Scioly.org

True we did suck but we are having fun playing it when we're bored...then again we haven't played it in awhile.

How does everyone feel about this event? I think it's great fun, I really do, but I don't know how good it is an actual event that counts toward the team's overall score. I know several instances of teams that missed Nats. by a few points, because they basically tanked this event. I think it's much better as a Trial Event, or they could make it more lab oriented questions (calclate work to move toy car from A-B etc.) instead of Physical Challenges. I think that would be much more appropriate...

i personally enjoy the event because it not only is mentally challenging but its a great teamwork skill that you are getting out of this, and i dont think that it is an event that will give you major points but it has the possibility to get you a better rank overall.

Yeah, I think it's a fun event and everything, but I agree that it's not a good way to decide who goes to Nats or who wins or whatnot. It would be a great trial event, but I don't think it should count toward regionals, states, and nationals.

see i think the opposite, i think that every event should have an effect on your score, now that effect should vary by the difficulty of the event.

That's an interesting point- weighting the events for different effects on overall scores, but I still don't think Pentathlon should effect the overall score. Also, what if an event proctor just happens to make certain tests harder than they normally are? I'm not sure I agree with the idea, but it is interesting...

I too enjoy the Pentathlon, and agree with Draylon Fogg that it's great for team-bulding. But I also agree with zyzzyva98 that it should not count, and would make a fantastic Trial Event.

There was a small competition in my school, just for fun. At the end, we were allowed to try out Pentathlon, and it was really fun. So you just basically have to answer questions and figure things out?

Basically, you do one physical challenge and answer a question. Not to difficult, right? Read the [wiki][/wiki] for more information and for some example challenges.

I too think weighting the events could make things more interesting. Some tests are obviously easier than others. The Pentathlon at state in KS last year was ridiculously hard, as well as one invitational this year that took teams about 20 minutes. Our last invitational, though, was one of the easiest I've seen. Weighting the events could make for an interesting situation, and maybe more teams will get the chance win.

The thing about weighing events, especially at invitationals where different team coaches write the tests or design the event, is there is no standard difficulty. A Solar System test might be really easy at one invitational and really hard at the next. This would make an accurate standard weight system impossible, unless it's customized for each tournament. Unless you have a panel of judges take each test, rate it, and give it a weight for every invitational, which would not only take a large block of time but also add stress to the coaches writing the tests, it would be inaccurate.

That's the thing with this plan. I noticed that as well. How do you determine the weighting? Here's an idea: When all the tests are down being graded, the one that had the lowest scores gets the lowest weighted score, and so on. But since events such as Trajectory and Pentathlon have different scoring system, this too would be flawed.