2006 NAQT HSNCT

Dormant threads from the high school sections are preserved here.
rhentzel
Rikku
Posts: 264
Joined: Thu May 15, 2003 4:20 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Contact:

16th/17th Amendment

Post by rhentzel »

Matt Morrison wrote:Oh yea, what was the deal with that income tax amendment bonus that erroneously had "17th amendment" as the answer? I hope that gets changed for any future copies of the nationals set that are sold. Also, hopefully that didn't affect the outcome of any games...
A mistake; it should have been caught but wasn't.

In theory, it shouldn't have affected any games...if there ever were a clear-cut case of protest resolution, it would be that one.

That's not an excuse, of course. To have as basic an error as that appears in a nationals set is embarrassing for NAQT as a whole. But it's why we allow unlimited protests and will resolve any issue that affects the outcome of a game.

-- R. Robert Hentzel
President and Chief Technical Officer,
National Academic Quiz Tournaments, LLC

User avatar
Captain Sinico
Auron
Posts: 2843
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: Champaign, Illinois

Re: The 16th Amendment and Fusion power

Post by Captain Sinico »

rhentzel wrote:
The Lawson criterion for this type of device is the product of the confinement time and ion density necessary to achieve ignition, although multiplying by the plasma temperature is more accurate for tokamaks. Overcoming the Coulomb barrier between two (*) nuclei and dealing with bremsstrahlung radiation formed by the plasma are the two main difficulties in--for 10 points--what source of power contrasted with fission?

answer: nuclear _fusion reactor_
I am not NAQT's science editor, but I believe this is uniquely specifying from "Lawson criterion" onward. I think "fission" is completely wrong at any point in the question and am somewhat surprised that there was even a discussion about it. At "type of device," it should be clear that we are looking for some sort of physical object rather than a process or concept.
A few things on this one:
1. A fusion reactor can't really be validly "contrasted with fission" as, as you say, one is an object whereas the other is a process. Confusion could result from that clue as it contradicts the earlier clues (which, incidentally, do uniquely specify a fusion reactor; that's the only thing the Lawson criterion applies to.)
2. The Lawson criterion is not "the product of the confinement time and ion density necessary to achieve ignition." It is an inequality involving the product of the mean ion density and energy confinement time. Specifically, it is the inequality such that, for a given mean ion temperature and set of conversion efficiencies, a reactor having a density-confinement time product satisfying it achieves energy breakeven (not ignition as a certain source claims... though this same source does correctly state that the criterion is an inequality, not an expression.)
3. "...multiplying by the plasma temperature is more accurate for tokamaks" doesn't even make sense. The product of the mean ion density, energy confinement time, and mean ion temperature is a useful figure of merit for magnetic fusion devices, but it's not unqualifiedly more or less accurate than anything else. I think you're trying to say that it's a better measure of the extent of energy return than the density-confinement time product that appears in the Lawson criterion. That's actually not the case (in spite of what a certain source claims.)
In short, this one seemed sloppily written and poorly researched to me.

MaS
Last edited by Captain Sinico on Wed Jun 14, 2006 10:37 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
quizbowllee
Auron
Posts: 2170
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 2:12 am
Location: Alabama

Re: The 16th Amendment and Fusion power

Post by quizbowllee »

ImmaculateDeception wrote:
A few things on this one:
1. A fusion reactor can't really be validly "contrasted with fission" as, as you say, one is an object whereas the other is a process. Confusion could result from that clue as it contradicts the earlier clues (which, incidentally, do uniquely specify a fusion reactor; that's the only thing the Lawson criterion applies to.)
2. The Lawson criterion is not, however, "the product of the confinement time and ion density"; it's an inequality involving the product of the mean ion density and energy confinement time.
3. "...multiplying by the plasma temperature is more accurate for tokamaks" doesn't even make sense. The product of the mean ion density, energy confinement time, and mean ion temperature is a figure of merit for magnetic fusion devices, but it's not unqualifiedly more or less accurate than anything else. I think you're trying to say that it's a better measure of the extent of energy return than the density-confinement time product that appears in the Lawson criterion. That's actually not the case.
In short, this one seemed sloppily written and poorly researched to me.

MaS
Wow... I actually did not understand a single word of that. I'm just a dumb ole' lit guy... :wink:

But seriously, on that tossup, the team we were playing answered with "fusion" before the power mark, wasn't prompted, and was given 15 points. I thought it was wrong, because I knew that the mod had said "device," but I'm kinda ignorant when it comes to science, so I didn't protest. I wish I had now...



Also, to R., I apologize for calling out the "Bride and Predjudice" tossup. I'll concede that it wasn't really a hose. Also, I'll concede that my team is notorious for not paying attention. I'll even go so far as to apologize for referring to it as a "steaming pile of excrement." But, seriously, I HATED that tossup. I'd have hated it just as much if we'd powered it. It just stuck out so much in a tournament so full of great questions. If you're gonna ask about a movie, why a cheesy straight-to-video Bollywood adaptation of a great work of literature? Why not just ask about Pride and Prejudice? It's been over-done, sure, but so has every TS Eliot question on earth. <Please note that, although it is hard to gauge mood and intent in a forum, I meant this in a good-natured jolly sort of way (even though I still hated the tossup)>

Seriously, though, I thought the set overall was great. We heard well over 300 tossups over the course of the weekend, and that was the only one that I really hated. But - and I can't stress this enough - I REALLY hated it.

:grin: :grin: :grin: :grin:
Lee Henry
AP English Teacher
Quiz Bowl Coach
West Point High School
Cullman, AL

User avatar
Captain Sinico
Auron
Posts: 2843
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: Champaign, Illinois

Post by Captain Sinico »

Is "this question's clues were drastically wrong in a number of ways" simple enough?

MaS

User avatar
quizbowllee
Auron
Posts: 2170
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 2:12 am
Location: Alabama

Post by quizbowllee »

ImmaculateDeception wrote:Is "this question's clues were drastically wrong in a number of ways" simple enough?

MaS
Gotcha. Thanks.
Lee Henry
AP English Teacher
Quiz Bowl Coach
West Point High School
Cullman, AL

User avatar
Irreligion in Bangladesh
Auron
Posts: 2081
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:18 am
Location: Winnebago, IL

Post by Irreligion in Bangladesh »

Out of random curiosity, I've got 22 rounds of Saturday preliminaries from the last two years of HSNCT, plus more than a dozen rounds of this year's ICT, all moderated by the same person who hasn't (to my knowledge) revealed his name. Who is the moderator for practically every podcast?

User avatar
cdbarker
Lulu
Posts: 93
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2003 1:17 pm
Location: Milan, MI

Post by cdbarker »

styxman wrote:Out of random curiosity, I've got 22 rounds of Saturday preliminaries from the last two years of HSNCT, plus more than a dozen rounds of this year's ICT, all moderated by the same person who hasn't (to my knowledge) revealed his name. Who is the moderator for practically every podcast?
That would be NAQT's own Dwight Kidder. You would think once Dwight would have introduced himself, but apparently not.

User avatar
btressler
Tidus
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:23 pm
Location: West Chester, PA
Contact:

Re: The 16th Amendment and Fusion power

Post by btressler »

quizbowllee wrote:But seriously, on that tossup, the team we were playing answered with "fusion" before the power mark, wasn't prompted, and was given 15 points. I thought it was wrong, because I knew that the mod had said "device," but I'm kinda ignorant when it comes to science, so I didn't protest. I wish I had now...
Don't convice yourself it would do any good.

An opponent of ours was given credit for "Conferate States of America" (a country) after hearing "this legislative body", which sought the Conferderate congress. My protest was denied unanimously by five judges.

If "this body" doesn't force congress into the answer, why would "this device" force a player to say reactor?

User avatar
solonqb
Tidus
Posts: 634
Joined: Mon Jun 16, 2003 11:00 am
Location: Pasadena, CA
Contact:

Post by solonqb »

As the author of the offending fusion question, I apologize for anything that resulted from this. In fact, I may have been the moderator responsible for giving 15 points, because I saw the contradiction in the question, but should have realized that the uniquely identifying device clue earlier trumped the end. (When this question came up, I went to the stat room and told them what I had done, and they did not object) The question should have ended possibly with some clue about ITER, but I'm not sure if I originally wrote the "contrasting with fission" part. I may have.

As to the errors in the question, I did attempt to confirm with sources other than wikipedia. I believe the inequality/product distinction, while true, not a gigantic mistake. A criterion by its nature implies some sort of threshold value which the product is to reach. And as to the fusion temperature, numerous sources mention the triple product as a measure of merit for tokamaks. I assumed that it was a more accurate measurement than simply the Lawson product. If I'm wrong as you say, I stand correted and defer to your expertise.

For the ignition definition, here was the source I used.

http://fusedweb.pppl.gov/FAQ/section1-physics.txt

(Lawrence Livermore National Labs I figured would be reputable enough)
Fusion Physics FAQ wrote: L. Just how hot and confined do these plasmas need to be?
(Or, what conditions are needed for controlled fusion?)

Basically, the hotter your plasma, the more fusion you will have,
because the more ions will be flying around fast enough to stick
together. (Although actually you can go *too* fast, and the atoms
then start to whiz by too quickly, and don't stick together long
enough to fuse properly. This limit is not usually achieved in
practice.) The more dense your plasma is, the more ions there are
in a small space, and the more collisions you are likely to have.
Finally, the longer you can keep your plasma hot, the more likely
it is that something will fuse, so duration is important too. More
importantly, the slower your plasma loses energy, the more likely
it is that it will be able to sustain its temperature from internal
fusion reactions, and "ignite." The ratio of fusion energy
production to plasma energy loss is what really counts here.

Hotness is measured by temperature, and as explained above, the
D-T fuel cycle (the easiest) requires temperatures of about 10 keV,
or 100,000,000 degrees kelvin. Density is typically measured in
particles-per-cubic centimeter or particles-per-cubic meter.
The required density depends on the confinement duration.

The Lawson product, defined as (density)*(confinement time) is a
key measure of plasma confinement, and determines what
combinations of density and energy confinement will give you
fusion at a given temperature. It is important to note that
what you must confine is the *energy* (thermal energy) stored
in the plasma, and not necessarily the plasma particles.

There's a lot of subtlety here; for instance, you want to
confine your fuel ions as well as their energy, so that they
stick around and fuse, but you *don't* want to confine the
"ash" from the reactions, because the ash needs to get out
of the reactor... But you'd like to get the *energy*
out of the ash to keep your fuel hot so it will fuse better!
(And it gets even more complicated than that!)

Regardless, it's true that for a special value of the Lawson
product, the fusion power produced in your plasma will just
balance the energy losses as energy in the plasma becomes
unconfined, and *ignition* occurs. That is, as long as
the plasma fuel stays around, the plasma will keep itself
hot enough to keep fusing.
In conclusion, the ending of the question deserves scorn, but I attempted to verify the other clues with numerous non-wikipedia sources.
Noah Rahman
Welcome to Simbabwe, where the property is already owned and the houses built and you compete to burn and dispossess them. Compete with Robert Mugabe, Canaan Banana, Cecil Rhodes and Sir Godfrey Huggins to earn a place on the all-time EU travel ban list!

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15338
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Post by AKKOLADE »

R. Rob - could you share the rest of the distribution split? I've always been curious as to what the percentage split was, and I believe I'm not the only one curious about this information.

User avatar
Captain Sinico
Auron
Posts: 2843
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: Champaign, Illinois

Post by Captain Sinico »

Hey,
Okay, cool; I can appreciate that you tried and made a mistake. It happens. That said, that's not what I'd consider a very good source, either (a decade-old informal fusion FAQ from the PPPL) and you also didn't read it very carefully. What the FAQ says is that there's a value for the n-tau product (Lawson product, as it calls it) at which ignition will occur. That's exactly true. However, the Lawson criterion doesn't give the value of the Lawson product required for ignition; it gives the value required for breakeven. This is also tied-in with your conflation of the Lawson product and Lawson criterion. The distinction between breakeven and ignition is an important one (for example, an ignited plasma doesn't require any power input anymore and ITER will be capable of breakeven but not ignition.) Sorry to bust your chops on this, but I think it's important to get it right since I hope you'll keep writing stuff like this one could have been.

MaS

User avatar
Kechara
Wakka
Posts: 162
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2003 1:28 am
Location: Atlanta, GA
Contact:

Re: Crossover giveaway clues

Post by Kechara »

rhentzel wrote: NAQT doesn't use crossover/pun/"sounds like" giveaways unless we've already given the easiest clues that we know for the answer and still think that the tossup won't achieve the 85% answerability level that we try to use as a standard. If you look at the questions to whose giveaways you object you'll (hopefully) see that there really weren't any easier clues that could have been used instead to bring up the answerability. If you do see such clues, please sign up as a writer...we always need more people writing accessible questions.

NAQT is trying to balance the competing goals of a broad answerspace that expands even more at the nationals level with our desire to have most tossups (85%) answered. Going with harder, less-common answers reduces the rate at which they are answered. We choose to take some questions that might only be answered, say, 70% of the time, and include them with crossover clues rather than restricting ourselves to workhorse answers from the high school canon that we know will hit the 85% mark.
One thing that I'm curious about is what percentage of bonus parts that are heard you want to be answered. I realize that this is somewhat of a difficult question since y'all don't use bouncebacks, and so there are four people per room that you are asking each question to and not eight. Still, it seems to me that the third part of a bonus can be a good place to introduce new material into the canon because a team can learn new material from hearing the clues while still scoring 20 points on the bonus, 30 if they have deep enough knowledge of the area to know things that are not in the canon for high school.

Disclaimer: I realize that this idea does not work for subjects that need long explanations in order for someone to have any idea what you're talking about!
Jessie Francis

User avatar
Mechanical Beasts
Banned Cheater
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:50 pm

Re: The 16th Amendment and Fusion power

Post by Mechanical Beasts »

Stat74 wrote:Don't convice yourself it would do any good.

An opponent of ours was given credit for "Conferate States of America" (a country) after hearing "this legislative body", which sought the Conferderate congress. My protest was denied unanimously by five judges.

If "this body" doesn't force congress into the answer, why would "this device" force a player to say reactor?
Though, obviously, I had a vested interest in having my answer upheld, I genuinely think I was in the right there.

I did initially say CSA, then took a breath and said "Congress," without being prompted for any sort of clarification. That's clear-knowledge equivalence if I've ever seen it.

Really, I think that once it says "this source of power, often contrasted with fission" then fusion should be perfectly acceptable. Similarly, once it says "this legislative body" my response was equivalent to saying "that of the CSA." And I clearly showed that I had heard the question in its entirety by following up with "Congress" and even an extra "Congress of the CSA" to boot. Panic does that to me. If I hadn't run out of breath, I'd have given the answer a third or fourth time.

Perhaps I'm a bit loose with what my moderation style would be, but if a response is a clear-knowledge equivalent to what's underlined, then I think we're good to go. Did you actually doubt that I knew what I meant to say, especially after I got out what I meant to say?

One way or another, I'd have wished that whole fiasco hadn't happened in a match between us, because I greatly respect your school and you played some awesome quiz bowl that round.

User avatar
Mike Bentley
Auron
Posts: 5941
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:03 pm
Location: Bellevue, WA
Contact:

Post by Mike Bentley »

Did the Podcast get updated since April? I think maybe I'm on a seperate feed that is not being updated.

User avatar
btressler
Tidus
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:23 pm
Location: West Chester, PA
Contact:

Re: The 16th Amendment and Fusion power

Post by btressler »

everyday847 wrote:Really, I think that once it says "this source of power, often contrasted with fission" then fusion should be perfectly acceptable. Similarly, once it says "this legislative body" my response was equivalent to saying "that of the CSA."
I had little doubt that you knew the correct answer, my point is either the "this whatever" statements are binding or they are not. R already said above that "fusion" should not be OK because a device is sought and not a concept or process. We can't have it both ways.

bigtrain
Rikku
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:33 pm
Location: Bethesda, Maryland-Atlanta, Georgia
Contact:

Post by bigtrain »

I thought I'd add a comment to this thread that I don't think anyone has brought up (although I havn't bothered to read through all 6 pages).

Why were there almost verbatim repeats of Division 2 ICT questions. After hearing the ICT podcasts I recognized the following repeats:
Lolita
Great Dismal Swamp (THIS WAS IN THE HS NCT FINALS!!)
"Type 2"
I'm sure there were more that I didn't catch. It was a bit ridiculous to put the Great Dismal Swamp question in the finals. I would assume the highest quality teams would take the time before the HSNCT to listen to division 2 college questions. Maybe answer repeats are acceptable, but I don't think reusing the same clues is acceptable when the tournaments were less than 2 months apart.
Sorry for interupting whatever argument is currently going on in this thread.
Alex Price
Walter Johnson 2006
Emory University 2010

User avatar
Howard
Yuna
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 5:42 pm
Location: Ellicott City, MD

Post by Howard »

While they haven't publicized it, NAQT has made it no secret that there's overlap between DIV II and IS sets (as well as between DIV I and DIV II).
John Gilbert
Coach, Howard High School Academic Team
Ellicott City, MD

"John Gilbert is a quiz bowl god" -- leftsaidfred

NotBhan
Rikku
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 12:30 pm
Location: Parts Unknown

Post by NotBhan »

Howard wrote:While they haven't publicized it, NAQT has made it no secret that there's overlap between DIV II and IS sets (as well as between DIV I and DIV II).
Do you mean D2 and HSNCT? I'm only guessing, but I wouldn't think there'd be overlap between a collegiate D2 SCT set and an IS set.

--Raj Dhuwalia, not speaking for anyone, etc.
"Keep it civil, please." -- Matt Weiner, 6/7/05

User avatar
Howard
Yuna
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 5:42 pm
Location: Ellicott City, MD

Post by Howard »

I'm a high school coach and have read at several collegiate events. I believe SCT was one of them, and I seem to recall there as overlap between IS-58 and 2006 SCT DIV II.

Further, when reading for div II, I noted that the best high school teams could be competitive on these questions.
John Gilbert
Coach, Howard High School Academic Team
Ellicott City, MD

"John Gilbert is a quiz bowl god" -- leftsaidfred

bigtrain
Rikku
Posts: 485
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2004 8:33 pm
Location: Bethesda, Maryland-Atlanta, Georgia
Contact:

Post by bigtrain »

I'm not at all complaining about the difficulty, just the fact that they put these questions online in the podcasts a few weeks before the HSNCT. Another repeat that comes to mind was Yom Kippur.
Alex Price
Walter Johnson 2006
Emory University 2010

jbarnes112358
Tidus
Posts: 664
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 5:58 am
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by jbarnes112358 »

bigtrain wrote:I'm not at all complaining about the difficulty, just the fact that they put these questions online in the podcasts a few weeks before the HSNCT. Another repeat that comes to mind was Yom Kippur.
I agree. I wonder if any players who attended HSNST heard any of these questions. Were there any warnings not to listen if attending HSNST?
A warning might have helped. But, then again, a warning would be like an invitation to a potential cheater. I believe in an honor sytem as much as the next guy. But, I see no reason to make cheating a temptation.

I did not realize NAQT recycled questions between sets like this.

User avatar
Howard
Yuna
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 5:42 pm
Location: Ellicott City, MD

Post by Howard »

Presumably, the question sets are for different audiences, so there shouldn't be any issues with repetition. But that's still no excuse for having the podcast available prior to HSNCT. That's just bad form. There should be no podcasts prior to all questions being done.
John Gilbert
Coach, Howard High School Academic Team
Ellicott City, MD

"John Gilbert is a quiz bowl god" -- leftsaidfred

wd4gdz
Tidus
Posts: 740
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 5:40 pm
Location: Tallahassee

Post by wd4gdz »

I'm a little puzzled by the responses on here. Of course there is going to be *some* repeats when it comes to tossup answers. The ICT and HSNCT packet sets have something like 500 tossups each. The tossups are not exactly the same. They share *some* common clues, but it's not something to be outraged about.

My 2 cents

Strongside
Rikku
Posts: 475
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 8:03 pm
Contact:

Post by Strongside »

I agree with wd4gdz. There are going to be repeats of questions and if you listened to the ICT podcasts you may have had an advantage at the HSNCT. There is an extreme of information that can be asked at the high school level but only a small portion that is asked because most of it would be too obscure.

I was moderating at an HSNCT mirror today and I got to see more people play the questions. The two questions that have been of interest to people here were the fusion reactor and Bride and Prejudice.

For the fusion reactor someone buzzed in and said fusion, I prompted and they aid cold fusion which was wrong and the other team got it wrong.

For the Bride and Prejudice question the one team said Pride and Prejudice and it was wrong and the other team got it right. The problem with this question is that it is somewhat hard to distinguish between pride and bride.

One thing about both of these questions is that they require you to listen intently. R. posted the text of the questions somwhere in this thread and they both have something early on that makes the answers P+P and fusion obviously wrong but if you don't listen to the question carefully then you might get it wrong. If I recall correctly I was going to say P+P but I think someone beat me out. Had I heard the entire fusion reactor question at nationals I probably would have said fusion.
Brendan Byrne

Drake University, 2006-2008
University of Minnesota, 2008-2010

Strongside
Rikku
Posts: 475
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 8:03 pm
Contact:

Post by Strongside »

There were some questions that I felt were misleading to players. They were not hoses but I felt were tempting a team to get it wrong.

Here are the right answers and the common wrong answers

Tanganyika
Victoria

3-4
West Coast Offense

J.P. Morgan
Carnegie

Funeral March
Requiem

Belarus
Ukraine

One question I didn't like was the one about the Green Monster. The question specifically said do not prompt on Fenway Park. I felt that there should have been a prompt on Fenway Park or have the question to be written differently so a prompt on Fenway Park would have been reasonable.

Another thing has to do with pronounciation and prompting. I have looked at NAQT rules about it but there is still a lot of gray area. Sometimes when someone says part of an answer I will prompt even though it says not to. For Example the question about the island Robinson Crusoe the team said Crusoe and I prompted and they said the whole name. There were also questions where a team would say a borderline answer where I would hesitate and then they would say the right answers.

I remembered the question about the Ambassadors the person said French Ambassadors and hesistated and then he said the Ambassadors. The answer said nothing about French. We decided to give the team a neg5 and give the other team a tossup just for them which they ended up getting wrong. I doubt this was the right thing to do but it was a blowout.


I remember at Nationals I said Papa Doc for Duvalier and then after a pause I said Duvalier. I also said espn got prompted, said espn the website, got prompted and said espn.com. I said Calcutta Hole then got prompted and said black hole of Calcutta. I pronounced Mont-Saint Victoire with one too many syllables but I did get counted wrong for mispronouncing Kazantzakis.

One thing I noticed today is that Khameini was pronounced different than it usually is but I didn't count it wrong. I count a team wrong for saying A Day in the Life Of Ivan Denisovitch instead of One Day and one team said Rawling instead of Rawlings and that probably cost them the game.

In summary I think it would be beneficial for question writers to help readers with pronounciation and for them to be more specific of prompts. Essentially what I am saying is that the judgment of the reader should be as little as possible and the game should be decided by the players and not the reader.

One more thing I got to read for three different Jeopardy champions who combined to win over 500,000 dollars on the show.
Brendan Byrne

Drake University, 2006-2008
University of Minnesota, 2008-2010

User avatar
davinci
Lulu
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 1:30 pm

Post by davinci »

wd4gdz wrote:I'm a little puzzled by the responses on here. Of course there is going to be *some* repeats when it comes to tossup answers. The ICT and HSNCT packet sets have something like 500 tossups each. The tossups are not exactly the same. They share *some* common clues, but it's not something to be outraged about.

My 2 cents
It wasn't a matter of repeated answers, there were quite a few questions with repeated clues. The Lolita toss-up both mentioned before power something about Alaska, and it was phrased almost exactly the same.

NotBhan
Rikku
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 12:30 pm
Location: Parts Unknown

Post by NotBhan »

bjb87 wrote:There were some questions that I felt were misleading to players. They were not hoses but I felt were tempting a team to get it wrong.

Here are the right answers and the common wrong answers

Tanganyika
Victoria

3-4
West Coast Offense

J.P. Morgan
Carnegie

Funeral March
Requiem

Belarus
Ukraine

One question I didn't like was the one about the Green Monster. The question specifically said do not prompt on Fenway Park. I felt that there should have been a prompt on Fenway Park or have the question to be written differently so a prompt on Fenway Park would have been reasonable.
I haven't seen the questions which go with these answers, but none of these looks inherently misleading, so long as the question clearly distinguishes that it's seeking one and not the other.

For instance, in the case of the two lakes, Victoria is a relatively shallow lake (max depth ~275 ft) which is roughly circular, etc; Tanganyika is extremely deep (max depth ~4700 feet) and is a long, narrow rift valley lake which borders different nations from Victoria. If a hypothetical question begins, "It is the world's second-deepest lake," the answer clearly can not be Victoria. If a team later hears "African Lake" and buzzes reflexively with Victoria, the question is not at fault. Same thing with the Green Monster ... if (say) the question opens, "It is 37 feet tall" or "It was covered with ads until 1947," then Fenway Park clearly can not be the answer and should not earn a prompt.

The question might be at fault if, in the case of Belarus and the Ukraine, it began with a geographical feature located in both countries without clearly distinguishing which country is the subject. But I'd reckon that probably wasn't the case.

((But in more general terms, you bring up a good point. Questions writers should bear in mind that when asking about, say, a Polish composer who is not Chopin (like Paderewski), one should be additionally careful to provide clear distinguishing information which invalidates Chopin as a possible answer. Mentioning Paderewski's 2nd-best-known work would technically distinguish between the two composers, but mentioning a performance from 1920 is far more distinctive.))

--Raj Dhuwalia
"Keep it civil, please." -- Matt Weiner, 6/7/05

chaska
Lulu
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 6:41 pm
Location: Chaska, Minnesota
Contact:

Post by chaska »

3-4
West Coast Offense
Hah! That was my neg.

I negged on JP Morgan with Vanderbilt after the railroad clues.

chaska
Lulu
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 6:41 pm
Location: Chaska, Minnesota
Contact:

Post by chaska »

I want to chime in on the fusion question.

I said fusion and the mod in my room awarded us 10 points.

Three quick thoughts on the question:

First, the "device" part of the question was far away from the identifying clues and was never reinforced. It shouldn't be the expectation of a question writer on a player to remember the second word of the tossup when no other part of the question clearly identifies the answer as a device (and in fact, later words in the question contradict that a device is being asked for).

Second, the word "source" is unacceptable for reiterating the device nature of the response necessary. The process of nuclear fusion can be a source for energy, as can a device that carries out nuclear fusion.

Third, the argument "the player should have remembered it" is ridiculous...the object of a QB question isn't to hinder the answerer from correctly identifying it if he knows the correct answer, which this question clearly does.

Finally, as was already pointed out, a device can't be contrasted with a process such as fission. The end of the question is extremely misleading. It's a downright verbal trap if the moderator refuses to accept simply "fusion," because the question basically demands that you answer it with the process that contrasts with fission.

User avatar
Stained Diviner
Auron
Posts: 4733
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 6:08 am
Location: Chicagoland
Contact:

Post by Stained Diviner »

bjb said:
I count a team wrong for saying A Day in the Life Of Ivan Denisovitch instead of One Day
That one should have been correct. It's the writer/editor's fault rather than yours. When you write a question about a title that originally was not English, then you need to look up alternatives.

User avatar
thepowerofche
Lulu
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: Etlanna, Jawjah
Contact:

Post by thepowerofche »

bjb87 wrote: 3-4
West Coast Offense

J.P. Morgan
Carnegie
Negged on both of those, except, like chaska, I said Vanderbilt for Morgan. My college football-loving coach made me feel bad about missing the 3-4, because APPARENTLY I should know about some old Oklahoma or something coach from the sixties. Right.
bjb87 wrote: Funeral March
Requiem
I was going to neg on this one until I remembered I had Chopin's funeral march on my iPod.

NotBhan
Rikku
Posts: 375
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 12:30 pm
Location: Parts Unknown

Post by NotBhan »

ReinsteinD wrote:bjb said:
I count a team wrong for saying A Day in the Life Of Ivan Denisovitch instead of One Day
That one should have been correct. It's the writer/editor's fault rather than yours. When you write a question about a title that originally was not English, then you need to look up alternatives.
Don't think that applies in this case -- the original title opens with (transliterating) "odin," which means "one." There might be a case if the word "life" was omitted (unless "dyen'" implies "day in the life" -- I don't know much Russian).
"Keep it civil, please." -- Matt Weiner, 6/7/05

Trevkeeper
Tidus
Posts: 527
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:12 pm

Post by Trevkeeper »

bjb87 wrote:
3-4
West Coast Offense

Belarus
Ukraine
In our room, the other team negged with West Coast Offense. At the end it became obvious that it was 3-4 (something about replacing a nose tacle with a linebacker), which is when we got it.

Also, I sort of did the Belarus/Ukraine mistake. The other team negged with Ukraine after hearing something about a nuclear disaster (or something like that), but apparently the name of the leader of Belarus sounds a lot like Yuschenko, because when I heard it I buzzed in reflexively with Ukraine. But then I realized that the other team had just negged with that, so I just sort of sat there dumbly. The moderator even got "Minsk" out before she stopped talking, but I completely failed to register that.
bjb87 wrote:One question I didn't like was the one about the Green Monster. The question specifically said do not prompt on Fenway Park. I felt that there should have been a prompt on Fenway Park or have the question to be written differently so a prompt on Fenway Park would have been reasonable.
I wanted to buzz in with Fenway Park. Thankfully our captain beat me to it and said Green Monster. I think Fenway Park should at least have been prompted. To whoever asked, the question mentioned something about Pesky's Pole in the beginning, and that's all I can remember from it.
Nick, IU and Aegis Questions

User avatar
Captain Sinico
Auron
Posts: 2843
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: Champaign, Illinois

Post by Captain Sinico »

NotBhan wrote:
ReinsteinD wrote:bjb said:
I count a team wrong for saying A Day in the Life Of Ivan Denisovitch instead of One Day
That one should have been correct. It's the writer/editor's fault rather than yours. When you write a question about a title that originally was not English, then you need to look up alternatives.
Don't think that applies in this case -- the original title opens with (transliterating) "odin," which means "one." There might be a case if the word "life" was omitted (unless "dyen'" implies "day in the life" -- I don't know much Russian).
While it doesn't apply, the Russian title has nothing to do with the reason why. As far as I can tell, this book has never been published in English as A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, so that's not an acceptable answer. That is the only criterion; what someone suspects the translation of a foreign-language title might be has nothing to do with anything.

MaS

Trevkeeper
Tidus
Posts: 527
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 7:12 pm

Post by Trevkeeper »

The reason our protest on that in the state series was upheld is because the reference book that the other team brought along referred to it as both "One Day" and "A Day."
Nick, IU and Aegis Questions

User avatar
swwFCqb
Rikku
Posts: 490
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Lancaster, Ohio

Post by swwFCqb »

I haven't seen the questions which go with these answers, but none of these looks inherently misleading, so long as the question clearly distinguishes that it's seeking one and not the other.

For instance, in the case of the two lakes, Victoria is a relatively shallow lake (max depth ~275 ft) which is roughly circular, etc; Tanganyika is extremely deep (max depth ~4700 feet) and is a long, narrow rift valley lake which borders different nations from Victoria. If a hypothetical question begins, "It is the world's second-deepest lake," the answer clearly can not be Victoria. If a team later hears "African Lake" and buzzes reflexively with Victoria, the question is not at fault. Same thing with the Green Monster ... if (say) the question opens, "It is 37 feet tall" or "It was covered with ads until 1947," then Fenway Park clearly can not be the answer and should not earn a prompt.
While you are right about what you said, the questions were not like that. I listened to the podcasts and I also thought that these questions could have been misleading with the way they were phrased.

I'm pretty sure the Tanganyika question talked about Stanley and Livingstone, and while I was listening I was thinking Victoria, myself.

As for the Green Monster question, I'm pretty sure that in the question it talked about Carlton Fisk and Bucky Dent hitting home runs over it. But if you buzzed in before "over it" then I can see how someone could be mislead. The question did lead off talking about some hill (I think), but I'm not sure if this clue would have allowed someone to differentiate between Fenway Park or the Green Monster.

User avatar
Stained Diviner
Auron
Posts: 4733
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 6:08 am
Location: Chicagoland
Contact:

Post by Stained Diviner »

I may have been wrong about the title. Because Russian does not have words for 'A' or 'The', Odin is sometimes translated as an article instead of One. However, it appears that English translators have always gone with 'One' even though reference sources are inconsistent.

User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8413
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by Matt Weiner »

Maybe someone at NAQT should check on the writers of those questions. It was formerly an open secret that certain writers would submit essentially the same question at several difficulty levels in order to make more money from less work. I thought NAQT had learned of that practice and put a stop to it, but if these similar tossups came from the same sources, then perhaps this is not the case.

chaska
Lulu
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 6:41 pm
Location: Chaska, Minnesota
Contact:

Post by chaska »

The Belarus question should have been a fairly easy power because it talked about "most of the fallout" from the Chernobyl accident falling in a certain country. It's fairly common knowledge that the fallout fell on Belarus. I can see how Ukraine could come to mind (Rob negged on it after all, just beating both me and another team member who actually knew it), but the clue isn't confusing for those with more in-depth knowledge of the disaster.

conker
Lulu
Posts: 54
Joined: Sat Apr 22, 2006 4:11 am

Post by conker »

Trevkeeper wrote:
I wanted to buzz in with Fenway Park. Thankfully our captain beat me to it and said Green Monster. I think Fenway Park should at least have been prompted. To whoever asked, the question mentioned something about Pesky's Pole in the beginning, and that's all I can remember from it.
It didn't mention anything about Pesky's Pole (I was thinking of actually buzzing in with that, until they said "Dent's and Yastremski's homers went over it"), but it did mention that Duffy's Cliff was in front of it. Since Duffy's Cliff is inside the park (à la Tal's Hill in Minute Maid Park), that would rule out a baseball park as an answer. I agree with the decision not to prompt on "Fenway Park."

Also, maybe I'm too lenient, but I would give a team credit for both "A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovitch" (the team clearly knew the answer, and it does not change the meaning of the title) and Kozantzakis or however you might mispronounce his name.
Dennis Sun
Shanghai American School '06
Harvard '10
Stanford '15

Strongside
Rikku
Posts: 475
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 8:03 pm
Contact:

Post by Strongside »

Another question that stood out to me was the second paper and pencil question in round 1 of the playoffs. The answer asked for the calendar but in match and the mirror I read at both teams said a day of the week. In the podcast one team gave a day of the week and the other didn't answer it.

Although the question asked for calendar days it is apparent that many people misinterpreted the question.

One more thing is I wish there would be fewer paper and pencil questions at nationals. Generally they go unanswered more than most subjects. They result in dead air, long pauses and they take up more time which means not as many tossups are asked. I wish p+p tossups would be limited to one per round as I would be disappointed if they were eliminated completely. Instead maybe asking more math questions about math terms and concepts would be the way to go.
Brendan Byrne

Drake University, 2006-2008
University of Minnesota, 2008-2010

User avatar
Golden Tiger 86
Auron
Posts: 1196
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2003 7:04 pm
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Contact:

Post by Golden Tiger 86 »

thepowerofche wrote:
bjb87 wrote: 3-4
West Coast Offense

J.P. Morgan
Carnegie
Negged on both of those, except, like chaska, I said Vanderbilt for Morgan. My college football-loving coach made me feel bad about missing the 3-4, because APPARENTLY I should know about some old Oklahoma or something coach from the sixties. Right.
You should know everything about Bud Wilkinson, Gomer Jones, Jim Mackenzie, and Chuck Fairbanks, Che.
Slade Gilmer, 2004 Graduate of THE Russellville High School, 2009 Graduate of THE University of North Alabama

User avatar
Howard
Yuna
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 5:42 pm
Location: Ellicott City, MD

Post by Howard »

davinci wrote:It wasn't a matter of repeated answers, there were quite a few questions with repeated clues. The Lolita toss-up both mentioned before power something about Alaska, and it was phrased almost exactly the same.
Unless my understanding is incorrect, there are questions repeated in their entirety between DIV II and the high school IS series. I definitely got the impression from an NAQT officer that this was common practice for them. I don't thing, as Matt says, that writers are basically submitting the same question in more than one form so as to get additional money. I think it's the case that NAQT is trying to market the questions to the largest possible number of users. I don't see anything wrong with that, as long as the questions aren't released for public consumption until all audiences have heard them, as I said above.
John Gilbert
Coach, Howard High School Academic Team
Ellicott City, MD

"John Gilbert is a quiz bowl god" -- leftsaidfred

wd4gdz
Tidus
Posts: 740
Joined: Mon Jan 19, 2004 5:40 pm
Location: Tallahassee

Post by wd4gdz »

Howard wrote:Unless my understanding is incorrect, there are questions repeated in their entirety between DIV II and the high school IS series.
I believe you are incorrect (although I'm not 100%). I played Div2 at SCT and ICT, and have accumulated many of the IS sets from this year via helping out at high school tournaments. I have not observed any "questions repeated in their entirety."

The closest thing I can think of is that the CC Sectionals use a IS set.

Strongside
Rikku
Posts: 475
Joined: Thu Apr 14, 2005 8:03 pm
Contact:

Post by Strongside »

A couple more things. Did anyone think the question about New Orleans which mentioned the Lower Ninth Ward in power was too easy? I heard references to the Lower Ninth Ward many times in the aftermath of Katrina.

Has anyone else noticed the high proportion of questions about Canadian/ Alaskan Geography in NAQT packets?
Brendan Byrne

Drake University, 2006-2008
University of Minnesota, 2008-2010

User avatar
Auks Ran Ova
Forums Staff: Chief Administrator
Posts: 4099
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Post by Auks Ran Ova »

[quote]A couple more things. Did anyone think the question about New Orleans which mentioned the Lower Ninth Ward in power was too easy? I heard references to the Lower Ninth Ward many times in the aftermath of Katrina. [/quote]

I could not understand for the life of me why the words "predominantly black Ninth Ward" were still in power. I was reading that round and just about everyone in the room jumped all over it at that point.
Rob Carson
University of Minnesota '11, MCTC '??
Member, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer and Editor, NAQT

vandyhawk
Tidus
Posts: 584
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:42 am
Location: Seattle

Post by vandyhawk »

wd4gdz wrote: I believe you are incorrect (although I'm not 100%). I played Div2 at SCT and ICT, and have accumulated many of the IS sets from this year via helping out at high school tournaments. I have not observed any "questions repeated in their entirety."

The closest thing I can think of is that the CC Sectionals use a IS set.
Quote from R. in college SCT discussion:

"Teams may NOT discuss the Community College SCT questions (that is, Invitational Series #58) nor may they discuss questions in the DII set that were "upped in difficulty" from IS #58. If you're not sure whether a question in the DII set is clear for discussion, feel free to contact NAQT at naqt-at-naqt.com and we'll let you know. "

User avatar
mentalchocolate
Wakka
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: the thermosphere

Post by mentalchocolate »

Tanganyika
Victoria

3-4
West Coast Offense

J.P. Morgan
Carnegie

Funeral March
Requiem

Belarus
Ukraine
Wow...I think we answered 3/5 with the 2nd answer mentioned. The other 2 we got right, but I do think (although I may be a bit biased since I got the question correct) that the wording for the "3-4" question was a bit more decisive than the others. It mentioned some of the teams using it and if you have deep knowledge of football then it should be obvious. Then again I may watch too much NFL football.

User avatar
thepowerofche
Lulu
Posts: 55
Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2005 2:25 pm
Location: Etlanna, Jawjah
Contact:

Post by thepowerofche »

ImmaculateDeception wrote:While it doesn't apply, the Russian title has nothing to do with the reason why. As far as I can tell, this book has never been published in English as A Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich, so that's not an acceptable answer. That is the only criterion; what someone suspects the translation of a foreign-language title might be has nothing to do with anything.

MaS
To hopefully put an end to this more or less frivolous discussion, I will point out that, having read the book, the novel spans exactly one waking day of Ivan Denisovich Shukhov, "from reveille to lights out." Therefore, I would say that the proper and only acceptable answer is "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich," Russian's lack of articles notwithstanding.
Golden Tiger 86 wrote:You should know everything about Bud Wilkinson, Gomer Jones, Jim Mackenzie, and Chuck Fairbanks, Che.
If they're not nicknamed "The Tuna," I don't have to know anything about them.

User avatar
No Sollositing On Premise
Yuna
Posts: 901
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2003 6:47 pm
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Contact:

Post by No Sollositing On Premise »

thepowerofche wrote:If they're not nicknamed "The Tuna," I don't have to know anything about them.
Well, you mentioned earlier that you negged with West Coast Offense, so the fact that the question was about a defensive scheme only tells you that you need to either learn a little more about football or stop making silly negs on football questions. That kind of attitude doesn't support your "argument", chief. </asshat>
Mike Sollosi, University of Virginia

Locked