Themed Submission Tournament held next to Andrew/Seth's

[Mr. Kwalter]

This is a call for interest AND discussion of format for a Kwartler-edited academic themed submission tournament to be juxtaposed with the Yaphe-Teitler masters tournament in May. This would be similar to Iowa's themed tournament, but would be ACF-style. There would also be powers. I don't know if there would be enough packets to have more than one available per round, so it might differ that way from the Iowa format. There is also the question of whether it should be duos or teams (singles is unfeasible for this kind of event). Duos would mean more recombination from the day before, but teams would mean fewer teams and more doable logistics. Opinions are requested on these subjects. I would also like the input of interested parties as to how the tournament should work and what packet guidelines should be, as I want as many people to enjoy the event as possible. Here is what I had in mind:

22/22 academic packets with your choice of one of two packet types:

1. A packet entirely on one subject (for example "Physics" or "Drunkenness in Literature")

2. A packet with a theme and a normal academic distribution (for example "Things referenced in Futurama"). Ideally, they would not include an abundance of clues concerning the packet's subject, especially if it's a trash base like Futurama.

I am thinking the tournament difficulty should shoot for regionals or lower. Also, please choose your packet subjects appropriately. The packet has to have at least 20/20 worth of canonical regionals-level answers and they shouldn't all be formulaic. Thus, a packet on say, sub-atomic particles woudl not work, as not only aren't there that many that are tossupable, but also most sub-atomic particle questions look alike. Also, try to keep away from things only a real specialist would be able to get; write "Asian literature" instead of "Chinese literature." I would also appreciate it if you would email me in advance to tell me your packet's subject (to prevent duplicates and to ensure all packets are on appropriate subjects). It will naturally be on a first come first serve basis. The packets can also have 1/1 or maybe 2/2 trash in them but should be primarily academic. Also, in case anyone was wondering, I will most likely be eliciting a bit of editing help, especially on science, and I will be accepting freelance packets in return for the set. Anyway, please let me know if you're interested, and I would appreciate any comments/criticism/suggestions people have.

Hope to see you all there,
Eric

[Skepticism and Animal Feed]

Playing a multi-themed tournament solo is extremely unpleasant if you're a specialist, because there will simply be packets and packets worth of stuff you know nothing about. I certainly approve of the team aspect of this, although if we have each team write a packet and we make such teams so as to pair people of divergent knowledge, wouldn't that result in a big fight within the team over what the packet should be about?

For instance, I am almost certainly going to write a History-themed packet. The kind of person I would want on my team would be a Science player. He or she is going to want to write a Science-themed packet (presumably), or at the very least something that's not History.

Now that I think about it, though, Chicago pulled off an intramural tournament last year with individually-written packets but with players on teams. I wonder if that's feasible for something like this.

[Mr. Kwalter]

Singles is out of the question if for no other reason because the logistics just wouldn't work. Duos have the advantage of pairing up one humanities and one science player and making the players more likely to play with different people from those with whom they played on saturday. Also, duos makes it easier for one team to dominate the field, which is never fun. Teams decreases the number of entries but increases the fairness, as a 4 man team is more likely to be able to cover packets on "physics," "Econ," and "World Literature." So basically it comes down to more entries/more packets vs. more equality.

[Skepticism and Animal Feed]

Here's how Chicago did it: we had teams of 4, but when a team would play a packet written by a member of that team, that person sat out the game (usually he served as a moderator that round). This would be my suggestion, since it would allow for us to express our individuality in packet-writing but still play on a team.

[Mr. Kwalter]

That is a fine idea.

[Mr. Kwalter]

This is the full announcement for the Marvelous Academic Themed Tournament of Excellence (MATTE) to be held in Chicago on May 21st, 2006. I, Eric Kwartler, will be head editor, and Paul Reverdy will be editing science. The packet format will be as follows:

Submissions should be 17/17 and should either be all on one subject (Drunkenness in Literature, etc) or should have an overarching theme (say, "Christopher," where every question is either about a christopher or more likely contains a clue about someone named christopher) and follow this distribution

4/4 Literature
4/4 History
2/2 RMP
2/2 Fine Arts
1/1 Social Science
1/1 Trash
3/3 Your Choice (may include science, please vary your choice subjects at least somewhat)

Any player (regardless of team affiliation) can submit a packet. As Bruce suggested, that player will merely sit out when his packet is read. This brings me to the reason for submissions being only 17/17, which is twofold. 1) If we play on 15/15 packets, we can play more games and accomodate the glut of packets that will most likely be submitted by individual players. 2) Since the packets have themes, packet writers may reach a point at which they are reaching for answers. Keeping the packet length down will hopefully keep the number of extraneous questions to a minimum.

Before you start writing packets, please contact me with the subject of your packet. I want to make sure there are no repeats and that all packets are on appropriate subjects. Once you have done that, please try to have the packet in ASAP. At the latest I would like packets in by May 7th, which leaves plenty of time after ACF/NAQT nationals to write 17/17.

The charge per team will be $40. It is a flat fee; no packet discounts will be given. I think $40 is more than affordable for a four person team, and since almost every team will have at least one member that submitted a packet, you can consider the discounts already incorporated.

Also, I am open to the possibility of mirrors, so if you are interested in mirroring MATTE or have any questions at all about what's above, please contact me at ekwartler at gmail dot com.

Hope to see you all there,
Eric Kwartler