Best Robots

Posted by Splash.

Student on team #53, Team Inferno, from Eleanor Roosevelt High School and NASA GSFC.

Posted on 6/6/2000 2:08 PM MST

How bout a poll for the best robots? My nominees:

Best Overall:

  1. 47 - Chief Delphi
  2. 67 - Hot Team
  3. 111 - Wildstang
  4. 173 - Rage
  5. 312 - Heatwave

Best Alliance Partner:

  1. 1 - Juggernauts
  2. 16 - Bomb Squad
  3. 25 - Bristol
  4. 121 - Rhode Warrior (my pick for most underrated)
  5. 293 - Hopewell

Best Defense

  1. 25 - Bristol
  2. 69 - HYPER
  3. 131 - Chaos
  4. 288 - RoboDawgs
  5. 308 - RoboStars

Best Offense

  1. 27 - OSMTech
  2. 67 - Hotbot
  3. 102 - Ortho
  4. 111 - Wildstang
  5. 122 - Nasa Knights

Posted by Lora Knepper.

Student on team #69, HYPER (Helping Youth Pursue Engineering & Robotics), from Quincy Public Schools and The Gillette Company.

Posted on 6/6/2000 5:49 PM MST

In Reply to: Best Robots posted by Splash on 6/6/2000 2:08 PM MST:

: Best Defense
: 1. 25 - Bristol
: 2. 69 - HYPER
: 3. 131 - Chaos
: 4. 288 - RoboDawgs
: 5. 308 - RoboStars

THE MONKEY BOTS!!! Wooohoooo! Thanks for including 69 in there!! :wink:

Lora

Posted by Patrick Seeney.

Student on team #469, Las Guerrillas, from Oakland Robotics and Lawrence Technological University and Magna Seating Systems, Nachi and Kuka Robotics.

Posted on 6/6/2000 8:16 PM MST

In Reply to: Best Robots posted by Splash on 6/6/2000 2:08 PM MST:

I don’t think you can really accurately say which robots are the best. SOme teams, like ourselves, get over looked by many teams. Us being one of the rookies, put us at an disadvantage. We prided our selves on being a defensive robot, and proved it every time by taking robots either off the ramp or sometimes off the pole, along with consistantly scoring around 16 points of our own, and finishing at grat lakes 15th, and at nationals 22nd. I guess it is how you look at things.

That is my two cents.
Pat

Posted by Erin.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Student on team #1, The Juggernauts, from Oakland Technical Center-Northeast Campus and 3-Dimensional Services.

Posted on 6/7/2000 7:58 AM MST

In Reply to: Re: Best Robots( can you really say that though?) posted by Patrick Seeney on 6/6/2000 8:16 PM MST:

Does anyone not agree with me when I say that where you end up in the nationals (when picked) is a pretty accurate description of how good your driver/human player/coaching/robot combination are? Some people try to convince me that they are not. However, how would they have gotten so far if they weren’t doing something right? My two cents.

-Erin

Posted by Patrick Seeney.

Student on team #469, Las Guerrillas, from Oakland Robotics and Lawrence Technological University and Magna Seating Systems, Nachi and Kuka Robotics.

Posted on 6/7/2000 8:42 AM MST

In Reply to: Re: Best Robots( can you really say that though?) posted by Erin on 6/7/2000 7:58 AM MST:

: Does anyone not agree with me when I say that where you end up in the nationals (when picked) is a pretty accurate description of how good your driver/human player/coaching/robot combination are? Some people try to convince me that they are not. However, how would they have gotten so far if they weren’t doing something right? My two cents.

So because our team wasn’t picked by one of the 16 alliances at nationals, however, we won every single match, finished 26th, teams that were ranked in the top 10, when we played them, we took them down and knocked them out of the top 16. Teams that had scouted us, when we played them, and beat them, knocking them out of the top teams simply because we were not going to throw a match. Winning against a great team with an aliance that could only bring balls back into the player station. You are saying just because we were not picked that say our team does not have the opportunity to be considered one of the better robots?
NOt to take anything away from the teams that were picked, they were great robots, picked for great (and sometimes for not so great reason as i found out when on stage at nationals.)Yes those teams that got picked wre picked for a reason, however even some of them didn’t get to show their potential. I remember watching a match at nationals, one of the quarter finals. The two alliances that went in to play were both human loaders, and were not quick bots, their alliance that was the third allliance, i believe it was teh robohamas, was the fastest of the 3, could get balls from the other side faster than any of them, and could hang very quickly, and because the decision to not put them in, well i can’t say if the outcome would have been different, except that bot complemented the other better then the other two complimented themselves.
That is my two and a half cents
Pat

Posted by Janna.

Student on team #349, The RoBahamas, from International Academy and Ford Motor Company.

Posted on 6/7/2000 5:18 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: Best Robots( can you really say that though?) posted by Patrick Seeney on 6/7/2000 8:42 AM MST:

Hey everyone,

I will vouch for Pat and the rest of Las Guerrillas in saying that their robot definitely would have made a good alliance partner in nationals and also at the regionals. It’s really too bad that a lot of the teams got overlooked this year due to the size of FIRST, especially the rookies (even those who won rookie all-star). I think one of the best suggestions I’ve heard was splitting the teams at nationals up into 4 divisions…it’s much easier for scouting that way. Or, with new scouting systems maybe people will find out that there are robots they’d never even heard of before that will be good complements. I think this would definitely make sure that good teams like Las Guerrillas and Juggernaut get opportunities to do well at Nationals.

And…getting picked is only half the battle. Luckily in Ypsilanti and Chicago we had really good alliance partners who had done their scouting and who understood that our team, which doesn’t have a long-standing reputation like many others, really could perform in the elimination rounds. However, in Florida, we were picked really early but never got a chance to play, like Pat said. So to all the teams who didn’t get picked, just beware that the elimination rounds are not always what you think they’ll be. They can be really wonderful and exciting or they can be a let-down to your team. But anyway, hopefully FIRST will fix these picking problems next year so all teams can have a fair chance.

Janna

Posted by Meg Z…

Student on team #349, Robahamas, from International Academy and Ford Motor Co…

Posted on 6/8/2000 9:31 AM MST

In Reply to: Re: Best Robots( can you really say that though?) posted by Janna on 6/7/2000 5:18 PM MST:

: But anyway, hopefully FIRST will fix these picking problems next year so all teams can have a fair chance.

Well, you can’t exactly fix ‘picking problems’ or whatever you want to call them. Although I like having alliances because it encourages teams to be friendlier, it also screws over teams that just have bad luck with their partners (like us). The problem is that a lot of teams are unable to do a complete scouting job: not just seeing who wins, but seeing which robots work and which don’t. This is more the problem than ‘picking’ per se.

Posted by Mike Dubreuil.

Student on team #175, Buzz, from Enrico Fermi High School and UTC/Hamilton Sundstrand.

Posted on 6/8/2000 4:41 PM MST

In Reply to: the real problem posted by Meg Z. on 6/8/2000 9:31 AM MST:

When it came to alliance picks at nationals we found ourselves to be at a disapointing 90-something place. And to just think, we had won the New Jersey regional. Although many people know about us we knew that we should do something else, so we distributed flyers. We distributed our Buzz flyers out the same day of the allaince picks; that way there’s a less likelely chance that a team will lose it. The flyer did help and it got us picked with the #1 alliance.
A good idea for next year would be to find new and innovative ways to advertise yourself as a good pick while at nationals. Many teams post their robot information here; but, that is simply not enough. You have to advertise in Florida.

Posted by Joe Johnson.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.

Posted on 6/8/2000 6:44 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: the real problem posted by Mike Dubreuil on 6/8/2000 4:41 PM MST:

In my mind, the Real Problem is that the Nationals have too low of a ratio of seeding rounds to teams in the competition.

The sorting process is directly related to the ratio of seeding rounds to number of teams in the competition.

In order for teams to have the same amount of information about the relative strengths & weakeness of teams as they have at a regional, there needs to be 4 or 5 times as many seeding rounds as are at a regional if there are 4 or 5 times as many teams at the Nationals.

Failing this there will always be the tendency to miss good teams and to fall back on the known teams from your regional.

Joe J.

Posted by Meg Z…

Student on team #349, Robahamas, from International Academy and Ford Motor Co…

Posted on 6/8/2000 7:43 PM MST

In Reply to: The Real Problem… posted by Joe Johnson on 6/8/2000 6:44 PM MST:

: Failing this there will always be the tendency to miss good teams and to fall back on the known teams from your regional.

This is definitely true. Also ‘reputation’ teams, even if their robot isn’t as great that year. And it’s hard for everyone else to build a reputation if no one is choosing them.

Posted by Bill Beatty.

Other on team #71, Team Hammond, from Team Hammond.

Posted on 6/11/2000 9:48 AM MST

In Reply to: Re: The Real Problem… posted by Meg Z. on 6/8/2000 7:43 PM MST:

In 1996 there were about 95 entries with something like 74 operating robots. Many of them had virtually no capability and another large segment had very limited capability. Scouting was simple because the field was narrowed very quickly to the handful of good competitive teams.

This year almost 400 entries with almost 300 at the Nationals, but even more impressive is the percentage of teams that had capability! There were very few ‘box with four wheels’ this year. Almost all machines had some ability, and a whole bunch were formidable. The field could not be narrowed easily.

The reasons for this are many, but is evident with the wide variances in the different '‘Top Ten’ lists. The bottom line is it will be more and more difficult to win this thing and luck will become a bigger factor no matter what the format.

Posted by Mike McIntyre.   [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Coach on team #1, Juggernaut, from Oakland Technical Center Northeast and 3 Dimensional Services.

Posted on 6/9/2000 11:00 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: Best Robots( can you really say that though?) posted by Patrick Seeney on 6/7/2000 8:42 AM MST:

I feel your pain, Patrick; we have a robot (Juggy) that was 2nd at the 67 team Great Lakes regional, went to the semi-finals in Chicago, and has since won both the Western Michigan and the Indiana Invitational tournaments. Not too shabby, eh? We make a great partner as Juggy was designed to win elimination matches, not seeding matches; we are only a moderate scoring machine but we can score those 1st 2 balls very fast and fight like a junk yard dog up on the ramp. We had teams of students at nationals approaching every top 25 team, handing out fliers and explaining our strengths. We only seeded around 50th and,of course, we didn’t get picked at nationals. It is small consolation to have dozens of teams tell you afterwards: ‘Wow! We can’t believe that nobody picked you guys!’ I guess the safest way to the finals is still to go heavy on the offense.

Posted by Splash.

Student on team #53, Team Inferno, from Eleanor Roosevelt High School and NASA GSFC.

Posted on 6/7/2000 7:46 PM MST

In Reply to: Best Robots posted by Splash on 6/6/2000 2:08 PM MST:

This really wasn’t meant to become controversial. The robots on my list were there because ‘I’ felt that they were the best in those categories. I found them to be the best because of all the robots I saw, these stood out. There were a lot of great robots not on my list, but I only listed 5 for each category so everyone could not make it.

I wouldn’t say that getting picked for the elimination rounds makes a robot a one of the best, but many of the teams I especially liked found a way to get noticed. It takes more than winning rounds to turn heads, these robots found a way to do just that.