Can't Judge a Powder B

[Cheesy Pie]

We could mark multiple observations per question @ Regs. We did a lot and got 1st.

[hpfananu]

But after doing this event through Nationals and looking up all this info, we realized the GOAL of the event isn't to make many observations. It's to make 30-40 GOOD, concise and clear observations. This is what the intent of the event was and I admit, I had been writing a lot of observations as well (invites and regionals don't always realize the intent of the event), but it makes more sense to combine and make one full observation.

[Cheesy Pie]

Really? @ tryouts we were told otherwise.

[NYLHVSSO]

We could mark multiple observations per question @ Regs. We did a lot and got 1st.

This is what I did.

Also, your observations have to be good or they may take off points. For example, you need to be precise and they may take off points if you mix up Celsius and Fahrenheit.

[Cheesy Pie]

We accidentally made a total inference with the hcl. The powder fizzed, and the result was neutral, so we thought the powder was extremely basic. Apparently a lot of people made mistakes like that. We got 1st

[gneissisnice]

But after doing this event through Nationals and looking up all this info, we realized the GOAL of the event isn't to make many observations. It's to make 30-40 GOOD, concise and clear observations. This is what the intent of the event was and I admit, I had been writing a lot of observations as well (invites and regionals don't always realize the intent of the event), but it makes more sense to combine and make one full observation.

You can possibly get away with 30-40 observations, but you have to get REALLY lucky and hope that the exam happens to only ask those.

Record everything you possibly can. Color, conductivity, phase of matter, smell, etc., for not only the powder, but every reagent as well. I can't tell you how stupid I felt when I did this event and when we got the test, we realized that we had forgotten to say that the powder was white (we still came in 1st, but it was just Regionals).

I remember writing up to around 200 observations for one competition, we just tested and wrote like crazy; the supervisors were getting annoyed at us because we kept asking for more paper. In 30 or so minutes of testing, you should be able to write WAY more than 30 or 40 observations. If you practice a lot and you find that you just can't write that fast, then try to streamline your observations.

I found it easiest to separate my observations into sections; instead of writing "the powder is white" and "the powder exhibits hygroscopic qualities", I made a heading of "powder" and just wrote "white" and "hygroscopic". No need for extra words, the graders get the point and it lets you write faster.

Technically, if it's a 10 question test, you could theoretically get away with only 10 observations, if you get extremely lucky and happen to only record the stuff they ask about (in that case, if I was a judge, I would accuse you of cheating and have you DQed). You're not graded on the amount of observations, so if you have 200 observations most of them will go to waste, but the more you have, the better chance of you putting down the right ones.

Though take my advice with a grain of salt; while I always medalled in Powders at Regionals and States, my National places have been...less than desirable (51st and 21st >.>).

[hpfananu]

I agree with you for Regionals and MOST States. We got 4th in Can't Judge a Powder at Nationals and we wrote down everything. BUT, the proctor's rules for what was considered 'one observation' was different. For example, when we added the powder to water and the question was if a reaction occurred, we could only write down one observation for an answer. So, we basically did the following:
Powder: bright white, highly reflects light etc etc
Then:
H2O: clear, no odor
H2O: pH
H2O: Conductivity Tester
H2O: Temp.
For powder and water, we did one line (or one observation) of reactions (EVERY reaction; bubbles, fizz, color changes, sound, smell anything!), and one of pH, conductivity, Temp, and the sort. We had everything that we were writing in 400 observations in 40.
I think I wasn't really clear when I said 40 observations. We did the whole header thing, but you could only write one COMPLETE observation for each question, so to keep safe we did the Reagent or the reagent + Powder then a colon.
It really depends on the proctor for this event but for Nationals, questions like "Physical Characteristics of Powder" needed to be answered with a complete observation, which in turn combines pretty much all the observations under the header of Powder or H2O
I'm not sure if I was really clear but if you want to see where I'm coming from, look at the Rules Clarifications. Pretty weird stuff.

[Cheesy Pie]

Ah thanks for the clarification.

[gneissisnice]

I agree with you for Regionals and MOST States. We got 4th in Can't Judge a Powder at Nationals and we wrote down everything. BUT, the proctor's rules for what was considered 'one observation' was different. For example, when we added the powder to water and the question was if a reaction occurred, we could only write down one observation for an answer. So, we basically did the following:
Powder: bright white, highly reflects light etc etc
Then:
H2O: clear, no odor
H2O: pH
H2O: Conductivity Tester
H2O: Temp.
For powder and water, we did one line (or one observation) of reactions (EVERY reaction; bubbles, fizz, color changes, sound, smell anything!), and one of pH, conductivity, Temp, and the sort. We had everything that we were writing in 400 observations in 40.
I think I wasn't really clear when I said 40 observations. We did the whole header thing, but you could only write one COMPLETE observation for each question, so to keep safe we did the Reagent or the reagent + Powder then a colon.
It really depends on the proctor for this event but for Nationals, questions like "Physical Characteristics of Powder" needed to be answered with a complete observation, which in turn combines pretty much all the observations under the header of Powder or H2O
I'm not sure if I was really clear but if you want to see where I'm coming from, look at the Rules Clarifications. Pretty weird stuff.

Ah, I understand, I thought you just mean 30-40 simple observations.

That's kinda dumb though that you can only use one observation for each question. If that's a rule, then they really can't ask questions like "What are the physical characteristics?" or "Does the powder react with any reagents?" because those basically inherently require several observations.

[hpfananu]

Yeah we found it dumb at first, but actually it makes sense. It was faster and technically the definition of an observation would be when you observe one thing happening (so just the powder, or the water or etc), by using one sense. It was hard to change but it does make sense.