2015 National Tournament: University of Nebraska

[Unome]

So infinicube, Do you think the major difference between teams in the bottom 50 and those in the top 50 starts with an idea, generated by students, that they want to win vs those that don't want to win. So the teams that win consistently recruit students who are more apt to believe they can win at Nationals while those in the bottom figure they can't so they don't work as hard?

Unome, I forgot that some states have 2. I just meant to divide it into the top and bottom of 50 but it is more than that. Some schools have winning teams year after year. What do you think contributes to that? Do some schools have 15 kids every year who want to win Nationals and others like your team only have 7 or 8 or might there be an influential other factor or factors?

Well, history certainly helps; teams that have done well in the past are more likely to stay strong; thus the common opinion in my school that Regionals will be easy, and that we can't possibly do well at Nationals. That's not to say that teams can't get better, though; last year was Mounds View's second year in the top ten at Nationals, and 2013 was the first time a Minnesota team in either division placed in the top ten in 13 years. However, such jumps are uncommon, with usually no more than one every few years. To me, the most important factors are good students, good coaches, and motivation.

I agree with you, Unome, and yes, gunked,i think it very very much has to do with attitude and motivation, and I feel that a team that doesn't have this, has less ability to do well. You may have individuals on a team that are absolutely brilliant in their events, but for example, they lose interest because they know regionals is easy but since nationals is hard, they wont try as hard, etc. Also, I am a firm believer in good coaching. When I was in div. B, I had a brilliant coach, extremely motivational. He ended up moving to the high school and become the coach there for Scioly, which gave that team a huge boost. So the year after when I moved to high school, we began to do much better as a team. But, ever since then, our middle school team has declined, and I believe it isn't that we have bad kids as much as the coaching isn't great, which I have seen first hand.
Students are important, yes, but I think a well motivated student with a positive attitude who may not be all that smart will do much better than an unmotivated, negative genius.

Well, the extent of the person's skill is important as well; last year, we had some people that were unmotivated geniuses that still did better than the people that worked hard; but they would definitely have been much better if they had put effort into it.

[samlan16]

Doesn't seem like any team "Sucks" at Nationals. Most teams had to earn their right to compete at Nationals. Teams differ in terms of how many other teams they had to beat to get there, the level of resources provided by the schools and or the team members, the experience of the team members and the coaches. I would guess that there are members on some teams in the bottom half that can outperform some team members whose team always ends up in the top 10. So it's hard to see any justification for characterizing any team as "weak" or as one "nobody's ever heard of". If you never heard of it, then it is you and not them that is lacking something. And to say anyone on any team, or any team "sucks at everything" is horrible and incorrect. It may suggest that at least one team that regularly does well at States has at least one rotten apple in it.

Umm... what does this refer to?

[InfiniCuber]

Well, history certainly helps; teams that have done well in the past are more likely to stay strong; thus the common opinion in my school that Regionals will be easy, and that we can't possibly do well at Nationals. That's not to say that teams can't get better, though; last year was Mounds View's second year in the top ten at Nationals, and 2013 was the first time a Minnesota team in either division placed in the top ten in 13 years. However, such jumps are uncommon, with usually no more than one every few years. To me, the most important factors are good students, good coaches, and motivation.

I agree with you, Unome, and yes, gunked,i think it very very much has to do with attitude and motivation, and I feel that a team that doesn't have this, has less ability to do well. You may have individuals on a team that are absolutely brilliant in their events, but for example, they lose interest because they know regionals is easy but since nationals is hard, they wont try as hard, etc. Also, I am a firm believer in good coaching. When I was in div. B, I had a brilliant coach, extremely motivational. He ended up moving to the high school and become the coach there for Scioly, which gave that team a huge boost. So the year after when I moved to high school, we began to do much better as a team. But, ever since then, our middle school team has declined, and I believe it isn't that we have bad kids as much as the coaching isn't great, which I have seen first hand.
Students are important, yes, but I think a well motivated student with a positive attitude who may not be all that smart will do much better than an unmotivated, negative genius.

Well, the extent of the person's skill is important as well; last year, we had some people that were unmotivated geniuses that still did better than the people that worked hard; but they would definitely have been much better if they had put effort into it.

It is important, I'm trying to show extreme cases, but yes skill, at least a little bit, is important, to an extent. A well motivated person who may not be all that smart will find ways to do something, generally better than someone who is smart and knows how to do something but just doesn't have the drive. The former, I believe, will be more successful.

[azuritemalachite]

I believe a strong mentality is required, but is not the only factor involving a team's success. Our coaches are always reminding us, almost nagging us, to make high goals and work to reach them. Every year it's something different and some teams who always go to Nats will always have a group of people who went and provide spirit to the others. Schools who have faith in their SciOly team will have great SciOly members and good coaches pick well and provide the extra effort. There may be lots and lots of geniuses, but to have a great team everyone needs to work as hard as they can or their trump card goes to waste.

[boomvroomshroom]

Preparation is also an extremely important factor. It doesn't matter how smart or pumped up you are if you get tiered in everything.
Anyway, I noticed that all of the bottom teams at Nats have multiple 61st places in their events - meaning that they didn't even compete. -_- Not trying to be mean, but perhaps it's like the people below me said: they just didn't care? Happy to be at Nats? Some local competitions don't run all the events, so that's probably why they were so unprepared.

[azuritemalachite]

Preparation is also an extremely important factor. It doesn't matter how smart or pumped up you are if you get tiered in everything.
Anyway, I noticed that all of the bottom teams at Nats have multiple 61st places in their events - meaning that they didn't even compete. -_- Not trying to be mean, but perhaps it's like the people below me said: they just didn't care? Happy to be at Nats? Some local competitions don't run all the events, so that's probably why they were so unprepared.

Yeah and while I was trying to look for dates for States from each State for the Wiki I noticed some states (well like one) only has State and does not have Regionals or Invitationals meaning there is only one time to practice their events while most dedicated teams go 4-5 times.

[gunked]

Invitationals isn't limited by state. I also think attitude is very important. But that does not just appear in students. Seems like the coach is critical for helping to generate the kind of attitude needed to win. And support from teachers, parents and the school is needed too. It is good to have the attitude to win. If you are on a team that does well at Nationals you should feel proud but don't assume that those that did not do well simply lack your dedication. They may have as much dedication but fewer resources, less money, less support from their school or district. They may have overcome amazing odds and challenges to simply get to Nationals-something your team may not have weathered as well had they been in the same position. I guess I'm suggesting "Stay humble" .

[Verdigris]

If I may add, it usually helps if competitors aren't spread too thin. If you have five or six events to prepare for, plus other extracurricular activities such as math clubs and NJHS/NHS, you won't have as much time for each activity, which can be detrimental to your performances in each. It's kind of like multitasking in that way, but longer-term.

[boomvroomshroom]

If I may add, it usually helps if competitors aren't spread too thin. If you have five or six events to prepare for, plus other extracurricular activities such as math clubs and NJHS/NHS, you won't have as much time for each activity, which can be detrimental to your performances in each. It's kind of like multitasking in that way, but longer-term.

Reminds me of a conversation we once had...
"How is he juggling seven events at once?"
"That's the thing. He didn't."

[InfiniCuber]

If I may add, it usually helps if competitors aren't spread too thin. If you have five or six events to prepare for, plus other extracurricular activities such as math clubs and NJHS/NHS, you won't have as much time for each activity, which can be detrimental to your performances in each. It's kind of like multitasking in that way, but longer-term.

Reminds me of a conversation we once had...
"How is he juggling seven events at once?"
"That's the thing. He didn't."

Generally, you either have to be VERY experienced and smart to handle that many events, or, you crash and burn. At that point its too much, so having enough people to have a spread out number of events is useful, although sometimes the veterans take more especially if they have similar topics!