The Quizbowl Resource Center

20.45ppb for LASA?

Wow...

Carangoides ciliarius wrote:20.45ppb for LASA?

Wow...

Just poking around at other ACF Regionals ppb stats...
UCSD 23.32
Yale 22.88
Maryland 22.03
Minnesota A 21.72
Michigan 21.53
Berkeley 21.49
LASA A 20.45
UVA A 20.27
Bellarmine 19.94
Chicago 18.84
Stanford 18.46

Below are stats from the 12th Annual TQBA high school state championship, held Saturday at Seven Lakes in Katy.
http://www.texasquizbowl.org/d/11state/

1st: LASA A 2nd: Seven Lakes A 3rd: LASA B 4th: St. Mark's 5th: Seven Lakes B

LASA beat Seven Lakes in the third final, 350-285. Thomas Littrell Powered the final tossup of the match with LASA ahead by 20. It was the first tournament of the season where Seven Lakes' full A team has faced LASA A. Jiawei Li led all individuals with 97.14 ppg.

Fort Worth Paschal, in its first TQBA event, had a 19.53 bonus conversion and won the bracket of teams not-yet qualified for HSNCT.

While reading the post concerning the results of the Texas State NAQT Tournament given above and elsewhere, I think it should be brought to the attention of the readership that Cistercian 'A' was erroneously excluded from its place in the competition's Championship rounds. While the mistake was accidental, the effect was devastating to our team's further participation in the tournament --it stopped us in our tracks. The official note of apology is as follows:

**Due to a typographical error in SQBS Cistercian A was excluded erroneously from the Championship Bracket. Cistercian A, LASA B, and Seven Lakes B all had 4-1 records at the end of the prelims, which led to a bonus conversion tie breaker. The typo led us to believe that Cistercian had the lowest bonus conversion, thus excluding them from the championship bracket. This issue was not discovered until the day after the tournament. Texas Quiz Bowl apologizes for the mistake and will issue a refund to Cistercian A.

Here are the stats from the 2011 St. Mark's NAQT Invitational,
played on IS-102 on April 2, 2011. LASA A Went 10-0 to finish in 1st, with Cistercian A finishing 2nd at 9-3. Host St. Mark's A finished in 3rd.
http://naqt.com/stats/tournament-teams. ... nt_id=3502

Here are stats from the TQBA Texas Middle School Championship and the concurrent New School event. They were contested using set IS 101-A.

http://texasquizbowl.org/d/11Middle/

In the middle school event, Kealing's three teams combined to go 25-2, with the B team topping the A team to go undefeated.

The new teams event was won by Houston Westside at 10-0, with Richmond George Ranch of Lamar Consolidated ISD placing second at 9-1.

Edit: for typo.

Hopefully, we'll get the STATS from the Texas Invitational at YES soon. It looked like quite a good collection of nationally ranked teams slugging it out -- and a good warm-up for NAQT nationals.

Here are those stats: http://texasquizbowl.org/d/11ICTDiv2/

Thanks, Chris, for all the hard work you've put in over the past several days! Cistercian got a LOT out of Friday's competition from some of the top-ranked teams in the US; so, we feel as though it has confirmed our own estimation of how things may well unfold at NAQT/Nationals.

For teams in Cistercian's position, HSNCT can be heavily dependent on luck with matchups, as I'm sure you're aware. I've seen some mediocre teams reach 6-4 (2009 Temple comes to mind: http://www.naqt.com/stats/team-performa ... m_id=16332), teams which I think were nowhere near as good is several teams that were left out at 5-5 (including St. John's in 2006, which had a better PPG than 12 6-4 teams). But after last year's showing for Texas teams in general, I think confidence in all the major players making the second day is reasonable. Indeed, several relative outsiders are showing genuine potential -- a team like the senior-laden Bellaire squad which Cistercian split with on Friday looks more and more like a potential second-day team.

Presumably, Cistercian's goal Saturday is to improve upon last year's 6-4 first day, and that seems entirely within reach. With the field expanding again to 224, 7-3 becomes a tiny bit more obtainable.

It will be good to soon have the rankings fuss set aside, and simply get on with HSNCT and NSC.

Best of luck to all the Lone Star contingent, which incidentally is 16 strong: Bellaire A&B; Cistercian A&B; El Paso Franklin; Richmond George Ranch; Highland Park; LASA A-D; Fort Worth Paschal; Seven Lakes A&B; St. John's and St. Mark's.

Edit: for Texas field detail.

May I heartily second the views of Stephen Fontenot? Apart from his lauding the LARGE contingent from the Lone Star Republic to NAQT nationals, he rightly states our hopes and intentions for NAQT. And, finally, may I also express my agreement with his observation to set aside "the rankings fuss." Far too much electronic ink has been shed over that entire matter, and, with Lent only concluded by days, let me acknowledge my own fault in that area, too.

Yes, the eyes of Texas will be upon ALL of the teams from the Lone Star State!

Remember the Alamo!
Remember Goliad!

As the final results from around the USA come in, I continue to see the Texas teams as a group doing well, very well, indeed.

Just as an update, this is the current Texas field at HSNCT. Chapin is in and George Ranch is out.

etchdulac wrote:Bellaire A&B; Cistercian A&B; El Paso Chapin; El Paso Franklin; Highland Park; LASA A-D; Fort Worth Paschal; Seven Lakes A&B; St. John's and St. Mark's.

I am weighing ways to keep track of as many Texas teams as we can throughout Saturday. My best idea is to ask folks to text-message me their scores and records as the day progresses, and between rounds I can post them here as I have time. It would just be a matter of gauging interest and getting a phone number out to the correspondents.

Private-message me on here if you'd like to help out.

Great idea!

I'll be posting LASA results on my Twitter feed - www.twitter.com/historytime. Problem is that I've got 4 teams and I'm not even sure I'll be able to keep up with all of them. Hopefully my kids / parents who are with the various teams will be good about texting me results. I would love a place to see results from the other teams though.

Hopefully with a final set of national rankings coming soon, we'll all be ready to head toward Atlanta!

It's sounding like there will be a lot of score-reporting going on, so perhaps the Texas scores hotline idea won't be necessary. Still, if you feel like passing things along, let me know and I'll PM you a phone number to use.

Texas has 11 playoff teams. Texas Teams (all 18):

LASA A 9-1 (#3), 409.57 PP20H (#4), lone loss to Bellarmine
Seven Lakes A 8-2 (#4), 468.72 PP20H (#1), losses to 10-0 Dorman and Detroit Catholic Central A
LASA B 8-2 (#12), 311.71 PP20H (#19), lost to Cistercian A
Cistercian A 7-3 (#21), 306.25 PP20H (#23), lost to 9-1 State College, 10-0 Dorman and DCC A
St. Mark's 7-3 (#27), 286.38 PP20H (#29)
LASA C 6-4 (#50), 251.17 PP20H (#49)
Seven Lakes B 6-4 (#52), 248.13 PP20H (#52)
LASA D 6-4 (#62), 227.40 PP20H (#64)
Cistercian B 6-4 (#70), 203.23 PP20H (#81)
St. John's 6-4 (#73), 194.91 PP20H (#89)
Bellaire A 6-4 (#81), 179.72 PP20H (#109)
_________________________________________

Bellaire B 5-5 (#106)
FW Paschal 5-5 (#127)
Seven Lakes C 4-6 (#168)
Highland Park 4-6 (#173)
EP Franklin 3-7 (#200)
LASA E 3-7 (#206)
EP Chapin 2-8 (#217)

LASA B finished 8-2

Three Texas teams attended the PACE NSC, with LASA finishing 3rd, Seven Lakes finishing 14th, and Cistercian finishing 20th.

EDIT: Also, at HSNCT, the aforementioned teams finished 2nd, T-8th, and T-21st, respectively.

Having read some of the blogs this morning, I wanted to note the following:
1. The logistics at PACE seemed to be somewhere between Dante's Inferno and Blake's hallucinations! T/F?

2. According to a number of folk, the future of PACE is very much in doubt unless SEVERE changes in administration are made, pronto. T/F

3. The "Protests Imbroglios" were so deep, so profound, and SO UNRESOLVED, that charges that the tournament's conclusions were NOT representative of the field seem likely. T/F (comments?)

NB: I was NOT there; only my team was there! I have no way of verifying any of this except from my own team's players (a partisan and opinionated group, if ever there was one!)

So, if anyone wants to let me know what happened, please post a comment. Of course, you can always contact me privately, if you feel that would be more effective.

Honestly, I DON'T know how bad it was --if at all -- so, SVP, let me know!

Remember-the-Alamo-Remember-Goliad wrote:Having read some of the blogs this morning, I wanted to note the following:
1. The logistics at PACE seemed to be somewhere between Dante's Inferno and Blake's hallucinations! T/F?

2. According to a number of folk, the future of PACE is very much in doubt unless SEVERE changes in administration are made, pronto. T/F

3. The "Protests Imbroglios" were so deep, so profound, and SO UNRESOLVED, that charges that the tournament's conclusions were NOT representative of the field seem likely. T/F (comments?)

NB: I was NOT there; only my team was there! I have no way of verifying any of this except from my own team's players (a partisan and opinionated group, if ever there was one!)

So, if anyone wants to let me know what happened, please post a comment. Of course, you can always contact me privately, if you feel that would be more effective.

Honestly, I DON'T know how bad it was --if at all -- so, SVP, let me know!

1. The tournament was 3 hours behind schedule on day 1, if that is any indication. Day 2 seemed to move at least slightly more smoothly.
2. I don't really think the future of PACE is in doubt, but that major overhauls to the format are likely to be pressed for and/or made.
3. The situation with protests varied from case to case, but in many cases the teams on the losing ends of protests were very unhappy. That said, much of the field did pan out as expected, BUT there were a lot more upsets than expected and than in previous years. Had all the protests been completely resolved, then the field may have been more representative, but in that way it wasn't too bad, with a few unexpected results here and there.

EDIT: Just realized that was a double-post!

Sorry about the double-post

Remember-the-Alamo-Remember-Goliad wrote:Honestly, I DON'T know how bad it was --if at all -- so, SVP, let me know!

Hopefully you've followed along with the NSC forum topics, and you're getting a more developed picture gradually. If you have any specific questions about things your students did not witness themselves, I will let you know if I did.

From the local-teams perspective: Your squad put in another solid showing in finishing 20th in a really strong field. I didn't see them at all this weekend, so I don't have a lot of details in that regard, but to have finished above Richard Montgomery in the standings can't have been too shabby.

Seven Lakes' squad for next year, minus Jiawei and Jonathan, finished 14th. That's a bit scary for the coming campaign, when I imagine SLHS will expect to be favored just ahead of the current LASA B and your squad as the preseason selection as top team in our state.

LASA, meanwhile, beat State College in their lone head-to-head on the weekend, but finished third overall due to Sunday losses to Hunter and Stevenson. LASA's departing seniors are the best team I've seen from our state, period.

I appreciate both the information and the analysis that you provide -- and on most points I think we are in substantial agreement.

While each Texas team will have to work out new configurations for their respective 'A' and 'B' teams (some more so than others), the departure of my seniors to university, I think, will be well compensated by members of my 'B' team and a couple of currently 'inactive' members.