Air Trajectory B/C

DoctaDave
Member
Member
Posts: 167
Joined: December 28th, 2013, 10:59 pm
Division: Grad
State: CA

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby DoctaDave » May 21st, 2016, 9:44 pm

My partners feet were outside the square but his hand was hovering inside when he pulled the pin. It must have only been sticking inside a couple inches or so.

A Person
Member
Member
Posts: 185
Joined: July 18th, 2010, 12:34 pm
Division: Grad
State: KY

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby A Person » May 22nd, 2016, 5:07 pm

Does anyone have the scores for air trajectory at nats? I got 0cm on the close 5.2 cm on the far and landed both bucket shots, but also got a 100 point penalty. I just want to see where I would have placed if we didn't get that penalty.
I know this might be bitter news for you, but I think you should know that you would have been first. You did better than me and my partner, not counting for your penalty, and we got first place. Know that your hard work was good enough, that you were good enough to win first.

That sounds like amazing performance from your trajectory, though remember that what you did was an easy mistake to make, so you shouldn't take that as the deciding factor for your loss. I don't think you should feel bad about it at all. My partner and I nearly got the same penalty, but we suddenly realized (note that we didn't get a warning or anything, we just suddenly thought about it) and tied one of our Scioly lanyards to the end of our string. The event supervisor watching over us said afterwards that, had we not done that, we would have been inside the block and received a penalty.

I think you need to know that you had the best device in the nation. It was just one of those things that you can't account for, that every team is subjected to. Did you go first round? I think we saw a team hit the pin before us.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." - Arthur C. Clarke

laidlawe18
Member
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: September 1st, 2015, 2:03 pm
Division: C
State: RI

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby laidlawe18 » May 23rd, 2016, 8:26 am

My team also received a devastating penalty. We would have gotten 12th place, but because of a stupid technicality that resulted from vagueness in the rules, we were 53rd.

After aiming our device using the laser pointer, we placed it on the ground inside the device square, probably at least a foot away from the actual device, thinking that everything we used had to be inside the square. Apparently that counted as having an electronic component as part of the device. Nowhere in the rules does it say that the device is everything within the 1m square. As a team that usually gets between 40th and 50th, 12th would have been one of the best performances ever from our team.

I think that in cases like this, when the rules are vague, the ES should allow for different interpretations, or at least make it clear before the event starts. We were even told that the ES noticed the laser pointer and could've told us but didn't want to make it unfair for other teams.

User avatar
windu34
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1330
Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Location: Gainesville, Florida

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby windu34 » May 23rd, 2016, 8:33 am

My team also received a devastating penalty. We would have gotten 12th place, but because of a stupid technicality that resulted from vagueness in the rules, we were 53rd.

After aiming our device using the laser pointer, we placed it on the ground inside the device square, probably at least a foot away from the actual device, thinking that everything we used had to be inside the square. Apparently that counted as having an electronic component as part of the device. Nowhere in the rules does it say that the device is everything within the 1m square. As a team that usually gets between 40th and 50th, 12th would have been one of the best performances ever from our team.

I think that in cases like this, when the rules are vague, the ES should allow for different interpretations, or at least make it clear before the event starts. We were even told that the ES noticed the laser pointer and could've told us but didn't want to make it unfair for other teams.
I too got tiered for the laser, but my case was different in that I completely forgot about it. Additionally, they never asked for graphs...
Boca Raton Community High School Alumni
Florida State Tournament Director 2020
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Member
kevin@floridascienceolympiad.org || windu34's Userpage

Circuit Lab Event Supervisor for 2020: UT Austin (B/C), MIT (C), Solon (C), Princeton (C), Golden Gate (C), Nationals (C)

User avatar
Bazinga+
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 383
Joined: March 8th, 2014, 7:10 am
Division: C
State: NY
Location: Ward Melville HD

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby Bazinga+ » May 23rd, 2016, 9:47 am

My team also received a devastating penalty. We would have gotten 12th place, but because of a stupid technicality that resulted from vagueness in the rules, we were 53rd.

After aiming our device using the laser pointer, we placed it on the ground inside the device square, probably at least a foot away from the actual device, thinking that everything we used had to be inside the square. Apparently that counted as having an electronic component as part of the device. Nowhere in the rules does it say that the device is everything within the 1m square. As a team that usually gets between 40th and 50th, 12th would have been one of the best performances ever from our team.

I think that in cases like this, when the rules are vague, the ES should allow for different interpretations, or at least make it clear before the event starts. We were even told that the ES noticed the laser pointer and could've told us but didn't want to make it unfair for other teams.
I too got tiered for the laser, but my case was different in that I completely forgot about it. Additionally, they never asked for graphs...
Same here. When we impounded we offered to give them the graphs but they said it was ok and they would just take them later. After we ran our air (and got tiered for not removing the laser) they asked for out graphs and told us we were supposed to give them the graphs without them asking for them. Was disappointing with how the event was run, since although they tried to follow the rules to the dime, I wish the event supervisors would have left some leeway in some of the more vague rules, as well as informing teams (before they went up to compete) of possible penalties/tiers with their device (i.e. letting teams with a laser know that they must remove the laser).
Innovation =/= success

chalker
Member
Member
Posts: 2089
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby chalker » May 23rd, 2016, 10:16 am

I think that in cases like this, when the rules are vague, the ES should allow for different interpretations, or at least make it clear before the event starts. We were even told that the ES noticed the laser pointer and could've told us but didn't want to make it unfair for other teams.
I wish the event supervisors would have left some leeway in some of the more vague rules, as well as informing teams (before they went up to compete) of possible penalties/tiers with their device (i.e. letting teams with a laser know that they must remove the laser).
For future reference, we have the appeals process in place for a reason and you shouldn't be afraid to use it. I can't guarantee your appeal will be successful, but there's always a chance. I think about 1/3rd of the appeals at nationals this year were granted, and I personally know that several related to other 'vague' rules in Air Trajectory were granted.

Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair

User avatar
Bazinga+
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 383
Joined: March 8th, 2014, 7:10 am
Division: C
State: NY
Location: Ward Melville HD

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby Bazinga+ » May 23rd, 2016, 11:34 am


For future reference, we have the appeals process in place for a reason and you shouldn't be afraid to use it. I can't guarantee your appeal will be successful, but there's always a chance. I think about 1/3rd of the appeals at nationals this year were granted, and I personally know that several related to other 'vague' rules in Air Trajectory were granted.
I would have appealed, but I actually appealed for 2 events prior to going up for air trajectory, and didn't want to stretch my luck (wasn't sure if appealing more would influence the divisions for my other events). I believe events should be ran with consideration of the spirit of the competition, and give students every chance to not be penalized for a minor slip up, especially for something that would not affect their performance/give them an unfair advantage.
Innovation =/= success

laidlawe18
Member
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: September 1st, 2015, 2:03 pm
Division: C
State: RI

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby laidlawe18 » May 23rd, 2016, 1:17 pm

My coach spoke to the ES and they seemed to make it pretty clear that too many teams had already been affected for a change to be made.

chalker
Member
Member
Posts: 2089
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby chalker » May 23rd, 2016, 6:03 pm

I would have appealed, but I actually appealed for 2 events prior to going up for air trajectory, and didn't want to stretch my luck (wasn't sure if appealing more would influence the divisions for my other events). I believe events should be ran with consideration of the spirit of the competition, and give students every chance to not be penalized for a minor slip up, especially for something that would not affect their performance/give them an unfair advantage.
Additional appeals aren't going to impact the decision on any other ones, each one is handled independently.

I 100% agree students should be given the benefit of the doubt, but that is very subjective thing sometimes. And event supervisors are really busy and don't always have time to consider all the details and ramifications. Hence the arbitration team exists to do exactly what you propose.

Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair

laidlawe18
Member
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: September 1st, 2015, 2:03 pm
Division: C
State: RI

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby laidlawe18 » May 23rd, 2016, 6:19 pm

I'm just curious but did anyone successfully appeal the laser ruling? It's okay if you can't say.


Return to “Air Trajectory B/C”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests