The deadline for submitting commitments for Round One in LAUSD was last Friday. It looks like we will have about 820 Decathletes from 63 teams competing at six different sites on November 13. The students will take the seven objective tests. Three additional teams should be ready for Round Two so I anticipate having 66 teams in our regional competition. The Decathletes and Coaches are very excited about the competition this year so I think we will have a good one. How is Round One shaping up in other parts of the country?

So we going to get some scores from that meet?

Sure. I don't give much credence to scores at this point, but most of my coaches do. I will post the top twenty or so.

Nobody does much talking in my neck of the woods. I find more information in sunny LA than from schools just a few miles from my own. If the usual trends hold true, University will be on top, Hallmark will compete, Edison's late start will translate to a tall mountain to climb, and Bullard will remain a mystery until November 17. But what do I know?

Neither do I, but it's nice to see where the rest of us stack up against the top of the country.

This is why we're eagerly awaiting Seven Lakes scores

LOL. You've seen what we got Gear. You'll probably be running rapshod over us in two weeks!

So Abuelo, who are some of the heavy hitters participating in the Rd. 1 at your place?

Too early to know that. Stay tuned for the Scrimmage (Round 1) results. That information may give us an indication as to how teams shape up at this point. Some of our teams have done well in R1 and R2.

I was curious what schools actually compete in your Rd. 1, is it the typical heavy hitters, ECR, Moorpark, Marshall, Granada Hills, and so on? Or do those schools keep to themselves, because it seems like we get no scores from Cali till official competitions.

Moorpark is in Ventura County; a separate region. I don't believe that they are planning to compete again this year.

We have lots of heavy hitters here in LAUSD. That is one of the reasons why our teams do so well in State and Nationals. Some of our schools do much better in round two than one. And in round three than round two. And in round four than round three.

Speaking of keeping to themselves, some of my coaches have requested that I not publish the team names when I provide the round one scores. I will honor that request, but most of y'all out there in Aca Deca Land are resourceful and will be able to figure out who is who.

And any Decathletes from LAUSD who are wasting their time doing things other than studying had better not let their teammates down!

I guess we'd try a little harder if we didn't see Marshall, Granada, and El Camino at the top. It seems silly to me, but then again our round 1 scores are always pretty average.

So every team will be anonymous?

Correcto. I will publish scores only. Again, I don't give much credence to round one scores. The range should be enough for those that want to know.

Well I guess we'll just have someone from the meet unofficially give us names.

You have some lame coaches in LAUSD. Their score or lack of will be noticed come regionals; why's it a big deal to see what's up months in advance?

We got coaches like that in Texas, too... but it's not lameness, it's personal preference. I won't put down student names until I've chosen a team... my preference...

Any particular reason for that?

I think having your school assigned to a score puts a certain amount of pressure on you. If your score is high then people start to consider the school's history to say whether they should be expected to keep up the quality. If a traditional power, say North Hollywood doesn't produce well then there is a lot of negative talk that can bring a team down. I guess it makes sense that everyone know the scores, but I always like to know who I'm chasing.

You guys are a bit off - often times at scrimmage, you don't see those kinds of teams at the top - or you get quite a few early surprises that may or may not affect the rest of the year.
And coaches choose not to reveal their team's scrimmage score because there's really no need to. From their viewpoint, why do you really need to know? Just as it seems silly to you guys that they don't reveal the scores, because everyone will know Round 2, it seems just as silly from theirs why you guys DO need to know, since everyone will know on Round 2. It's not about other people knowing your score and "pressure." I didn't care after scrimmage, all I knew was that I needed to get better, and what I especially needed to get better in. Other teams' scores shouldn't matter, only your own. It doesn't matter what the others are doing - just keep studying.

Um, sorry to prove you wrong, but that's EXACTLY who you see at the top at scrimmages in LAUSD. Marshall, Granada Hills, and El Camino were far and away the best three last year, and none of that was surprising. 2009, ECR, North Hollywood, Palisades, Granada Hills, and Marshall were the top. 2008: NoHo, Palisades, Taft, Granada Hills, El Camino Real were the top 5. None of those teams are surprises to me; the only surprises you see every year are teams becoming absolute trash.

And while I'll agree that it's not necessary to the process, you already proved one of the counterpoints as to why coaches wouldn't want it. I feel that it is probably those coaches from places like NoHo and Palisades who slipped up a bit last year, and then we were all like "damnnnnn, where they at?"

The entire point of scrimages is to compare yourself to other people. If you didn't want to compare then why would you go to scrimages? And really you're only good in acdec relative to other people. Your 900 isn't good if everyone else scores 920, and 600 might not be that bad if everyone else scored 400.

I agree with you that people should focus on getting better, but it helps put things into context for a team to have some sort of idea how far behind they are, or how close they are relative to what they've been doing. This isn't like a sport where you get multiple chances to prove yourself. Realistically, you have a one day season. Any feedback you can get on your standing relative to others helps. Motivation is a tricky thing though. If your team feels like it has been busting their butt and they find themselves 5-6K behind they might fold the tent and say why bother. Hopefully, they'll renew and expand their effort to narrow the gap. I especially like to see how the cards lie in November because it usually helps a coach say, "see I told you that we're not doing enough." Until the team has some hard evidence I might as well talk on this board instead because they won't feel the reality.

^ Word.

In a way, scrimmages let people know where the bar is for each test, especially on the USAD ones. I see the USAD materials being pretty much the same across the board and haven't seen huge differences in their difficulty levels, except in the practice test booklet.

I dig this.

All I see are people becoming increasingly wussy over the years.

In my day, LAUSD released everyone's scores and newspapers would interview you and stuff.

This is as silly as sports teams refusing to give the results of pre-season games.

Data is still coming in but it looks like we have at least four (anonymous) teams that got over 30K today. Seven objectives only. Stay tuned

Impressive! Will you also publish (anonymous, of course) individual scores?

Any day now. Let's see how much over 30K they are.

[quote name='spartandecathlon' date='Nov 14 2010, 03:05 AM' post='52257']


Any day now. Let's see how much over 30K they are.
[/quote

Patience, y'all

Here you go:

31984
30901
30142
30115
28629
26729
26094
25394
23961
23414
23101
22572
22231
22228
21931
21571
21489
21141
20210
19939
19893
19884
19711
18925
18674

Top 25 team scores. USAD Round 1 tests. 7 objectives, 42K max score

My guess would be Granada Hills, Marshall, ECR, NoHo or Pali maybe making a comeback?

Here's a score: 34625

I'd tell you to whom this belongs but I'm afraid your kids would work hard to beat this score once they knew. If I post it with no school name attached, I'm positive that your kids will remain slackers and pose no threat. Happy studying and good luck to all

LOL, Gear.

Those are solid scores, we all have work to do if we are going to keep pace with those Cali schools!

Dec. 4th for us - at Pearland.

The team with 31,984 is Marshall! According to a recent edit on DDSIC. And I trust the user who added that name- he's made accurate edits in the past.
http://acadecscores.gilslotd.com/wiki/Scrimmages/2011

Wow, good job Franklin.

LAUSD and LA County Round 1 Full Team Results

Marcos Chinchilla looks like the next "can he make it over 9000?" varsity with that beastly score

Marshall is straight stacked at every category, especially varsity. Looks like they have the foundation for even better teams in the future.
Franklin has the best 1,2 scholastics, and some damn good varsities, they could make a run at the title as a major darkhorse (Franklin?!)
Granada Hills has some powerful honors, but the rest of the team needs to pick it up around them.
ECR is the same old, still the favorite despite being 1.8k down.


I call on our Texas and Arizona varsities and scholastics to stop this domination of California! Texas honors were magnificent last year and look to be repeating the same again this year, but our bottom categories need to step it up!

Marcos' score is definate modivation, I now have a round one goal, although unrealistic due to my math. Can't wait to see how I stack up to him at regionals.

Your preaching to the choir brother.

And for the record, Texas beat Cali in honors as well as scholastics last year. But unfortunately there is more to the competition than just that.

Impressive numbers all the way around, it definitely gives us Texans something to shoot for.

Problem is simple assuming that one schools not from California can match them closely in the honors and scholastic category like Seven Lakes did do last year it comes down to varsities as always. The issue is in general the most you can truly hope from your two counters is like 16,000, but that isn't very likely since your team back in '08, and then the Cali varsities pretty much match their honors and scholastics so many times it ends up like a good 2000 point swing at the bare minimum. Another thing that you probably are overlooking is that if it just takes 7500ish to win varsity at state well that is the number most varsities are shooting for not 8500 like Cali varsities. Competition breeds competition and our lack of it has killed any chance.

Basically agree with Godfather here. Stop trying to compete within your state. Start trying to compete with California. Setting goals at 7500 is way too low if you're seriously trying to win anything on a national level.

That's what my team did to get as good as it did; we looked at ECR, not Plano, for who our competition really was.

I guess the real question to all of this is are you HAPPY with just a state title and willing to settle for just that, or are you truly serious at making a run to be national champions and dethrone Cali. That is what a team must ask themselves because let's face it there is nothing wrong with just "happy to be there" aka nationals, but its important to look in the mirror and ask yourselves do you want it all and be Michael Phelps or are you just content with your success.

Well my school did worse than last years Scrimmage. 26 (Banning) Really?!?!?!?!?

But the real surprise was the 500-600 average in English for LAUSD. Then again I really don't care much because Marshall or the other guys who always go to nationals will get a gagillion medals in the LAUSD competition while I look and cry in the back.

LAUSD medals are pretty easy to get imo. They give out like a bazillion speech medals and a gajillion interview medals. Shoot for a super quiz relay medal. All you need to do is get a 10/10. You can completely bomb the written test and still win one.

this is why we like to see CA's top scores early, indi and team. our state comp isn't a breeze, but it's not nearly as rigorous as CA's so if we aim to win natty's-as we shoot for every year-then we have to see their scores early to stay motivated. winning state with a 45k just isn't enough to compete seriously at natty's with CA's top schools.

I would like to know if the Math scores are similar to those in the past couple years for LAUSD round 1. Can we expect near impossible math problems again, or is math actually doable.

Any feedback?

It better not be like last year, that negated any advantage that good math teams had. We are another strong math team this year, making those tests like they were last year was stupid, it was not testing math skill or knowledge. Just random guessing, which is counter to an academic competition!

We will see what it's like in 2 weeks.

I would welcome math tests whose difficulty challenges last year's math tests.

It isn't like last year as far as i know.
It looks fairly doable. I know a Junior who got a 714 from University in math. and there were a lot of 500's from people who are decent at math. It was nothing like Round 2 from last year as far as i can tell.

Top math scores at the LAUSD scrimmage:
Honors
Granada Hills - 886
Granada Hills - 857
Venice - 800
ECR - 771
Granada Hills - 771
North Hollywood - 743
Marshall - 714
Marshall - 686
ECR - 657
Venice - 657

Scholastic
Palisades - 829
Marshall - 743
ECR - 714
Marshall - 714
Marshall - 714
Palisades - 686
Granada Hills - 657
Granada Hills - 657
Taft - 657
Granada Hills - 628
Venice - 628

Varsity
Granada Hills - 714
Marshall - 714
Marshall - 686
North Hollywood - 686
ECR - 657
Marshall - 629
Granada - 600
Palisades - 600
Granada Hills - 514
Granada Hills - 514

Top math teams:
Marshall - 4114
Granada Hills - 3886
Palisades - 3629
ECR - 3600
North Hollywood - 3429
Venice - 3114
Taft - 2629
Van Nuys - 2571
Narbonne - 2286
Franklin - 2257

WOH WOH WOH WAIT JUST ONE SECOND!
MARSHALL IS FIRST IN MATH?

oh jeeze, ECR is gonna have fun this year. They are always GREAT in math. a 3600 is looking bad for them...