NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

This forum is for tournament announcements, updates, and results (official or otherwise).
Post Reply
The Billiards Fool
Wakka
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 2:09 pm

NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by The Billiards Fool » Tue Dec 18, 2018 5:04 pm

Hello! I am happy to announce that Rutgers University (New Brunswick) will be hosting the Northeast site of the Sectional Championship Tournament on February 9, 2019.

Location:
The tournament will take place at Scott Hall. The address for the building is 43 College Avenue, New Brunswick, NJ 08901. A searchable map of the campus can be found at this link. Parking is available in a deck on Wall Street, though it is cheapest parking option is to purchase a parking pass. An instructional video is located here.

If you need any help with travel to Rutgers, parking, or housing email me!

Entry Fees and Discounts:
Base Registration Fee: $135.00 per team
New Program (SCT) Discount: $20.00 per team. A program is considered new if no team from its school competed in an SCT, CC SCT, ICT, or CCCT in either of the two previous full competition years.
Buzzer System Discount: $10.00 each
Team-Provided Staff Discount: $40.00 each. Must be approved by the tournament director (NAQT rules request that readers be able to complete a 22 question round in 21 minutes)
Multiple-Team Discount: $25.00 per team after the first

The deadline for registration closes one week before the tournament (2/2/19).

Payment can be made in cash or via a check addressed to “Rutgers University Academic Team.” We expect payment the day of. If that is not possible please let us know as soon as you become aware of an issue. Any team that needs an invoice in advance should email me as soon as they would like one.

To register please fill out the form here. Just fill it out once per school.

Eligibility:
This tournament will be held in two divisions, which will use different question sets. To determine which division your team is eligible to play in, see NAQT's Division II policy.

Food:
There are plenty of lunch options in the vicinity of Scott Hall. We will provide a more detailed guide to the RU area in the logistics emails.

Current Field:
The current field is here.
We hope to see you there!
Emmett Laurie
East Brunswick '16
Rutgers University '20

The Billiards Fool
Wakka
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 2:09 pm

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by The Billiards Fool » Wed Dec 19, 2018 1:06 am

Field updates (for ease of visibility I'll keep an updated field here):

Division I
Columbia A
Columbia B
Delaware A
Georgetown A
Gettysburg A
Johns Hopkins A
Johns Hopkins B
Maryland A
NYU A
Penn A
Penn B
Princeton A (in process)

Division II
Columbia C
Columbia D
Delaware B
Georgetown B
Georgetown C
Gettysburg B
Johns Hopkins B
Maryland B
NYU B
NYU C
NYU D
Penn C
Penn D
Penn E
Princeton B
Princeton C (in process)
Rutgers
Swarthmore
West Chester
Last edited by The Billiards Fool on Tue Jan 29, 2019 3:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Emmett Laurie
East Brunswick '16
Rutgers University '20

The Billiards Fool
Wakka
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 2:09 pm

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by The Billiards Fool » Tue Jan 29, 2019 3:03 pm

Few reminders:

There is about a week left before the registration deadline!

We need as many buzzers as we can get so if you have any you're not bringing or if you know where to access some let me know!
Emmett Laurie
East Brunswick '16
Rutgers University '20

The Billiards Fool
Wakka
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 2:09 pm

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by The Billiards Fool » Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:40 pm

Because our fields are currently at 11 and 19 (and how incredibly convenient it would be to be at 12/20 or at least 12/19 or 11/20) I have opened registration until Thursday. If any teams have any more teams they would like to sign up I encourage people to sign up asap!

EDIT: also we can never get enough mods so if people know anyone in the region that I have no contacted about staff let me know!

EDIT: I will also close it at 12/20 and admit waitlisted teams on a 2 by 2 basis.
Emmett Laurie
East Brunswick '16
Rutgers University '20

The Billiards Fool
Wakka
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 2:09 pm

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by The Billiards Fool » Sun Feb 10, 2019 11:13 am

We're finalizing some stats stuff up today but congratulations to our winners, Columbia A in Di and Maryland B in Dii. Congrats also to JHU A, who defeated UMD A in a tiebreaker game to take second place in Di. In Dii Columbia B and Penn C took second and third.

As Eric has rightfully pointed out, I forgot (I made the post rather off the cuff whoops) to mention Delaware's run to the UG title, which consisted of winning three straight tiebreaker games over NYU then Princeton to take the title. Congratulations to Delaware, and to Princeton and NYU, the second and third place UG teams.

I hope everyone had a great time yesterday. I am infinitely grateful to all of the staffers, team affiliated and non-team affiliated, without whom this tournament wouldn't have been possible. Thank you to JinAh Kim, Jordan Brownstein, Ophir Lifshitz, Saul Hankin, Aaron Cohen, Emily Lamonica, Jason Golfinos, Antonio Jimenez, Alex Echikson, Chris Chiego, Alex Dzurick, Sam Braunfeld, Rebecca Rosenthal, and Emilie Hautemont. The tournament would have very literally not been possible without the generosity of every one of yall.

EDIT: adding UG stuff
Last edited by The Billiards Fool on Sun Feb 10, 2019 8:01 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Emmett Laurie
East Brunswick '16
Rutgers University '20

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: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN) » Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:35 pm

Speaking strictly as a Division 1 player, I LOVED that we were done with like 45 whole minutes to spare before the 5:30 PM train (and that the tournament had great moderators and real-ass competition in every single room). The long delay at the beginning mixed with somebody reminding me that Rutgers once hosted a very messy MUT in the not-too-distant past put me in the "resigned to playing a disaster that will take until like 7 to get through 11 rounds" mindset, and I was elated that we ended up NOT playing that kind of tournament, so kudos.
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
Milhouse
Rikku
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 9:16 am

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by Milhouse » Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:49 pm

I'd like to echo Charlie's praise for the speed at which this tournament went (though Delaware had to leave later due to an Undergraduate finals series [which Delaware won over Princeton A in the tiebreak of the second game of a disadvantaged final after beating NYU A for the right to play them, unless there are procedural issues I'm unaware of that explain why Emmett didn't mention it in his wrap-up post]). This event was extremely well run and I offer many thanks to the Rutgers and outside staffers who made it happen.
Eric Wolfsberg
Bethlehem Central High School 2016
University of Delaware 2020
Writer, NAQT


"For the stronger we our houses do build, / The less chance we have of being killed."
William McGonagall, "The Tay Bridge Disaster"

User avatar
Youngster Joey
Lulu
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 4:36 am
Location: Route 30, Johto

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by Youngster Joey » Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:37 am

At Saturday's tournament, following the 14 round schedule in D2 all teams were required to wait upwards of 30 minutes to determine if any ties needed to be broken. Johns Hopkins B, Princeton C, and Swarthmore were determined to be in a 3-way tie for fifth, and played on half-packets to determine final placement. As shown on the NAQT website itself, Johns Hopkins B won both of their games for supposedly fifth place. Instead, it appears Princeton C and Swarthmore were both given fifth place, and Johns Hopkins B given ninth place, behind NYU B who was not even in said tiebreaker for alleged fifth place. I believe said tiebreaker was based on the shared 4-5 playoffs record of Princeton C, Swarthmore, and Johns Hopkins B; however, as NAQT has clarified in the SCT @ Queen's thread, viewtopic.php?f=8&t=22258, final placement should be based on overall record. In this case, Johns Hopkins B and NYU B are tied at 7-7, and should have played a tiebreaker. Instead, Johns Hopkins B was duped into playing two half-packet tiebreakers, won both, told that they placed 5th, and then actually placed 9th behind both teams they beat in the tiebreaker as well as the team they rightfully should have played a tiebreaker with instead. This causes Johns Hopkins B's D-value ranking to drop from 32-35 (Princeton C - NYU B) to 42.

It seems NAQT decided that the tiebreak games were invalid due to the above reasoning. However, why then were Princeton C and Swarthmore given tied for fifth while Johns Hopkins B was placed behind NYU B? Since no tiebreak was played both teams should be tied at eighth.

How was this allowed to happen? Were hosts not made aware of SCT placement policies?

An even more egregious error was missed if the HSQB stats are to be believed, as Columbia C, Penn D, Princeton C, and Swarthmore were tied at an overall 9-5 record. However, there is a discrepancy between the HSQB and NAQT stats regarding the Columbia C - Penn D game, with HSQB stats indicating Columbia C achieved 30 PPB.
Walter Zhao
Torrey Pines '16
Johns Hopkins '19
UCSF '20

"Remember my super cool Rattata? My Rattata is different from regular Rattata. It’s like my Rattata is in the top percentage of all Rattata."

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

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by Cody » Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:18 am

According to the stats that I can see on the DB, Rutgers did everything correctly here and ought to be praised. (Seriously—playing off a 3-way 5th place tie is commitment!)

NAQT’s SCT placement policies cannot be considered when running a tournament because they are completely unpublished and not communicated to hosts.* Moreover, they are strictly antithetical to running a good and fair tournament.** Hosts can and should ignore them, and the community should pressure NAQT to change them. This is a great example of how their nonsensical policy fucks over teams.

* Prior to the 2017 thread, even people “in the know” did not know that NAQT unilaterally changed hosts’s final rankings, we only knew their placement policy for ICT. Outside of the people who would’ve seen that thread, there is no way to find out about this.

** Except in the instance of a non-bracketed prelims, where all games are against a common field, as in the SCT @ Queens thread.
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
Milhouse
Rikku
Posts: 281
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2014 9:16 am

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by Milhouse » Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:51 am

Also, why on the NAQT website is Princeton A ahead of Delaware A in the overall rankings but second to them in UG?

EDIT: Looking at it more closely, I guess the answer for this is that the UG finals series was counted only for the UG rankings and not the overall rankings, since you don’t do an advantaged final between the 6th and 5th ranked teams. This would also explain why Delaware and NYU are tied for 6th in the overall ranking, since they had the same record before the UG finals series. That said, I agree with Cody that NAQT should document these issues relating to the determination of placement better.
Eric Wolfsberg
Bethlehem Central High School 2016
University of Delaware 2020
Writer, NAQT


"For the stronger we our houses do build, / The less chance we have of being killed."
William McGonagall, "The Tay Bridge Disaster"

User avatar
lumosityfan
Lulu
Posts: 52
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 8:27 pm

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by lumosityfan » Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:27 pm

There seems to be a discrepancy between the stats on HSQB and the stats on NAQT. Penn D is shown to have a 10-4 overall record and Columbia C a 8-6 overall record on NAQT while HSQB shows Penn D to have a 9-5 record and Columbia C a 9-5 record. Also, HSQB shows Columbia C's PPB to be 20.72 while NAQT shows Columbia C's PPB to be 17.57.
Jeff Xie
John P. Stevens Class of 2015 (Go Hawks!)
Columbia University Class of 2019 (Go Lions!)

The Billiards Fool
Wakka
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 2:09 pm

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by The Billiards Fool » Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:21 pm

Youngster Joey wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 7:37 am
At Saturday's tournament, following the 14 round schedule in D2 all teams were required to wait upwards of 30 minutes to determine if any ties needed to be broken. Johns Hopkins B, Princeton C, and Swarthmore were determined to be in a 3-way tie for fifth, and played on half-packets to determine final placement. As shown on the NAQT website itself, Johns Hopkins B won both of their games for supposedly fifth place. Instead, it appears Princeton C and Swarthmore were both given fifth place, and Johns Hopkins B given ninth place, behind NYU B who was not even in said tiebreaker for alleged fifth place. I believe said tiebreaker was based on the shared 4-5 playoffs record of Princeton C, Swarthmore, and Johns Hopkins B; however, as NAQT has clarified in the SCT @ Queen's thread, viewtopic.php?f=8&t=22258, final placement should be based on overall record. In this case, Johns Hopkins B and NYU B are tied at 7-7, and should have played a tiebreaker. Instead, Johns Hopkins B was duped into playing two half-packet tiebreakers, won both, told that they placed 5th, and then actually placed 9th behind both teams they beat in the tiebreaker as well as the team they rightfully should have played a tiebreaker with instead. This causes Johns Hopkins B's D-value ranking to drop from 32-35 (Princeton C - NYU B) to 42.

It seems NAQT decided that the tiebreak games were invalid due to the above reasoning. However, why then were Princeton C and Swarthmore given tied for fifth while Johns Hopkins B was placed behind NYU B? Since no tiebreak was played both teams should be tied at eighth.

How was this allowed to happen? Were hosts not made aware of SCT placement policies?

An even more egregious error was missed if the HSQB stats are to be believed, as Columbia C, Penn D, Princeton C, and Swarthmore were tied at an overall 9-5 record. However, there is a discrepancy between the HSQB and NAQT stats regarding the Columbia C - Penn D game, with HSQB stats indicating Columbia C achieved 30 PPB.
Hey Walter. I am sorry for any inconveniences caused by JHU B's extra games. I was under the impression that this would shape the final placement (as it has at all other tournaments I have hosted). Cody's post describes my experience. Also the HSQB stats thing was my mistake so nothing in Dii should be amiss based on the guidelines I was operating under during the tournament.
Emmett Laurie
East Brunswick '16
Rutgers University '20

The Billiards Fool
Wakka
Posts: 214
Joined: Wed May 06, 2015 2:09 pm

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by The Billiards Fool » Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:23 pm

lumosityfan wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 8:27 pm
There seems to be a discrepancy between the stats on HSQB and the stats on NAQT. Penn D is shown to have a 10-4 overall record and Columbia C a 8-6 overall record on NAQT while HSQB shows Penn D to have a 9-5 record and Columbia C a 9-5 record. Also, HSQB shows Columbia C's PPB to be 20.72 while NAQT shows Columbia C's PPB to be 17.57.
Hey Jeff. These were a result of a few stat-entering errors in the post I uploaded. The stats sent to NAQT are accurate and so now are the ones on the database.

The final Division I standings are now here; the final Division II standings are here. Everything except the order of finish is accurate as to what is on NAQT's website.
Emmett Laurie
East Brunswick '16
Rutgers University '20

User avatar
Youngster Joey
Lulu
Posts: 42
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 4:36 am
Location: Route 30, Johto

Re: NAQT SCT @ Rutgers (2/9/19)

Post by Youngster Joey » Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:58 pm

The Billiards Fool wrote:
Tue Feb 12, 2019 9:21 pm

Hey Walter. I am sorry for any inconveniences caused by JHU B's extra games. I was under the impression that this would shape the final placement (as it has at all other tournaments I have hosted). Cody's post describes my experience.
My apologies Emmett, I would like to clarify that neither I nor anyone from JHU blames Rutgers for what occurred. I know you, JJ, David, and the entire staff gave their all to ensure a quality tournament experience, and I will speak for JHU (as well as echo previous posts) in saying that you did a superb job. We are only upset that final placements used for qualification at ICT do not reflect the standings as determined at the end of the tournament; this falls on NAQT's lack of transparency regarding this issue.
Walter Zhao
Torrey Pines '16
Johns Hopkins '19
UCSF '20

"Remember my super cool Rattata? My Rattata is different from regular Rattata. It’s like my Rattata is in the top percentage of all Rattata."

Post Reply