The Quizbowl Resource Center

something ambiguous wrote:

David Riley wrote:I second Andrew, but I also wonder--where were states (with active circuits) such as Michigan, Florida, South Carolina, Maryland, etc. Is it economics?

In the case of Michigan, we fully planned on coming, but my team mates didn't have the money to pay for it. If facebook is correct, the kids from Maryland just didn't want to.

For Maryland, many of the state's top players weren't interested in coming, and those who were couldn't make the economic commitment or couldn't get the logistics together in time. Basically, the whole process of trying to judge interest, organize tryouts, and get a team together was just started too late.

Just returned from Columbus, Ohio to New Jersey with both the New Jersey & New York teams sharing a large passenger Van. The kids seemed to have a great time, both in the competition itself and in sharing the Van and Hotel costs, which saved the two teams thousands of dollars and which probably enabled both to attend. Whether such sharing of costs could help other states attend in the future is something worth looking into.

Thanks to everyone involved in hosting and organizing the competition. The players from NY & NJ seemed to have enjoyed both the questions and the level of the competition involved, and virtually every reader was excellent. So, kudos to all.

One question, though. Grace Liu from New Jersey finished 5th overall in the final scoring but was not called up as a member of the final 8 person All Star Team. I assume that this was simply an oversight? If so, I trust she can be named ASAP as one of the All Stars on these boards so that she receives her well deserved recognition? Thanks!

And on the issue of the variability of All Star selectees, I think such variability is inevitable given the different degrees of both organization and interest from state to state. Further, I think that Charlie is correct---it can make for a very interesting competition. Further, I would not assume that because someone is only a youngster as compared to a graduating senior that the youngster---even if that person is a middle schooler---that such a youngster does not belong. Remember how good some of our middle school competitors have been this year. It has not been uncommon for some of them to defeat college teams or even some of the top high school teams in the country. Bottom line, quizbowl is as democratic as any student activity: All get a chance, while the cream naturally rises to the top, and age is not and should not be a barrier. And since quizbowl IS about honoring excellence, congratulations to California for clearing such a talented field by three games, a truly outstanding performance. And congrats also to Illinois, New York and Georgia, NASAT's other Top teams this year.

Coach Powers:

I believe that the All-Stars were named based off solely on prelim scoring (where Grace finished an extremely close 9th).

Cheynem wrote:Coach Powers:

I believe that the All-Stars were named based off solely on prelim scoring (where Grace finished an extremely close 9th).

This is correct.

Oh, my mistake then. Thanks for the clarification Mike.

If it helps, everyone is an All-Star in my book.

I think that, like any other tournament, people will make a choice as to whether the time and money commitment required (which of course can vary based on how much help organizations outside of the players' own pockets provide in a given state) are worth it to go. On the quizbowl level, we've turned in three straight years of what has basically been a universally lauded question set and, if I may say so myself, flawless execution of the tournament logistics. I trust that to speak for itself when "quizbowl insiders" make their economic decisions in the future.

We are working on various strategies for attracting states that are not in the first quizbowl tier right now or wish to come but have persistent difficulties in fundraising. We do want to see all 25 or so states with active good quizbowl circuits participate in the near future, at a minimum, and there's no reason that in the long run this tournament can't be as big as Panasonic was at its peak, with 45 or more teams from US states, US territories, and Canadian provinces.

Nobody is doubting that this was a well run tournament. I'm just saying you have to remember that many of these kids are paying out of pocket, and the 200+ for tournament admission, plus lodging, and plus food might be too much for people. I really wanted to go to this tournament, I simply couldn't afford it, and I'd be willing to bet I wasn't the only one. Had tournament admission been, let's say, 100 dollars, you would have seen a Michigan team.

Perhaps my experiences with flying from the Twin Cities to Columbus have been unusual but I have found Columbus to be particularly expensive to fly into which may have contributed to the low number of teams this year.

something ambiguous wrote:Nobody is doubting that this was a well run tournament. I'm just saying you have to remember that many of these kids are paying out of pocket, and the 200+ for tournament admission, plus lodging, and plus food might be too much for people. I really wanted to go to this tournament, I simply couldn't afford it, and I'd be willing to bet I wasn't the only one. Had tournament admission been, let's say, 100 dollars, you would have seen a Michigan team.

Money wasn't really a problem with the hypothetical Maryland team (our team had just gotten 2.5k from It's Ac). We didn't come because a: no one from Blair/Whitman wanted to go and b: the whole process was started way too late.

Any idea yet as to where NASAT will be held next year?

Lord Hatefun Complainington wrote:

something ambiguous wrote:Nobody is doubting that this was a well run tournament. I'm just saying you have to remember that many of these kids are paying out of pocket, and the 200+ for tournament admission, plus lodging, and plus food might be too much for people. I really wanted to go to this tournament, I simply couldn't afford it, and I'd be willing to bet I wasn't the only one. Had tournament admission been, let's say, 100 dollars, you would have seen a Michigan team.

Money wasn't really a problem with the hypothetical Maryland team (our team had just gotten 2.5k from It's Ac). We didn't come because a: no one from Blair/Whitman wanted to go and b: the whole process was started way too late.

I know nothing about the finances of NASAT or HSAPQ, but $100 is impossible (and insulting to even suggest). The standard fee for a regular college tournament/mirror is $120. Normal HS tournaments run usually $60-80. HSNCT is $595 and NSC is $500. ACF Nats is $220 (packet sub) and ICT is $375. Keep in mind the number of teams that come to each of these tournaments.

A national tournament is expensive, because the questions are written, and used once (in addition to getting all the staff there). Mirroring opportunities are extremely limited. It'd be nice to make it affordable for more "out-of-pocket" teams, but it probably doesn't make sense.

It's been a couple of months since someone asked, so:
Is there any word on where this might be next year? I'd at least like to try to get a Louisiana team together, but it's difficult to get started when we don't know where we'd be going.