Mission Possible C

ScottMaurer19
Member
Member
Posts: 555
Joined: January 5th, 2017, 9:39 am
Division: C
State: OH
Location: Solon, OH

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby ScottMaurer19 » December 31st, 2018, 2:34 pm

ftf841 wrote:Would this be legal? The Rule clarification says that "anything labeled programmable would not be allowed per rule 3.i." Technically, it's not labeled as programmable, but it's adjustable, since there's a potentiometer that's allows you to adjust output voltage.

Adjustable does not equal programmable.
SHS '19 Captain
Placements:
2017 (r/s/n):
Hydro: 3/5/18
Robot Arm: na/1/1
Rocks: 1/1/1

2018 (r/s/n):
Heli: 2/1/7
Herp: 1/4/4
Mission: 1/1/6
Rocks: 1/1/1
Eco: 6/3/9

2019
Dynamic
Fossils
GLM
Herp
Mission
WS

Total Top 3 Placements: 125

User avatar
PM2017
Member
Member
Posts: 440
Joined: January 20th, 2017, 5:02 pm
Division: C
State: CA

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby PM2017 » December 31st, 2018, 4:36 pm

ScottMaurer19 wrote:
ftf841 wrote:Would this be legal? The Rule clarification says that "anything labeled programmable would not be allowed per rule 3.i." Technically, it's not labeled as programmable, but it's adjustable, since there's a potentiometer that's allows you to adjust output voltage.

Adjustable does not equal programmable.

I was going to say the same, but I couldn't come up with an argument as to why this is the case. I guess that isn't always necessary lol.
2018 Events
Astronomy, Mousetrap Vehicle, Mission Possible, Fermi Questions

2019 Events
Astronomy, Mousetrap Vehicle, Mission Possible, Fermi Questions, Circuit Lab

--
West High School Science Olympiad

“I didn’t come this far to only come this far. We’ve still got further to go.” – Tom Brady

MgEHS22
Member
Member
Posts: 4
Joined: December 1st, 2018, 7:57 pm

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby MgEHS22 » January 11th, 2019, 6:55 pm

Is it allowed to use a track with a ball rolling down it as the timer? If you mark each seconds on the track, for when it passes Each mark?

TheSquaad
Member
Member
Posts: 113
Joined: March 18th, 2017, 5:14 pm
Division: C
State: MA

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby TheSquaad » January 12th, 2019, 3:22 pm

MgEHS22 wrote:Is it allowed to use a track with a ball rolling down it as the timer? If you mark each seconds on the track, for when it passes Each mark?


Any non-electric or spring task can be a timer if it lasts over 30 seconds. Rolling a ball seems extremely inefficient to do that though.

User avatar
windu34
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1238
Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Location: Gainesville, Florida

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby windu34 » January 13th, 2019, 10:27 am

Thoughts on Mission Possible after MIT
I thought I would do a quick write-up now that Ive had some sleep and can think cohesively again. I am not going to release raw scores or anything of the such until I get permission to do so from MIT SciOly. But I will provide some useful comments and numbers that can be of use to you all.
Top 3: ~1200
Top 6: ~1100
Top 10: ~ 1000
Mean: ~650
Overall: Out of the 76 teams, only 57 showed up. MIT SciOly was VERY clear about running all events using Nationals rules this year - those that were tiered hopefully will be more vigilant about such things. Overall, the event ran pretty smoothly and I was quite pleased - I had put alot of thought into how I was going to run Mission for such a massive number of teams by myself. In the end, I knew I wasnt going to be able to judge all the devices myself, and I ended up recruiting two additional ESes that had varying levels of familiarity with the event, and I felt they did an outstanding job judging teams.
Setup: I was told I had the Lobdell Balconies, and the rest was pretty much up to my discretion. I thought breaking it up into an "impound side" separated by a walkway that lead to the "Competitor side" was the most optimal way to set it up. I created a barricade with chairs for spectators so that they could have a good visual on devices that were competing, but not the ones in impound. As a recent build events competitor myself, I know teams want to try their best to keep their innovative designs secret until states/nationals. Spectators had no access to even looking at the impound area and I was very clear about pictures/video only being allowed for their own teams. I did catch one person trying to take pictures of more than one device, but after I demanded her to identify her team affiliation and told her I would DQ her team if I saw her try to take another picture of another team, I had no more issues. I had signage stating "Pictures/Video for your team only, violation is grounds for DQ". In the future, I plan to increase the signage of this and make it even more clear. I dont want teams feeling like they need to hide their devices and not bring them to tournaments because they are afraid of others stealing their designs, and I want to do everything I can to promote the best competition possible.
Impound: I was very worried about impounding 76 devices, but (thankfully) only 57 teams showed up. At the last minute the night before the tournament, we sent out an email to coaches stating we were starting impound 1 hour earlier for a total of 2 hours so that students with other events to impound or compete at wouldnt be stuck in a line. I was glad I chose to make an impound sign-in sheet so that there was no question as to whether or not a team had impounded their device.
Competing: The first two time blocks were rather busy. This was in part due to me having to run back and forth with HQ to deal with arbitration, but also because my other 2 ESes and I were judging a few devices together in the beginning to make sure they understood the flow I wanted to use so that we would all be consistent. If you are worried about missing an event, I highly recommend NOT signing up for the first two time blocks because those will always be the least efficient on the ES side. However, if you want to see other peoples devices and dont mind having to wait, this is a good opportunity to sign-in and then go and spectate while you wait for your turn. I saw some very innovative designs and some of the timer designs were very impressive. We caught a large number of teams interpreting tasks wrong and stating that it had been OK at ________ invitational so they thought it was fine. What surprised me the most was how many teams just accepted that a task wouldn't count for points when another ES or myself told them we didn't think they interpreted the rule correctly. While I do not want a full argument to break out while judging teams, I do like to seem teams do their best to understand why I am taking away points. Many teams seemed a bit complacent in that regard - ESes make mistakes too, and if you think you deserve those points, you should try explaining your reasoning to the ES in a polite way. I was happy that I didnt see any Team B trying to use an identical device as their Team A, something I know I will see alot of next month judging in Florida. Whenever I am suspicious, I will always start questioning them and ask very specific questions trying to catch them in an "uhhhh" moment, at which point I would feel comfortable asking "Did you build and design this device?" and then perhaps a DQ is in order.
Scores: The scores were mostly what i expected, but I thought I would see more 1000+. I think the top 2-3 teams would have been in the top 10 at nationals with their device performances. There were no "perfect" scores. The teams that did the best had tasks that were very consistent and cleanly built. Teams that tried to force more tasks than they knew how to implement well failed miserably, and many lost over half the points they initially were going for. I saw teams with very nice devices capable of 8+ tasks fail because they didnt test their device enough. It is so much more important to do a 6 or 7 tasks well and know they will not go wrong at competition than have 9+ tasks that "worked at home".
Final remarks: My team and I were very strict on enforcing the rules, and it is likely that many teams will not face such strict judging until Nationals (unless youre from Florida, in which case I'll see you again soon). A few people stopped by after the last time block to ask my ES team about how they could improve. I think this was a fantastic idea by them and I think more teams should take advantage of such opportunities. All of the ESes at MIT are past competitors with very strong nationals experience and they just finished looking at every teams device/build. If you are looking for ways to improve, talking to them after the last time block is probably the best thing you can do. This goes for study/lab events too - I think most of the ESes (at MIT at least) would be more than happy to give you pointers on ways you can improve. I hope it was a good learning experience for all those that competed and you should feel welcome to email me with any questions you have.
President of Science Olympiad at the University of Florida || Boca Raton Community High School Alumni
kevin@floridascienceolympiad.org
windu34's Userpage

Event Supervisor for 2019:
MIT Invitational - Mission Possible
Harvard Invitational - Sounds of Music
Princeton Invitational - Herpetology

JonB
Coach
Coach
Posts: 267
Joined: March 11th, 2014, 12:00 pm
Division: C
State: FL

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby JonB » January 13th, 2019, 10:52 am

Thank you for running mission at MIT. The event setup was great (with the two sides and close spectator area) and for the amount of teams you had to move through the event, I think you and your team did a great job. I appreciated the questions you asked each competitor and the conversations you had with the teams about each device.

mrtoaf
Member
Member
Posts: 1
Joined: January 15th, 2019, 5:59 am

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby mrtoaf » January 15th, 2019, 6:03 am

Do most top 10 teams at nationals do every single one of the tasks offered?

nicholasmaurer
Coach
Coach
Posts: 318
Joined: May 19th, 2017, 10:55 am
Division: Grad
State: OH
Location: Solon, OH

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby nicholasmaurer » January 15th, 2019, 3:02 pm

mrtoaf wrote:Do most top 10 teams at nationals do every single one of the tasks offered?


Last year I think many attempted all of the tasks. This year I expect a number will avoid the unguided balloon task.
Assistant Coach and Alumni ('14) - Solon High School Science Olympiad
Co-Director - Northeast Ohio Region

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

TheSquaad
Member
Member
Posts: 113
Joined: March 18th, 2017, 5:14 pm
Division: C
State: MA

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby TheSquaad » January 15th, 2019, 5:46 pm

nicholasmaurer wrote:
mrtoaf wrote:Do most top 10 teams at nationals do every single one of the tasks offered?


Last year I think many attempted all of the tasks. This year I expect a number will avoid the unguided balloon task.


I’d expect more to avoid the quarter flip task.

nicholasmaurer
Coach
Coach
Posts: 318
Joined: May 19th, 2017, 10:55 am
Division: Grad
State: OH
Location: Solon, OH

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby nicholasmaurer » January 15th, 2019, 6:11 pm

TheSquaad wrote:
nicholasmaurer wrote:
mrtoaf wrote:Do most top 10 teams at nationals do every single one of the tasks offered?


Last year I think many attempted all of the tasks. This year I expect a number will avoid the unguided balloon task.


I’d expect more to avoid the quarter flip task.


I've seen several effective solutions for the quarter flip task. The unguided balloon has no clever solutions - it takes up a tremendous amount of space by design, fills at a somewhat unpredictable pace, and always risks being invalidated by bumping into something and thus becoming "guided."
Assistant Coach and Alumni ('14) - Solon High School Science Olympiad
Co-Director - Northeast Ohio Region

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

User avatar
windu34
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1238
Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Location: Gainesville, Florida

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby windu34 » January 15th, 2019, 7:15 pm

nicholasmaurer wrote:
TheSquaad wrote:
nicholasmaurer wrote:
Last year I think many attempted all of the tasks. This year I expect a number will avoid the unguided balloon task.


I’d expect more to avoid the quarter flip task.


I've seen several effective solutions for the quarter flip task. The unguided balloon has no clever solutions - it takes up a tremendous amount of space by design, fills at a somewhat unpredictable pace, and always risks being invalidated by bumping into something and thus becoming "guided."

I think it will be totally reasonable to place without the balloon task at nationals. If you have all the other tasks and there are no issues and nothing goes wrong, I think its even possible to get 1st. Consistency in this event is key, and should always be prioritized over increasing number of tasks.
President of Science Olympiad at the University of Florida || Boca Raton Community High School Alumni
kevin@floridascienceolympiad.org
windu34's Userpage

Event Supervisor for 2019:
MIT Invitational - Mission Possible
Harvard Invitational - Sounds of Music
Princeton Invitational - Herpetology

TheSquaad
Member
Member
Posts: 113
Joined: March 18th, 2017, 5:14 pm
Division: C
State: MA

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby TheSquaad » January 16th, 2019, 8:38 am

nicholasmaurer wrote:
TheSquaad wrote:
nicholasmaurer wrote:
Last year I think many attempted all of the tasks. This year I expect a number will avoid the unguided balloon task.


I’d expect more to avoid the quarter flip task.


I've seen several effective solutions for the quarter flip task. The unguided balloon has no clever solutions - it takes up a tremendous amount of space by design, fills at a somewhat unpredictable pace, and always risks being invalidated by bumping into something and thus becoming "guided."


I don’t thinking bumping into a wall qualifies as guided. That happened to my balloon at mit, and there were no concerns. In fact, in my opinion, as long as the balloon isn’t guaranteed to bump into a wall, it should just be considered random movement.

nicholasmaurer
Coach
Coach
Posts: 318
Joined: May 19th, 2017, 10:55 am
Division: Grad
State: OH
Location: Solon, OH

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby nicholasmaurer » January 16th, 2019, 6:50 pm

TheSquaad wrote:
nicholasmaurer wrote:
TheSquaad wrote:
I’d expect more to avoid the quarter flip task.


I've seen several effective solutions for the quarter flip task. The unguided balloon has no clever solutions - it takes up a tremendous amount of space by design, fills at a somewhat unpredictable pace, and always risks being invalidated by bumping into something and thus becoming "guided."


I don’t thinking bumping into a wall qualifies as guided. That happened to my balloon at mit, and there were no concerns. In fact, in my opinion, as long as the balloon isn’t guaranteed to bump into a wall, it should just be considered random movement.


I have discussed this at length with one of the National Event Supervisors who was involved in writing the rules. Because one cannot determine if an object was intentionally placed to guide the balloon, essentially any object it collides with will likely be treated as guidance. This is reinforced by the 10/15/18 FAQ. While the FAQ begins by saying only objects "placed strategically" count as violations, it then goes on to say there "must be enough room between the balloon and the other parts of the machine to allow the balloon to move randomly." In other words, there has to be enough space that the first thing it runs into is the trigger for the next action. They intentionally designed this task to require a significant amount of space to execute successfully.

I cannot speak for how windu34 and others scored this at MIT, but that is how I expect it to be scored at the Ohio State and National Tournaments.

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.
Assistant Coach and Alumni ('14) - Solon High School Science Olympiad
Co-Director - Northeast Ohio Region

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

User avatar
windu34
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1238
Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Location: Gainesville, Florida

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby windu34 » January 17th, 2019, 5:50 am

nicholasmaurer wrote:
TheSquaad wrote:
nicholasmaurer wrote:
I've seen several effective solutions for the quarter flip task. The unguided balloon has no clever solutions - it takes up a tremendous amount of space by design, fills at a somewhat unpredictable pace, and always risks being invalidated by bumping into something and thus becoming "guided."


I don’t thinking bumping into a wall qualifies as guided. That happened to my balloon at mit, and there were no concerns. In fact, in my opinion, as long as the balloon isn’t guaranteed to bump into a wall, it should just be considered random movement.


I have discussed this at length with one of the National Event Supervisors who was involved in writing the rules. Because one cannot determine if an object was intentionally placed to guide the balloon, essentially any object it collides with will likely be treated as guidance. This is reinforced by the 10/15/18 FAQ. While the FAQ begins by saying only objects "placed strategically" count as violations, it then goes on to say there "must be enough room between the balloon and the other parts of the machine to allow the balloon to move randomly." In other words, there has to be enough space that the first thing it runs into is the trigger for the next action. They intentionally designed this task to require a significant amount of space to execute successfully.

I cannot speak for how windu34 and others scored this at MIT, but that is how I expect it to be scored at the Ohio State and National Tournaments.

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

I personally only remember judging 1 device that even attempted the balloon task, and im pretty sure it did touch the sides, but it failed to initiate the next action so it didnt matter. Perhaps my co-supervisors judged your device and deemed it "accidental/random". Regardless, what nicholasmaurer is saying is correct, and I would encourage you to get the task to comply to ensure you dont get penalized in the future.
President of Science Olympiad at the University of Florida || Boca Raton Community High School Alumni
kevin@floridascienceolympiad.org
windu34's Userpage

Event Supervisor for 2019:
MIT Invitational - Mission Possible
Harvard Invitational - Sounds of Music
Princeton Invitational - Herpetology

jinhusong
Member
Member
Posts: 65
Joined: March 16th, 2017, 3:34 pm
Division: C
State: CA
Location: Bay Area

Re: Mission Possible C

Postby jinhusong » January 17th, 2019, 9:11 am

Long and narrow Mylar balloon will make this task much easier.


Jinhu


Return to “Mission Possible C”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest