Most competitive state

[RandomPerson]

I used the average number of years each champion wins in each state (state ranking) for how competitive states are inside their state (low score is the best) and avererage nats score for how competitive each state is compared to other states. Each is weighted the same.

I'm not saying you weren't evaluating things right. I'm saying your definition of being competitive isn't a good one.

[SirBobo]

Dunno, New York seems to do the best in B division, but that could just mean we have had one powerhouse team (which is mostly true, RC Murphy was a powerhouse up until relatively recently, then Gelinas took up the mantle). I believe last year was the first year (at least, the first year in a long time) that NY had two top 10 teams.

This means that its mostly been one team sweeping, which isn't really competition.

I agree with you.

[tornado guy]

http://scioly.org/wiki/State_Champion_Statistics
Based off the information I collected this weekend, New York is the most competitive state in B and Michigan is the third most competitive. I will try to finish it by next weekend.
What do you think?

How is Washington in front of Ohio?

[thsom]

Illinois' up there with marie murphy, south, and daniel wright also new trier and stevenson, all placed in top 20, marie murphy in top 10 consistently, got 2nd last year.

Good point. But as far as it goes, it's only those three teams for Division B jockeying for those two bids to nats. What about div C?

Division C has IMSA (always close to second, never really made it though, one time only a few points away), New trier, Stevenson, Naperville, Hinsdale, and Crystal Lake Central vouching for the top spaces in state. However in nats placing wise New trier stole 7th and stevenson stole 16th. But for division B, Kennedy is also up there always in the top 3 or 4

[foreverphysics]

Why the heck is AL 32nd? Shouldn't we be somewhere around..oh, I don't know...50?!

[tuftedtitmouse12]

Illinois' up there with marie murphy, south, and daniel wright also new trier and stevenson, all placed in top 20, marie murphy in top 10 consistently, got 2nd last year.

Good point. But as far as it goes, it's only those three teams for Division B jockeying for those two bids to nats. What about div C?

Division C has IMSA (always close to second, never really made it though, one time only a few points away), New trier, Stevenson, Naperville, Hinsdale, and Crystal Lake Central vouching for the top spaces in state. However in nats placing wise New trier stole 7th and stevenson stole 16th. But for division B, Kennedy is also up there always in the top 3 or 4

Wait, Kennedy made it to nats? I thought it was Daniel Wright and Marie Murphy...

[Littleboy]

Why the heck is AL 32nd? Shouldn't we be somewhere around..oh, I don't know...50?!

The least competitive state is 49 so how could it be 50? and there are some really uncompetitive states.

How is Washington in front of Ohio?

Good does not nessecarily mean competitive. Ohio has just a couple teams that win. Washington has more. Washington is also a fairly good team at nats.

[fishman100]

I/any other Virginian on this board can almost guarantee that VA is not the 4th most competitive state. For Div B, there is usually 1 specific team that goes to Nats. No team besides Longfellow MS has gone to Nats more than once, and they have won States 6 of the 10 years VA has been part of Science Olympiad. Following up on what Randy said, if one team is dominating, can that be considered competition?

Also, what is the Nationals ranking? What does the average place at Nats have to do with the competitiveness of a state?

[thsom]

Wait, Kennedy made it to nats? I thought it was Daniel Wright and Marie Murphy...

No no no, Kennedy didn't make it to nats, you are correct about Daniel Wright and Marie Murphy. What I was saying was that Kennedy was competitive in state while marie murphy, south, and daniel wright are competitive out state

[zyzzyva980]

Since everyone seems to be ignoring what I posted on the talk part of that page, I think I'll repost it in an abbreviated form here:

deciding on a definitive ranking of state competitiveness is essentially impossible. There are too many variables that factor into a state's "competitiveness" that choosing one set is very arbitrary. In the end, "competitiveness" is an opinion, not a fact, and that's why we continue to have debates over whether or not a state is "competitive."

It would be a great idea to have the page comparing different states and their statistics, but to say that one state is more competitive than another based on an arbitrary set of statistics isn't very helpful and only causes... the arguments in the posts above this one.