Announcement: 2010 Chicago Open, Chicago, IL (July 23-25)

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:43 pm

Hello all,

I am pleased to announce the 2010 Chicago Open, to be held at the University of Chicago on a summer date to be determined soon. Barring any unforeseen events between now and May, I will be serving as the head editor of the tournament.

As you all know, Chicago Open is a nationals-and-above difficulty level tournament. Lately, it has also been a packet submission tournament, which means that if you want to play, you must write a packet. Unlike other tournaments, CO does not have the luxury of relying on mirror sites to supply quality packets; therefore, no team will be allowed to play without submitting a high-quality packet. I cannot emphasize this enough; packets that are just plain bad will be returned to the submitting teams. This has not, to my knowledge, been too much of an issue in the past, since CO attracts some of the best players and writers around, but I want to deliver a high-quality tournament and this means that I will need high-quality submissions. Use care when writing your packets.

Packet guidelines

The distribution for submitted packets should follow the standard ACF distribution. The packets must be formatted according to the standard ACF formatting guidelines; improperly formatted packets will be returned.

Packet deadlines

This year's CO features an extra special discount opportunity. Namely, if you submit your packet very early, you can play for the nominal fee of $20! How good a deal is that?! (Answer: so fucking good!). Please keep in mind that in order to actually receive this discount, your packet has to be pristine. As in, so good that I don't have to do much more than minor corrections on it; if I have to rewrite half your questions, you will not receive the big discount! So please don't think you can just slap something together. I outline the submission schedule below:

Base fee: $120
Packet submitted before May 1st: -$100 (such a good deal OMG)
Packet submitted before May 15th: -$50 (still a good deal)
Packet submitted before May 29th: -$25 (not too shabby)
Packet submitted before June 12: no penalty
Packet submitted before June 26th: +$25 (plus bonus glaring from me)
Packet submitted before July 3rd: +$50 (glaring AND scowling)
every day after July 3rd: +$10 with the permission of the editor, which will not be easy to get.

WARNING: I would like to have 3 weeks between the tournament and the last deadline. This means that if the earlier of the available dates is selected, I reserve the right to push the submission schedule up accordingly. This will be accomplished by compressing the time between two of the penalty deadlines by one week. Read this carefully and don't tell me two months from now that you didn't know this would happen.

There will be logistical discounts as well, to the tune of -$10 for a buzzer system and -$5 for a laptop if we need it, unless you are claiming the $100 discount above (I gotta keep something for myself). There will be no other discounts.

Last year CO had 14 teams. I anticipate similar numbers this year. Since every team will have submitted a packet, and the editors will produce 3 playoff/finals packets, the final number of rounds should be somewhere between 15 and 18. I will soon post a link to a Google spreadsheet where you can enter your team; I'll also be using that spreadsheet to keep track of discounts and such.

You may email all packets to me at [email protected]. I look forward to receiving your packets and seeing you in Chicago this summer.

CAVEAT: While I do not anticipate anything that should preclude me from editing CO this year, in the unlikely but not impossible event that something like this occurs, I will do my best to find replacement editors. I'm putting this out there so that there are no surprises later on.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:45 pm

I need editors!

If you are interested in contributing to this tournament, please get in touch with me. I specifically need editors in the areas of biology, chemistry, music, and social science. If you can contribute to the editing effort in any of these fields, I would love to have your assistance.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:52 pm

Side tournaments!

What is CO without a bevy of side tournaments? In the past, CO weekend has typically featured a literature tournament, some form of history tournament, and CO trash. Seth informs me that we may not have the ability to run more than two side events during CO, so space is limited. Tournament slots have traditionally been allocated on a quasi-seniority basis, plus a combination of interest and time of request. What this means is that established events will typically have precedence over newer ones, more popular events over older ones, etc. Since ceteris is never paribus I will attempt to allocate the various slots based on a combination of the above factors; if you're gunning to run a side event, it greatly behooves you to poll the populace and see how much demand there is for it. Please submit all requests for running side events to me.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:53 pm

Staffers!

CO gotta have staff, son. If you are willing and able to help run this tournament, please let me know as soon as you can. We're going to need roughly 10 people for the main event, I'm guessing. There will be a staff sign up Google doc soon.

Post by **Important Bird Area** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:56 pm

Expressing interest in the traditional west coast mirror.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:57 pm

bt_green_warbler wrote:Expressing interest in the traditional west coast mirror.

I was just about to post about mirrors. If you want to mirror CO, get in touch with me and we'll work something out.

Cheynem · Post by **Cheynem** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 5:59 pm

Should would-be staffers e-mail you directly or wait for the Google Doc or what?

jonah · Post by **jonah** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:06 pm

If I am in Chicagoland on the date of CO, which is likely but not certain, I'll staff.

dtaylor4 · Post by **dtaylor4** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:06 pm

Cheynem wrote:Should would-be staffers e-mail you directly or wait for the Google Doc or what?

This. Unless anyone objects, I'll do the SQBS thing again. Once side events are chosen, the people running them should get in touch with me about doing it for them as well.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 6:29 pm

Cheynem wrote:Should would-be staffers e-mail you directly or wait for the Google Doc or what?

You can email me or actually post in this thread. The doc will be up today.

Charbroil · Post by **Charbroil** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 7:59 pm

If I don't have a team by May 1st but submit a partial packet, would it be possible to receive a partial discount to apply toward my eventual team's registration costs?

Skepticism and Animal Feed · Tue Mar 09, 2010 10:29 pm

I'm not going to play this tournament, but I want to publicly praise Jerry for pricing this tournament so low. $20 is amazing, given how expensive some recent CO's have been.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Tue Mar 09, 2010 11:58 pm

Charbroil wrote:If I don't have a team by May 1st but submit a partial packet, would it be possible to receive a partial discount to apply toward my eventual team's registration costs?

I'm gonna say no. The rationale behind this is for me to get complete packets early, and the discount is already generous enough. If you need to wait until you get a full team together, you can get one of the other discounts instead.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Wed Mar 10, 2010 12:00 am

Whig's Boson wrote:I'm not going to play this tournament, but I want to publicly praise Jerry for pricing this tournament so low. $20 is amazing, given how expensive some recent CO's have been.

Last year's CO had the same base fee, so I'm sticking with that. As for the mega discount, it's really a win-win. If it motivates people to form teams and write awesome packets early on, that saves me a lot of work, and time is money. I figure the amount of time I save by not having to heavily edit a problematic packet is well worth the tournament fee I'm giving up.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Wed Mar 10, 2010 2:18 pm

You can now register your team for CO 2010 online thanks to the magic of Google. I've added an option for each member of the team to select two of the possible side events they'd like to play. Some of the options have not actually been announced, but I figured that it could motivate someone to produce a side event if there's an overwhelming demand for it. Remember, please only vote for two.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Wed Mar 10, 2010 2:26 pm

If you're planning to staff, I would appreciate it if you could fill out this form. If you know someone who doesn't read the forums here but might want to staff, feel free to share this link with them.

Irreligion in Bangladesh · Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:18 pm

grapesmoker wrote:If you're planning to staff, I would appreciate it if you could fill out this form. If you know someone who doesn't read the forums here but might want to staff, feel free to share this link with them.

If we're interested in staffing but not sure yet if we'll be able to, what should we do with regards to that form?

ETA: Also, the team signup form doesn't have CO trash as a side event option -- am I right in assuming that's because CO trash is a given?

Mike Bentley · Post by **Mike Bentley** » Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:20 pm

In the event there is a West Coast mirror, what's the packet policy going to be?

Cheynem · Post by **Cheynem** » Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:24 pm

Is there a way in which staffers can vote on side events they would wish to play without registering a team?

Post by **Susan** » Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:31 pm

Beussink v. Woodland wrote: If we're interested in staffing but not sure yet if we'll be able to, what should we do with regards to that form?

I filled out the staffer form without being 100% certain that I'll be available to staff CO (though it seems reasonably likely that I'll be able to), so...now you know, Jerry.

It might be good to add a comments box or something to the form so that people can say whether they're sure they can come (and when they might know by).

Maxwell Sniffingwell · Wed Mar 10, 2010 3:59 pm

I used the name box as a comments box.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Wed Mar 10, 2010 4:34 pm

Comments boxes added to both forms. Thanks.

Maxwell Sniffingwell · Wed Mar 10, 2010 10:01 pm

grapesmoker wrote:Comments boxes added to both forms. Thanks.

Could you delete my entry so I can re-enter without the awkward comment, then?

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:49 pm

cornfused wrote:
grapesmoker wrote:Comments boxes added to both forms. Thanks.
Could you delete my entry so I can re-enter without the awkward comment, then?

Done.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:58 pm

Beussink v. Woodland wrote:If we're interested in staffing but not sure yet if we'll be able to, what should we do with regards to that form?

Leave a comment in the comments box, as you have done. Thanks!

ETA: Also, the team signup form doesn't have CO trash as a side event option -- am I right in assuming that's because CO trash is a given?

Yes, CO trash is basically a for-sure thing. Marnold is in charge this year, and he'll provide the details.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 12:59 pm

Cheynem wrote:Is there a way in which staffers can vote on side events they would wish to play without registering a team?

I think I may just go to an individual survey of side events. That makes more sense.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 1:03 pm

Bentley Like Beckham wrote:In the event there is a West Coast mirror, what's the packet policy going to be?

Teams at mirror sites will have the option of writing a packet for a discount by the no-penalty date. After that, we'll still take your packets but you won't get a discount for them. The discount structure will -$50 for before the -$25 deadline teams, -$25 for before the no-penalty deadline. Mirror site teams will still be eligible for the May 1st -$100 discount.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 1:40 pm

Side events!

I've created a separate form for CO side events. Vote for your favorites there. We've already got a proposal for arts and literature but I've put some other possibilities on the board as well.

edit: I've removed the side event options from the team registration form.

Post by **Auks Ran Ova** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 1:54 pm

You can delete my first response; I accidentally put my additional comments in the "other" box rather than the, uh, comments box.

marnold · Post by **marnold** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 2:32 pm

grapesmoker wrote:Yes, CO trash is basically a for-sure thing. Marnold is in charge this year, and he'll provide the details.

Details status: provided.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 2:55 pm

I'm pleased to say that Andy Watkins and Shantanu Jha have joined the editing team to work on biology, chemistry, social science, and fine arts. Unless something changes, we should be all set for editors.

edit: Guy Tabachnick will help make sure your linguistics questions are of the highest quality.

Cheynem · Post by **Cheynem** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 3:05 pm

This tournament just went to a whole 'notha level of REALNESS.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 4:44 pm

Cheynem wrote:This tournament just went to a whole 'notha level of REALNESS.

You'd best believe it.

I want to say a few words about the expected distribution of CO. It will mostly resemble the distribution of this year's ACF Nationals, in this way: out of 20/20 (that is, not counting a tiebreaker in every packet) I intend to have 4/4 each of history, literature, and science, followed by 3/3 each of fine arts and RMP, 1/1 social science, and 1/1 "miscellaneous." That last category may include trash or geography which I find particularly interesting, but given that there's a whole trash tournament being run the same day, I feel no compulsion to ensure the presence of trash in every packet (and I'll be honest with you, any geography question that's just about identifying some dull-ass land feature is almost certainly getting the boot). I'm much more interested in exploring the use of that "miscellanious" category (which is essentially equivalent to the "your choice" in the submission requirements) to ask about otherwise interesting things that maybe don't fit neatly into any one category. That includes things like random intellectual history and other relevant thought, non-fiction writing, current events, and so on, in short, anything of relevant and interesting cultural value that isn't captured by the existing framework. I strongly encourage teams to submit questions of that type. I don't think this is a huge deviation from CO's past, but it's relevant and so I'm putting this out there for public consumption so that there won't be any surprises and no one will complain about their precious tossup on Lady Gaga being used.

Post by **Auks Ran Ova** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 5:15 pm

What sort of difficulty should we be shooting for? ACF Nats? Crazy post-ACF Nats like the last year or two? Something else?

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 5:29 pm

Ukonvasara wrote:ACF Nats? Crazy post-ACF Nats like the last year or two?

These two; a lot of it is probably going to end up resembling the last year or two in terms of statistical difficulty, but I guarantee the tournament will have a different feel than either of those editions.

Cheynem · Post by **Cheynem** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 5:47 pm

I forgot to add a comment about my staffing being contingent on me being there and not finding a team that would take someone with no time to write.

Mechanical Beasts · Post by **Mechanical Beasts** » Thu Mar 11, 2010 6:11 pm

grapesmoker wrote:
Ukonvasara wrote:ACF Nats? Crazy post-ACF Nats like the last year or two?
These two; a lot of it is probably going to end up resembling the last year or two in terms of statistical difficulty, but I guarantee the tournament will have a different feel than either of those editions.

By which Jerry means that the finals will contain a tossup on tridecavalent iron.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Sat Mar 13, 2010 5:35 pm

As long as I'm issuing dicta regarding CO submissions:

I've already said this in a few other contexts, but I'd really like to see some originality in submissions. Not to say that in the past CO hasn't gotten some very original stuff, of course. However, the great thing about a tournament like CO is that it gives people a chance to explore novel topics and I encourage everyone to try and do this. What I don't want to see is people just mining old packets for answer choices; this is not the year you write a "Prize Stock," tossup because it's already come up enough times as a clue. In short, be original, challenge yourself, and challenge the boundaries of knowledge of the other players. It's what makes CO fun.

Mike Bentley · Post by **Mike Bentley** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 2:43 pm

So the ACF distribution requires 1/1 geography but you've already stated that at best geography is going to be squeezed into the 1/1 your choice/trash space. Do you still want us to submit 1/1 geography or is it okay if we use some of that space for, say, extra SS?

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Mon Mar 22, 2010 6:22 pm

Bentley Like Beckham wrote:So the ACF distribution requires 1/1 geography but you've already stated that at best geography is going to be squeezed into the 1/1 your choice/trash space. Do you still want us to submit 1/1 geography or is it okay if we use some of that space for, say, extra SS?

Good question. I'm going to open up the geography category to other social science questions or more of the "intellectual history" type of "your choice" stuff. You can still write geography if you want but it should be interesting.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:36 pm

Based on the poll responses, I'm going to officially declare that the weekend of July 23-25 is going to be the weekend of CO. Go ahead and start making plans with that date in mind.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Mon Apr 05, 2010 6:48 pm

Your side tournaments this year will be the arts tournament being written by Abid Haseeb et al. and Ike Jose's lit tournament. Logistics will be decided sometime after I'm finished with this damn thesis.

abnormal abdomen · Post by **abnormal abdomen** » Mon Apr 05, 2010 6:55 pm

grapesmoker wrote:Your side tournaments this year will be the arts tournament being written by Abid Haseeb et al. and Ike Jose's lit tournament. Logistics will be decided sometime after I'm finished with this damn thesis.

See here:

http://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic. ... 55#p177455

OctagonJoe · Post by **OctagonJoe** » Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:53 pm

Frank Firke would like to staff this. To get in touch with him, send an e-mail to ffirke at gmail.com. Or tell me stuff and I'll tell him.

grapesmoker · Post by **grapesmoker** » Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:22 am

OctagonJoe wrote:Frank Firke would like to staff this. To get in touch with him, send an e-mail to ffirke at gmail.com. Or tell me stuff and I'll tell him.

Ok. Couldn't he just register on the forums and fill out the staffing form like everyone else?

OctagonJoe · Post by **OctagonJoe** » Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:53 am

grapesmoker wrote:Couldn't he just register on the forums

I've been trying to get him to do that for a long time now.

Cheynem · Post by **Cheynem** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 11:12 am

Anybody traveling from Michigan:

Do you guys have full teams? If not, I would be happy to team up with any combination of you.

Quantum Mushroom Billiard Hat · Wed Apr 14, 2010 11:58 am

Cheynem wrote:Anybody traveling from Michigan:

Do you guys have full teams? If not, I would be happy to team up with any combination of you.

We have one full team from Michigan figured out, and other people are still figuring out their plans. We'll let you know when they decide something.

Cheynem · Post by **Cheynem** » Wed Apr 14, 2010 12:22 pm

Thanks.

Charbroil · Post by **Charbroil** » Sun Apr 25, 2010 2:58 am

grapesmoker wrote: Packet guidelines
The distribution for submitted packets should follow the standard ACF distribution. The packets must be formatted according to the standard ACF formatting guidelines; improperly formatted packets will be returned.

Does the request to follow ACF guidelines include the guideline on question length (in terms of tossups being limited to 6-7 lines in length)?