Towers B/C
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 2407
- Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 3:12 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: WA
- Pronouns: He/Him/His
- Has thanked: 166 times
- Been thanked: 735 times
Towers B/C
"One of the ways that I believe people express their appreciation to the rest of humanity is to make something wonderful and put it out there." – Steve Jobs
-
- Coach
- Posts: 573
- Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:20 pm
- Division: B
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 7 times
Re: Towers B/C
So has anyone seen this years rules yet? Any twists?
Dan Holdgreve
Northmont Science Olympiad
Dedicated to the Memory of Len Joeris
"For the betterment of Science"
Northmont Science Olympiad
Dedicated to the Memory of Len Joeris
"For the betterment of Science"
-
- Member
- Posts: 81
- Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 4:53 pm
- Division: C
- State: PA
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 1 time
Re: Towers B/C
From what I've heard, they removed the restriction that limited the width of the tower above a certain height, so most designs no longer need to be built in two pieces. I also heard about a 2kg bonus for a tower that spans a 29cm diameter circle.dholdgreve wrote:So has anyone seen this years rules yet? Any twists?
-
- Member
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Sun Feb 01, 2015 11:26 am
- Division: C
- State: NY
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Towers B/C
you have to estimate your load score for tie-breakingdholdgreve wrote:So has anyone seen this years rules yet? Any twists?
Ward Melville High School -> Princeton University
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 4315
- Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:48 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: GA
- Has thanked: 216 times
- Been thanked: 75 times
Re: Towers B/C
...I'm not entirely sure whether to take this seriously. My first thought was "lol that woudl be hilarious" but now I'm not so sure.JZhang1 wrote:you have to estimate your load score for tie-breakingdholdgreve wrote:So has anyone seen this years rules yet? Any twists?
-
- Administrator
- Posts: 2407
- Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 3:12 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: WA
- Pronouns: He/Him/His
- Has thanked: 166 times
- Been thanked: 735 times
Re: Towers B/C
Yes, this is correct, outlined in rule 5.a.iii. The Load Scored estimate is used as a tiebreaker, see 6.e.Unome wrote:...I'm not entirely sure whether to take this seriously. My first thought was "lol that woudl be hilarious" but now I'm not so sure.JZhang1 wrote:you have to estimate your load score for tie-breakingdholdgreve wrote:So has anyone seen this years rules yet? Any twists?
"One of the ways that I believe people express their appreciation to the rest of humanity is to make something wonderful and put it out there." – Steve Jobs
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 4315
- Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:48 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: GA
- Has thanked: 216 times
- Been thanked: 75 times
Re: Towers B/C
An interesting way to add an extra tiebreaker just in case (though I figure ties aren't that common in these events).bernard wrote:Yes, this is correct, outlined in rule 5.a.iii. The Load Scored estimate is used as a tiebreaker, see 6.e.Unome wrote:...I'm not entirely sure whether to take this seriously. My first thought was "lol that woudl be hilarious" but now I'm not so sure.JZhang1 wrote: you have to estimate your load score for tie-breaking
-
- Member
- Posts: 2107
- Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2009 7:30 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: OH
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 56 times
Re: Towers B/C
Actually they do happen. One of the very rare times we had a tie at Nationals for a medal we couldn't break was with Towers many years back.Unome wrote:An interesting way to add an extra tiebreaker just in case (though I figure ties aren't that common in these events).bernard wrote:Yes, this is correct, outlined in rule 5.a.iii. The Load Scored estimate is used as a tiebreaker, see 6.e.Unome wrote: ...I'm not entirely sure whether to take this seriously. My first thought was "lol that woudl be hilarious" but now I'm not so sure.
Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 4315
- Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:48 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: GA
- Has thanked: 216 times
- Been thanked: 75 times
Re: Towers B/C
Oh yeah, now I remember; 6th? place Towers, 2012. Someone mentioned it in conjunction with it being your first time running scoring at Nationals.chalker wrote:Actually they do happen. One of the very rare times we had a tie at Nationals for a medal we couldn't break was with Towers many years back.Unome wrote:An interesting way to add an extra tiebreaker just in case (though I figure ties aren't that common in these events).bernard wrote: Yes, this is correct, outlined in rule 5.a.iii. The Load Scored estimate is used as a tiebreaker, see 6.e.
Is that what inspired the change?
-
- Member
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 3:17 am
- Division: C
- State: NY
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Towers B/C
So are we expecting more straight towers that try to just go for the raw score that may be easier or a repeat from past years the basic two part tower, or just a straight gradual pyramid design because triangular pyramids are some of the inherently strongest structures.HandsFreeCookieDunk wrote:From what I've heard, they removed the restriction that limited the width of the tower above a certain height, so most designs no longer need to be built in two pieces. I also heard about a 2kg bonus for a tower that spans a 29cm diameter circle.dholdgreve wrote:So has anyone seen this years rules yet? Any twists?
Happy to be here