EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

This forum is for tournament announcements, updates, and results (official or otherwise).
Post Reply
User avatar
Kilroy Was Here
Rikku
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 7:29 pm
Location: Michigan

EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by Kilroy Was Here » Wed Sep 13, 2017 8:29 pm

I am pleased to announce that the University of Michigan will be hosting a mirror of the Early Fall Tournament (http://www.hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewto ... =8&t=19786). The set's difficulty is between ACF Fall and Regionals. The tournament will be ran in Mason Hall, and registration will open at 8:15 with a target start time of 9AM.

Fee Structure:
$120 base fee
-$5 per functioning buzzer
-$10 per competent staffer
-$15 per 200 miles travel time one way

Payment:
Checks should be made out to "Michigan Academic Competitions." While we prefer that you bring them to the tournament and hand them in at registration, if this is not possible, you can mail the check to:

Michigan Academic Competitions
C/O The University Activities Center
4002 Michigan Union
530 S State St
Ann Arbor MI 48109-1349

Registration: CLOSED

If you have any other questions, feel free to shoot me an e-mail at parksgc@umich.edu

We hope to see you on October 21st!




FIELD:
Keyon (x1)
OSU (x2)
Michigan State (x2)
Wright State (x1)
Case Western (x1)
Chicago (x4)
Northwestern (x1)
Collin Parks
University of Michigan '18

"Aragorn was the famed king of Gondor, while the Iberian kingdom was Aragon. Both parties were aware of this coincidence: we have a journal entry from Aragorn that expresses his anger at receiving mail meant for King Peter IV of Aragon for the umpteenth time."~ CommodoreCoCo

User avatar
Beast Mode
Lulu
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 12:47 am

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by Beast Mode » Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:24 am

The control room will be 3401 Mason Hall, and teams should report there for registration.
Saul Hankin
Michigan '13, '18
Yiddish Book Center '13-'14, Columbia '16

User avatar
Kilroy Was Here
Rikku
Posts: 354
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 7:29 pm
Location: Michigan

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by Kilroy Was Here » Sat Oct 21, 2017 6:47 pm

Hey everyone, the tournament is about to wrap up well behind schedule and so I just wanted to have my thoughts out here for you all.

First off, I want to thank you all for your angelic patience with this tournament. We had multiple issues with the score-keeping system (including one room where it simply broke) that delayed the tournament in the morning and throughout the day. Although I have very strong views about this system, and why I was told about it two days before via an e-mail that I have not used in multiple years, it was ultimately my responsibility to ensure that I and all of my staffers were capable and able on this system. In this I believe I failed and I am incredibly disappointed in myself. This is not the quality of tournament I have ran in the past and so I want to reiterate how much I appreciate people trying to cheer an obviously very-upset me and telling me that everything was fine.

Since I believe a few common complaints may come up, I want to try and pre-empt them and explain.

1) Many people were giving issues with how our players were rotating in and out of staffing. I can't blame people for being upset at this, it unnecessarily slowed down things multiple times (although at others it didn't.) In the future, I wont try this sort of system. I was unwilling to change it during the day because many of the people playing were new, and thus shouldn't really have been reading full time, or were playing at the tournament specifically because they were told they wouldn't have to staff very much. My hands were sort of tied once the tournament actually started. I will not attempt this sort of system again.

2) People seemed relatively unhappy with the book prizes being awarded out. I want to say that usually, Michigan gets their book prizes from two places (and has, to my knowledge, almost always gotten them from two places)

A) People donating books
B) The Dawn Treader Discount rack.

The last few tournaments have seen me give out books from my own library that I wanted to give away, and before that our literati in chief Will Nediger frequently gave out books. I had no books to spare, nor did anyone volunteer any, and so the Dawn Treader Discount Rack was where I acquired them. Books in a discount rack are often there for a reason (and apparently even more so this time around, as romantic comedies seemed to be a top choice in the rack), and so I tried to make up for it by grabbing ones that seemed either interesting, had titles that were humorous, or were about academic subjects. Some were disappointed with the quality of the books given out, and to these people I apologize. We usually have better books, but not wanting to spend lots of money on books and not having donations, the quality suffered. I don't blame you for your disappointment and frustration (especially with the pace of this tournament), but I hope you can understand why this was an issue. In the future, if I have to buy books again, I'll try to track down different sorts of books or go somewhere else. I just went to Dawn Treader because its discount rack is exactly what I associate "quizbowl prize books" with.

3) Of course, people are unhappy with how slow this tournament ran. For reasons mentioned above, the score keeping was incredibly hectic as I tried to get people in place and sure of what they were doing. Alongside this, multiple staffers arrived late as did a team who was bringing a staffer. I ensure you that once the tournament started I did everything I could to get the pace of play back up, including moving staffers around and frequently simply tossing the system aside and using paper to speed things up. You all have the right to be upset with the pace, but I promise you I did everything I could to mitigate any delays.

Once more, thank you all for your patience with this tournament. Stats should be up within a day or two.
Collin Parks
University of Michigan '18

"Aragorn was the famed king of Gondor, while the Iberian kingdom was Aragon. Both parties were aware of this coincidence: we have a journal entry from Aragorn that expresses his anger at receiving mail meant for King Peter IV of Aragon for the umpteenth time."~ CommodoreCoCo

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Sat Oct 21, 2017 7:10 pm

I apologize for not sending to the preferred email - I sent things Thursday night to the one I had on file from an earlier communication some time ago. I then forwarded the information to Kenji a few minutes later (having misspelled his email the first time I sent the info). So, to my understanding at the time, multiple Michigan team members had received instructions and packets Thursday night.
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16
"...should be treated as the non-stakeholding troll he is" -Matt Weiner

User avatar
CPiGuy
Rikku
Posts: 451
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 8:19 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by CPiGuy » Sat Oct 21, 2017 8:24 pm

Hi! So, first of all, thanks to the editors and writers for putting together a really quality set -- I had virtually zero complaints, and everyone I talked to seemed to share the same opinion.

Obviously, there were some logistical issues. I'll address some of the concerns since I was also involved in making some of the decisions that led to them.
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea wrote:I apologize for not sending to the preferred email - I sent things Thursday night to the one I had on file from an earlier communication some time ago. I then forwarded the information to Kenji a few minutes later (having misspelled his email the first time I sent the info). So, to my understanding at the time, multiple Michigan team members had received instructions and packets Thursday night.
Y'know, Thursday's great and all, and if we'd been more on top of things we could perhaps have mitigated the 30-minute delay that happened because staffers didn't know how to use the system (although I sent out the instructional video to all of our rotating staffers a week in advance) -- but what would have been even better would have been a few weeks' notice, since you clearly knew about this for a really long time, and yet you didn't really indicate it anywhere in the tournament announcement (at least not that I saw). That way we could have actually planned on having an appropriate number of staff, rather than realizing four rounds in that we had insufficient staff and the tournament was going to be delayed. Even if we'd realized this as soon as we'd gotten your email, it would have been pretty difficult to completely restructure our staffing on two days' notice.

(Edit: this was unfair to Will, as I've said below them telling us beforehand probably wouldn't have changed anything since we still wouldn't have had enough info [that is, an actual tournament situation] to make different assumptions. I think my point still stands, but it wouldn't have changed how things played out this time.)
Kilroy Was Here wrote:1) Many people were giving issues with how our players were rotating in and out of staffing. I can't blame people for being upset at this, it unnecessarily slowed down things multiple times (although at others it didn't.) In the future, I wont try this sort of system. I was unwilling to change it during the day because many of the people playing were new, and thus shouldn't really have been reading full time, or were playing at the tournament specifically because they were told they wouldn't have to staff very much. My hands were sort of tied once the tournament actually started. I will not attempt this sort of system again.
So, I'm going to unapologetically defend the decision to do a staff rotation (and it was my decision, not Collin's). The rooms in which player-staffers were reading ran at a comparable pace to the rooms in which permanent staffers were reading, with, I think, one major exception (which lasted all of two rounds). Almost all of the people who read as part of this rotation are reasonably experienced readers. If I could do the tournament over again, the only change I would make to the rotation was making sure there were enough people in it in order to have two staffers per room (see below). However...
Kilroy Was Here wrote:3) Of course, people are unhappy with how slow this tournament ran. For reasons mentioned above, the score keeping was incredibly hectic as I tried to get people in place and sure of what they were doing. Alongside this, multiple staffers arrived late as did a team who was bringing a staffer. I ensure you that once the tournament started I did everything I could to get the pace of play back up, including moving staffers around and frequently simply tossing the system aside and using paper to speed things up. You all have the right to be upset with the pace, but I promise you I did everything I could to mitigate any delays.
I can confirm that Collin did in fact do everything he could to mitigate delays. Obviously the tournament started late due to issues outside of our control (and by the way, teams that are bringing staffers should take special care to let the tournament director know if they are going to be late, because the tournament literally cannot start in their absence. Teams should also make sure they actually know whether or not they told the TD they were bringing a staffer when they registered). There were additional delays throughout the tournament, to the point where most rounds took 45 minutes or longer. I'll have more to say about this in the thread about it, but it became apparent while the tournament was going on that Ophirstats requires both a reader and a scorekeeper in order to not run extremely slowly -- the primary cause of delays during the tournament was not logistical issues, or TD incompetence, but the fact that readers had to take a significant amount of time between questions, and that slowed rounds down by a lot.

At this point you are probably asking "well why didn't you put two staffers in every room?", and that would be a legitimate question. Well, basically every non-timed quizbowl tournament until the advent of Ophirstats has run perfectly fine with one reasonably competent (not "highly experienced", not "good", just "reasonably competent") staffer per room. While we were planning for the tournament, we were operating under the assumption that one staffer per room would be sufficient. All of our decisions were predicated on ensuring there would be one staffer per room (and yes, I at least knew that we would be using Ophirstats, thanks to discussion on the forums; however I didn't realize that it would be a significantly larger moderator burden than paper scoresheets.) So, I take responsibility for this oversight, which was largely responsible for the delay.

Again I'll have more to say about this in the ophirstats discussion thread, but I just want to make it clear that in no way am I intending to impugn Ophir, the people who made the decision to require EFT hosts to use Ophirstats, or the stats system itself, in any way. There are bound to be hiccups when a major new system is introduced, and I think it's wrong to attempt to assign blame to any one person or individual. I have a hard time seeing what, if any, decisions I would make differently had I put myself in the shoes of anyone else associated with this tournament (assuming I had the same amount of knowledge they did).

I'll echo Collin's thanks to everyone who came to today's tournament and enjoyed a great (if longer-than-expected) day of quizbowl. And since I don't think Collin mentioned it -- congrats to Ohio State A for clearing the field and winning.
Conor Thompson
Bangor HS (Maine) '16
Michigan '20

User avatar
Beast Mode
Lulu
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 12:47 am

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by Beast Mode » Sat Oct 21, 2017 10:53 pm

I'm also someone who truly deserves the blame for how behind today ran. I used OphirStats for the first time at Jordaens, where I was in a room by myself and was able to both read and keep score with no problems. Thus, I was another voice in Collin's ear saying that if I (who nearly always prefer paper things to their electronic equivalents) could catch on so quickly, anyone could, and that we could totally go through with the playing/staffing rotation scheme (especially since Conor sent out the training video beforehand). Being new to OphirStats, of course Collin took my word for it. I was clearly wrong, and so it was that Collin got to spend today troubleshooting everyone's woes in a system he was learning right along with them.

To the teams who came, and to Collin: I'm sorry for all this. The next time I'm involved in staffing a tournament that uses OphirStats, I'll know to pound the table for having two staffers to a room, and recommend more training beforehand. Maybe the thing to do in the future is to have a staffer meeting/practice the night before the tournament, wherein everyone can actually try out OphirStats in a game situation using the tournament packets; this would obviously eliminate the possibility of player/staffer rotation, but that's probably for the best because it simplifies things. As the host of the tournament, our responsibility was to get the tournament on solid staffing footing before we worried about playing it ourselves, and I hindered our doing so.
Saul Hankin
Michigan '13, '18
Yiddish Book Center '13-'14, Columbia '16

Charbroil
Auron
Posts: 1135
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 11:52 am
Location: St. Charles, MO

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by Charbroil » Sat Oct 21, 2017 11:51 pm

I'm a little curious why you all were surprised at rounds taking 45+ minutes. Both of the tournaments I've attended at Michigan have had 45 minute rounds. The most comparable example, MLK, had 45 minute rounds even with two staffers per room. Thus it seems like it should have been possible to predict that your mirror would take at least 45 minutes per round, especially since using new technology would logically add at least a couple of minutes per round.

Also, how late were your late teams/staffers? I am asking because a 45 minute/round tournament should end around 5:45 PM, assuming you take some time to rebracket. Your mirror seems to have ended around 6:45 PM, based on the timestamp on Collin's post. If your late teams/staffers were 30 minutes late, and you had a 30-minute delay because of staffers unfamiliar with the new system, then those factors would seem to explain your entire delay. If so, the electronic scoresheets would actually be a minor factor, except in that some staffers may have needed some time to familiarize themselves with them beforehand and thus slowed your tournament down in the morning, an issue which is obviously not an inherent fault of the scoresheets themselves.

Finally, I endorse Saul's idea of running a training session for moderators before using the electronic scoresheets. We had one the morning of the tournament that only took 10 minutes, and I think it helped us avoid a lot of issues.
Charles Hang
Francis Howell Central '09
St. Charles Community College '14
Washington University in St. Louis '19 (President, 2017-19)

Owner, Olympia Academic Competition Questions, LLC
Question Writer, National Academic Quiz Tournaments, LLC and National History Bee and Bowl

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3042
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by DumbJaques » Sun Oct 22, 2017 12:37 am

I think Collin is being too hard on himself here about the delays. Yeah, it got a little crazy early on, but we made up some time. I also think Collin is to be commended for being extremely responsive to feedback when a couple teams pointed out that the initial schedule was suboptimal and needed updating. I know Collin tried everything he could to sort things out, but it sounds like a couple of key miscommunications sealed our fate. I sincerely appreciate the effort Collin and co put into this.

Also, for the record, multiple rooms were staffed quite efficiently with one person. I don't think the issues were in-round as much as they were coordination problems.



On the other hand, I really was bothered by the book prizes. Like, I'm not usually that finnicky about this, but these really were straight garbage: A1960's unpublishable sci-fi book, a random textbook on monopolies (from before the last 4 significant anti-trust legislations!), and what can only be described as an overthick brochure about how to enter the thrilling world of semi-professional antiquing. And those were the good ones.

The explanations mentioned did not hold a lot of water for me. The idea that the only way to acquire cheap used books is to get useless crap nobody wants is totally wrong. I simply cannot believe there is no discount bookstore in the entire town of Ann Arbor that sells regular book prize fare. Nobody is asking you to spend more than is typical - than we all do - on prizes. We're asking you to be aware of the norms around book prizes, and make smarter decisions with more advance-planning (e.g., asking team members to bring in a book fad enough ahead of time and with enough emphasis that it has a chance of succeeding). Like, this isn't a new concept - you can literally find threads on the forums here where people explain why you shouldn't use random old textbooks and other unwanted detritus as prizes.

I had people on my team today who won their first college tournament. They got no prizes, and I felt really bad about it. Additionally, I *really* did not appreciate being told, "if you don't like it, you don't have to take anything at all." While true, this was incredibly condescending and frankly absurd given how ridiculously bad the books were. I get that it was the end of the day, and people were tired, but this sucked.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

Charbroil
Auron
Posts: 1135
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 11:52 am
Location: St. Charles, MO

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by Charbroil » Sun Oct 22, 2017 1:01 am

I forgot to mention this in my last post, but you can get quite good book prizes from thrift stores (Goodwill, the Salvation Army, etc.) for $1-2 per book. (This is where we get our book prizes). A brief look at Google Maps reveals several such stores within walking distance of Mason Hall.

Chris's post mirrors one of my initial responses to Collin and Conor's posts as well--I was confused why there seemed to be such self-flagellation for a tournament which only had 30-60 minutes in avoidable delays (depending on how much of your delay was caused by teams showing up late--and thus unavoidable--as opposed to being caused by staffers not being trained on the new system--and thus avoidable). This was why I brought up the fact that past Michigan tournaments seem to take 45 minutes per round, even when run as intended, which seems to be only a little faster than how fast this tournament went.
Charles Hang
Francis Howell Central '09
St. Charles Community College '14
Washington University in St. Louis '19 (President, 2017-19)

Owner, Olympia Academic Competition Questions, LLC
Question Writer, National Academic Quiz Tournaments, LLC and National History Bee and Bowl

User avatar
Emperor Pupienus
Lulu
Posts: 97
Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2014 1:53 pm

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by Emperor Pupienus » Mon Oct 23, 2017 5:11 pm

Will regular SQBS stats for this tournament be posted in addition to the OphirStats?
Jason Zhou
Nichols School '14
University of Chicago '18

Food or not food?

User avatar
Periplus of the Erythraean Sea
Auron
Posts: 1726
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: Falls Church, VA

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by Periplus of the Erythraean Sea » Tue Oct 24, 2017 12:42 pm

Great End wrote:Will regular SQBS stats for this tournament be posted in addition to the OphirStats?
It's the prerogative of the host team to get these up - we'd encourage them to do so, since it provides a nice consolidated view.

In the meantime, anyone who wants to view advanced stats can join the discussion forum!
Will Alston
Bethesda Chevy Chase HS '12, Dartmouth '16
"...should be treated as the non-stakeholding troll he is" -Matt Weiner

User avatar
cornfused
Auron
Posts: 2154
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2006 3:22 pm
Location: Chicago, IL

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by cornfused » Fri Oct 27, 2017 8:55 pm

So the OphirStats have everything you could possibly want, except PPB. Here's PPB for our site.

Team PPB
Case Western 14.64
Chicago A 22.79
Chicago B 22.85
Chicago C 13.05
Chicago D 12.16
Kenyon 16.89
Michigan A 20.17
Michigan B 15.05
Michigan C 13.44
Michigan D 9.43
Michigan State A 21.58
Michigan State B 13.45
Northwestern 24.30
Ohio State A 24.48
Ohio State B 14.13
Wright State 16.51
Greg Peterson

Northwestern University '18
Lawrence University '11
Maine South HS '07

"a decent player" - Mike Cheyne

User avatar
t-bar
Tidus
Posts: 646
Joined: Sun Jan 25, 2009 4:12 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by t-bar » Fri Nov 03, 2017 9:20 pm

Should we be expecting an SQBS report at some point? I know we have the scoresheets in the subforum, but many of the results that are easy to read off of SQBS reports are harder to extract from the raw data or Ophir's summary sheets.
Stephen Eltinge
TJHSST 2011 | MIT 2015 | Yale 20??
ACF member | PACE member | NAQT writer

User avatar
heterodyne
Rikku
Posts: 360
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 9:47 am

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by heterodyne » Fri Apr 27, 2018 1:27 pm

t-bar wrote:Should we be expecting an SQBS report at some point? I know we have the scoresheets in the subforum, but many of the results that are easy to read off of SQBS reports are harder to extract from the raw data or Ophir's summary sheets.
bumpe
Alston [Montgomery] Boyd
Bloomington High School '15
UChicago '19
he/him/his or they/them/their

User avatar
CPiGuy
Rikku
Posts: 451
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 8:19 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by CPiGuy » Fri Apr 27, 2018 4:58 pm

Unfortunately, it's not going to happen, especially because the scoresheets for three of the games just don't exist, and I'm pretty sure Collin just never got around to it, for whatever reason.

Sorry to everyone inconvenienced by this. You can see what stats we have in the discussion forum. They're pretty comprehensive.

I promise that the lack of stats won't happen at future tournaments Michigan hosts. The people who will be directing them in the future understand that having publicly posted stats is important.
Conor Thompson
Bangor HS (Maine) '16
Michigan '20

Charbroil
Auron
Posts: 1135
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 11:52 am
Location: St. Charles, MO

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by Charbroil » Fri Apr 27, 2018 5:07 pm

I don't have a personal stake in this, but couldn't you just upload what you have? Based on what you just said, you do have results for 85 of 88 games. I can't imagine that anyone would hold it against you to simply put down the win/loss information for those remaining 3 games. Alternatively, you could reach out to the teams involved in those games to see if any of them kept more detailed results.
Charles Hang
Francis Howell Central '09
St. Charles Community College '14
Washington University in St. Louis '19 (President, 2017-19)

Owner, Olympia Academic Competition Questions, LLC
Question Writer, National Academic Quiz Tournaments, LLC and National History Bee and Bowl

User avatar
a bird
Wakka
Posts: 125
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2012 3:50 pm
Location: College Park, MD

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by a bird » Fri Apr 27, 2018 5:24 pm

At the risk of sounding like Naveed, I'm quoting Sam from the SMT@Harvard announcement thread:
Cherrybell Miramonte wrote:hosts need to be using SQBS to generate statistics, because the hsqb database only accepts SQBS reports. For a variety of reasons* hosts must put statistics on the hsqb database; this is why any time you post a new tournament announcement, you immediately get an e-mail notification telling you to make a page on the hsqb database. Using the hsqb database isn't optional; it's a requirement for hosts, and it's unacceptable for hosts not to put in the bare minimum of effort involved in uploading stats.
*Specifically, when statistics are posted on the hsqb database, it's very simple to find them by searching the database and clicking on the stat reports, whereupon they are presented in a standard format. By contrast, if the only stats provided are a link on the forums, anyone looking for stats has to be able to find the forum thread first, which is particularly inconvenient when trying to aggregate statistics from multiple tournaments. This is why Harry White's database of players and teams only includes results from the NAQT website and the hsqb database. Furthermore, results hosted on a third-party website are only good for as long as that website exists; as soon as the website is lost, so will all records hosted there. Many older tournaments that were held prior to the creation of the hsqb database have had their statistics lost in this precise way. This is the very reason that the hsqb database was implemented. You don't get to not use it just because you don't feel like it.
It's important that hosts post result for their tournaments in some form. Right now, the community norm is to post SQBS reports on the database for the reasons discussed above. Detailed stats in an invite only discussion forum is not an adequate replacement for posting results publicly on the database. As Charles pointed out, incomplete stats are better than no stats, and posting them now would be a nice show of good faith going forward. No one even posted the order of finish for the tournament and the winner was only mentioned as an afterthought!
Graham Reid
Kenyon 2017
Maryland Physics 20??

User avatar
CPiGuy
Rikku
Posts: 451
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2016 8:19 pm
Location: Ann Arbor, MI

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by CPiGuy » Fri Apr 27, 2018 5:32 pm

Given the points people have made here and on the discord, we're going to SQBS-ify the mostly complete stats. Our incoming TD, Nick Guilfoyle, will do so; they'll hopefully be posted soon (like, within a week ideally).
Conor Thompson
Bangor HS (Maine) '16
Michigan '20

User avatar
Beast Mode
Lulu
Posts: 73
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 12:47 am

Re: EFT at the University of Michigan (10/21)

Post by Beast Mode » Fri Aug 17, 2018 11:29 pm

I gave up waiting on UM TDs past and present and did the stats myself: http://www.hsquizbowl.org/db/tournaments/5168/. Ohio State A cleared the field with a perfect 11-0 record, and Chicago A took second at 9-2. I seem to recall that third place was a three-way tie, which would mean that Michigan State A won its prelim game against Ohio State B.

There are four rounds of the original advanced stats that are either missing or incomplete:
  • Chicago C vs. Case Western (room 1, round 1) is incomplete
  • Chicago B vs. Michigan A (room 7, round 1) is missing (EDIT: but Jason Zhou sent me his scoresheet of the round; I've updated the SQBS stats accordingly, but not the advanced stats, since JZ understandably didn't keep track of which individual bonus parts were converted.)
  • Kenyon vs. Michigan D (room 7, round 2) is missing
  • Michigan State A vs. Ohio State B (room 7, round 3) is missing
I edited the HTML of the SQBS reports to add things like placeholder rows where games are missing from team reports. Anyone with further information to offer on these matches (be it who won, complete stats, or anything in between) can email me at sehankin [at] umich [dot] edu. (Please put "EFT" or "Early Fall Tournament" or some such thing in the subject line.) Anyone with general corrections (e.g. spelling of players' names) can do likewise.
Saul Hankin
Michigan '13, '18
Yiddish Book Center '13-'14, Columbia '16

Post Reply