Best Robots by Age

[EricH]

1992: 191 (2x CCA)
1994:
1995:
1996: 111 (CCA, 2x Champions, etc) by a nose over 71 (no CCA)
1997: 67(CCA, plus above...)
1998:
1999: 254 (CCA, plus above...)
2000:
2001:
2002:
2003: 1114 (RCAs every year, plus above)
2004:
2005:
2006: 1717 (regional EI and similar things of that nature)
2007:
2008:
2009:
2010: We don't know yet.

[gorrilla]

1251 is a very good team for 2004, they have won at UCF 3x in the past 4 years, and they always have a very competitive robot.

Although IMHO, they did not have as good of a robot this year as they have in past years, It was still undoubtably a great robot, but not what i was expecting.

But obviously their alliance(1251,86,1612) worked out better than ours
(1557, 79, 801)

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by EricH

1992: 191 (2x CCA)

2006: 1717 (regional EI and similar things of that nature)

I would like to nominate 1714. Rookie All-Star, Rookie inspiration at the Championship, Engineering inspiration and 2 RCAs, among other awards.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by TheFish

1999: 254 is still above 217 because of their long history of success (although if 217 continues their Champs performances this year that could very well change.
1992: Still close between: 148, 45, 190... but 148 has had more recent success so they go in the #1 spot.

This is really inconsistent logic here.

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

I would like to nominate 1714. Rookie All-Star, Rookie inspiration at the Championship, Engineering inspiration and 2 RCAs, among other awards.

1714 has more trophies than any team whose rookie year was 2006 (I needed an ego boost one day last year), two RCAs, two EIs, on top of now 2 regional wins. I think they're legit.

1902 is certainly worth mention, behind by only one CA, one EI, and one win, but they're in a stronger region and they have a division win.

[dodar]

actually 1902 has 2 regional wins (CT 2009 and NC 2010)

and i would also like to say that in the program race for best team per year, i Think Pink should be on that list

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by dodar

actually 1902 has 2 regional wins (CT 2009 and NC 2010)

and i would also like to say that in the program race for best team per year, i Think Pink should be on that list

Oh, I didn't catch that they won North Carolina. They're nearly tied then.

[TheFish]

Hey, so sorry for the confusion (and for the people who just posted in the last 30 minutes) but to keep things more simple I started a new thread for this new topic of discussion.

Unfortunately because I am a "relatively new user"... the new thread might not show up for a few hours, so I can't link to it yet.

For those of you who are dying to talk about the programs feel free to do so here, otherwise wait until the new discussion pops up.

Thanks,
TheFish

[Arefin Bari]

Originally Posted by dodar

actually 1902 has 2 regional wins (CT 2009 and NC 2010)

and i would also like to say that in the program race for best team per year, i Think Pink should be on that list

Team 1902 has also been on Einstein (I would want to say that was in 2007); please correct me if I am wrong.

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

Oh, I didn't catch that they won North Carolina. They're nearly tied then.

nearly tied? 1902 is clearly creating more dominate robots on a yearly basis.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

nearly tied? 1902 is clearly creating more dominate robots on a yearly basis.

I think we are comparing 1902 and 1714 on their entire programs so awards are also factored in. I would agree that 1902 has traditionally built better robots, but they cannot match 1714's 2 RCA and other awards.

[Laaba 80]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

nearly tied? 1902 is clearly creating more dominate robots on a yearly basis.

please explain your logic. Yes they had better robots in our first years, but we have had much more success in the past two years.

Im not trying to say we are better than 1902 overall, however to say they create more dominate robots on a yearly basis is not true.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

nearly tied? 1902 is clearly creating more dominate robots on a yearly basis.

I was referring to the "program". 1902 obviously has 1714 beat, hands down, on robot performance. I am not without bias for my old team though in either department.

1902's 2009 robot was directly comparable to 1714's 2009 effort in terms of quality IMHO, as are the robots this year. Slight edge to 1902 this year, last year, I dunno.
08 is no contest 1902, as is 07, and probably 06.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by Laaba 80

please explain your logic. Yes they had better robots in our first years, but we have had much more success in the past two years.

Robot wise, I'm not sure about that (atleast when going by the numbers). Both teams have 2 regional wins. 1714 has made eliminations at 3/4 regionals and is 0/1 in Atlanta. 1902 is 4/4 at regionals and 1/1 in Atlanta. 1902 was probably gone to tougher regionals, but won Connecticut as 3rd robot compared to 1714's back to back wins as top seed in a 'young' Minnesota Regional.

Overall 1714 is 7/10 in regionals and 1/3 in Atlanta. 1902 is 10/10 in regionals and 3/4 in Atlanta.

But, I think 1714 has just as big an advantage on the non-technical awards.

[Laaba 80]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

Robot wise, I'm not sure about that (atleast when going by the numbers). Both teams have 2 regional wins. 1714 has made eliminations at 3/4 regionals and is 0/1 in Atlanta. 1902 is 4/4 at regionals and 1/1 in Atlanta. 1902 was probably gone to tougher regionals, but won Connecticut as 3rd robot compared to 1714's back to back wins as top seed in a 'young' Minnesota Regional.

If you go by record 1902 is 40-35 and 1714 is 49-18.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by Laaba 80

If you go by record 1902 is 40-35 and 1714 is 49-18.

Fair enough. Especially for Atlanta, judging based on getting selected may not be the best because someone could have a better robot but may not fit what the alliance captians is looking for. Plus, we know 1902 will never be overlooked come alliance selection time.