissors (slow RC grabber). However, there's another alliance that has quicker RC grabbers than you, but can't score as many 6-stacks as you. They'll be paper. If you can help scissors improve their average (sharing RCs), then there's a chance they'll knock paper out of elims. Then when Finals come, you could easily beat scissors.

It's a different strategy, but you can see why you'd do it.

[FIMAlumni]

Archimedes: 1023-314-3602
Carson: 67-85-3604
Carver: 4967-66-2834
Curie: 5046-107- 70
Galileo: 1189-494-3618
Hopper: 548-33-4362
Newton: 1918-3641-3539
Tesla: 2137-2959-226

I started making this as a joke, but some of these have a legitimate chance to form and win their division.

[CaityDawh]

I am very well aware that this will never happen. But just out of curiosity how do you all think the divisions would do in Einstein if the top 4 teams from each division was in an alliance. I am basing the top 4 teams off of OPR. OPR isn't the most accurate when it combines multiple events, but still is accurate enough that I am using it.

Archimedes:
1023, 2338, 314, 1538
Carson:
254, 1519, 1730, 4488
Carver:
368, 1986, 2852, 1768
Curie:
1114, 148, 4143, 3309
Galileo:
2056, 1619, 330, 525
Hopper:
2826, 987, 33, 3683
Newton:
118, 1678, 1756, 3130
Tesla:
2481, 2122, 3824, 1806

[Pretzel]

Originally Posted by CaityDawh

I am very well aware that this will never happen. But just out of curiosity how do you all think the divisions would do in Einstein if the top 4 teams from each division was in an alliance. I am basing the top 4 teams off of OPR. OPR isn't the most accurate when it combines multiple events, but still is accurate enough that I am using it.


Carver:
368, 1986, 2852, 1768
Curie:
1114, 148, 4143, 3309
Galileo:
2056, 1619, 330, 525
Hopper:
2826, 987, 33, 3683
Newton:
118, 1678, 1756, 3130
Tesla:
2481, 2122, 3824, 1806

I would predict Newton winning in that scenario with their canburglars by starving the other teams of cans while still being able to put up a large number of stacks.

[MrJohnston]

Originally Posted by Basel A

It's not quite so simple. Let me give the example from MSC. 1023, a HP bot, seeded first and had three realistic choices:

• 33 - Best landfill bot
• 548 - Most consistent 2-can grabber, very capable HP stacker
• 469 - Arguably a better can grabber than 548 when functioning, similar speed for 4 cans. Caveats: only used once in a match, takes a bit too long to set up

No single team, even with a little help, can put up enough points to win, no matter how many cans are available. Picking the team with the best can grabber available might have worked at MSC, because a team like 1023 plus 469 (not that great a stacker) plus the last pick of the draft could probably have put up enough points. But 1023 made the obvious choice in picking an arguably worse can-grabber but better stacker in 548, because 2 cans is enough if you can put up the stacks.

Fast-forward to CMP, there's no guarantee a great stacker seeding 1st will have a 548 available to them (except in Hopper, I suppose). Picking a dedicated can-grabber could work if there's a good enough stacker coming back around, but the last picks at MSC were higher quality than they will be at CMP, and even at MSC this was barely a viable strategy*. Maybe they'll be able to rely on one stack from their 3rd bot.

But a top alliance knows they need to win their division before they win Einstein. Picking a can grabber that can't do much else will result in that alliance doing neither, because one team, with a little help, simply can't create enough stacks to win.

tl;dr Even can grabbers need to score stacks if they want to be picked first


*573, as the 5th captain, took a big gamble picking 27, a dedicated canburglar/capper, as their first pick. But it paid off like crazy because they were able to get a phenomenal 3rd bot, 3098 (Watch them score 20 totes). It should not have worked, 3098 should've been picked way earlier.

I do disagree. If you are a great stacker (such as 4488) as the #1 captain and pick a great robot - whose not a can grabber, by the time you get your second pick you may not have any good can grabbers left. You have now limited yourself to 3 RC's for elimination rounds: A formula for an exit in the quarter finals. Sure, you might have the worlds fastest piece of cheesecake, but that will still limit you to getting two additional RC's - assuming your cheesecake truly is the fastest.

Nay... Unless that #1 captain is an autonomous RC grabber or has some very fast cheesecake waiting, it needs to choose an RC grabber.

[dodar]

Originally Posted by CaityDawh

I am very well aware that this will never happen. But just out of curiosity how do you all think the divisions would do in Einstein if the top 4 teams from each division was in an alliance. I am basing the top 4 teams off of OPR. OPR isn't the most accurate when it combines multiple events, but still is accurate enough that I am using it.


Carver:
368, 1986, 2852, 1768
Curie:
1114, 148, 4143, 3309
Galileo:
2056, 1619, 330, 525
Hopper:
2826, 987, 33, 3683
Newton:
118, 1678, 1756, 3130
Tesla:
2481, 2122, 3824, 1806

I can tell you now, there is 0% chance of any of those happening.

[Gweiss96]

Originally Posted by dodar

I can tell you now, there is 0% chance of any of those happening.

Never say never

[MrJohnston]

Originally Posted by Basel A

tl;dr Even can grabbers need to score stacks if they want to be picked first

I do agree with this... If the can grabber is truly so good it will get 2 every time and winning every possible match, I would want it to be able to put up at least 40 points on its own...

[CaityDawh]

Originally Posted by dodar

I can tell you now, there is 0% chance of any of those happening.

I know this will never happen. I was just curious. That would be a really exciting Einstein if it did. Lol

[Kevin Leonard]

He literally listed the 4 best teams in each division and asked which would win if they had to face off. No where did he say those were anywhere near realistic.

And he didn't list all the divisions. What?

[Gweiss96]

Originally Posted by CaityDawh

I am very well aware that this will never happen. But just out of curiosity how do you all think the divisions would do in Einstein if the top 4 teams from each division was in an alliance. I am basing the top 4 teams off of OPR. OPR isn't the most accurate when it combines multiple events, but still is accurate enough that I am using it.


Carver:
368, 1986, 2852, 1768
Curie:
1114, 148, 4143, 3309
Galileo:
2056, 1619, 330, 525
Hopper:
2826, 987, 33, 3683
Newton:
118, 1678, 1756, 3130
Tesla:
2481, 2122, 3824, 1806

Not to be biased, but I think Curie would win.

[CaityDawh]

Originally Posted by Kevin Leonard

He literally listed the 4 best teams in each division and asked which would win if they had to face off. No where did he say those were anywhere near realistic.

And he didn't list all the divisions. What?

I had them all typed out but apparently they were lost... I'm going to edit that.

[CaptainKirby]

Originally Posted by CaityDawh

I am very well aware that this will never happen. But just out of curiosity how do you all think the divisions would do in Einstein if the top 4 teams from each division was in an alliance. I am basing the top 4 teams off of OPR. OPR isn't the most accurate when it combines multiple events, but still is accurate enough that I am using it.


Carver:
368, 1986, 2852, 1768
Curie:
1114, 148, 4143, 3309
Galileo:
2056, 1619, 330, 525
Hopper:
2826, 987, 33, 3683
Newton:
118, 1678, 1756, 3130
Tesla:
2481, 2122, 3824, 1806

We would have an amazing set of quarterfinal rounds, where five teams would be eliminated instead of the usual 4. In the slot left open the Woodie Flowers, Dean Kamen and Donald Bossi alliance would enter and sweep through to win the whole thing.

But on a more serious note, most of teams would be much less effective than they look. Even if they manage to get all the bins off the step, most have the capacity to stack more than seven 6 stacks. We would have probably one of the least exciting einsteins ever because they would finish stacking way before the time is up (except for when Dean Kamen lobs a game winning noodle into an unfinished six stack).

[cjl2625]

Originally Posted by Kevin Leonard

And I guarantee 1114 has a fast canburglar by now.
So there's that.

http://www.simbotics.org/files/photo...ssex2015_0.jpg
From 1114's website, it looks like they had a cool canburglar from windsor essex. I can't find any video though.

Originally Posted by Greg Needel

Assuming your team can use all the cans look at the point potentials

step cans         Points (all 42 point stacks)
0	              126
1	              168
2	              210
3	              252
4	              294

0 step cans means 126 points?
In QF8 at NECMP, our canburglars missed, so all four went to the other side.
With 0 step cans, we (1519-195-2067) scored 214 points.