NAC - New Orleans

btressler · Post by **btressler** » Sun May 29, 2005 10:48 pm

Here's the standings through almost 2 days of

at New Orleans. These are incredibly unofficial, and subject to my miscopying the posted scores. All teams 4-2 or better will advance into Tuesday.

St Thomas 5-0, 1850
Clear Lake 4-0 1315
Kinkaid 4-0, 1085
Poquoson 4-1, 1250
East JV 4-2, 1490
Plano East 3-0, 1170
East Varsity 3-0, 1025
Charter School of Wilmington 3-1, 1240
Plano 3-1, 1210
Daviess 3-1, 1055
Old Saybrook 3-2, 1185
Boyd 2-0, 555
Madison A 2-0, 555
Fairfield 2-0, 490
Penn Manor 2-1, 820
Delaware Valley 2-1, 740
Edina 2-1, 675
Lenape 2-2, 1170
Jackson Prep 2-2, 1060
Kamiakin 2-2, 975
Elida 2-2, 775
Syosset A 2-3, 1125
New Rochelle 2-3, 945
Ridgeland 2-3, 905
Tatnall 2-4, 1190
Holland Hall 1-0, 370
Pingry A 1-1, 490
Pingry B 1-1, 455
Grundy 1-2, 415
Plano West 1-3, 715
Jesuit 1-4, 1060
Clark 1-4, 1040
Lamar 1-4, 825
Clinton 0-1, 170
St. Croix 0-2, 335
Vandebilt Catholic 0-3, 500
Antonito 0-4, 305
Madison B 0-6, 1030
Syosset B 0-6, 600

Matt Weiner · Post by **Matt Weiner** » Sun May 29, 2005 11:00 pm

Will St. Thomas be crowned the new GREATEST TEAM EVER if they once again protest their way through this gutted field?

1073741824 · Post by **1073741824** » Mon May 30, 2005 11:11 am

I'm there in New Orleans right now (typing from the computers in the Loyola library actually). I'm from Madison Central A. We won our early match this morning, so we're 3-0 now. I'm figuring we'll probably win 2 or 3 of our remaining matches, since we don't have anyone that difficult scheduled (that I'm aware of). Hopefully we can get a high seeding in the playoffs and go from there.

I also can't believe how our B-team did...you can see from the total score that they weren't that bad...

They just couldn't get it together in any one math I guess.

jrbarry · Post by **jrbarry** » Mon May 30, 2005 4:03 pm

"Will St. Thomas be crowned the new GREATEST TEAM EVER if they once again protest their way through this gutted field?"

Matt: how do you KNOW this NAC field is "gutted?" It looks pretty typical for an NAC in recent years. It seems to me that there is not a valid way to compare teams who don't compete in NAQT-type tournaments to those who do. And most of the teams in the NAC-New Orleans don't show-up at tournametns with NAQT questions.

I guess one way to compare might be to compare the showing of teams who comnpete at NAQT Nationals and NAC. Plano East comes to mind.

Although I firmly believe that NAQT will haver the strongest field, the only real way to compare teams is for them to actually play. My team is 138-8 so far this year, but we have not played anyone from outside the South. Until we actually play some teams from DC area and MI and OH and CA and IL, etc, I won't have any valid way to compare.

I am looking forward to this weekend to see what we can do.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Mon May 30, 2005 7:15 pm

I think we have to include a Brad Rutter icon... considering...

well... you take a look at

's page on this.

http://www.qunlimited.com/ .

Zip Zap Rap Pants · Post by **Zip Zap Rap Pants** » Mon May 30, 2005 8:05 pm

on the note of nac - naqt comparison (if there is any), the best way to compare is to play 'em in some sort of competition in the middle, for instance, vhsl. and when i look here on the list, i see poquoson is 4-1. (i used to have a house there btw). in vhsl, they're a division A team (usually lowest quality/smallest schools), and i believe they got knocked out early in the vhsl A playoffs. now don't get me wrong, because i am pulling for them, but for such a team to have such a record at a "national" tournament, says something about that tournament.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Mon May 30, 2005 10:34 pm

I'm going to agree with Matt's point. Presumably many of these teams have played each other at a common competition, so the results from those events (which should equalize for game format and be "easier" in difficulty) should be a better measuring stick.

Matt Weiner · Post by **Matt Weiner** » Mon May 30, 2005 11:29 pm

jrbarry wrote:Matt: how do you KNOW this NAC field is "gutted?" It looks pretty typical for an NAC in recent years. It seems to me that there is not a valid way to compare teams who don't compete in NAQT-type tournaments to those who do. And most of the teams in the NAC-New Orleans don't show-up at tournametns with NAQT questions.

Whether the NAC contains the teams who do the best at the NAC is a tautological proposition, but whether it contains more than one in ten of the teams who can break .500 at tournaments that don't feature audio tossups on "blenders" is the real issue here. The reason most teams who go to NAC don't go to NAQT, PACE, or to well-run invitationals is because 99% of the teams who still bother with NAC do so out of either a desire to win a fradulent "national title" against the weak field or, in most cases, because they are not very serious teams and they do not know or care about the existence or superiority of other tournaments. The few exceptions--the teams who can or do perform well at the tournaments I mentioned, but still participate in the NAC, a list which is rapidly dwindling with each passing year--really need to take a look at the example they are setting for the less experienced coaches out there as well as the best use of their team budgets.

Byko · Post by **Byko** » Tue May 31, 2005 12:39 am

I may not be the biggest fan of Chip Beall's tournament, but I am going to come out and say this in defense of some of what's been talked about with regards to him.

There are plenty of areas of the country that, because of lack of marketing or an overdominance of one particular company or format, simply don't know about the general state of quiz bowl. Look at most of the Mountain Time Zone. Look at New York (city and state). Look at areas of Texas. You don't see these areas as well-represented, not just on this board but also in quiz bowl in general, not because they choose to hide themselves away. They simply don't know what all is out there. Colorado, for example, probably knows little more about what's out there in the quiz bowl world than what they do in their state, which is run by the folks who do KMO and have questions like that for their championship (from my understanding, and some of that could be inaccurate). But the fact is that if you're in an area of the country and all you know is Chip Beall and that format and those kinds of questions, that's all you're going to do.

Does more outreach need to be done? Of course. There are plenty of areas of the country that aren't even really familiar with quiz bowl in any form: good, bad, or ugly. And there are plenty more that know very little. The area around Long Island is so dominated by Chip Beall because the teams play nothing but that format and probably don't know that there's much more than that out there. And there are some very good teams in that area. I saw Smithtown play at NAC in DC in 2003, and they were a very good, knowledgeable team. So was Kellenberg Memorial. So was Horace Greeley. Would I have said they're among the top 5 in the country that year? Probably not, but I don't know for certain. I'd like to see them take on teams that, that year, I thought were that good. But they would beat plenty of other good teams, much to the surprise of some people.

The fact is that you play what you know. It's hard to go out there and do something that you've never seen or experienced before when it comes to quiz bowl formats and tournaments, especially when looking at something "national." A lot of people simply aren't willing to do that. That's where quiz bowl needs to reach out to everyone else out there, not wait for everyone else to come to them. And unfortunately, very few people in quiz bowl are good at doing that.

The bottom line is this: teams do what they know and what they feel comfortable with. It isn't that 99% of the NAC's teams want to win, as others have termed it, "a fraudulent national title." It's that that's what they're accustomed to and, as far as they know, they like it. Can you do better? Then prove it to them.

The soapbox is now available for the next speaker.

Matt Weiner · Post by **Matt Weiner** » Tue May 31, 2005 12:42 am

As I said, I agree with David; the most common reason that teams play the NAC is because they don't know any better. There are also a few teams that can only get funding for it for inertial reasons or who do indeed consciously choose the worst tournament in order to increase their chances of winning, but I do not believe they are very common.

It is absolutely the responsibility of those who do know better to expose these teams to other options in a friendly and nonconfrontational way, which is why it is very dissapointing to see the small remaining number of very experienced, very talented teams participating in and defending the NAC.

Post by **DumbJaques** » Tue May 31, 2005 12:50 am

It is absolutely the responsibility of those who do know better to expose these teams to other options in a friendly and nonconfrontational way, which is why it is very dissapointing to see the small remaining number of very experienced, very talented teams participating in and defending the NAC.

It's sad that a tournament can suck so much that in can invoke the phrase "friends don't let friends. . . "

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Tue May 31, 2005 9:55 am

Matt Weiner wrote:As I said, I agree with David; the most common reason that teams play the NAC is because they don't know any better. There are also a few teams that can only get funding for it for inertial reasons or who do indeed consciously choose the worst tournament in order to increase their chances of winning, but I do not believe they are very common.

It is absolutely the responsibility of those who do know better to expose these teams to other options in a friendly and nonconfrontational way, which is why it is very dissapointing to see the small remaining number of very experienced, very talented teams participating in and defending the NAC.

Again, I'd like to see NAQT group take up that challenge, and I'm sure they're up for it too (and have done a lot to take that on). I also remark that even in spite of all the difficulties that we have known and have had documented about the NAC, it is even more disappointing that those teams who do know better continue. I can accept genuine conflicts in the schedule, and I certainly understand that we are just a game.

I'll also remark that NAC does provide a level of familiarity. Not every part of the country runs in tossup-bonus format, and not everyone who does will go to NAQT's competitions. Not everyone has a budget that can handle going to nationals on a yearly basis, and not everyone will have kids that will have winning the tournament as their goal.

But that said, we'd like to see more teams become involved because it does help everyone. Increase the level of participation and make people excited to play. It disappoints me more that not more is done on this. Rather there is more bickering about how bad tournaments are run, or why high-school run events are superior to college-run events, etc. The more we fight ourselves the less progress we will have compared to what it could be.

solonqb · Post by **solonqb** » Tue May 31, 2005 10:37 am

Certainly NAQT is trying to make an outreach effort. The increase in teams from the Midwest (Iowa, Minnesota) and California/Washington can be seen as proof positive. And I believe New Mexico had their first NAQT State Qualifier this year, courtesy of Mr. Zuffranieri. I'll be interested to see how this initiative turns out. Free questions removes a fairly large barrier to organization.

Byko · Post by **Byko** » Tue May 31, 2005 12:32 pm

I hate to say it, but in all likelihood, it won't work. Sure, it's a great idea. But if you're in rural New Mexico or Arizona, you probably don't know about quiz bowl unless it appears to you via snail mail right in front of your eyes. You're not going to be going out and searching for quiz bowl organizations, Yahoo groups, etc. It's whatever happens to pop up in front of you that you'll know about.

If online information is the only marketing being done to promote this initiative, it will fail, plain and simple. You have to use paper mailings through snail mail. In many cases, we're probably talking about states that don't have a state championship of any kind. So you can't just do it this way. Too many people in quiz bowl think that simply putting stuff online will do the trick. It will...for those who are already informed. It's just like preaching to the choir.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Tue May 31, 2005 12:55 pm

To add to DB's comments... it's interesting for me to note that a lot of the states in which there is very little to no quiz bowl activity are hotbeds for Academic Decathlon. Arizona has a very active AD organization, as does most of the West Coast and Rockies area. In these states (Texas included), AD is the premier academic competition. And they function because their state education administrators have bought into it, despite the fact it costs so much more to compete in AD than in QB.

I do think online has a place, but unless there is someone on the ground really working to promote the activity, progress will be quite limited.

bigtrain · Post by **bigtrain** » Tue May 31, 2005 2:42 pm

NAQT's outreach effort is shown by their offer to provide questions for free to any program looking to run a tournament next year in a state that featured no NAQT tournaments this year. Additionally, they have not picked HSNCT sites in the East in the past few years. This is probobaly due to the prevalence of the game in the region and their desire to spread the game westward.

dtaylor4 · Post by **dtaylor4** » Tue May 31, 2005 2:50 pm

E.T. Chuck wrote:To add to DB's comments... it's interesting for me to note that a lot of the states in which there is very little to no quiz bowl activity are hotbeds for Academic Decathlon. Arizona has a very active AD organization, as does most of the West Coast and Rockies area. In these states (Texas included), AD is the premier academic competition. And they function because their state education administrators have bought into it, despite the fact it costs so much more to compete in AD than in QB.

I do think online has a place, but unless there is someone on the ground really working to promote the activity, progress will be quite limited.

Then something must be done on a national level. It would take way too long to go to each state individually. Something done involving the government would be nice, but might cost a lot of money.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Tue May 31, 2005 3:04 pm

DaGeneral wrote:
E.T. Chuck wrote:To add to DB's comments... it's interesting for me to note that a lot of the states in which there is very little to no quiz bowl activity are hotbeds for Academic Decathlon. Arizona has a very active AD organization, as does most of the West Coast and Rockies area. In these states (Texas included), AD is the premier academic competition. And they function because their state education administrators have bought into it, despite the fact it costs so much more to compete in AD than in QB.

I do think online has a place, but unless there is someone on the ground really working to promote the activity, progress will be quite limited.
Then something must be done on a national level. It would take way too long to go to each state individually. Something done involving the government would be nice, but might cost a lot of money.

Unfortunately that will also be difficult, seeing as there is not one way to play quiz bowl. Unlike in Canada where there is one national program to do quiz bowl, we have a large number of different formats. Heck, there is no high school national championship tournament in basketball, football, baseball, or any other sport, and in those cases the rules are all the same.

Avoiding the politics that would be involved with trying to get national involvement in the government... it would need to be presented as an issue of national importance. I don't know that there is an argument that could do that.

Stained Diviner · Post by **Stained Diviner** » Tue May 31, 2005 4:53 pm

NAQT has done outreach right the past few years. It is paying off this year with 100 schools from 24 states.

The best thing to do is to get local people to host quality tournaments. College teams are the easiest hosts to get in areas that are undeveloped at the high school level. This is what they have done. If you can get local people to recruit for local tournaments, it then becomes easier to have national people recruit for national tournaments.

Academic Decathlon, on the other hand, has taken advantage of their financial strength. They used to have a fair amount of money from corporate sponsorship. If you contacted USAD and told them that you had plans to grow Acadec in your area of the country where it was not so big, they would give you thousands of dollars to raise awareness. This worked in many places. They also helped teams travel to tournaments when circumstances warranted and gave awards out to teams that overcame great obstacles to compete.

Pardon me for continuing this long post...

As a group, we should understand that different teams have Quiz Bowl for different reasons and thus have different priorities. Sometimes on days before vacations I do quiz bowl with my classes. I have found that with nonSchoBowlers it's a lot more fun with quick questions than NAQT questions--most kids want to ring in often, and they do not want to hear a bunch of information they do not know about. It is the same way with Freshmen. NAQT has not taken off in Illinois because teams want to prepare for the state tournament, which has different rules and a lot of math and science. So, teams go to tournaments that play by Illinois rules. We should not be shocked that other people have different tastes than we do, and we should not worry about the fact that there are alternatives to NAQT and PACE.

What we should do is accentuate the positive. I don't know what my role in this is, but I am glad that some people are doing the right thing.

jrbarry · Post by **jrbarry** » Tue May 31, 2005 5:34 pm

"We should not be shocked that other people have different tastes than we do, and we should not worry about the fact that there are alternatives to NAQT and PACE."

Well put.

dtaylor4 · Post by **dtaylor4** » Tue May 31, 2005 7:22 pm

ReinsteinD wrote:What we should do is accentuate the positive. I don't know what my role in this is, but I am glad that some people are doing the right thing.

As a coach, your should encourage other coaches to attend tournaments with different formats and keep pushing for Illinois to get rid of the "one tournament after state series" rule to encourage this even further (please don't consider this another Illinois hijack). I'm sure that most states have tourneys in several different formats every year and all coaches should make an effort to at least go to them.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Tue May 31, 2005 9:08 pm

jrbarry wrote:"We should not be shocked that other people have different tastes than we do, and we should not worry about the fact that there are alternatives to NAQT and PACE."

Well put.

Agrees. That said, coaches should also not be afraid to participate in all the formats either. Of course, we are all limited with money that we cannot possibly do it all either.

As an odd question, what should we worry about? I'd hardly think that the state of quiz bowl is that wonderful.

But back to the real point: what happened in New Orleans?

Zip Zap Rap Pants · Post by **Zip Zap Rap Pants** » Tue May 31, 2005 11:27 pm

E.T. Chuck wrote:
DaGeneral wrote:
E.T. Chuck wrote:To add to DB's comments... it's interesting for me to note that a lot of the states in which there is very little to no quiz bowl activity are hotbeds for Academic Decathlon. Arizona has a very active AD organization, as does most of the West Coast and Rockies area. In these states (Texas included), AD is the premier academic competition. And they function because their state education administrators have bought into it, despite the fact it costs so much more to compete in AD than in QB.

I do think online has a place, but unless there is someone on the ground really working to promote the activity, progress will be quite limited.
Then something must be done on a national level. It would take way too long to go to each state individually. Something done involving the government would be nice, but might cost a lot of money.
Unfortunately that will also be difficult, seeing as there is not one way to play quiz bowl. Unlike in Canada where there is one national program to do quiz bowl, we have a large number of different formats. Heck, there is no high school national championship tournament in basketball, football, baseball, or any other sport, and in those cases the rules are all the same.

Avoiding the politics that would be involved with trying to get national involvement in the government... it would need to be presented as an issue of national importance. I don't know that there is an argument that could do that.

not to mention the government would have to favor one organization over another (naqt over pace, for instance), and there's no precedent for it, and it's unconstitutional (if you disagree...please see the 9th and 10th amendments...). hah government getting involved in sports and competitions, who ever thought of that idea? oh right that guy from arizona... but i mean i can understand dageneral's point of view, i mean he is a military man, has to get paid by the government

anyway what i worry about....aside from us getting dangerously off topic here....is pac being the one tournament that gives out a nice deal of $$ and thereby attracts greater attention to quizbowl, and yet it represents it badly with a 2 match-per-team tourney and one which has 5 tj players on va (don't get me wrong, they're the best, but i mean come on) and no ral. charter players on n.c.

ahh sorry for the sidetrack there, and the huge quote

dtaylor4 · Post by **dtaylor4** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 1:30 am

First of all, I am not a military man even though my name may say otherwise, secondly, I don't think that one organization would have to be favored, instead each state would individually be allowed to choose a format that they prefer or something like that.

btressler · Post by **btressler** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:46 am

Oh wow, I inadvertedly started another round of format wars

.

I don't have much in the way of playoff results, but I can give you the matchups:

There were two play-in games on Monday night:
Wilmington Charter 325 def. Del Valley 165
Poquoson 305 def Old Saybrook 140

The round of 16 was:
Holland Hall (5-1) v Kinkaid (4-2)
East Varisty (5-1) v Kamiakin (4-2)
Plano (4-2) v Penn Manor (4-2)
St Thomas (6-0) v Wilmington Charter (5-2)
Madison A (5-1) v Pingry B (4-2)
Clear Lake (6-0) v Daviess County (4-2)
Plano East (6-0) v Poquoson (5-2)
Fairfield (4-2) v Pingry A (4-2)

and I can tell you that St. Thomas defeated us (Charter) 345-285 in that round. We led from mid-2nd to mid-4th periods and then ran into an unlucky set of questions in the last set of the last quarter, which is to say that the questions were just topics we hadn't practiced, and that's what you get when you only practice on NAQT questions.

I don't know what the comment about St. Thomas protesting was all about, but I felt that they were a good team. When a protest did occur, I felt they were right, even though it meant we lost points. When there are protests, I don't blame the team so much as the questions. Sometimes they are just a bit vague and there is more than one possible answer. (one of their players played Hold-Em with us earlier, and he busted out, so it all came out even).

For the record, several of the teams mentioned above do participate in other formats. NAQT tournaments this year have seen teams from Kellenberg, Smithtown, and Horace Greeley. I think they did pretty well, as I recall.

Another factor you should include in your discussion is NAQT's date. Every year it falls on our school's graduation. Years in which my "A" team is senior-heavy, we have to look for alterantives, even though we consider ourselves an NAQT-style team and would prefer to be there.

Finally, let me say that I liked the changes Chip made this year. The shortened format so that we could play six games was well-liked by myself and my students.

See you in Chicago.

Bill Tressler,
Charter School of Wilmington

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:16 am

Stat74 wrote:Oh wow, I inadvertedly started another round of format wars .

Another factor you should include in your discussion is NAQT's date. Every year it falls on our school's graduation. Years in which my "A" team is senior-heavy, we have to look for alterantives, even though we consider ourselves an NAQT-style team and would prefer to be there.

Well, we'd welcome you guys at PACE Nationals too if you were ever interested. ;)

I would be interested in knowing more specifically what those changes you mentioned were.

Zip Zap Rap Pants · Post by **Zip Zap Rap Pants** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 6:17 pm

DaGeneral wrote:First of all, I am not a military man even though my name may say otherwise, secondly, I don't think that one organization would have to be favored, instead each state would individually be allowed to choose a format that they prefer or something like that.

Ahh i guess you're one a those tin star generals then

but i see what you're saying, have the state governments promote it, which sort of happens in virginia since virginia lotto (of course a commonwealth-owned co.) sponsors Battle of the Brains now. thing is, if all the states decided upon several different formats, it would be difficult to have a good national tournament if teams from many states hardly ever hear their style of questions. one thing i would like to see is PACE running some state tournaments more directly (taking over vhsl scholastic bowl for instance), but alas, that would take more people and resources than PACE has...

Oh yea, go Poquoson!

And Spotswood I guess....

solonqb · Post by **solonqb** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 6:24 pm

You know, getting the state overly involved in academic competition is not necessarily a good thing. Part of the reason Sue Korosa deserved her Cooper award this year was the role she played in the 80s in rescuing OAC from corrupt state officials who after presiding over unfair, favoritist question tenders, starting recycling question sets verbatim (I'm not making this up). The 'state' element in OAC is now limited to a token Ohio Department of Education official. (Yes, it's run out of Shawnee State, by Ms. Conn, but a public university employee is not commensurate to the extent of government involvement we're talking about here, nor with the level that was going on in the 80s).

Dr. Chuck/Mr. Bellas of Tippecanoe may be able to corroborate this/correct any mistake I may be making, as my knowledge of this is not perfect.

NoahMinkCHS · Post by **NoahMinkCHS** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 9:33 pm

In agreement with solonqb's points, I'd go further and say that, in general, government involvement often makes things worse, at least under the standards most people here favor.

Florida's PAC-like qb is, I believe, gov't-run. Chip Beall did "Bill Clinton's Arkansas Quizbowl". Illinois -- which seems to have a very active circuit (a great credit to everyone there) -- nonetheless plays questions most of "us" generally dislike, and further, restricts participation of its teams in nationals. Add in the OAC past Noah mentioned... plus I just remembered NC Library Bowl or whatever... And it's not a great record.

Virginia may be the exception to the government makes it worse rule, at least in part because (somehow!) Va. managed to hire a commissioner who actually knows something about formats played outside of his own state. (Of course, I don't know what things were like pre-Pickrell, maybe it was fine then too.)

Meanwhile, states with minimal government involvement, like Georgia and South Carolina (the greatest quiz bowl state ever! -C. Beall), tend to have developed successful circuits on their own with a long history of nationals participation, and at least in our case, a long-running state tournament that (at least recently) has featured good pyramidial questions.

Realizing that Ill./Va. people vastly outnumber Ga./SC people here, I hope I haven't started something; but as pyramid-style partisans vastly outnumber other factions, I'm hoping that makes up. And I know I've missed many states, likely because I don't know much about the way things are there. But my point (finally) is that quiz bowl is best when run by quiz bowl people, something governments rarely let happen.

(Also, I know we're far off-topic. Maybe a spin-off thread(s) on spreading "good" quiz bowl practices and government involvement would be in order.)

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 10:41 pm

http://www.qunlimited.com/national.htm finally has the New Orleans report. You may begin your commentary to the commentary now.

Byko · Post by **Byko** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:00 pm

Interesting to read the commentary. Then again, it's also interesting to see my alma mater be the "team to beat in 2006." Oddly enough, that'll also be 10 years after I graudated from there. Hmmm....

Regardless, I'm sure nobody in Oklahoma would disagree with the assessment that Holland Hall is a quality team, and I fully expect them to make some noise at NAQT this weekend. Will they win? I'd be very surprised, but I fully figure they'll make playoffs.

dtaylor4 · Post by **dtaylor4** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:03 pm

The one surprise I have is how Fairfield (IL) made the playoffs. Here they are a Class A team and are OK at best. Then again, this is

's tourney.

Trevkeeper · Post by **Trevkeeper** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 11:07 pm

I personally like how if you look before the page loads entirely, the headline above Brad Rutter's picture is "Brad Rutter Wins $2"...I nearly cracked up laughing.

orangecrayon · Post by **orangecrayon** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 2:41 am

"Regardless, I'm sure nobody in Oklahoma would disagree with the assessment that Holland Hall is a quality team, and I fully expect them to make some noise at NAQT this weekend. Will they win? I'd be very surprised, but I fully figure they'll make playoffs."

Byko--Holland Hall is a quality team, although the main competition in OK is generally limited to Booker T. Washington (my old team), the Edmond schools and sometimes one of the other Tulsa-area schools that rarely go to nationals (i.e. Bishop Kelley or Broken Arrow). How they do at

nationals or at NAQT nats just depends on how hot Matt Pargeter gets. That's how they've always been. Hell, the school started the team in large part because of him. Should be very interesting to see where they are next year.

BroNi · Post by **BroNi** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 11:06 am

I usually just read the NAC bashing, say to myself, here we go again, and then laugh....or get angry, and then move on. But now that one of you has mentioned my school by name, I feel I must throw myself into the fray.

I can't speak for other teams, but it is certainly not true that Kellenberg doesn't "know any better." As was mentioned, we participate in NAQT tournaments often and also tournaments using KMO, NAC, It's Academic, and Patrick's Press. We even run a NAQT tournament right here on LONG ISLAND.

It is also not true that Long Island is dominated by Mr. Beall. Westchester (north of NYC) maybe yes, but not us. Our Regional Quiz Bowl league uses Patrick's Press and KMO as question sources as does two other Long Island tourneys, in addition to the NAQT one that we run.

As a coach, I like to vary the question format and type for my teams both at practices and tourneys. I believe it makes them more well rounded. It helps them develop different skills and timing. I don't want to keep feeding them NAQT. In fact, the more varieties and question sources we hear, the more chances that a topic will be repeated in a different format than what we practiced, and this gives us an advantage. This variety is one of the reasons why I like the NAC. Having a variety of different formats makes the game more interesting than simply toss-up and bonus. I think the 60 second round is very exciting and really forces the team to work together quickly...and you never know who is going to come up with that one last item to get all 10. I also like the fact that the games involve audio and later on visual questions as well. And the audio are not just "Blender" questions!

Which brings me to my second point. Yes, there are some definite non-academic questions that find their way into NAC. But the same is true of NAQT and It's Academic and others (don't know about PACE - never been). But you have to admit that the vast majority of the questions in NAC are academic. And some of them are pretty tough! Yes, some are written a little strangely, but again not by far most of them.

And I like the fact that the NAC is spread out over 3 weekends. It gives us a choice of venues and cities. But most of all, it gives me a chance to bring a team to the same National Tournament year after year. I like that point of comparision. How does this year's team compare to my previous ones? I don't want to start going to a National tourney where I can only bring my team one year and not the next....due to some conflict such as Senior Prom or Graduation or graduation party or whatever. I have a better chance of bringing my whole A team to NAC than I have to NAQT, PACE, ASCN, or Panasonic -- and in the end, that's why they have been working together the entire year for anyway.

And I do like the fact that the preliminaries are spead out over 3 days. Despite what has been said in other old threads, the touring IS important. My students have been working hard all year long - and now we get a chance to compete and relax. And to me, that's important. It may not be pure hard-core academic questions all the time, but it is a chance for me as a coach to enjoy my team's company in non-stressful and relaxing situations. It's my chance to thank them and reward them for all their hard work. In addition, we don't have to rush from game to game nor do we have to cram as many questions as we can in 20 minutes.

"Live a balanced life - learn some and think some and draw and paint and sing and dance and play and work every day some." (Robert Fulghum)

So I have spoken my peace. Now you could tear my points apart....but why? We all approach things a little differently - let's be tolerant. And realize that maybe, just maybe, there could be other reasons than "didn't know any better," or "do indeed consciously choose the worst tournament in order to increase their chances of winning."

Besides, Brad did beat Ken pretty badly!

Bro. Nigel

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 2:52 pm

Again, I'm giving due credit to

for increasing the number of prelim games up to 6. It may have taken us a long time to see this happen, but it is a positive step.

I can understand the ability to go to one of a number of weekends. That's the advantage of being able to do a competition over that period of time because it is one's livelihood. (Meaning: the rest of us who volunteer our time for this could never be able to do that.) Certainly I can appreciate a trip to Nationals as a reward for work and preparation for an entire year, and too few schools do take teams to nationals to know what that's all about. I personally want to see more teams attending nationals, no matter who runs them, and I understand conflicts of schedule or financial difficulties as factors that get in the way. But I also want teams to attend multiple nationals because I want them to know that they have a stake in improving the game.

As for PACE, we allow teams to choose a bonus question if they get a tossup correctly, and in the past we have run audio and visual questions. I run the High School Celebrity Shoot biography tournament, which tests team depth completely differently (and depending on the mood of the writers we will also have audio and visual questions too). I have also found that buzzer races are quite popular things to keep a lot of kids involved (though obviously that should be done very judiciously). Academic Decathlon... well, that's a completely different beast.

As for schedules being as they are, I know from our feedback over the years, the kids who attend our tournaments would rather consolidate all the activity to one or two days. Quite frankly those of us who run this event cannot help but run it in that short a period of time (because many of the volunteers we have actually work for a living). Sure, if we decided to just run down to 2 or 3 games going on every hour to allow people to relax and watch other opponents... I wouldn't mind it if that's what the kids wanted. But overwhelmingly in our samples, people like to play and play multiple games in one day. Coaches would rather the kids play games as well, because it is less likely the kids would get themselves in trouble (and we know what the liabilities are when it comes to trips like this).

I don't think there is just "one way" to do nationals (timed NAQT, reboundable PACE bonuses, etc.), and the fact we have so many different types of events is a wonderful opportunity for multiple programs. But the dates for all the nationals are known ahead of time: if you wanted to try out one of the other nationals, you can still do it. Granted, PACE has normally been on Chip's last weekend, but we have accommodated teams that wind up competing on that last weekend that have registered for ours (give them a full refund of their NSC entry fee and automatic bid to the following year's NSC, so it's no-risk if one wins a QU regional outright).

So maybe you'll consider going to NAQT or PACE next year. It is your choice after all.

Byko · Post by **Byko** » Thu Jun 02, 2005 8:38 pm

Brother Nigel, I appreciate the comments. It was good getting a chance to finally meet you in person a couple years ago as I observed the competition at NAC at Marymount, and, in all seriousness, thanks for setting me straight on a few points (I suppose my New York metro area geography isn't so hot--perhaps I should make a trip up there to straighten it out). Yes, Westchester is what I was trying to come up with and Long Island came out--mea culpa.

I'm glad to see that the New York area is getting exposure to other formats. At least from what I had heard, it seemed that NAC format (and perhaps questions) were all that were being used/seen in the area, so I'm glad to see diversity. I honestly think diversity is a good thing in quiz bowl--please don't mistake me for being one who simply wants one national champion. At one point, I did, but that's really not possible, as there is not, contrary to some people's desires, "one world, one people, one format" of quiz bowl.

As for the NAC itself, increasing to 6 prelim games is definitely a good move. And while I felt that in my previous observance, there were some bad questions at the tournament (such as "what medium is currently posing a threat to radio?"), yes, they tended to be academic, and you said it well--they're decent, even if written a little strangely. They're not my personal favorites, but frankly, they're not as bad as most people probably think (some of whom may have less actual experience with them than others).

I guess my biggest point was really more directed toward the idea of making more places more knowledgeable about the diversity of quiz bowl that does exist. Some places don't know as much as others. Mistakenly, I thought that Long Island, Westchester, and the New York metro area were part of that. So, I apologize for my inaccuracy. But more than anything, to those of you who feel that something more and/or better can be done, do it. There is much good that can be done, and there is a great deal of support out there for the game.

Matt Weiner · Post by **Matt Weiner** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 1:14 am

To clarify: The major objections I have to Chip are not format-based. While I do absolutely believe that pyramidal, academic questions are superior to one-liners or trivia, I recognize that others may proceed from different premises and disagree on that point. I mainly object to Chip because of his unethical behavior. Altering tournament formats midway, tailoring questions to his favored teams, illicitly plagiarizing question after question after question from collegiate packets--these practices are dishonorable and have no place in an event associated with schools that pride themselves on integrity and often have honor codes. I expect players, coaches, and parents to go out of their way to eschew such behavior. The things Chip Beall does would get a student failed, suspended, or expelled from many of the schools who play his tournament if he did them in an academic setting. I don't see how any school with an honor code can justify giving money to someone who so flagrantly violates the respect and dignity of the very students whose honor is valued.

If you do like the one-liners and four-quarter format, why not go to ASCN instead? It offers the format you like, but without the ethical baggage of Chip. Then, we could have an honest discussion about whether superior formats exist and if so what they are, comparing tournaments with equally valued ethical reputations (ie, every tournament except Chip) and not clouding the discussion with what is ultimately a much higher priority than quizbowl formats.

NoahMinkCHS · Post by **NoahMinkCHS** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 1:18 am

Question for Matt or anyone else who might know: How long are Chip's quarters? It seemed (at least in '02) that the judges ended the rounds with a buzzer, sometimes mid-question, as if they were timed. But unlike every other timed format I've ever played, there was no clock nor any stated rule, at least that I knew about. My guess was always that he ended it at a dramatic moment or when a favored team was up or something, but I'd appreciate being set straight if I'm wrong. It just seems like something he'd do.

AKKOLADE · Post by **AKKOLADE** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 2:07 am

NoahMinkCHS wrote:Question for Matt or anyone else who might know: How long are Chip's quarters? It seemed (at least in '02) that the judges ended the rounds with a buzzer, sometimes mid-question, as if they were timed. But unlike every other timed format I've ever played, there was no clock nor any stated rule, at least that I knew about. My guess was always that he ended it at a dramatic moment or when a favored team was up or something, but I'd appreciate being set straight if I'm wrong. It just seems like something he'd do.

I have never been to NAC, but one tournament that is regularly held in WV is the Marshall SCORES tournament, ran by Ernie Anderson (member of the Chip brigade). It was supposed to mimic the format of NAC, including the timed factor - a point brought up often by my then-high school coach.

My senior year, the only time I played in this tournament, my team advanced to the final three, which played in the morning of the second day of the tournament. Groggy and preparing for the tournament, I (or someone else; this has been over three years ago now) asked Ernie if the matches were timed. His response was "no."

However, matches did seem to end at odd times. I don't remember any mid-question ends of matches, but there were likely a few matches that ended at a funny time for momentum's sake.

Anyway, I don't have any proof that this happened (though I do recall at least one question that was ripped straight from a non-NAC set that I attended in junior high), but just going from the few statements I heard at the SCORES tournament and what I've read on the NAC web page (i.e., the heavy pimping of various teams), if one were to state that NAC officials stop the clock when they wish to get a result they wished for, I wouldn't ask if they owned a tin foil hat.

mhanna · Post by **mhanna** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 8:10 am

National tournaments are not the only events that may have a bias or perceived unethical behavior. I suspect any team that travels has a story to tell about being an outsider going up against the hometown favorite, but what are we to do? Stay at home?

My teams learned a long time ago that when we travel to another man's backyard, expect the unexpected and learn to deal with his rules. Those rules may not be in the coach's packet.

Thankfully, those occasions are rare, but they do happen and can leave a lasting taste of bitterness.

So many whines and so many rants. Why can't we just play the game without mugging people and events?

Mac Hanna
Aiken

Byko · Post by **Byko** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 12:40 pm

From my experiences, both playing in 1996 in New Orleans and observing in 2003 in Washington, I can say this: the matches are not timed. I counted pretty much every match I watched in DC for two days, and the first and fourth quarters were each 20 questions in length. The second quarter ends when they've gone through 4 bonuses or 8 tossups (whichever comes first). Our coach's scoresheet back in '96 had room for 20 questions in each of those rounds, and it was filled every time--no more, no less. So there's the answer. They only give the impression that they're timed.

mhanna · Post by **mhanna** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 1:57 pm

NAC used to be timed when the elimination matches were televised and Texaco was the sponsor. After the tournament lost its sponsorship, I believe that the fourth quarter went through a set number of questions.

Mac Hanna

STPickrell · Post by **STPickrell** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 7:54 pm

NoahMinkCHS wrote:Virginia may be the exception to the government makes it worse rule, at least in part because (somehow!) Va. managed to hire a commissioner who actually knows something about formats played outside of his own state. (Of course, I don't know what things were like pre-Pickrell, maybe it was fine then too.)

The circuit in VA had already developed a fair bit before Scholastic Bowl had been put into place; the first season we did this was 1997-98.

I heard about the VHSL Scholastic Bowl competition from Marian Suter, who provided a reference for me when I initially applied for the job in the spring of 1997. I did not get the job then, instead Claude Sandy, who had worked with Virginia's Academic Decathlon in the past.

Mr Sandy wrote most of the questions for the 97-98 and 98-99 seasons, and I will let those who have played or observed them provide commentary. After that, I took the reins, writing the entire series in 99-00, and have enlisted several QB people from the 00-01 season onwards.

Over the five years my team and I have organized the VHSL series, we have moved the questions towards (1) great conciseness (we avoid "how" questions) and (2) more NAQTish length/structure. Teams have gotten more used to the length over the years, although last year we may have erred in excess difficulty (especially for Regionals.)

I will agree with Byko's statement that unless snail-mail or phone calls are used in this initiative, it will fail.

Poquoson is a Group AA school. It has been at every VHSL state championship tournament save one (02-03, IIRC.) This year they lost to Spotswood and Blacksburg at states. They were defeated by Powhatan at regionals as well.

Jefferson Forest, who defeated eventual champion Charlottesville and took runner-up Spotswood to overtime on VHSL questions, are playing in the DC phase. It will be interesting to see how they do!

Zip Zap Rap Pants · Post by **Zip Zap Rap Pants** » Fri Jun 03, 2005 9:17 pm

StPickrell wrote:Poquoson is a Group AA school. It has been at every VHSL state championship tournament save one (02-03, IIRC.) This year they lost to Spotswood and Blacksburg at states. They were defeated by Powhatan at regionals as well.

Ahh, thanks for clearing that up for me. Aren't they division A in sports though?

msuter · Post by **msuter** » Sun Jun 05, 2005 10:23 pm

If Poquoson is AA in Scholastic Bowl, they are AA in sports as well. A, AA, and AAA classifications are based on student population and teams don't move up or down based on the activity.

STPickrell · Post by **STPickrell** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 6:18 am

msuter wrote:If Poquoson is AA in Scholastic Bowl, they are AA in sports as well. A, AA, and AAA classifications are based on student population and teams don't move up or down based on the activity.

Actually, the Appomattox Regional Governor's School [ARGS] is A for athletic activities and AAA for non-athletic activities.

In theory, I suppose Maggie Walker could avail themselves of this; they are Group A in enrollment size, IIRC. The closest Group A district is the James River, and they'd have to travel out to Goochland, Amelia, etc., for their games (an hour to 2 1/2 hours.) That is simply untenable.

Remarkably, they won a state cross-country title a few years ago despite having an enrollment 1/3 that of most of their competition. I'd like to see them field a football team as well; maybe THAT could be group A since the number of trips are fewer and they're all on Fridays.

Thomas Jefferson, on the other hand, are Group AAA in enrollment as well. In fact, they were gunning for a spot in the Northern Region football playoffs this fall. (However, Virginia is effectively 6-A in football.)

And this concludes today's lesson from VHSL 201.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Mon Jun 06, 2005 8:31 am

StPickrell wrote:
msuter wrote:If Poquoson is AA in Scholastic Bowl, they are AA in sports as well. A, AA, and AAA classifications are based on student population and teams don't move up or down based on the activity.
Actually, the Appomattox Regional Governor's School [ARGS] is A for athletic activities and AAA for non-athletic activities.

In theory, I suppose Maggie Walker could avail themselves of this; they are Group A in enrollment size, IIRC. The closest Group A district is the James River, and they'd have to travel out to Goochland, Amelia, etc., for their games (an hour to 2 1/2 hours.) That is simply untenable.

Remarkably, they won a state cross-country title a few years ago despite having an enrollment 1/3 that of most of their competition. I'd like to see them field a football team as well; maybe THAT could be group A since the number of trips are fewer and they're all on Fridays.

Thomas Jefferson, on the other hand, are Group AAA in enrollment as well. In fact, they were gunning for a spot in the Northern Region football playoffs this fall. (However, Virginia is effectively 6-A in football.)

And this concludes today's lesson from VHSL 201.

Okay... sorry to hijack this, but as one person who has to deal with dividing teams by population for Decathlon, I do have to ask: so it's solely based on enrollment at whatever check date(s). So magnet schools are not somehow clustered in with the AAA automatically (or whatever your highest enrollment is)? Ohio athletics is based on (I think) a population/proportion of the gender eligible for that activity, so a private school [St. Ignatius, St. Edward's, and the other private schools with great football programs] has to compete against huge schools with large populations [Mentor, which is the largest public school 10-12].

I have arguments all the time on how to treat small private and magnet schools for the purposes of "small school" designations. Those in the public school argue for large school, while I say based on the burden of activities placed on the students, I would argue small.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 6:46 pm

Chip has posted his review of last weekend's DC phase on his website.

http://www.qunlimited.com/national.htm#DC

NoahMinkCHS · Post by **NoahMinkCHS** » Tue Jun 07, 2005 7:37 pm

Haha, I always love reading those. Say what you will about

, he can tell a story. My pick for quote of the year thus far:

Chip, perhaps with sarcasm (?), wrote:Key to Russell's convincing win over Horace Greeley in the last DC match was beating Horace Greeley at their own game; namely, by buzzing in early at just the right time with correct responses.

Um, that's not just HG's game -- isn't that THE game? Maybe it was sarcasm... maybe...

Second place quote might go to his N.O. wrap, where he asks his phase MVP to let him coach him for Jeopardy!. I really hope that doesn't become his new M.O. -- "Learn from the J! master! (Well, at least his 'coach'...)"

The Quizbowl Resource Center

NAC - New Orleans

NAC - New Orleans

re

On a completely different note...

Commentary

Yes, we're hijacking this post.

Washington results are up!