What do you think is the hardest regionals and why???
I only have experience with two regionals, but I’m going to have to go with the Midwest Regional. It’s right next door to Hammond, Indiana, home of the four-time [inter]national champions, Team 71. Many other well-known and well-respected teams attend as well.
I have been noticing some of the teams going to the Boilermaker Regional. It reads like a who’s who of midwest robotics;
16 Baxter Bomb Squad
68 Truck Town Thunder
71 Team Hammond
and many others.
I think Boilermaker will be an amazing regional. (Now if only I could get up there for it!)
At the risk of tooting my own horn, I think Palmetto’s got something going for it. 25, 180, 343, and rookie mind-blowers 1319 will all be there (along with several teams that I’ve likely forgotten about). It should be a great competition.
Can there really be such a thing as a hardest regional? Because in this game your worst enemy one match can be your best partner the next match.
Right, but if you don’t perform as well as the top bots, people will notice and you don’t stand to be picked for the finals. If it is a mediocre regional, people will pick mediocre bots for their alliances. At the top regionals (like the Boilermaker) only the best will make it.
I think this topic has already been discussed here (even though it applies to the 2004 season):
This is a “horse before the cart” moment at this moment. It would be a more valid discussion when people actually start revealing their robots in week four, five and six.
But, Ed, some teams DO have a history…
I would have to say any regionals with the most veteran teams around them. More specifically, UTC, BAE, Boiler, Michigans, Midwest come to mind.
Which One is the hardest? That can’t be determined until nationals.
I see “hard” not only as having good robots to compete against but not having good robots to compete with.
Past success does not guarantee future results…
i find it interesting that boilermaker has been mentioned already, considering that no one has attended it yet. i noticed that many of these statements are based on the teams that are participating in the regional, but to paraphrase Koko Ed, it can change from year to year!
This is true. However, given the odds of such a long list of teams with amazing track records all having off years during this particular season (which I calculate to be mighty slim odds), I’m willing to take that calculated risk.
I liken it to when I hold off on a project until the night before it is due. I take a chance of my computer dying, the dorm printer failing, et cetera. However, I know my track record when it comes to these sorts of situation (I’d say about 98% of my projects done this way come out as A’s or B’s) and assume that risk. Sure, I could completely bomb–and when it happens, I’ll take what comes with it.
If Boilermaker proves to be a bust, I’ll crack eggs on my forehead in Atlanta. A dozen, Grade A Large.
Agreed, but I think there is a strong correlation between past success and future results. For example, based on what I’ve seen over the past 7 years, I don’t think I’m going out on too much of a limb by saying that Teams 71 and 254 will be pretty good this year.
This by no means precludes any upstart team from entering the class of elite teams. But, I just think that going into the season there’s certain teams out there that we know to expect great things from. To me it’s sort of like Vegas setting the early lines on who’s going to win the 2006 Rose Bowl. There’s a good chance that USC, the favourite will come through, but just because they’re favoured doesn’t mean that Ohio State (Go Bucks!!) won’t be in the big dance.
All that being said I think the “tougher” regionals this year will be Boilermaker and Western Michigan But heed Ed’s comment, all early lines are subject to change upon the release of robot pictures in weeks 4-6.
I’ll put out my opinion: I agree with Billfred and Karthik that many teams are expected to do well year after year and the aforementioned regionals have some good lists of teams. I will also say that the larger regionals will also be a little tougher: there are more teams that you have to do better than to win, more teams that you have to pay attention to when scouting, and fewer rounds per team thus fewer chances to make-up for one or two poor performances. The regionals that have over 60 teams attending fall into this category.
Edit: Billfred: I’m holding you to the egg-cracking bit.
Agreed. I’d buy that for a dollar.
But it is a very good indicator.
First week regionals, overall, tend to be the ones that set the pace. Therefore, any first week regional is, in theory, quite difficult. What you see at any of those regionals is likely to be seen over and over again before the season is over with.
Just to answer your question, in my opinion the hardest regional out of the two we’ve been to is probably the Canadian Regional. Why? Well it’s got a lot of participants and I’d say that EVERY team is highly competitive hence making the regional itself very “interesting”.
But like mentioned above it all depends on certain teams, or nationals. I’d rather not predict the future of something that has a high rate of uncertainty (ex: rookie’s and innovative methods).