Scioly.org

Division B (from spreadsheet):
1st: Beckendorff
2nd: Kealing
3rd: Bonham
4th: AAH

C: (from spreadsheet)
1. Seven Lakes
2. LASA
3. Clements
4. Stephen F. Austin

Division C
1. Seven Lakes (60)
2. LASA (79)
3. Clements (89)
4. Stephen F. Austin (153)

Seven Lakes advances to Nationals.

I'm curious: will the removal of Texas' 2nd bid reduce the number of elite teams the state can sustain?

Before now, TX was like OH, with 3ish elite teams (Solon, Centerville, Mason; 7L, LASA, Clements) and 1-2 fringe teams (Mentor, Chardon?; Tompkins, ... TAMS maybe?). But with only 1 bid, it will be interesting to see if the rotation of elite teams collapses into 1 dominant team (probably 7L), or if the current rotation of 7L, LASA and Clements is able to sustain itself.

Personally, I think it will collapse and we will see TX turn into a state like MN or Nor/So Cal, with 7L making Nationals every year (and perhaps earning even more success than they've had so far) and Clements and LASA falling back to clear second-tier teams.

Alex-RCHS wrote:...Personally, I think it will collapse and we will see TX turn into a state like MN or Nor/So Cal, with 7L making Nationals every year...

Why not LASA or Clements?

I don't really see why the state by default would go to one team if all three actually do have a decent shot. Especially considering the history (https://scioly.org/wiki/index.php/Texas#History) and the scores that were just posted, the teams don't seem all that far off from each other either (at least to me).

It's different with those other states knowing their history and *how* certain teams rose to their spots (e.g. usually a coach or student group that set things up particularly well and then *demolished* the competition...setting things to another level). I would imagine the domination has to either be ridiculously strong one year or at least has to be held over 4 or more years...partly to send a message of domination to other teams but mostly to set some sort of edge they might have (whatever it is) into something long-term.

Finally, a counterexample: NJ and WWPS v. WWPN? Why not two teams? I don't think comparing with NJ is necessarily justified either. I think it'll stay as three unless something particularly good or bad has happened to one of the teams.

Edit: Just in case people read this post again...the NJ comparison I could also add vs. Monty, etc (sorry!). The point was just that there's plenty of other states to compare with and it's hard to say really if teams just fizzle out unless you really think they can't make it for some practical reason.

syo_astro wrote:

Alex-RCHS wrote:...Personally, I think it will collapse and we will see TX turn into a state like MN or Nor/So Cal, with 7L making Nationals every year...

Why not LASA or Clements?

I don't really see why the state by default would go to one team if all three actually do have a decent shot. Especially considering the history (https://scioly.org/wiki/index.php/Texas#History) and the scores that were just posted, the teams don't seem all that far off from each other either (at least to me).

It's different with those other states knowing their history and *how* certain teams rose to their spots (e.g. usually a coach or student group that set things up particularly well and then *demolished* the competition). I would imagine the domination at least has to be held over 4 or more years...partly to send a message of domination to other teams but mostly to set some sort of edge they might have (whatever it is) into something held long-term.

Finally, a counterexample: NJ and WWPS v. WWPN? Why not two teams? I think it'll stay as three unless something particularly good or bad has happened to one of the teams.

I'm in agreement. Unless we see evidence of a major shift within the next two years, I'll say Texas remains competitive at the top.

I'll concur that MN's present situation has less to do with the state itself and more to do with a certain person - prior to 2013 MN was very competitive at the top. SoCal is basically the same - it's widely assumed that Troy is strong mainly because of Kurt Wahl (though I've never heard from someone at Troy on this subject so I'm not certain).

Besides, if any team is likely to make Nationals perennially I'd bet on LASA.

syo_astro wrote:Why not LASA or Clements?

Seven Lakes was just my best guess. But mainly because LASA has now missed nats for 3 straight years, and Clements has historically taken the back seat to the other two programs.

syo_astro wrote:Finally, a counterexample: NJ and WWPS v. WWPN? Why not two teams? I don't think comparing with NJ is necessarily justified either. I think it'll stay as three unless something particularly good or bad has happened to one of the teams.

That's still only two teams

We'll see. NJ hasn't quite been on the level of Texas, so I'm not sure if that's a fair comparison.

I didn't mean to imply that I'm confident that Seven Lakes will become the dominant team in Texas for a long time, just that that's my personal guess. More than anything, what I mean to say is that the next few years will give us an interesting window into how the success of elite teams is effected by nationals attendance. If we see LASA and Clements fading away, then it might imply that regular national attendance is a necessity to sustain an elite program. If they stick around despite recently missing nationals, then it would seem that teams can rally back to nationals even despite missing out for several years.

Keep in mind that even though we don't know what will happen in 2020, either LASA will reach 4 years without a national bid, or Clements will hit 3, or both. No matter what happens, I think it will reveal a great deal about what motivates elite teams.

Unome wrote:

syo_astro wrote:

Alex-RCHS wrote:...Personally, I think it will collapse and we will see TX turn into a state like MN or Nor/So Cal, with 7L making Nationals every year...

Why not LASA or Clements?

I don't really see why the state by default would go to one team if all three actually do have a decent shot. Especially considering the history (https://scioly.org/wiki/index.php/Texas#History) and the scores that were just posted, the teams don't seem all that far off from each other either (at least to me).

It's different with those other states knowing their history and *how* certain teams rose to their spots (e.g. usually a coach or student group that set things up particularly well and then *demolished* the competition). I would imagine the domination at least has to be held over 4 or more years...partly to send a message of domination to other teams but mostly to set some sort of edge they might have (whatever it is) into something held long-term.

Finally, a counterexample: NJ and WWPS v. WWPN? Why not two teams? I think it'll stay as three unless something particularly good or bad has happened to one of the teams.

I'm in agreement. Unless we see evidence of a major shift within the next two years, I'll say Texas remains competitive at the top.

I'll concur that MN's present situation has less to do with the state itself and more to do with a certain person - prior to 2013 MN was very competitive at the top. SoCal is basically the same - it's widely assumed that Troy is strong mainly because of Kurt Wahl (though I've never heard from someone at Troy on this subject so I'm not certain).

Besides, if any team is likely to make Nationals perennially I'd bet on LASA.

What’s the backstory about Luo?

SluffAndRuff wrote:

Unome wrote:

syo_astro wrote:
Why not LASA or Clements?

I don't really see why the state by default would go to one team if all three actually do have a decent shot. Especially considering the history (https://scioly.org/wiki/index.php/Texas#History) and the scores that were just posted, the teams don't seem all that far off from each other either (at least to me).

It's different with those other states knowing their history and *how* certain teams rose to their spots (e.g. usually a coach or student group that set things up particularly well and then *demolished* the competition). I would imagine the domination at least has to be held over 4 or more years...partly to send a message of domination to other teams but mostly to set some sort of edge they might have (whatever it is) into something held long-term.

Finally, a counterexample: NJ and WWPS v. WWPN? Why not two teams? I think it'll stay as three unless something particularly good or bad has happened to one of the teams.

I'm in agreement. Unless we see evidence of a major shift within the next two years, I'll say Texas remains competitive at the top.

I'll concur that MN's present situation has less to do with the state itself and more to do with a certain person - prior to 2013 MN was very competitive at the top. SoCal is basically the same - it's widely assumed that Troy is strong mainly because of Kurt Wahl (though I've never heard from someone at Troy on this subject so I'm not certain).

Besides, if any team is likely to make Nationals perennially I'd bet on LASA.

What’s the backstory about Luo?

Roughly, he brought Mounds View from obscurity to national prominence. You're better off asking someone who was around then, I joined after he graduated although generally people who were active in 2014-2016 are aware of him.

Elastic Launch Glider superdab was epic.