Re: Storm the Castle B
Posted: March 24th, 2011, 2:38 pm
In all likelihood no. It will just be Division B.JSGandora wrote:Just a question, will be Storm the Castle next year for Division C?
Page 26 of 34
Re: Storm the Castle B
Posted: March 24th, 2011, 5:27 pm
Oh well, I had been hoping I'd get to do my favorite event just one more timechalker wrote:In all likelihood no. It will just be Division B.JSGandora wrote:Just a question, will be Storm the Castle next year for Division C?
Re: Storm the Castle B
Posted: March 25th, 2011, 5:10 am
I think perhaps the scoring system should be reworked a bit because I think the way it works right now is, if you undershoot your target, but get close to it, you get more points than if you overshoot it even though that is a greater distance.chalker wrote:As you may or may not know, we on the national rules committees at Science Olympiad begin work about this time every year on updating the rules for next year. We have a general policy of trying to make at least one significant change to each returning event (not all events return every year - they rotate in and out every so often), as well as trying to correct issues that required clarifications or FAQs.
The day after Nationals we (the national event supervisors, state directors, etc. etc.) always have a big meeting where we hash out issues face to face and try to come up with a near final version of the new rules. While many of us (myself included) are former competitors, in general we don't get direct input from current competitors during this process, although we do get some input from some coaches who happen to be involved at the national level.
Thus, as the Physical Sciences Committee chair, I've decided to try an experiment this year. Storm the Castle is tentatively scheduled to return next year (2011-2012 season). What specific changes would you make to the rules? I'm open to all suggestions (small and large), but can't promise we'll actually implement any of them. Feel free to post ideas here or send me a PM if you'd like.
Re: Storm the Castle B
Posted: March 25th, 2011, 10:57 am
I think that the emphasis for this event is primarily accuracy and then distance. Plus you as a competitor are setting the distance of your target, if you overshoot it by a significant margin then you are missing some data from your graphs/charts.earthbot25 wrote:I think perhaps the scoring system should be reworked a bit because I think the way it works right now is, if you undershoot your target, but get close to it, you get more points than if you overshoot it even though that is a greater distance.chalker wrote:As you may or may not know, we on the national rules committees at Science Olympiad begin work about this time every year on updating the rules for next year. We have a general policy of trying to make at least one significant change to each returning event (not all events return every year - they rotate in and out every so often), as well as trying to correct issues that required clarifications or FAQs.
The day after Nationals we (the national event supervisors, state directors, etc. etc.) always have a big meeting where we hash out issues face to face and try to come up with a near final version of the new rules. While many of us (myself included) are former competitors, in general we don't get direct input from current competitors during this process, although we do get some input from some coaches who happen to be involved at the national level.
Thus, as the Physical Sciences Committee chair, I've decided to try an experiment this year. Storm the Castle is tentatively scheduled to return next year (2011-2012 season). What specific changes would you make to the rules? I'm open to all suggestions (small and large), but can't promise we'll actually implement any of them. Feel free to post ideas here or send me a PM if you'd like.
Re: Storm the Castle B
Posted: March 25th, 2011, 6:29 pm
hey guys, just asking some last minute questions, so here i go
1- is the projectile normally a tennis ball?
2- is the counterweight ever the maximum height?, because we just realized that we didn't have enough room under our rails(FAT) so we had to cut out a hole from the bottom of the device.
3- can somebody explain the target distance thing to me really good? because umm, we just finished it two days ago and didn't get much practice, probably less than 30 shots, so graphs aren't gonna be extremely reliable for us.
4- do they put random weights in the counterweight like 2.37 kg or something, or is it like 1kg, 1.25, 1.5, etc?
thank you to whoever awnsers this because it's tomorrow and i'm kinda nervous
1- is the projectile normally a tennis ball?
2- is the counterweight ever the maximum height?, because we just realized that we didn't have enough room under our rails(FAT) so we had to cut out a hole from the bottom of the device.
3- can somebody explain the target distance thing to me really good? because umm, we just finished it two days ago and didn't get much practice, probably less than 30 shots, so graphs aren't gonna be extremely reliable for us.
4- do they put random weights in the counterweight like 2.37 kg or something, or is it like 1kg, 1.25, 1.5, etc?
thank you to whoever awnsers this because it's tomorrow and i'm kinda nervous
Re: Storm the Castle B
Posted: March 25th, 2011, 7:50 pm
1. tennis balls are usually too large. the maximum diameter is 6 cm.
2. you can't count on it but if you're desperate, i think they won't have maximum height. you would be pretty unlucky if they do.
3. target distance is where you tell the proctor to put the target and what you're aiming at if you're counting on the bonus.
4. it varies.
2. you can't count on it but if you're desperate, i think they won't have maximum height. you would be pretty unlucky if they do.
3. target distance is where you tell the proctor to put the target and what you're aiming at if you're counting on the bonus.
4. it varies.
Re: Storm the Castle B
Posted: March 26th, 2011, 4:25 pm
Just got back from regionals. Places 3rd in Compute This but Storm the Castle was a mess. The event supervisor got sick so a volunteer ended up running the event. The volunteer didn't have the CW weight or the projectile weight so he ended up taking a CW from another kid in the competition along with a projectile that was 40.5 grams. And slanted rails ARE ILLEGAL. Me and my partner got put down a tier under the rule "The center of gravity of which the axis rotates cannot drop," since the wheels (the axis point) which are on the rails fell. Not a good competition this year
Re: Storm the Castle B
Posted: March 26th, 2011, 6:52 pm
You must've been at the Wayne-Monroe Regional, I was there too. I agree, STC was a mess. For one thing, the supervisor borrowed the counterweight from a team (unfair advantage) and refused to reveal its weight after impound. We were one of just 2 teams to hit the target but distance was more important than accuracy. We hit the target 1 meter away, we probably would have been better off placing our target at 20 feet and landing 1 foot away, or something along that line. Got 11th.pokegman wrote:Just got back from regionals. Places 3rd in Compute This but Storm the Castle was a mess. The event supervisor got sick so a volunteer ended up running the event. The volunteer didn't have the CW weight or the projectile weight so he ended up taking a CW from another kid in the competition along with a projectile that was 40.5 grams. And slanted rails ARE ILLEGAL. Me and my partner got put down a tier under the rule "The center of gravity of which the axis rotates cannot drop," since the wheels (the axis point) which are on the rails fell. Not a good competition this year
Re: Storm the Castle B
Posted: March 28th, 2011, 5:00 am
The current rule really count distance more the accuracy. The precision score should count more.chalker wrote:As you may or may not know, we on the national rules committees at Science Olympiad begin work about this time every year on updating the rules for next year. We have a general policy of trying to make at least one significant change to each returning event (not all events return every year - they rotate in and out every so often), as well as trying to correct issues that required clarifications or FAQs.
The day after Nationals we (the national event supervisors, state directors, etc. etc.) always have a big meeting where we hash out issues face to face and try to come up with a near final version of the new rules. While many of us (myself included) are former competitors, in general we don't get direct input from current competitors during this process, although we do get some input from some coaches who happen to be involved at the national level.
Thus, as the Physical Sciences Committee chair, I've decided to try an experiment this year. Storm the Castle is tentatively scheduled to return next year (2011-2012 season). What specific changes would you make to the rules? I'm open to all suggestions (small and large), but can't promise we'll actually implement any of them. Feel free to post ideas here or send me a PM if you'd like.
I will use an example. Two teams can both shoot the same projectile about 20m using the same counterweight.
Team one chooses to place the target at 20 m and overshoots by 0.5 m getting a score of 19.5m
Team two chooses to place the target at 30 m and undershoots by 9.5m (the same overall 20.5 as team one) and get a score of 20.5 m.
Both teams shot the same distance bu tthe team that came closer gets a lower score. There is no real advantage to trying to come close. Even if team one would have landed in the castle they would have gotten a 10% bonus oand scored 22.
But another team that shot 22m at a 30 m target (missing by 8m ) would get the same score.
If distance is the main thing then get rid of the farce accuracy score.
Re: Storm the Castle B
Posted: March 28th, 2011, 5:42 am
Yes, the current scoring method has the accuracy flaw.
Take this example; you have a treb that always shoots 19.5m (it's extremely consistant)
If you place the target at 20m, you are 0.5m away and your score is 20-0.5= 19.5 points
If you place the target at 19m, you are still 0.5m away but now your score is 19-0.5 = 18.5 points
The moral of the story, NEVER Overshoot the target.
Since the target box is only 20cm square, it would be nice to be able to move the target in 0.5m increments. This would allow the above trebuchet the oppertunity to actually hit the target. Yes, they could sacrifice some distance and try for the bonus (by hitting and keeping the projectile in the box). If they were successful in hitting but not keeping the projectile in, their score would be 19 points (19-0) and still should have gone for the farther distance. If, by luck, the projectile stayed in the box, they could have a score of 20.9 points (but that's the risk).
To summarize the improvement ideas:
1) allow the target to be placed at 0.5m increments
2) change the scoring method to better reward accuracy. Something like LS = TD - (2A+Penalties). Also add the 10% bonus for hitting rather than staying in the box.
Take this example; you have a treb that always shoots 19.5m (it's extremely consistant)
If you place the target at 20m, you are 0.5m away and your score is 20-0.5= 19.5 points
If you place the target at 19m, you are still 0.5m away but now your score is 19-0.5 = 18.5 points
The moral of the story, NEVER Overshoot the target.
Since the target box is only 20cm square, it would be nice to be able to move the target in 0.5m increments. This would allow the above trebuchet the oppertunity to actually hit the target. Yes, they could sacrifice some distance and try for the bonus (by hitting and keeping the projectile in the box). If they were successful in hitting but not keeping the projectile in, their score would be 19 points (19-0) and still should have gone for the farther distance. If, by luck, the projectile stayed in the box, they could have a score of 20.9 points (but that's the risk).
To summarize the improvement ideas:
1) allow the target to be placed at 0.5m increments
2) change the scoring method to better reward accuracy. Something like LS = TD - (2A+Penalties). Also add the 10% bonus for hitting rather than staying in the box.