Kickoffs

Dormant threads from the high school sections are preserved here.
jonah
Auron
Posts: 2300
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Kickoffs

Post by jonah » Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:31 pm

To celebrate the fact that we actually have a whole subforum to ourselves, I'm going to take advantage of it and put this in a new thread. Mods, maybe we could split off the Kickoff-related posts from the main Illinois thread into here.

Now, here are my observations from the WN Kickoff. Starting with the playoff seeds:
1. Loyola A is good. Should learn some science. I didn't get the impression that they were dominating, however, and I don't necessarily think they'll be able to consistently beat a Lloyd-enabled Auburn.
2. Naperville Central is also incredibly good. I read for their game against Barrington in the first round of the playoffs, which was very close at the half (Barrington leading, if I recall correctly, but only by 10 or so) but quickly became not so close. (It was exciting throughout, though. More on Barrington later.) Krystle is clearly their star player, but they have other players who knew things too, and were showing it. They can go far this year if they keep showing up to good tournaments.
3. Auburn A was missing Lloyd, but was still pretty good. Their final match against Loyola went down to the last question and was pretty awesome to watch. Hopefully they will continue being able to go to lots of good tournaments.
4. St. Ignatius has a pretty good player, I hear. I saw him getting more support from his teammates today than he had previously, though he's still clearly the Andrew Deveau Sheau. Apparently his skill is lighting a fire under at least some of those teammates, which is a great thing. I expect to see them often, including in championship matches.
5. New Trier A was not one of the teams I saw today. If what I guess happened happened, then they need to learn things that aren't chem, history, and current events. Like lit, which has long been a weakness of NT teams, but as we move away from IHSA-like distributions where the amount of lit is miniscule, it's becoming more of a serious handicap. Arts, too.
6. Lisle A and 7. Fremd A were also teams I didn't see.
8. Buffalo Grove A has a superstar in Greg Ward and some other people who, frankly, didn't give me much cause to notice them. (I hear they have an excellent sophomore, though, who was making excellent use of his time by going to Kaneland. I kid, I kid.) Greg, however, knows a lot of stuff. If they are able to go to good tournaments, which is a huge question, they will do well. Another team that could do with learning some science, though.
9. Wheaton-Warrenville South A - didn't see them. I haven't all year, actually; I'm not even sure they've been anywhere before today.
10. OPRF A was not among the teams I saw, but I heard a bunch of things, all of which were "they're good, and just need to keep going to good tournaments". They beat Naperville Central, which is a very impressive feat on its own. I definitely look forward to seeing them in action.
11. Culver A, 12. Latin, 13. St. Viator A, and 14. Carmel A - didn't see them.
15. Barrington A lost to Naperville Central in the only game I saw them in, which was close for a while. They were very good, buzzing early on lots of categories. Their bonus conversion was more spotty, I believe; there were some 30s and some 0s in addition to various 10s and 20s. With a new coach at the helm and Jeff Price helping him out, they will do very well this year.
16. Libertyville - didn't see them.

Observations on other things: We need to stop using single-elimination for playoffs and start keeping individual stats. I have yet to hear a single legitimate argument against either of these proposals.
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
Irreligion in Bangladesh
Auron
Posts: 2068
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 1:18 am
Location: Winnebago, IL

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Irreligion in Bangladesh » Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:36 pm

Jonah, post your proposal for a 64 team tourney format that allows rebracketed afternoon play, so we can nip the "you have to do single elim with ALL THESE TEAMS" argument in the bud.
Brad Fischer
Head Editor, IHSA State Series

Winnebago HS ('06)
Northern Illinois University ('10)
Assistant Coach, IMSA (2010-12)
Coach, Keith Country Day School (2012-16)

jonah
Auron
Posts: 2300
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Kickoffs

Post by jonah » Sun Nov 22, 2009 7:41 pm

Okay, here it is. I assumed 64 teams because I don't know the intricacies of fudging the power-matching with numbers of teams that aren't powers of two, but I know it can be done and I assume the results would be similar.

Let's say we have 64 teams at one of next year's Kickoffs. We do five rounds of power-matching and get 2 teams at 5-0, 10 at 4-1, 20 3-2, 20 2-3, 10 1-4, and 2 0-5; that's 5 packets. Take the 5-0 and 4-1 teams and break into 2 brackets of 6 (each of which contains one 5-0 team, and half the 4-1 teams, splitting them up as evenly as possible by PPB). Play a round-robin within those brackets; that's 5 more packets for a total of 10. Break ties within each bracket if necessary by playing a full game; that's possibly another packet, for a total of 10 or 11. Play a final between the winner of each bracket; that's 1 packet for a total of 11 or 12. There are also 52 teams that are 3-2 or below after the power-matching, so break into 8 brackets of 6 and one bracket of 4 by PPB, and play round robins within those brackets.
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
JackGlerum
Tidus
Posts: 660
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 9:20 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by JackGlerum » Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:08 pm

jonah wrote:Naperville Central is also incredibly good
jonah wrote:a superstar in Greg Ward
I assume both of these statements are hyperbole? I suppose it depends what perspective you come from, but nonetheless.

jonah
Auron
Posts: 2300
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Kickoffs

Post by jonah » Sun Nov 22, 2009 9:22 pm

JackGlerum wrote:
jonah wrote:Naperville Central is also incredibly good
jonah wrote:a superstar in Greg Ward
I assume both of these statements are hyperbole? I suppose it depends what perspective you come from, but nonetheless.
The second one maybe a little bit, but not the first one. It would not surprise me if Naperville Central were to beat (say) Auburn, Loyola, or Carbondale in some match. I don't think any of those would happen with regularity, but they're very very good.
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
the return of AHAN
Auron
Posts: 1919
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2007 10:40 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by the return of AHAN » Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:02 pm

The Barrington A - Naperville Central playoff match was 155-150 at halftime. But Central out-TU'd us 7-3 in the 2nd half, including 3 powers. When Gaurav negged #14 (much to Norman's chagrin), which was power-vulched by Krystle, we never held the lead again. Our bonus conversion was 17.5 per bonus controlled (2 30's; no bagels; 30 rebounded pts), while Central's conversion was 17.3 per bonus controlled (3 30's; 1 bagel; 50 rebounded points). The final score was 365-255, with Krystle bagging 70 points to lead NC Central.
They took the loss well, and didn't blame the questions or the format for their loss (Not that I'd suffer that sort of attitude). The team enjoyed Norman reading the unasked questions on the bus ride home, and the frosh-soph team got some great experience not available to them anywhere else this weekend. Most importantly, they're primed for the NTV next month!
Jeff Price
Barrington High School Coach
Barrington Station Middle School Coach (2013 MSNCT Champions, 2013 & 2017 Illinois Class AA State Champions)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

User avatar
jdeliverer
Rikku
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:26 pm
Location: Providence

Re: Kickoffs

Post by jdeliverer » Mon Nov 23, 2009 1:00 am

jonah wrote:To celebrate the fact that we actually have a whole subforum to ourselves, I'm going to take advantage of it and put this in a new thread. Mods, maybe we could split off the Kickoff-related posts from the main Illinois thread into here.

5. New Trier A was not one of the teams I saw today. If what I guess happened happened, then they need to learn things that aren't chem, history, and current events. Like lit, which has long been a weakness of NT teams, but as we move away from IHSA-like distributions where the amount of lit is miniscule, it's becoming more of a serious handicap. Arts, too.

16. Libertyville - didn't see them.
These were the only teams in the finals that we saw today. I have to agree with you on New Trier, we were able to steal some surprising Lit questions (notably don't discuss answers from sets that haven't been cleared!) and fine arts went our way too. That said, Steve is great in his specialties and he can sweep plenty of SS bonuses.

Libertyville has a good balanced team, but they don't have the depth of knowledge or raw talent that is required to be a top contender yet. With some study they could go far this year.

These were our two losses, both by 25 points. We were missing 3 of our starting 5 for IMEA, etc., which definitely hurt - once we are at full strength I look forward to playing some of these teams again.

The tournament was a lot of fun, and was very well run. Nice format, too. More comp math please though (good quiz bowl? ha!) :cool:
Robert Volgman
Brown '14
Latin School of Chicago '10

User avatar
abnormal abdomen
Rikku
Posts: 346
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2009 3:58 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by abnormal abdomen » Mon Nov 23, 2009 2:56 am

(don't discuss answers from sets that haven't been cleared!
Don't mention specific questions, I think.

you made me have to edit two posts! argh! -Mgmt.

User avatar
Deviant Insider
Auron
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 6:08 am
Location: Chicagoland
Contact:

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Deviant Insider » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:32 am

The problem with Jonah's proposal above is that a team could go 9-1 against strong competition and not qualify for the Championship Match.

If you could play six matches before lunch (and the timing of six matches without bouncebacks should be the same as five matches with bouncebacks), the power matching would get you to one undefeated team and six teams with one loss. To those seven teams, you could add the best two-loss team based on the best criterion available (hopefully bonus conversion) and treat that team as though it only had one morning loss. For the afternoon, you could divide the whole field into eight groups of eight teams each (based on record and then bonus conversion), and play three rounds of power matching within those groups. Everybody would play nine rounds. At the end of the day, there would either be one undefeated team while everybody else had at least two losses, which could be named Champion, or two one-loss teams, which could play a Championship Match.
David Reinstein
PACE VP of Outreach, Head Writer and Editor for Scobol Solo and Masonics (Illinois), TD for New Trier Scobol Solo and New Trier Varsity, Writer for NAQT (2011-2017), IHSSBCA Board Member, IHSSBCA Chair (2004-2014), PACE Member, PACE President (2016-2018), New Trier Coach (1994-2011)

David Riley
Auron
Posts: 1428
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 8:27 am
Location: Morton Grove, IL

Re: Kickoffs

Post by David Riley » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:53 am

I also think that with 64 teams, you will find (unfortunately) that most of them will want to leave after lunch, especially those that end up in the bottom-most brackets.
David Riley
Coach Emeritus, Loyola Academy, Wilmette, Illinois, 1993-2010
Steering Committee, IHSSBCA, 1996 -
Member, PACE, 2012 -

"This is 1183, of course we're barbarians" -- Eleanor of Aquitaine in "The Lion in Winter"

User avatar
Deviant Insider
Auron
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 6:08 am
Location: Chicagoland
Contact:

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Deviant Insider » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:31 am

We might want to put a spot on the entry form asking whether or not the team wants to play some matches after lunch if they don't have a chance to win the tournament. It would be messy planning the brackets not knowing ahead of time how many of those teams will be in the top bracket, but it would at least give some sense of how many teams will want to stick around.
David Reinstein
PACE VP of Outreach, Head Writer and Editor for Scobol Solo and Masonics (Illinois), TD for New Trier Scobol Solo and New Trier Varsity, Writer for NAQT (2011-2017), IHSSBCA Board Member, IHSSBCA Chair (2004-2014), PACE Member, PACE President (2016-2018), New Trier Coach (1994-2011)

User avatar
Dresden_The_BIG_JERK
Tidus
Posts: 709
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:56 am
Location: Lowell, IN
Contact:

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Dresden_The_BIG_JERK » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:37 am

Such a tournament would run a very long time, and sadly, I just wouldn't anticipate 75%ish of IHSA teams to have the motivation and stamina.
BJ Houlding

Winnebago '04
Saint Joseph's College '08
IHSSBCA Certified Moderator

David Riley
Auron
Posts: 1428
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2003 8:27 am
Location: Morton Grove, IL

Re: Kickoffs

Post by David Riley » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:46 am

I think that another part of this is that, unlike college teams--who are used to spending entire days at tournaments--many high school teams look at quiz bowl as "just another thing to do", and schedule other activities for the evening. And if they are wed to IHSA-formatted tournaments, they are probably used to 5-8 matches at most.
David Riley
Coach Emeritus, Loyola Academy, Wilmette, Illinois, 1993-2010
Steering Committee, IHSSBCA, 1996 -
Member, PACE, 2012 -

"This is 1183, of course we're barbarians" -- Eleanor of Aquitaine in "The Lion in Winter"

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

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Mechanical Beasts » Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:37 am

Shcool wrote:We might want to put a spot on the entry form asking whether or not the team wants to play some matches after lunch if they don't have a chance to win the tournament. It would be messy planning the brackets not knowing ahead of time how many of those teams will be in the top bracket, but it would at least give some sense of how many teams will want to stick around.
I imagine in almost all cases the top bracket teams will want to stick around for their shot at the championship; if one doesn't, replace it with the next-highest seed.
Andrew Watkins

User avatar
Dresden_The_BIG_JERK
Tidus
Posts: 709
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:56 am
Location: Lowell, IN
Contact:

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Dresden_The_BIG_JERK » Mon Nov 23, 2009 11:38 am

Crazy Andy Watkins wrote:
Shcool wrote:We might want to put a spot on the entry form asking whether or not the team wants to play some matches after lunch if they don't have a chance to win the tournament. It would be messy planning the brackets not knowing ahead of time how many of those teams will be in the top bracket, but it would at least give some sense of how many teams will want to stick around.
I imagine in almost all cases the top bracket teams will want to stick around for their shot at the championship; if one doesn't, replace it with the next-highest seed.
Sad as it is, you might be surprised...some Illinois teams would say 5-6 afternoon rounds are just too many.
BJ Houlding

Winnebago '04
Saint Joseph's College '08
IHSSBCA Certified Moderator

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

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Mechanical Beasts » Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:09 pm

Dresden The Moderator wrote:
Crazy Andy Watkins wrote:
Shcool wrote:We might want to put a spot on the entry form asking whether or not the team wants to play some matches after lunch if they don't have a chance to win the tournament. It would be messy planning the brackets not knowing ahead of time how many of those teams will be in the top bracket, but it would at least give some sense of how many teams will want to stick around.
I imagine in almost all cases the top bracket teams will want to stick around for their shot at the championship; if one doesn't, replace it with the next-highest seed.
Sad as it is, you might be surprised...some Illinois teams would say 5-6 afternoon rounds are just too many.
I guess I was judging from the teams that Jonah was describing--that top bracket, certainly, would stay around, right?
Andrew Watkins

User avatar
Deviant Insider
Auron
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 6:08 am
Location: Chicagoland
Contact:

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Deviant Insider » Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:54 pm

I was assuming that teams with a shot at the Championship would want to stick around--the question was aimed at teams that would not have a chance. Also, the system I described only had three afternoon rounds (after six morning rounds), with if necessary one extra match for the top two teams.

There has never been a major problem with teams leaving a tournament early, but there has been an expectation that only the top teams would play after lunch. That expectation no longer holds with the small number of teams that regularly attend very good tournaments, but it still holds for many teams.
David Reinstein
PACE VP of Outreach, Head Writer and Editor for Scobol Solo and Masonics (Illinois), TD for New Trier Scobol Solo and New Trier Varsity, Writer for NAQT (2011-2017), IHSSBCA Board Member, IHSSBCA Chair (2004-2014), PACE Member, PACE President (2016-2018), New Trier Coach (1994-2011)

User avatar
Haaaaaaaarry Whiiiiiiiiiite
Auron
Posts: 1123
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:46 pm
Location: Fairfax, VA
Contact:

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Haaaaaaaarry Whiiiiiiiiiite » Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:35 pm

The problem with that is you're having the winner of a 64-team single-elim play the winner of an 8-team single-elim.
Harry White
TJHSST '09, Virginia Tech '13
Member, PACE
Tournament Database Search by Team
Will run stats for food

User avatar
jdeliverer
Rikku
Posts: 296
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2009 10:26 pm
Location: Providence

Re: Kickoffs

Post by jdeliverer » Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:40 pm

Latin's stats:


Morning:

Robert Volgman, Senior: 4-18, 48 PPG
Seth Perlman, Senior: 4-15, 42 PPG
JJ Jarik, Senior: 2-5, 16 PPG
Hannah Spooner, Junior: 1-3, 9 PPG
Aldo Chavez, Senior: 0-2, 4 PPG
Dilara Akgunduz, Junior: 0-1, 2 PPG

Afternoon:

Robert Volgman, Senior: 1-3, 45 PPG
Seth Perlman, Senior: 1-2, 35 PPG
Hannah Spooner, Junior: 0-1, 10 PPG
Dilara Akgunduz, Junior: 0-1, 10 PPG

Aside from Seth and myself, there was some switching during the morning round. We also had a freshman that rotated in a few times that is not shown here. So some of the other players might have been shorted a few PPG due to not playing the full games.
Robert Volgman
Brown '14
Latin School of Chicago '10

jonah
Auron
Posts: 2300
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Kickoffs

Post by jonah » Mon Nov 23, 2009 3:57 pm

Also, I'm going to now post a version of the email I sent to people who wanted to hear how Sterling's Kickoff went from my point of view. All specific question-related information has been <redacted>, and I've toned myself down a bit.

In general, teams were absolutely awful at RMP, fine arts, and social science. I expected this. I was surprised, however, by how awful they were at trash and current events/politics/recent history. In my room, 0 points were scored on <nonzero amount> worth of video game questions, and very few on movies, TV, or sports. A tossup on <trash answer> did get powered. Which brings me to...

I saw three powers all day, two of them on trash, and none of them in the playoff rounds. Other than those three powers, I saw fewer than 10 buzzes before the end of the question. Most of them were right, because the players weren't aggressive. One of the people I was with theorized that this is because the players are so used to getting hosed, they're conditioned not to buzz early. Based on other data, I think it's more likely they just don't know much, but the theory was interesting. And when they did buzz at the end of the question, it was 4.5 seconds after the end, when I was just about to call time. Sometimes I would give them another second or two beyond the five. And these answers would usually be right--why couldn't they just give them right when I was done?!

Bonuses were similar. I saw I think three bonuses thirtied all day, one of which was on the rebound. There might've been one or two others that the two teams combined for thirty on. And when they knew there was no way they were going to come up with the answer, which was nearly always, they still made me count off all ten seconds, then the other team would make me count off all three. It was really frustrating.

There were several questions that absolutely anyone who has passed their (say) sophomore year of high school should have known cold, some from classes and some from simply living in the United States. However, in my room, a large number of such questions were not converted (both as tossups and as bonus parts), even given the easiest possible clues about them.

Conversion on the computation questions was just as awful as everything else, even though they had 20 seconds to do problems that are designed to be done in 10, and even though NAQT's computation questions all end with "For 10 points, what is 3 times 2?" or similar.

Cheryl Christianson (the host and Sterling coach) and I had some discussion about why teams there don't like pyramidal questions, and I can now understand it. The advantage of pyramidal questions is that they differentiate between who knows more, but if neither team knows the answer given the easiest possible clue, you have nothing to differentiate, so it's a massive waste of time.

The following were overheard in my room during morning rounds:
  • "I feel like taking my basketball and going home." --a coach, stated twice. (I wonder if maybe s/he should've brought a buzzer system instead of a basketball? Then they might've done better.)
  • "According to Hoyle, ..." --same coach, phrase used THREE times
  • "Don't listen to the first few sentences; wait until he gets to the end." --same coach
  • "OUR league would NEVER do this." --same coach (I'm not sure what s/he meant here. Our league would never win? Our league would never ask about academic material?)
  • "These are so hard, the questions." --player from the team whose coach I was just quoting
  • "Stillman Vally" --written by my scorekeeper three times (sic)
  • Number of times I was told to slow down, despite going incredibly slowly: I lost count, but over 20. On the other hand, the Stillman Valley coach complimented my speed and style three times.
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
Deviant Insider
Auron
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 6:08 am
Location: Chicagoland
Contact:

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Deviant Insider » Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:44 pm

Earthquake wrote:The problem with that is you're having the winner of a 64-team single-elim play the winner of an 8-team single-elim.
I'm not sure why that's a big problem if the 8-team single-elim consisted of the top 8 teams from the 64-team single-elim.
David Reinstein
PACE VP of Outreach, Head Writer and Editor for Scobol Solo and Masonics (Illinois), TD for New Trier Scobol Solo and New Trier Varsity, Writer for NAQT (2011-2017), IHSSBCA Board Member, IHSSBCA Chair (2004-2014), PACE Member, PACE President (2016-2018), New Trier Coach (1994-2011)

gack1224
Wakka
Posts: 102
Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2007 10:19 pm
Location: Minneapolis, MN

Re: Kickoffs

Post by gack1224 » Mon Nov 23, 2009 5:46 pm

jonah wrote: I saw three powers all day, two of them on trash, and none of them in the playoff rounds.

Bonuses were similar. I saw I think three bonuses thirtied all day, one of which was on the rebound. There might've been one or two others that the two teams combined for thirty on. And when they knew there was no way they were going to come up with the answer, which was nearly always, they still made me count off all ten seconds, then the other team would make me count off all three. It was really frustrating.

Conversion on the computation questions was just as awful as everything else, even though they had 20 seconds to do problems that are designed to be done in 10, and even though NAQT's computation questions all end with "For 10 points, what is 3 times 2?" or similar.
I'll interject here and say that we probably saw different sides of the field. Perhaps if you had seen Geneva, Marian Central, Bettendorf, these issues may have been tempered. All day I saw teams answering questions prior to the last word on 4/5 or more of the tossups. In addition, we never saw a math tossup go the full 20 seconds. As for powers, I saw few but more than three. In all, I can say that Sterling was far less competitive than Wheaton, but the field had its moments.
jonah wrote:Cheryl Christianson (the host and Sterling coach) and I had some discussion about why teams there don't like pyramidal questions, and I can now understand it. The advantage of pyramidal questions is that they differentiate between who knows more, but if neither team knows the answer given the easiest possible clue, you have nothing to differentiate, so it's a massive waste of time.
Part of the problem is that these teams are working towards winning things like Masonic and IHSA finals which they know will be on the type of questions which one could call "bad quiz bowl" or just "scholastic bowl." Teams and coaches are likely against NAQT and mACF because it's not what they're used to and not what they're going to "need." Teams like Auburn, Loyola, Chicagoland etc., they have hopes of doing well at HSNCT and others, so they want to play this format more. Until IHSA finals are NAQT or a good bunch of teams start going to HSNCT, I don't know that you'll change many minds based on the fact that NAQT and mACF questions are simply better at differentiating than quick recall and the like.
Cresston Gackle
University of Minnesota '13

User avatar
The King's Flight to the Scots
Auron
Posts: 1456
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by The King's Flight to the Scots » Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:05 pm

Shcool wrote:
Earthquake wrote:The problem with that is you're having the winner of a 64-team single-elim play the winner of an 8-team single-elim.
I'm not sure why that's a big problem if the 8-team single-elim consisted of the top 8 teams from the 64-team single-elim.
You're basically combining the (terrible) idea of single-elim with a bizarre bracketing format. You might as well pick a name out of the hat to figure out who the best team is.

Anyway, I can't help but laugh at the arguments against having a lot of rounds that people have been posting. They basically boil down to "Illinois just isn't as good as other regions, so we can't play all these rounds." Why do you think the DC area is so good? Because the top teams from years ago accepted various standards of good quizbowl, then passed them down when they left. Now, everyone knows to expect 10 rounds of round-robins on good questions and abhors speed arithmetic and bad formats. Frankly, you're right that Illinois isn't there yet. However, if you ever want teams besides Loyola and Auburn to advance into the new age, you're going to have to stuff these widely-accepted standards down their throats. People will complain at first, but eventually, people will learn to expect the new standards. It shouldn't be a long, drawn out process, either. When I was a freshman, every DC tournament involved single elimination, speed arithmetic, and terrible questions. Now, every good DC team would be shocked at a tournament with any one of those things.

In conclusion: people will complain. Who cares? Round robins are just better than single elim, and arithmetic questions suck.
Matt Bollinger
UVA '14, UVA '15
Communications Officer, ACF

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Charley Pride » Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:26 pm

Good things by Matt Bollinger
I wholeheartedly agree.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
JackGlerum
Tidus
Posts: 660
Joined: Wed Aug 15, 2007 9:20 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by JackGlerum » Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:57 pm

gack1224 wrote:Part of the problem is that these teams are working towards winning things like Masonic and IHSA finals which they know will be on the type of questions which one could call "bad quiz bowl" or just "scholastic bowl." Teams and coaches are likely against NAQT and mACF because it's not what they're used to and not what they're going to "need." Teams like Auburn, Loyola, Chicagoland etc., they have hopes of doing well at HSNCT and others, so they want to play this format more. Until IHSA finals are NAQT or a good bunch of teams start going to HSNCT, I don't know that you'll change many minds based on the fact that NAQT and mACF questions are simply better at differentiating than quick recall and the like.
This is a different (and better) version of what I said here. Kickoff, as usual, brings our state's problems to the forefront of our collective minds. Indeed, an insightful post by Cresston.
Journey to the Planets wrote:if you ever want teams besides Loyola and Auburn to advance into the new age, you're going to have to stuff these widely-accepted standards down their throats. People will complain at first, but eventually, people will learn to expect the new standards. It shouldn't be a long, drawn out process, either. When I was a freshman, every DC tournament involved single elimination, speed arithmetic, and terrible questions. Now, every good DC team would be shocked at a tournament with any one of those things.
How many teams does DC have? 20? 50? 100? We have literally hundreds of teams spread statewide. It's not possible to do what you suggest, despite your good intentions. You can't say "F you, do our format you inferior people!" and expect them to get on their knees. It's cynical, but it's the reality around here. Yes, we should always try to get more teams on board, but I maintain that we should be satisfied with the many good tournaments we have. Illinois teams rolled out in record numbers at last year's HSNCT and performed the best they ever have at both HSNCT and NSC.

User avatar
The King's Flight to the Scots
Auron
Posts: 1456
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by The King's Flight to the Scots » Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:24 pm

JackGlerum wrote:
Journey to the Planets wrote:if you ever want teams besides Loyola and Auburn to advance into the new age, you're going to have to stuff these widely-accepted standards down their throats. People will complain at first, but eventually, people will learn to expect the new standards. It shouldn't be a long, drawn out process, either. When I was a freshman, every DC tournament involved single elimination, speed arithmetic, and terrible questions. Now, every good DC team would be shocked at a tournament with any one of those things.
How many teams does DC have? 20? 50? 100? We have literally hundreds of teams spread statewide. It's not possible to do what you suggest, despite your good intentions. You can't say "F you, do our format you inferior people!" and expect them to get on their knees. It's cynical, but it's the reality around here. Yes, we should always try to get more teams on board, but I maintain that we should be satisfied with the many good tournaments we have. Illinois teams rolled out in record numbers at last year's HSNCT and performed the best they ever have at both HSNCT and NSC.
Dude, who cares how many teams you have? It really says something that even though you have so many teams, none of them got into the top bracket of NSC (I'm not counting HSNCT, since speed arithmetic gave you guys an edge there). I don't think we should ever be "satisfied" with how many good tournaments we have; in fact, that idea is ridiculous and reactionary. If people in DC had decided, three years ago, that we had enough good tournaments, think of where GDS, TJ, and St. Anselm's would be today. Moreover, I contend that you are the one considering teams "inferior." I contend that any team can contend in pyramidal quizbowl if they have enough intellectual curiosity, and if they learn to expect pyramidal questions, we will see teams rising to the challenge. Certainly, not everyone will instantly improve. However, after a time, some of the schools who previously only played bad formats will become strong contenders, and the top Illinois teams will become even better. By saying "Well, you guys are just too dumb for pyramidal questions, play the crappy IHSA format for 5 rounds and call it a day," you are not giving these teams enough respect.
Matt Bollinger
UVA '14, UVA '15
Communications Officer, ACF

jonah
Auron
Posts: 2300
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Kickoffs

Post by jonah » Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:31 pm

Journey to the Planets wrote:
JackGlerum wrote:
Journey to the Planets wrote:if you ever want teams besides Loyola and Auburn to advance into the new age, you're going to have to stuff these widely-accepted standards down their throats. People will complain at first, but eventually, people will learn to expect the new standards. It shouldn't be a long, drawn out process, either. When I was a freshman, every DC tournament involved single elimination, speed arithmetic, and terrible questions. Now, every good DC team would be shocked at a tournament with any one of those things.
How many teams does DC have? 20? 50? 100? We have literally hundreds of teams spread statewide. It's not possible to do what you suggest, despite your good intentions. You can't say "F you, do our format you inferior people!" and expect them to get on their knees. It's cynical, but it's the reality around here. Yes, we should always try to get more teams on board, but I maintain that we should be satisfied with the many good tournaments we have. Illinois teams rolled out in record numbers at last year's HSNCT and performed the best they ever have at both HSNCT and NSC.
Dude, who cares how many teams you have? It really says something that even though you have so many teams, none of them got into the top bracket of NSC (I'm not counting HSNCT, since speed arithmetic gave you guys an edge there). I don't think we should ever be "satisfied" with how many good tournaments we have; in fact, that idea is ridiculous and reactionary. If people in DC had decided, three years ago, that we had enough good tournaments, think of where GDS, TJ, and St. Anselm's would be today. Moreover, I contend that you are the one considering teams "inferior." I contend that any team can contend in pyramidal quizbowl if they have enough intellectual curiosity, and if they learn to expect pyramidal questions, we will see teams rising to the challenge. By saying "Well, you guys are just too dumb for pyramidal questions, play the crappy IHSA format for 5 rounds and call it a day," you are not giving these teams enough respect.
So by your argument, because none of Illinois' teams managed to be among the top eight in a very competitive field, we should shut up? That's absurd, and you ought to know it. Illinois' teams' collective failure to make the top bracket of last year's NSC doesn't say anything other than that there were a bunch of teams that did better in the relevant games.

Regarding satisfaction with the number of good tournaments, that doesn't hold either. Right now, there are more programs wanting to host good tournaments than there are dates on the calendar. This leads to tournaments taking away from each other's fields, which is obviously not what we want. Other than weekends like the upcoming one (Thanksgiving) and a few others that for good reasons few people would attend a tournament on, nearly every weekend that we are permitted to hold tournaments on (by IHSA rules) has at least one good one.

No one on these boards is saying that the 500 or so teams in Illinois that eschew good quizbowl are too dumb for it, or anything like what you said. They themselves are saying they think they're too dumb for it. Many of the teams I saw at Sterling, among others, simply lack the intellectual curiosity that you cite (quite rightly) as a prerequisite for improving at quizbowl. They just don't want to get better. Why do they play scholastic bowl at all? Heck if I know. Probably they shouldn't. But they do, and certain people with a lot of influence think it's better to have 550 teams, most of which barely exist, than 50 teams that want to be good.
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
Boeing X-20, Please!
Rikku
Posts: 406
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 2:40 pm
Location: Evanston, IL

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Boeing X-20, Please! » Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:36 pm

Journey to the Planets wrote:Moreover, I contend that you are the one considering teams "inferior."
How can you say something like this after just using the fact that Illinois was inferior to DC/VA at NSC as support for your own points!?
Nolan Winkler
Loyola Academy '12
UChicago '16

User avatar
The King's Flight to the Scots
Auron
Posts: 1456
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by The King's Flight to the Scots » Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:44 pm

jonah wrote:
Journey to the Planets wrote:
JackGlerum wrote:
Journey to the Planets wrote:if you ever want teams besides Loyola and Auburn to advance into the new age, you're going to have to stuff these widely-accepted standards down their throats. People will complain at first, but eventually, people will learn to expect the new standards. It shouldn't be a long, drawn out process, either. When I was a freshman, every DC tournament involved single elimination, speed arithmetic, and terrible questions. Now, every good DC team would be shocked at a tournament with any one of those things.
How many teams does DC have? 20? 50? 100? We have literally hundreds of teams spread statewide. It's not possible to do what you suggest, despite your good intentions. You can't say "F you, do our format you inferior people!" and expect them to get on their knees. It's cynical, but it's the reality around here. Yes, we should always try to get more teams on board, but I maintain that we should be satisfied with the many good tournaments we have. Illinois teams rolled out in record numbers at last year's HSNCT and performed the best they ever have at both HSNCT and NSC.
Dude, who cares how many teams you have? It really says something that even though you have so many teams, none of them got into the top bracket of NSC (I'm not counting HSNCT, since speed arithmetic gave you guys an edge there). I don't think we should ever be "satisfied" with how many good tournaments we have; in fact, that idea is ridiculous and reactionary. If people in DC had decided, three years ago, that we had enough good tournaments, think of where GDS, TJ, and St. Anselm's would be today. Moreover, I contend that you are the one considering teams "inferior." I contend that any team can contend in pyramidal quizbowl if they have enough intellectual curiosity, and if they learn to expect pyramidal questions, we will see teams rising to the challenge. By saying "Well, you guys are just too dumb for pyramidal questions, play the crappy IHSA format for 5 rounds and call it a day," you are not giving these teams enough respect.
So by your argument, because none of Illinois' teams managed to be among the top eight in a very competitive field, we should shut up? That's absurd, and you ought to know it. Illinois' teams collective failure to make the top bracket of last year's NSC doesn't say anything other than that there were a bunch of teams that did better in the relevant games.
.
No, my argument is that since no Illinois team managed to break the top 16 teams at NSC, you guys haven't advanced to the level of the elite teams. More to the point, I think that you COULD become a good circuit by providing good quizbowl more regularly and boycotting terrible tournaments.

Anyway, I don't feel like quoting the rest of your post. Here's my rebuttal: if you think that those teams don't have any intellectual curiosity at all, you should give up on them. Don't waste your time providing tournaments that cater to them, since they are not the target audience any quizbowl tournament should be focusing on. Instead, give them an ultimatum: stop playing quizbowl, or go to good tournaments. The majority will probably fade out of the circuit, but if you reach out to them effectively, some teams WILL improve when they can no longer play kiddie events.

Anyway, I'd like to laugh at your comment about "a bunch of teams [doing] better in the relevant games." THAT'S HOW YOU TELL IF A TEAM IS GOOD!
How can you say something like this after just using the fact that Illinois was inferior to DC/VA at NSC as support for your own points!?
I don't think Illinois is naturally inferior. I think that Illinois's failure to produce top-level teams is a result of their circuit failing to provide enough good events. If the circuit begins providing more outlets for these top teams to demonstrate their real abilities (and I think it's starting to), I predict that more top teams will start coming out of Illinois. My ideas are clearly distinct from Jack's idea that these hundreds of teams just aren't cut out for top-level events.
Matt Bollinger
UVA '14, UVA '15
Communications Officer, ACF

User avatar
Self-incompatibility in plants
Rikku
Posts: 350
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2008 9:59 pm
Location: Dover, Delaware

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Self-incompatibility in plants » Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:45 pm

Trey Taraila
Caesar Rodney 2010
University of Delaware 2014

User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Matt Weiner » Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:48 pm

Matt Weiner wrote:I think focusing too much on nationals participation misses the big picture of what good quizbowl in any particular state is all about. Not everyone has to play at national tournaments. Only the top few teams from each state really should; the questions are indeed designed to be more difficult than regular high school quizbowl, even though they are entirely appropriate for contending teams.

The real tragedy for the average [Illinois] team would be if tournaments in [Illinois] [continued] thinking that you should only ask questions on "high school material," having lots of speed-arithmetic tossups, having non-pyramidal questions, having trivia or trash play a large role in their questions, etc. For the people who want to get something out of high school quizbowl even if they aren't contending at nationals, having their local tournaments be of a low academic value is arguably even worse than it is for teams who do have the skills and/or money to compete elsewhere, since the local teams will not get the chance to play anything else.
Matt Weiner
Founder of hsquizbowl.org

jonah
Auron
Posts: 2300
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Kickoffs

Post by jonah » Mon Nov 23, 2009 7:58 pm

Journey to the Planets wrote:No, my argument is that since no Illinois team managed to break the top 16 teams at NSC, you guys haven't advanced to the level of the elite teams. More to the point, I think that you COULD become a good circuit by providing good quizbowl more regularly and boycotting terrible tournaments.
Journey to the Planets wrote:Anyway, I'd like to laugh at your comment about "a bunch of teams [doing] better in the relevant games." THAT'S HOW YOU TELL IF A TEAM IS GOOD!
Your argument remains an utterly idiotic one. The number of "elite teams" in the country is, while obviously not a precisely-defined number, surely greater than sixteen. Incidentally, NSC results are not necessarily a perfect ordering of the teams that attended. Anyway, so disregarding HSNCT results utterly is foolish to begin with, but to then insist that, after you throw out a bunch of essentially legitimate (though imperfect, just as NSC's is) data that doesn't support your point, your point is true is not a good way to convince anyone of that point. (Of course, since your point is wrong to begin with, it doesn't really matter.)
Journey to the Planets wrote:Anyway, I don't feel like quoting the rest of your post. Here's my rebuttal: if you think that those teams don't have any intellectual curiosity at all, you should give up on them. Don't waste your time providing tournaments that cater to them, since they are not the target audience any quizbowl tournament should be focusing on. Instead, give them an ultimatum: stop playing quizbowl, or go to good tournaments. The majority will probably fade out of the circuit, but if you reach out to them effectively, some teams WILL improve when they can no longer play kiddie events.
I am all in favor of giving up on them. But they are not going to fade away in the near future. For one thing, they're going to keep hosting their--to use your word--"kiddie events", at which they can do "well" by the standards of those events. The good and bad quizbowl circuits in Illinois are separating more and more every year, but there will be two points of intersection for the forseeable future: the IHSA and Masonic tournaments. Many programs rely on the latter for most of their funding, including several of the teams that are powerhouses at good quizbowl. And participation in the latter is pretty much mandated by every school administration.
Journey to the Planets wrote:I don't think Illinois is naturally inferior. I think that Illinois's failure to produce top-level teams is a result of their circuit failing to provide enough good events. If the circuit begins providing more outlets for these top teams to demonstrate their real abilities (and I think it's starting to), I predict that more top teams will start coming out of Illinois. My ideas are clearly distinct from Jack's idea that these hundreds of teams just aren't cut out for top-level events.
Again, your claim that Illinois has "fail[ed] to produce top-level teams" is an utter lie. But more importantly, you have not addressed my statement that there simply cannot be more "outlets for these top teams to demonstrate their real abilities". I may not be a wizard at IHSA numberwang, but according to my calculations, the calendar only has a finite number of dates!
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
The King's Flight to the Scots
Auron
Posts: 1456
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by The King's Flight to the Scots » Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:04 pm

Alright, I hate quoting. You have failed to show why I am wrong at all. Your entire post is "YOUR ARE WRONG, YOUR ARE IDIOTIC, ILLINOIS ARE GREAT." I don't see the need to respond to such baseless points when I have backed up mine.


Anyway, as to your point about calendar dates. Here, YOUR ARE WRONG: there IS a way to find new dates on the calendar.

1. Good teams should stop hosting bad events. No NAQT with arithmetic. No terrible, terrible events like Scobowl solo. Reform them.
2. Stop caring if you host an event on the same date as a bad tournament. Cater to teams that want to learn something. The proponents of bad quizbowl can form their own circuit to show off how much they know about pop culture. Draw a hard line: Good teams go to good tournaments. If you want to be a good team, don't go to IHSA events.
Matt Bollinger
UVA '14, UVA '15
Communications Officer, ACF

jonah
Auron
Posts: 2300
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 5:51 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Kickoffs

Post by jonah » Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:08 pm

Journey to the Planets wrote:Alright, I hate quoting. You have failed to show why I am wrong at all. Your entire post is "YOUR ARE WRONG, YOUR ARE IDIOTIC, ILLINOIS ARE GREAT." I don't see the need to respond to such baseless points when I have backed up mine.
It's certainly not. I have demonstrated why your arguments are wrong, and you have not done the converse. I don't think you are idiotic, though I think your posts in this thread have been. I don't think Illinois is great, but I do think that the good quizbowl portion thereof is better than you're giving it credit for.

Journey to the Planets wrote:Anyway, as to your point about calendar dates. Here, YOUR ARE WRONG: there IS a way to find new dates on the calendar.
1. Good teams should stop hosting bad events. No NAQT with arithmetic. No terrible, terrible events like Scobowl solo. Reform them.
2. Stop caring if you host an event on the same date as a bad tournament. Cater to teams that want to learn something. The proponents of bad quizbowl can form their own circuit to show off how much they know about pop culture. Draw a hard line: Good teams go to good tournaments. If you want to be a good team, don't go to IHSA events.
I can't think of any good teams that host bad events. Solo is mediocre, but it's not a "terrible, terrible event[]", and it's getting better. Regarding (2), I'm not indicating any care about that. I am saying that there are good tournaments on nearly every weekend! And you also are not understanding that good teams cannot avoid going to IHSA events. I have talked to multiple coaches of good teams about deaffiliating from the IHSA, and every single one has stated that their administration will not permit it.
Jonah Greenthal
National Academic Quiz Tournaments

User avatar
The Moviegoer
Lulu
Posts: 88
Joined: Sat Jan 26, 2008 12:43 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by The Moviegoer » Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:16 pm

Well I wrote a big quoted out post but Jonah has already taken some points.

Basically, I visited my old High School's quizbowl team today, and I think they demonstrate the problem quite well.

There was some pretty decent quizbowl hosted over the weekend (kickoffs) yet they, instead of sending a couple teams there, sent the F/S team to Kaneland, an IHSA format speedcheck type thing. Why? Because they will do well there, and skipping kickoffs really isn't a big deal since there are copious amounts of conference matches and tournaments run on speedcheck types of questions to attend. There's no real way to keep anti good-quizbowl teams from running these types of events either (of course someone correct me if I'm wrong).

Thus, the circuit gets split, good teams go to good events, bad teams to poor ones. What's the solution then? Well barring any sort of mass, extremely effective re-education campaign, the IHSA format just has to change, so that teams will be exposed to good quizbowl during the thing everyone in Illinois does, conference matches. Is this likely? Maybe not. But I think it's the course that needs to be taken.
Craig Messner
Illinois '12
Lakes Community '08

User avatar
Deviant Insider
Auron
Posts: 4603
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 6:08 am
Location: Chicagoland
Contact:

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Deviant Insider » Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:21 pm

I'm pretty confused by this whole argument. Illinois uses pretty much every HSAPQ set and NAQT set, several of the better house-written sets that are available to mirror, and writes a good house set or two.

Several tournaments now provide several afternoon rounds for all teams without single elimination, though that only started catching on last year and is still not universal, even though it is heading in that direction.

Are people upset because we had some single elimination last week even though we are talking about eliminating it, because we used an IS set with about 20 computational tossups, because my design only had nine rounds in it, because we are talking about giving teams the option of only staying for half a tournament, or what?
David Reinstein
PACE VP of Outreach, Head Writer and Editor for Scobol Solo and Masonics (Illinois), TD for New Trier Scobol Solo and New Trier Varsity, Writer for NAQT (2011-2017), IHSSBCA Board Member, IHSSBCA Chair (2004-2014), PACE Member, PACE President (2016-2018), New Trier Coach (1994-2011)

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Charley Pride » Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:31 pm

Journey to the Planets wrote: No, my argument is that since no Illinois team managed to break the top 16 teams at NSC, you guys haven't advanced to the level of the elite teams. More to the point, I think that you COULD become a good circuit by providing good quizbowl more regularly and boycotting terrible tournaments.
Dude, you act like the good teams haven't already been doing this for a long time. It's not like the good teams are going to bad tournaments or avoiding good ones.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
Charley Pride
Rikku
Posts: 362
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 11:24 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Charley Pride » Mon Nov 23, 2009 8:46 pm

I'd say that top Illinois teams are doing pretty well considering what we have access to. You can't call us out for attending an NAQT or IHSA tournament, simply because we need to attend them in order to maintain our very existence as quiz bowl teams. I can't imagine Auburn supporting us if we as a team refused to participate in the IHSA state series.

Furthermore, on a much less hypothetical level, not attending these relatively "bad" tournaments would severely handicap not only the amount of buzzer time Illinois teams get leading up to nationals, but also remove the once catalyzing force for change among the teams that are still lagging behind. Believe it or not, bad teams DO become good after seeing good teams and aspiring to their level. If we want the state to move forward, we have to make the rather paltry sacrifice of enduring a few clunkers and computational questions, because abandoning the middling teams makes them more likely to go by the wayside by reducing their exposure to good quiz bowlers. And even if the IS set we played on Saturday was rather weak, and even if the format of the tournament was silly, I can't say anyone got any worse at quiz bowl. I don't know how you can associate attending tournaments like IHSA and NAQT with Illinois not living up to its potential. That's a rather self-righteous and shortsighted assertion, because you fail to consider that pretty much every good team attends every good tournament, no bad tournaments, and a few average tournaments. Comparatively speaking, IHSA and (moreso) NAQT aren't absolutely terrible. They're still (imperfectly) pyramidal and still (generally) test relevant quiz bowl knowledge.
Zahed Haseeb

Auburn High School 2010
University of Chicago 2014

User avatar
The King's Flight to the Scots
Auron
Posts: 1456
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by The King's Flight to the Scots » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:15 pm

Okay, I'll clarify: I think that NAQT is (mostly) valid, as long as there aren't arithmetic questions involved. I don't think any team is bad for playing on arithmetic or IHSA questions. I only think that when a good team like New Trier hosts a tournament, they should stop catering to the bottom teams by including such bad questions. Hosts should start upholding basic standards like "no arithmetic" and "round-robin playoffs" as requirements, not bonuses. There will be an outcry for a while, but there's no need to pay attention to it. Just host good tournaments and wait as these teams become accustomed. It's just a waste to host tournaments on good questions without upholding good tournament practices. Furthermore, tournaments like Solo shouldn't be happening at all. Make them better.

Anyway, on to the subject of Illinois's "eliteness". Part of the problem is the Illinois '09-'10 topic. Loyola, Auburn, and others are pretty good. Nevertheless, that thread essentially becomes a circle-jerk for teams and players to compliment each other on how good they already are. Whatever you might say, Jonah, NSC last year proved that Illinois has a long way to go. All your points to the contrary are "Well, we're PRETTY good, aren't we? We got a few teams in the top 20." Don't be amazed at how good you already are. Set goals to improve on the national level (sorry for seeming condescending here. St. Anselm's is struggling to break the top bracket as well, and I'm looking forward to some great games at NSC against you guys). However, as Matt said, national success isn't the only goal. On the local level, reach out to these lower-ranked teams instead of giving up on them as you want to do. Make Illinois a circuit where all teams play good tournaments on good questions and try to get better.

Anyway, I'll take this time to commend teams like Loyola for taking the lead in this. Mirroring DAFT and hosting HSAPQ tournaments are a huge set in the right direction.
Matt Bollinger
UVA '14, UVA '15
Communications Officer, ACF

User avatar
Geringer
Rikku
Posts: 354
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:10 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Geringer » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:34 pm

Matt Bollinger, do you REALLY have ANY idea what you're talking about? Illinois is a horse of a completely different color than you're used to dealing with. The best teams in Illinois play a full schedule of "good tournaments" with the exception of the cash prize Masonic tournament and the school-required IHSA State Series.

The two school names you keep dropping, Loyola and Auburn, are two teams out of nearly two dozen that frequent good events and play a full schedule of national format and college tournaments. Every year, the number of good schools increase. So, you can poke fun at my NSC finish all you want, but the fact is, there were more Illinois teams interested in good quizbowl last year than ever before, and I fully except that number to keep increasing.

Finally, the speed-check, comp-math ridden IHSA format is both a curse and a blessing. Obviously, comp math bites, so it's a curse, and yes, I said blessing. Because almost every Illinois school has a scholastic bowl team, it provides a starting point from which teams improve. If the IHSA decided to eliminate scho bowl from the state series, a lot of teams who are on the cusp of joining the aforementioned good quizbowl cadre will disappear forever. My high school, for example, would have never made a bid at NSC or HSNCT had we not started as a crappy number-crunching club.

Things here are improving, man. Spend the time that you're wasting on a pointless argument in the Illinois thread writing questions and studying for good quizbowl. It'll do everyone more good and will probably save everyone a little hardship.

EDIT: And no, dude, don't come in here and call this a circle-jerk. Please go away.
R. Jeffrey Geringer
Saint Viator '09
Illinois '13, '14

User avatar
AlphaQuizBowler
Tidus
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:31 pm
Location: Alpharetta, GA

Re: Kickoffs

Post by AlphaQuizBowler » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:44 pm

Journey to the Planets wrote:Hosts should start upholding basic standards like "no arithmetic" and "round-robin playoffs" as requirements, not bonuses. There will be an outcry for a while, but there's no need to pay attention to it. Just host good tournaments and wait as these teams become accustomed. It's just a waste to host tournaments on good questions without upholding good tournament practices.
As a member of a non-DC circuit, here's my question: what if the people hosting the tournament like including arithmetic or doing single-elimination? You might not realize it, but not everyone in the country lives in good-quizbowl-land where there's a tournament on good questions with a good format and 5 of the top ten teams nationally in attendance every weekend. A lot of people who are involved in quizbowl don't read this board, weren't told that arithmetic was out when it comes to "good quizbowl," and don't see anything wrong with single-elim. A lot of those people coach good teams; a lot of those people host important tournaments. You might not understand that because you have umpteen colleges with active quizbowl teams within an hour's drive, a concentration of good teams, and an atmosphere of good quizbowl where you live.
Furthermore, tournaments like Solo shouldn't be happening at all. Make them better.
You have yet to put forth an argument as to why Solo is inherently bad. Why can't Illinois host a solo tournament (or 2) if they want to?
William
Alpharetta High School '11
Harvard '15

User avatar
dtaylor4
Auron
Posts: 3733
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 11:43 am

Re: Kickoffs

Post by dtaylor4 » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:49 pm

Journey to the Planets wrote:However, as Matt said, national success isn't the only goal. On the local level, reach out to these lower-ranked teams instead of giving up on them as you want to do. Make Illinois a circuit where all teams play good tournaments on good questions and try to get better.

Anyway, I'll take this time to commend teams like Loyola for taking the lead in this. Mirroring DAFT and hosting HSAPQ tournaments are a huge set in the right direction.
Matt, yelling at players from the elite teams will do no good. This is not the fault of the schools, because they are not geographically close to the central part of the state, where there are a number of teams that don't do much of anything. Also, if you want to yell about the lack of good tournaments, check the schedule here, then try again.

Outside of the Kickoffs, there really are no good regular tournaments in this part of the state. This is a problem, because many teams are either unable or unwilling to travel great distances. There are a number of people who have been spent a great deal of time and effort encouraging teams in this area to attend good tournaments. There have been small successes, such as the presence of brand-new team Champaign Centennial at the UIUC FNT mirror and Earlybird. Later this academic year, the school will be hosting a tournament using NAQT questions with bonuses modified for the IHSA structure. I've also received word that Urbana might be starting a team next year, and if I'm still in the area, I plan to point their coach in the right direction as well.

In short, check your facts before yelling at people over a perceived lack of effort.

Also: I too would like to hear your argument against Solo. If it's the questions, join the crowd. If not, I'm listening.

User avatar
The King's Flight to the Scots
Auron
Posts: 1456
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by The King's Flight to the Scots » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:50 pm

AlphaQuizBowler wrote:
Journey to the Planets wrote:Hosts should start upholding basic standards like "no arithmetic" and "round-robin playoffs" as requirements, not bonuses. There will be an outcry for a while, but there's no need to pay attention to it. Just host good tournaments and wait as these teams become accustomed. It's just a waste to host tournaments on good questions without upholding good tournament practices.
As a member of a non-DC circuit, here's my question: what if the people hosting the tournament like including arithmetic or doing single-elimination? You might not realize it, but not everyone in the country lives in good-quizbowl-land where there's a tournament on good questions with a good format and 5 of the top ten teams nationally in attendance every weekend. A lot of people who are involved in quizbowl don't read this board, weren't told that arithmetic was out when it comes to "good quizbowl," and don't see anything wrong with single-elim. A lot of those people coach good teams; a lot of those people host important tournaments. You might not understand that because you have umpteen colleges with active quizbowl teams within an hour's drive, a concentration of good teams, and an atmosphere of good quizbowl where you live.
I think you're misunderstanding me. Teams should attend whatever fairly good tournaments are near them. However, I don't really care if hosts like single-elim and arithmetic, and you shouldn't either. They're inherently bad things, and teams should be doing their best to make sure their region realizes this. That's where I feel Illinois needs to improve most.
Furthermore, tournaments like Solo shouldn't be happening at all. Make them better.
You have yet to put forth an argument as to why Solo is inherently bad. Why can't Illinois host a solo tournament (or 2) if they want to?
It's not the solo part: there are plenty of great singles tournaments. The questions are just poorly written, as anyone who looks at them can see.

EDIT:
Matt, yelling at players from the elite teams will do no good. This is not the fault of the schools, because they are not geographically close to the central part of the state, where there are a number of teams that don't do much of anything. Also, if you want to yell about the lack of good tournaments, check the schedule here, then try again.
Hey, I didn't mean to be yelling at those teams for not doing enough. In that case, I was just encouraging them to keep reaching out, as people say they are already doing. I'm not sure how you think I was yelling at good teams in that post, since I proceeded to compliment those teams immediately afterward.
Matt Bollinger
UVA '14, UVA '15
Communications Officer, ACF

User avatar
Geringer
Rikku
Posts: 354
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:10 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Geringer » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:56 pm

Journey to the Planets wrote:In that case, I was just encouraging them to keep reaching out
That's the partial purpose of this thread, and quite frankly, it's working.

So...what was the point of your posts in here, again?
R. Jeffrey Geringer
Saint Viator '09
Illinois '13, '14

User avatar
dtaylor4
Auron
Posts: 3733
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 11:43 am

Re: Kickoffs

Post by dtaylor4 » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:03 pm

Journey to the Planets wrote:
Matt, yelling at players from the elite teams will do no good. This is not the fault of the schools, because they are not geographically close to the central part of the state, where there are a number of teams that don't do much of anything. Also, if you want to yell about the lack of good tournaments, check the schedule here, then try again.
Hey, I didn't mean to be yelling at those teams for not doing enough. In that case, I was just encouraging them to keep reaching out, as people say they are already doing. I'm not sure how you think I was yelling at good teams in that post, since I proceeded to compliment those teams immediately afterward.
You accuse good teams of hosting events on bad questions, and of trying to avoid conflict with other tournaments.

You want to talk about the strides in the DC circuit? My senior year (04-05), I recall TWO weekends which were run on good questions: the Earlybird, and the first NAQT State Qualifier. Now, we have three FNT mirrors, tournaments on every HSAPQ set and (I think) NAQT set, a mirror of Harvard's tournament, and we're sending a team to the NASAT. How is this not progress? Personally, I still see the dearth of tournaments in this area as a major drawback, but it's not for lack of trying.

User avatar
The King's Flight to the Scots
Auron
Posts: 1456
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by The King's Flight to the Scots » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:04 pm

Macho Man for Expediency wrote:
Journey to the Planets wrote:In that case, I was just encouraging them to keep reaching out
That's the partial purpose of this thread, and quite frankly, it's working.

So...what was the point of your posts in here, again?


The point of my posts is that you guys are too complacent. You're satisfied with being pretty good. You're okay with running decent tournaments with a lot of flaws, and you applaud the winners of bad formats like IHSA. You treat yourselves like an autonomous region, and every time you play the top teams from other areas, you lose.

Get better.

Now, as you wish, I'm out of here.
Matt Bollinger
UVA '14, UVA '15
Communications Officer, ACF

User avatar
Huang
Rikku
Posts: 442
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:29 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Huang » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:12 pm

I counted at least 5 times where the initial post claimed "X team from Illinois is good." So Matt is not completely ridiculous for claiming that this thread (and other past Illinois threads) of being essentially circle-jerks.

Also this thread is hilarious.
"Hey Illinois, this is how you can become good." - DC quizbowler
"No, screw you. We're already good." - some Illinois quizbowl people

To see that some people in this thread are conveniently ignoring or dismissing the fact that there were no Illinois teams who made the top bracket this past year at NSC is also laughable. Even more laughable than a bunch of people responding insanely to legitimate criticism.
Sandy

User avatar
dtaylor4
Auron
Posts: 3733
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 11:43 am

Re: Kickoffs

Post by dtaylor4 » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:17 pm

Journey to the Planets wrote:The point of my posts is that you guys are too complacent. You're satisfied with being pretty good. You're okay with running decent tournaments with a lot of flaws, and you applaud the winners of bad formats like IHSA. You treat yourselves like an autonomous region, and every time you play the top teams from other areas, you lose.

Get better.

Now, as you wish, I'm out of here.
Um, hold the phone. Just because as a state we are behind the DC region, does not make us complacent. Illinois as a state is making ginormous strides, but so is the rest of the country. We're still behind, yes. That does not make us complacent.

As several people have mentioned here and elsewhere on this forum, the good teams do not care who wins IHSA. Teams play it because they are strong-armed into doing so. Some elite teams use the money from Masonic (upwards of $2500 if you win the whole damn thing) to go to Nationals. They do not focus on trying to win Masonic, they focus on performing at Nationals.

User avatar
AlphaQuizBowler
Tidus
Posts: 695
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:31 pm
Location: Alpharetta, GA

Re: Kickoffs

Post by AlphaQuizBowler » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:19 pm

Huang wrote:I counted at least 5 times where the initial post claimed "X team from Illinois is good." So Matt is not completely ridiculous for claiming that this thread (and other past Illinois threads) of being essentially circle-jerks.
Heaven forbid people compare teams in a comparisons forum!
Also this thread is hilarious.
"Hey Illinois, this is how you can become good." - DC quizbowler
"No, screw you. We're already good." - some Illinois quizbowl people
That's not even what really happened, but ignoring that, don't you find this just a little bit patronizing?
William
Alpharetta High School '11
Harvard '15

User avatar
Huang
Rikku
Posts: 442
Joined: Wed Dec 17, 2008 9:29 pm

Re: Kickoffs

Post by Huang » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:23 pm

AlphaQuizBowler wrote: Heaven forbid people compare teams in a comparisons forum!
Problem is that the "comparisons" made are useless.
AlphaQuizBowler wrote: That's not even what really happened, but ignoring that, don't you find this just a little bit patronizing?
No.
Sandy

Locked