Thread: The "complicated" scoring system
View Single Post
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-06-2002, 03:24
archiver archiver is offline
Forum Archival System
#0047 (ChiefDelphi)
  
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Pontiac, MI
Posts: 21,214
archiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond reputearchiver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: The "complicated" scoring system
Posted by Chris Orimoto at 04/10/2001 9:25 PM EST


Student on team #368, Kika Mana, from McKinley High School and Nasa Ames/Hawaiian Electric/Weinberg Foundation.


In Reply to: The "complicated" scoring system
Posted by Chris on 04/10/2001 9:07 PM EST:



Somehow, the only big difficulty to this year's scoring system seemed to be the time multipliers. Other than that, the scoring was pretty simple. Bridge balancing was self-explanatory...

I think last year's scoring was more diabolical, with the winning team's score being 3 times that of the losing team. I think at San Jose last year, Team 330 was the only undefeated team after the qualifying matches, but they were only seeded 5th or something like that because of match scores.
There was also another round when we were paired with 360 (I think) and we had to score ALL the points for the other team. I think we barely outscored ourselves though, but ended up with a HUGE amount of qualifying points.

All in all, I can't wait to see how scoring develops next year.

Just my personal thoughts...

Chris, #368
__________________
This message was archived from an earlier forum system. Some information may have been left out. Start new discussion in the current forums, and refer back to these threads when necessary.