This reminds me of a similar thread Akash posted a few years ago before my time in FRC
I just wanted to say, as someone familiar with 1391, that from what I observed, you guys really took the next step this year in a lot of ways. Best thing you can do now is learn from both the good and the bad and start working now for next year.
1137, 1262, and 5279 are all effective low goal bots. 836, another CHS Low goal bot was a 4th pick. In Chesapeake low goals were enough to seed high and win. At Champs, at least in our Case, we were able to capture because we could put 6 balls in the low goal, this lead to more ranking points. However in eliminations teams could capture with only high goal shooters, diminishing the value of the low goalers.
Basically we were very valuable as a qualifying bot since when partnered with a single bot that could score 4 balls we would capture regardless of who the third bot was. However in elims teams were able to select two high goal bots who could score 10 balls between the two of them or 3 high goalers who could score 10+ combined. It is something we were aware would happen eventually.
This is certainly true, however there is another factor that plays into it, and it is the way the game changes between qualifications and eliminations. 5279 is a good example, I suspect if you replayed the weekend with other random schedules over and over again I suspect we would seed in the same area as we did on average. In this game, low bar bots that could score 6+ balls did well in qualifications, but were less valuable in eliminations because their were enough high goal shooters that could combine for 10+ balls to capture. I suspect that if they had not raised the tower strength to 10 then these low goal bots would have seeded lower, as more high goal bots would have been able to capture in qualifying with out them. On the other hand if they raised it to 12 then the low goal bots would have seeded higher and would have been more valuable to elimination alliances.
It is entirely possible for a robot to both deserve to seed where they did, and not get picked. In our case, while we were very valuable to the average alliance, we were less valuable as a complimentary part of a designed alliance. On the other hand a robot like 1662 could not contribute as much to an average alliance in qualifying as they were a defensive robot designed to beat very good shooters so they were not able to contribute to damaging the tower, however once an alliance had two robots that could capture without contribution from a third partners, a robot like 1662 jumped in value. Us ranking 19th, and 1662 ranking 65th both reflected (to at least some degree) our value to random alliances, also, 1662 being picked in the second round, and us missing eliminations also reflects our value to the alliances as designed by the alliance captains.
“Reliability and consistency are paramount. If you do ONE thing, every single match, without fail, you will beat the guy who does many different things poorly. Every time.“
As a follow up note, this year 3005 went from never having made championships before, and the only regional finalist achievement made as a 2nd pick in 2011, to a 2nd seed in Alamo (regional finalist AC), 2nd seed in Dallas (SF), and AC of the Curie Finalist division… by designing a low goal capable robot with no hang. We could cycle 6-8 low balls per match. When picking our amazing alliance partners, we knew we were weaker than our 1st and 2nd pick, but had a strategy we knew should work.
On the flip side, this was the first year we ever made a practice bot, had our first robot done and functional before week 5, got 8-10 weeks of practice before champs, and never had a single thing break in our robot that took us out of a match (or lost comms).
Strategy + reliability is a winning combination in many years even with a simple robot, and the GDCs decision on how to structure quals this year made it an exceptionally attractive option for many mid-tier teams.
Yes, we took that risk last year. We had a bot that could only stack 5. 1671, 701 and 971 easily could have pushed us out of qualifying at each regional if our can grabber strategy had not been successful.
Exceptions to what? I know that 254, 971 and us all had very different robots at Champs than what we started with. Tuning through the competition season is critical.
1983 was ranked 40th on Curie, and was the fist pick of the No. 2 alliance (and they talked their way out of being the first overall pick as the combination would not have been high scoring enough.)
A note in reference to Corsetto: he’s been on other teams before 1678. At the time he was either 114 or 1662 I think?
Haha I actually just went back to read my old thread as well. Funny how things change in a few years.
1391 is a great team and was arguably one of the best in MAR. Luck and who you know is a huge factor in getting picked at champs in the later rounds. For example, 228 is a decent robot with very capable drivers, but as the very last pick on Carver, we know our friends on 359 had to do a bit of persuasion for us to get picked.
Keep working and getting better, 1391 is more than capable
I was actually with 1678 at the time, but took a brief hiatus from mentoring 1678 full-time when I moved to Lodi and mentored 1662 in 2012 and 2013.
This post is a crazy reminder to me of how fortunate I have been to work with 1678 over the last 9 years.
-Mike
This was true for our team on Archimedes, by Friday we had our 20 pt auto working and were averaging 5-6 Teleop high goal boulders per match but didn’t get picked. I feel teams don’t do enough scouting or at least get only a few top picks but when those are taken they are stuck. We knew we were in trouble when around teams 2nd pick they were looking up at the board for numbers.
Thanks for clarifying!
And thanks for the advice all those years ago 
It’s a shame that scouting is not looked at as much at championships because the basis of most teams is to have fun. I realize that for the most part is all about the FIRST experience but it’s a shame some didn’t realize the potential of other teams for their high level skill due to their ranks. Some teams were troubled due to bad matches with rookie teams and teams could not know that had happened if they actually did scout.
Next time Plasma Robotics will try harder to carry our whole team farther. Though it’s very hard to carry through championships and regionals itself. We ranked 29th out of 76 teams and we were planning to get picked but our last two matches brought us down from the top 15 to the lower third of teams.
Not sure why you think scouting isn’t as big of a deal at Championship as at the lower levels. All of the top teams (ie teams playing in elims) are very much intensely scouting. You don’t end up on Einstein without it.
I didn’t mean to imply that powerhouse teams do not improve over the season, or show up to week 1 with perfect bots. I just meant that they generally go to their first event better equipped to handle the game than the average robot.
I can’t speak much to the California bots not having seen them firsthand, but I did see 2056 draining shots at GTR-E when most robots were still adjusting their shooters to hit the target.
Similarly, last year 1114 was putting up 3 capped 6 stacks at GTR-E when most teams were just figuring out that they needed a ramp to be a HP bot.
Both of these robots made improvements over the season, but when you’re at 95% capability, 100% is not as far away as when you start at 50%.
I just want to be clear, I’m not trying to belittle teams that come out of the gate with near-perfect robots. On the contrary they should be praised. But it is unreasonable for the majority of teams to expect this experience without prior planning. It is important to note that this experience is not out of reach for any team, they just need to set the proper goals for their individual situation. Karthik’s strategy seminars are a great place to start, as are the Minimum Competitive Concept threads.
That’s too bad that was happening. Teams that get to Champs should have some sort of scouting system in place just in case.
I fully agree with this characterization. But it’s $@#$@#$@#$@# hard to get that last 5% (and it’s rarely achieved.)
We were scouting up until late Friday, when we knew for sure we couldn’t crack top 30.
Did notice that several other scouting operations shut down well before the replay of Galileo Q120 (played after the last match).
I believe that my team (4607) may be the lowest pick among the 256 elim teams. After quals on Carver, we were ranked 56 over all. This was due to our strategic choice to forgo any boulder points whatsoever and concentrate on what we know best - defense.
This was not an easy choice, but after our success with defense against 359 at Lake Superior in week 1, we decided to go this route throughout a Week 6 regional at North Star. We knew that we were taking a big leap and knowing that the 3v0 and 2v1 scenarios laid out by Ginger Power, this would be our best bet to set our team apart.
It worked. We are grateful that 503 and 359 picked us up as the 9th pick on Carver - we just wish we could do more. Our robot has the ability to play all ends of the game (breacher, shooter, defense, and climb) - yet we love to play defense all the way back to our rookie year (2013).
This years’ CMP experience will definitely mold the team for years to come. And we are now better aware about how to play the game as one of the best defenders for Stronghold. We cannot wait to see what the MSHSL Tournament beholds for us as we know that 3042 and 4539 will also be defensive robots. Being one of the three dedicated defensive robots that can also work on other parts of the game will set us apart. And our drive team may be a little bit crazy - but they do so with committing very few penalties!
See you all on May 21 at the MSHSL tournament!
I don’t know if we were the lowest either, but team 11 was ranked 59 on Carson and picked for the 3rd pick of the second alliance.
Edit: Upon further inspection, team 1369 was ranked 75th on Carson and was picked for elims, making them at least tied for the lowest seed selected.
I am confident all teams in elims were scouting and doing a good job. After 8 matches we were ranked 72nd yet were consistent in 20 pt auto on CDF and low bar, scoring 5 to 7 high goals per match. I think our first win was Q118 where we got 10 high goals and 20 pt auto (3824).
Before that match, 2122 was in our pits talking about elims. Thier scouts saw we were a sleeper due to a tough draw. I’m always impressed with the level of scouting at championship. Last year our alliance captain at champs picked the 75th team as our 3rd bot. Generally, if you are highly ranked and not picked it’s because either their scouting data suggests that they need something you don’t have or they see an inconsistency or vulnerability that they need to avoid in the finals. We started self scouting years ago to keep ourselves honest as well as for marketing our team to others.
This year just seemed to have a higher percentage of low ranked teams getting picked which suggested to me that there was something implicit in the game that had a disproportionate number of strong teams with low rankings.
You definitely were overlooked and it’s very frustrating for the team. I’ve seen this happen at almost every event. Mistakes happen and it can be disheartening for the students. If you are not doing so already, consider having one of your scouts devoted to self scouting and a small group of your best communicators using that data to market your team to the top teams in your division. Networking is good for both getting visibility at the competition as well as fostering long term relationships with other teams.