World Finals 2003 Discussion Thread

Alexander Grushetsky · Fri Mar 28, 2003 1:56 pm

This year is for Europe, moreover - for East Europe (4 top teams and 6 from 10 are from here). Before contest I gambled on Warsaw and Moscow, and I was right. They are really the best (specially Warsaw).

Problems this year was much more easier, it was really possible to solve 8-9 problems (to protect myself - I was sick and had a temperature and my team-mates as usually did not do nothing, except for reading problem statements and checking my input/output, but we was able to take 9th place - if my team-mate did not do stupid mistake in taking integral we'd had 3d place, so I'm not very happy about my position).

P.S. Warsaw Eagles did not solve problem E (it was the only really hard problem). For this problem was only 2 submissions from one team and no AC.

.. · Post by .. » Fri Mar 28, 2003 6:29 pm

Ar........
I just feel confused, is E so difficult??
As I was a reserve, I didn't code my algorithm to try.
But I have a algorithm that use similar method in 308 to solve it....
Anyone want to dicusss on it?

Alexander Grushetsky · Sat Mar 29, 2003 4:05 pm

Not E is too dificult but other problems are much smaller to code.

Moni · Post by **Moni** » Sat Mar 29, 2003 11:01 pm

jingye wrote:Yep, the US is pathetic. There are too many regions and too many slots. Some of the US universities at the World Finals are laughable. Then again, this contest is being paid for by a US company.

Hai! though ibm is us company but they have nothing to do if their country students fail. I am not saying that the us univ. are not good, we all know they are very good but is univ. reflects how they will do in world final ? Isn't waterloo a good univ. ? or MIT ? but China got the medal last year now Poland so the gold medal is travelling..........

jingye · Post by **jingye** » Sun Mar 30, 2003 12:35 am

Most of the US universities at the World Finals are considered bad, third tier schools. American high school education is atrocious, it is one of the worst in the world. This explains why the average American college student is an idiot. US schools have good reputations because of the faculty, not the students. What I am saying is that even if a school is well known, their ACM team is most likely pathetic. An undergraduate, or even high school, education in some countries of Europe and Asia is on par with a graduate level education in America. This explains why foreign students fill up a large portion of American graduate schools, and why America issues so many H1B visas to foreign workers. Americans are just dumb, and they are getting dumber every year...

FYI: I would not consider Waterloo one of the top 5 schools in Canada.

shahriar_manzoor · Post by **shahriar_manzoor** » Sun Mar 30, 2003 3:14 am

I have no clear idea about University Ranklist of Canada but Waterloo has been doing well in WF in last 10 years or even more. One bad performance (compared to their standard) should not make them bad I guess.

Eric3k · Post by **Eric3k** » Sun Mar 30, 2003 4:18 am

Don't forget US had 3 schools score on the top 10 last year, MIT placing 2nd. Just because a country has a bad year does not necessarily mean their students or universities stink.

Luck plays a great role many times, although not always.

BTW jingye, "An undergraduate, or even high school, education in some countries of Europe and Asia is on par with a graduate level education in America", think about what you just said if you CAN. Although assessing from your comments, I doubt you'll come to any logical conclusions. Also look around other international contests, such as for Math, to see the weaknesses in your argument. No offense.

jingye · Post by **jingye** » Sun Mar 30, 2003 4:31 am

Although assessing from your comments, I doubt you'll come to any logical conclusions.

Ad hominem. Attack my arguments, not my personality.

Don't forget US had 3 schools score on the top 10 last year, MIT placing 2nd. Just because a country has a bad year does not necessarily mean their students or universities stink. Luck plays a great role many times, although not always.

Of course the US has some good schools. I never said the US should have 0 slots. Currently the US has 26 slots. It should be cut down to the same level as Europe and Asia.

An undergraduate, or even high school, education in some countries of Europe and Asia is on par with a graduate level education in America

I don't retract this statement. Talk with anybody from Eastern Europe, Russia, or Asia, and this is what they'll tell you. I know that Olympiad schools in China teach graduate level bio, chem, cs, math, and physics.

Also look around other international contests, such as for Math, to see the weaknesses in your argument.

I said that the average American student is below par. I never said anything about the best American students.

Your naivete is appalling.

jingye · Post by **jingye** » Sun Mar 30, 2003 4:34 am

About Waterloo, I did not refer to their cs program. When I say Waterloo is not one of the top universities in Canada, I am referring to all of the departments, not just cs. Sorry if I did not make that clear.

Ranking of Canadian colleges:
http://www3.telus.net/info/gourman-can.htm
Waterloo is ranked 22nd in Canada.

Eric3k · Post by **Eric3k** » Sun Mar 30, 2003 5:24 am

I was actually reluctant to post the above in fear of staging a war and so will refrain from fueling it, especially since this is a programming forum.

Ad hominem. Attack my arguments, not my personality.

Back at you! BTW I was stating an opinion, not attacking your argument by such. Mainly based on statements like "Americans are just dumb, and they are getting dumber every year..."

Of course the US has some good schools. I never said the US should have 0 slots. Currently the US has 26 slots. It should be cut down to the same level as Europe and Asia.

That was a general post, not specifically directed at yours. How many slots does Asia and Europe have? I'm guessing about 40?

I don't retract this statement. Talk with anybody from Eastern Europe, Russia, or Asia, and this is what they'll tell you. I know that Olympiad schools in China teach graduate level bio, chem, cs, math, and physics.

Sorry but I can't imagine the top high school students learning Theory of Computation or Advanced Quantum Mechanics. They can't possibly have the sufficient background yet (at least not the majority). Assuming they do, what would they teach in the top universities? Future Physics XV? j/k I'm pretty sure those schools are more like the best Magnet schools on the US.

kmhasan · Post by **kmhasan** » Sun Mar 30, 2003 12:03 pm

Eric3k wrote:How many slots does Asia and Europe have? I'm guessing about 40?

Have a look at http://icpc.baylor.edu/icpc/finals/Roster.asp
Asia has 16 slots
Europe has 16 slots
North America alone has 26 slots!!

I think it's justified to question this sort of distribution.

Eric3k · Post by **Eric3k** » Sun Mar 30, 2003 6:57 pm

Yeah I guess they should be distributed a bit more fairly. Perhaps the three each having about 20. Or it would probably be better to distribute them according to the amount of universities in each continent.

jingye · Post by **jingye** » Sun Mar 30, 2003 9:46 pm

Sorry but I can't imagine the top high school students learning Theory of Computation or Advanced Quantum Mechanics. They can't possibly have the sufficient background yet (at least not the majority). Assuming they do, what would they teach in the top universities? Future Physics XV? j/k I'm pretty sure those schools are more like the best Magnet schools on the US.

In China, there is usually one magnet school per subject per district. The student quality is very high, due to the enormous population. So yes, they do have sufficient background. It is survival of the fittest. Since Quantum Mechanics is on the IPhO, students will learn a lot about it. The schools in China are infinitely better than the best magnets in the US, aka TJHSST, IMSA, Stuy. I personally know many people at these US schools, and the average student quality is much poorer than in China.

As an example, the top 50 math students in China are almost indistinguishable. Performance and qualification for the IMO team is almost entirely based on luck, because everyone's ability and knowledge is the same. This is not true in the US. The only reason China doesn't consistently get 6 golds at the IMO is because of anxiety (somebody isn't feeling well or is too nervous).

sohel · Post by **sohel** » Sun Mar 28, 2004 12:23 pm

It is a great shame that the number of teams chosen from each continent is a little biased.

For example: Europe is much better than North America as a whole ( at least in recent times ) , but from what i have seen -- this time 20 teams are participating from Europe and 25 from North America.

I think the rule should be something like the FIFA world cup....... in which previous performance of the continents holds the key in choosing the number of teams.... Since N.American's performance last year was not up to the mark , the number of NA teams should be decreased to 15/16.

Good luck to the participants.

gvcormac · Post by **gvcormac** » Sat Apr 03, 2004 10:44 pm

.. wrote:Ar........
I just feel confused, is E so difficult??
As I was a reserve, I didn't code my algorithm to try.
But I have a algorithm that use similar method in 308 to solve it....
Anyone want to dicusss on it?

[Update: I failed to notice that this comment referred to the 2003 finals. My note below refers to the 2004 finals.]

At the blackout, 14 teams had done E. ICPC never announce what problems are solved in the last hour, and it is difficult to keep a systematic count of the balloons. Presumably at least 20 teams did E in the end.

Here's a snapshot of the scoreboard at 4 hours:

http://plg.uwaterloo.ca/pc2/score.html

OJ Board

World Finals 2003 Discussion Thread

Hey

Great Shame!