IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

8 Pages V  « < 5 6 7 8 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Round 1/2018
Guest_JakeLHS_*
post Dec 10 2017, 08:10 PM
Post #121





Guests






QUOTE (madcap @ Dec 10 2017, 07:16 PM) *
QUOTE (JakeLHS @ Dec 10 2017, 12:53 PM) *
Also, which ECR results are going on ADSIC: v1 or v2?


I don't know. What do you think we should do? It's a website run by volunteers like you (yaaay PBS! biggrin.gif).

Some might say that we need test dates and version numbers on the wiki. Some might say that would be really messy with too much information, and that we don't have enough volunteers to keep it updated and consistent, and that we seldom know which version somebody used.

Some might say that it's more fair to show the v1 scores for all of the California teams and the v2 scores for all of the Texas teams, and that it would be unfair to show ECR's v2 scores while showing v1 scores for the rest of the California. Some might say that we should just show the most recent scores whenever we can.

I'd put both ECR v1 qnd ECR v2 on the wiki so they can be compared both to Cali and Texas schools, which would also make it possible to compare other California shhools to Texas schools and vice versa. Is there any reason not to do that?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
madcap
post Dec 10 2017, 08:42 PM
Post #122


Advanced Member
***

Group: Nazgul
Posts: 1,519
Joined: 25-March 18
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (JakeLHS @ Dec 10 2017, 03:10 PM) *
I'd put both ECR v1 qnd ECR v2 on the wiki so they can be compared both to Cali and Texas schools, which would also make it possible to compare other California shhools to Texas schools and vice versa. Is there any reason not to do that?


I hadn't thought about that. So Round 1/2018 would look like this?

Place School State Score
1 El Camino Real Charter High School California 39,400.0[1]
- El Camino Real Charter High School California 37,642.7[2]
2 Dulles High School Texas 35,662.9
3 South Pasadena High School California 34,980
4 Granada Hills Charter High School California 34,371.5
5 Mark Keppel High School California 34,060.1

(with endnotes 1 and 2 explaining it)

And I guess we would have to do the same for all of the ECR individual scores, meaning you would have two instances each of "ECR H1" / "ECR H2" / etc. cluttering up the individual section, some of whom scored higher on v2, and some of whom scored higher on v1.

We have had people warn us that we need to think about making ADSIC readable, accessible information for parents, supporters, the media, etc. versus turning it into an esoteric "Math Playhouse for the AcaDeca Community" / scoremongers / the select few. At the same time, we want to represent them fairly and this may be the best way to do it.

I would like to hear more thoughts from others if y'all have any opinion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stanleytree
post Dec 10 2017, 09:39 PM
Post #123


Advanced Member
***

Group: Nazgul
Posts: 1,478
Joined: 25-March 18
Member No.: 12



I think we could add a footnote about v.2 to a reference from v.1. Like have the asterisk thingy, and have the asterisk explain their score. You cannot understand the difference between v1 and v2 and who had it and who didn't anyways, so it doesn't really matter. Those who care to know the different will understand.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_ridgepoinths_*
post Dec 10 2017, 11:25 PM
Post #124





Guests






QUOTE (Stanley Tree @ Dec 10 2017, 03:39 PM) *
I think we could add a footnote about v.2 to a reference from v.1. Like have the asterisk thingy, and have the asterisk explain their score. You cannot understand the difference between v1 and v2 and who had it and who didn't anyways, so it doesn't really matter. Those who care to know the different will understand.


Is there a specific time window that teams have to use the v.1 tests as opposed to the v.2 tests? Or is it geographic-based? I guess I'm just trying to figure out if any earlier Round 1 testing in Texas was with the v.1 tests or is pretty much every Texas team using the v.2 tests?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stanleytree
post Dec 11 2017, 01:30 AM
Post #125


Advanced Member
***

Group: Nazgul
Posts: 1,478
Joined: 25-March 18
Member No.: 12



It's state-based, each state director gets a certain version
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
madcap
post Dec 11 2017, 01:45 AM
Post #126


Advanced Member
***

Group: Nazgul
Posts: 1,519
Joined: 25-March 18
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (Stanley Tree @ Dec 10 2017, 04:39 PM) *
I think we could add a footnote about v.2 to a reference from v.1. Like have the asterisk thingy, and have the asterisk explain their score. You cannot understand the difference between v1 and v2 and who had it and who didn't anyways, so it doesn't really matter. Those who care to know the different will understand.


I vote for this! It is much cleaner! biggrin.gif I went ahead and put it on ADSIC, keeping ECR on version 1 for consistency with past years' results and other California teams, and adding an endnote with their version 2 scores (team and individual) from the CDO scrimmage. https://acadecscores.gilslotd.com/wiki/Round_1/2018

But please feel free to disagree with me or edit ADSIC yourself! Really, you can! smile.gif See how Jimmy Wales, the founder of Wikipedia, encourages anybody to edit his user page: "After all, that's what Wikipedia is all about!" -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jimbo_Wales
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
madcap
post Dec 11 2017, 02:14 AM
Post #127


Advanced Member
***

Group: Nazgul
Posts: 1,519
Joined: 25-March 18
Member No.: 16



There probably is no significant difference between version 1 and version 2 difficulty on the Round 1 tests.

* 5 of 9 ECR Decathletes actually increased from version 1 to version 2 despite the team score going down.

* 6 of 9 ECR Decathletes remained within 250 points of their version 1 score, and a 7th was only an outlier because this individual increased 354.1 points from version 1 to version 2.

(The individual scores are now in the endnotes on Round 1/2018 on ADSIC.)

I have medium confidence that test difficulty is similar between Round 1 version 1 and version 2, based on these individual scores, ECR score trends throughout each of the past 11 years, and relative score trends between states (coinciding at Nationals) throughout each of the past 33 years. Data from more than nine individuals (an extremely small sample size, regardless of how good a given program is) would increase my confidence level.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TinDefacto
post Dec 11 2017, 03:24 AM
Post #128


Turtlemaster.
***

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,260
Joined: 23-March 18
Member No.: 21



QUOTE (madcap @ Dec 10 2017, 10:14 PM) *
There probably is no significant difference between version 1 and version 2 difficulty on the Round 1 tests.

Yeah, after a more in-depth look, I'm leaning toward a similar conclusion, though I do think SS and Art were slightly harder on this version (on v2 compared to v1). Even so, that only accounts for a fairly small difference. For most intents and purposes, I'd say they're about equal.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stanleytree
post Dec 11 2017, 03:30 AM
Post #129


Advanced Member
***

Group: Nazgul
Posts: 1,478
Joined: 25-March 18
Member No.: 12



How did the varsities drop so much? I think some outside influence happened on that- sickness or airplane situations or something.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_JakeLHS_*
post Dec 11 2017, 03:35 AM
Post #130





Guests






QUOTE (TinDefacto @ Dec 11 2017, 04:24 AM) *
QUOTE (madcap @ Dec 10 2017, 10:14 PM) *
There probably is no significant difference between version 1 and version 2 difficulty on the Round 1 tests.

Yeah, after a more in-depth look, I'm leaning toward a similar conclusion, though I do think SS and Art were slightly harder on this version (on v2 compared to v1). Even so, that only accounts for a fairly small difference. For most intents and purposes, I'd say they're about equal.

But ECR had more than a month more time to prepare for this meet and still scored around 2000 points less. You shouldn't be surprised that some people improved, they had a lot of time to do so. We would expect nearly everyone to improve over that time frame on equal tests, when in fact their team did much worse on average. By the same reasoning, you would conclude these tests were about the same difficulty as the easy tests, since half of Lubbock's team improved in the month between tests and our score only dropped a bit over 1000 points. In fact that's an even better argument since we had a (slightly) shorter time gap and a much lower score drop between the easy tests and these than ECR had between Round 1s, but obviously, these were much harder than the easy tests and likewise than the v1 tests.

This post has been edited by JakeLHS: Dec 11 2017, 03:47 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
madcap
post Dec 11 2017, 03:55 AM
Post #131


Advanced Member
***

Group: Nazgul
Posts: 1,519
Joined: 25-March 18
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (Scholastic Underdog @ Dec 9 2017, 07:12 PM) *
QUOTE (The Evil Dr. Calculus @ Dec 9 2017, 05:50 PM) *
Ten Event Scores:
52,667.0 El Camino Real
47,860.1 Highland Park
43,659.4 Canyon del Oro
43,292.9 Rockwall High School

High Score: Piper Gray, CDO, 9,515,4 ten event, 6,742.9 objective.

Highest score on ECR was a varsity, but they had 3 kids within 20 points of each other, all over 9k.

What the heck, Piper? What a freaking beast!


First non-California Decathlete over 9,500! Congratulations! smile.gif I hope you are very proud!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
madcap
post Dec 11 2017, 04:07 AM
Post #132


Advanced Member
***

Group: Nazgul
Posts: 1,519
Joined: 25-March 18
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (JakeLHS @ Dec 10 2017, 10:35 PM) *
QUOTE (TinDefacto @ Dec 11 2017, 04:24 AM) *
QUOTE (madcap @ Dec 10 2017, 10:14 PM) *
There probably is no significant difference between version 1 and version 2 difficulty on the Round 1 tests.

Yeah, after a more in-depth look, I'm leaning toward a similar conclusion, though I do think SS and Art were slightly harder on this version (on v2 compared to v1). Even so, that only accounts for a fairly small difference. For most intents and purposes, I'd say they're about equal.

But ECR had more than a month more time to prepare for this meet and still scored around 2000 points less. You shouldn't be surprised that some people improved, they had a lot of time to do so. We would expect nearly everyone to improve over that time frame on equal tests, when in fact their team did much worse on average. By the same reasoning, you would conclude these tests were about the same difficulty as the easy tests, since half of Lubbock's team improved in the month between tests and our score only dropped a bit over 1000 points. In fact that's an even better argument since we had a (slightly) shorter time gap and a much lower score drop between the easy tests and these than ECR had between Round 1s, but obviously, these were much harder than the easy tests and likewise than the v1 tests.


Possibly. Scores are volatile. Sometimes the hardest-working and best people on the hardest-working and best teams just decrease.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
madcap
post Dec 11 2017, 04:09 AM
Post #133


Advanced Member
***

Group: Nazgul
Posts: 1,519
Joined: 25-March 18
Member No.: 16



QUOTE (TinDefacto @ Dec 10 2017, 03:07 AM) *
Also, I keep misreading this as like "Hunter Dortch, Sr." and thinking, "How do they know there's gonna be a junior?!" xD


Ahahahaha - I had the same thoughts. biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stanleytree
post Dec 11 2017, 03:59 PM
Post #134


Advanced Member
***

Group: Nazgul
Posts: 1,478
Joined: 25-March 18
Member No.: 12



QUOTE (madcap @ Dec 11 2017, 05:07 AM) *
QUOTE (JakeLHS @ Dec 10 2017, 10:35 PM) *
QUOTE (TinDefacto @ Dec 11 2017, 04:24 AM) *
QUOTE (madcap @ Dec 10 2017, 10:14 PM) *
There probably is no significant difference between version 1 and version 2 difficulty on the Round 1 tests.

Yeah, after a more in-depth look, I'm leaning toward a similar conclusion, though I do think SS and Art were slightly harder on this version (on v2 compared to v1). Even so, that only accounts for a fairly small difference. For most intents and purposes, I'd say they're about equal.

But ECR had more than a month more time to prepare for this meet and still scored around 2000 points less. You shouldn't be surprised that some people improved, they had a lot of time to do so. We would expect nearly everyone to improve over that time frame on equal tests, when in fact their team did much worse on average. By the same reasoning, you would conclude these tests were about the same difficulty as the easy tests, since half of Lubbock's team improved in the month between tests and our score only dropped a bit over 1000 points. In fact that's an even better argument since we had a (slightly) shorter time gap and a much lower score drop between the easy tests and these than ECR had between Round 1s, but obviously, these were much harder than the easy tests and likewise than the v1 tests.


Possibly. Scores are volatile. Sometimes the hardest-working and best people on the hardest-working and best teams just decrease.


I still think these were the harder tests just based on what my kids were telling me throughout the day, but each team does prep different- ECR could've been in the middle of a cycle, or used this as a vacation, or whatever. There are multiple factors for why ECR could have decreased.

I will say I am glad to see the round 1 tests get a little more serious. I hope that continues throughout the year- I was worried that they would be too easy and lead to heavy inflation (they still might be too easy).

Congrats to Piper that is insane. Let's hope she can reproduce at an official meet (spoilers: of course she will).
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TinDefacto
post Dec 11 2017, 05:26 PM
Post #135


Turtlemaster.
***

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,260
Joined: 23-March 18
Member No.: 21



New results are in!! biggrin.gif Check 'em out! More individuals are on ADSIC here!

Pearland Invitational:
Teams:
1. James E. Taylor 32,097.2
2. Seven Lakes 30,785.8
3. Friendswood 30,759.9
4. Pearland 29,020.0
5. Clear Lake 28,077.2
6. Morton Ranch 27,811.5
7. Clear Creek 27,182.8
8. Alvin 26,525.7
9. Barbers Hill 25,651.4
10. Turner College & Career 23,385.7
11. Dickinson 19,285.7
12. North Shore 16,463.0
13. Clear Brook 15,674.4 (no Varsities)

Honors:
1. Emily Liu, James E. Taylor 6534.3 (top score in the state)
2. Achutha Srinivasan, James E. Taylor 6374.3
3. Audrey Isaak, Friendswood 6125.7
4. Sarah Thomas, Friendswood 6097.1
5. Eric Tang, James E. Taylor 6022.9
6. Eshan Gaitonde, Seven Lakes 5974.3
7. Karen Tseng, Morton Ranch 5897.1
8. Vincent Cacciatore, Clear Lake 5822.9
9. Anushka Jetly, Friendswood 5820.0
10. Rachel Moore, Pearland 5782.9

Scholastic:
1. Stephany YipChoy, James E. Taylor 5708.6
2. Andrew Hewitt, James E. Taylor 5468.6
3. Aidan Hernandez, Friendswood 5317.1
4. Jaden Walker, Friendswood 5174.3
5. Sakshi Mohta, James E. Taylor 5128.6
6. Emily Burns, Seven Lakes 5120.0
7. Thomas Mataro, Friendswood 5102.9
8. Patrick Schumacher, Seven Lakes 5048.6
9. Ben Lewis, Friendswood 5017.1
10. Dylan Allen, Seven Lakes 4937.1

Varsity:
1. Katherine Krueger, Clear Lake 4928.6
2. Joyee Chakrabarti, Seven Lakes 4780.0
3. Mark Kostjuhin, Clear Creek 4591.4
4. Teague Mize, Barbers Hill 4557.1
5. Jacob Garza, Alvin 4500.0
6. Atticus Simmons, Alvin 4400.0
7. Derek Bedar, Pearland 4365.7
8. Mykal Buster, Morton Ranch 4354.3
9. Rosy Murphy, Pearland 4291.4
10. Nolan King, Friendswood 4274.3

Frisco ISD Scrimmage:
Teams:
1. Lebanon Trail 27,522.7
2. Centennial 26,442.8
3. Reedy 26,374.3
4. Lone Star 25,534.3
5. Wakeland 23,771.4 (only one Varsity)
6. Heritage 23,728.6
7. Independence 22,205.6
8. Frisco 20,018.5
9. Liberty 19,457.3 (only one Scholastic, missing S1 and S2)

Honors:
1. Hannah Lee, Wakeland 6497.1 (holy wow)
2. Rohan Nagabhirava, Lebanon Trail 6197.1
3. Emily Heraty, Lone Star 5985.7
4. Tanay Rishi, Lebanon Trail 5751.4
5. Labiba Uddin, Wakeland 5694.3

Scholastic:
1. Zain Kalson, Lebanon Trail 5157.1
2. Luke Mello, Lebanon Trail 4951.4
3. Phoebe Bair, Heritage 4837.1
4. Joshua Antonini, Reedy 4785.7
5. Ilisa Norman, Wakeland 4560.0

Varsity:
1. Zoya Bokhari, Lone Star 4120.0
2. Johnny Hernandez, Centennial 4094.3
3. Luke Newcombe, Liberty 3854.3
4. Jonathan Guidry, Reedy 3851.4
5. Edmund Vaughan, Reedy 3805.7

Holmes Meet:
Large only; does anyone have Medium/Small results? Got 'em! biggrin.gif

Teams:
Large:
1. Klein 31,697.2*
2. Nimitz 27,277.2
3. John Marshall 24,711.4
4. Holmes 22,342.9
5. Earl Warren 22,254.4
6. Brandeis 19,105.7
7. Clark 18,359.9
8. La Porte 18,011.4

Medium/Small:
1. Bandera 25,842.9
2. Alice 22,597.2
3. Tuloso-Midway 20,991.5
4. IL Texas 19,111.4 (will compete in Large despite being small)
5. Veterans Memorial 18,477.2 (only one Varsity)
6. Carroll 17,685.7


* So, Klein also competed at their district meet and took first. I don't know what test set they used. Either their district took another test set or this is their second time taking these tests. Not sure which, but I'm leaning toward the latter, so I'm leaving them off ADSIC for now. Regardless, they are very impressive this year.

Honors:
Large:
1. Logan Baker, Klein 6511.4
2. Chibu Ejiofor, Klein 5962.9
3. Divya Nagarajan, Klein 5742.9
4. Alan Ta, Nimitz 5491.4
5. Francis King, Klein 5128.6

Medium/Small:
1. Blake Kromer, Bandera 5060.0
2. Nicole Cuadra, Alice 4988.6
3. Brian Adjetey, Veterans Memorial 4482.9
4. Mallory Winchester, Tuloso-Midway 4414.3
5. Amit Kumar, IL Texas 4380.0


Scholastic:
Large:
1. Jonny Brewer, Nimitz 5157.1
2. Vix Brown, Klein 4748.6
3. Hunter Hermantin, Klein 4534.3
4. Mace Wages, Klein 4145.7
5. Madison Freeman, Klein 4088.6

Medium/Small:
1. Javi Martinez, Alice 4385.7
2. David Guzman, Bandera 4165.7
3. Austin Vasquez, Veterans Memorial 3902.9
4. Taylor Martin, Bandera 3874.3
5. Maddie Brzezinski, Bandera 3742.9

Varsity:
Large:
1. Ethan Donckles, Klein 5142.9
2. Danielle Breitstein, Klein 4797.1
3. Mikayla Edens, Nimitz 4382.9
4. Millie Compean, Nimitz 3982.9
5. Sami Carranza, Nimitz 3905.7

Medium/Small:
1. Matthew Houser, Bandera 4734.3
2. Zackery Nordquist, Bandera 3885.7
3. Lane Hadley, Bandera 3822.9
4. Ashley Abitz, Bandera 3677.1
5. Andrew Juarez, Alice 3454.3
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_GJNHS_*
post Dec 11 2017, 07:41 PM
Post #136





Guests






QUOTE (TinDefacto @ Dec 11 2017, 11:26 AM) *
New results are in!! biggrin.gif Check 'em out! More individuals are on ADSIC here!

Pearland Invitational:
Teams:
1. James E. Taylor 32,097.2
2. Seven Lakes 30,785.8
3. Friendswood 30,759.9
4. Pearland 29,020.0
5. Clear Lake 28,077.2
6. Morton Ranch 27,811.5
7. Clear Creek 27,182.8
8. Alvin 26,525.7
9. Barbers Hill 25,651.4
10. Turner College & Career 23,385.7
11. Dickinson 19,285.7
12. North Shore 16,463.0
13. Clear Brook 15,674.4 (no Varsities)

Honors:
1. Emily Liu, James E. Taylor 6534.3 (top score in the state)
2. Achutha Srinivasan, James E. Taylor 6374.3
3. Audrey Isaak, Friendswood 6125.7
4. Sarah Thomas, Friendswood 6097.1
5. Eric Tang, James E. Taylor 6022.9
6. Eshan Gaitonde, Seven Lakes 5974.3
7. Karen Tseng, Morton Ranch 5897.1
8. Vincent Cacciatore, Clear Lake 5822.9
9. Anushka Jetly, Friendswood 5820.0
10. Rachel Moore, Pearland 5782.9

Scholastic:
1. Stephany YipChoy, James E. Taylor 5708.6
2. Andrew Hewitt, James E. Taylor 5468.6
3. Aidan Hernandez, Friendswood 5317.1
4. Jaden Walker, Friendswood 5174.3
5. Sakshi Mohta, James E. Taylor 5128.6
6. Emily Burns, Seven Lakes 5120.0
7. Thomas Mataro, Friendswood 5102.9
8. Patrick Schumacher, Seven Lakes 5048.6
9. Ben Lewis, Friendswood 5017.1
10. Dylan Allen, Seven Lakes 4937.1

Varsity:
1. Katherine Krueger, Clear Lake 4928.6
2. Joyee Chakrabarti, Seven Lakes 4780.0
3. Mark Kostjuhin, Clear Creek 4591.4
4. Teague Mize, Barbers Hill 4557.1
5. Jacob Garza, Alvin 4500.0
6. Atticus Simmons, Alvin 4400.0
7. Derek Bedar, Pearland 4365.7
8. Mykal Buster, Morton Ranch 4354.3
9. Rosy Murphy, Pearland 4291.4
10. Nolan King, Friendswood 4274.3

Frisco ISD Scrimmage:
Teams:
1. Lebanon Trail 27,522.7
2. Centennial 26,442.8
3. Reedy 26,374.3
4. Lone Star 25,534.3
5. Wakeland 23,771.4 (only one Varsity)
6. Heritage 23,728.6
7. Independence 22,205.6
8. Frisco 20,018.5
9. Liberty 19,457.3 (only one Scholastic, missing S1 and S2)

Honors:
1. Hannah Lee, Wakeland 6497.1 (holy wow)
2. Rohan Nagabhirava, Lebanon Trail 6197.1
3. Emily Heraty, Lone Star 5985.7
4. Tanay Rishi, Lebanon Trail 5751.4
5. Labiba Uddin, Wakeland 5694.3

Scholastic:
1. Zain Kalson, Lebanon Trail 5157.1
2. Luke Mello, Lebanon Trail 4951.4
3. Phoebe Bair, Heritage 4837.1
4. Joshua Antonini, Reedy 4785.7
5. Ilisa Norman, Wakeland 4560.0

Varsity:
1. Zoya Bokhari, Lone Star 4120.0
2. Johnny Hernandez, Centennial 4094.3
3. Luke Newcombe, Liberty 3854.3
4. Jonathan Guidry, Reedy 3851.4
5. Edmund Vaughan, Reedy 3805.7

Holmes Meet:
Large only; does anyone have Medium/Small results? Got 'em! biggrin.gif

Teams:
Large:
1. Klein 31,697.2*
2. Nimitz 27,277.2
3. John Marshall 24,711.4
4. Holmes 22,342.9
5. Earl Warren 22,254.4
6. Brandeis 19,105.7
7. Clark 18,359.9
8. La Porte 18,011.4

Medium/Small:
1. Bandera 25,842.9
2. Alice 22,597.2
3. Tuloso-Midway 20,991.5
4. IL Texas 19,111.4 (will compete in Large despite being small)
5. Veterans Memorial 18,477.2 (only one Varsity)
6. Carroll 17,685.7


* So, Klein also competed at their district meet and took first. I don't know what test set they used. Either their district took another test set or this is their second time taking these tests. Not sure which, but I'm leaning toward the latter, so I'm leaving them off ADSIC for now. Regardless, they are very impressive this year.

Honors:
Large:
1. Logan Baker, Klein 6511.4
2. Chibu Ejiofor, Klein 5962.9
3. Divya Nagarajan, Klein 5742.9
4. Alan Ta, Nimitz 5491.4
5. Francis King, Klein 5128.6

Medium/Small:
1. Blake Kromer, Bandera 5060.0
2. Nicole Cuadra, Alice 4988.6
3. Brian Adjetey, Veterans Memorial 4482.9
4. Mallory Winchester, Tuloso-Midway 4414.3
5. Amit Kumar, IL Texas 4380.0


Scholastic:
Large:
1. Jonny Brewer, Nimitz 5157.1
2. Vix Brown, Klein 4748.6
3. Hunter Hermantin, Klein 4534.3
4. Mace Wages, Klein 4145.7
5. Madison Freeman, Klein 4088.6

Medium/Small:
1. Javi Martinez, Alice 4385.7
2. David Guzman, Bandera 4165.7
3. Austin Vasquez, Veterans Memorial 3902.9
4. Taylor Martin, Bandera 3874.3
5. Maddie Brzezinski, Bandera 3742.9

Varsity:
Large:
1. Ethan Donckles, Klein 5142.9
2. Danielle Breitstein, Klein 4797.1
3. Mikayla Edens, Nimitz 4382.9
4. Millie Compean, Nimitz 3982.9
5. Sami Carranza, Nimitz 3905.7

Medium/Small:
1. Matthew Houser, Bandera 4734.3
2. Zackery Nordquist, Bandera 3885.7
3. Lane Hadley, Bandera 3822.9
4. Ashley Abitz, Bandera 3677.1
5. Andrew Juarez, Alice 3454.3

I tend to think that Klein's scores are for real. They were a good team last year, ranked 4th in Large School after regionals, and though they dropped quite a bit at State, they were still very good in 2017. They have quite a few returners, including Logan Baker, so I think that they have come back this year with a purpose. Maybe the disappointment at State last year has fueled a really strong team this year.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Guest_JakeLHS_*
post Dec 11 2017, 07:54 PM
Post #137





Guests






Lubbock scores update: People who didn't make the team. These decathletes won't be competing the rest of the year, but Monona will likely compete next year and all deserve to be recognized because they would all still make nearly every team we've ever produced.
Honors: Monona Khare: 5940 (8466.7)
Andrew Yan: 5934.2 (8425.9)
Scholastics: Robert Trevino: 4885.7 (7702.4)
Varsities: Sarah Medina: 3728.6 (6033.6)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TinDefacto
post Dec 11 2017, 08:13 PM
Post #138


Turtlemaster.
***

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,260
Joined: 23-March 18
Member No.: 21



QUOTE (GJNHS @ Dec 11 2017, 03:41 PM) *
I tend to think that Klein's scores are for real. They were a good team last year, ranked 4th in Large School after regionals, and though they dropped quite a bit at State, they were still very good in 2017. They have quite a few returners, including Logan Baker, so I think that they have come back this year with a purpose. Maybe the disappointment at State last year has fueled a really strong team this year.

Oh, certainly -- I've no doubt they've got a really strong team this year! It's not that I don't think they could score that high; my doubt only stems from knowing they had a district meet but not being sure what tests they used there. Hopefully we know for sure soon!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TinDefacto
post Dec 11 2017, 09:20 PM
Post #139


Turtlemaster.
***

Group: Admin
Posts: 1,260
Joined: 23-March 18
Member No.: 21



Keller results are in!! Turns out they did use Round 1! Here goes:

Keller Invitational:
Teams:
1. Rockwall-Heath 31,122.8
2. Plano East 29,157.0 (full team, but missing V1)
3. Irving 28,951.4
4. Little Elm 28,768.7
5. Keller 28,688.6
6. Fossil Ridge 24,182.9 (almost positive second time taking R1)
7. South Grand Prairie 21,805.8
8. Seagoville 19,011.5 (their two good Varsities from Rockwall competed as Honors; not sure what that means)
9. Liberty 17,403.0 (from Liberty ISD, not Frisco -- the namespace collision returns!)
10. Manvel 14,445.7 (only one Varsity)

Honors:
1. Annie Jain, Plano East 6600.0 (new top Texan wow)
2. Rahul Mandalia, Plano East 6271.4
3. Natasha Raman, Plano East 6242.9
4. Minh-Tuah Phung, Plano East 6014.3
5. Minh Vu, Irving 5862.9
6. Melissa Chitakunya, Little Elm 5628.6
7. Harrison LaCroix, Rockwall-Heath 5517.1
8. Deba Elahio, Little Elm 5514.3
9. Samika Kulkami, Keller 5468.6
10. Diego Raygoza-Castanos, Little Elm 5345.7

Scholastic:
1. Bryan Liu, Keller 5045.7
2. Tyler Hurley, Rockwall-Heath 4880.0
3. Alondra Borjas, Rockwall-Heath 4802.9
4. Cesar Guerrero, Little Elm 4742.9
5. Lizzie Melton, Little Elm 4620.0
6. Antonio Soriano, Irving 4534.3
7. Andrew Smith, Irving 4517.1
8. Andrew Sheng, Keller 4505.7
9. Jatin Suri, Plano East 4497.1
10. Sean Wilhour, Keller 4445.7

Varsity:
1. Hanor Smith, Rockwall-Heath 5820.0
2. Anthony Robles, Rockwall-Heath 4837.1
3. Omar Lazcano, Irving 4677.1
4. Ulysses Oles, Keller 4462.9
5. Javier Suarez, Irving 4388.6
6. Kathryn Laitinen, Little Elm 4322.9
7. Sujith Baktha, Plano East 4117.1
8. Nahbi Tinajero, South Grand Prairie 3968.6
9. Britney Meighen, Little Elm 3940.0
10. Rhett Cooprider, Rockwall-Heath 3928.6

guys I have been so unproductive at work today
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
stanleytree
post Dec 11 2017, 11:16 PM
Post #140


Advanced Member
***

Group: Nazgul
Posts: 1,478
Joined: 25-March 18
Member No.: 12



This may be the most info we've had for a round 1 ever. Pretty neat.

Dulles' team:
Sophie Yangyi
Jeffrey Zhang

Sam Steinman-Friedman
Moeez Tariq
Vani Vellore
Matthew Gabino

Leighton Nylander
Tejas Tuppera
Logan House

It was not a fun day, I will tell you that much. Telling 13 kids you're done is never easy. Especially when many of them were so close.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

8 Pages V  « < 5 6 7 8 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 22nd April 2018 - 06:28 AM