It's About Time C

[Jazzy09]

thank you chalker

at the Wayzata (MN) invititational today, i got first out of 20 teams. there were a lot of pendulums some water clocks, and one cool one that had balls roll around and would start the next ball. on the test half there were 6 questions and we got them all right

[Jazzy09]

whats the rule about calculators? in the rulebook i thought it said you can use a calculator (it didnt specify non-programmable) for part 2 but at the event i was told it had to be nonprogrammable

[captbilly]

I have timed swimming events for years and I can tell you that reaction time is going to be a huge factor in this event. When we use stop watches to time swimming we have all the advantages: we have a starting command that is carefully coordinated with a starting buzzer about a second later, and we can see the swimmers comming in so we can predict the stop time very carefully. Even with these advantages, that won't exist in "it's abobout time", we get variations of at least several tenths of seconds between 3 timers. Without the advantage of knowing that the event timer is about to start or stop I would expect reaction time errors of from several tenths to several seconds.

[Jazzy09]

it gives two warning beeps so reaction time shouldn't be such a large factor to start it but the end beep has no warning so that depends on reaction a bit. i find with my pendulum that if i count out loud half periods (one and two and ...) that i am able to remember where the final happened (on a beep or a half or in between) so i am able to determine my period to approximately one fourth and i can round up or down depending when i think the beep happened

at the invitational yesterday i didnt know i couldnt use my calculator until i got to the meet so i had to make 5 pages of charts that converted my periods to times. i got it done before the event though and i got first so no worries

[captbilly]

It says that calculators (to be used during part 2 of the competition), are one of the items allowed. The normal rule for SO is that if something is not specifically stated to be not legal then it is considered legal. I don't see anywhere in the rules where it says that programmable calculators are not allowed in this event so I don't know why the event coordinator didn't allow you to use one. I have been involved in SO for 4 years now and I think the biggest advantage that any competitor can have is the ability to deal with event coordinators and the ability to deal with unexpected events. I would have assumed that a programmable calculator would be legal and would likely not have been well prepared to do the event without one.

Did you talkk to the event coordinator about the programmable calculator? I cannot see any reason that your event coordinator would allow a programmable calculator since the rules clearly state that all required formulas, constants and basic equations needed for part 2 will be provided anyway. So even if you programmed in every possible formula and piece of data that you might think would be useful, you wouldn't really have any advantage over someone who did not.

[Jazzy09]

luckily i also had my nonprogrammable with me so i used that. i just asked if we could use a graphing calculator and he said we couldnt use programmable calculators. i see why you cant have one on part because you could use a program but on part two i agree that any info could be in a binder and all formulas given so it shouldnt matter

[L42]

Has anyone else had Invitationals yet? What kind of calculators did you use? Has anyone submitted a rule clarification?

[Primate]

What sort of questions should I be expecting? I have an invitational coming up.

[saturnian]

It would be much safer to bring a non-programmable calculator, because I know that many event supervisors will require that even if the rules do not specify exactly. It is true that the rules are at times ambiguous, so some supervisors may interpret it differently than others. Don't rely on a graphing/programmable calculator, but if you already have both, you might want to bring both and ask which one you can use. I usually just take a non-programmable calculator because they are always allowed, and a programmable calculator does not give you any significant advantage, but it does eliminate some worry.

[saturnian]

Well, we did have an invitational. Below are sample questions that were asked.

1. On what date will the 22nd century start? (The answer key says: January 1, 2201)
2. What is a tropical year? (The answer key says: The time between equinoxes!!! Well, the time between two consecutive equinoxes (spring to fall) is only six months)
3. When is the spring solstice in South Africa? (The answer key says: September 22, while there is no such thing as spring solstice )

I feel discouraged when I see so many mistakes on one test. Everyone works so hard to prepare, why can't event supervisors spend a little time to proof-read their tests? How can we ever get a fair competition?

[tad_k_22]

That sort of thing happens at invitationals.
The problem with the study portion of this event is that the rules are so vague that coordinators interpret them in any which way, which can also be to...wow, yuck, you're right.
But in any case, the only person who we can all be sure knows what is kosher for a test and knows the information for the test is the National Event Supervisor. Everybody else, from an invitationals level to a states level, can interpret the rules in different ways or simply not know anything. Your regionals should be better, just be glad that this didn't count.

[saturnian]

tad_k_22 wrote on Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:57 pm
That sort of thing happens at invitationals.
The problem with the study portion of this event is that the rules are so vague that coordinators interpret them in any which way, which can also be to...wow, yuck, you're right.
But in any case, the only person who we can all be sure knows what is kosher for a test and knows the information for the test is the National Event Supervisor. Everybody else, from an invitationals level to a states level, can interpret the rules in different ways or simply not know anything. Your regionals should be better, just be glad that this didn't count.

Actually, last year's national astronomy test had 3 mistakes, not interpretation, but things like forgetting to square period in the Kepler's third law. I sent email to the person who wrote the test and got no response. Three mistakes can make a difference not only in your own placement on the event, but determine the place of your team.

I think all event supervisors, starting at invitationals and ending with national competition, must be more careful and perhaps give the test to someone to solve before giving it to teams.

Also, I agree that the rules for this event allow for anything to be on the test. But that is not the point here.

[Flavorflav]

tad_k_22 wrote on Thu Jan 15, 2009 11:57 pm
That sort of thing happens at invitationals.
The problem with the study portion of this event is that the rules are so vague that coordinators interpret them in any which way, which can also be to...wow, yuck, you're right.
But in any case, the only person who we can all be sure knows what is kosher for a test and knows the information for the test is the National Event Supervisor. Everybody else, from an invitationals level to a states level, can interpret the rules in different ways or simply not know anything. Your regionals should be better, just be glad that this didn't count.

Actually, last year's national astronomy test had 3 mistakes, not interpretation, but things like forgetting to square period in the Kepler's third law. I sent email to the person who wrote the test and got no response. Three mistakes can make a difference not only in your own placement on the event, but determine the place of your team.

I think all event supervisors, starting at invitationals and ending with national competition, must be more careful and perhaps give the test to someone to solve before giving it to teams.

Also, I agree that the rules for this event allow for anything to be on the test. But that is not the point here.

While you are absolutely right that it is irresponsible to produce an event with errors in it, remember that event writers are donating their time.

[binary010101]

I seriously doubt that there will be mistakes that serious on the regional and states test, where ranking actually counts.

[Flavorflav]

I seriously doubt that there will be mistakes that serious on the regional and states test, where ranking actually counts.

If only that were true.