2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Dormant threads from the high school sections are preserved here.
User avatar
Smuttynose Island
Forums Staff: Moderator
Posts: 490
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:07 pm

2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Smuttynose Island » Sun Jun 16, 2013 12:07 pm

Post your comments about the 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament in this thread.
Daniel Hothem
TJHSST '11 | UVA '15 | Oregon '??
"You are the stuff of legends" - Chris Manners
https://sites.google.com/site/academicc ... ubuva/home

User avatar
Huntur
Lulu
Posts: 88
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 8:49 am
Location: Blacksburg, VA

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Huntur » Sun Jun 16, 2013 7:04 pm

Overall, I and Team Virginia really enjoyed the set and tournament as a whole. We were all commenting on the ride home that logistically, everything was pretty close to flawless so kudos to Daniel and Matt for a well-run tournament.

Set-wise, we had some general grumblings about the Science questions being either too easy or too hard. Without having the set in front of me (and I me be wrong on second look) I can only pick out a few single incidents and then just continue grumbling. For too hard, there were very specific proteins or chemicals that were probably beyond most (even all-stars) knowledge as answerlines. For too easy, I remember a solubility toss-up this morning that probably should have been gotten on second or third clue in most rounds with a science player in them.
-Also, one of my players was really confused why he wasn't prompted on "channel protein" for "aquaporin" before the FTP and then when protested was denied. Anyone able to provide clarification for his and my own curiosity?

Nitpicking: I liked the way the protest resolutions were handled with printed copies at NSC and would love to see that at NASAT.

Lastly, thanks to Dave Madden for the lunch today! And congratulations to Missouri!
Brian Mongilio
Virginia Tech '16, Treasurer 2011-Present
Parkersburg South (WV) '11

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6576
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Cheynem » Sun Jun 16, 2013 7:46 pm

I was very happy to staff this tournament. Matt Weiner alluded to this on Sunday, but the field here was impressive and it was very enjoyable to see every team respond so well to a pretty hard set. Even the teams in the lower bracket had all kinds of good buzzes, competitive matches, and high scores, and would have been clear top or second bracket teams at many tournaments.

I wrote a good number of questions for this set, particularly in history (yes, I wrote the bonus that began "shiver me timbers"--I REGRET NOTHING).In my history bonuses, I tried (perhaps too hard) to avoid having every part be a person, polity, or battle, which resulted in some things that perhaps were a little crazy (surely I am not the only one who loves the tale of the rampaging French wolves?).
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

User avatar
blizzard
Lulu
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 6:13 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by blizzard » Sun Jun 16, 2013 8:51 pm

What category was the rook question considered? Chess is a board game, and therefore I think it deserves to be considered trash, just like asking questions about Monopoly or Sorry or any other board games would be considered trash.
Sam Blizzard
Northmont High School '15
University of Cincinnati '19

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

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Mewto55555 » Sun Jun 16, 2013 9:09 pm

I loved the set! One thing that did concern me was some sub-optimal randomization -- stuff we found particularly standing out day 2 was, for example, the lit in the last playoff packet being 3 poems, 1 short stories, or stuff like tossups on San Francisco and LA Philharmonic in close succession (though that particularly stood our since we were playing CA). I don't think the second type of thing is that big a deal, though if it could be helped that wouldn't be terrible, but the first is definitely bad and could easily be seen by someone reading through (though I have no idea when NASAT was finished, and this too is not a huge deal in the long run).

Also chess is presumably GK, which I totally think is where it belongs -- I don't know if you've ever played chess but it is pretty different than Monopoly and Sorry, and also lots of study have gone into it, etc, though I'm sure someone can write a more convincing defense. Certainly its a more appropriate way to spend GK than "pretzels".That said, "these pieces should guard passed pawns" was way too early.

Again, loved the set! Thanks everyone involved!
Max
formerly of Ladue, Chicago

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6576
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Cheynem » Sun Jun 16, 2013 9:12 pm

It was "General Knowledge." Chess is a bit more intellectual and academic than those other games, so I'm okay with limited amounts of chess questions, especially in the nebulous "GK" category (this is independent of the actual question's quality, which I can't judge).

I agree that the randomization got weird at times, although I'm skeptical that the S.F. and LA questions needed to be moved per se.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

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

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Mewto55555 » Sun Jun 16, 2013 9:15 pm

Cheynem wrote: I agree that the randomization got weird at times, although I'm skeptical that the S.F. and LA questions needed to be moved per se.
Yeah, I was just trying to come up with an example of very similar concepts coming up in two different categories and that was the best I could do off the top of my head, I can probably find something less stupid when I glance through the packets again.
Max
formerly of Ladue, Chicago

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

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Kilroy Was Here » Sun Jun 16, 2013 9:26 pm

To the writer who wrote the pretzel tossup, I thank you for writing the tossup that gave me one of my favorite buzzes of all time. Although, I must ask what subject that was in.
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

Banana Stand
Wakka
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 4:38 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Banana Stand » Sun Jun 16, 2013 9:56 pm

blizzard wrote:What category was the rook question considered? Chess is a board game, and therefore I think it deserves to be considered trash, just like asking questions about Monopoly or Sorry or any other board games would be considered trash.
Yes, chess is totally like Sorry and Monopoly because it's played on a board. Maybe opera should be considered trash because Ke$ha also sings.

And it's probably classified as general knowledge.
Jack Mehr
St. Joe's NJ '14
UVA '19

User avatar
blizzard
Lulu
Posts: 64
Joined: Fri Apr 15, 2011 6:13 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by blizzard » Sun Jun 16, 2013 10:12 pm

Obviously not everyone agree with me, but you have to draw the line between trash and general knowledge somewhere, and I would put chess on the trash side, along with the pretzels tossup.

In regards to the academic questions, I really liked the set. The lit questions were really fun and were definitely more unique than most questions. I especially liked the lit common link tossup on earthquakes.
Sam Blizzard
Northmont High School '15
University of Cincinnati '19

User avatar
Kafkaesque
Lulu
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:20 am

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Kafkaesque » Sun Jun 16, 2013 10:39 pm

To the writer who wrote the pretzel tossup, I thank you for writing the tossup that gave me one of my favorite buzzes of all time. Although, I must ask what subject that was in.
YES. I first-clued this toss-up, and it was one of my favorite buzzes as well.

Regarding the set, I enjoyed it. I think my only gripe was the somewhat inconsistent bonus difficulty. I recall a few really easy 20s (one of them might have had "Spanish" as its first answer), and there were definitely a few extremely difficult bonuses that were only really 10-able (if that).

Also, just to chime in, chess is rightfully considered general academic knowledge. It's been around in its modern form for over 500 years, and a vast amount of academic study has been pored into its associated strategy. Comparing it to Sorry or Monopoly is pretty silly, in my opinion.

Finally, although it doesn't affect the final standings, we (VA) lost to NJ in a close match, partly because I wasn't prompted on "channel protein" for aquaporin. I realize that channel protein was not a fully correct answer, but that I wasn't prompted was a little disappointing (and the protest was eventually decided against us, which I still don't understand).

Overall, a great tournament and a well-written set. Big thanks to those involved!
Mason Hale
Loudoun County '14
Harvard '18

User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Matt Weiner » Sun Jun 16, 2013 10:48 pm

The biology team I consulted on your protest said that the two clues prior to where you buzzed are not true of channel proteins of general and thus it is a wrong answer.
Matt Weiner
Founder of hsquizbowl.org

User avatar
Sniper, No Sniping!
Tidus
Posts: 706
Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 12:25 pm
Location: Pickerington, OH

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Sniper, No Sniping! » Sun Jun 16, 2013 11:10 pm

Banana Stand wrote:
blizzard wrote:What category was the rook question considered? Chess is a board game, and therefore I think it deserves to be considered trash, just like asking questions about Monopoly or Sorry or any other board games would be considered trash.
Yes, chess is totally like Sorry and Monopoly because it's played on a board. Maybe opera should be considered trash because Ke$ha also sings.

And it's probably classified as general knowledge.
I'm not sure what Sam's argument is, but I can see why chess could be considered "trash" since it's something people play as a "game" recreationally. I wouldn't argue that it is trash, since chess can be referenced in many important concepts across different disciplines, but I can see why one would yell "trash"! And while its a cool tossup, it seemed pretty transparent.

The only thing I enjoyed about the "pretzels" tossup as a spectator was someone negging it with "candy cane" and the ensuing "who the hell wants to eat a candy cane hamburger?" comment from the peanut gallery.
Thomas Moore
Lancaster Fisher Catholic HS c/o 2014
Ohio Wesleyan University c/o 2018

User avatar
UlyssesInvictus
Yuna
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 7:38 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by UlyssesInvictus » Sun Jun 16, 2013 11:46 pm

Whether or not this set eventually gets posted, can someone post at least the text of this pretzel tossup to satisfy my curiosity? Thanks!
Raynor Kuang
quizdb.org
Harvard 2017, TJHSST 2013
I wrote GRAPHIC and FILM

User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Matt Weiner » Sun Jun 16, 2013 11:52 pm

NASAT has actually had one general knowledge question per every other packet in each year it's been run, but it's been used for nobler purposes in the past such as cross-category academic questions. As the editor of the category, I let the number of trash clues and borderline topics accumulate past where it should have this year. I'm going to recommend either eliminating the category or redefining it as explicitly "multi-category academic questions" in the future.
Matt Weiner
Founder of hsquizbowl.org

User avatar
Kafkaesque
Lulu
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:20 am

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Kafkaesque » Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:28 am

The biology team I consulted on your protest said that the two clues prior to where you buzzed are not true of channel proteins of general and thus it is a wrong answer.
I don't quite understand that reasoning. An aquaporin is a type of channel protein. I buzzed with channel protein, which wasn't quite specific enough (i.e. the answer was a channel protein that transports water exclusively), so I should have been prompted, right? Channel protein wasn't wrong per se; it was just more general than what was wanted.

Oh, I just remembered another sort of strange toss-up. I'm still not quite sure what the answer was, but I buzzed on the DPIP clue (about it changing color due to "this process") with "light reaction of photosynthesis." This apparently was not specific enough, but I couldn't come up with the right answer. Neither could Michigan after the giveaway was read. I didn't know the first clue, though, so I can't be sure that "light reaction of photosynthesis" was correct where I buzzed.
Mason Hale
Loudoun County '14
Harvard '18

User avatar
Rococo A Go Go
Auron
Posts: 2245
Joined: Sat Jan 10, 2009 1:08 am
Location: Louisville, KY

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Rococo A Go Go » Mon Jun 17, 2013 8:00 am

Kafkaesque wrote:It's been around in its modern form for over 500 years, and a vast amount of academic study has been pored into its associated strategy.
I don't like this argument, because you can probably fit this these criteria to other games that you would be fine with excluding from the academic canon, and it wouldn't be right to have a double standard for chess just because a bunch of quizbowlers like to play 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
Dominator
Tidus
Posts: 546
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:16 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Dominator » Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:00 am

blizzard wrote:What category was the rook question considered? Chess is a board game, and therefore I think it deserves to be considered trash, just like asking questions about Monopoly or Sorry or any other board games would be considered trash.
I'd love to see the question. Yes, chess is somehow more academic than the other games because of its history and strategic analysis. That said, unless the question involved the history or strategic analysis, it may have felt "trashy".

I can say that, if it were my tournament, it would have been trash (regardless of how "academic" the clues were), simply because my tournament has a trash category but not GK. That's perhaps the biggest problem with GK: since so few non-NAQT tournaments use it, it's hard to know what it means. This makes a stronger case for Matt's suggestion of a more specific category title.

To be clear, though, I strongly support more questions on things like chess, especially as part of trash distributions, where appropriate.
Dr. Noah Prince

Normal Community High School (2002)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (2004, 2007, 2008)

Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy - Scholastic Bowl coach (2009-2014), assistant coach (2014-2015), well wisher (2015-2016)
guy in San Diego (2016-present)
President of Qblitz (2018-present)

Image

User avatar
Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN)
Chairman of Anti-Music Mafia Committee
Posts: 5640
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 11:46 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN) » Mon Jun 17, 2013 10:17 am

Cheynem wrote:It was "General Knowledge." Chess is a bit more intellectual and academic than those other games, so I'm okay with limited amounts of chess questions, especially in the nebulous "GK" category (this is independent of the actual question's quality, which I can't judge).

I agree that the randomization got weird at times, although I'm skeptical that the S.F. and LA questions needed to be moved per se.
I'm not skeptical about it, because this is a tournament whose entire eligibility is themed around everybody being from the same state. I don't care about a single question being put in a packet that would favor one state, simply because the question has to go somewhere, but having a game (especially in the playoffs) where there are questions about both San Francisco and LA when you know a California team where everybody lives in San Francisco and LA goes into the territory of giving a pretty undue advantage to them. It shouldn't be that hard to sit through and see which questions are about states where teams at this event are from and then make sure they end up in different packets.

I thought the set was pretty great as usual, had a good time moderating, and was unbelievably excited to see the kids on our team pull out the victory, so suck it, quizbowl!
Charlie Dees, North Kansas City HS '08
"I won't say more because I know some of you parse everything I say." - Jeremy Gibbs

"At one TJ tournament the neg prize was the Hampshire College ultimate frisbee team (nude) calender featuring one Evan Silberman. In retrospect that could have been a disaster." - Harry White

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6576
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Cheynem » Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:07 am

I see Charlie's point, particularly in conjunction with it being NASAT--my skepticism was more rooted in my feeling that it didn't seem like the clues (at the point where California buzzed) really seemed to reward regional knowledge, although maybe it did. It's probably something that could have been fixed for a tournament like this--in any other tournament, I think it would have been okay, as Charlie said. My feeling is that the obviously regional questions (geography, current events) should be separated--history seems a little more difficult to gauge--Texas did not get the President of Texas question when I was reading to them, while Missouri did not get the Turnip Day bonus either. That unpredictability aside, it does make some sense to pay more attention to that stuff in randomization, perhaps flagging questions with particular state emphasis early on in the process.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

User avatar
Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN)
Chairman of Anti-Music Mafia Committee
Posts: 5640
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 11:46 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN) » Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:22 am

Well, but like I said, as long as you separate those things to make sure that there aren't more questions about Texas or Missouri in the same packet, we should be all cool.
Charlie Dees, North Kansas City HS '08
"I won't say more because I know some of you parse everything I say." - Jeremy Gibbs

"At one TJ tournament the neg prize was the Hampshire College ultimate frisbee team (nude) calender featuring one Evan Silberman. In retrospect that could have been a disaster." - Harry White

User avatar
Auroni
Auron
Posts: 2999
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:23 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Auroni » Mon Jun 17, 2013 11:39 am

Yeah, there's no question that this set could have benefited from more careful proofreading/packet feng-shuing. We'll just have to finish writing and editing earlier next year.
Auroni Gupta
UIUC
ACF

User avatar
Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN)
Chairman of Anti-Music Mafia Committee
Posts: 5640
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 11:46 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN) » Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:57 pm

Also, I want to give shouts out to Ohio. At a tournament like NASAT I think it takes a lot of skill to really figure out how to select a team that comes together to be more than the sum of its parts, and every year it seems like Ohio does a really good job of combining good, not great players, many of whom you've never really heard of, and getting them to really work well in sync with each other to end up way outperforming what you would expect of them, and outperforming teams with more well-known players on them. This year was no exception, obviously Sam Blizzard is good but Ohio managed to really do a great job of picking other people who filled out the team and were able to upset teams that look better on paper to get into the playoffs. For a tournament like NASAT, being able to get your team to do that is a really great skill and I hope more states can figure out how to do what Ohio does every year, because they sure do a great job every year on that front.
Charlie Dees, North Kansas City HS '08
"I won't say more because I know some of you parse everything I say." - Jeremy Gibbs

"At one TJ tournament the neg prize was the Hampshire College ultimate frisbee team (nude) calender featuring one Evan Silberman. In retrospect that could have been a disaster." - Harry White

Banana Stand
Wakka
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 4:38 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Banana Stand » Mon Jun 17, 2013 2:40 pm

In NJ's game against Missouri, there was a current events tossup on New Jersey and a geography tossup on St. Louis, which was a welcome coincidence.
Jack Mehr
St. Joe's NJ '14
UVA '19

User avatar
Auroni
Auron
Posts: 2999
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:23 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Auroni » Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:14 pm

Banana Stand wrote:In NJ's game against Missouri, there was a current events tossup on New Jersey and a geography tossup on St. Louis, which was a welcome coincidence.
The St. Louis tossup was actually architecture.
Auroni Gupta
UIUC
ACF

Banana Stand
Wakka
Posts: 147
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 4:38 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Banana Stand » Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:17 pm

My mistake, I vaguely remember a clue or two that could've probably been construed as geo, but it was mainly focused on architecture.
Jack Mehr
St. Joe's NJ '14
UVA '19

User avatar
Euler's Constant
Lulu
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Dec 30, 2011 6:58 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Euler's Constant » Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:27 pm

I really enjoyed this set, especially the math. Whoever wrote the bonus with the Chinese Remainder Theorem and quotient parts, even though I managed to screw those up, thank you.

Also could someone post the Veronese painting toss-up (I think it was the wedding at cana) from round 8, and the polynomial question from round 9? Thanks.
Nicholas Wawrykow
Saint Joseph('s) High School (IN) '13
Yale '17

User avatar
Auroni
Auron
Posts: 2999
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:23 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Auroni » Mon Jun 17, 2013 3:49 pm

In the bottom-right of this painting, a cat is doing a barrel roll to scratch at a scary-looking mask on a stone jar. Doric columns in the buildings framing this painting's lower level contrast with the Corinthian columns on the upper level. The presence of a servant butchering a lamb in this painting refers to the sacrifice of the "lamb of god." In the foreground of this painting, two dogs are tied together in front of a string quartet consisting of the artist and three other Venetian painters. Suleiman the Magnificent and Francis I of France are among the diners in this painting, which features a dwarf with a parrot. For 10 points, name this Paolo Veronese painting of the feast where Jesus turned water into wine.
ANSWER: <i>_Wedding at Cana_</i> [or <i>_Marriage at Cana_</i>; or <i>_Wedding Feast at Cana_</i>]

If a ring is Noetherian, this type of ring over the original is also Noetherian by the Hilbert basis theorem. A splitting field is the smallest field extension for which a given one of these decomposes into linear factors. The complex numbers are algebraically closed because these functions are always zero at least one point in that field. Synthetic division is applied to these functions. No general solution exists for certain types of these functions by Abel's impossibility theorem. Descartes' rule of signs shows how many positive or negative roots one of these can have. For 10 points, name these functions consisting of variables raised to integer powers.
ANSWER: _polynomial_ [prompt on _rational_ function]
Auroni Gupta
UIUC
ACF

User avatar
Ben Dillon
Rikku
Posts: 274
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 10:47 pm
Location: South Bend, IN
Contact:

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Ben Dillon » Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:12 pm

Kenneth Widmerpool wrote:If a ring is Noetherian, this type of ring over the original is also Noetherian by the Hilbert basis theorem. A splitting field is the smallest field extension for which a given one of these decomposes into linear factors. The complex numbers are algebraically closed because these functions are always zero at least one point in that field. Synthetic division is applied to these functions. No general solution exists for certain types of these functions by Abel's impossibility theorem. Descartes' rule of signs shows how many positive or negative roots one of these can have. For 10 points, name these functions consisting of variables raised to integer powers.
ANSWER: _polynomial_ [prompt on _rational_ function]
Rational function shouldn't be prompted. f(x) = 1/x is rational, but it isn't a polynomial, and it fails Clue #3 about closure because it never equals zero. Maybe it's promptable earlier?
Ben Dillon, Saint Joseph HS

"Why, sometimes I've believed as many as
six impossible things before breakfast!"

jonah
Auron
Posts: 2301
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by jonah » Mon Jun 17, 2013 4:17 pm

Ben Dillon wrote:
Kenneth Widmerpool wrote:If a ring is Noetherian, this type of ring over the original is also Noetherian by the Hilbert basis theorem. A splitting field is the smallest field extension for which a given one of these decomposes into linear factors. The complex numbers are algebraically closed because these functions are always zero at least one point in that field. Synthetic division is applied to these functions. No general solution exists for certain types of these functions by Abel's impossibility theorem. Descartes' rule of signs shows how many positive or negative roots one of these can have. For 10 points, name these functions consisting of variables raised to integer powers.
ANSWER: _polynomial_ [prompt on _rational_ function]
Rational function shouldn't be prompted. f(x) = 1/x is rational, but it isn't a polynomial, and it fails Clue #3 about closure because it never equals zero. Maybe it's promptable earlier?
I don't think it's correct to prompt on "rational function" at any point of this question.
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

mithokie
Rikku
Posts: 314
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2006 2:39 pm
Location: Blacksburg, VA

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by mithokie » Mon Jun 17, 2013 5:26 pm

I thought that maybe the rational function prompt was placed there for the synthetic division clue. The prompt doesn't apply elsewhere, but maybe it's a prompt for generosity's sake???
Matt Beeken
Blacksburg High School
Math and Physics Teacher
(2012-??)ACE Coach, Blacksburg HS
(2010-12) ACE CO-Coach, Blacksburg HS
(2011-12) Science MACC Coach, Blacksburg HS
Volunteer Assistant (2009-2010) ACE Coach, Blacksburg HS
mbeeken AT mcps DOT org

User avatar
geowzrd
Lulu
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 5:30 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by geowzrd » Mon Jun 17, 2013 5:30 pm

Good tournament overall and thanks to all the writers and staffers.
Was the McDonalds tossup supposed to social science, history or general knowledge?
Also I feel that first clue on Profumo affair was practically identical to an old NHB question.
Christopher Miller
Woodgrove '13
William and Mary '17

User avatar
The Ununtiable Twine
Yuna
Posts: 999
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:09 pm
Location: Lafayette, LA

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by The Ununtiable Twine » Mon Jun 17, 2013 6:33 pm

Ben Dillon wrote:
Kenneth Widmerpool wrote:If a ring is Noetherian, this type of ring over the original is also Noetherian by the Hilbert basis theorem. A splitting field is the smallest field extension for which a given one of these decomposes into linear factors. The complex numbers are algebraically closed because these functions are always zero at least one point in that field. Synthetic division is applied to these functions. No general solution exists for certain types of these functions by Abel's impossibility theorem. Descartes' rule of signs shows how many positive or negative roots one of these can have. For 10 points, name these functions consisting of variables raised to integer powers.
ANSWER: _polynomial_ [prompt on _rational_ function]
Rational function shouldn't be prompted. f(x) = 1/x is rational, but it isn't a polynomial, and it fails Clue #3 about closure because it never equals zero. Maybe it's promptable earlier?
It's not.
Jake Sundberg
Louisiana '04-'10, '14-'16, '18-'xx
Alabama '10-14
President, University of Louisiana at Lafayette Club for Academic Competition

User avatar
Sam
Rikku
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 2:35 am

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Sam » Mon Jun 17, 2013 7:17 pm

mithokie wrote:I thought that maybe the rational function prompt was placed there for the synthetic division clue. The prompt doesn't apply elsewhere, but maybe it's a prompt for generosity's sake???
This is basically the reasoning. Synthetic division seemed a place where many teams would buzz, and I couldn't imagine a situation where people would buzz anywhere else with "rational function" before that. In retrospect, of course, I should have just used a different clue. Sorry if this affected actual gameplay; did it?
Sam Bailey
Minnesota 'xx
Chicago '13

User avatar
Cody
2008-09 Male Athlete of the Year
Posts: 2301
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:57 am
Location: Richmond

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Cody » Tue Jun 18, 2013 8:27 am

A polynomial is a rational function. There's nothing wrong with being generous on prompts, even if none of the clues in the question strictly apply (although in this case, it does apply to at least one clue, which is a very good reason to prompt!). I'm skeptical that there is any point in discussing this facet of the question.
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
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6576
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Cheynem » Tue Jun 18, 2013 9:37 am

I wrote both McDonald's and Profumo--I think the McDonald's one was general knowledge. I don't know about the Profumo lead-in thing; I was unfamiliar with the lead-in (about Profumo becoming a janitor in his later years), but maybe it got used before.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

User avatar
abnormal abdomen
Rikku
Posts: 346
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by abnormal abdomen » Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:08 pm

So how did the tossup on "doors of the Florence Baptistery" play out?
Abid Haseeb
Auburn High School '12
Brown University '16
Writer, HSAPQ
Writer, NAQT

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6576
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Cheynem » Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:13 pm

In my room, someone said "The Gates of Paradise," which prompted a protest.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

jonah
Auron
Posts: 2301
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by jonah » Tue Jun 18, 2013 12:44 pm

SirT wrote:A polynomial is a rational function. There's nothing wrong with being generous on prompts, even if none of the clues in the question strictly apply (although in this case, it does apply to at least one clue, which is a very good reason to prompt!). I'm skeptical that there is any point in discussing this facet of the question.
Prompt on all of the following that polynomials are:
  • relations
  • map(ping)s
  • functions
  • continuous functions
  • (everywhere)-(differentiable | analytic | holomorphic | conformal) functions
  • elementary functions
  • (Riemann, etc.-)integrable functions
I could probably come up with a dozen more, but these are very silly prompts, which is basically my point: saying them doesn't indicate much if any knowledge about what the question is asking.
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
Cody
2008-09 Male Athlete of the Year
Posts: 2301
Joined: Sun Nov 15, 2009 12:57 am
Location: Richmond

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Cody » Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:24 pm

The whole idea behind generosity on prompts is to choose something people are likely to say. People are not likely to say any of the things you listed for any of the clues. People are likely to say "rational functions" for a variety of reasons, including the fact that one of the clues specifically applies to rational functions. I will repeat that this is not worth discussing at all and there are far more useful critiques to be had.
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
Auroni
Auron
Posts: 2999
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:23 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Auroni » Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:30 pm

Kafkaesque wrote:I don't quite understand that reasoning. An aquaporin is a type of channel protein. I buzzed with channel protein, which wasn't quite specific enough (i.e. the answer was a channel protein that transports water exclusively), so I should have been prompted, right? Channel protein wasn't wrong per se; it was just more general than what was wanted.
While that's true, also keep in mind that "channel protein" is a really broad kind of answer encompassing lots of different substances, many of which are completely unlike aquaporins (such as voltage-gated sodium channels, for instance). I envision your buzz as someone ringing in to say "subatomic particles" for a tossup on quarks.
Auroni Gupta
UIUC
ACF

User avatar
The Ununtiable Twine
Yuna
Posts: 999
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 11:09 pm
Location: Lafayette, LA

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by The Ununtiable Twine » Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:36 pm

Ambiguous synthetic division clue is ambiguous. Just write uniquely identifying clues and we can all be happy. Something like "rational functions are functions where both the numerator and denominator are these types of functions." That and the fact that things like f(x) = 1/x are not polynomials.

[f(x) = 1/x is a "Laurent polynomial" (which is very different algebraically speaking!!!). More general rational functions like q(x) = 1/(x^2+1) are not. Our general polynomial rings do not include the inverse as a variable unless specified. For instance, Z[x, x^-1], the polynomial ring over the integers where input is either x or x^-1, is used in the study of Alexander polynomials.]

No, the Hilbert Basis theorem does not work for rational functions in that sense except for the trivial one [p(x)/q(x) where q(x) = 1, q(x) =/= 0] but no one would ever buzz there with "rational function" - by the way you also have to accept "multivariable polynomial" in the first line because we are not required to have a polynomial in one variable. [I wouldn't expect a high school student to come up with that answer but hey you never know.] It works in the setting of multivariable polynomials over Noetherian rings - rings that satisfy the max condition (which was notably not invented to appease Max Schindler) on chains of ideals - that's it.

*Note: polynomials with rational coefficients and rational functions are different things. I don't blame any of you for thinking this (and hence don't blame anyone who would buzz with that) but instead I blame textbook writers for their use of bad jargon.
Jake Sundberg
Louisiana '04-'10, '14-'16, '18-'xx
Alabama '10-14
President, University of Louisiana at Lafayette Club for Academic Competition

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5686
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by theMoMA » Tue Jun 18, 2013 1:53 pm

The Ununtiable Twine wrote:Ambiguous synthetic division clue is ambiguous. Just write uniquely identifying clues and we can all be happy. Something like "rational functions are functions where both the numerator and denominator are these types of functions." That and the fact that things like f(x) = 1/x are not polynomials.
In general, it seems like a really good idea for people to write their questions to clarify the relationship between likely-to-be-said answers and the actual answer in the question text, as Jake suggests here, instead of simply throwing a prompt in the answer line, especially when the prompt might not be accurate for all of the clues. Of course, this should be done in a way that's actually intuitive and empathetic to the player (instead of just throwing in a hard-to-parse technicality that makes one answer right and one answer wrong).
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

jonah
Auron
Posts: 2301
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by jonah » Tue Jun 18, 2013 2:24 pm

theMoMA wrote:
The Ununtiable Twine wrote:Ambiguous synthetic division clue is ambiguous. Just write uniquely identifying clues and we can all be happy. Something like "rational functions are functions where both the numerator and denominator are these types of functions." That and the fact that things like f(x) = 1/x are not polynomials.
In general, it seems like a really good idea for people to write their questions to clarify the relationship between likely-to-be-said answers and the actual answer in the question text, as Jake suggests here, instead of simply throwing a prompt in the answer line, especially when the prompt might not be accurate for all of the clues. Of course, this should be done in a way that's actually intuitive and empathetic to the player (instead of just throwing in a hard-to-parse technicality that makes one answer right and one answer wrong).
I agree. Prompting on "rational function(s)" makes sense for the synthetic division clue but not any of the others; the best solution, in my strong opinion, is to not use that clue in this context, at least not without a clarification like Jake suggests (which does not have the problem Andrew mentions of being hard to parse or overly nitpicky).
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
Kafkaesque
Lulu
Posts: 42
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2013 12:20 am

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Kafkaesque » Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:46 pm

While that's true, also keep in mind that "channel protein" is a really broad kind of answer encompassing lots of different substances, many of which are completely unlike aquaporins (such as voltage-gated sodium channels, for instance). I envision your buzz as someone ringing in to say "subatomic particles" for a tossup on quarks.
I suppose the specificity of my answer is up for debate. I think of it more as someone buzzing with "paintings of Pablo Picasso" on that Picasso Rose Period toss-up, a situation that would clearly warrant a prompt. (And if "rational functions" was prompted because a single clue in the question pertained to it, then "channel protein" should certainly have been prompted.)

Another note: the mutations toss-up was uncharacteristically easy for this tournament. Easy might not be the right word, though--transparent maybe? I didn't know all of the early clues, but "mutation" was what kept coming to mind because of the phrasing of the question.
Mason Hale
Loudoun County '14
Harvard '18

User avatar
bmanzo44
Lulu
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 9:31 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by bmanzo44 » Tue Jun 18, 2013 4:55 pm

I didn't play this tournament but I'm a huge classical music fan - could I possibly see the aforementioned LA Philharmonic tossup?
Thanks
Brian Manzo
North Babylon High School '13
Notre Dame '17

User avatar
ProfessorIanDuncan
Wakka
Posts: 195
Joined: Tue Dec 20, 2011 10:37 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by ProfessorIanDuncan » Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:04 pm

Another note: the mutations toss-up was uncharacteristically easy for this tournament. Easy might not be the right word, though--transparent maybe? I didn't know all of the early clues, but "mutation" was what kept coming to mind because of the phrasing of the question.
You want transparent? How about that Guinevere tossup?
Alec Vulfson
Irvington High School '13

Urech hydantoin synthesis
Tidus
Posts: 523
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:35 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Urech hydantoin synthesis » Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:18 pm

ProfessorIanDuncan wrote:
Another note: the mutations toss-up was uncharacteristically easy for this tournament. Easy might not be the right word, though--transparent maybe? I didn't know all of the early clues, but "mutation" was what kept coming to mind because of the phrasing of the question.
You want transparent? How about that Guinevere tossup?
There was a tossup on Guinevere?
Ben Zhang

Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra/Northwell '23
Columbia University '18
Ladue Horton Watkins HS '14

User avatar
Auroni
Auron
Posts: 2999
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:23 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by Auroni » Tue Jun 18, 2013 5:22 pm

bmanzo44 wrote:I didn't play this tournament but I'm a huge classical music fan - could I possibly see the aforementioned LA Philharmonic tossup?
Thanks
One director of this orchestra produced a saxophone concerto titled from a quote from Kafka's <i>The Trial</i>. In 1961, George Solti was succeeded as its music director by Zubin Mehta, who became renowned for being the youngest leader of an American orchestra. A more recent director of this orchestra championed the works of Igor Stravinsky, who spent thirty years in this orchestra's city. In 2009, this orchestra's leader Esa-Pekka Salonen passed the baton to the young Venezuelan-born violinist Gustavo Dudamel. This orchestra plays inside an intense glare-producing stainless steel-coated structure designed by Frank Gehry. For 10 points, name this orchestra which relocated to the Walt Disney Concert Hall from its former home, the Hollywood Bowl.
ANSWER: _Los Angeles Philharmonic_ [or _LA Phil_harmonic]
Auroni Gupta
UIUC
ACF

User avatar
vinteuil
Auron
Posts: 1347
Joined: Sun Oct 23, 2011 12:31 pm

Re: 2013 NASAT Set & Tournament Discussion

Post by vinteuil » Tue Jun 18, 2013 6:04 pm

NASAT 2013 wrote:One director of this orchestra produced a saxophone concerto titled from a quote from Kafka's The Trial. In 1961, George Solti was succeeded as its music director by Zubin Mehta, who became renowned for being the youngest leader of an American orchestra. A more recent director of this orchestra championed the works of Igor Stravinsky, who spent thirty years in this orchestra's city. In 2009, this orchestra's leader Esa-Pekka Salonen passed the baton to the young Venezuelan-born violinist Gustavo Dudamel. This orchestra plays inside an intense glare-producing stainless steel-coated structure designed by Frank Gehry. For 10 points, name this orchestra which relocated to the Walt Disney Concert Hall from its former home, the Hollywood Bowl.
ANSWER: _Los Angeles Philharmonic_ [or _LA Phil_harmonic]
I feel like this first clue is a bit ridiculous, considering that Salonen is heading the Philharmonia (an equally famous/good ensemble) right now and auf den ersten blick was written long before he was in LA—the only argument that this clue excludes "Philharmonia Orchestra" is that his job title doesn't include the word "director" (I admit that I had to look that up just now) and that's not a particularly strong exclusion, at least in my opinion. Why wasn't the clue written about the LA Variations, which is still kind of famous (let's face it—no composition by Esa-Pekka Salonen is famous famous), and points directly to the LA Phil?

Also, I guess I feel like the Stravinsky clue is pretty vague until "this orchestra's city" (I'm not even completely sure which music director this is referring to, because nobody associated with the LA Phil is especially known for "championing" Stravinsky in particular, although I get the logic behind including the fact that Stravinsky lived in LA).

I understand that it's really hard to write a question on an orchestra (especially early and middle clues), because directors move around (and, as this question points out, even people very strongly associated with one orchestra, like Solti/Chicago, worked with others), and "style clues" (e.g. Chicago being known for having strong principals and weaker back desks) are somewhat subjective and vague—and this question shows these problems off admirably.

</rant>
Jacob Reed
Chicago ~'25
Yale '17, '19
East Chapel Hill '13
"...distant bayings from...the musicological mafia"―Denis Stevens

Locked