Page 6 of 8

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 11th, 2009, 4:31 pm
by sachleen
Untitled wrote:Well if you cap it at 15 people per school, people can't get the opportunity to compete and have the sci oly experience. Especially if you are in a big school with lots of competitive college nazis around you. I mean sure life would be a lot easier without b teams but you can't take that experience away from those who want it.

I know, that's the only down side to it. What you can do however is not count the B teams score towards the final scoring. All of the B teams can compete and see how they did relative to everyone else but only the A team's scores would count.

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 11th, 2009, 6:58 pm
by danger will robinson
tehkubix wrote:I wasn't using myself as an example (not for this year at least). No other team can get the points that your B team gets, making your A team stronger. So lets take Churchill A and B for example. They took 1st and 2nd respectively at Regionals. If 3rd place (Arden A) wanted to win, they'd have to beat both Churchill teams. If Churchill B wasn't a team, moving everyone up one point per event, Arden may have won (I don't have the score sheet so I can't actually do it). So Churchill adding a B team created the buffer they needed to win 1st.


Well, but Arden had an A and a B team too. But I do see your point. However, I do think that it's a good for people to get more years of experience. Also, you can't get mad at the schools who are taking advantage of it. (We'd be nuts to not take advantage of something like that if we have enough people to do it!) You should be frusterated with the people who made up the rule.

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 11th, 2009, 7:06 pm
by sachleen
danger will robinson wrote:Well, but Arden had an A and a B team too. But I do see your point. However, I do think that it's a good for people to get more years of experience. Also, you can't get mad at the schools who are taking advantage of it. (We'd be nuts to not take advantage of something like that if we have enough people to do it!) You should be frusterated with the people who made up the rule.


Well, we had enough people for 2 teams, but it wasn't even an option because we just don't have the money to send a second team. The schools with enough money can do this, and get whatever advantages come with it. It comes back down to the whole money thing, but this is something that can be changed without making people complain. Say this were to happen, only the A team's score would count in the final scores and event scores.. Would you complain? If you do, I'd say it's because it hurts your team, and your team uses the second team as the buffer thing i described earlier.

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 11th, 2009, 7:36 pm
by danger will robinson
You didn't have enough money to do another team? That's really unfair! I can see why you would complain because money isn't something that should be a factor in this.

However, I don't think it's a buffer-if anything else, it hurts the other team because its another team to compete against. Say for example A team gets 1st in an event, it doesn't help the B team.

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 11th, 2009, 8:16 pm
by sachleen
danger will robinson wrote:You didn't have enough money to do another team? That's really unfair! I can see why you would complain because money isn't something that should be a factor in this.

However, I don't think it's a buffer-if anything else, it hurts the other team because its another team to compete against. Say for example A team gets 1st in an event, it doesn't help the B team.

Right, but B team getting 2nd in that same event helps A team in a sense that its their OWN people (who they know aren't gonna win the entire comp) getting that extra point and not some other school. They basically 'threw out' that point so now the best anyone else can do is 3rd.

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 11th, 2009, 8:23 pm
by Untitled
Well we can assume that the a team will always do better than the b team right? So if thats the case, churchill's a is better than their b which was better then arden's a. So lets say we take churchill b out of the picture, churchill a would have placed higher than arden regardless if their b was there or not.

I also see kube's point about the money. Our school's sci depart prob won't be having a second sci oly team next year due to the new cali state budget cuts.

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 11th, 2009, 9:03 pm
by sachleen
Untitled wrote:Well we can assume that the a team will always do better than the b team right? So if thats the case, churchill's a is better than their b which was better then arden's a. So lets say we take churchill b out of the picture, churchill a would have placed higher than arden regardless if their b was there or not.

I also see kube's point about the money. Our school's sci depart prob won't be having a second sci oly team next year due to the new cali state budget cuts.

You would need to give every team who placed below Churchill B in every event that extra point since everyone would be moved up one position in each event.

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 11th, 2009, 9:12 pm
by Untitled
But either way it would maintain the balance of the rankings of those teams below churchill b. And churchill b did and worked hard to win 2nd place so I think we should penalize them for their hard work but reward them for their achievement.

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 11th, 2009, 9:14 pm
by sachleen
Untitled wrote:But either way it would maintain the balance of the rankings of those teams below churchill b. And churchill b did and worked hard to win 2nd place so I think we should penalize them for their hard work but reward them for their achievement.

They can still get rewarded for it, i just don't think their scores should be counted toward the final scores/places.

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 11th, 2009, 9:21 pm
by Untitled
But they did work hard and did well during the competition. And I think that they should be rewarded with an overall ranking and placing trophy if they deserve it. I don't think that just because they are "b" or "c" team that we can not allow them to be rewarded with a final placing. Also both "a" and "b" teams compete as separate teams so they should be rewarded and recognized as separate teams. I know that the "b" team's success indirectly helps to secure their "a" team's win but their "b" team competed like everyone else and should be have their own placing. If they win 2nd, they win and deserve the 2nd place ranking because they legitimately earned it. We shouldn't degrade them by saying since you are "b" team you don't count or something of the sort.

(Btw this is mine on solely my opinion only. I didn't intend to offend anyone when writing this. Just expressing my thoughts on the manner.)

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 12th, 2009, 10:57 am
by danger will robinson
tehkubix wrote:They basically 'threw out' that point so now the best anyone else can do is 3rd.


Not necessarily. This is the first time the B team has ever gotten 2nd. Every other year, its been either us or Arden.

Also, I agree with Untitled. The B team deserves to place and have their scores counted because they're just another team that worked just as hard as everyone else. They worked just as hard as us, so they need to be recognized as such. How would you like it if you worked hard for months and then didn't get recognition or get placed for it just because you were om a "B" team? (I was on the B team for two years, and if that happened to me, I would be really angry and upset)

The B team is simply another team for everyone to compete against. It hurts the A team from their school just as much as the other schools because its someone else to worry about. (Plus there's the shame of being beatne by someone on the B team if you're on A team and rank below a B teamer.)

(I'm with Untitled again, I don't want to offend anybody. It's just my opinion)

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 12th, 2009, 11:32 am
by sachleen
But the A team doesn't have to worry about the B team (as much as the other schools do). In a few events the B team places higher than the A team, but in general, the B team scores less than the A team.

To clarify any confusion/misunderstanding: I don't despise B teams or hate people or anything.. i just thing the whole multiple teams from the same school idea needs to change.

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 12th, 2009, 12:34 pm
by danger will robinson
But that's what I've been saying. It's just another team to compete against. Plus, if a B team makes it in the top 3, along with the A team, it doesn't get to go to States. It would be unfair for other teams if only two school would be allowed to advance.

I understand your frustration. I know that you don't hate B teams, just think that the system is flawed and don't dislike anyone on B teams.

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 16th, 2009, 9:35 pm
by e99angel
To be honest - I actually had a concern about B teams affecting the results, but I've analyzed our regional competition for three years now, and B teams haven't changed the top 3 or so places...so I think it's fair to allow schools with a lot of interest to let more people compete - one school had 3 teams at regionals this year? Plus, if a B team does better than an A team, that team would go to state instead. The school could choose to weight its teams evenly too, if it wanted. The system's not perfect though, I agree. I'm not sure what would be best, though...

States in less than two days!! I'm super excited. Now back to studying and building....:D

Re: Northern California

Posted: April 16th, 2009, 9:41 pm
by starpug
e99angel wrote:To be honest - I actually had a concern about B teams affecting the results, but I've analyzed our regional competition for three years now, and B teams haven't changed the top 3 or so places...so I think it's fair to allow schools with a lot of interest to let more people compete - one school had 3 teams at regionals this year? Plus, if a B team does better than an A team, that team would go to state instead. The school could choose to weight its teams evenly too, if it wanted. The system's not perfect though, I agree. I'm not sure what would be best, though...

States in less than two days!! I'm super excited. Now back to studying and building....:D

Bay Area? Yeah I'll see all you guys at states. 3rd year I'm going to states, but I have yet to compete at states :(. It's still fun to watch though. :)