So, I was mulling over how we discuss the performance of traditional sports teams vs. how we discuss FRC teams and I began thinking of the concept of “the winningest team.” This is something often talked about in traditional sports, where the win is often the most important thing, but in FRC–particularly in recent seasons–we also have the complicating factors of alliances and rank points which I think muddies the issue a little bit. This is not to mention the huge time differences between when teams began and the number of plays each team gets per season.
So, summer CD, here is my question to you. Who, in your mind, is the winningest FRC team of all time and more importantly, what is your metric? Is it simply the number of wins, as the name would suggest? Or is there a better way to do this?
If I am going off of wins I have a few ways to go. I could go with the team with the most amount of regional wins, the team with moist championchips wins, the team that has performed the greatest feat in frc, a teams best first year, etc… There are so many options but for wins I would have to go with 2056 1114 waterloo duo (hey its a team made of 2056, 1114, and another team). They dominated Canada winning regionals together year after year after year with it all culminating in the 2056 vs. 1114 in the finals with 2056 ultimately coming out on top.
Another way to look at it is through chairmans and I don’t know enough about hof teams and their contributions to really make a judgement on who I consider to be the most winningest team in chairmans.
I think that overall number of blue banners is a pretty accurate way of assessing a team because it shows robot performance and team performance. Unless you only want to judge based on robot performance, in which regional wins is probably more accurate.
The problem with judging robot performance based on regional wins is that it takes more than a good robot to win a regional. Some teams do some very impressive work with their robots, but they lack in execution and strategy aspects. And some teams have fairly basic robots, but they make up for it with superior strategy, consistency, communication, etc.
The problem with this metric is that it can unfairly inflate older teams. Take a team that has been around for 20 years and won a blue banner every year, versus one that has been around for 10 years and won a banner every year - how do you compare them?
A better metric would be banners/year, or maybe even banners/event, with some sort of artificial limit put in (must be 5 years old, or something to that effect) to limit the impact of a lucky rookie year and to highlight team success over time. You could also keep it to the total number of banners, but limit the timeframe. Instead of including the full history of FRC, only include the past 5 years (or however many you think is relevant).
Just take some of the teams with the most blue banners:
254 - 48 banners over 19 years, about 2.5 banners per year.
1114 - 44/15, or almost 3 banners per year
67 - 41/21, close to 2 banners per year
2056 - 37/11, well more than 3 banners per year!
I’m not going to get into figuring out how many total events each of these teams attended over their history.
Personally, I like banners/event. It helps to even out the differences between teams that can afford more events and those that can’t.
I would say it has to be one of (67, 254, 2056). You have the most consistent regional and national performance, most regional wins, and highest win percentage between those three.
I think 67 should come out on top of that. 67 is currently the only team to take home CA and a championship win in the same season, one of only 2 teams to have consecutive championship wins, and one of only 4 teams to have 3 or more championship wins. They have also made division finals or better on all but THREE years since 2003. Finally, they are third in both blue banner totals and regional/district wins, so I’d say they’ve seen consistent winning over their long history.
As for win rate vs. total wins, of course win rate is a more valuable metric. However, it should be noted that the longer a team is around, the more difficult it is to keep a win rate high. One bad season can ruin these world-class win rates. Props to 254 and 67 especially for keeping consistent performances EVERY YEAR over their ~20 years.
These types of threads are always fun to think about, and extremely difficult to measure. When we talk about “winningest teams” that does feel more geared to the on field robot performance than the off the field community building in my opinion. Another part of that is off the field measurements are so difficult to measure even just among the HOF chairman’s teams. I am going to take a little different approach and look at consecutive year success simply to see groups of student accomplishments. Also if one of the longer tenured chief users could fill in some of the early runs of teams that would be great.
Major Einstein runs by frc teams:
177: 2006-2011 The bobcats won their division at Worlds for 6 consecutive year while also winning the big chip in 2007 and 2010.
1678: 2013-20?? I never thought any team would ever match the run by 177 on Einstein, but 1678 has come pretty close. They won the big chip in 2015 as well.
There were a few teams that made long (4+ times) Einstein runs with a year or two break.
67:2004-2010(ex. 06,07) Big Chip in 05,09,10
2056: 2012,2015-2017 Also their regional win streak speaks for itself.
I think this is every major Einstein runs by teams. If I missed any please add them.
I also want to say that there are many other great winning teams such as 16,33,71,111,118,148,217,233,254,330,341,359,469,610,971,973,1024,1114,1477,1640,1717,1986,2451,2481,3310 just to name a few, and I know this list isn’t complete either. I also know I excluded younger teams as I haven’t really paid that much attention to FRC since 2015, sorry about that.
In my mind of a UK basketball fan, “Winningest ****** team of all time” automatically applies to the team with the most most game wins or comparatively, match wins in FRC. I think a FRC match (vs. a regional event) is much more equivalent to a “game” in most team sports considering the # of matches in an average FRC team’s season and the number games in basketball, baseball etc. team’s season. Looking at team’s historical match win-loss records* is IMO a important metric to look at for determining the “Winningest” team in FRC.
*My favorite part about this is it allows you to pretty much ignore what happened in 2015.:]