Page 40 of 44
Re: New Jersey 2018
Posted: March 15th, 2018, 7:53 pm
by pb5754
windu34 wrote:knottingpurple wrote:Alex-RCHS wrote:If trial events didn’t count, South would have won
If heli hadn't been thrown out yet year, Monty would've won. Today, if trial events didn't count, but also if the appeals people submitted were accepted, if the competition on Tuesday wasn't cancelled because of snow, if the tests which were kinda easy but still within the rules were a bit harder, if every team were given the same conflicts... there's any number of things which could have changed the results, there's any number of ways we could cherry pick the data and argue a certain team is, underneath, the best. I felt no joy from this tournament, unlike 2016 States where we also lost but participating felt worthwhile, but how I feel about the tournament does not decide if it counts or not. Since we can't send all of NJ to Nats, we don't actually know which team would be the best in this year's Nats to see if it even agrees with today's results, but we just have to deal with NJSO's method of running tournaments. My partners and I in some of my events, we chose answers we didn't consider technically correct because we know how NJ States works, we thought they were looking for the simplistic answer or something, not the real one. We knew going in that there would be trial events counted and poorly run events and who knows what other problems, and the team which wins despite those problems goes to Nats. Oh well.
If I sound slightly salty, I'm sorry, I'm still trying to sound a lot calmer than I feel? But we'll live.
Congrats to North for winning. Congrats to South for being in the top 2 since 2006 consecutively. Congrats to Monty for being really close behind South once again. Congrats to JPS for really improving. Congrats to Community for it's umpteenth trip to Nats and to Monty Middle for regaining 2nd. Idk enough about the other teams to know what to congratulate them for besides working hard but yeah.
^Love this
. SciOly will never be perfect and the teams that understand this and can adapt will do the best. While NJ certainly seems to be a lot more different than most states in terms of how things are run, teams knew going in and therefore it's hardly fair to say the results are unfair in that sense. A few events do seem a little off though (chem lab)...
definitely solar vehicle as well...
Re: New Jersey 2018
Posted: March 15th, 2018, 8:19 pm
by Alex-RCHS
For the record, I never said or implied it was unfair, I just put out that it was a relevant and significant fact. Also, while its true that all teams knew about that rule beforehand, it doesn't make it a good rule. It does seem weird to me that a state tournament with as many problems as NJ's appears to have would choose to complicate things further by running weird trials.
Of course, congrats to North, South and Montgomery for all being really good!
Re: New Jersey 2018
Posted: March 15th, 2018, 8:26 pm
by EastStroudsburg13
Alex-RCHS wrote:If trial events didn’t count, South would have won
Good thing trial events will also count at nationals, so we can be sure that NJSO is sending its best possible representative from its state...
Your friendly reminder from East that states that count trial events in their state scores are incorporating a self-defeating policy
Sorry, carry on, don't want to derail this too much.
Re: New Jersey 2018
Posted: March 15th, 2018, 8:28 pm
by windu34
EastStroudsburg13 wrote:Alex-RCHS wrote:If trial events didn’t count, South would have won
Good thing trial events will also count at nationals, so we can be sure that NJSO is sending its best possible representative from its state...
Your friendly reminder from East that states that count trial events in their state scores are incorporating a self-defeating policy
Sorry, carry on, don't want to derail this too much.
Yeah I would like to know their logic for counting trial events. It is very counter-intuitive
Re: New Jersey 2018
Posted: March 15th, 2018, 8:33 pm
by Raleway
There are a bunch of events that seem quite strange... it seems very strange that either West Windors or Montgomery would not place in an event. Through each invitational, I'm very sure each team has placed at least once for each event, and this is considering the extraordinarily high level of teams they compete against. For a team that accomplished 6th at MIT (Montgomery), 3rd AND 5th at SOUP (Montgomery), 6th AND 2nd at Cornell (Montgomery), while also 4th at SOUP (West Windsor North), it seems QUITE strange that Montgomery would take a 15th place and then North, very well reputed for their chemistry prowess as well, to get 9th? It also seems strange that South would place so poorly (19th) at Solar Vehicle. So many events seem so out of place, but still quite an overwhelming victory by North this year. Their success at SOUP seems to have panned out similarly here, despite South winning far more gold medals. Congratulations to West Windsor Plainsboro North for advancing to the national tournament!
Re: New Jersey 2018
Posted: March 16th, 2018, 8:32 pm
by fanjiatian
In case anyone was curious, here are a few summary statistics for the Optics C test. Section I was out of 50 points and Section II was out of 55 points, for a total of 105 points. Definitely could have made the test harder but the distribution was around what we were aiming for.
Section I Mean: 30
Section I Min: 10
Section I Max: 42
Section II Mean: 17.3
Section II Min: 0
Section II Max: 45
Test Total Mean: 47.3
Test Total StdDev: 20.3
Test Total Max: 87
LSS Mean: 10.5
LSS StdDev: 9.3
LSS Max: 29.7 (5 mirrors, 1 barrier, 3 mm from target point)
Re: New Jersey 2018
Posted: March 16th, 2018, 10:03 pm
by windu34
fanjiatian wrote:In case anyone was curious, here are a few summary statistics for the Optics C test. Section I was out of 50 points and Section II was out of 55 points, for a total of 105 points. Definitely could have made the test harder but the distribution was around what we were aiming for.
Section I Mean: 30
Section I Min: 10
Section I Max: 42
Section II Mean: 17.3
Section II Min: 0
Section II Max: 45
Test Total Mean: 45.54
Test Total StdDev: 21.9
Test Total Max: 87
LSS Mean: 10.13
LSS StdDev: 9.35
LSS Max: 29.7 (5 mirrors, 1 barrier, 3 mm from target point)
Here is a prime example of an event being extremely well run from a data standpoint. Great Job!
Re: New Jersey 2018
Posted: March 16th, 2018, 10:35 pm
by kenniky
fanjiatian wrote:In case anyone was curious, here are a few summary statistics for the Optics C test. Section I was out of 50 points and Section II was out of 55 points, for a total of 105 points. Definitely could have made the test harder but the distribution was around what we were aiming for.
Section I Mean: 30
Section I Min: 10
Section I Max: 42
Section II Mean: 17.3
Section II Min: 0
Section II Max: 45
Test Total Mean: 45.54
Test Total StdDev: 21.9
Test Total Max: 87
LSS Mean: 10.13
LSS StdDev: 9.35
LSS Max: 29.7 (5 mirrors, 1 barrier, 3 mm from target point)
How is the total mean different from the sum of the section 1 and section 2 mean?
Re: New Jersey 2018
Posted: March 17th, 2018, 7:32 am
by fanjiatian
kenniky wrote:fanjiatian wrote:In case anyone was curious, here are a few summary statistics for the Optics C test. Section I was out of 50 points and Section II was out of 55 points, for a total of 105 points. Definitely could have made the test harder but the distribution was around what we were aiming for.
Section I Mean: 30
Section I Min: 10
Section I Max: 42
Section II Mean: 17.3
Section II Min: 0
Section II Max: 45
Test Total Mean: 45.54
Test Total StdDev: 21.9
Test Total Max: 87
LSS Mean: 10.13
LSS StdDev: 9.35
LSS Max: 29.7 (5 mirrors, 1 barrier, 3 mm from target point)
How is the total mean different from the sum of the section 1 and section 2 mean?
Good catch! One team was a no-show and I removed them from the Section I and Section II calculations, but forgot to do so for the total test score and laser shoot. I've modified my post.
Re: New Jersey 2018
Posted: March 17th, 2018, 12:56 pm
by LiteralRhinoceros
How did you guys feel about the test quality at states? I thought it was ok, but I have to say the Division B Dynamic Planet test was really bad. Here is an example of a problem (or at least what I remembered): The boundary between an oceanic plate and a continental plate occurs: _____. There are so many possible answers that it's dumb (I put subduction zone down if you're wondering).