Sacrificing a State Championship for the Cause???

[Dancin103]

Originally Posted by Rich Kressly

Give yourself the best chance to win at the event you're at by picking the best possible alliance partners available - always. Teams work too hard and there is never a guarantee you'll ever be in that position again.

As a third party observer, however, yeah Joe, I'd like to see a pairing that could give em a run.

I agree with you, to every extent. That's exactly what I was thinking.

Cass

[WJF2011]

I think another state who is starting to rise in FRC domination would be Texas, they are not really on the same level as MI yet, but maybe soon...?

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by WJF2011

I think another state who is starting to rise in FRC domination would be Texas, they are not really on the same level as MI yet, but maybe soon...?

I respectfully disagree. Michigan has MANY great teams and no other state comes even close, especially this season. I would rank California as the next best (in terms of #s).

[Basel A]

California may have the next largest number of teams, but they also have more teams than Michigan. In that way, they may not be the second highest 'robot-quality per team' state. Also, with Michigan averaging 3 teams in the Einstein Finals since 2004, I don't think any other state or country (besides the US [duh]) really comes all too close. Of course, there's many ways to judge quality (i.e. Michigan, New York, and Ohio each have 2 CCAs), but in most respects there's little to no match.

[The Lucas]

Originally Posted by Basel A

California may have the next largest number of teams, but they also have more teams than Michigan. In that way, they may not be the second highest 'robot-quality per team' state. Also, with Michigan averaging 3 teams in the Einstein Finals since 2004, I don't think any other state or country (besides the US [duh]) really comes all too close. Of course, there's many ways to judge quality (i.e. Michigan, New York, and Ohio each have 2 CCAs), but in most respects there's little to no match.

Just to clarify, California has more teams:
CA: 153 teams
MI: 140 teams
Even though it is hard to find on FIRST's Redesigned site the team/event map is still there

You are correct that quantity does not equal quality. MI is definitely the top state and it is not even close. Really you need to compare MI to regions. Is MI better than the rest of the Midwest? Now that is a tougher question. Where do New England, Mid Atlantic, South East, South West, West, Canada and other counties fit in? It is really all a matter of opinion.

Now as for the comparison to CMP. I believe that independent of divisions the top 96 (24*4) elim bots at CMP are on average better than the top 24 at MSC. This should make for better eliminations as the top tiers are deeper. Now throw in divisions and depending on the luck of the draw there pretty much will be at least 1 division that the the top 24 can be weaker than MSC. Divisions may also break pairings of outstanding individual teams (ie if you truly believe that 1918 & 469 or 67 & 217 is the best possible pairing it may not be possible at CMP but if it is can they can probably get a more accomplished 3rd bot).

Now where MSC is far ahead of CMP is in the qualification rounds. The middle and lower tiers are higher quality bots at MSC. All of the 65 teams at MSC qualified based primarily on their robot performance in 2 district events. At CMP a max of 141 (3 * 43 regionals + 12 FIM) of ~ 348 teams qualified based their robot performance at a regional this year. The rest can get in based on awards, open registration, HOF, etc... which doesnt necessarily indicate robot performance. It is even less than 141 robot performance qualifiers because teams win multiple regionals. There is no way (points system) for teams to qualify on robot performance without winning a regional, leaving strong double finalists like 987 out. A good # of the teams at CMP dont have elim experience this year. This dilutes the talent in any given qualifier. The amazing qualifier matchups like at MSC will fewer and farther between at CMP. Also it seems the MI teams used good qualifier strategy, which lead to higher scoring, more exciting matches. Hopefully, a higher percentage of teams at CMP will employ good qual strategy than at some regionals.

Fortunately, the new seeding system (post TU16 I think it is doing a great job of ranking the top bots high) and atleast one more match per team should result in much better CMP seeding than usual. In previous years, a surprise #1 in at least 1 division has been the norm. I'm definitely looking forward to CMP elims. Of course as usual the CMP & MSC competitive levels will be trumped by IRI

[Basel A]

Just to clarify, California has more teams:

That's what I intended to say, I promise. I was having a durrr moment.

I believe that independent of divisions the top 96 (24*4) elim bots at CMP are on average better than the top 24 at MSC.

When making an argument, you must have a solid point, then use the assumption of that point to make your next point. The above is not a solid point. Now, I can't claim it's one way or another, neither from data nor from experience, but just because you think it and have minimal evidence doesn't mean it's true.

Personally, in most years I would be unsure about comparative quality. However, this year I think Michigan is having an above average season. This year, I believe that MSC finals could match Einstein semifinals or even finals. Where else do you get an 18-18 tie, with one robot on each alliance playing defense?

[The Lucas]

Originally Posted by Basel A

When making an argument, you must have a solid point, then use the assumption of that point to make your next point. The above is not a solid point. Now, I can't claim it's one way or another, neither from data nor from experience, but just because you think it and have minimal evidence doesn't mean it's true.

Personally, in most years I would be unsure about comparative quality. However, this year I think Michigan is having an above average season.

I know its not a solid point just my opinion/prediction. We are all just sharing opinions thats why I qualify it as my belief (others are free to disagree). Often if you dont throw something like IMHO or I believe in then you get someone posting something like "you dont know that" which is true but is moot because no one really knows. Of course your response is much better reasoned and worded, but you also qualify all your statements with "personally", "I think" etc... which is not a solid point as you correctly pointed out. My opinions are based on observations from 2 regionals attended and watching multiple webcasted regionals at once on the other weeks including most of MSC and experience in FIRST that is humble compared to many on this forum.

So since we are both just sharing opinion lets compare. We both agree that MSC is better than any other regional by a good margin. We disagree about whether the MSC elim field is better than the CMP elim field which happens over a week from now in an ever evolving game. My opinion is that the CMP quals will not be as good as MSC because the elim level talent is spread out and I believe good high scoring qual mathces (combined score is a good metric) requires 6 quality bot and good qual strategy that is more prevalent in MI. However, I believe that all divisions will seed well so that most divisions will field a better elim group than MSC. It will still be basically a matter of opinion if the elim field is better because there is very few metric you can use to compare. Combined score is not a very good metric because different effective strategies can produce varying scores, however tracking MI robot performance might be good.

Everything is opinion because we cant produce any good stats to compare regionals. We have combined scores and OPR but those are regional specific and hard to normalise. The graph of regionals is probably not interconnected enough (particularly with MI teams playing at very few outside events) to for a good Elo style rating system .

Originally Posted by Basel A

This year, I believe that MSC finals could match Einstein semifinals or even finals. Where else do you get an 18-18 tie, with one robot on each alliance playing defense?

As for the MSC finals they were epic and I dont know if Einstein will produce a series with that entertainment value of rubber match in final 4. However, MSC finals a poor example when discussing depth of an elim field, because that is more about the 4 top MSC robots (1918, 469, 67, & 217) with very good 3rd partners (2834 & 2612, I'm not going to set Jack up) that no other alliances could beat for in a single match (close but no upsets).

As for 18 - 18 with 1 robot per alliance playing defence that really depends on how you interpret defence. I didnt see any robots that were "only playing defence" (trust me I've seen that enough to know it when I see it) just 6 robots playing good strategic roles in that match. I saw 217 blocking 469's shots then shooting them at their blue goals to be scored. All 6 robots contributed significantly to their alliance score while also contributing in at different levels to the defensive effort. Bravo to all the teams, that is a great way to play the game.

[Rich Kressly]

Originally Posted by WJF2011

I think another state who is starting to rise in FRC domination would be Texas, they are not really on the same level as MI yet, but maybe soon...?

No disrespect intended, but not even close. TX team numbers are rising fast due to the infusion of some big funding. However, once you get past the top level teams in TX, you'll find many that are nowhere ready to be competitive with even the "average" MI team. For example, I believe in Houston there were a large number of teams not yet fully inspected (30+ I think, but someone can correct me if I'm wrong) on Friday AM at the event. Perhaps teams numbers and excitement are growing in TX, but many of these new teams are a long way from being long-term sustainable let alone competitive like we see in MI.

One thing I know for sure in TX - the "top level vets" are working their butts off to support all of the new FRC participants in their home state and I applaud their example ... and I pray, with more grant funding expanding things further next year, that the same amount of veteran teams there can continue to provide the level of FRC support the whole state will need.

[JaneYoung]

To add to what Rich is saying, I think it is important for teams to be able to compete to the best of their ability. Sometimes, that can mean playing against a deeper field of competent and robust drive teams/robots. Usually when the competition gets deeper/tougher, the teams can rise or be pulled up to the occasion. With Lone Star running so deep with teams who are still learning the basics in FRC and competition, they aren't well prepared as teams at this stage. If there were more "top level vets" that competed at Lone Star or were of the region, the process would advance quicker.

A few teams in Texas have learned the benefits of traveling outside the state to other competitions over the years. They have also learned the benefits of attending competitive off seasons. The majority of teams in Texas are still not at the point of considering a 2nd competition or traveling to other competitions, and off seasons aren't even a blip on the radar. Hopefully, teams will learn that if they want to deepen their competitive abilities, they will have to consider more options and take advantage of them. They will also have to deepen their knowledge in the technical and the non-technical aspects of running a competitive team.

I also think the competitions, themselves, need to stay sharp and stay abreast of what it takes to run a top notch and professional event. Each year brings change and opportunity, not only to teams but to events and to the program, itself.

[Wayne TenBrink]

Wow. I can't believe I missed this thread.

Regarding the original question, we were fortunate enough to be in that position. We had heard rumors that 67 & 217 were going to pair up - passing up on 469. I was never convinced. We were advised by several people that we should pick 67 and then 217 in the hope that they would turn us down, just to break them up. That wasn't our style. Last year we lost to 67 & 217 in the finals and we wanted a rematch. A chance like this doesn't come around every day, and we were wise enough to take it.

When it looked like we would seed #1 we started talking to 469, and our scouts got together to compare notes. Having 469 as a partner completely changed what we were looking for in a third partner. While most teams were looking for defense, 1918 was going to play center zone support and we needed a front zone striker. That is probably why 2834 was still around.

We were struggling with overheated motors by the time we got to the finals and we really struggled to feed many balls into the loop. Our driver ran a good balance between trying to move balls and trying to slow 67 down. 2612 made every move a lot of work for us.

469 is a great team with a great robot. I have a lot of respect for them on and off the field. We never got to play against them in quals. Perhaps we will in Atlanta. I think they can be stopped by the proper combination of robots and a bit of luck. Who knows. Just like they do a lot better with proper help, it will take an alliance to stop them - not any single, great robot.

Regarding the depth & quality of teams in MI compared to other areas in the country, I think the truth is somewhere in the middle. There is definitely a large core of great teams here that improves the quality of every other team that comes into contact with them. However, the FIM format helps us out a lot. If you look at how seeding scores improved week to week at the district events, it is apparent that the same teams finished the season a lot better than they started it. That pattern ought to repeat anywhere the teams get a real chance to develop their skills. For this year, however, I think the rest of the country will be in a world of hurt in Atlanta (with notable exceptions, of course). We'll see in a week.

[Ed Law]

Originally Posted by Wayne TenBrink

When it looked like we would seed #1 we started talking to 469, and our scouts got together to compare notes. Having 469 as a partner completely changed what we were looking for in a third partner. While most teams were looking for defense, 1918 was going to play center zone support and we needed a front zone striker. That is probably why 2834 was still around.

What I am going to say deviates from the original post but I wanted to reply to something Wayne said. I want to explain why we designed our robot that way.

Some time in Week 2 or 3, after some discussions with Jim Zondag from Team 33 who mentors us, I came to the conclusion that the great teams will want to play midfield or start in far zone to kick the 3 balls and move to midfield. My predictions were correct. This is similar to real soccer where if you dominate the midfield, you will most likely win.

My philosophy for our young team at this point is to design a robot to be the best supporting robot and not try to do everything. We wanted to help our alliance partners win matches. This worked really well last year when we concentrated on delivering empty cells. We were able to make a difference in many matches and helped our alliance partners win. It worked so well that we were alliance captain #8 at the State Championship. However we realized that we were lacking a critical component which is to collect balls so we put it in with Team 33's help during offseason before going to MARC.

This year, in order to try to get picked in the elimination round, I decided to design a robot to play striker in the near zone to support the good robots playing midfield. I designed the kicking angle to kick low and not try to clear a long distance. I put in soft kick for very near shots and regular kick for further out. We concentrated on ball control to quickly acquire balls. We also realized early on that there is no shame in pushing balls in when you can push 2 or 3 at a time at close to 100% accuracy. That is why we can score 8 balls a match. Our robot can actually go to midfield and score from there. We did that quite a few times when our partners were not able to feed us balls. Most teams probably didn't know this about us unless they have very detail match scouting data.

During alliance selection, we were passed up by all the teams, partly because we were ranked very low and partly because they were looking for defensive robots. Throughout district events and qualifying at States, we never played defense in the far zone so teams could not tell what we can do. When the alliance selection got down to #15 pick and Team 67 and 217 picked 2612, I thought we should just pack up. I thought I made the wrong decision to design the robot to play near zone. Fortunately the combination of 1918 and 469 needed a near zone striker and we were the best robot other than 910 (from scouting statistics) for that role.

We did contribute to the alliance. I posted the videos on vimeo and you can count how many balls we cleaned up including the winning shot in match 4 of the finals as time expires. Despite one team calling us nothing more than a pushing cart, we can actually shoot from far away if we need to.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Ed Law

We did contribute to the alliance. I posted the videos on vimeo and you can count how many balls we cleaned up including the winning shot in match 4 of the finals as time expires. Despite one team calling us nothing more than a pushing cart, we can actually shoot from far away if we need to.

After watching videos of your matches, you certainly did contribute. Pushing cart or not, the bottom line is you scored enough to get a blue banner!
Teams that focus on striking will definitely get picked in ATL.

If an all-around robot is an alliance captain, I'd predict that they take the best all-around bot with their first pick followed by a pure striker in the 2nd round. I highly doubt you'll find 3 excellent all-around bots on one alliance, even at CMP, and the fact that its not imperative to have one.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Wayne TenBrink

Wow. I can't believe I missed this thread.

Regarding the original question, we were fortunate enough to be in that position. We had heard rumors that 67 & 217 were going to pair up - passing up on 469. I was never convinced. We were advised by several people that we should pick 67 and then 217 in the hope that they would turn us down, just to break them up. That wasn't our style. Last year we lost to 67 & 217 in the finals and we wanted a rematch. A chance like this doesn't come around every day, and we were wise enough to take it.

When it looked like we would seed #1 we started talking to 469, and our scouts got together to compare notes. Having 469 as a partner completely changed what we were looking for in a third partner. While most teams were looking for defense, 1918 was going to play center zone support and we needed a front zone striker. That is probably why 2834 was still around.

This post made my day. If I were in your shoes, I would have done the exact same thing.
We were #1 twice this season. When it came down to making the 1st choice, it was about taking the best robot that complemented our style of play as striker. And never about weakening the other alliance.
Congrats on the win! Its not everyday a 67/217 alliance gets beat.

[JackG]

Originally Posted by Joe Johnson

Here is my question for you. As has been discussed elsewhere on these fori and in many many FIRST circles around the country since the Cass Tech District competition, 469 is the real deal. They have come as close to a lock on the Championship as any team has ever come.

So... ...suppose you are at a pre-Championship competition with them. Suppose you have been battling with them for #1 seed. Suppose you edge them out. Do you pick them and be virtually assured of another trophy (all be it, not FIRST's Grand Championship in Atlanta) OR do you pick another offensive powerhouse and a team to be named later in an attempt to find out PRIOR to the Championships if ANYONE can beat them?

Tough choice, high stakes.

Would you give up a near certain Michigan State Championship (the win of a lifetime for many teams) in order to probe the limits of a team that you may face in Atlanta?

Think about it. Let's hear what you have to say...

Would anybody have considered (had they seeded first) not picking 1114 for Overdrive? Would anybody have considered picking somebody over 67 in Lunacy? I don't think so. Both of those teams were dominating in their respective years, and everybody was focusing on how to beat them. Eventually, both of those teams ran into a wicked alliance and then we got to see just how tough they were. The same thing is going to happen with 469 this year. They will be put to the test, and we'll see what they're made of.

If your goal is simply to see if 469 is mortal, then the MSC is not the best place to do so. The level of opposition you can bring against them at MSC is simply not as great as what they'll face in Atlanta. If you could pass over them and bring the toughest opposition they'll face all year, it might be worth not picking them. But since that's not going to happen, it's certainly not worth the sacrifice. If you think that 469 is the best team available, it would be foolish not to pick them.

[kgzak]

469 is beatable and here is how I think someone can beat them: as you saw in MSC 217 blocked a lot of the 469's "shots." If 217 had a ball magnet and shooter on the side of the robot 469 would never be able to loop balls. they would just catch them and shoot them to their goals. The reason 469 wins is because they still have another robot in front picking up and scoring the balls that are blocked.