Best Robot of 2010

[CalTran]

I like 2337 for innovation in making a suspension able robot. There's no doubt 469 holds a place in this catagory too; we were paired with them in Atlanta once and they were beastly. One I like that wasn't 469 or 1114 would be team 1625. They were part of the 2nd seed alliance at Greater KC, and did one heck of a good job.

[3286]

Wow...we are getting almost like NASCAR here. While I won't discount anyones posts so far because some of this is very arguable and some is very supportable with statistics, the original question still begs of opinion to me. Cant wait to see the winning teams standing in the spotlight, swapping hats back and forth and saying something like " Well this time the Dewalt, Andymark, Crayola number 7 robot did pretty well but we got a realy good crew and Bubba did a great job today when the back end got loose in turn 4"

How many days till we start again...oh wait, a lot of us havent stopped from last time!!

Mikey

[maverickfan138]

Don't get me wrong, 469 had an outstanding robot, but I don't think they were the best. They had one flaw; they needed another great robot to fuel their fire. Yes, with a solid alliance, they could rack up points upwards of 25. How often did that happen? About six. I bet 469's robot, including offseason, was in close to 150 matches. On the other hand, there were a lot of matches with non redirecting robots where the scores were upwards of 20 points, especially at IRI. My point; if you put 469 in a one on one match verses one of those teams that Chris mentioned earlier, chances are that they will lose. I haven't seen 573 in this topic, yet we basically won a one on one(say that ten times fast) verse 469 at Troy. I'm not saying that we're better than them; the banners should speak for themselves, but they needed a decent second robot to give them their edge.

One of my favorite robots from this year and also one of the best was 33's. Honestly, I felt a little bad for them, since they lost in the finals at Kettering and Troy. At the state championship, they were semifinalists; the lowest they ever qualified in 2010. On Archimedes, they were on an alliance that 573 envied, yet they ended up finalists again. One of the things I noticed about their robot was that it looked very good, yet when you get a look at it up close, you'll notice minor details like pieces of sheet metal that wasn't cut straight or rivets that don't line up. You notice the evidence that students built the robot, and they were still one of the best. They had a decent kicker and a great hanger, not to mention the team itself. They were always spirited and you could tell that they had pride. All of this gave them a lot of respect in my book.

Another bot that I loved was 33's friends, 1718. They had a monster robot this year. Their kicker was excellent and they had the ability to vertically suspend and still thread the tunnel. Their drivetrain was also very impressive. They were able to push 469 over the bump at MARC, which was unbelievable(and pretty funny as well). 573 got to work with them during the mentor tournament at MARC(along with 1918), and it was a great experience. Just like 33, 1718 was spirited and proud of their robot and accomplishments.

[XaulZan11]

Originally Posted by maverickfan138

Yes, with a solid alliance, they could rack up points upwards of 25. How often did that happen? About six. I bet 469's robot, including offseason, was in close to 150 matches. On the other hand, there were a lot of matches with non redirecting robots where the scores were upwards of 20 points, especially at IRI.

Yes, there were many matches with over 20 points, but I don't think you will find a team that was apart of them as much as 469 was.

I think 469 was clearly the best team this with, leaving 67 and 1114 to battle for 2nd. I think a more interesting debate would be between 469 from 2010 and 1114 from 2008.

[dodar]

1114 from 2008 wins that debate. Which team was more dominant in their back-to-back championship wins: 67 or 71?

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by maverickfan138

Don't get me wrong, 469 had an outstanding robot, but I don't think they were the best. They had one flaw; they needed another great robot to fuel their fire. Yes, with a solid alliance, they could rack up points upwards of 25. How often did that happen? About six.

You're implying any other normal alliance ever got more than 25 points without 469. That happened once, maybe twice. It was not a normal occurrence. 469 had that happen 6 times.

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by dodar

1114 from 2008 wins that debate. Which team was more dominant in their back-to-back championship wins: 67 or 71?

71, but those were games more easily won by a single robot. And 67 got a little bit lucky this year.

1114 is 2008 was more of a game-breaker than 469 this year, imo. If only because of 469's field alignment requirement.

[Karthik]

Originally Posted by dodar

Which team was more dominant in their back-to-back championship wins: 67 or 71?

71.

Don't get me wrong, HOT was amazing in both their Championship runs in 2009 and 2010, but the dominance put forth by Beatty in 2001 and 2002 is something we'll probably never see again in FIRST. By far the most awe-inspiring two year stretch in FIRST history. I get excited just thinking about it.

[dodar]

I know that it is blasphemy to doubt or contradict karthek but I think that 67 has to be the most dominant 2 year span ever. Even though they are a little skewed for the fact that they get so many more matches because of the district system in MI, the fact that when they left that kind of system and still won over 90% of their matches is just mind-blowing.

One bad thing is that the only way that i know of 71's dominance of 2001 and 2002 is the 2 or 3 videos from Einstein in 2002, which is epic by the way, and those who tell stories of those glorious days.

[apalrd]

As for the best robot of 2010, I vote 1114 and 469. Either one was pure awesomeness.

469 has a habit of showing up on our match lists as our last qualification, against us. And we have lost every time we have gone against them (except once, when we tied).

We only went against 1114 at IRI. Ties to eternity. They are certainly the best normal robot that exists, followed by 67, who is very, very good.



As for 71 vs 67, I would have to say 71

in 2001, they did everything themselves, and did not need to rely on their partners. Edit: I've heard they were the only team that could beat us.

in 2002, they once again did everything themselves, controlling everything themselves and making sure that if they didn't win, it was because they made a mistake

[Basel A]

Like I sortof mentioned, 71 was given a greater chance to be dominant. Absolutely they took that opportunity, and made the best robot possible, and destroyed the competition, but at the same time, a similar chance to game-break hasn't been given since then.

Personally, I like including some sort of chance of game-breaking, but with 1800 teams and so many great innovators, we might end up with a few too many, and Einstein would just be a toss-up (or whoever has a better/faster auton... that might be good).

[XaulZan11]

In regard to the 71 vs 67 debate, I think it is hard for most of us (myself included) to really participate in the debate, because we weren't in FIRST back when 71 was dominate. I'm not going to say who I think was better (because I simply don't have enough knowledge to make a good decision), but if a gun was pointed at my head, I would listen to the people who witnessed both teams first hand, and go with 71.


(I guess this means I should stop my "Terry Bradshaw is the most overrated QB in NFL History" rant...but, come'on, a hall of fame player with 3 pro bowl trips and 2 more TDs than INTs?!)

[robodude03]

Originally Posted by XaulZan11

In regard to the 71 vs 67 debate, I think it is hard for most of us (myself included) to really participate in the debate, because we weren't in FIRST back when 71 was dominate. I'm not going to say who I think was better (because I simply don't have enough knowledge to make a good decision), but if a gun was pointed at my head, I would listen to the people who witnessed both teams first hand, and go with 71.


(I guess this means I should stop my "Terry Bradshaw is the most overrated QB in NFL History" rant...but, come'on, a hall of fame player with 3 pro bowl trips and 2 more TDs than INTs?!)

As someone who was there during the 71 years I would have to toss my vote over to them. Although 67 is and continues to be a top contender, the sheer feeling of excitement that I got from 71 vs. 60 in 2002 was amazing. I have to say though that I had some of that feeling of excitement return as I saw 67 climb after the buzzer in this year's finals

[Josh Fox]

The Beatty of 2001-2002 is the stuff of legends.


Which is definitely what the 2009,2010,...,? HOT has the potential to be as well.

Someday in the future anyway.

[dodar]

Ok so just to throw this in there, IF 67 were to make it a 3-peat, would they jump over 71 as the greatest team in FIRST?