Contextual Question Pertaining to the Relevance of Awards

<p>Ok, so there are a lot of people that have all these crazy awards like State Champion in this sport or state tennis captain thing.</p>

<p>My question is do college admissions people look at how significant that really is in the context of where that student lives?</p>

<p>For example, I live in California. For many sports like X Country, Wrestling, and Track, you have to place in League, then CIF, then Masters, then go to the State Preliminaries, and then finally you actually make it to State. The reason being is that California has so many overpopulated high schools with such a depth in athletes.
However, in some smaller states, like Utah or Rhode Island, I would imagine the level of competition is nowhere near that of a big state like California or New York. So a state champion in Nevade might be nowhere near as good as the state champion of Pennsylvania.</p>

<p>Now, lets move on to events like Debate or Academic Decathlon. In California, there is no state competition for these things simply because it would be too long and difficult. It only goes up to regional. Yet in smaller states you get the nifty title of State next to that activity when it is the same thing as a smaller, lest prestigious sounding award in a big state.</p>

<p>My point is do colleges realize this?</p>