Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Old college threads.
Locked
User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5599
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by theMoMA » Mon May 12, 2014 6:17 pm

Hey all,

I'd like to discuss the purpose of my Collegiate Novice tournament with you. I'm at a bit of a crossroads with the tournament. After four years, it's clear that there's an audience for the tournament and that it serves a purpose. But my original conception of the tournament as an event where new teams could try out collegiate quizbowl has not played out. Instead, the tournament has been a great introduction to collegiate quizbowl for new players on existing teams.

Even though my initial aim was for team-level (as opposed to player-level) outreach, I'd like to embrace what the tournament has become. I simply don't have the time or energy to put in the outreach efforts necessary advertise the tournament to new teams, and it's obvious that they're not finding it for themselves.

With that in mind, I'd like to expand the set to a full-sized, 15-packet tournament. I'd also like to loosen eligibility restrictions so that all first- and second-year college students (in addition to all new-to-quizbowl players) are eligible to play. I'd like to change these rules because I initially crafted them to ease newer teams into the game. Because, in practice, most of the players are familiar with quizbowl from playing in high school, I don't see a purpose in having an abridged event. And because very good players are just as likely to drift away from quizbowl, introducing them to college-level competition early is just as important as it is for less talented players.

I'd like to get feedback from people who have directed or played this tournament before moving ahead with these changes, so please discuss.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

User avatar
ValenciaQBowl
Auron
Posts: 2311
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: Orlando, Florida

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by ValenciaQBowl » Mon May 12, 2014 6:33 pm

Well, in Florida the Novice has absolutely been an introduction to quiz bowl, not just to college quiz bowl, for the vast majority of players. It's been the first tournament of any kind for nearly all of my Valencia players, and I've liked that the questions were short and the tournament itself was round constrained.

Still, allowing second-year players and adding rounds isn't really a big deal. I hope you'll try to keep the questions at about the same length and difficulty, though.
Chris Borglum
Valencia College Grand Poobah

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5599
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by theMoMA » Mon May 12, 2014 6:43 pm

ValenciaQBowl wrote:Well, in Florida the Novice has absolutely been an introduction to quiz bowl, not just to college quiz bowl, for the vast majority of players. It's been the first tournament of any kind for nearly all of my Valencia players, and I've liked that the questions were short and the tournament itself was round constrained.

Still, allowing second-year players and adding rounds isn't really a big deal. I hope you'll try to keep the questions at about the same length and difficulty, though.
Definitely agree on the question length. I don't think anything would change except the number of packets, the eligibility, and the cost (I'll probably allow hosts to charge up to $20 per player instead of $15 given the increase in tournament length).

In terms of round constraints, I'm interested in allowing a more "normal" quizbowl experience (i.e. 10-12 rounds and finals if necessary). So something like 14 or 15 packets, as opposed to 10.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

User avatar
Bartleby
Rikku
Posts: 315
Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 5:45 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Bartleby » Mon May 12, 2014 7:56 pm

One of the nice things about this tournament is the amount of mirrors that are typically held. I think that the expansions that you've suggested are a good thing -- they allow for regions to use the set in whatever way is most constructive. In Florida, that might mean staying closer to the original format of the tournament, but other TDs across the United States (and Canada!) can use their discretion to provide an optimal introductory experience.
Brian McNamara
Western University '13
University of Waterloo '14
Temple University '20

njsbling
Rikku
Posts: 331
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2012 8:17 pm
Location: Carmichael, California

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by njsbling » Mon May 12, 2014 8:53 pm

I have a couple of questions/ thoughts about this.

1) Andrew- How many people this past year contacted you and asked if they could play and you said no?
2) I'm in favor of expanding the set to 15 rounds
3) I feel like this is basically the only place where someone who is brand new to quiz bowl can avoid playing against people who will completely demolish the field. Maybe make the eligibility a little less restrictive (e.g. 30 ppg at college tournaments -> 50 ppg and instead of "making HSNCT playoffs" how about "scored 70+ ppg at HSNCT or PACE"?)
4) When you started the college novice project with the goal of getting more new schools involved how did you anticipate teams would find out / get involved in the first place? I presume by local teams/hosts doing outreach to other nearby schools?
Nicholas Karas
Member, Northern California Quiz Bowl Alliance
Outreach Coordinator, National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
i never see pigeons in wheeling
Rikku
Posts: 363
Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 3:57 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by i never see pigeons in wheeling » Mon May 12, 2014 9:22 pm

Nicholas, if we're running Collegiate Novice next year, we could set our own eligibility restrictions to avoid this issue. It is true that there are some incoming freshmen in the California college circuit who should not be playing EACN, and I think we can use our own discretion to resolve potential issues once Andrew loosens restrictions.
Ankit
Cal '16
Bellarmine College Preparatory '12

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15099
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by AKKOLADE » Mon May 12, 2014 9:29 pm

I really like this tournament and hope it continues. I'm going to comment on some stuff like eligibility in the future I hope, but I just wanted to say that I had a very positive experience hosting and would love to again at UK next year.
Fred Morlan
PACE President, 2018-19
International Quiz Bowl Tournaments, co-owner
University of Kentucky CoP, 2017
hsqbrank manager, NAQT writer (former subject editor), former hsqb Administrator/Chief Administrator, 2012 NASAT TD

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5599
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by theMoMA » Mon May 12, 2014 9:51 pm

njsbling wrote:I have a couple of questions/ thoughts about this.

1) Andrew- How many people this past year contacted you and asked if they could play and you said no?
A half-dozen or so. I'd say I approve 90-95% of requests. Note that most of them are slam-dunk approvals (people who are almost entirely new to quizbowl).
3) I feel like this is basically the only place where someone who is brand new to quiz bowl can avoid playing against people who will completely demolish the field. Maybe make the eligibility a little less restrictive (e.g. 30 ppg at college tournaments -> 50 ppg and instead of "making HSNCT playoffs" how about "scored 70+ ppg at HSNCT or PACE"?)
I'm certainly amenable to other tweaks in the restrictions. My feeling is that there are players who were quite good in high school for whom playing the tournament would nonetheless increase the chances that they stick with quizbowl in college.
4) When you started the college novice project with the goal of getting more new schools involved how did you anticipate teams would find out / get involved in the first place? I presume by local teams/hosts doing outreach to other nearby schools?
The first year, I sent out postcards to honors departments and the like (with some help from teams to identify which colleges might be useful to target). In all subsequent years, I have relied exclusively on hosts to conduct outreach. I simply haven't had the time or energy to do more than that.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

Urech hydantoin synthesis
Tidus
Posts: 521
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:35 pm

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Urech hydantoin synthesis » Mon May 12, 2014 10:02 pm

In lieu of a dramatic general loosening of eligibility restrictions, would it be possible to provide hosts with base eligibility rules similar to that of last year's, and have them run any possible changes by you (in the vein of what Ankit is saying)?
Ben Zhang
Columbia '18 | Ladue '14
PACE member

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5599
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by theMoMA » Mon May 12, 2014 10:06 pm

christino wrote:In lieu of a dramatic general loosening of eligibility restrictions, would it be possible to provide hosts with base eligibility rules similar to that of last year's, and have them run any possible changes by you (in the vein of what Ankit is saying)?
Nothing's set in stone. That seems like an interesting idea.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6381
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Cheynem » Tue May 13, 2014 10:36 pm

We discussed this a bit in the IRC--I am generally opposed to these eligibility changes, as I think the important thing this tournament does is try to introduce new players to quizbowl (yes, not so much new teams). We can allow some exemptions if appropriate, but I don't think it's particularly helpful for experienced freshmen or sophomores to play it.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

fett0001
Tidus
Posts: 605
Joined: Wed Feb 27, 2008 11:50 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by fett0001 » Wed May 14, 2014 11:03 am

I'm of the opinion that no matter how good they were, if they've never played a collegiate tournament before, letting them play is a good idea.

If they are an excellent player, maybe restricting team size?
Mike Hundley
PACE Secretary
Martinsville High School 2001-2005
Virginia Tech 2005-

User avatar
Cody
2008-09 Male Athlete of the Year
Posts: 2173
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:57 am
Location: Richmond

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Cody » Wed May 14, 2014 12:03 pm

fett0001 wrote:I'm of the opinion that no matter how good they were, if they've never played a collegiate tournament before, letting them play is a good idea.

If they are an excellent player, maybe restricting team size?
This is exactly the wrong viewpoint that Mike and I are strongly against.

Experienced HS players had literally centillions of chances to play HS-difficulty sets throughout their high school career: even if they didn't play a college set, they'll do perfectly fine at your MFTs/IFTs/EFTs and ACF Falls. They don't need another HS-difficulty set to get them hooked on collegiate quizbowl, and I would argue that such can only be harmful.

What actually needs to happen is an early - like, truly early - tournament along the MFT/IFT/EFT line that experienced HS players can play. Having them play EACN solves nothing.
Cody Voight, VCU ‘14. I wrote lots of science and am an electrical engineer.
VCU Tournament Director ‘13-‘17. HSAPQ President ‘15-16.
Hero of Socialist Quizbowl Labor (NSC ‘14). “esteemed colleague” of Snap Wexley, ca. 2016. Stats Hero (Nats ‘16).
Quizbowl at VCU

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15099
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by AKKOLADE » Wed May 14, 2014 1:09 pm

Cody wrote:
fett0001 wrote:I'm of the opinion that no matter how good they were, if they've never played a collegiate tournament before, letting them play is a good idea.

If they are an excellent player, maybe restricting team size?
This is exactly the wrong viewpoint that Mike and I are strongly against.

Experienced HS players had literally centillions of chances to play HS-difficulty sets throughout their high school career: even if they didn't play a college set, they'll do perfectly fine at your MFTs/IFTs/EFTs and ACF Falls. They don't need another HS-difficulty set to get them hooked on collegiate quizbowl, and I would argue that such can only be harmful.

What actually needs to happen is an early - like, truly early - tournament along the MFT/IFT/EFT line that experienced HS players can play. Having them play EACN solves nothing.
I think this is more complex than just "experienced HS players should not play, period." I think skill level should be considered; I'm fine with high schoolers who averaged 10 ppg to play EACN. I also think that it's pretty vital to consider the age of the program - if you're a new program being formed by one experienced high schooler as a freshman, it's pretty vital to be able to get people to go to tournaments ASAP.
Fred Morlan
PACE President, 2018-19
International Quiz Bowl Tournaments, co-owner
University of Kentucky CoP, 2017
hsqbrank manager, NAQT writer (former subject editor), former hsqb Administrator/Chief Administrator, 2012 NASAT TD

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6381
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Cheynem » Wed May 14, 2014 1:25 pm

In response to Fred, 10 PPG high schoolers should indeed be eligible and I think under the current rules they are (or are pretty easy to get exemptions). We're not talking about someone who averaged 10 PPG at an IS set a few times not being able to play, or someone who was a buzzer rock for a great team; I just think there's no utility in many HSNCT or NSC all-stars in playing this set.

In regards to your second point, it is vital to get to tournaments ASAP, which is why I agree with Cody that accessible to all tournaments should appear consistently earlier. The scenario of "experienced high schooler is a freshman" is a valid one, but something I think we can work around--maybe the experienced player could staff EACN. I agree all of these issues are important ones, but I fear tampering with EACN eligibility is a dangerous stepping stone.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

User avatar
Rococo A Go Go
Auron
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:08 am
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Rococo A Go Go » Wed May 14, 2014 1:34 pm

I don't see the point of tinkering with the rules to allow the Will Walters of the world to score 100 ppg at this tournament. I'm of the opinion that if it's not broke, don't fix it.
Nick Conder
Louisville, KY

"Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."--Eugene V. Debs

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15099
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by AKKOLADE » Wed May 14, 2014 3:05 pm

Fortunately, no ones arguing for allowing that to happen.
Fred Morlan
PACE President, 2018-19
International Quiz Bowl Tournaments, co-owner
University of Kentucky CoP, 2017
hsqbrank manager, NAQT writer (former subject editor), former hsqb Administrator/Chief Administrator, 2012 NASAT TD

User avatar
Rococo A Go Go
Auron
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:08 am
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Rococo A Go Go » Wed May 14, 2014 3:29 pm

Dr. Loki Skylizard, Thoracic Surgeon wrote:Fortunately, no ones arguing for allowing that to happen.
I'm going off this:
theMoMA wrote:I'd also like to loosen eligibility restrictions so that all first- and second-year college students (in addition to all new-to-quizbowl players) are eligible to play.
Perhaps I can't read, which is certainly possible since I'm from rural Kentucky, but I interpreted this as Andrew suggesting that we loosen eligibility restrictions to allow all second-year college students to play.
Nick Conder
Louisville, KY

"Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."--Eugene V. Debs

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15099
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by AKKOLADE » Wed May 14, 2014 3:32 pm

NickConderWKU wrote:Perhaps I can't read, which is certainly possible since I'm from rural Kentucky, but I interpreted this as Andrew suggesting that we loosen eligibility restrictions to allow all second-year college students to play.
Eh, what does Andrew Hart's opinion matter in all of this, anyway?
Fred Morlan
PACE President, 2018-19
International Quiz Bowl Tournaments, co-owner
University of Kentucky CoP, 2017
hsqbrank manager, NAQT writer (former subject editor), former hsqb Administrator/Chief Administrator, 2012 NASAT TD

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6381
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Cheynem » Wed May 14, 2014 3:34 pm

For the record, that is what Andrew was suggesting, although in private convos, he has suggested that second-year blanket eligibility might be pushing it.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15099
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by AKKOLADE » Wed May 14, 2014 3:35 pm

Real talk: Andrew, do you (or anyone else) have all the EACN sites' stats in one convenient place?
Fred Morlan
PACE President, 2018-19
International Quiz Bowl Tournaments, co-owner
University of Kentucky CoP, 2017
hsqbrank manager, NAQT writer (former subject editor), former hsqb Administrator/Chief Administrator, 2012 NASAT TD

User avatar
Mewto55555
Tidus
Posts: 708
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2010 9:27 pm
Contact:

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Mewto55555 » Wed May 14, 2014 3:49 pm

Ideally all quizbowlers would realize what events are suitable for them -- regardless of if eligibility is granted to second years, I shouldn't be playing this event (and I won't, I promise!), but quizbowl history reveals that some people who shouldn't will still play. I don't see any problem with relatively strict eligibility rules combined with the possibility of exemptions.
Max
formerly of Ladue, Chicago

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15099
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by AKKOLADE » Wed May 14, 2014 4:53 pm

Dr. Loki Skylizard, Thoracic Surgeon wrote:Real talk: Andrew, do you (or anyone else) have all the EACN sites' stats in one convenient place?
I've actually found most of these on the Database here. Does anyone know if Notre Dame's site actually happened, and if so, where those stats would be? Also, did Minnesota ever post combined stats that I've somehow missed?
Fred Morlan
PACE President, 2018-19
International Quiz Bowl Tournaments, co-owner
University of Kentucky CoP, 2017
hsqbrank manager, NAQT writer (former subject editor), former hsqb Administrator/Chief Administrator, 2012 NASAT TD

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15099
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by AKKOLADE » Wed May 14, 2014 5:39 pm

Here's a histogram of the frequency of individual PPGs from the data I have available to me, broken into ranges.

Additionally, some basic statistical info for this:

Number of players: 470
Mean: 22.8956
Median: 16.88
Standard deviation: 20.71265
3rd quartile: 32.84
1st quartile: 8.12
Attachments
individual ppg.png
(11.5 KiB) Not downloaded yet
Fred Morlan
PACE President, 2018-19
International Quiz Bowl Tournaments, co-owner
University of Kentucky CoP, 2017
hsqbrank manager, NAQT writer (former subject editor), former hsqb Administrator/Chief Administrator, 2012 NASAT TD

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5599
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by theMoMA » Wed May 14, 2014 10:54 pm

Mike is correct; my current thought is to expand eligibility only so far as making all incoming freshmen eligible (and retaining the other rules). My thought is that all entering freshmen, even good high school players, might still benefit from playing a very early quizbowl tournament (albeit a very easy one) when making their decision about which activities are worthwhile for them to spend their time on in college. As we've seen, many good high school players walk away from the game in college, and that's an unfortunate loss.

I don't know if playing a tournament along the lines of Collegiate Novice will help retain these players (and I don't know how to test that hypothesis one way or another), but my intuition is that Collegiate Novice can serve as a reminder of how fun it is to play a tournament. I also think that the tournament, however easy, is still fundamentally different from high school play because it provides the experience of playing against intercollegiate competition in a university setting with and against other college students. And I think that can only help retain people. As Max and others have pointed out, talented high school players who don't feel that they'll get anything out of playing are free to sit on the sidelines.

Others have pointed out that some good incoming freshmen with no interest in playing anything other than very easy events may play this tournament under the new rules. I don't deny this, but I think that (a) having these people stick around on the fringes provides tangible benefits to a club, like potential staff for events, and (b) that the potential benefit of retaining more people outweighs any negatives to stacking the field. Others may disagree, and I welcome further comments below.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5599
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by theMoMA » Wed May 14, 2014 11:54 pm

After some very productive IRC discussions, I think the rule tweak is most likely to take the form of requiring special permission to play for anyone who scored at least a certain number of points [20-25] as a high schooler playing a college tournament, and eliminating the blanket restrictions on players who made a high school championship playoff. The net change will probably render a few extra good (but not super elite) freshmen eligible to play automatically.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

User avatar
Rococo A Go Go
Auron
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:08 am
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Rococo A Go Go » Thu May 15, 2014 12:19 am

While we're at it:

Is there a way to reword the rules to keep players eligible if, quite frankly, they just aren't improving in college? For instance if a player plays EACN in their first two years of college and doesn't break 10-15 ppg either time, I suspect you're likely to give them an exemption to play again for the third year. Is there any benefit to having a rule on the books that says people are automatically going to need an exemption past a specific year of college, when all the people you want to keep out are likely to do something else like win a tournament or score 30 ppg to render themselves ineligible anyway?
Nick Conder
Louisville, KY

"Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."--Eugene V. Debs

User avatar
Cody
2008-09 Male Athlete of the Year
Posts: 2173
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:57 am
Location: Richmond

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Cody » Thu May 15, 2014 12:38 am

NickConderWKU wrote:Is there a way to reword the rules to keep players eligible if, quite frankly, they just aren't improving in college? For instance if a player plays EACN in their first two years of college and doesn't break 10-15 ppg either time, I suspect you're likely to give them an exemption to play again for the third year. Is there any benefit to having a rule on the books that says people are automatically going to need an exemption past a specific year of college, when all the people you want to keep out are likely to do something else like win a tournament or score 30 ppg to render themselves ineligible anyway?
People have to step off HS difficulty questions at some point - if they're not interested in playing seriously, so be it, but there's no reason to have them play EACN every year.
Cody Voight, VCU ‘14. I wrote lots of science and am an electrical engineer.
VCU Tournament Director ‘13-‘17. HSAPQ President ‘15-16.
Hero of Socialist Quizbowl Labor (NSC ‘14). “esteemed colleague” of Snap Wexley, ca. 2016. Stats Hero (Nats ‘16).
Quizbowl at VCU

User avatar
Rococo A Go Go
Auron
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:08 am
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Rococo A Go Go » Thu May 15, 2014 12:40 am

Cody wrote:
NickConderWKU wrote:Is there a way to reword the rules to keep players eligible if, quite frankly, they just aren't improving in college? For instance if a player plays EACN in their first two years of college and doesn't break 10-15 ppg either time, I suspect you're likely to give them an exemption to play again for the third year. Is there any benefit to having a rule on the books that says people are automatically going to need an exemption past a specific year of college, when all the people you want to keep out are likely to do something else like win a tournament or score 30 ppg to render themselves ineligible anyway?
People have to step off HS difficulty questions at some point - if they're not interested in playing seriously, so be it, but there's no reason to have them play EACN every year.
Fair point.
Nick Conder
Louisville, KY

"Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."--Eugene V. Debs

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15099
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by AKKOLADE » Thu May 15, 2014 8:50 am

theMoMA wrote:I don't know if playing a tournament along the lines of Collegiate Novice will help retain these players (and I don't know how to test that hypothesis one way or another), but my intuition is that Collegiate Novice can serve as a reminder of how fun it is to play a tournament.
I just don't see how this couldn't be accomplished for excellent high school players by having them play ACF Fall, amongst other easier college tournaments that aren't intended for Collegiate Novices.
Fred Morlan
PACE President, 2018-19
International Quiz Bowl Tournaments, co-owner
University of Kentucky CoP, 2017
hsqbrank manager, NAQT writer (former subject editor), former hsqb Administrator/Chief Administrator, 2012 NASAT TD

User avatar
Connie Prater
Lulu
Posts: 51
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 8:00 pm

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Connie Prater » Wed May 21, 2014 5:15 pm

theMoMA wrote:I don't know if playing a tournament along the lines of Collegiate Novice will help retain these players (and I don't know how to test that hypothesis one way or another), but my intuition is that Collegiate Novice can serve as a reminder of how fun it is to play a tournament. I also think that the tournament, however easy, is still fundamentally different from high school play because it provides the experience of playing against intercollegiate competition in a university setting with and against other college students. And I think that can only help retain people.
In my experience with Chicago's program, this hasn't really been the case. EACN is a great recruiting tool for us, but as far as retaining freshman membership goes, it has very little effect. I think it's better to have more easy tournaments throughout the year if you're looking to retain membership in a program that is otherwise preparing at a nationals-level; I've found that the majority of people who played EACN fizzle out after going to a few regular to hard tournaments. Nothing against it at all! We love having it, and it's a really helpful introduction to quizbowl in general.
Connie Prater
Chattahoochee High School '10
UChicago '14

Nonprofit legal aid fundraising and communications professional
Proud Cat Mom

Adventure Temple Trail
Auron
Posts: 2613
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:52 pm

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Adventure Temple Trail » Wed May 21, 2014 9:16 pm

La Maga wrote: I think it's better to have more easy tournaments throughout the year if you're looking to retain membership in a program that is otherwise preparing at a nationals-level; I've found that the majority of people who played EACN fizzle out after going to a few regular to hard tournaments. Nothing against it at all! We love having it, and it's a really helpful introduction to quizbowl in general.
I really question whether it's necessary to have even more easy tournaments in existence than we already have. After EACN, there's ACF Fall, DII SCT, and MUT every year, and most years there's another less-than-regular event early on (EFT in 2007-10, IFT in 2012, MFT in 2013) plus DII ICT for low-level teams which get good -- that's already enough to crowd out spots for (or in the NAQT case, attendance at) regular events in most years. At some point, it's just going to be the case no matter what we do that not everybody who tries quizbowl is going to like it or want to stick with it, and I don't think that squeezing the calendar of regular tournaments (at which attendance has lately been surging) ever further is the best way to address this reality.
Matt J.
ex-Georgetown Day HS, ex-Yale
member emeritus, ACF

Sailing away on my copper boat

User avatar
Rococo A Go Go
Auron
Posts: 2241
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:08 am
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Rococo A Go Go » Thu May 22, 2014 3:50 am

RyuAqua wrote:
La Maga wrote: I think it's better to have more easy tournaments throughout the year if you're looking to retain membership in a program that is otherwise preparing at a nationals-level; I've found that the majority of people who played EACN fizzle out after going to a few regular to hard tournaments. Nothing against it at all! We love having it, and it's a really helpful introduction to quizbowl in general.
I really question whether it's necessary to have even more easy tournaments in existence than we already have. After EACN, there's ACF Fall, DII SCT, and MUT every year, and most years there's another less-than-regular event early on (EFT in 2007-10, IFT in 2012, MFT in 2013) plus DII ICT for low-level teams which get good -- that's already enough to crowd out spots for (or in the NAQT case, attendance at) regular events in most years. At some point, it's just going to be the case no matter what we do that not everybody who tries quizbowl is going to like it or want to stick with it, and I don't think that squeezing the calendar of regular tournaments (at which attendance has lately been surging) ever further is the best way to address this reality.
You can add Delta Burke to the list of easy sets written every year as well. And you're completely right here; if there is a need to add tournaments to the schedule, the community would be better served by more regular difficulty sets than anything else. I think new players and teams do much better when they can play an easy tournament and then turn around and play good regular difficulty tournament than simply playing a steady diet of easy tournaments. I've learned from experience that you can't turn people who don't want to improve at quizbowl into good players by just taking them to easy tournament after easy tournament and hoping that knowledge magically trickles up on regular difficulty.
Nick Conder
Louisville, KY

"Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free."--Eugene V. Debs

User avatar
ObsidianFoot
Lulu
Posts: 18
Joined: Sun Mar 03, 2013 12:55 am

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by ObsidianFoot » Wed May 28, 2014 12:59 am

I realize that I am joining this conversation at a fairly late stage; I have been dashing around China for the past three weeks, and have only sporadically glanced at the forums. However, after reflecting upon my own experiences playing the inaugural version of this tournament, I have now come to the realization that I care very much about voicing my thoughts on this issue.

First, I very strongly oppose the proposed eligibility changes. I think others have hinted at this, but I will say it openly: The changes eliminate what is, perhaps, the most important difference between this tournament and ACF Fall. When I played this tournament, I greatly enjoyed being able to play on questions and face a field that were appropriate for my skill level at that time. In contrast, my experience at ACF Fall a few weeks later was less enjoyable: While the questions did not seem significantly harder to me, the field was much better, and I was crushingly defeated by many much better teams. In other words, I very much appreciated the fact that Early Autumn Collegiate Novice allowed me to explore the college game for myself, instead of simply discovering that I was hopelessly outclassed.

Building on the above, I think that the eligibility rules, whatever they may be, must keep in mind the distinction between skill and experience. To clarify, I see no problem with any proposed revisions that would render eligible players who accumulated plenty of experience in high school, and even were on a top-bracket team at any of the national tournaments, but never actually put up high individual scores. However, as Max indicated, it is very important to keep out players like himself; otherwise, some of them will play this tournament, although they definitely should not do so. Also, regarding skill, one must remember that a lot can change in one year, so blanket second-year eligibility is going too far. In my case, even if the rules had allowed me to play this tournament a second time, I should not have done so: At the beginning of my second year, I was still nowhere near my current level, but I had already reached a point at which EACN was no longer an appropriate tournament for me.
La Maga wrote:In my experience with Chicago's program, this hasn't really been the case. EACN is a great recruiting tool for us, but as far as retaining freshman membership goes, it has very little effect.
Finally: this. Regarding retention, I'm not sure if there is anything we can really do. Many skilled players drift away from quizbowl because they end up doing other things they consider more important, or they simply lose interest in this game; while this is unfortunate, it is an issue beyond our control, and certainly not one that we can resolve with EACN. As for less skilled players, while this tournament may provide them with an initial positive experience, any other tournament, where the field will be much stronger, may scare them away. In my own case, I was not scared away by the non-EACN tournaments I played during my first year because I was willing to commit the time and effort necessary to become a good player; unfortunately, though, most people are not.

EDIT: In case anyone misunderstood my above comment, I merely wanted to say that, regardless of how successful (or not) EACN is at retention, it was, for me, a joy to play, and I think many would agree with me; it should definitely continue to be run.
Last edited by ObsidianFoot on Thu May 29, 2014 1:04 am, edited 1 time in total.
Charles Tian
University of Chicago, 2014

ACF Nationals 2013 Undergraduate Champion

"You should have seized power, Tian!" --Rob Carson, 2012 National History Bee and Bowl

User avatar
Rufous-capped Thornbill
Tidus
Posts: 711
Joined: Sun Jun 07, 2009 5:03 pm

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Rufous-capped Thornbill » Wed May 28, 2014 8:52 am

EACN has been incredibly useful in recruitment and especially retention at OSU, and I see no need to change it. In the however many years it's been run, people who join the team and play EACN have been much, much more likely to stick around past September.
Jarret Greene
South Range '10 / Ohio State '13 / Vermont '17
Member, PACE

Florida Gateway
Lulu
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:18 pm

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Florida Gateway » Mon Jun 02, 2014 1:26 pm

Andrew,

In Florida the majority of teams come from colleges which are primarily 2 year schools; many of us have started offering BS programs but we are geared mainly toward having our kids only 2-3 years. I think UF is the only university that has participated (Maybe a smaller 4 year school, Judson, a few years ago). So perhaps the EACN serves us slightly differently that your other hosts.

We occationally have a returning player who could benefit from a 3rd year, players who are definitely not close to 30 ppg but we'd like to see them step up. I've also seen a time or two where a coach would play a team shorthanded (like two scorers who are 30-40 ppg players) instead of having a full team. I think letting hosts have some control of what would be deemed "fair" for their field is appropriate.

As for having strong teams in the field, I think Chris from Valencia said it best to me a few years ago: (to paraphrase) Sometimes getting their butts kicked shows them how much harder they need to work or they decide they're just not into this and they can go home.

I think the EACN is extremely valuable and openning it to players under 30 ppg for a 3rd year or to 1st and 2nd year higher scorers (if done well) could help with growing the field and providing a robust introductory competition.
James Givvines
Coach at Florida Gateway College

Florida Gateway
Lulu
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 9:18 pm

Re: Discussion of the purpose of Collegiate Novice

Post by Florida Gateway » Mon Jun 02, 2014 1:55 pm

As for the increase in number of rounds.

Since this serves as an introduction to quiz bowl for many of the players, I like having only 10 rounds. That allows for something near 7 rounds of round-robin (if you can get nice groups of 8) and 3 rounds of play-offs. More than that often burns out the new-to-quiz-bowl players. Also, we don't feel quite so rushed; we can take a few minutes to pause and help correct the newer players. If we tried to squeeze 12 rounds into one day I don't feel we would be helping to encourage the newer players. We're not trying to find the best 2 teams to match up for a championship. "We're talking about practice man, practice." (OK, I know I reversed the whole meaning of that quote :) )

If this is moved to 12-14 rounds, I would prefer to see the tournament with an option as a 2 day event (Friday evening-Saturday morning). Some the teams prefer to stay overnight anyway (State of Florida rules on what we can pay for, no meals for travel if you don't overnight). I know some schools within a 2 1/2 hour drive do like the one day tournament though since it saves on budgets.

Thank You,
James Givvines
Coach at Florida Gateway College

Locked