UoM Maths Comp???

[luken93]

yeah, these competitions are very different from VCE, questions are much funner (from my perspective), one should really read some basic problem solving books before doing the competitions. One could try "Winning solutions" or "Art and craft of problem solving volume 1", they will help immensely with competition maths as they give you the elementary explanations of combinatorics, algebra and a bit of number theory. Try "Geometry Revisited" for geometry, very good book.

and where would i get these books? i don't think the school library is that advanced haha

I can never be screwed preparing for these comps.

i can see how this comes about after looking at it.

Don't listen to kyzoo, without any preparation he still manages to get $60 prizes from that competition.  >.>

Yeah same, I don't prep for MUMC either... I prep in AMO and big stuff like that but I tend to do better in MUMC anyway.
I have the e-books too but can't be stuffed reading half of them, I need more practice, not more reading. So probably going to practice off IMO Selection School papers and lecture questions. There's like 500 pages for one camp!!!!

I'll never get you people.  Why would you even want to do Olympiad maths? >.>;;

i second that, but how do you even get selected for it?

[GerrySly]

i second that, but how do you even get selected for it?

http://vcenotes.com/forum/index.php/topic,13587.msg242142.html#msg242142

[TrueTears]

yeah, these competitions are very different from VCE, questions are much funner (from my perspective), one should really read some basic problem solving books before doing the competitions. One could try "Winning solutions" or "Art and craft of problem solving volume 1", they will help immensely with competition maths as they give you the elementary explanations of combinatorics, algebra and a bit of number theory. Try "Geometry Revisited" for geometry, very good book.

and where would i get these books? i don't think the school library is that advanced haha

I can never be screwed preparing for these comps.

i can see how this comes about after looking at it.

Don't listen to kyzoo, without any preparation he still manages to get $60 prizes from that competition.  >.>

Yeah same, I don't prep for MUMC either... I prep in AMO and big stuff like that but I tend to do better in MUMC anyway.
I have the e-books too but can't be stuffed reading half of them, I need more practice, not more reading. So probably going to practice off IMO Selection School papers and lecture questions. There's like 500 pages for one camp!!!!

I'll never get you people.  Why would you even want to do Olympiad maths? >.>;;

why wouldn't you... it might be much funner for some people than the shitty vce maths

[appianway]

yeah, these competitions are very different from VCE, questions are much funner (from my perspective), one should really read some basic problem solving books before doing the competitions. One could try "Winning solutions" or "Art and craft of problem solving volume 1", they will help immensely with competition maths as they give you the elementary explanations of combinatorics, algebra and a bit of number theory. Try "Geometry Revisited" for geometry, very good book.

and where would i get these books? i don't think the school library is that advanced haha

I can never be screwed preparing for these comps.

i can see how this comes about after looking at it.

Don't listen to kyzoo, without any preparation he still manages to get $60 prizes from that competition.  >.>

Yeah same, I don't prep for MUMC either... I prep in AMO and big stuff like that but I tend to do better in MUMC anyway.
I have the e-books too but can't be stuffed reading half of them, I need more practice, not more reading. So probably going to practice off IMO Selection School papers and lecture questions. There's like 500 pages for one camp!!!!

I'll never get you people.  Why would you even want to do Olympiad maths? >.>;;

why wouldn't you... it might be much funner for some people than the shitty vce maths

+1
but if I keep doing olympiad next year, it's going to kill my VCE. And selection is like triple as hard than the science olympiads.
I should switch to olympiad biology/chem/physics because it's actually more related to the syllabus.

I don't actually agree with that. At all. I know people who've missed out on team selection for science olympiads who've qualified for the training in all three disciplines, who've attended the maths excellence school since year 8, who've gone to the science camp twice, who've medalled almost every year in the westpac, who have both LMus and AMus, who've been perfect scorers on the AMOC, who've won international humanities and science problem solving competitions, who've medalled in other mathematics competitions, who topped their state in subjects taken in year 10, who win debating awards and who play competitive chess who've been rejected. Those specific examples aren't drawn from many individuals - they describe one of my friends from the camp. He was ineligible for selection after he started going to science camps, but he might have made the maths team this year if he'd focused on that instead. He wasn't the only student like that. The standard of students in the science camps is incredibly high - the "dumb" guy in physics had been selected as a state representative for national science camps (not NYSF - think more selective), and had been a perfect scorer in the Rio Tinto. We had quite a few 50s, almost perfect SATs which had been taken in year 9, people who'd won international environmental prizes, state french prize winners, national ambassadors, state winners of OzClO, a lot of perfect scorers in the National Chemistry Quiz, a lot of medallists in every science competition around, people who'd done research projects... the list goes on. Obviously most of these people are brilliant, and obviously most didn't make it into the teams.

The people who get chosen for the teams in maths are generally the best in the country in maths. But it's also fair to say that the people who get chosen for biology, informatics, physics and chemistry are also the best for their respective areas. I wouldn't say it's harder to get into maths at all - I'd just say that maths is more 'exclusive' because people get chosen from a young age and trained, so it's harder to get in once you're older. Science doesn't do that.

In regards to the point on the curriculum - you need to know it, but that's only a starting point. I have a friend who scored 50 and 49 in her year 11 3/4s who did the biology camp. She gave up everything in term 1 to study for the FSE, and quite evidently, knew the material back to front. She didn't make the team. Like maths, the science olympiads require a lot of higher level thinking, and learnt material is only a starting point. It's more of a prerequisite than a determining factor.

You'll also find that the curriculum for the actual olympiads (not the NQEs) strech farrrrr beyond VCE. They won't help much. The science olympiads swallow up a LOT of time as well.

[AzureBlue]

I don't actually agree with that. At all. I know people who've missed out on team selection for science olympiads who've qualified for the training in all three disciplines, who've attended the maths excellence school since year 8, who've gone to the science camp twice, who've medalled almost every year in the westpac, who have both LMus and AMus, who've been perfect scorers on the AMOC, who've won international humanities and science problem solving competitions, who've medalled in other mathematics competitions, who topped their state in subjects taken in year 10, who win debating awards and who play competitive chess who've been rejected. Those specific examples aren't drawn from many individuals - they describe one of my friends from the camp. He was ineligible for selection after he started going to science camps, but he might have made the maths team this year if he'd focused on that instead. He wasn't the only student like that. The standard of students in the science camps is incredibly high - the "dumb" guy in physics had been selected as a state representative for national science camps (not NYSF - think more selective), and had been a perfect scorer in the Rio Tinto. We had quite a few 50s, almost perfect SATs which had been taken in year 9, people who'd won international environmental prizes, state french prize winners, national ambassadors, state winners of OzClO, a lot of perfect scorers in the National Chemistry Quiz, a lot of medallists in every science competition around, people who'd done research projects... the list goes on. Obviously most of these people are brilliant, and obviously most didn't make it into the teams.

The people who get chosen for the teams in maths are generally the best in the country in maths. But it's also fair to say that the people who get chosen for biology, informatics, physics and chemistry are also the best for their respective areas. I wouldn't say it's harder to get into maths at all - I'd just say that maths is more 'exclusive' because people get chosen from a young age and trained, so it's harder to get in once you're older. Science doesn't do that.

In regards to the point on the curriculum - you need to know it, but that's only a starting point. I have a friend who scored 50 and 49 in her year 11 3/4s who did the biology camp. She gave up everything in term 1 to study for the FSE, and quite evidently, knew the material back to front. She didn't make the team. Like maths, the science olympiads require a lot of higher level thinking, and learnt material is only a starting point. It's more of a prerequisite than a determining factor.

You'll also find that the curriculum for the actual olympiads (not the NQEs) strech farrrrr beyond VCE. They won't help much. The science olympiads swallow up a LOT of time as well.

Yeah, but I've checked the NQE Biology paper - at least some of its relevant to the VCE syllabus... and is what I've been doing in school.
On the other hand, the maths is at least 95% irrelevant to VCE, basically none of it is in the VCE syllabus.
WTF that guy is freaky if he's done all that! At least 30 of my friends have Lmus (I dropped after completing my AMus because of time constraints), I know a lot of maths camp kids and some IMO members, a few that have gone to science camp, like everyone who plays chess because I used to play competitive chess too, debating swannie winners etc... but they are definitely not all one person! What year did this person go for selection?

Yeah, I meant that it is clearly hard to get into ANY olympiad team because you have to be the best 5-6 in the ENTIRE NATION. It's amazing alone if you get into the top 25 (camp) and or even100. All I mean is that Angelo said that the easy questions in the maths papers = the most difficult questions in the science olympiad papers. And yes, it is imperative that you train young, starting at at least year 8 to get the edge in the maths olympiads and get into the circuit of Senior Contest, AMOs, APMOs, Apr & Dec schools and invitational events early.

[TrueTears]

I don't actually agree with that. At all. I know people who've missed out on team selection for science olympiads who've qualified for the training in all three disciplines, who've attended the maths excellence school since year 8, who've gone to the science camp twice, who've medalled almost every year in the westpac, who have both LMus and AMus, who've been perfect scorers on the AMOC, who've won international humanities and science problem solving competitions, who've medalled in other mathematics competitions, who topped their state in subjects taken in year 10, who win debating awards and who play competitive chess who've been rejected. Those specific examples aren't drawn from many individuals - they describe one of my friends from the camp. He was ineligible for selection after he started going to science camps, but he might have made the maths team this year if he'd focused on that instead. He wasn't the only student like that. The standard of students in the science camps is incredibly high - the "dumb" guy in physics had been selected as a state representative for national science camps (not NYSF - think more selective), and had been a perfect scorer in the Rio Tinto. We had quite a few 50s, almost perfect SATs which had been taken in year 9, people who'd won international environmental prizes, state french prize winners, national ambassadors, state winners of OzClO, a lot of perfect scorers in the National Chemistry Quiz, a lot of medallists in every science competition around, people who'd done research projects... the list goes on. Obviously most of these people are brilliant, and obviously most didn't make it into the teams.

The people who get chosen for the teams in maths are generally the best in the country in maths. But it's also fair to say that the people who get chosen for biology, informatics, physics and chemistry are also the best for their respective areas. I wouldn't say it's harder to get into maths at all - I'd just say that maths is more 'exclusive' because people get chosen from a young age and trained, so it's harder to get in once you're older. Science doesn't do that.

In regards to the point on the curriculum - you need to know it, but that's only a starting point. I have a friend who scored 50 and 49 in her year 11 3/4s who did the biology camp. She gave up everything in term 1 to study for the FSE, and quite evidently, knew the material back to front. She didn't make the team. Like maths, the science olympiads require a lot of higher level thinking, and learnt material is only a starting point. It's more of a prerequisite than a determining factor.

You'll also find that the curriculum for the actual olympiads (not the NQEs) strech farrrrr beyond VCE. They won't help much. The science olympiads swallow up a LOT of time as well.

Yeah, but I've checked the NQE Biology paper - at least some of its relevant to the VCE syllabus... and is what I've been doing in school.
On the other hand, the maths is at least 95% irrelevant to VCE, basically none of it is in the VCE syllabus.
WTF that guy is freaky if he's done all that! At least 30 of my friends have Lmus (I dropped after completing my AMus because of time constraints), I know a lot of maths camp kids and some IMO members, a few that have gone to science camp, like everyone who plays chess because I used to play competitive chess too, debating swannie winners etc... but they are definitely not all one person! What year did this person go for selection?

Yeah, I meant that it is clearly hard to get into ANY olympiad team because you have to be the best 5-6 in the ENTIRE NATION. It's amazing alone if you get into the top 25 (camp) and or even100. All I mean is that Angelo said that the easy questions in the maths papers = the most difficult questions in the science olympiad papers. And yes, it is imperative that you train young, starting at at least year 8 to get the edge in the maths olympiads and get into the circuit of Senior Contest, AMOs, APMOs, Apr & Dec schools and invitational events early.

I agree with Azure here, basically in olympiad maths theres no calculus, so you can say good bye to any calculus you do in spesh or methods. Number theory is not covered at all in VCE, nor is combinatorics (yes there's the small part on combinations and permutations you learn in methods but there's way more), algebra - especially inequalities+fundamental theorems are not taught in VCE. I'd say almost 99% of the VCE course is unrelated to olympiad maths.

Where as personally I found Olympiad chem (did it in year 11) at least relevant to some of the stuff in VCE chem which helped.

[AzureBlue]

And there is no geometry in VCE, at least not in Victoria! Geometry, on the other hand, tends to be 40% of olympiad papers.

[TrueTears]

And there is no geometry in VCE, at least not in Victoria! Geometry, on the other hand, tends to be 40% of olympiad papers.

There we go, another thing VCE maths doesn't have

[appianway]

I'll just put this out there - NQE papers are very different to 'olympiad' papers, so what you guys found with the NQE and the school based olympiad program is dramatically different to what the real stuff's like. The actual olympiad training covers a completely different course, and the style of questions is very different - like the maths papers, the whole *blank stare* thing is common. They're higher order thinking, to say the least. I think last year the cut off for a gold at IPhO was 32/50 or something ridiculous, so that probably gives an indication of how hard it is! I think IMO was 32/42... so, to cut a long explanation short, the actual olympiad level papers (not the NQEs - these are just done to find scientific talent...) are incredibly, incredibly hard - it's absurd to say they're not level with IMO terms of difficulty in their fields. Then again, it's impossible to compare disciplines, but I don't think you should judge science olympiads on the NQEs. It's a completely different ballgame. That said, there are usually a few challenging questions on the physics and chemistry NQEs - keep in mind that you have half the time allowed for the national maths competitions, so there's less time to mull things over. The average scores at the summer school are also massively lower than those at the maths schools - in my opinion, our FSE was probably much harder than APhO and IPhO papers... and then our labs and exams at the summer school were ridiculously hard considering we'd only just been introduced to the topics. Actually, they were ridiculously hard anyway...

The required content to know for olympiad exams (the 'prerequisite') is really different from VCE. I can't comment about chemistry because I didn't go to the summer school for that (it was on at the same time as physics... all of the summer schools are on at the same time!), but in physics we did motion (rotational and translational), simple harmonic motion, fluid statics and dynamics, thermodynamics, a bit of statistical mechanics, AC circuits, DC circuits, electromagnetism, physical optics, geometrical optics, relativity, quantum, gaussian surfaces, statics, kinetics (really covered in thermodynamics though...) and waves. We also covered a fair bit of maths (mostly calculus, because that's really a toolbox for physics), including deriving moments of inertia, 3-D integration, 4 vectors, complex numbers, differential equations, vectors and a lot of trigonometric relations. Some of this is covered in VCE, most isn't, and the aspects which are included in the curriculum are completely brushed over and very superficial. I think chemistry had a lot to cover, and I heard one of the biol tutors (who did amazingly at IBO) say "Oh, our course only covers first year and some of the more interesting parts of 2nd year." But, as I said, the emphasis is on the problem solving, not the content... but you need to know the content to be able to attempt the questions!

Oh, and this guy went to physics camp this year, biology the year before and the maths camps before that. I think he's also been asked to teach some people oboe... (all of his diplomas and awards are on piano). There were a few people like him on physics camp - achieving incredible results in a variety of fields, but I won't give too much information because some of them live in Victoria...

[TrueTears]

like the maths papers, the whole *blank stare* thing is common. They're higher order thinking, to say the least.

Not quite, olympiad maths is just a different area of mathematics from VCE mathematics, they do not need "higher order thinking", it is just because most people are too used to doing the area of mathematics that VCE provides, their brain is not used to doing questions like those in olympiad mathematics. Whereas if you have been learning olympiad maths, they certainly do not involve higher order thinking rather they use some of the same techniques as you would go about solving VCE maths but the only difference is applying it on a different style of mathematics.

i can't comment on physics/chem/bio coz im not interested at all in those sciences so i dont know if they require higher order thinking but im certain for maths you dont, u just need to attune your brain to a different style thats all.

[EvangelionZeta]

yeah, these competitions are very different from VCE, questions are much funner (from my perspective), one should really read some basic problem solving books before doing the competitions. One could try "Winning solutions" or "Art and craft of problem solving volume 1", they will help immensely with competition maths as they give you the elementary explanations of combinatorics, algebra and a bit of number theory. Try "Geometry Revisited" for geometry, very good book.

and where would i get these books? i don't think the school library is that advanced haha

I can never be screwed preparing for these comps.

i can see how this comes about after looking at it.

Don't listen to kyzoo, without any preparation he still manages to get $60 prizes from that competition.  >.>

Yeah same, I don't prep for MUMC either... I prep in AMO and big stuff like that but I tend to do better in MUMC anyway.
I have the e-books too but can't be stuffed reading half of them, I need more practice, not more reading. So probably going to practice off IMO Selection School papers and lecture questions. There's like 500 pages for one camp!!!!

I'll never get you people.  Why would you even want to do Olympiad maths? >.>;;

why wouldn't you... it might be much funner for some people than the shitty vce maths

I'm going to be the odd one out here and say that writing essays is way more fun than maths or science, even of the interesting sort.  >.>

I don't actually agree with that. At all. I know people who've missed out on team selection for science olympiads who've qualified for the training in all three disciplines, who've attended the maths excellence school since year 8, who've gone to the science camp twice, who've medalled almost every year in the westpac, who have both LMus and AMus, who've been perfect scorers on the AMOC, who've won international humanities and science problem solving competitions, who've medalled in other mathematics competitions, who topped their state in subjects taken in year 10, who win debating awards and who play competitive chess who've been rejected. Those specific examples aren't drawn from many individuals - they describe one of my friends from the camp. He was ineligible for selection after he started going to science camps, but he might have made the maths team this year if he'd focused on that instead. He wasn't the only student like that. The standard of students in the science camps is incredibly high - the "dumb" guy in physics had been selected as a state representative for national science camps (not NYSF - think more selective), and had been a perfect scorer in the Rio Tinto. We had quite a few 50s, almost perfect SATs which had been taken in year 9, people who'd won international environmental prizes, state french prize winners, national ambassadors, state winners of OzClO, a lot of perfect scorers in the National Chemistry Quiz, a lot of medallists in every science competition around, people who'd done research projects... the list goes on. Obviously most of these people are brilliant, and obviously most didn't make it into the teams.

The people who get chosen for the teams in maths are generally the best in the country in maths. But it's also fair to say that the people who get chosen for biology, informatics, physics and chemistry are also the best for their respective areas. I wouldn't say it's harder to get into maths at all - I'd just say that maths is more 'exclusive' because people get chosen from a young age and trained, so it's harder to get in once you're older. Science doesn't do that.

In regards to the point on the curriculum - you need to know it, but that's only a starting point. I have a friend who scored 50 and 49 in her year 11 3/4s who did the biology camp. She gave up everything in term 1 to study for the FSE, and quite evidently, knew the material back to front. She didn't make the team. Like maths, the science olympiads require a lot of higher level thinking, and learnt material is only a starting point. It's more of a prerequisite than a determining factor.

You'll also find that the curriculum for the actual olympiads (not the NQEs) strech farrrrr beyond VCE. They won't help much. The science olympiads swallow up a LOT of time as well.

Yeah, but I've checked the NQE Biology paper - at least some of its relevant to the VCE syllabus... and is what I've been doing in school.
On the other hand, the maths is at least 95% irrelevant to VCE, basically none of it is in the VCE syllabus.
WTF that guy is freaky if he's done all that! At least 30 of my friends have Lmus (I dropped after completing my AMus because of time constraints), I know a lot of maths camp kids and some IMO members, a few that have gone to science camp, like everyone who plays chess because I used to play competitive chess too, debating swannie winners etc... but they are definitely not all one person! What year did this person go for selection?

Are there even thirty LMus holders in Victoria still in high school?  Either you must know every single one of them, or they're all Uni students (:p), haha.

Incidentally, who do you know from the IMO (apart from Dana, lol)?

[TrueTears]

ok good to know

[appianway]

Oh, and can I jump in with who do you know from science camps too? Aside from the girl from your school

[appianway]

IBO participants or summer school?

[AzureBlue]

IBO participants or summer school?

IBO olympians - olympians would've been to summer school yeah?