It's About Time C

[joshxiong]

My biggest concern is whether it's going to cause more confusion amongst participants as to what constitutes the start and stop of the interval, since there are more beeps of different types to listen for. Anyone have any thoughts regarding that?

Sorry for the relatively late response, but I found that the warning beeps before the end made it more difficult, especially since I've been practicing with the sound files provided on soinc.org. At Yale, I stopped counting early for the first two trials when I heard the first warning beep (side note: I'm using a pendulum). Even though the event supervisor played a sample file beforehand and made it extremely clear that the file was not the "official" one provided by soinc.org, it was still fairly difficult for me to adjust to the different format. I think that having to adjust to different sound file formats probably costs more points than those lost due to a "slow" reaction time, especially considering that the first few trials have greater point deductions for inaccuracies and that the reaction time "problem" is shared by all teams.

[hipparcos]

I really do think that the soundtrack for the testing should also contain warning beeps for the end as well. The event is to test the clock the students made, and the reaction time shouldn't play such a significant problem for the students. For the 10-300 sec one, I have to stand there concentrated for the whole time, with my eyes closed.

I know this was talked about by our state director, Mike McKee (also past national competition director and such) and he supported that idea as well. Not sure if it will change, but I would agree with you that there should be warning beeps.

Interesting thought. I have to profess that It's About Time is near and dear to my heart since I got a silver medal in the event at Nationals in 1992. And I guess I've been thinking all along that current competitors should continue to have to do it 'the way I did' back then. My biggest concern is whether it's going to cause more confusion amongst participants as to what constitutes the start and stop of the interval, since there are more beeps of different types to listen for. Anyone have any thoughts regarding that?

On warning beeps: I think it's not that distracting if you pay attention and know exactly what it's going to sound like. Warning beeps do help with precision. When I count pendulum swings, I also count fractions of a swing, and when there are warning beeps, I find it easier pinpoint exactly when the final beep occurs and estimate the fraction of a swing. A single beep is pretty darn abrupt, and it's harder to figure out what fraction it is - you spend like a quarter second simply realizing that a beep had happened. Of course, this is all subjective, but still.

But yeah, if we don't have time to practice on the new format before the competition, it can lead to errors which could sink us.

[olympiaddict]

What kind of scores are people seeing on the build portion of the event? Trying to gauge what the best balance between precision and long-term accuracy would be, as well as how well my clock is doing...

[elephantower]

Quick note: practice with both starting at 1st and 3rd beep -- states started at 1st beep and it messed us up a tad

[blakinator8]

What kind of scores are people seeing on the build portion of the event? Trying to gauge what the best balance between precision and long-term accuracy would be, as well as how well my clock is doing...

I would expect that most teams at good competitions will be getting scores north of 45 on the device.

[lumosityfan]

I know this sounds stupid (and yes, I read the rules), but do both competitors need to go up and do Part I or can one competitor stay behind to do the test while the other does the time measuring portion?

[bernard]

I know this sounds stupid (and yes, I read the rules), but do both competitors need to go up and do Part I or can one competitor stay behind to do the test while the other does the time measuring portion?

Your question doesn't sound stupid, and it isn't specified in the rules. It depends on the event supervisor. I could imagine some event supervisors not allowing it. I would personally prefer having a partner there to make sure I'm counting oscillations correctly (if that's what you're doing) since being off by 1 or 10 would affect my timing and placement.

[chalker]

I know this sounds stupid (and yes, I read the rules), but do both competitors need to go up and do Part I or can one competitor stay behind to do the test while the other does the time measuring portion?

Most times I've run the event (or heard of others running it), we do Part 1 for all teams at the same time, then pass out the test for part 2.

[GoldenKnight1]

I know this sounds stupid (and yes, I read the rules), but do both competitors need to go up and do Part I or can one competitor stay behind to do the test while the other does the time measuring portion?

Most times I've run the event (or heard of others running it), we do Part 1 for all teams at the same time, then pass out the test for part 2.

When I run this event I usually switch this order because after they take the paper test 1st then teams without a clock leave (saving them time and getting them out of the way) and once the clock portion is done the event is over so teams can take their device that they are already at with them.

[blaub1196]

Just out of curiosity, what is everyone's devices like and how accurate have you gotten them.