Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Old college threads.
User avatar
ThisIsMyUsername
Yuna
Posts: 804
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:36 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by ThisIsMyUsername » Mon Jul 21, 2014 5:17 pm

Tanay wrote:Inconsequential correction here, but John Lawrence was given 110 points in Round 5 in Room 1 despite playing that round in Room 2.
The phantom 110 appears in my score for round 5, but they don't appear to have been added to my cumulative score. So, 675 should still be the correct total. Also, I suspect that Auroni's 0-2-2 match must have occurred in Round 5 and not in Round 6, since that wouldn't make any sense. But, as you say, these are inconsequential, since the final scores seem to be correct; these just clarify what the heck is going on in the scoresheets.

What would make a difference is the fact that the original announcement said that the scores would include a correction factor for the rounds where players read on their byes (provided that they were supposed to be in the top room for that round). If this tournament were scored in this fashion (and assuming I've done my arithmetic properly) the final order and scores change to:

1. John Lawrence: 787.5
2. Matt Bollinger: 552
3. Tommy Casalaspi: 253.33
4. Will Nediger: 235
5. Ike Jose: 170
6. Auroni Gupta: 166.67
7. Evan Adams: 125
8. Rob Carson: 95
John Lawrence
Yale University '12
King's College London '13
University of Chicago '19

“I am not absentminded. It is the presence of mind that makes me unaware of everything else.” - G.K. Chesterton

User avatar
women, fire and dangerous things
Tidus
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:34 pm
Location: Örkko, Cimmeria

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by women, fire and dangerous things » Mon Jul 21, 2014 6:36 pm

This was an exciting and enjoyable format, but there are some fairness issues with it. This kind of format accentuates the inherent round-to-round variability of guerrilla tournaments, especially in literature, where different writing styles very much play to different people's strengths. For instance, it's unfortunate for Matt that the Jerry round was first when I was in the second room with him, since Jerry questions play to my strengths, and it's also unfortunate for me that my performance on the Jerry packet didn't matter for the final standings.

The other issue is with correcting for players who had a bye when they were supposed to be in the top room. It's obviously better than not doing that correction at all, but it disadvantages players who happened not to be in the top room during their bye.

I'd certainly play a tournament in this format again, but I think it's better just to stick with a standard singles or doubles format for this kind of tournament.
Will Nediger
-Proud member of the cult of Urcuchillay-
University of Western Ontario 2011, University of Michigan 2017
Member, ACF
High-volume writer, NAQT

Adventure Temple Trail
Auron
Posts: 2617
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:52 pm

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by Adventure Temple Trail » Mon Jul 21, 2014 7:09 pm

Speaking entirely for myself, I found the ladder format an especially entertaining change of pace. Perhaps because lit isn't a particularly strong suit for me and I knew going in that I wasn't going to win, I had a lot more fun seeing if I could promote myself up the ladder round-to-round getting a good break, and getting to face off against different sets of people, than I did going 2-7 at WELD. There are definitely balance issues to be worked out (getting to the top room early, particularly during Round 1, is a huge advantage compared to working up there later, for example, and perhaps points scored in the second room could count to some reduced extent), but the concept of this format was definitely a much more intriguing way to do singles for me, especially on a weekend where three standard RR-and-rebracket events have already been played, and I certainly hope an amended version of this format gets used again at future side events.
Matt J.
ex-Georgetown Day HS, ex-Yale
member emeritus, ACF

Try my original crossword puzzles

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5692
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by theMoMA » Mon Jul 21, 2014 8:10 pm

I would have liked to see slightly bigger room sizes (maybe 5 or 6 per). It struck me as unfortunate that so few people were able to accumulate meaningful stats in any given round (and that the format created an underclass of players who couldn't reach the top rooms, which could also have been addressed by having another player or two in each room). I also agree with Will that the mix of the ladder format and the disparate writing styles wasn't always fair. Since I'm a mediocre literature player, I just kind of shrugged my shoulders and kept on getting just enough points to stay in room three, but I can see how those in the higher (and lower) rooms might have been a bit frustrated.

That said, I echo the prevailing sentiment that this was a fun, very well-written event that I was incredibly grateful to be able to play. I also agree with Matt J. that the format was a fun change of pace; with a few tweaks, I'd enjoy playing something similar again. Thanks to Evan, Matt, Tommy and co. for putting it together, and to the authors of the seed round and the packets for their time and effort.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

Tanay
Rikku
Posts: 427
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 5:05 pm

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by Tanay » Mon Jul 21, 2014 8:22 pm

It seems like using this format for a centrally-written singles tournament in the future would more or less resolve the problem of variability within packets, while taking care of the aforementioned problems with byes, with minimal trade-off.
Tanay
ex-Berkeley, ex-Bellarmine

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by grapesmoker » Mon Jul 21, 2014 8:25 pm

I can see how the format might have been somewhat unfair to some players; still, I very much enjoyed the experience. I felt like games in all the rooms that I played were reasonably competitive and had a very good time. Thanks to Tommy for putting this together, and thanks to whoever wrote that tossup on "A Frolic of His Own."
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
Auks Ran Ova
Forums Staff: Chief Administrator
Posts: 4060
Joined: Sun Apr 30, 2006 10:28 pm
Location: Minneapolis
Contact:

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by Auks Ran Ova » Mon Jul 21, 2014 9:33 pm

ThisIsMyUsername wrote:(By the way, one small correction to the stats, in fairness to Auroni: he actually should be in 7th place and Rob in 8th. The stats show Rob as getting two 10's and zero negs on the Jerry packet, but he actually got two negs and zero 10's. The top room, alas, was not quite adequate to getting all 20 questions in Jerry's packet.)
I was wondering how that happened!

This tournament was a lot of fun--thanks to everyone who helped make it possible. I hope you all enjoyed my packet.
Rob Carson
University of Minnesota '11, MCTC '??
Member, ACF
Member, PACE
Writer and Editor, NAQT

User avatar
Masked Canadian History Bandit
Rikku
Posts: 443
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 11:43 pm

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by Masked Canadian History Bandit » Mon Jul 21, 2014 10:13 pm

My one suggestion for anyone organizing a tournament of this type is that moderators should calculate the powers/gets/negs tally and rank the players per the rules before turning in spreadsheets. Five minutes could have been saved if all Joe and I had to do was input the score and ranks into the spreadsheet.
vcuEvan wrote: Given the very high difficulty of the set, it makes a lot of sense to concentrate the players at the bottom so that tossups are less likely to go dead.
I'm not sure if this was a problem because I was doing stats all day, but if eight or nine people are giving a random guess at the end of tossups, that could eat up a lot of time and should be discouraged in the interest of time.
ThisIsMyUsername wrote: (By the way, one small correction to the stats, in fairness to Auroni: he actually should be in 7th place and Rob in 8th. The stats show Rob as getting two 10's and zero negs on the Jerry packet, but he actually got two negs and zero 10's. The top room, alas, was not quite adequate to getting all 20 questions in Jerry's packet.)
This was a mistake and has been fixed, sorry.
Cheynem wrote:As far as I know, "Foster" and Joe Hansen are the same people.
The format used for the name was the same that early indicated that Mike Bentley had left and been replaced by Gautam, so I kept "Foster" in to be safe.
ThisIsMyUsername wrote: The phantom 110 appears in my score for round 5, but they don't appear to have been added to my cumulative score. So, 675 should still be the correct total. Also, I suspect that Auroni's 0-2-2 match must have occurred in Round 5 and not in Round 6, since that wouldn't make any sense. But, as you say, these are inconsequential, since the final scores seem to be correct; these just clarify what the heck is going on in the scoresheets.

What would make a difference is the fact that the original announcement said that the scores would include a correction factor for the rounds where players read on their byes (provided that they were supposed to be in the top room for that round)
I got the round six scoresheet for the top room before the round five scoresheet, and so inputted that first before realizing the top room was actually a scoresheet behind and sending Joe to pick it up. Something must have messed up when I fixed that mixup. This probably resulted in Auroni's score being misplaced. Joe said that Tommy told him to ignore the correction factor because it was too complicated.
Patrick Liao
Lisgar Collegiate Institute 2011, University of Pennsylvania 2015, University of Toronto Faculty of Law 2019
President, Ontario Quizbowl Association (ONQBA)
Support the ONQBA on Facebook!

User avatar
Benin Rebirth Party
Yuna
Posts: 789
Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 8:46 pm
Location: Farhaven, Ontario

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by Benin Rebirth Party » Mon Jul 21, 2014 11:23 pm

My apologies to moderators and scorekeepers for the inappropriate distribution of scoresheets; While I was not looking, a staffer had taken a stack of scoresheets to their room and I couldn't chase them down until round 4, after which I felt it didn't really matter anymore.

I'm not going to comment much on the format itself in a player perspective, just in logistics.

Totals (e.g. 2/5/5) + Ranks (e.g. Foo->1st, Bar->2nd) would have been extremely appreciated to save some time between the seeding round. Also, because this type of tournament is still currently using a google spreadsheet to keep stats, it would be good if staffers inputted stats themselves after each round, which would have been great after the seeding round so the control room didn't have 9 scoresheets of totals and ranks to do in a short amount of time. Then players could even stay in their rooms and then once the spreadsheet indicates it's final, then players can move.

Also, the bottom bracket was delayed because the tossups went longer and every player (8-10!) were given many seconds to answer. So they should play one less round or something if this happens again. Any suggestion in statskeeping, whether it's writing an excel sheet or a variant of sqbs for these types of events could be interesting to discuss.
Joe Su
Lisgar 2012, McGill 2015, McGill 20--

FINALIST -- 2017 ILQBM MEME OF THE YEAR

User avatar
Guile Island
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 789
Joined: Thu Feb 10, 2011 11:45 pm
Location: Milwaukee, WI

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by Guile Island » Tue Jul 22, 2014 12:19 am

Just a small correction: my one 10 in the last packet was actually a power, so my final total in room 6 should be -5.
Dylan Minarik
PACE (Former Director of Communications, 2018-19 season)

Northwestern '17
Belvidere North High School '13

JRPG Champion, BACK TO BACK Robot Slayer

User avatar
ValenciaQBowl
Auron
Posts: 2370
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: Orlando, Florida

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by ValenciaQBowl » Tue Jul 22, 2014 12:02 pm

I had a fine time playing these questions and appreciate all the writers' efforts. It certainly isn't important, as I was in the final twenty underclass, but my best round was a 75 I got on Evan's packet (which was right up my alley--thanks, Evan!), though the spreadsheet says zero. So it goes!

There was a fun vibe in the lower depths. We could worry about the questions more than our rankings. I dug it.
Chris Borglum
Valencia College Grand Poobah

User avatar
Ike
Yuna
Posts: 917
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 5:01 pm
Contact:

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by Ike » Tue Jul 22, 2014 1:18 pm

I had fun playing this tournament - I think John is right about this format - it's always fun to have to constantly worry about whether or not you will be relegated to a lower room. I think the format may be refined by possibly having 5 or 6 people in a room and having 2 move up and 2 move down and having 30-40 questions per a packet to reduce variance, but that's probably something that can only be determined by future experimentation.

In general, I think the set was fun. I enjoyed all the packets and chalk up my poorer performances to the question writer's tastes and not to ineptitude. I do think that for the sake of some of the teams in the lower rooms, the set could be made a tinge easier, but obviously this was guerrilla tournament and that goal was not a priority.
Ike
UIUC 13

User avatar
Quantum Mushroom Billiard Hat
Rikku
Posts: 435
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:16 pm
Location: Midland, MI

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by Quantum Mushroom Billiard Hat » Tue Jul 22, 2014 6:49 pm

I thought the basic format was pretty neat, and think that this was a perfect time to use it. The ladder format can handle a few people leaving throughout the tournament to catch flights or start a long drive, which really messes up a typical round robin format. For the last side event of a weekend, that flexibility opens up the tournament to a lot of people who otherwise couldn't play at all.
Michael Hausinger
Coach, Bay City Western High School
formerly of University of Michigan and East Lansing High School

User avatar
Auroni
Auron
Posts: 3012
Joined: Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:23 pm
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by Auroni » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:22 pm

This was a fun tournament and featured probably the most high-octane competitive playing environment I've ever been in. I also loved the questions and I'm using them as a guide for what books to read in the future.
Auroni Gupta
UIUC
ACF

User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 6621
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Gorilla Literature Singles (July 20, Chicago)

Post by Cheynem » Tue Jul 22, 2014 7:41 pm

I thought the ladder format was fine and didn't think the final rooms lagged or were not competitive; I just think it would have been nice for the chance of trying to make it to the show, so people like, say, Chris Borglum, didn't become perpetual Crash Davises.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger

Locked