Dan wrote:What was up with the distribution? As a Lit/Fine Arts player, I was angered that there were no discernible rules for distribution or categorization. One round had 3 lit toss-ups, another had none. The rest just had one.
Fine arts was absent as toss-up category. Save for of course, the toss-up about rock 'n' roll-er Chuck Berry that was, for reasons unbeknownst to me, categorized as arts. Sports, mythology, economics, and entertainment/pop culture are not their own categories. Please categorize them appropriately. As a result, there was waaaaayy too much computational math.
Also, the lead-in clues on many of the toss-ups were just plain bad. For example one toss-up was: "An island off the coast of Indonesia is home to many types of (some species of) snake. But it is more famous for a certain lizard—" At this point, are we looking Komodo or Komodo dragon? (Thankfully I buzzed and said Komodo and was prompted for Dragon.) Another: "Spell the 'd' word that describes Aldous Huxley's—" I buzz in with dystopian, given that the question says describes and is clearly asking for an adjective. The answer was dystopia. Another toss-up: "Sirius and XM announced plans to join forces as one, preeminent satellite radio provider. This was approved by—" At this point there could be a number of answers: merger, stockholders, etc. So the rest of the question: "—the FCC. What does the FCC stand for?" Absolutely ridiculous.
Far too many bonuses were uncategorized "all the answers being with this letter" bonuses. Far too many toss-ups featured "begins with this letter" or "rhymes with" giveaway clues, resulting in buzzer races. The introduction to one toss-up in the morning even read, "OK teams, time for a buzzer beater question."
Finally, every bonus throughout the day was a four-parter. On the last bonus of the tournament, we have control, down by ten. What does the question writer do? Throws in a ridiculous three-part physics problem about an ice fisher trapped in a cabin slowly sliding around the ice.
I just thought I would remind you of what you insist produces the correct winner.
I made BG MSL Champs when I first joined the forum. The reason I joined was essentially because I was bored, and I decided that it would be fun to post about how good we were (which I did my first few posts). As I read the forums more and more, I realized how interesting they were. I started contributing actively to this thread, which I hope to do every post. I tried to change my user name in the "Name Change Please" thread, but inexplicably that thread went dead seemingly the instant I posted to change my name. I took it as a sign and have stuck with BG MSL Champs.
I will now ask the mods to change my name to a more meaningful one. That name is Sarconeely. It holds particular importance to me, because that answer was accepted as the name of the President of Georgia. We protested. The moderator insisted that it was "close enough". Hopefully, my new name will serve as a reminder to how little the results of conference play matters.
Note: I had a monster post, but it apparently was too big, because it said I had too many pixels or something like that. I don't know how Dwight Wynne does it.
BG MSL Champs wrote:A. The idea that Andrew Deveau cannot beat a balanced team. My way of "attacking" this was to say that he beat our team and your team, both of whom are balanced (even if you are missing a player, you were still fairly balanced). Note that I never said that he was better than St. Viator. Ever.
But, you used evidence re: Viator's performance at Huskie bowl w/o bothering to check if we were at full strength.
ONCE AGAIN, I NEVER, EVER SAID THAT MAINE SOUTH WAS BETTER THAN ST. VIATOR. WHAT I SAID WAS THAT ANDREW DEVEAU IS CAPABLE OF BEATING BALANCED TEAMS. AS EVIDENCE, I USED YOUR GAME FROM HUSKIE BOWL. AT HUSKIE BOWL, YOUR TEAM HAD 30, 25, 20, AND 7 PPG. THIS IS BALANCED. THUS, HE CAN BEAT BALANCED TEAMS. I DO NOT GET WHAT THE FACT THAT YOU WERE NOT AT FULL STRENGTH HAS TO DO WITH THIS.
Note: Caps are meant to get Dan to read carefully, not meant to convey anger
BG MSL Champs wrote:B. Jeff's assertation that St. Ignatius had a much worse F/S team than Viator, and that this could be proven by conference results. I "attacked" this by showing that St. Ignatius outperformed a team from their conference on good questions, even though that team did much better in your conference.
you probably didn't check and see if Latin was at full strength here.
Now, honestly where could I have checked that? Similarly, I imagine that Jeff did not check to see that St. Ig was playing at full strength. Either way, scoffing at St. Ignatius as he did was totally uncalled for, and he gave no evidence at all relating to acceptable quizbowl. I, at least, tried to do the best that I could.
Dan wrote:Charlie Dees
What did Charlie Dees do that was in any way rude? I could at least understand a tiny bit of anger at me, for the sarcastic comment (which was not meant the way that you interpreted it). He did absolutely nothing.
Edit: Dan, this is not a personal debate. I am trying to make sure that you, the captain of one of the best team's in Illinois, understand that Question Bank and Byrce Avery are wholly unacceptable. I also want to make sure that anybody from Stevenson or Ignatius (my top 2 teams) understands that they should not attend these tournaments. They do not reward knowledge, but rather, as Greg Gauthier would say, ESPN. If this makes me the "smaller man", then fine.