Scioly.org

Oooo my predictions were solid

XJcwolfyX wrote:Oooo my predictions were solid

C:
New Trier (81)
Stevenson (87)

B:
Daniel Wright (48)
Marie Murphy (100)
SAA (150)
Twin Groves (167???)

Results on avogadro

DW's score is so impressive. NT and Stevenson were closer than I expected, though...

We have our first discrepancy...yesterday, as stated above, the rank for B division was Daniel Wright, Marie Murphy, SAA, and Twin Groves, in that order; SAA had a score of 150 with Twin Groves having a score roughly 15-20 points higher than that (I don't remember, specifically). However, Avogadro places Twin Groves ahead of SAA, 179-188. Anyone who was keeping track of events see where the scorers went wrong, and who is right?

HeavyHitter406 wrote:We have our first discrepancy...yesterday, as stated above, the rank for B division was Daniel Wright, Marie Murphy, SAA, and Twin Groves, in that order; SAA had a score of 150 with Twin Groves having a score roughly 15-20 points higher than that (I don't remember, specifically). However, Avogadro places Twin Groves ahead of SAA, 179-188. Anyone who was keeping track of events see where the scorers went wrong, and who is right?

I think it may have to do with factoring in the A team's into the final score. For example, DW had 48 overall. When the final scores came out, they had a 49 with a 6th in disease detectives instead of a fifth place. The team that got first in A in disease probably got in the top 5 overall, so DW was shifted down one place.

Trohans wrote:

HeavyHitter406 wrote:We have our first discrepancy...yesterday, as stated above, the rank for B division was Daniel Wright, Marie Murphy, SAA, and Twin Groves, in that order; SAA had a score of 150 with Twin Groves having a score roughly 15-20 points higher than that (I don't remember, specifically). However, Avogadro places Twin Groves ahead of SAA, 179-188. Anyone who was keeping track of events see where the scorers went wrong, and who is right?

I think it may have to do with factoring in the A team's into the final score. For example, DW had 48 overall. When the final scores came out, they had a 49 with a 6th in disease detectives instead of a fifth place. The team that got first in A in disease probably got in the top 5 overall, so DW was shifted down one place.

Good call! Really interesting to see how factoring lesser competitive schools into the picture hurts some teams and helps others based on the events ceetain lesser competitive teams did well in. Same thing happened for C; when factoring in A teams Waubonsie valley placed third ahead of Hinsdale Central.

It is quite interesting to see how it only affected DW by giving them one more point. On the flip side, SAA got many points added to their score because of the combined scores.

Skink wrote:DW's score is so impressive. NT and Stevenson were closer than I expected, though...

Its similar to how they placed at invitationals all year...

Does anyone know wind power raw scores for Div. C? Especially for the building portion?