Score Discussion

User avatar
windu34
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1220
Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Location: Gainesville, Florida
Contact:

Score Discussion

Postby windu34 » October 16th, 2018, 6:38 pm

Nationals Predictions
1.) 12
6.) 19
20.) 45

This was much harder for me to predict than Mission. I was pretty disappointed in the MTV scores from last years Nationals, i really thought they would be higher better. These predictions reflect that.
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

User avatar
PM2017
Member
Member
Posts: 417
Joined: January 20th, 2017, 5:02 pm
Division: C
State: CA
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby PM2017 » October 16th, 2018, 9:24 pm

windu34 wrote:Nationals Predictions
1.) 12
6.) 19
20.) 45

This was much harder for me to predict than Mission. I was pretty disappointed in the MTV scores from last years Nationals, i really thought they would be higher. These predictions reflect that.


I'm assuming you meant lower scores (as in better scores.)
The time score this year is going to be much higher, simply because the change in direction is so much after the start, so I'd wager that scores would be even higher than you predicted.
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

User avatar
windu34
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1220
Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Location: Gainesville, Florida
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby windu34 » October 17th, 2018, 12:52 pm

PM2017 wrote:
windu34 wrote:Nationals Predictions
1.) 12
6.) 19
20.) 45

This was much harder for me to predict than Mission. I was pretty disappointed in the MTV scores from last years Nationals, i really thought they would be higher. These predictions reflect that.


I'm assuming you meant lower scores (as in better scores.)
The time score this year is going to be much higher, simply because the change in direction is so much after the start, so I'd wager that scores would be even higher than you predicted.

Ah yes sorry I meant the scores were worse than I expected them to be. I would agree with that, except this is the second year so it should be a bit more competitive than a direct comparison from last year
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

User avatar
Alex-RCHS
Member
Member
Posts: 510
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 3:46 pm
Division: C
State: NC
Location: Raleigh, NC
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby Alex-RCHS » January 7th, 2019, 7:06 pm

Anyone want to update with some scores?
About me!
Raleigh Charter HS (NC) 2018
UNC-Chapel Hill 2022

mnoga
Member
Member
Posts: 43
Joined: March 19th, 2015, 6:12 pm
State: -
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby mnoga » January 13th, 2019, 11:01 am

Alex-RCHS wrote:Anyone want to update with some scores?


Mira Loma C approximate results and discussion:

1. Mira Loma: 17
2. Troy: 18
3. Albany: somewhere between 17 and 33
4. Mtn View: 33

1. Mira Loma was running on their home floor. On their first run cup tipped over when it hit the VTP tape strip but it stayed in front of vehicle and landed on top of the CTP. Car backed up and missed the VTP by about 2.5cm. Car wasn't particularity fast with a total run time of 14.5 seconds. Their second run missed the CTP by a few centimeters but they were slightly closer to the VTP.

2. Troy had a mechanical issue on their first run. On their second run they were about three centimeters from the CTP and a couple of centimeters from the VTP. Car was fast with a run time of about 10 seconds. Because of their bad 1st run, Troy had no information to adjust for their 2nd run, so this car can probably score around 11 or 12 with a near perfect run. Note: Troy had an issue with their log, so they incurred a penalty and did not actually finish 2nd.

3. I did not see Albany run their car so I have no idea what they actually scored. They did win the NorCal State last year.

4. Mtn View had same issue as Mira Loma on their 1st run as the cup tipped over but it was pushed around 11cm short of the CTP. Their car backed up around 5 from the VTP. Mtn View's second run was better as the cup did not tip over and they managed to push the cup 9cm short of the CTP and it backed up 1.5cm from the VTP. The Mtn View car run time was around 12 seconds. I believe Mtn View did not make the correct adjustment on the 2nd run by subtracting one winding for the backward leg, thereby adding one extra winding to the forward leg.

RECOMMENDATION: VTP 5cm x 2.5cm tape should be reduced to very small 0.5 cm square thereby lessening chances of cup tipping over.

shrewdPanther46
Member
Member
Posts: 404
Joined: October 9th, 2017, 6:25 pm
Division: C
State: NJ
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby shrewdPanther46 » January 13th, 2019, 11:22 am

mnoga wrote:
Alex-RCHS wrote:Anyone want to update with some scores?


Mira Loma C approximate results and discussion:

1. Mira Loma: 17
2. Troy: 18
3. Albany: somewhere between 17 and 33
4. Mtn View: 33

1. Mira Loma was running on their home floor. On their first run cup tipped over when it hit the VTP tape strip but it stayed in front of vehicle and landed on top of the CTP. Car backed up and missed the VTP by about 2.5cm. Car wasn't particularity fast with a total run time of 14.5 seconds. Their second run missed the CTP by a few centimeters but they were slightly closer to the VTP.

2. Troy had a mechanical issue on their first run. On their second run they were about three centimeters from the CTP and a couple of centimeters from the VTP. Car was fast with a run time of about 10 seconds. Because of their bad 1st run, Troy had no information to adjust for their 2nd run, so this car can probably score around 11 or 12 with a near perfect run. Note: Troy had an issue with their log, so they incurred a penalty and did not actually finish 2nd.

3. I did not see Albany run their car so I have no idea what they actually scored. They did win the NorCal State last year.

4. Mtn View had same issue as Mira Loma on their 1st run as the cup tipped over but it was pushed around 11cm short of the CTP. Their car backed up around 5 from the VTP. Mtn View's second run was better as the cup did not tip over and they managed to push the cup 9cm short of the CTP and it backed up 1.5cm from the VTP. The Mtn View car run time was around 12 seconds. I believe Mtn View did not make the correct adjustment on the 2nd run by subtracting one winding for the backward leg, thereby adding one extra winding to the forward leg.

RECOMMENDATION: VTP 5cm x 2.5cm tape should be reduced to very small 0.5 cm square thereby lessening chances of cup tipping over.

What rules did the mira loma invitational use for mousetrap?

sciencecat42
Member
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: March 14th, 2016, 7:07 pm
State: -
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby sciencecat42 » January 13th, 2019, 11:28 am

Given that those above scores are some of the best in the nation, could you make a relatively competitive car for state by ignoring the reverse angle completely? Let's say you hit the CTP perfectly and get around a 10s run time, your score would be 20.

mnoga
Member
Member
Posts: 43
Joined: March 19th, 2015, 6:12 pm
State: -
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby mnoga » January 13th, 2019, 12:26 pm

shrewdPanther46 wrote:
mnoga wrote:
Alex-RCHS wrote:Anyone want to update with some scores?


Mira Loma C approximate results and discussion:

1. Mira Loma: 17
2. Troy: 18
3. Albany: somewhere between 17 and 33
4. Mtn View: 33

1. Mira Loma was running on their home floor. On their first run cup tipped over when it hit the VTP tape strip but it stayed in front of vehicle and landed on top of the CTP. Car backed up and missed the VTP by about 2.5cm. Car wasn't particularity fast with a total run time of 14.5 seconds. Their second run missed the CTP by a few centimeters but they were slightly closer to the VTP.

2. Troy had a mechanical issue on their first run. On their second run they were about three centimeters from the CTP and a couple of centimeters from the VTP. Car was fast with a run time of about 10 seconds. Because of their bad 1st run, Troy had no information to adjust for their 2nd run, so this car can probably score around 11 or 12 with a near perfect run. Note: Troy had an issue with their log, so they incurred a penalty and did not actually finish 2nd.

3. I did not see Albany run their car so I have no idea what they actually scored. They did win the NorCal State last year.

4. Mtn View had same issue as Mira Loma on their 1st run as the cup tipped over but it was pushed around 11cm short of the CTP. Their car backed up around 5 from the VTP. Mtn View's second run was better as the cup did not tip over and they managed to push the cup 9cm short of the CTP and it backed up 1.5cm from the VTP. The Mtn View car run time was around 12 seconds. I believe Mtn View did not make the correct adjustment on the 2nd run by subtracting one winding for the backward leg, thereby adding one extra winding to the forward leg.

RECOMMENDATION: VTP 5cm x 2.5cm tape should be reduced to very small 0.5 cm square thereby lessening chances of cup tipping over.

What rules did the mira loma invitational use for mousetrap?


State Rules and the run distance was 3.4m ... Teams were made aware before competition that Mira Loma would be using State Rules.

mnoga
Member
Member
Posts: 43
Joined: March 19th, 2015, 6:12 pm
State: -
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby mnoga » January 13th, 2019, 12:41 pm

sciencecat42 wrote:Given that those above scores are some of the best in the nation, could you make a relatively competitive car for state by ignoring the reverse angle completely? Let's say you hit the CTP perfectly and get around a 10s run time, your score would be 20.


Reverse angle? Are you saying you run straight and then try to adjust steering at CTP? Or are you talking fixed path but aiming slightly right and curving slightly right?

20 is definitely achievable at any distance if you run a fixed path AND you know a priori the rules you are running under, that is, Regional (0.1m), State (0.25m), or National (0.5m). You can adjust your curvature depending upon distances from imaginary line that runs thought the SP and the CTP.

Zxcvbnm123
Member
Member
Posts: 11
Joined: October 14th, 2018, 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby Zxcvbnm123 » January 13th, 2019, 2:01 pm

mnoga wrote:
sciencecat42 wrote:Given that those above scores are some of the best in the nation, could you make a relatively competitive car for state by ignoring the reverse angle completely? Let's say you hit the CTP perfectly and get around a 10s run time, your score would be 20.


Reverse angle? Are you saying you run straight and then try to adjust steering at CTP? Or are you talking fixed path but aiming slightly right and curving slightly right?

20 is definitely achievable at any distance if you run a fixed path AND you know a priori the rules you are running under, that is, Regional (0.1m), State (0.25m), or National (0.5m). You can adjust your curvature depending upon distances from imaginary line that runs thought the SP and the CTP.

He means straight forward and back.

User avatar
dragonfruit35
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 217
Joined: February 28th, 2015, 7:49 am
Division: C
State: VA
Location: TJHSST
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby dragonfruit35 » January 13th, 2019, 7:26 pm

Zxcvbnm123 wrote:
mnoga wrote:
sciencecat42 wrote:Given that those above scores are some of the best in the nation, could you make a relatively competitive car for state by ignoring the reverse angle completely? Let's say you hit the CTP perfectly and get around a 10s run time, your score would be 20.


Reverse angle? Are you saying you run straight and then try to adjust steering at CTP? Or are you talking fixed path but aiming slightly right and curving slightly right?

20 is definitely achievable at any distance if you run a fixed path AND you know a priori the rules you are running under, that is, Regional (0.1m), State (0.25m), or National (0.5m). You can adjust your curvature depending upon distances from imaginary line that runs thought the SP and the CTP.

He means straight forward and back.


(in which case, sciencecat is also referring to the regional rules, since the VTP is .25m from the center under the state rules, so your score could theoretically be around 35, which is decent but not nearly as good as 20 :) )

2018: (VT/FFX/Reg/States/Nats)
MV 1/1/5/-/- Mission 3/4/4/-/- Herp 7/2/4/-/-
WiFi -/-/-/4/13 Indoor Bottle Rocket -/-/-/1/- Code -/-/-/-/1

2019: (Duke/Reg/Cornell?/States?/Nats?)
MV 2/?/? Mission 3/?/? Sounds 4/?/? Code 3/?/?

Goooooooo Colonials!!

biz11
Member
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: February 15th, 2015, 10:55 am
Division: C
State: -
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby biz11 » January 13th, 2019, 8:43 pm

He may mean fixed path as in a path that can't be changed, not a straight path. In other words, you may go to the side, but the angle you go to the side is always the same.

sciencecat42
Member
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: March 14th, 2016, 7:07 pm
State: -
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby sciencecat42 » January 14th, 2019, 7:14 pm

dragonfruit35 wrote:
Zxcvbnm123 wrote:
mnoga wrote:
Reverse angle? Are you saying you run straight and then try to adjust steering at CTP? Or are you talking fixed path but aiming slightly right and curving slightly right?

20 is definitely achievable at any distance if you run a fixed path AND you know a priori the rules you are running under, that is, Regional (0.1m), State (0.25m), or National (0.5m). You can adjust your curvature depending upon distances from imaginary line that runs thought the SP and the CTP.

He means straight forward and back.


(in which case, sciencecat is also referring to the regional rules, since the VTP is .25m from the center under the state rules, so your score could theoretically be around 35, which is decent but not nearly as good as 20 :) )


I did confuse it with the regional rules, but 35 is pretty decent if I don't have to hurt my brain thinking about the curvature. :lol:

User avatar
cuber
Member
Member
Posts: 42
Joined: March 25th, 2017, 7:26 am
Division: C
State: NY
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby cuber » January 20th, 2019, 4:07 pm

Top 2 scores at the Columbia invitational were ~35. The rest were 60+. Not looking so great up in NY.

sciencecat42
Member
Member
Posts: 48
Joined: March 14th, 2016, 7:07 pm
State: -
Contact:

Re: Score Discussion

Postby sciencecat42 » January 20th, 2019, 4:29 pm

cuber wrote:Top 2 scores at the Columbia invitational were ~35. The rest were 60+. Not looking so great up in NY.


Regionals, state, or national rules? And the breaking system is hard not to mention the curving.


Return to “Mousetrap Vehicle C”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests