• Welcome to the Speedsolving.com, home of the web's largest puzzle community!
    You are currently viewing our forum as a guest which gives you limited access to join discussions and access our other features.

    Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community of 35,000+ people from around the world today!

    If you are already a member, simply login to hide this message and begin participating in the community!

Where do you think US Nationals 2010 should be held?

Where should the US nationals be held next? In your opinion


  • Total voters
    114
Status
Not open for further replies.

Logan

Alot of Azure
Joined
May 5, 2009
Messages
839
Location
Veelox
WCA
2009KELL02
YouTube
ljrox123
I am voting for detroit, not just because it's a neighboring state of mine, but because it's pretty much the center of the U.S. , it's relatively cheap (definitely cheaper than NY.), and it doesn't get that hot in august the average temperature July-August is 71.

While it obviously doesn't have as much to do as NY or DC, it is the optimal place for people who would just be going for the tournament because of the points I made before.
Man I'm way behind! when did Detroit become a state? [/sarcasm]



EDIT: I vote for anywhere in the center (or mid-north) of the united states.
 
Last edited:

brunson

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
1,124
Location
Westminster, CO
WCA
2008BRUN01
He should have used the search function!
Maybe he meant "center" in terms of population, but I still don't think that Detroit would be the center anyway. >.>
This is actually a really interesting page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_center_of_United_States_population

It shows how the center of population has moved since the late 1700s.

Looks like Kansas City, MO is pretty much right between the geographic and population centers of the US. I vote KC. (Or Denver) :D
 

StachuK1992

statue
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
3,812
Location
West Chester, PA
WCA
2008KORI02
YouTube
StachuK1992
He should have used the search function!
Maybe he meant "center" in terms of population, but I still don't think that Detroit would be the center anyway. >.>
This is actually a really interesting page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mean_center_of_United_States_population

It shows how the center of population has moved since the late 1700s.

Looks like Kansas City, MO is pretty much right between the geographic and population centers of the US. I vote KC. (Or Denver) :D
hmm..that is actually pretty interesting.
If only we had some means of knowing where all of the cubers are...

Brunson. I have an idea for you, since you seem to have fun with this sort of stuff.

Get the coordinates of every US competition held so far, as well as the 'population' of cubers at said competitions. Use this data to find out where people are most likely to be able to go. :)
 

brunson

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
1,124
Location
Westminster, CO
WCA
2008BRUN01
I was thinking of something along those same lines. Find where every US cuber lives, weight them by best average, number of competitions attended and number of US nationals attended. Use that to create a weighted mean of the center of the US cubing community.

Don't have me do it, because I'm pretty sure I could play with the weighting algorithm until the answer ended up being Denver. ;)
 

StachuK1992

statue
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
3,812
Location
West Chester, PA
WCA
2008KORI02
YouTube
StachuK1992
I was thinking of something along those same lines. Find where every US cuber lives, weight them by best average, number of competitions attended and number of US nationals attended. Use that to create a weighted mean of the center of the US cubing community.

Don't have me do it, because I'm pretty sure I could play with the weighting algorithm until the answer ended up being Denver. ;)
I'm pretty sure that we can't find out where everyone lives, let alone the people on these forums, which is why I was thinking that my previous idea could actually be plausible.
I understand where you're coming from, though. I just think that mine is *slightly* more plausible.

Hmm...who could we get to do this? :p
 

brunson

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
1,124
Location
Westminster, CO
WCA
2008BRUN01
I can certainly get the numbers of cubers at each event and the datadump has the lat/log of each of the venues. I can't to it tonight, maybe I'll play with it later. :)
 
Last edited:

brunson

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
1,124
Location
Westminster, CO
WCA
2008BRUN01
I can certainly get the numbers of cubers at each event and the datadump has the lat/log of each of the venues. I can't to it tonight, maybe I'll play with it later. :)
My wife is obsessed with finishing the Twilight series :rolleyes:, so that left me some time to dink with the data this morning.

Last night my thought was that some places have a *lot* of competitions, like 4 a year and that would give them an unfair advantage in weighting. But then I thought about it some more and came to the conclusion that if I'm weighting based on attendees, then what I'm really doing is giving every participant in any comp a "vote" for that location. Thinking of it like that I was able to convince myself that it really was okay. If they can get people to show up four times a year, then more power to them.

I also thought about grouping it by city, but since each venue had its own lat/lon it would have simply been more work for almost no difference in the result. So here are the counts of attendees by competition:

Code:
mysql> select competitionId,
    ->        count(0) attendees, 
    ->        latitude, longitude
    -> from competition as c
    -> join ( select personId, competitionId
    ->        from result
    ->        group by personId, competitionId 
    ->      ) as r 
    ->      on r.competitionId = c.id
    -> where  year in ( 2008, 2009 ) 
    ->        and c.countryId = 'USA'
    -> group by competitionId;
+-------------------------------+-----------+----------+------------+
| competitionId                 | attendees | latitude | longitude  |
+-------------------------------+-----------+----------+------------+
| ArmonkSpring2008              |        35 | 41119199 |  -73708530 | 
| AuroraSummer2009              |        29 | 39719735 | -104803019 | 
| AustinOpen2008                |        24 | 30284073 |  -97731905 | 
| AustinSpring2009              |        38 | 30289088 |  -97741523 | 
| BerkeleyFall2008              |        63 | 37870736 | -122279811 | 
| BerkeleySpring2008            |        56 | 37872397 | -122266230 | 
| BerkeleySpring2009            |        60 | 37870736 | -122279811 | 
| BerkeleySummer2009            |        48 | 37870736 | -122279811 | 
| BigCubesSummer2009            |        27 | 40554452 |  -75535410 | 
| Boulder2008                   |        30 | 40005171 | -105266394 | 
| CaltechFall2008               |        80 | 34137855 | -118126316 | 
| CaptainsCove2008              |        26 | 41158319 |  -73212500 | 
| CaptainsCove2009              |        30 | 41158319 |  -73212500 | 
| CarnegieMellonFall2008        |        37 | 40444579 |  -79942892 | 
| CarnegieMellonSpring2009      |        48 | 40444579 |  -79942892 | 
| ChattahoocheeSpring2008       |        37 | 34047987 |  -84207763 | 
| ChattahoocheeSpring2009       |        31 | 34047987 |  -84207763 | 
| CincinnatiSpringOpen2008      |        37 | 39109808 |  -84532175 | 
| CincinnatiSummerOpen2008      |        36 | 39230058 |  -84374303 | 
| CornellSpring2008             |        30 | 42447576 |  -76476089 | 
| CumberlandValley2009          |        28 | 40237847 |  -77061025 | 
| DallasOpen2009                |        29 | 32775927 |  -96809374 | 
| DaVinciScience2008            |        40 | 40579993 |  -75521548 | 
| DecaturOpen2008               |        18 | 33774101 |  -84293943 | 
| DenverOpen2008                |        41 | 39677004 | -104962367 | 
| DenverOpen2009                |        39 | 39750859 | -105222399 | 
| DiscoveryScience10thAnniv2008 |        57 | 33769876 | -117867482 | 
| DiscoveryScience2008          |        57 | 33770350 | -117867940 | 
| DiscoveryScience2009          |        56 | 33769876 | -117867482 | 
| DrexelFall2008                |        42 | 39962947 |  -75248970 | 
| DrexelWinter2009              |        34 | 39962947 |  -75248970 | 
| EPGYCaliforniaOpen2008        |        58 | 37431985 | -122171071 | 
| EPGYStanfordWinter2009        |        68 | 37424487 | -122161587 | 
| FortLeeWinter2009             |        59 | 40855021 |  -73972934 | 
| HorizonsOpen2009              |        31 | 33761004 |  -84324794 | 
| IndianaSummerOpen2009         |        47 | 39960457 |  -86015178 | 
| IndianaWinterOpen2008         |        28 | 39166546 |  -86531051 | 
| KearnyKardinal2008            |        34 | 40757562 |  -74156599 | 
| LexingtonFallOpen2008         |        28 | 37998277 |  -84442605 | 
| MinnesotaOpen2008             |        27 | 44046425 |  -92496188 | 
| MinnesotaOpen2009             |        36 | 44046425 |  -92496188 | 
| MissouriOpen2009              |        19 | 39252796 |  -94607185 | 
| MotorCityOpen2009             |        47 | 42443118 |  -82906915 | 
| NewarkOpen2008                |        64 | 40744155 |  -74170336 | 
| NewarkWinter2009              |        94 | 40744155 |  -74170336 | 
| OhioOpen2009                  |        57 | 40005158 |  -83015403 | 
| PrincetonOpen2008             |        86 | 40348213 |  -74669214 | 
| SafeHaven2009                 |        49 | 41322143 |  -74803570 | 
| SanDiegoOpen2008              |        52 | 32730860 | -117146984 | 
| SanDiegoOpen2009              |        40 | 32730860 | -117146984 | 
| SanDiegoScience2009           |        18 | 32731458 | -117149877 | 
| SanFranciscoOpen2009          |       150 | 37804209 | -122448166 | 
| StetsonSpring2008             |        21 | 29034476 |  -81302825 | 
| TwinCities2009                |        47 | 44984628 |  -93294123 | 
| UCSD2008                      |        48 | 32864674 | -117238137 | 
| UCSDSummer2008                |        43 | 32875104 | -117239784 | 
| UPennSpring2009               |        41 | 39952635 |  -75190719 | 
| USOpen2008                    |       104 | 33752325 |  -84389803 | 
| UtahOpen2008                  |        26 | 40771537 | -111836886 | 
| UtahOpen2009                  |        29 | 40767020 | -111847995 | 
| VirginiaOpen2008              |        27 | 37270323 |  -76714836 | 
| WashingtonDCOpen2008          |        51 | 38818691 |  -77168125 | 
| WestchesterFall2008           |        60 | 41077005 |  -73788968 | 
| WisconsinOpen2008             |        19 | 43157494 |  -87909888 | 
+-------------------------------+-----------+----------+------------+
64 rows in set (0.46 sec)
Then it was simply a matter of treating it like a center of mass problem and averaging the lat/lon of every attendee:

Code:
mysql> select sum( latitude * attendees )/sum(attendees)/1000000 as lat, 
    ->        sum( longitude * attendees )/sum(attendees)/1000000 as lon
    -> from ( select competitionId,
    ->               count(0) attendees, 
    ->               latitude, longitude
    ->        from competition as c
    ->        join( select personId, competitionId
    ->              from result
    ->              group by personId, competitionId 
    ->            ) as r 
    ->            on r.competitionId = c.id
    ->        where  year in ( 2008, 2009 ) 
    ->               and c.countryId = 'USA'
    ->        group by competitionId
    -> ) as comps;
+-------------+--------------+
| lat         | lon          |
+-------------+--------------+
|  38.06346368 | -95.66539705 |
+-------------+--------------+
1 row in set (0.05 sec)
It's actually a pretty surprising result.

They're only about 250 miles apart. http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=%2B37%C2%B0+41%27+49.15%22,+-91%C2%B0+48%27+34.44%22+(37.696987,+-91.809567)&daddr=38.06346368,+-95.66539705&hl=en&geocode=Fdo1PwId4RiH-g%3BFWjNRAIdC0NM-g&mra=ls&dirflg=w&sll=38.175592,-92.515869&sspn=1.349433,2.353821&ie=UTF8&ll=38.414862,-93.927612&spn=2.689873,4.707642&z=8

Edit: Fixed the attendees sum, but I'm not doing the center calculation correctly.
Edit2: Or am I? It's hard derive formulas and run shepherd on a bunch of four year olds at the same time...
Edit3: Fixed the final lat/lon.
 
Last edited:

fanwuq

Member
Joined
Dec 5, 2007
Messages
2,833
WCA
2008FANW01
YouTube
fanwuq
How did you get your number of attendees? There definitely wasn't over 100 people at big cubes summer 09, even if you include the parents/siblings. Or... are you counting by people or events participated?
 

brunson

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
1,124
Location
Westminster, CO
WCA
2008BRUN01
You are correct, I was counting each result rather than each person... I changed that calculation, but I'm still convincing myself I'm doing the mean calculation correctly.
 

brunson

Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
1,124
Location
Westminster, CO
WCA
2008BRUN01
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
1,802
I was thinking of something along those same lines. Find where every US cuber lives, weight them by best average, number of competitions attended and number of US nationals attended. Use that to create a weighted mean of the center of the US cubing community.

Don't have me do it, because I'm pretty sure I could play with the weighting algorithm until the answer ended up being Denver. ;)
Uh-oh, most of my competitions were in China and I attended three US Nationals, with a best (3x3x3) average of 12.26. :p
 

Bryan

Premium Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Messages
1,297
Location
Rochester, MN
WCA
2007LOGA01
Just south of the US/Saskatchewan border. Or just north of it XD... So I can actually go!
Actually, if you can guarantee enough people, I'll hold a competition over there.

As for the "center" of the cubing population, that doesn't really matter too much. It's probably cheaper to fly from CA to NY than it is to fly from CA to KS or MO.

On a side note, the center of the registered CubingUSA people is in Illinois. Of course, this is skewed by the fact that account registration has been tied to competition registration in MN, IN, and MO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top