FRC Top 25- Post-Build Ranking

[s_forbes]

Originally Posted by gorrilla

.....i would argue that new teams would stand a better chance of adapting to this game?

I've seen this argument several times so far this year, and it bugs me every time I read it. The teams that consistently do better do so because they are able to figure out how games will play out and dedicate a lot of time to building their robots/practicing. They are not just experienced at driving on carpet, they are experienced at coming up with clever solutions.

[Sunbun]

Disagreements, disappointments, and misinterpretations aside, will Looking Forward be making a reappearance this year?

[vivek16]

Originally Posted by Sunbun

Disagreements, disappointments, and misinterpretations aside, will Looking Forward be making a reappearance this year?

If he does, I'm certainly looking forward to it.

I also agree that an accurate ranking can't really be done already. Although the teams on that list are all great in their own right, we just don't know yet.

-Vivek

[Herodotus]

So far I've seen alot of good designs cropping up here on CD, and you can't forget the hundreds of other teams that havn't shared anything yet. I think this will be a year of surprises and black horses, and I wouldn't see the legitimacy of any ranking of the robots until the end of the season.

[EricH]

Folks, if you don't like that only 7 people submit lists, PM Josh and ask to be included. This includes you, Tom, unless you were indeed tongue-in-cheek (and didn't submit one).

gorrilla, the rookies don't know (or didn't) the system. Vets did. There are exceptions (notably 2775--Greg, I hope you submit a full list next round--and 2753), but the vets have: past experience, a look at the control system long before any rookies (talks started last year), and the knowledge of a successful building method. Rookies have to draw on the experience of local veteran teams.

For the record, I had a list ready before it was requested, based on the released videos and the "complaints" last time. No rookies this time, though I was tempted.

[gorrilla]

Originally Posted by EricH

gorrilla, the rookies don't know (or didn't) the system. Vets did. There are exceptions (notably 2775--Greg, I hope you submit a full list next round--and 2753), but the vets have: past experience, a look at the control system long before any rookies (talks started last year), and the knowledge of a successful building method. Rookies have to draw on the experience of local veteran teams.

For the record, I had a list ready before it was requested, based on the released videos and the "complaints" last time. No rookies this time, though I was tempted.

Eric:I just dont think rookies get the credit they deserve, I mean, I saw(and still see) lots or great looking rookie teams out there,

experience in good building and engineering practices definitaly helps, but as far as actually playing the game, this year, I think everyone really does have just as good a chance as anyone else

you could have a great robot, but if you cant play the game you wont get that far(i think everyone saw this 2005 and 2008)...

[Akash Rastogi]

Originally Posted by gorrilla

Eric:I just dont think rookies get the credit they deserve, I mean, I saw(and still see) lots or great looking rookie teams out there

As one of the voters, I encourage whoever wants to join to do so. Eric pointed out 2 of the 3 rookies I'm watching out for. 2775 and 2753. 2753 is mentored by 303, 11, has influence from many successful veteran teams and is indeed the 08 FTC world champion team. We were all tempted to include them but as much as a team can deserve to be on a list they just didn't belong there with those veteran teams. Hope nobody gets all touchy from these "rankings." Tis all fun'n games. Good luck to all for this coming weekend.

[EricH]

There's "great looking" and "great performing". While they are not mutually exclusive, particularly since the former tends to follow the latter, great looking != great performing. One of the most convincing performances of a rookie was by the last pick in Arizona 2006. Their robot looked like a nightmare, to be quite honest. They won the event. Really good looking robots don't always do well either. You can't go by looks when evaluating a team. If you think differently, you have a lot to learn.

Rookies aren't showing up because we don't know much about them. I bet that by the end of the season, some will be making a run at the list.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by gorrilla

Eric:I just dont think rookies get the credit they deserve, I mean, I saw(and still see) lots or great looking rookie teams out there,

Of course--they haven't had an opportunity to build a recognizable brand. If you had to buy a plane ticket, right now, to see a regional where Simbotics was competing or a regional where Los Pollos Locos was competing, where would you be flying? Why? If I weren't affiliated with the latter, I'd probably be flying to Chicago to see the team with three or four years of dominant robots.

experience in good building and engineering practices definitaly helps, but as far as actually playing the game, this year, I think everyone really does have just as good a chance as anyone else

No, they don't. Experience helps, but then how do you explain five-year teams that have worse-looking robots than rookies? There will always be teams that show up at these events that don't have a prayer, veterans and rookies alike.

[Kyle Love]

If people aren't happy that they aren't on the list, then go out and make your robot known as being "one of the best of the best". If your mad about the top 25 thing then disregard it and keep reading all the other threads on the site. If your in the top 25, it doesn't mean a darn thing, there's no prize for being in it.

Just my $0.02

[AlexD744]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

I'm not sure how you can rank without seeing some of these robots, never mind how the game will play out..

I for one think scoring moon rocks will be disadvantageous, and 1114 will be nothing more than a glorified paper weight this season.

I don't understand how scoring points can be DISadvantageous. With 120 moon rocks on the feild, if 90 of them get scored, that is 180 points that could sway either way. And with 8 super cells if only 5-6 (apx. the same ratio) getting scored, could be 75-80 points on either side. I beleive the super cells are important for obvious reasons, however it's also obvious that the moon rocks are just as, if not, more advantageous. I beleive 1114 proved last year that if you can hurdle 7 times(akin to scoring apx. 30 moon rocks) placing (akin to scoring super cells) is not as important, even though it is still important.

just my $0.02

[AlexD744]

Originally Posted by Kyle Love

If people aren't happy that they aren't on the list, then go out and make your robot known as being "one of the best of the best". If your mad about the top 25 thing then disregard it and keep reading all the other threads on the site. If your in the top 25, it doesn't mean a darn thing, there's no prize for being in it.

Just my $0.02

definately didn't see him say "just my $0.02" before I posted. I guess great minds think alike.

[thefro526]

I didn't vote.

But this list is solid. Everyone on that list has proven themselves in their consistency over the last few years. You really don't even need to see pictures or videos to make that list. I think it's fun.

[Tottanka]

i happen to be one of the voters...

And i would like, once again, to remind everyone that this is just a game.

Beeing asked to rate teams fropm all around the globe is no easy task. There is no chance for me to consider teams that are quite new and have no videos or pictures of their design here.

I have top ranked 71, without even seeing their design. This is a team i know will perform greatly year after year, and i know that without seeing their robot.

Besides - if you guys haven't seen pictures or videos of some robots in this video, it doesn't mean that the voters haven't. Look at Looking Forward's predictions, he has some info on robots that i personally don't have, and maybe some of the voters have that information or more.

And again, if you do not agree with those rankings you are more than welcome to post them here, or even better try joining the voters, i'm not sure how they are picked but you might easily be one of them.

We would all be very excited to see all of those 25 teams that are here now beeing in the top 25 when the season is over, but we all know that won't happen and that is exactly why we all like FIRST and any other kind of sports - the unknown guranteed to happen at many of the regiponals, in many of the games. If this prediction would have been entirely correct there would be no reason to attend or watch any regional, but you still are going to do it, and you still are going to be excited to see the first match that any of those 25 teams participate in during the wekk one regionals.

So please, if you have any complaints about this list and it's organizer and voters you may either post here your own opinion, or just completely ignore the whole thread. This is not something we say you must follow, this is no rule and no solid state of teams - it's just a prediction, motivated by intuition, knowladge and scouting done by each voter.

[Dan Petrovic]

The AP polls work because the game doesn't change from year to year and only a few members from each team change. Also, writers can evaluate recruits and make judgements based on that. So, ranks can be established at the start of the season.

They work because each team has at least one game every week (depending on the sport). There are teams who only go to one regional.

I liked the idea at first, but after thinking about it, it doesn't seem feasible for the reasons I've listed above.