The Quizbowl Resource Center

Posted: **Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:03 pm**

naqt.com wrote:NAQT is pleased to announce that its fourth annual Middle School National Championship Tournament (MSNCT) will be held at the Hilton Atlanta hotel on the weekend of May 9-11, 2014.

The field for the tournament is limited to 128 teams.

Registration for standby teams will open on January 1, 2014.

Wildcard applications will be accepted beginning January 1, 2014.

Full details

Current field

Posted: **Mon Oct 21, 2013 12:49 pm**

Registration is now open.

Posted: **Tue Jan 07, 2014 2:48 pm**

Wildcard applications for the 2014 MSNCT are now open. To apply, please use this online form.

If you would like to add a team to the standby list for the 2014 MSNCT, please do so here.

Posted: **Fri Mar 21, 2014 12:57 pm**

naqt.com wrote:As of March 21, 107 teams have registered for the 2014 NAQT Middle School National Championship Tournament. There are still 5 spots available, but NAQT recommends that schools hoping to attend register within the next week.

Posted: **Tue Apr 01, 2014 5:28 pm**

I am pleased to report that the field for this tournament has been expanded to 128 teams.

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:33 pm**

What difficulty would the packet set be comparable to? Also, is it targeted to be easier or harder than last year's?

Posted: **Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:45 pm**

Expect questions that are slightly more difficult than last year's, but still easier than NAQT's introductory high school sets.

Posted: **Wed May 07, 2014 12:52 am**

Are there any plans for a possible side tournament at MSNCT?

Posted: **Wed May 07, 2014 1:20 pm**

I am not aware of any plans for side tournaments at MSNCT.

Posted: **Fri May 09, 2014 10:20 pm**

anyone want to meet at starbucks tommorow at like 7:15?

i bought a t shirt too.

Posted: **Fri May 09, 2014 11:08 pm**

jeremylu wrote:anyone want to meet at starbucks tommorow at like 7:15?

i bought a t shirt too.

http://goo.gl/GE36C1
which one

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 10:12 am**

Will NAQT be updating results on its website throughout the day?

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 10:54 am**

We intend to.

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 11:18 am**

Results are posted at http://naqt.com/stats/tournament-teams. ... nt_id=4999 through round 2. We'll be updating throughout the day.

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 12:24 pm**

Results are now posted through round 4. 21 teams remain undefeated.
http://naqt.com/stats/tournament-teams. ... nt_id=4999

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 1:02 pm**

Round 5 is up. (Are these updates useful?)

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 1:35 pm**

Round 6 is up. At lunch time, eight teams are undefeated.

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 3:38 pm**

Yes the updates are very useful!

One thing I have noticed so far about MSNCT this year (at least just from looking at the stats) is that the PPBs are a little on the high side. Also judging from the number of powers in some of these rounds I feel that the tossups may be on the easy side as well. Just some random observations I had (and perhaps these numbers will decrease significantly as the tournament progresses.).

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 3:54 pm**

Round 8 is up, minus two games that ran behind schedule.

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 5:26 pm**

Round 10 is complete and uploaded. Most of Saturday's games are finishing up as I write this, and we'll have the rest of the preliminary stats up within an hour or so.

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 5:59 pm**

MoeMoney wrote:One thing I have noticed so far about MSNCT this year (at least just from looking at the stats) is that the PPBs are a little on the high side. Also judging from the number of powers in some of these rounds I feel that the tossups may be on the easy side as well. Just some random observations I had (and perhaps these numbers will decrease significantly as the tournament progresses.).

Looking at the available prelim stats:

Mean team PPB: 16.94
Median team PPB: 17.17
Tossup conversion rate: 89.5%
Power rate: 28.8% (just under 3/team/game)

Bonuses seem to be converted higher than normal (though IMO it doesn't seem too bad, and tossup conversion rates seem to fall in the (I believe) 85-90% desired range.

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 6:41 pm**

And the full prelim stats are available. We'll be fixing errors as we find them, so do pipe up if you see any!

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 7:44 pm**

puls wrote:And the full prelim stats are available. We'll be fixing errors as we find them, so do pipe up if you see any!

Jack Robertson on Middlesex C should be Jack Roberson.

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 8:23 pm**

Smooth coarea formula wrote:Jack Robertson on Middlesex C should be Jack Roberson.

This has been fixed; thanks for letting us know!

Posted: **Sat May 10, 2014 10:35 pm**

The playoff bracket is here.

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 11:18 am**

Results through round 15 (that is, the first three rounds of the playoffs) are posted.
28 teams remain in the playoffs.

http://naqt.com/stats/tournament-teams. ... nt_id=4999

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 11:57 am**

Results through round 17 are posted. 11 teams remain.

(We're also updating the bracket at http://naqt.com/ms/msnct/2014/2014-msnc ... ackets.pdf as the playoffs continue.)

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 12:33 pm**

Kealing goes down to a team they had already beaten 620-210? Weird.

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 12:47 pm**

Mnemosyne wrote:Kealing goes down to a team they had already beaten 620-210? Weird.

St. Mark's was 5-3 yesterday, and now they're the only team left in the winner's bracket.

Edit: And it turns out that exact roster tied for 7th at TQBA states 2 weeks ago. That might just be the weirdest thing.

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 3:33 pm**

Smooth coarea formula wrote:
Mnemosyne wrote:Kealing goes down to a team they had already beaten 620-210? Weird.
St. Mark's was 5-3 yesterday, and now they're the only team left in the winner's bracket.

Edit: And it turns out that exact roster tied for 7th at TQBA states 2 weeks ago. That might just be the weirdest thing.

On top of that, here are some of St. Mark's stats compared to the rest of the pack:

In Prelims: 13 in pp20th, 26th in powers, 37th in ppB
Overall: 19th in pp20th, 13th in powers, 33rd in ppB

Underdogs of the century, anyone?

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 4:06 pm**

Yes, I have noticed as well that St. Marks stats were weird for a team finishing so high, and yet for the eventual runners-up to almost have not made the playoffs is a bit weird. Also, the 2 and 3 card getting knocked out relatively early on is very weird. I feel like inconsistencies in the set may have been at play here especially with the previous example pointed out that Kealing lost to a team it crushed. When you can beat a team by that much, you don't just magically drop a game to them later on...

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 4:22 pm**

Upsets happen.

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 5:06 pm**

A runner-up team barely clearing 300PP20TH is certainly weird... but not too surprising if you look at St. Mark's playoff run(all of their wins were by less than 100 points) and their two final games, both lost by a margin of more than 300.

I obviously wasn't there, but I can't help but think that the packets can be partially blamed for the unusual outcomes... nevertheless, congrats to St. Mark's and Harmony for their great performances.

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 5:59 pm**

Congrats to Harmony for an excellent performance, and to the tournament organizers for a great tournament.

Regarding packet variety, I agree. Some of the rounds were easier than others (with some even coming straight from Protobowl, and some being quite a bit harder (at least for us).
Similarity in diffculty is something they should watch out for in future tournaments...

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 6:24 pm**

naqt.com wrote:Congratulations to the Harmony School of Excellence of Houston, Texas, for winning the 2014 Middle School National Championship Tournament! St. Mark's School of Dallas, Texas was second; Trickum Middle School of Lilburn, Georgia was third; and Winburn Middle School of Lexington, Kentucky was fourth.

Complete stats

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 7:19 pm**

Congrats to everyone, especially Harmony. Can't wait to see William Golden (top scorer at MSNCT) on Jeopardy this summer, he deserves it. Congrats to my hometown team of Middlesex A for their 8th place finish (though not as good as Borecki and I's 7th place finish last year).

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 8:10 pm**

Wait, wait, wait... People seem to think that this set might have been too easy, right? Were people saying the same thing a year ago? I ask because my team powered 153 toss-ups last year in 15 games, and scored 479.2 PP20TH and 24.8 PPB (2nd behind St.John's 25.05). The highest number of powers I see this year is Harmony's 108; the only school to crack 100 powers, and doing so in 16 matches. The highest average I see this year was Kealing A's 435.1. I mean, we couldn't be there this year, so this is supposition on my part, but maybe the issue is there's a bit of 'catching up' happening with the rest of the nationals-level field??

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 8:37 pm**

the return of AHAN wrote:Wait, wait, wait... People seem to think that this set might have been too easy, right? Were people saying the same thing a year ago? I ask because my team powered 153 toss-ups last year in 15 games, and scored 479.2 PP20TH and 24.8 PPB (2nd behind St.John's 25.05). The highest number of powers I see this year is Harmony's 108; the only school to crack 100 powers, and doing so in 16 matches. The highest average I see this year was Kealing A's 435.1. I mean, we couldn't be there this year, so this is supposition on my part, but maybe the issue is there's a bit of 'catching up' happening with the rest of the nationals-level field??

I think people just like saying things.

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 8:53 pm**

the return of AHAN wrote:Wait, wait, wait... People seem to think that this set might have been too easy, right? Were people saying the same thing a year ago? I ask because my team powered 153 toss-ups last year in 15 games, and scored 479.2 PP20TH and 24.8 PPB (2nd behind St.John's 25.05). The highest number of powers I see this year is Harmony's 108; the only school to crack 100 powers, and doing so in 16 matches. The highest average I see this year was Kealing A's 435.1. I mean, we couldn't be there this year, so this is supposition on my part, but maybe the issue is there's a bit of 'catching up' happening with the rest of the nationals-level field??

Maybe Barrington is better than the entire field this year, but there's no reason to "back door brag"...
I can't say for any past MSNCT's, but I expected this year's to be have less variance in difficulty. The questions were by no means easy; some were just easier than others.

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 8:56 pm**

Siegfried wrote:Maybe Barrington is better than the entire field this year, but there's no reason to "back door brag"...

Posting about how the questions are too easy is classic quiz bowl "I want to act humble because I answered questions at a tournament, yet still call attention to my answering questions" behavior 99% of the time.

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 9:30 pm**

Siegfried wrote:
the return of AHAN wrote:Wait, wait, wait... People seem to think that this set might have been too easy, right? Were people saying the same thing a year ago? I ask because my team powered 153 toss-ups last year in 15 games, and scored 479.2 PP20TH and 24.8 PPB (2nd behind St.John's 25.05). The highest number of powers I see this year is Harmony's 108; the only school to crack 100 powers, and doing so in 16 matches. The highest average I see this year was Kealing A's 435.1. I mean, we couldn't be there this year, so this is supposition on my part, but maybe the issue is there's a bit of 'catching up' happening with the rest of the nationals-level field??
Maybe Barrington is better than the entire field this year, but there's no reason to "back door brag"...
I can't say for any past MSNCT's, but I expected this year's to be have less variance in difficulty. The questions were by no means easy; some were just easier than others.

No, I'm genuinely positing that there is not nearly the separation among the top teams this year as last. And this year's iteration of Station A would've done well to crack the top 20, knowing what I know of the teams in the field we played.
Last year, 5 of 95 teams averaged more than 23 PPB....Go back two years ago... There were 4 teams with more than 23 PPB out of 72, with Kealing averaging 26.34!... this year, just TWO out of 128 teams averaged over 23 PPB.... So, I'm having a hard time with the idea the set was easier this year.

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 9:42 pm**

the return of AHAN wrote:
Siegfried wrote:
the return of AHAN wrote:Wait, wait, wait... People seem to think that this set might have been too easy, right? Were people saying the same thing a year ago? I ask because my team powered 153 toss-ups last year in 15 games, and scored 479.2 PP20TH and 24.8 PPB (2nd behind St.John's 25.05). The highest number of powers I see this year is Harmony's 108; the only school to crack 100 powers, and doing so in 16 matches. The highest average I see this year was Kealing A's 435.1. I mean, we couldn't be there this year, so this is supposition on my part, but maybe the issue is there's a bit of 'catching up' happening with the rest of the nationals-level field??
Maybe Barrington is better than the entire field this year, but there's no reason to "back door brag"...
I can't say for any past MSNCT's, but I expected this year's to be have less variance in difficulty. The questions were by no means easy; some were just easier than others.
No, I'm genuinely positing that there is not nearly the separation among the top teams this year as last. And this year's iteration of Station A would've done well to crack the top 20, knowing what I know of the teams in the field we played.
Last year, 5 of 95 teams averaged more than 23 PPB....Go back two years ago... There were 4 teams with more than 23 PPB out of 72, with Kealing averaging 26.34!... this year, just TWO out of 128 teams averaged over 23 PPB.... So, I'm having a hard time with the idea the set was easier this year.

I see where you're coming from.

Off topic: (If you don't mind me asking) Why didn't Barrington attend this year? Logistical reasons?

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 9:49 pm**

Siegfried wrote:Off topic: (If you don't mind me asking) Why didn't Barrington attend this year? Logistical reasons?

On that note, why did it seem like no particularly good IL team (Daniel Wright, Thurgood Marshall, etc.) attended?

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 9:58 pm**

Smooth coarea formula wrote:
Siegfried wrote:Off topic: (If you don't mind me asking) Why didn't Barrington attend this year? Logistical reasons?
On that note, why did it seem like no particularly good IL team (Daniel Wright, Thurgood Marshall, etc.) attended?

Friday was the IESA State Series in downtown Peoria, which Daniel Wright won in AA. Given that the Sectional qualifier was Monday (and DW's Sectional included Marshall and Station), trying to make plans ahead of time would have been complicated, to say the least.

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 10:17 pm**

Friday night was the evening of the Illinois State Scholastic Bowl Championships (like quizbowl, but with 4 part bonuses that rebound, a significant amount of computational math, and toss-ups that may or may not be pyramidal), and teams good enough to possibly play in the state finals couldn't make plans to attend MSNCT. The lone exception, Quest Academy, was a private school that could make the last-minute pivot precisely because they were a private school (no bureaucracy to navigate). They only registered last Tuesday after getting upset in the Class A (small schools) sectionals the night before. Marshall and Station each fell to the eventual state champ, Daniel Wright, that same night in the Class AA sectional. Had the tournament been in Chicago again, teams would've registered anyway, much as we did for the 2011 MSNCT, which was also scheduled for the same weekend as IESA State.

EDIT: Beaten by Donald. Posting anyway...

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 10:24 pm**

KoreanTacos wrote:A runner-up team barely clearing 300PP20TH is certainly weird... but not too surprising if you look at St. Mark's playoff run(all of their wins were by less than 100 points) and their two final games, both lost by a margin of more than 300.

I obviously wasn't there, but I can't help but think that the packets can be partially blamed for the unusual outcomes... nevertheless, congrats to St. Mark's and Harmony for their great performances.

Upsets happen dude.

It's hard to blame a set for packet imbalance across the board and then say it's a reason why a team did better. Sometimes teams can catch a fire while playing and go on a streak in a game. Other times they may catch a disfavorable packet, or not catch any steam if a category they're strong in is towards the back of the packet (or vice versa an opponent's strong categories are heavy in the front half... i.e. we played Solon at HSNCT 2013 and I believe three of the science tossups were in the first half).

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 10:26 pm**

the return of AHAN wrote:Friday night was the evening of the Illinois State Scholastic Bowl Championships (like quizbowl, but with 4 part bonuses that rebound, a significant amount of computational math, and toss-ups that may or may not be pyramidal), and teams good enough to possibly play in the state finals couldn't make plans to attend MSNCT. The lone exception, Quest Academy, was a private school that could make the last-minute pivot precisely because they were a private school (no bureaucracy to navigate). They only registered last Tuesday after getting upset in the Class A (small schools) sectionals the night before. Marshall and Station each fell to the eventual state champ, Daniel Wright, that same night in the Class AA sectional. Had the tournament been in Chicago again, teams would've registered anyway, much as we did for the 2011 MSNCT, which was also scheduled for the same weekend as IESA State.

EDIT: Beaten by Donald. Posting anyway...

I see--sorry to hear that. I looked forward to see how you guys would fare (quite well, I suppose).

EDIT: typo

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 10:36 pm**

I was there and saw it happen, and read most of the question sets. I'll go into more detail when I actually get off the plane and home, but if the questions were all over the place in difficulty, I certainly didn't see it. I think that people who say that are overthinking this, and JEff's supposition is closer to correct. We simply just saw the first true Cinderella run to an NAQT final in quite a long time, maybe ever.

--Scott

Posted: **Sun May 11, 2014 10:43 pm**

Ithaca Cricket Ump wrote:I was there and saw it happen, and read most of the question sets. I'll go into more detail when I actually get off the plane and home, but if the questions were all over the place in difficulty, I certainly didn't see it. I think that people who say that are overthinking this, and JEff's supposition is closer to correct. We simply just saw the first true Cinderella run to an NAQT final in quite a long time, maybe ever.

--Scott

I could be wrong, but there was some imbalance in the sets (as an impression, certainly not entirely accurate), which is why some packets seemed "easier" to our team than others, because we have different strong points.

Do you know when the questions will be released?

Posted: **Mon May 12, 2014 10:04 am**

the return of AHAN wrote:Wait, wait, wait... People seem to think that this set might have been too easy, right? Were people saying the same thing a year ago? I ask because my team powered 153 toss-ups last year in 15 games, and scored 479.2 PP20TH and 24.8 PPB (2nd behind St.John's 25.05). The highest number of powers I see this year is Harmony's 108; the only school to crack 100 powers, and doing so in 16 matches. The highest average I see this year was Kealing A's 435.1. I mean, we couldn't be there this year, so this is supposition on my part, but maybe the issue is there's a bit of 'catching up' happening with the rest of the nationals-level field??

Another variable that (I think) no one has mentioned is the location of power marks in the questions. The same set of tossups, but power marked with a slightly different philosophy or set of criteria, will dramatically affect these statistics.

I don't know if this was intentional, but it seemed to me like the power marking was much less generous in the playoff games than it was in the preliminaries.

ETA: For my team, in 8 preliminary games, in which we played against 5 eventual playoff and 3 non-playoff teams, 68/175 tossups (38.9%) were powered by either team. Median 9.5 and mean 8.5 powers per game.

In 5 playoff games, which theoretically should feature stronger teams which power more questions, 27/109 tossups (24.8%) were powered by either team. Median 5 and mean 5.4 powers per game. Obviously this a small sample size, but at a glance, this seems significant.

The Quizbowl Resource Center

2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: May 10-11, Atlanta

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!

Re: 2014 NAQT MSNCT: Congratulations Harmony-Excellence!