67 and 469 are different on tba because the DCMP were counted too
What is point of this?
Yes, I too read The Blue Alliance.
It is too show that the tba insights page is wrong
You know you can email the folks at tba?
Some people consider DCMP the same as a regional.
Perhaps it would be interesting to look at percentages of regionals played & won vs number of regionals won. It would reduce the impact of the teams’ ages.
2056 - 100% 
They’re also pretty attentive on the #moardata @ The Blue Alliance](https://www.facebook.com/groups/moardata/) Facebook group.
Where did you come up with the teams on your list? Here are some other teams with 10 or more regional wins:
175, 330, 1986.
With WATER even more stacked than last year, I hope they can keep it that way :yikes:
I believe “some people” includes FIRST in this case.
Not sure if TBA statistics (that are just made because people enjoy them) are FIRST official. Anyone know for sure?
The insights on TBA are made to follow “significant” trends to the FIRST community, not necessarily the same way as FIRST records them. (Some of the stats are not even recorded by FIRST, rather TBA calculated them directly from regional data)
Blue Banners, Championship Wins, and Chairman’s are self explanatory. Regional and District wins also includes District Championships even though the title does not explicitly say so (I agree that it SHOULD include DCMPs), and the successful teamups include every alliance that wins a blue banner: Regional, District, DCMP, CMP Division, and Einstein. This is why a lot of “odd” combos pop up - 254 and 111, for example, are credited with 3 successful teamups due to an Einstein appearance together in 2001 and a Einstein win in 2011. Expect them to win together again in 2021. I feel like World champs alliances should not be counted twice in this stat, but it is how it is.
#IFIAlliance first seed?
Just saying 1114, 2056, 148 and 610 can’t all be in alliance #1 :yikes:
Looks like the regional is stronger than a world subdivision
This brought me back to this picture from before my time
Team IFI has changed since then…
Having worked with a lot of the TBA data, people should really know that lots of 2005 data is non-existent. I don’t know why… It just is. TBA data I would assume is compiled by TBA and it’s databases, I doubt FIRST would be interested in keeping track of such information for themselves.
This might be a slight overstatement.
2056 drop the mike.
TEAM IFI: All your banners belong to us.