The Quizbowl Resource Center

Carnegie Mellon will be hosting a mirror of FEUERBACH on October 4.

Registration

To register, please e-mail [email protected] with the number of teams & buzzers you are planning on bringing.

Location

This tournament be held in Scaife Hall. Registration will start at 8:30, and matches will start promptly at 9:00.

Tournament Details

This will be a regular-difficulty, packet-submission academic tournament edited by Matt Weiner. The guidelines on who is supposed to write packets and what the packets should look like are exactly the same as the ACF guidelines, which you can find below:

http://www.hsquizbowl.org/acf/acf.html

You need to write a packet in order to play the tournament if anyone on your team played a real tournament before the 2007-2008 academic year.

Send packets directly to Matt Weiner at [email protected].

Cost

Base Fee: $100
Buzzer Discount: $10 for each system with 8 functioning buzzers
Distance Discount: $10 for each 200 miles
Packet submitted by September 13: $25 discount
Packet submitted by September 20: No discount or penalty
Packet submitted after September 20: $10 penalty per day it's late
No packet submitted after September 27: You don't get to play.

Minimum fee per team: $60

Field Update (as of 24 Sept 2008)

• Case Western (x1)
• Ike (x1)
• Maryland (x2)
• Michigan (x4)
• Pitt (x1)

(Note: parts of this post were taken from the South Carolina FEUERBACH mirror announcement and the Main FEUERBACH announcement)

So, I'm speaking way out of turn on this maybe, but I was wondering if there was any chance that this could be moved to the 11th. I think some teams that would be interested in this are going to the EFT mirror at Illinois on 10/4.

Of course, I realize that the Wake Forest is running EFT on 10/11 and the mid-Atlantic teams would be disadvantaged under my proposed scheme -- but I figure I may as well try.

Of course, I realize that the Wake Forest is running EFT on 10/11 and the mid-Atlantic teams would be disadvantaged under my proposed scheme -- but I figure I may as well try.

This would less than advantageous for us, at least, as we were hoping to send 2-3 teams to each of those events.

PaladinQB wrote:So, I'm speaking way out of turn on this maybe, but I was wondering if there was any chance that this could be moved to the 11th. I think some teams that would be interested in this are going to the EFT mirror at Illinois on 10/4.

Of course, I realize that the Wake Forest is running EFT on 10/11 and the mid-Atlantic teams would be disadvantaged under my proposed scheme -- but I figure I may as well try.

The main reason we are running it on the 4th is because we plan on going to the Wake Forest EFT ourselves.

Our options at Michigan are either (a) attend the CMU FEUERBACH and the Vandy EFT, or (b) attend the Illinois EFT and the Iowa FEUERBACH. Despite the fact that the Midwest fields will largely be doing the latter, after crunching the mileage numbers, it's definitely more advantageous for us to do the former.

So, I guess watch out, The South.

I'll be updating the main post with field updates as they occur; as of now:

(edit: removing out of date field update)

Maryland will be there with 2-3 teams.

I regret to say that I don't think Penn will be able to make it. The team decided to go to EFT at Brown instead. Hope it goes well!

Have any other teams expressed interest in attending this tournament?

Charlie Rosenthal (or all of Shady Side, possibly) sure should go. Email la2pgh03@gmail.

I would totally go, but I have a cross country meet on that day, and since one of our other captains is already skipping out to take the SAT, I feel honor bound to show up.

Send me emails anyways. I love getting email.

There's now a field update in the main post.

Chris, do you have a definite count for the number of teams Maryland is bringing?

Yeah, we're bringing 2.

Great, thanks.

So, as pretty much anyone could have guessed, we have had a couple of people de-commit in the past day or two. I will provide you with a more final number of teams tomorrow after practice, and I apologize for the inconvenience this may cause you.

That's fine; let me know as soon as possible.

Is it possible to access Forbes from I-376? Or is there still construction preventing one from doing so?

There is still construction at a lot of those exits; I would take a look at http://www.traffic.com/Pittsburgh-Traff ... ports.html for full details.

Hey Dan, you know Dan Puma is coming and playing solo, right?

Yep.

Congratulations to Maryland A, who went undefeated in a nine-team round robin, clearing second place Michigan B and third place CMU by two games to win CMU's mirror of FEUERBACH. Top individual scorers included Kurtis from Michigan B, Chris from UMD A and Ike from the combined Dan/Ike team.

Full stats are available here: http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/org/college-b ... dings.html. The round reports lists packets along with the rounds, but I had to reconstruct the order used afterwards, so if I mixed packet order up, please let me know.

Thanks to everyone who came to play and moderate; special thanks go to Dan and Ike, who were willing to merge teams at the last minute to make the schedule run smoother, and the Pitt team, which provided three moderators and made staffing arrangements much easier.

Please remember that the questions used at the tournament are not currently cleared for discussion; please wait until Matt Weiner gives clearance to discuss about them publicly.

Can someone confirm the total number of rounds that exist for this tournament?

11 packets. We ran a round robin with 9 rounds, with two packets reserved for ACF-style finals; Maryland cleared the field by 2, and hence finals were not needed. The final two packets were played in post-tournament scrimmages.

One team from the midwest who said they were writing a packet did not, and I had to combine two packets submitted since one of them was atrocious. Myself and Andrew Alexander wrote four full packets for this packet-submission event, which I figured would be more than enough; I'm not sure what to do when only 6 reasonable submitted rounds, a basically useless seventh round, and half of an eighth round from someone who wasn't required to write anything and was doing me a favor to even give me that much, is what shows up. We didn't really have time to write a fifth or sixth editor packet this week since we had no way to know in advance that it would be necessary. I hope no one's experience was compromised by the shortness of the set.

On a better note, I'd like to particularly congratulate Michigan for writing a very good round. I haven't seen a Michigan packet in a while so I didn't know what to expect; I ended up being pleasantly surprised.

Please hold off on public discussion of the questions until next week's sites are done. The set will be sent to the usual archives for posting at that time.

I'd like to thank everyone at Carnegie Mellon for running a very good tournament, and the editors for producing a good set. The tournament ran as smoothly as any I've been to. It was nice to get back to Ann Arbor relatively early after playing a good tournament. It was really nice to get back into the feel of playing QB, and I'm really looking forward to EFT, and the rest of the year.

squareroot165 wrote:I'd like to thank everyone at Carnegie Mellon for running a very good tournament, and the editors for producing a good set. The tournament ran as smoothly as any I've been to. It was nice to get back to Ann Arbor relatively early after playing a good tournament. It was really nice to get back into the feel of playing QB, and I'm really looking forward to EFT, and the rest of the year.

Couldn't have said it better myself. I am sincerely looking forward to going back to CMU for ACF Fall (with a much-improved sense of how to get to Pittsburgh).

Matt Weiner wrote:On a better note, I'd like to particularly congratulate Michigan for writing a very good round. I haven't seen a Michigan packet in a while so I didn't know what to expect; I ended up being pleasantly surprised.

Thank you very much for saying so. I'll pass on your kind words to the co-authors of the packet. Without going into specifics, I was worried about how our packet might have been received after looking at the round report statistics for the CMU site, but I'm glad to know you liked it. We'd also definitely appreciate your feedback on the packet.

I'd also be interested to know in what order the South Carolina site read the packets, because it looks to me as though (if their order was the same as CMU's) they had similar TU and bonus conversion statistics.

Matt Weiner wrote:half of an eighth round from someone who wasn't required to write anything and was doing me a favor to even give me that much

Matt, can you confirm that this person is not Ray Luo? We've got a partial packet and I need to know if those questions are still blind for an Illinois Open freelance packet.

EDIT: Apparently the Illinois Open is not packet-submission. In any case, we've got a partial packet of questions laying around to freelance submit to some tournament and I would like to know whether they are still blind to people.

The half round was submitted by Guy Tabachnick, if I heard Matt Weiner correctly last Saturday.

ClemsonQB wrote:The half round was submitted by Guy Tabachnick, if I heard Matt Weiner correctly last Saturday.

confirm

Judge William wrote:

ClemsonQB wrote:The half round was submitted by Guy Tabachnick, if I heard Matt Weiner correctly last Saturday.

confirm

Thanks.