Hyrdofluoric_Acid wrote:1 Lincolnshire (Stevenson)
2 Barrington
3 Palatine (Fremd)
4 Mundelein (Carmel)
5 Wilmette (Loyola Academy)
6 Lake Forest (H.S.)
7 Palatine (H.S.)
8 Arlington Heights (St. Viator)
seeds in our sectional... it sucks that only 1 team can make it to state because at least 4 of the top 8 teams are here, in my exceedingly biased opinion.
Hyrdofluoric_Acid wrote:1 Lincolnshire (Stevenson)
2 Barrington
3 Palatine (Fremd)
4 Mundelein (Carmel)
5 Wilmette (Loyola Academy)
6 Lake Forest (H.S.)
7 Palatine (H.S.)
8 Arlington Heights (St. Viator)
seeds in our sectional... it sucks that only 1 team can make it to state because at least 4 of the top 8 teams are here, in my exceedingly biased opinion.
hcube wrote:When can we discuss Regionals Sets?
Hyrdofluoric_Acid wrote:not good. The fractal tossup made me very sad.
TylerV wrote:Regionals was definitely a step down from the Prince-led effort of last year but i was surprisingly unrepulsed by many of the questions. I wrote a decent number of the history questions, as well as the film, and, save a few that were the victim of sub-optimal packetizing, they seem to have went well.
The standard issues still exist, and I may be biased because the Centennial site was rather exciting, but I found this year's regionals to be better than what I played in 2013 and 2014 and better than what I read in 2015.
JakobeanEra wrote:As long as you weren't the one who wrote that Argentina tossup that clued Mapuche or that Athens tossup that put Delian League in the first line, your questions were pretty good overall.
TylerV wrote:With regards to the Athens tossup, that was mea culpa and I ill this as a moment to discuss my regionals writing philosophy has a whole, how I failed in this specific instance, and other issues with the question.
The Athens tossup was originally written with the idea of it being slotted in Round 0, at the time I wrote the question in my mind this was Seed 8 vs Seed 9. Since then I have come to realize three things. 1. Tossups do not necessarily go where I request them to be placed. 2. That there does not exist any seeds beyond the top 8 in the sectional and thus the original goal was moot. 3. Even if there were the seeding is not accurate enough to where this is a bad idea.
The second issue with the tossup is that the Leonidas clue was an extremely bad idea. Had I been more on top of things, or working in a group more like SCOP, it is highly likely I would have recognized that clue as neg bait for the level of team that I specifically wrote it for.
Overall, my goal when writing regionals, at least for Rounds 0-2, was to focus on the ~350 teams that don't often play quiz bowl. The idea of this tossup was to help in Team #512 vs Team #330. The thought process behind this the top teams in the state, as long as they don't have to play each other, will hear enough tossups that they will beat teams they are better than. Unfortunately, that is a fatal flaw as the other regionals questions were too wonky for that to be true.
I apologize that the question didn't go where I wanted it to and that it was based on flawed assumptions. However, there is nothing wrong with an Athens tossup leading in with the Delian league. If the tossup existed in a vacuum, where we examine it for pyramidalty without regard to difficulty, the tossup is fine.
username_crisis_averted wrote:Unrelatedly, is there a reason that IHSA doesn't keep a public record of individual stats or PPB for their matches? It seems odd, seeing as the unreleased conference stats are supposed to be used as justification for sectional seedings. Even disregarding that, it would be convenient to be able to see the relative strength of teams based on something other than the vague information on the scoreboard. This would be especially helpful for teams that don't attend very many other tournaments during the regular season.
MLaudermith wrote:2017 IHSA Scholastic Bowl State Finals results:
Class 2A:
1. IMSA
2. University Lab (Urbana)
3. Auburn (Rockford)
4. Dunlap
Congratulations to Timothy Christian and IMSA!
I am anxious to hear feedback on the questions used in the state finals rounds.
heterodyne wrote:While it's great that quality writers are taking over the production of IHSA questions, I'd just like to note that this certainly does not warrant referring to Andrew as Mr. Wang.
Borel hierarchy wrote:heterodyne wrote:While it's great that quality writers are taking over the production of IHSA questions, I'd just like to note that this certainly does not warrant referring to Andrew as Mr. Wang.
Me in another thread wrote:I'm going to have missed the Brad Fischer/Noah Prince golden age of IHSA writing by just one year. Feels pretty bad man.
Sit Room Guy wrote:Me in another thread wrote:I'm going to have missed the Brad Fischer/Noah Prince golden age of IHSA writing by just one year. Feels pretty bad man.
Return to High school area archives
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 8 guests