Anyone medaled at Nats?

scienceolympiadist
Member
Member
Posts: 153
Joined: April 6th, 2007, 12:08 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Anyone medaled at Nats?

Postby scienceolympiadist » July 16th, 2009, 2:02 pm

I, being from Ohio, would think that is a beneficial idea, yet I don't see it happening. Here for the past few years, it's been dead heat between Centerville, Mentor, and Solon. The 4th place team comes about 100 points below these 3. Having 3 to Nationals would defeat the meaning of States, essentially. That would be harmful for alums for former 3rd place teams.

Also, I'm in Speech and Debate, and the region I am in overall isn't a strong region. Yet, top 2 competitors in each event still goes to Nationals. I happened to be a National qualifyer this year (although I couldn't go, due to an internship). Bottom line, I know hundreds of kids across the nation did not get to go to Nationals, because they happened to be in more competitive regions, although they could easily be better than I am.

In all, there is no real solution to this. All we should just take out of this, is that when we go to compete at Nationals, know that these are not the top 60 teams in the nation. There are many great schools who could not go, because their states are just more competitive. For those qualified to go to Nationals, just remember your fallen State companions.

nejanimb
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 343
Joined: November 14th, 2008, 5:17 am
Division: Grad
State: PA

Re: Anyone medaled at Nats?

Postby nejanimb » July 16th, 2009, 2:23 pm

I, actually, would tend to agree. You make a lot of good points. I was just suggesting one way it might be done.

ps - what kind of debate do you do?
Harriton '10, UVA '14
Event Supervisor in MA (prev. VA and NorCal)

scienceolympiadist
Member
Member
Posts: 153
Joined: April 6th, 2007, 12:08 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Anyone medaled at Nats?

Postby scienceolympiadist » July 17th, 2009, 9:59 am

I actually just do Speech: International Extenporaneous.

User avatar
EastStroudsburg13
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 3035
Joined: January 17th, 2009, 7:32 am
Division: Grad
State: MD
Location: At work trying to be a real adult
Contact:

Re: Anyone medaled at Nats?

Postby EastStroudsburg13 » July 20th, 2009, 10:16 am

One way of doing this somewhat objectively is to say "If the base # of teams from any given state make top 10, that state gets a bonus team for the next year." It could be even top 5, if we wanted to be even more picky. From this year, this would mean that each OH, CA, and PA would get to bring a 3rd team next year (C division). As it turned out, none of the top 10 C division teams this year came from a state with only 1 team, but, under this policy, if they had, their state would earn a second berth for next year as well. Then, next year, the states that got to bring a bonus team would have to maintain their performance - that is, 2 teams from each OH, PA, and CA would have to make top 10. If that did not happen, they would go back to only getting 2 spots. For B division, this would mean that next year, WA and NJ got to bring 2 teams, and CA and MI got to bring 3 teams.

I... am not sure about this. But it'd be one somewhat fair, objective way to do it. What do other people think? Good idea? One definite problem with this is that having the top team (or top 2 teams) is not necessarily indicative of how well the bonus team would do...
If anything, I think this idea can be realistically done, which says a lot for it. And it could give other teams more incentive because they have a better chance at nationals, making the overall competition even fiercer.

However, the problem would be that the amount of teams every year would change, which I am not sure would work so well. I tend to be one of those people who likes nice round numbers. Another small problem I foresee with this is that it puts an immense amount of pressure on the top teams to do very well so their state can get the bonus spot. Still, this is relatively minor and since it affects all front-runners, there really isn't much of an advantage or disadvantage for anyone.

Besides this, I really like this idea for the extra chance it gives teams in competitive states. :)
East Stroudsburg South Class of 2012, Alumnus of JT Lambert, Drexel University Class of 2017

Helpful Links
Wiki
Wiki Pages that Need Work
FAQ and SciOly FAQ Wiki
Chat (See IRC Wiki for more info)
BBCode Wiki


So long, and thanks for all the Future Dictator titles!

User avatar
49ers
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 371
Joined: April 13th, 2009, 7:22 am
Division: Grad
State: PA
Location: Campo
Contact:

Re: Anyone medaled at Nats?

Postby 49ers » July 20th, 2009, 10:21 am

One way of doing this somewhat objectively is to say "If the base # of teams from any given state make top 10, that state gets a bonus team for the next year." It could be even top 5, if we wanted to be even more picky. From this year, this would mean that each OH, CA, and PA would get to bring a 3rd team next year (C division). As it turned out, none of the top 10 C division teams this year came from a state with only 1 team, but, under this policy, if they had, their state would earn a second berth for next year as well. Then, next year, the states that got to bring a bonus team would have to maintain their performance - that is, 2 teams from each OH, PA, and CA would have to make top 10. If that did not happen, they would go back to only getting 2 spots. For B division, this would mean that next year, WA and NJ got to bring 2 teams, and CA and MI got to bring 3 teams.

I... am not sure about this. But it'd be one somewhat fair, objective way to do it. What do other people think? Good idea? One definite problem with this is that having the top team (or top 2 teams) is not necessarily indicative of how well the bonus team would do...
If anything, I think this idea can be realistically done, which says a lot for it. And it could give other teams more incentive because they have a better chance at nationals, making the overall competition even fiercer.

However, the problem would be that the amount of teams every year would change, which I am not sure would work so well. I tend to be one of those people who likes nice round numbers. Another small problem I foresee with this is that it puts an immense amount of pressure on the top teams to do very well so their state can get the bonus spot. Still, this is relatively minor and since it affects all front-runners, there really isn't much of an advantage or disadvantage for anyone.

Besides this, I really like this idea for the extra chance it gives teams in competitive states. :)

thank you finally someone whom agrees with me partially!!!!!!!!!!!!!
i hate how everyone thinks that 3 teams from each state going is unfair it is perfactley fair and affects everyone therefore no advantages or disadvantages as stated by EASTstroudsburg13
East Stroudsburg South and J.T.L Cavs Alumnus
49ersfan
Metsfan
You are now free to lose the game.
Ursinus Bearcox 2020
Need a rugger? Look no further.
Disk is lif.
Physics and Astronomy major; Bio, Math minors
Nu Delta Omicron founder.

fleet130
Staff Emeritus
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 433
Joined: November 10th, 2001, 3:06 pm
Location: Mare Tranquillitatis
Contact:

Re: Anyone medaled at Nats?

Postby fleet130 » July 20th, 2009, 1:32 pm

The BIG question is: If you give a state a 3rd team slot, which state are you going to take it away from. There are only soooo many slots available and that number is maxed out, unless you have an extra quarter mil or so in your pocket that you don't need!
Information expressed here is solely the opinion of the author. Any similarity to that of the management or any official instrument is purely coincidental! Doing Science Olympiad since 1987!

User avatar
49ers
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 371
Joined: April 13th, 2009, 7:22 am
Division: Grad
State: PA
Location: Campo
Contact:

Re: Anyone medaled at Nats?

Postby 49ers » July 20th, 2009, 1:35 pm

well we are not taking it away from any state, and I believe with all the bail-outs the gov. is giving 1/4 mil is not much to them
East Stroudsburg South and J.T.L Cavs Alumnus
49ersfan
Metsfan
You are now free to lose the game.
Ursinus Bearcox 2020
Need a rugger? Look no further.
Disk is lif.
Physics and Astronomy major; Bio, Math minors
Nu Delta Omicron founder.

fleet130
Staff Emeritus
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 433
Joined: November 10th, 2001, 3:06 pm
Location: Mare Tranquillitatis
Contact:

Re: Anyone medaled at Nats?

Postby fleet130 » July 20th, 2009, 1:45 pm

well we are not taking it away from any state
I'm afraid there are only a limited number of slots. If you give one state another slot you MUST take one away from another state.

with all the bail-outs the gov. is giving 1/4 mil is not much to them
What does government bail-outs have to do with this. The National Science Olympiad tournment is privately funded. They get NOTHING in the way of government funding!
Information expressed here is solely the opinion of the author. Any similarity to that of the management or any official instrument is purely coincidental! Doing Science Olympiad since 1987!

User avatar
49ers
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 371
Joined: April 13th, 2009, 7:22 am
Division: Grad
State: PA
Location: Campo
Contact:

Re: Anyone medaled at Nats?

Postby 49ers » July 20th, 2009, 1:51 pm

well ok but hat doesn't make sense that SO is not gov funded but OK
and why not make more slots for nats?
East Stroudsburg South and J.T.L Cavs Alumnus
49ersfan
Metsfan
You are now free to lose the game.
Ursinus Bearcox 2020
Need a rugger? Look no further.
Disk is lif.
Physics and Astronomy major; Bio, Math minors
Nu Delta Omicron founder.

User avatar
fmtiger124
Member
Member
Posts: 480
Joined: March 8th, 2009, 3:59 pm
Division: Grad
State: NY

Re: Anyone medaled at Nats?

Postby fmtiger124 » July 20th, 2009, 1:59 pm

well ok but hat doesn't make sense that SO is not gov funded but OK
and why not make more slots for nats?
BECAUSE 50 TEAMS IS ENOUGH AND IT WOULDN'T BE FAIR TO GIVE 1 STATE 3 SLOTS AND NOT THE OTHER 49!
Image


Return to “2009 Nationals”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests