Northern California 2020

[mnoga]

GGSO Invitational Results

1. Mountain View Black (128)
2. Troy A (131)
3. Monta Vista Purple (170)
4. Lynbrook Blue (222)
5. Westview(SoCal) (287)

Troy B (274)

Ah, Lynbrook. The strongest non-state qualifying team in the nation, that's what I remember them for.

My prediction is that Lynbrook will make it to NorCal states this year. They will need to finish fourth or better at the Santa Clara Valley (or Silicon Valley) Regional, which includes several strong teams, including Mountain View, Palo Alto, and Monta Vista.

[EastStroudsburg13]

Ah, Lynbrook. The strongest non-state qualifying team in the nation, that's what I remember them for.

My prediction is that Lynbrook will make it to NorCal states this year. They will need to finish fourth or better at the Santa Clara Valley (or Silicon Valley) Regional, which includes several strong teams, including Mountain View, Palo Alto, and Monta Vista.

A reminder to anyone from Norcal's board who might be reading this, your states qualification system is hella broken and you need to fix it to be proportional to number of teams in each region ASAP. Thanks much.

THE ABOVE ONLY REPRESENTS MY PERSONAL VIEWPOINT. IT DOES NOT REPRESENT THE OPINION OF SCIOLY.ORG

[kman1234t]

Looks like BARSO is officially running PPP as a trial event.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fCY ... p=drivesdk

As a competitor in Ping Pong Parachute myself, I really hope that the other regionals as well as NorCal states will follow this example and trial the event as it is incredibly unfair and against the spirit of Science Olympiad.

[Godspeed]

Looks like BARSO is officially running PPP as a trial event.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fCY ... p=drivesdk

As a competitor in Ping Pong Parachute myself, I really hope that the other regionals as well as NorCal states will follow this example and trial the event as it is incredibly unfair and against the spirit of Science Olympiad.

What exactly is unfair?

[kman1234t]

Looks like BARSO is officially running PPP as a trial event.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fCY ... p=drivesdk

As a competitor in Ping Pong Parachute myself, I really hope that the other regionals as well as NorCal states will follow this example and trial the event as it is incredibly unfair and against the spirit of Science Olympiad.

What exactly is unfair?

NorCal runs PPP outdoors, so wind is a huge factor. For instance, two teams in the same event block, with the same designs for rocket and parachute, can get vastly different times and placings. Wind is the largest factor in sperating good teams from each other.

[builderguy135]

Looks like BARSO is officially running PPP as a trial event.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fCY ... p=drivesdk

As a competitor in Ping Pong Parachute myself, I really hope that the other regionals as well as NorCal states will follow this example and trial the event as it is incredibly unfair and against the spirit of Science Olympiad.

What exactly is unfair?

PPP is a very luck based event, especially if it's run outside.

[jaggie34]

Looks like BARSO is officially running PPP as a trial event.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fCY ... p=drivesdk

As a competitor in Ping Pong Parachute myself, I really hope that the other regionals as well as NorCal states will follow this example and trial the event as it is incredibly unfair and against the spirit of Science Olympiad.

What exactly is unfair?

PPP is a very luck based event, especially if it's run outside.

I think it's fair to trial if it has to be held outside, but I wouldn't say it should be if held properly. While there is an aspect of luck just like any event, I wouldn't say it's extremely luck based if run properly. (Although Princeton PPP is a good example of luck playing a relatively large factor)

[builderguy135]

What exactly is unfair?

PPP is a very luck based event, especially if it's run outside.

I think it's fair to trial if it has to be held outside, but I wouldn't say it should be if held properly. While there is an aspect of luck just like any event, I wouldn't say it's extremely luck based if run properly. (Although Princeton PPP is a good example of luck playing a relatively large factor)

Problem is, it's very hard to run properly and most of the time it's not anyways. It seems to me as if almost every tournament follows different rules -- at one, we were tiered for using the cup strat (not a "nose cone") and I also rarely see ESs enforce rules such as the bottle cap rule and the carbonated beverage rule.

In addition, the launchers can be inconsistent -- at 3/5 invitationals this year, I have noticed leaky launchers and/or the fork on the Model Z not fully retract, leaving a pressurized bottle half on the launchpad.

The deployment of the parachute can also play a significant role in your score. There's a significant chance that your parachute will catch onto the rocket both runs, dragging the chute down and bombing the event. Even the best teams have this problem, mostly because the launcher is not flat on the ground.

Finally, this event has a very right skewed score distribution, leaving 20th place often only 1 or 2 seconds ahead of 60th. Just a few milliseconds could add or subtract a significant amount of points to your team score, while in study events, the scores are much more distributed.

[kman1234t]

PPP is a very luck based event, especially if it's run outside.

I think it's fair to trial if it has to be held outside, but I wouldn't say it should be if held properly. While there is an aspect of luck just like any event, I wouldn't say it's extremely luck based if run properly. (Although Princeton PPP is a good example of luck playing a relatively large factor)

Problem is, it's very hard to run properly and most of the time it's not anyways. It seems to me as if almost every tournament follows different rules -- at one, we were tiered for using the cup strat (not a "nose cone") and I also rarely see ESs enforce rules such as the bottle cap rule and the carbonated beverage rule.

In addition, the launchers can be inconsistent -- at 3/5 invitationals this year, I have noticed leaky launchers and/or the fork on the Model Z not fully retract, leaving a pressurized bottle half on the launchpad.

The deployment of the parachute can also play a significant role in your score. There's a significant chance that your parachute will catch onto the rocket both runs, dragging the chute down and bombing the event. Even the best teams have this problem, mostly because the launcher is not flat on the ground.

Finally, this event has a very right skewed score distribution, leaving 20th place often only 1 or 2 seconds ahead of 60th. Just a few milliseconds could add or subtract a significant amount of points to your team score, while in study events, the scores are much more distributed.

No, the problem is not that it isn't being run properly, but the fact that there is wind. (NorCal runs PPP outdoors). I guess pollution is also a problem as many parachutes end up blowing away to who knows where.

NorCal runs PPP outdoors, so wind is a huge factor. For instance, two teams in the same event block, with the same designs for rocket and parachute, can get vastly different times and placings. Wind is the largest factor in seperating good teams from each other.

[SOPomo]

At Ukiah's Div B invitational, first place had over three MINUTES, 2nd-4th all had just over one minute, and then 5th-10th were in the 20s and 40s, with everyone else in the teens and single digits. Yes, wind is a huge factor in PPP and I really hope the Kennedy-Churchill rivalry doesn't swing on it's outcome at States.

But even if it's better indoors, gym floors are also getting torn up with bottle rockets falling to the ground from 30 feet up. And like another said, the different between 10th and 20th and 30th in any given tourney isn't very many seconds. If ever there was an event that could be replaced after one year, I think it should be this one.