Page 2 of 2

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:37 pm
by ryanrosenberg
Snoopy wrote:What happened with that Edgemont forfeit in the middle of playoffs?
I asked my dad, who teaches at Edgemont. He said that the team had to leave to go catch their flight back. They were apparently up 200 in the fourth quarter but were unable to finish the game.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:45 pm
by the return of AHAN
Granny Soberer wrote:
Snoopy wrote:What happened with that Edgemont forfeit in the middle of playoffs?
I asked my dad, who teaches at Edgemont. He said that the team had to leave to go catch their flight back. They were apparently up 200 in the fourth quarter but were unable to finish the game.
Well, that's not :chip: 's fault. That's just poor planning by Edgemont. I mean, I assume :chip: provides the expected conclusion time of the championship finals.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 5:47 pm
by Stained Diviner
How long does the 4th quarter take?

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 7:46 pm
by a Joe
Big Y wrote:How long does the 4th quarter take?
It doesn't take an absurdly long time; the game as a whole takes ~40-45 minutes, theoretically, which is far longer than most Quizbowl matches but still not horrible.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 7:58 pm
by ryanrosenberg
the return of AHAN wrote:
Granny Soberer wrote:
Snoopy wrote:What happened with that Edgemont forfeit in the middle of playoffs?
I asked my dad, who teaches at Edgemont. He said that the team had to leave to go catch their flight back. They were apparently up 200 in the fourth quarter but were unable to finish the game.
Well, that's not :chip: 's fault. That's just poor planning by Edgemont. I mean, I assume :chip: provides the expected conclusion time of the championship finals.
They weren't expecting to do that well, they were mediocre at local competitions and had only qualified for nationals a couple of weeks before.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 8:39 pm
by Father Comstock
Snoopy wrote:
Big Y wrote:How long does the 4th quarter take?
It doesn't take an absurdly long time; the game as a whole takes ~40-45 minutes, theoretically, which is far longer than most Quizbowl matches but still not horrible.

I played 11 nationals rounds, and not one took more than 30 minutes.

Also regarding the wiki Mr. Dillon, since i do not know how to double quote, I definitely thought it was ridiculous that the questions were played. However one of the questions that was accidentally projected in the STE round was asking about the number of protons in chlorine if chlorine has an atomic number of 17... The second was a somewhat pyramidal credit mobilier question that i wouldn't have known until halfway through if the answer hadn't been projected. Either way, weird. Also some art pieces were displayed ahead of time in the powerpoint scrollbar on the left, so the question on identifying Klimt as the artist of The Kiss was a dead giveaway ahead of time if you had looked at the projector.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:10 pm
by a Joe
Father Comstock wrote:I played 11 nationals rounds, and not one took more than 30 minutes.

The question on identifying Klimt as the artist of The Kiss was a dead giveaway ahead of time if you had looked at the projector.
I've sat in those rooms for quite longer than that; in the one playoff round I was ever in, we were in there for a good 40 minutes. (EDIT: And that was a high-scoring game too. It's not like a lot of things went dead)

Now that, my friend, has to be one of the finest cases of Chip's stupidity I've ever heard. :lol:

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 9:50 pm
by Father Comstock
Snoopy wrote:
Father Comstock wrote:I played 11 nationals rounds, and not one took more than 30 minutes.

The question on identifying Klimt as the artist of The Kiss was a dead giveaway ahead of time if you had looked at the projector.
I've sat in those rooms for quite longer than that; in the one playoff round I was ever in, we were in there for a good 40 minutes. (EDIT: And that was a high-scoring game too. It's not like a lot of things went dead)

Now that, my friend, has to be one of the finest cases of Chip's stupidity I've ever heard. :lol:

Did you go to nationals this year? The past years it's been behind, but this year, everything was right on schedule or even early. Quite a shocker.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Tue Jun 14, 2016 11:35 pm
by Marble-faced Bristle Tyrant
Father Comstock wrote:Also some art pieces were displayed ahead of time in the powerpoint scrollbar on the left, so the question on identifying Klimt as the artist of The Kiss was a dead giveaway ahead of time if you had looked at the projector.
They didn't even put the powerpoint in presentation mode?!

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 12:31 am
by dhumphreys17
Marble-faced Bristle Tyrant wrote:
Father Comstock wrote:Also some art pieces were displayed ahead of time in the powerpoint scrollbar on the left, so the question on identifying Klimt as the artist of The Kiss was a dead giveaway ahead of time if you had looked at the projector.
They didn't even put the powerpoint in presentation mode?!
PowerPoint being out of slideshow mode happens more often than I would hope for humanity's sake, speaking outside of quizbowl, as that is where the nAC is.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:17 am
by a Joe
Double post, FZ please :lol:

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:18 am
by a Joe
Father Comstock wrote:Did you go to nationals this year? The past years it's been behind, but this year, everything was right on schedule or even early. Quite a shocker.
Yes, I've been at DC phase for four miserable years. This year in particular my whole team was taking SATs so I went with a bunch of... (okay, I guess) players. We were destroyed. :grin:

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 8:42 am
by Valefor
I'd think more about what sort of logical cluster :capybara: could result in a situation in which a question packet could be accidentally displayed along with a Powerpoint presentation (like, were the questions also for some reason in the Powerpoint file?!), but I'd be worried that would lead to a real life reenactment of that scene from Scanners.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2016 9:50 am
by Father Comstock
Vissi d'arte wrote:I'd think more about what sort of logical cluster :capybara: could result in a situation in which a question packet could be accidentally displayed along with a Powerpoint presentation (like, were the questions also for some reason in the Powerpoint file?!), but I'd be worried that would lead to a real life reenactment of that scene from Scanners.

Nope. The questions were in word. So powerpoint wasn't even open. Why it wasn't kept in presentation mode is beyond me.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Thu Jun 16, 2016 1:20 am
by the return of AHAN
QUnlimited wrote:The first consideration in declaring a national champion is number of losses. Next Generation suffered one loss in the preliminary rounds to perennial contender Danville Bate (KY), winners of this year’s Giant Killer Award. The Illinois team finished first in total points by far – 411 to Wooster’s 354 -- but that one loss kept them from winning it all. Paideia and Wooster were undefeated, and Wooster ended up No. 1 in the nation, narrowly edging Paideia on statistics. Wooster won the $1,500 prize for their No. 1 finish; Paideia, $1,000 for No. 2; Next Generation, $500 for No. 3.
This highlights what is easily my biggest gripe with the nAC... Next Gen got punished for having more difficult opponents in a tournament that wasn't really seeded, never mind that they may very well have been playing the toughest field. The 'declaring a national champion' criteria, or any criteria that doesn't involve the teams playing each other, is no better than spinning a wheel.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2016 6:08 pm
by Ben Dillon

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2016 7:45 pm
by the return of AHAN
Ben Dillon wrote:Well, this picture makes no sense:

http://www.qunlimited.com/imgnational/2 ... od2016.jpg
Weirdly, I can see what he did; just follow the game numbers. The 'loser's bracket' was where the loser of game 1 went to go play Daviess County. Which bolsters my suspicion that in this format, you want to be the team sitting out 1st. The other two teams that play in the first round MUST play at least FOUR times to be crowned champion, if they lose a match, while it's possible, in Daviess County's position, to lose once and still win the championship by playing three matches.


EDITED: I can't count.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2016 7:56 pm
by Cody
How does following the numbers help? Daviess County wins 2 but goes to the loser bracket? (they also won three matches not two)

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Wed Jun 22, 2016 8:11 pm
by the return of AHAN
You're right. I just went back and looked again and they did play three times. I still maintain that it's an advantage to sit the first round. Had Daviess lost to Harrison, Harrison would've been due to re-play Briarcliff in round 4, with one of them getting eliminated in that round, setting up a winner-take-all final in round 5, which would've been Daviess' 3rd match, but the 4th for either of the other two.

Also the way they used "Circle of Death" on that page...
Image

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 6:25 pm
by Ben Dillon
Also, if you look at the rankings on the website (http://www.qunlimited.com/national/2016/VRanking.html), Briarcliff is listed as 9-1 although they lost twice to Daviess County.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 11:57 pm
by Ent
I find it difficult to accept that a guy with 50 testimonials on his website would make a math mistake like this.

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2016 9:13 pm
by dhumphreys17
Ent wrote:I find it difficult to accept that a guy with 50 testimonials on his website would make a math mistake like this.
Especially when 20 or so of those testimonials are :capybara: ing duplicates...

Re: 2016 nAC

Posted: Sun Feb 12, 2017 2:50 pm
by Father Comstock
didn't want to justify the 2017 NAC with a thread but my team will (unfortunately) be attending instead of HSNCT. However, we will be attending PACE NSC, god bless. For what it is worth, they currently don't have an editor ( :lol: ) as Jason Russell has left to work for NHBB (don't blame him). NAC questions will start to return to the horrible one liners they were before Jason at least attempted to make them pyramidal while Chip suffocated his attempts.