The Quizbowl Resource Center

by **Church51907** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 3:10 pm

The University of Louisville will host the Third Annual Arts & Sciences Academic Challenge on October 17th, 2009 on the Belknap Campus (main) of the University. We will be using NAQT Invitational Series and will do either pool play or round robin pending the amount of interest. If you are interested in participating in the tournament, please e-mail me at mschur01@llouisville.edu.

Matt Church
University of Louisville
mschur01@louisville.edu

by **grayson77** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 9:04 pm

Sadly, I will not be able to attend.
However, I still believe Grayson will be interested in sending a team.

by **Huang** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:24 pm

Is Louisville aware this is a PSAT date?

by **Church51907** » Mon Jun 22, 2009 10:48 pm

Sorry to hear you cannot attend Scott, but hopefully we will see you in the spring. With the PSAT date, we did not know, but had to choose between the 17th and the 24th, which is an ACT Date and opted for the 17th

Matt Church
University of Louisville

by **Church51907** » Fri Aug 14, 2009 10:00 am

Any team interested in participating in this years Arts & Sciences Academic Challenge, please let me know. We are trying to secure enough space for the tournament and, due to recent flooding on campus, we need to let our facilities folks know as soon as possible. Then entry fee will most likely be $20 per team and either $15 or 10 for teams bringing working buzzer systems or moderators. All the best. My e-mail is mschur01@louisville.edu

Matt Church
University of Louisville

by **bsrich00** » Tue Aug 25, 2009 3:55 pm

Hey Matt,

I assume you know Vandy is also that weekend. Just an FYI because there will be some conflicts.

Thanks,
Bryan

by **Church51907** » Tue Aug 25, 2009 5:00 pm

Bryan:
Hope all is well. I just found out Vandy was the same weekend, usually they had done a halloween tournament. Unfortunately, the space on campus is at a premium so we'll see what kind of tunrout we get.
Matt Church
University of Louisville

by **grayson77** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 7:05 pm

I would like to thank U of L for running a great tournament.
I actually was able to go do to a variety of circumstances.
Sadly two of our starters were not able to go, which affected our performance quite a bit.

Sadly, we lost to Danville by 5 in the round of 16 and did not qualify for nationals.
They were however, a great team, especially considering that they will return all of their players next year (I think.)

I would like to say that Dunbar has an exceptional B team,
but more impressively, Manual E (all freshmen) held their own with everyone in our pool except Grayson, Manual and Dunbar.
They will be great in the future.

Just a quick question though, not trying to be a sore loser.
One question (I will try not to be specific) referred to the musically elements to a specific opera.
I recognized the description, and buzzed in giving the name of the opera as my answer.
It was counted incorrect and the question continued but changed topic slightly.
It turned out that the question was looking for a specific section of the opera.
I would think that I should be prompted on the opera name because the answer was technically correct based on the question up to that point.
I'd like to see some opinions on the issue.

by **bt_green_warbler** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 7:23 pm

grayson77 wrote:I recognized the description, and buzzed in giving the name of the opera as my answer.
It was counted incorrect and the question continued but changed topic slightly.

Not a ton we can do about this in public without the questions clear; I just sent you email asking for the details so we can get this fixed.

by **Charbroil** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 7:33 pm

grayson77 wrote:Just a quick question though, not trying to be a sore loser.
One question (I will try not to be specific) referred to the musically elements to a specific opera.
I recognized the description, and buzzed in giving the name of the opera as my answer.
It was counted incorrect and the question continued but changed topic slightly.
It turned out that the question was looking for a specific section of the opera.
I would think that I should be prompted on the opera name because the answer was technically correct based on the question up to that point.
I'd like to see some opinions on the issue.

This is pretty common, actually--this happened last year (also on NAQT questions), and I asked about it; it turns out that the question usually does a good job of pointing only to that part, except that it can be hard to tell which part it is.

Edit: Personally, I would prefer if questions like this didn't test listening skills so much, but as written, it is correct only to accept that part.

by **grayson77** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 7:38 pm

That makes sense.

I did have another problem though.
I gave the French answer for a music tossup and it was counted incorrect.
The moderate gave the answer as an Anglicized version of what I said.
This did not affect the outcome of the game, but was somewhat confusing to me.

So what were the results for the tournament?

by **Church51907** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 9:41 pm

Scott, do you remember what rounds those two questions were in? As for the tournament, the final standings were
1. Dunbar C
2. Manual A
3. Manual B
4. Manual C
5. Simon Kenton A
5. Danville A

I am going to work on getting the full stats up tomorrow. Glad you enjoyed the tournament and the next one will run on schedule, I hope.

Matt Church
University of Louisville

by **grayson77** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 9:53 pm

One of the questions, I actually think it was correct not to prompt, after thinking about it.
The other was in round 6 (we played Simon Kenton B; we would have protested if it had made a difference in the score.)

by **Hilltopper22** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:31 pm

One question I have about this tournament:

Why are the playoffs at UofL always single elimination? That's not exactly a good way to run the playoffs of a quizbowl tournament. I would much rather see a round robin or even double elimination for the afternoon rounds.

In other news, I find it both impressive and disheartening that Dunbar's 3rd stringers beat the rest of the state at quizbowl...

by **Huang** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 10:34 pm

soaringeagle22 wrote:In other news, I find it both impressive and disheartening that Dunbar's 3rd stringers beat the rest of the state at quizbowl...

I hear that Dunbar split up the team to try to qualify more teams for nationals (I was taking the PSAT today). Manual might have done the same but I'm not sure.

by **dbarman** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 11:06 pm

Church51907 wrote:Scott, do you remember what rounds those two questions were in? As for the tournament, the final standings were
1. Dunbar C
2. Manual A
3. Manual B
4. Manual C
5. Simon Kenton A
5. Danville A

I am going to work on getting the full stats up tomorrow. Glad you enjoyed the tournament and the next one will run on schedule, I hope.

Matt Church
University of Louisville

It was Dunbar B

by **Hilltopper22** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 11:17 pm

Oh, well that's not nearly as disheartening. But it's still impressive, you all are stacked again this year.

by **dbarman** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 11:28 pm

One small question I would like to ask is why you guys don't take similar/just equally correct/taken every where else/ answers. I am talking about several questions, but especially one in the final where I gave a similar/just equally correct/taken every where else/ answer but was negged. Also, I am pretty sure that once the moderator calls time, no matter how close the buzz was afterwards, the buzz doesn't count. In the finals, one of my teammates buzzed in a split second after time was called on a math tossup, but we were still awarded the points and bonuses. It wouldn't have changed the outcome but would have forced the game to be decided on the last tossup.

by **grayson77** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 11:36 pm

Does anyone know big the margin in the final was?

by **Huang** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 11:40 pm

grayson77 wrote:Why were you are Dunbar B this year after playing on A last year?

Huang wrote:Dunbar split up the team to try to qualify more teams for nationals

I'm sure no one really cared what team they were on. Hence the reason why Ping was on Dunbar "B".

by **grayson77** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 11:45 pm

It is impressive that Manual was able to produce three teams that qualified for nationals.
If they continue to improve, I wouldn't be surprised if they have two teams in the top half at HSNCT.

by **Huang** » Sat Oct 17, 2009 11:49 pm

grayson77 wrote:Ah, okay.
Why did Dunbar A not go?

Ugh, again..

Huang wrote:Dunbar split up the team to try to qualify more teams for nationals

So there were presumably two teams named Dunbar "A" and Dunbar "B"

Edit: I see what you're saying. I don't know why there was no Dunbar "A" but it's rather annoying when teams do this. It shows an unhealthy obsession with Byko's ratings (ratings that don't even exist as of now!).

by **grayson77** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 12:00 am

I guess there was a misunderstanding in the scheduling, because Dunbar's teams were listed as B and C.
This is not really something that would affect the HSNCT qualification procedures though.

by **Inkana7** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 12:10 am

grayson77 wrote:It is impressive that Manual was able to produce three teams that qualified for nationals.
If they continue to improve, I wouldn't be surprised if they have two teams in the top ten at HSNCT.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves. It's very rare for any team not named Dorman or Thomas Jeffereson to have a B team that competitive. Unless you meant a few years down the road.

by **grayson77** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 12:13 am

I did not mean to put top 10, but rather top half.
Sorry about that; I better go to bed, before a make even more a fool of myself.

by **bt_green_warbler** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 12:48 am

dbarman wrote:One small question I would like to ask is why you guys don't take similar/just equally correct/taken every where else/ answers. I am talking about several questions, but especially one in the final where I gave a similar/just equally correct/taken every where else/ answer but was negged.

Please send me the details and we'll get it fixed.

by **dbarman** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 7:01 am

That was mainly aimed at the Louisville people as I think it was their choice not to take such answers. Usually, at other NAQT tournaments, those similar/just equally correct answers/ would be prompted or accepted.

by **dbarman** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 7:03 am

grayson77 wrote:I guess there was a misunderstanding in the scheduling, because Dunbar's teams were listed as B and C.
This is not really something that would affect the HSNCT qualification procedures though.

Our coach signed up as Dunbar B and C as I wasn't planning on going until the last minute and the rest of the players on Dunbar B usually plays on the B and C teams.

by **ahunt** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 8:49 am

Huang wrote:
soaringeagle22 wrote:I hear that Dunbar split up the team to try to qualify more teams for nationals (I was taking the PSAT today). Manual might have done the same but I'm not sure.

Manual definitely did not do the same. Our "A" team was our strongest team, "B" team was the second strongest, so on and so forth. No one who typically plays on a higher ranked team played on a lower ranked team.

Also, as far as the name thing, I believe that teams should not be allowed to skip letters when they play at tournaments. For example, at Danville we only took one team and that team was missing our "A" team starter, but I did not insist that they were Manual "B".... If I were missing my whole "A" team today then my teams still should've been listed as A-E and not B-E. In reality how many teams do we know that are never missing any players at any given tournament?

by **SHM** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 9:51 am

Sorry, all, the Dunbar “alphabet” mess was my fault. At the time we signed up, I thought only JV players were going to be able to go. We were inundated with testing and college essays this weekend and didn’t finally find out who would really be able to participate until the night before. Sandy wasn’t aware of the years the varsity teams complained when the JV played as Dunbar A and skewed those rankings. Glad to hear these no longer exist! Pikeville was also playing only as Pikeville B because their starting team was not able to come either. I didn't realize this could be problematic but now that I do, I will ask U of L to change the Dunbar names. Susan Hawn Magedanz, PLD

by **Huang** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 11:19 am

ahunt wrote:
Huang wrote:
soaringeagle22 wrote:I hear that Dunbar split up the team to try to qualify more teams for nationals (I was taking the PSAT today). Manual might have done the same but I'm not sure.

Manual definitely did not do the same. Our "A" team was our strongest team, "B" team was the second strongest, so on and so forth. No one who typically plays on a higher ranked team played on a lower ranked team.

Also, as far as the name thing, I believe that teams should not be allowed to skip letters when they play at tournaments. For example, at Danville we only took one team and that team was missing our "A" team starter, but I did not insist that they were Manual "B".... If I were missing my whole "A" team today then my teams still should've been listed as A-E and not B-E. In reality how many teams do we know that are never missing any players at any given tournament?

Yeah I completely agree. Also, sorry for the misinformation. It's clear that duPont Manual looks to have the deepest team in the state. Here's one of the edits I made after realizing I was wrong about the situation: "I don't know why there was no Dunbar "A" but it's rather annoying when teams do this. It shows an unhealthy obsession with Byko's ratings (ratings that don't even exist as of now!)."

by **SHM** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 1:09 pm

“Manual definitely did not do the same. Our "A" team was our strongest team, "B" team was the second strongest, so on and so forth. No one who typically plays on a higher ranked team played on a lower ranked team.”

We agree with Mrs. Hunt and the DuPont Manual team’s practice-this is also our philosophy and 8 of our 9 players were arranged that way at the U of L tournament. Only one player (not a varsity starting player) was moved to the lower team and that was because we did not want to have all three of our ONLY lit majors in attendance on the same team. Our lit major who has the lowest scoring average was the one placed on the 2nd team. Our players are not locked into or assigned specific teams; we construct teams for each tournament according to who can go and try to construct ones that each have a major for each subject. Our strongest majors are assigned to the highest team, and so on and so forth.

by **ahunt** » Sun Oct 18, 2009 2:15 pm

To clarify- I was not the one who made the claim that Dunbar split talent amongst teams. I was responding to the thought that Manual had "split talent" amongst teams in hopes of obtaining more bids. Of course who attends a given tournament will help determine team composition along with players improving (or declining) over the course of time. I also do not have permanent teams. As far as the letter thing... my statement was more directed towards the thought that at any given tournament letters shouldn't be skipped. In the end it isn't a huge deal.

Anyway, I hope that clarifies.

We are fortunate to have many talented teams in the state!

We look forward to continuing to play Dunbar in future tournaments.

On an unrelated note, I was very impressed with the performance of St. X. They put up some impressive numbers in early games. It was unfortunate that they had to play down at the end of the tournament due to Homecoming.

I also was impressed with the decorum of all of the teams in attendance in the rounds that I moderated.

Website · by **akinney** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 3:47 am

I heard something along the lines of Louisville hosting another tournament later this year? Is this true? This tournament sounded pretty awesome, and I'd like my team to go to as many tournaments as possible (and if Jarret knows any good Ohio tournaments, tell me). Unfortunately, the economy sucks and Madisonville can't travel too far. :grin:

And of course, I'd love to see how my team performs at NAQT against Manual and the like (we know how we perform against Dunbar--and it ain't pretty!).

by **SHM** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 9:00 pm

Thanks, Allison!

Aaron- UofL is good because they keep the cost at about $10-$15 a team, Wofford is hosting a free NAQT tournament in the spring, and some tournaments can get to almost the free mark if you bring buzzers, moderators, questions, etc. Look on-line. Sometimes, if you will contact the tournament director they can help you out with lower fees or arranging free housing. Go to cities where someone has a friend, take sleeping bags, and stay at someone's home. ALSO....not to ruin your excitement about playing Manual .....but check out the morning stats- our game against them wasn't too pretty, either. They have a fabulous team. SHM/ PLD

Website · by **akinney** » Mon Oct 19, 2009 10:10 pm

Oh, we've played Manual. We know how good they are.

Thanks for the suggestions!

by **Church51907** » Tue Nov 10, 2009 8:10 pm

Apologies for the delay, but the stats from our tourney are up on the web. All the best.
http://www.naqt.com/stats/tournament-te ... nt_id=3033

Matt Church
University of Louisville

by **ahunt** » Thu Nov 12, 2009 7:15 am

Matt,
Thanks for posting the stats and for hosting the tournament!

The Quizbowl Resource Center

Who is online