Indiana 2020

[splane21]

Butler C Predictions (Assuming Carmel, BHSS, and BHSN stack):

1. Carmel 1 (~59)
2. BHSS 1 * (~71)
3. Carmel 2 * (~84)
4 BHSN 1 (~102)
5. BHSN 2 (~120)
6 BHSS 2/3 (~145)
7. BHSS 2/3 (~155)

*Carmel 2 beat BHSS 1 last year but by only 5 points. Both teams seem stronger this year so Butler should be interesting.

I haven't been paying much attention to B teams in Indiana this season.

[HerpNerd]

Butler C Predictions (Assuming Carmel, BHSS, and BHSN stack):

1. Carmel 1 (~59)
2. BHSS 1 * (~71)
3. Carmel 2 * (~84)
4 BHSN 1 (~102)
5. BHSN 2 (~120)
6 BHSS 2/3 (~145)
7. BHSS 2/3 (~155)

*Carmel 2 beat BHSS 1 last year but by only 5 points. Both teams seem stronger this year so Butler should be interesting.

I haven't been paying much attention to B teams in Indiana this season.

Also Butler's schedule is notoriously bad and unfair (schedule of builds, teams don't have the same conflicts, 5 events at the same time, etc)

So any team winning/scores in both divisions, isn't putting their best team forward

[boomifailure]

Butler C Predictions (Assuming Carmel, BHSS, and BHSN stack):

1. Carmel 1 (~59)
2. BHSS 1 * (~71)
3. Carmel 2 * (~84)
4 BHSN 1 (~102)
5. BHSN 2 (~120)
6 BHSS 2/3 (~145)
7. BHSS 2/3 (~155)

*Carmel 2 beat BHSS 1 last year but by only 5 points. Both teams seem stronger this year so Butler should be interesting.

I haven't been paying much attention to B teams in Indiana this season.

Also Butler's schedule is notoriously bad and unfair (schedule of builds, teams don't have the same conflicts, 5 events at the same time, etc)

So any team winning/scores in both divisions, isn't putting their best team forward

I don't think schedule can play a factor due to the fact an L is still an L. Sidenote, what SOURCE is telling you that the scheduling is unfair and that teams aren't putting their best foot forward.

[Vortexx2]

To try to get the forums back on topic, I'll throw my own predictions out there. These might change after seeing the butler regional.

Division C:
1. Carmel
2. Munster
3. BHS
4. BHN
5. John Adams
6. Lake Central

[boomifailure]

To try to get the forums back on topic, I'll throw my own predictions out there. These might change after seeing the butler regional.

Division C:
1. Carmel
2. Munster
3. BHS
4. BHN
5. John Adams
6. Lake Central

Oh, these are state predicts? I would have Munster one more up especially because of there Designer Genes and Protein people.

[cbrant554]

Butler C Predictions (Assuming Carmel, BHSS, and BHSN stack):

1. Carmel 1 (~59)
2. BHSS 1 * (~71)
3. Carmel 2 * (~84)
4 BHSN 1 (~102)
5. BHSN 2 (~120)
6 BHSS 2/3 (~145)
7. BHSS 2/3 (~155)

*Carmel 2 beat BHSS 1 last year but by only 5 points. Both teams seem stronger this year so Butler should be interesting.

I haven't been paying much attention to B teams in Indiana this season.

Also Butler's schedule is notoriously bad and unfair (schedule of builds, teams don't have the same conflicts, 5 events at the same time, etc)

So any team winning/scores in both divisions, isn't putting their best team forward

I don't think schedule can play a factor due to the fact an L is still an L. Sidenote, what SOURCE is telling you that the scheduling is unfair and that teams aren't putting their best foot forward.

_{I have no idea if you're trolling or not but} Schedules definitely affect a loss, especially if it's a close loss with lots of conflicts, his "source" is probably the fact that he goes to that competition, or has heard from people that do go. When you have a conflict in an event and have to put a person in that event that hasn't ever studied it will probably tank there score, therefore them not putting there best team forward.

[boomifailure]

Also Butler's schedule is notoriously bad and unfair (schedule of builds, teams don't have the same conflicts, 5 events at the same time, etc)

So any team winning/scores in both divisions, isn't putting their best team forward

I don't think schedule can play a factor due to the fact an L is still an L. Sidenote, what SOURCE is telling you that the scheduling is unfair and that teams aren't putting their best foot forward.

_{I have no idea if you're trolling or not but} Schedules definitely affect a loss, especially if it's a close loss with lots of conflicts, his "source" is probably the fact that he goes to that competition, or has heard from people that do go. When you have a conflict in an event and have to put a person in that event that hasn't ever studied it will probably tank there score, therefore them not putting there best team forward.

Yeah, but aren't there conflicts at every level of competition therefore one is never able to put their best team forward.

[Creationist127]

I don't think schedule can play a factor due to the fact an L is still an L. Sidenote, what SOURCE is telling you that the scheduling is unfair and that teams aren't putting their best foot forward.

_{I have no idea if you're trolling or not but} Schedules definitely affect a loss, especially if it's a close loss with lots of conflicts, his "source" is probably the fact that he goes to that competition, or has heard from people that do go. When you have a conflict in an event and have to put a person in that event that hasn't ever studied it will probably tank there score, therefore them not putting there best team forward.

Yeah, but aren't there conflicts at every level of competition therefore one is never able to put their best team forward.

Two things for that. First, I'd think a lot of teams have people with certain 'specialties'--a couple events they are really good at. If at a certain competition, these two or three (or more?) events conflict with each other, they have to sacrifice some events for others. Second, I would imagine that teams would tend to base their rosters off of their state's schedule, as well as the nats schedule. Like, they wouldn't assign someone to Chem Lab, Circuit Lab, and Water Quality if those events conflict at States. So their team would probably be 'optimized' when following that schedule. If the schedule for a competition is pretty similar to the state schedule, their team would probably perform better than if the schedule was significantly different.
Of course, this is just my two cents--feel free to differ (or yell at me if I'm totally off base ).

[boomifailure]

_{I have no idea if you're trolling or not but} Schedules definitely affect a loss, especially if it's a close loss with lots of conflicts, his "source" is probably the fact that he goes to that competition, or has heard from people that do go. When you have a conflict in an event and have to put a person in that event that hasn't ever studied it will probably tank there score, therefore them not putting there best team forward.

Yeah, but aren't there conflicts at every level of competition therefore one is never able to put their best team forward.

Two things for that. First, I'd think a lot of teams have people with certain 'specialties'--a couple events they are really good at. If at a certain competition, these two or three (or more?) events conflict with each other, they have to sacrifice some events for others. Second, I would imagine that teams would tend to base their rosters off of their state's schedule, as well as the nats schedule. Like, they wouldn't assign someone to Chem Lab, Circuit Lab, and Water Quality if those events conflict at States. So their team would probably be 'optimized' when following that schedule. If the schedule for a competition is pretty similar to the state schedule, their team would probably perform better than if the schedule was significantly different.
Of course, this is just my two cents--feel free to differ (or yell at me if I'm totally off base ).

Ah, ok that makes some sense.

[Cornstalk]

Yeah, but aren't there conflicts at every level of competition therefore one is never able to put their best team forward.

Two things for that. First, I'd think a lot of teams have people with certain 'specialties'--a couple events they are really good at. If at a certain competition, these two or three (or more?) events conflict with each other, they have to sacrifice some events for others. Second, I would imagine that teams would tend to base their rosters off of their state's schedule, as well as the nats schedule. Like, they wouldn't assign someone to Chem Lab, Circuit Lab, and Water Quality if those events conflict at States. So their team would probably be 'optimized' when following that schedule. If the schedule for a competition is pretty similar to the state schedule, their team would probably perform better than if the schedule was significantly different.
Of course, this is just my two cents--feel free to differ (or yell at me if I'm totally off base ).

Ah, ok that makes some sense.

This is why I don't think regionals are an accurate representation of a team's strength. So i don't think it would help much to look at Butler results for state predictions.

P.S.: HAPPY 400TH POST