Trajectory C

[dcambrid]

Yeah, it was a little different I agree. I think the idea was that having teams put their device in ready to launch configuration would slow down impound, if teams had a lot to do to setup (just guessing). I think the idea was that you would have to set it all up to launch on the clock anyway and then as soon as it was ready, stop the time and measure. I think they were pausing time during the measurement, but then you had to move back over to the launch box. If I ran it, I would probably measure the basic dimensions at impound, then during the event if someone setup something that extended out, I would pause time and measure again. I don't think it added a lot of time, but it was definitely different. Sorry to hear that you guys ran out of time.

So one interesting thing that happened for us at our state tournament was how they ran the timer. For some reason at the beginning of the event, they had a 60 x 60 cm box taped out that you had to set up your device to launch in, to show your device met parameters. At previous tournaments this had been done at impound, but by putting this on the timer the event supervisor made us use time that we had normally used for aiming and such, which led us to rushing our final bucket shot and missing entirely to the side.

Has anybody else experienced this style of event timing? I did not exactly hate the style but it was unique for how the event had otherwise been ran for me this year.

[knightmoves]

Yeah, it was a little different I agree. I think the idea was that having teams put their device in ready to launch configuration would slow down impound, if teams had a lot to do to setup (just guessing). I think the idea was that you would have to set it all up to launch on the clock anyway and then as soon as it was ready, stop the time and measure. I think they were pausing time during the measurement, but then you had to move back over to the launch box. If I ran it, I would probably measure the basic dimensions at impound, then during the event if someone setup something that extended out, I would pause time and measure again. I don't think it added a lot of time, but it was definitely different. Sorry to hear that you guys ran out of time.

The rules certainly don't require measurements to be done at impound. I'd agree that it was usual to verify construction measurements at impound, but I've seen events run other ways.

I think my favorite was where the ES had a measurement crew and a testing crew, and while one team was operating their device under the supervision of the testing crew, the next team in line would be having their device measured. So that avoided the slow impound at the cost of having each team present for overlapping 15-minute slots rather than 8-minute slots.

But I would agree that the ES stopping time and performing measurements is fine. Stopping time and then asking the team to move their device to somewhere else makes no sense, because you'd have to do most of your setup all over again once you've moved the device.

[Jehosaphat]

Yeah all of this was about what we were thinking, and we still are a bit upset as are pretty proud of the device we built. This is just one of the things that comes along with having volunteers run events, and our ES did a wonderful job outside of this one thing, but it was just too late in the day to attempt to change anything. It kinda sucks that this is the way my competitive Science Olympiad career ends, but it just makes me all the more driven to be an ES myself in the future.

[knightmoves]

Yeah all of this was about what we were thinking, and we still are a bit upset as are pretty proud of the device we built. This is just one of the things that comes along with having volunteers run events, and our ES did a wonderful job outside of this one thing, but it was just too late in the day to attempt to change anything. It kinda sucks that this is the way my competitive Science Olympiad career ends, but it just makes me all the more driven to be an ES myself in the future.

One of my teammates quit Science Olympiad over what we felt (and still feel) was a harsh and unreasonable ruling at a state tournament. Arbitration agreed that it was harsh, but wouldn't overrule it. She was proud of her device, too. She'd spent all year improving it, and come up with something that was in contention for a medal, and felt completely dismissed by the ES.

You might argue that she should have had a thicker skin, and picked herself up and got on with it. You might be right. But she was in 6th grade and hadn't yet developed the jaded outer shell that expects unfair treatment.

Being a good ES matters. Doing your homework beforehand and knowing the rules matters. Applying General Rule 5 correctly matters. (ES should assign the minimum penalty necessary to restore equity. See, for example, the cellphone example in the scoring guidelines. A technical breach of the rules that clearly doesn't benefit the students should not attract a scoring penalty.)