2011 Championship Alliances

I figured some people may want to see all of the alliances in one place, so here you are:

what are your predictions?? :slight_smile:

my predictions:

1718 1918 and 2512

1717 67 2751

254 111 973

148 234 2481


I predict Galileo is going to be one heck of a place to be for eliminations. Newton should be great to watch too. I’m surprised about some of the captains and how low they are!

Archimedes: 1477/33/191 (5th seed)
Curie: 1717/67/2751 (2nd seed)

Newton: 217/1503/25 (7th seed)
Galileo: 254/111/973 (2nd seed)

Finals: 1717/67/2751 vs 254/111/973

World Champs: 1717/67/2751

Curie Curse is lifted!!!

Archimedes 2016/177/781 (because 177 has made Einstein every year since 2005)

Curie 1717/67/2751 (really, HOT and 1717, no explication needed)

Galileo 254/111/973 ( I think that 1114 will give them a run for their money, but 254 is better than 1771)

Newton 148/234/2481 (We got dominated by 234 at BMR, and 148 has been doing well all season so they seem like a shoo-in)

final 1717’s alliance vs 254’s alliance with 254 winning

148 and 234 falls to one of the biggest upsets I’ve ever seen. Congratulations 11, 1730, 2122. All solid teams who finally had a chance to shine.

I am working on a take home final due @ 5:00 PM today and keeping an eye on scores and it appears that a lot of the division quarter final matches are very close games. This would seem to validate that the game design folks created scoring options that didn’t have a choke hold strategy as well as provided a greater number of teams the ability to design and build effective scroing machines:cool:

why did 2337 choose 578 who only won 3 matchs

From watching 548, The Robostangs at Michigan State Championship, they had a fast minibot and solid arm. After all they were on the alliance that beated the Thunder Chickens, the Las Guerillas, and The Feds.

Qualification schedule matches have to work in your favor really to have a decent rank at times.

In 2009 BOB was first pick by 2nd seed of 1918 when our record was 3-4.

This year really showed how rankings does not determine who was the best. Simbotics, 1114, wasn’t even in the top 8 after being 1 seed every regional competition and winning all of them.


I don’t care if someone wins all their matches or none of their matches. If there is something that they do well, and that complements my team’s strategy, if they’re around when my team is picking, they won’t be around much longer. If there’s a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none robot around that does everything but does not do it well, they’re probably going to be available a while longer.

Rankings are kind of tough anyway–the “algorithm of death” a few years back proved that by putting teams against each other multiple times (and I do mean multiple–sometimes as many as half of their matches were against each other). Teams that pick solely based on rankings are at a distinct disadvantage against teams that pick based on strategy and team ability. And sometimes, a team thinks another team will be a good strategy fit, but the other team is looking for something completely different.

Thanks, Chris! After a difficult match schedule and a field issue because our driver station was logged in as both developer and driver, we ended up 5-5.

That being said, Team 11 is so thankful to 1730’s great scouting for this year’s CRAZY alliance selection to put together a group of robots that meshed so well! There’s not a more exciting feeling than putting up the highest score in the Newton Elims against teams I’ve idolized since I started FIRST.

Props to 217/1503 for besting us in the SFs, your teams are amazing and we couldn’t have lost to better robots than yours!

rankings don’t mean anything, we picked the 35th (2122) and the 37th (11). and i think we proved that it’s not about which robot’s the best, it’s about who works well as a team. the guys at 2122 were awesome. people talk about sleepers, and they were it. myself and a few others were waiting to get on the practice field while 2122 was practicing. they were hanging like mad and we brought it up to our scouts’ attention. i however had not seen 11 until we competed with them. they were also great and had the same shirts as us :slight_smile:

with all of our regional/national history it seems unfair that we had to play against cyber blue (234). getting our first regional win at boilermaker, and then seeing you again last year there and in kc, along with always being in your devision in nationals has always been nice. playing with you last year on an alliance in division finals was awesome. i was nervous myself that we were playing you guys and our idols at 148. i was with those who thought we were the underdogs and would never make it as far as we did. i couldn’t take my eyes off of 148’s robot when we played our one match together, that thing was one solid piece of engineering. it’s one thing to look at it online, but seeing it in person was even better.

i would also like to thank Paul Copioli for his dedication to a fair competition, any mentor who extends an offer to help an opponent robot get fixed on a timeout should be recognized. that is the true spirit of gracious professionalism. after that outreach to help, losing to your alliance was ok in my book.

Absolutely. Our picks were based off of our data and our empirical evaluations of teams at our scouting meeting. 548 had an auton that had succeeded 100% of their matches during qualifications, and had a good minibot, as well as a good roller claw to deliver tubes to us. They also had a track record, this year, of really coming to play after not-always-spectacular qualifications showings. Unfortunately, the unthinkable happened: That 100% autonomous failed twice in a row. In the grand scheme of things, even success in their autonomous would not have won the second match of the quarterfinals for us, but the first match could have been won with the extra ubertube.

A bit of a tangent: Strategy dictates EVERYTHING on our team. Strategy runs the team, from robot design to match play. That is our team’s mantra. The way that we performed at Championship, at Troy, at Ann Arbor, and at Kettering was due to our strategy. And you’re absolutely right: we make our picks based not solely off of data, but also based on what parts of the robot are strong. We’ve said at every competition this year that we want our third pick to be “Our Juggernauts,” (For those of you who don’t know, Team 1 was almost at the very bottom of the rankings at Kettering in Week One, got picked by the 1 alliance captained by the Killer Bees, and then were so fantastic at “throwing” tubes into the Bees’/TORCs’ scoring zone that they might have decided the competition). It doesn’t matter about how many points you score in a match, what your seed is, or anything like that: what matters to us is what a robot’s capabilities are and whether or not they will complement our strategy.

I can say with great confidence that winning Troy and Ann Arbor was the direct result of our strategy. Unfortunately, we got slightly unlucky at Championship, but I feel slightly less bad about being eliminated in the quarterfinals considering we were in a division that yielded the World Champions.

There is no question that 254 was better than 1771. In fact, there were several teams that were better. 1771 enjoyed a favorable match schedule where we really should have gone undefeated. (we forgot to turn on the minibot in the first match and were quite rusty since our drivers had not touched the controls for 6 weeks prior to our first match). 254, 111 and 1114 were all awesome, but with 111 and 1114 both outside the top 8 we could do nothing to break up an eventual killer alliance that we felt would probably end up going all the way (as they did). We chose 1114 because we felt they would give us the best chance to succeed. We didn’t play as well as we could have during the elims, and we had some minibot issues. I know that 1114 was disapointed with the outcome, as were we. Congratulations to 254, 111, and 973, as well as a big thank you to 1114 and 294 for doing their best.

I also have to give props to my kids. Our driver was a senior, driving for the second year, and our manipulator was a junior in his first year as drive team member. They did an outstanding job under difficult circumstances. Those two, plus one more student and two college mentors were almost the whole team. There were three other kids (all freshmen) involved in the build and championship travel team, and they had a total robot budget of about $3,000. To accomplish what they did with what they had was nothing short of amazing. Austin, Matt, Emily, Prerak, Ashay and Erika, you guys are awesome.

edit: Oh yeah, and to the team that made a point to run over and tell us that if picked, you would decline: thanks, but you were never on our list.

*548. Also our schedule was unbelievably difficult this year with a matches against 254, 469, 1114, 399, 1771, ect. Also as a side note we had the highest ranking score in all four divisions (according to a few members on our team) with more then 73 points. Thanks again to 2337 for selecting us and 70 for accepting to make an all Michigan alliance!

I heard about this from the students on MORT, definitely such a classy show of professionalism from one of the best mentors in FRC. It was good to hear this from one of them, “I have a LOT of respect for Paul from 217.”

Either that or they designed a game with tremendous diminishing returns on the tube rack. If your alliance could score 12 tubes and your opponent could only score 6, you got 96 points while your opponent got 72 (assuming 3 top row ubertubes). If you could score all 18, you got 108 points. That’s a 33% higher score for 2x the number of tubes and a 50% higher score for 3x more tubes. That’s the main reason for the close scores, not because the alliances were more evenly matched than in past years.

Luck sure did play into our win this year. At the beginning of matches on Saturday, we had a chance to be anywhere between 1st and 10th seed depending on how a few key matches went. If we won and a few teams lost or had low RP matches, we would be 1st. If we lost and a few other teams won and had high RP matches, we would be 10th or maybe even lower. We ended up losing our match (partly because one of the motor leads snapped off on our minibot) and finishing 0.40 points out of 8th place. Another possibly lucky break for us is that 1771 finished 1st and chose 1114. If 254 was 1st they may have chosen 1114 instead of us and they certainly would have plowed through the divisional bracket regardless of the other alliance pairings.

As a side note, this scenario reminds me of 2001 when we were less than a ranking point away from being 8th seed and getting auto-paired with the 4th seed for eliminations. Being 9th allowed us to get selected by 33 & 254 where we won Archimedes and were runners-up on Einstein.

Newton alliance selection surprised me. 148 was not selected by the #1 seed? Was I the only one watching and scratching my head the entire time? Were people making mistakes this far in the competition or was it just very very strategic super secret mind boggling strategy that I can not understand?

I’m happy to see 2122 get some attention here. They have rapidly become a very competitive team and are committed to finding the resources they need to get better each year. This season’s robot is as good as the usual suspects that get so much love around here, I’d argue, and I’m thrilled they got the chance to demonstrate that.