Regional/District Power Rankings

In celebration of everybody being back together again at a single world championship, I thought it would be interesting to gauge public opinion on the competitiveness of various regions. In the polls below rate your impression of the level of competitiveness of each region as they relate to all the others.

  • Consider 5 points for “depth” of a region: how good is an average robot in this region

  • Consider 5 points for the competitiveness of the top end teams: how likely are the top 5 robots from this region to make Einstein

The results will be put to the test in Houston in just a few short weeks!

FIRST in Michigan
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

FIRST Chesapeake
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

FIRST In Texas
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

FIRST Indiana Robotics
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

FIRST Israel
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

FIRST Mid-Atlantic
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

FIRST North Carolina
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

New England
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

Ontario
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

Pacific Northwest
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

Peachtree
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

Canada Not including Ontario
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

International Other
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

New York
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

Minnesota/North Dakota/South Dakota
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

Hawaii
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

California
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

South Carolina
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

West Virginia/Ohio/Western Pennsylvania
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

Wisconsin/Illinois
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

Florida
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

Idaho and surrounding states
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

Louisiana and surrounding states
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

Other
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10

0 voters

4 Likes

Voters seem to be largely ignoring this criteria in favor of the second criteria.

4 Likes

Also - Are Missouri and Iowa now considered to be surrounding Louisiana? :laughing:

2 Likes

Yeah I realized when I woke up that I forgot to include them :joy: I knew I’d forget somebody…

1 Like

Missouri and Iowa definitely do not have Louisiana surrounded. There’s the whole Gulf of Mexico they can use to escape, plus seven other states if they want to flee northward along the Mississippi.

Or they could just go to Texas.

4 Likes

Per request from Ryan, here is the Elo breakdown by region:

Summary
Region 50% of average Elo + 50% top 5 Elo average Elo Top 5 Elo Average Teams in region Highest Elo Team 2nd Highest Elo Team 3rd Highest Elo Team 4th Highest Elo Team 5th Highest Elo Team
California 1741 1496 1986 272 1323 973 1678 254 5940
fim 1691 1512 1871 465 27 3538 2767 3357 2075
tx 1690 1493 1887 164 148 3310 118 6800 624
pnw 1684 1528 1841 123 2910 2046 4089 2930 4488
ne 1684 1520 1848 184 176 125 5813 230 2168
isr 1673 1522 1825 56 1690 1577 3339 2630 1574
Other 1640 1482 1798 277 1619 1706 4522 1339 1987
WI/IL 1639 1499 1779 113 1756 2481 111 2451 2338
New York 1628 1492 1765 138 870 694 3015 340 329
pch 1628 1506 1749 68 1771 4188 2974 8736 6919
ont 1627 1518 1736 77 2200 2056 4678 3683 4476
in 1626 1528 1724 51 7457 3940 1501 4272 5484
LA/AR/MS 1626 1492 1760 46 16 2992 364 3937 1421
fma 1623 1515 1730 125 5895 2590 2539 1640 1807
International Other 1620 1466 1774 347 4635 4481 3478 7285 4774
chs 1619 1516 1723 113 2363 836 1629 384 1885
Florida 1614 1486 1743 74 179 180 2383 5472 386
nc 1591 1505 1677 65 4795 1533 5727 3506 4829
WOW 1590 1489 1690 80 2614 4028 1787 2252 379
MN/ND/SD 1590 1481 1698 198 5172 5913 3184 876 2052
ID/MT/WY/UT/NV 1583 1470 1696 63 987 2122 3374 1891 7426
Hawaii 1576 1507 1645 21 359 2443 3882 368 3721
South Carolina 1566 1494 1639 28 4451 1051 343 1287 2815
Canada excluding Ontario 1541 1487 1595 57 3990 4421 6485 3986 5528

Notice the number of teams in each region, much easier to have a high top 5 average Elo if you have hundreds of teams in a region vs dozens.

5 Likes

Is there any way that you could change it to be 50% of average + 50% of average of top 5% or something?

It feels like taking the top x% of a district would be much more accurate assessment of the regions strength than looking at the top n teams in a district.

Also, doesn’t average team elo essentially just measure the average performance of each team in a district at champs? My understanding is that elo is zero sum, so the average elo of a district would be the starting average elo ± the average elo change at championships. Of course regionals aren’t so insular, so that isn’t how it works for regions or for districts with a lot of interplay like fim/fin.

2 Likes