The Quizbowl Resource Center

The Kate Duncan Smith DAR High School Quizbowl Team would like to invite you to the 2nd annual "DAR Invitational" to be held on August 22, 2009. We will begin registration at 8:00 a.m. at DAR High School and begin play at 9 am. But, if all teams are present before 9 a.m., we will begin play after a brief coaches meeting. The cost is sixty-five ($65) dollars per team with a discount of 5 dollars for working buzzers, 5 dollars if you travel over 200 miles as verified by either MSN Live Search or MapQuest, 5 dollar discount for any team after the first team from a given school with the minimum fee being 50 dollars if you have all three discounts. We will be using a NAQT IS set (to be named later) at this tournament, if you interested please contact me about driving directions or other information. Due to the size of our school, I will have to limit the number of teams to 24 total teams.

I will take the dangerous step of saying that Hoover will have two teams present, three if there is a JV pool.

Thanks Josh, I hope we will have a JV pool this time

Just thought I would give a update on teams that have already indicated they are coming on the 22nd

Hoover (2 or 3)
Hume Fogg (2)
Brindlee Mountain (not sure on teams)

We still have room and we would love to have as many teams as we can up to the max of 26 teams at this early in the season tournament.

Matt:

I am trying to get TWO Brookwood teams to DAR on August 22. Other Georgians are interested as well. We all need to know that the NAQT questions you will use will NOT conflict with Sept 12 Kennesaw State (GA) Ty or Sept 19 Gwinnett County Ty.

JR Barry

Rick,
I would love to see your teams up at DAR in August. Right now I am attempting to get a clarification on which set we are using and I will attempt to see if we can make sure there is not a conflict if it can be helped

Rick looks like that we are IS-86 using, which is the same as the Gwinnett County event. Kennesaw is using our first A-level set (87A), the same as Alabama's Rufus King event.
So I don't know what to tell you
Matt

Well, it looks like we won't be going to DAR. Sorry about that Matt. I'll try again next year.

Looks like our first tournament will be Sept 12 at Kennesaw State.

Totally understand Rick and sorry we won't be seeing you guys then...
Matt

St. Andrew's (Ridgeland, MS) is interested in 1-2 teams, but has to make sure the set doesn't overlap other tournaments also.

Aaron Johnson

Update on teams as of today

MLK (1?)
Hume-Fogg (2)
Brindlee Mt (2)
DAR (2)
Hoover (2-3)

Have you tried asking Gwinett County whether they could switch to a different set? Since that tournament is later, NAQT might have its next IS set available by then, since I know IS 88 will be available by October 17th (since the RPI tournament will be using it)--> viewtopic.php?f=1&t=8221

Charbroil wrote:Have you tried asking Gwinett County whether they could switch to a different set? Since that tournament is later, NAQT might have its next IS set available by then, since I know IS 88 will be available by October 17th (since the RPI tournament will be using it)

The RPI event is the first scheduled use of IS #88; we do not anticipate that that set will be available by mid-September.

Well I hope that you and your crew will be able to make it Aaron.
Hopefully we will be able to compare who's who on what sets soon..

Aaron,
Can you give me an update on your status about the tournament yet?

Updated field so far

MLK (1?)
Hume-Fogg (2)
Brindlee Mt (2)
DAR (2)
Hoover (2-3)
Holy Spirit (1-2)
Lincoln County (1-2)
Ringgold (finalizing # of teams)

Hi,
Calhoun High (GA) would like to bring two teams to the 8/22 tourney. Please let me know if space is still available.
Thanks, Terry Bennett, CHS Coach

We still have spots available please drop me an email please
Thanks
Matt

Field Update

Confirmed coming
Hoover (2)
Ezell-Harding (2)
Brindlee Mt. (3)
Hume-Fogg (2)
Lincoln County (2)
Holy Spirit (2)
DAR (2)
Convent Christian (1)
MLK (1)
Expressed interest but no email to confirm
Calhoun Co (2)

If any other teams would like to play please contact me.
Also, if you would like to help with moderating, I would be grateful for the help

Is the above field update final?

Also, we will DEFINITELY only have two teams.

Final update

Add Russellville Kids and delete one of BMHS teams
16 total teams two pools of 8
7 rounds pool play then playoffs... top 3 from each pool but I might be flexible about 2 wildcats on PPG if all the coaches agree

Matthew D wrote:Final update

Add Russellville Kids and delete one of BMHS teams
16 total teams two pools of 8
7 rounds pool play then playoffs... top 3 from each pool but I might be flexible about 2 wildcats on PPG if all the coaches agree

Why not just do 4/4/4/4 or another 8/8?

not sure what you are meaning by the 4/4/4/4 but I am kicking around the idea of doing the pool play that is up to 18 teams now, two pools of 9 each and the do round robin playoff with the top 6 teams (basically 3 from each pool) both pools seem to be evenly matched from what I know about the teams and no A teams in same pool as their B teams.. but we have an IS set that as the normal 15 rounds in it

Matthew D wrote:not sure what you are meaning by the 4/4/4/4 but I am kicking around the idea of doing the pool play that is up to 18 teams now, two pools of 9 each and the do round robin playoff with the top 6 teams (basically 3 from each pool) both pools seem to be evenly matched from what I know about the teams and no A teams in same pool as their B teams.. but we have an IS set that as the normal 15 rounds in it

Since you had sixteen, he meant for you to divide into four playoff/consolation brackets of four teams each. As is, you'll use nine packets in the prelims. You could make three brackets of six, as you say, but then you'll have only one packet left for finals/ disasters and you'll need two. 4/4/4/6 could work (as the bottom six won't be playing in the finals, it won't be a problem that they will play the first finals packet).

I like doing 6/6/6 pools when they're that size tournament, although I think it works better if you go with a 10 round format.

Jeremy Gibbs Free Energy wrote:I like doing 6/6/6 pools when they're that size tournament, although I think it works better if you go with a 10 round format.

Yeah, 6/6/6, two from each into 6/6/6 gives you ten rounds of play in ten rounds. Then finals and you still have three packets for TB/disaster.

Good job getting all those teams for a season opener. Schools in FL and other states haven't even started yet, and we just started four days ago.

Hoover won by a score of 460-105 over Hume-Fogg in the finals. Other semifinalists were MLK and Ezell-Harding A.

Hoover was very impressive throughout, but did lose to Hume-Fogg earlier in the tournament and had a few strange gaps in their knowledge.

Matt Dennis did an excellent job running a solid tournament using powers and negs and without any mathcomp questions. Good to see that quizbowl is alive and expanding in Northern Alabama.

On another note, I was pretty disappointed with the "randomization" of the set and in some of the editing. I'm not talking about just "annoying" things that corrupt my sense of quizbowl aesthetics; there were some moments when teams went "huh"? because of near-repeats and very similar topics grouped closely together. I know it was early in the season so I'm hoping some more randomizing and editing can take place before it's played elsewhere.

Thank you Chris that means a lot to us.
Here are the stats from today the last pool is the playoff pool

http://darhslab.bravehost.com/DAR09/DAR ... dings.html

Congratulations to Hoover, Hume-Fogg, MLK, Ezell-Harding AND everyone else that attended the tournament today. The teams All did very well to be SO early in the year and I was very impressed with the players, coaches, parents, etc. Everyone was so polite and did so well. Alabama and Tennessee have a lot of excellent students in our mist!!!

Thank you to EVERYONE that helped us out today to make the tournament a success. You, our moderators, are the best!!! We are so lucky to have friends like you. And, Matthew, thank you for all you do for not only for our kids, but for Quiz Bowl as a whole. I don't know anyone who cares more about everyone and how well they do and continue to do after they leave high school, like you do. You truly want everyone to do the best that he or she is able to do and it shows in your team and when you run a tournament!!!

Again, thank you to everyone, moderators, coaches, teams and parents for making the DAR Invitational a success!

While we're working on updating the PACE website, I wanted to state that this is the first PACE-affiliated event of the year. I also wanted to congratulate the first two teams to qualify for the 2010 PACE NSC: Hoover High School of Hoover, Alabama and Hume-Fogg Academic High School of Nashville, Tennessee.

Congratulations to all teams that competed and to the tournament staff for a job well done.

Any chance you could enable round report? Its a big help when reviewing statistics.

Sorry .... I actually forgot to hit the switch on that one.. fixed now

the first game that Hume-Fogg and Hoover played wrote:Bonuses: Hoover A 10 195 19.50, Hume-Fogg A 10 290 29.00

Holy crap, did Hume-Fogg really hear 30 bonus questions and get 29 of them right in a game??

Well unless my wife entered something incorrectly which I don't think happened or SQBS kicked something out wrong (SQBS gave us some fits) it is as reported...

Matthew D wrote:Well unless my wife entered something incorrectly which I don't think happened or SQBS kicked something out wrong (SQBS gave us some fits) it is as reported...

I'm not really questioning that it actually occurred... i just want someone to attest to the awesomeness of that.

Matthew D wrote:Well unless my wife entered something incorrectly which I don't think happened or SQBS kicked something out wrong (SQBS gave us some fits) it is as reported...

Dig out the scoresheet, and check it. It may need to be scanned and posted for some doubters to believe it.

it is in my room and as for scanning it.. that might not happen due to the fact I don't have a scanner sorry

Just looked at the SQBS file... it was 10 bonus heard for 290 points on that game.. and SQBS did the auto calculation on that one...

dtaylor4 wrote:

Matthew D wrote:Well unless my wife entered something incorrectly which I don't think happened or SQBS kicked something out wrong (SQBS gave us some fits) it is as reported...

Dig out the scoresheet, and check it. It may need to be scanned and posted for some doubters to believe it.

According to the conversation I had with Josh Rutsky (Hoover's coach), Hume-Fogg indeed got 10 bonuses that round, got 30 on nine of them, and 20 on the other.

That was a truly epic game. Hume-Fogg and Hoover split the tossups evenly, 10 and 10, but Hume converted astonishingly on their 10, while we missed a couple. The score was 350 to 305 on question 20, with Hume ahead, and we went for the power to try to tie, negged the question, and Hume converted their 9th 30 for the round to make the final tally 390-300. They had an AMAZING round against us, and certainly earned that win and respect. We did beat them in the final, but Ian has seriously stepped his game up over the summer, and Hume is a team to be taken seriously.


Thanks again, Matt, for another very well-run tourney that was over ON TIME! Woohoo!

Wow, that is damn impressive. Props to them, and congrats to Hoover for winning the first tournament of the year. Quizbowl has returned!

Inkana7 wrote:Wow, that is damn impressive. Props to them, and congrats to Hoover for winning the first tournament of the year. Quizbowl has returned!

That was on a regular IS set.

FredMorlan wrote:

Inkana7 wrote:Wow, that is damn impressive. Props to them, and congrats to Hoover for winning the first tournament of the year. Quizbowl has returned!

That was on a regular IS set.

Yeah, I noticed that and edited. That makes it even more impressive.

uga_chris wrote: On another note, I was pretty disappointed with the "randomization" of the set and in some of the editing. I'm not talking about just "annoying" things that corrupt my sense of quizbowl aesthetics; there were some moments when teams went "huh"? because of near-repeats and very similar topics grouped closely together. I know it was early in the season so I'm hoping some more randomizing and editing can take place before it's played elsewhere.

I can take care of this stuff (and sounds like I should have taken care of it earlier this week!). I'll be in touch by email, so I hope this will be better for everyone else who hears the set later this fall.

Hi Matt -- NAQT has tasked me with uploading the results of tournaments this year to their website, and Chad K. sent me the data file from your event. Just a quick question if you still have the scoresheets -- in game 59 (of which there were 2 in the original file sent to me, I corrected that, so it is the second game 59 in your copy) when Hoover beat Ezell 505 to 125, the total number of tossups answered by all players equals 21. Is it possible to review the scoresheet and pick out where the error is, and then I can correct it in SQBS?

Thanks,
Greg

I'll attempt to locate it but had class today and somethings got moved..

Matt,

Your email is bouncing the couple of messages I've tried to send to you the past couple of days. Could you send me an email from an address that works for you? [email protected]

Thanks!

Fred,
I just sent one from my school account so you should have it soon... it might be the proxy that we have for the dennisme account (my school account)

I never really weighed in on this tournament.

The good: Great readers, good questions, great teams, ran on time. Really one of the better tournaments we've been to.

The bad: not applicable. There was really nothing bad about this tournament...

Matt and the DAR crew did a superb job. It is a rare thing to do 10 total rounds of quiz bowl and be done by 4:00 pm.