Illinois 05-06

harpersferry · Post by **harpersferry** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 8:00 pm

Yes the final at WN was, shall we say exciting. Unfortunately, 16-question rounds stunted the full exersize of the teams' skills. This was the reason I think the tournament finished so early, but I agree it went smoothly. After 3 questions, we led 75-0 yet 3 TU and 5 bonuses in math later, it was a different story. We were beaten on other quick buzzes, but both teams were playing well. Because most bonuses were swept (by both teams) TU's were extra important. It felt a heck of a lot like varsity, except not on varsity questions. In respect to the topic of this thread, I think we saw some early forcasts of future varsity competition today.

mlaird · Post by **mlaird** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 8:30 pm

Brad, the invitations for NAQT state were just sent out a few days ago, hence, there is no field as of right now. However, I'm pretty sure that the "usual suspects" will be there. I think it's pretty safe to expect the teams that were there last year will be there again this year. The invitations were sent to only a few teams around the state, but registration is open. We would love to have 'Bago there, if at all possible, though I know you have expressed the disapproval of your coach.
It will be a fun, competitive tournament, and a berth to the NAQT HSNCT is up for grabs. That's the big dance, folks. Last year 2 out of 3 Illinois teams attending ended up making the playoffs.

AnonSchoBowlCoach · Post by **AnonSchoBowlCoach** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 9:08 pm

/edited as per my following post.

bigtrain · Post by **bigtrain** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 9:18 pm

This is why no team should ever play in their own tournament, especially when their coaches are writing the questions.

Irreligion in Bangladesh · Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:29 pm

AnonSchoBowlCoach wrote:I noticed a number of very strange things at the torunament, and I think it raises serious questions of impropriety on the part of the WN coach(es). Upon really looking back at all the coincidinces that occured, I have the impression that at the least the WN coach(es) may have specifically chosen/written questions to give their team a decisive advantage in the afternoon rounds.

You note that this is not an accusation of any misdoing on Saturday, rather a production of issues to be considered and answered. As I do not believe anyone associated with WN posts or visits this board, I will attempt to answer these issues the way I would, were I a coach.

1. The first thing I noticed was that in the afternoon rounds, it appeared that the bonus questions seemed, as a whole, a LOT easier than in the earlier rounds. The morning had an excellent mix of difficult and easy questions, whereas in the afternoon rounds whatever team got the tossups tended to pick up 3/4 or more of the points. I really thought nothing terribly strange of this at first, though this would appear to give a tremendous advantage to a team that is fast on the buzzer.

This, if true, is bad question writing. While there has been spirited debate recently in the college forum about whether or not questions should get harder in the transition from morning to playoff, there is no question that the level of difficulty should at least not be lowered in that transition. Whether or not this is tampering or being a bad writer/organizer cannot be said.

Knowing that Wheaton North is very fast on the buzzer, this may be considered tampering, but I fail to see why WN would do that, knowing that they are also capable of sweeping Varsity level PLEASE MAKE FUN OF ME BECAUSE I SPEAK NEITHER LATIN NOR ENGLISH. This is most likely a case of bad editing.

2. The 'character' of the questions in the morning and afternoon rounds seemed VERY different, particularly regarding math questions. This piqued my interest. The morning rounds had a good variety of different kinds of math. The questions in the later rounds tended towards certain kinds of questions such as calculating large roots, calculating percentages from fractions, determining roman numerals, and others. None of these kinds of questions were asked in the morning. WN features very talented player(s) who have abilities which fall specifically into these categories. The captain has an ability to do certain kinds of Math calculations, which would put his team at a tremendous advantage at these kinds of questions. In every instance, the captain would call out 'All answers!', implying that he had all the answers, IMMEDIATELY after the reader stopped reading the bonus parts. - this is not to imply that the player was given the answers, only that certain questions were chosen which favor his particular skills.

Based on your anonymity, I do not know if you've encountered Greg Gauthier before in your career. He is, simply put, the best math player I (and many others) have ever seen. It does not matter which math you place in front of him; strict computation, knowledge of theorems, exposure to higher level math, he's got it all. As an 8th grader, he won the individual National Mathcounts championship and led Illinois to the national championship in the 'state team' competition. As a freshman, he qualified for the desperation shot at Scobol Solo, in part by winning the Calculus/Combinatorics and Geometry categories. This year, he took second in the Solo, the top Illinois finisher out of 99, winning Geometry and Algebra. I've played him several times this year, at Solo (morning match and finals), New Trier (quarterfinals), and Sterling (championship). In a total of 100 questions, approximately 15-20 would be math - he answered every single one of them correctly, save for a few in the Solo finals. In those few tossups that he did not get, he did not try, and only once was anyone else foolish enough to. (That would be me, and I got it wrong.)

To say that the math questions were biased towards him would be foolish. Mathematics itself is biased towards him, at least in Scholastic Bowl. It does not matter what question is asked, ESPECIALLY in a fresh-soph tournament. He will answer it.

3. In addition to the above, there was also a dramatic shift in the type of sports questions asked. In the morning sports subjects ranged from pro basketball, college team names, and olympic questions, with no commonalities b/w the questions. The afternoon had a number of similar 'Give the team and the city name given their nicknames.' These were absent in the morning, and there were at least 3 instances of them in the afternoon. The morning rounds had a great variety of subjects, whereas in the afternoon questions were based around specific categories and 'types' of questions - in particular football questions. I would cite specific examples here, but alas, see point #4.

I cannot chalk this up to anything more than bad writing/organizing. However, sports shouldn't make up more than 30 points in any game. If this is the only true case of openly switching to an easier subject, this is not the worst case of question writing I have seen.

4. No teams were allowed to keep copies of the questions. This is very unusual in weekend tourneys. The explanation was that they like to re-use the questions every few years, which at first seemed acceptable enough. However, even should the team re-use the questions, the prospect of re-using the actual question packets is nonsense. Every moderator marks up the question books, and reusing them for a later tourney would be impossible. If they were to reuse the questions they would simply print out new copies. For the morning rounds there were 10+ copies of the question packets. Why they would need to keep this many copies of questions, of which they presumably already had electronic copies, is a mystery. Is it possible that WN did not want curious coaches to be able to peruse the questions later on? Thinking that they may notice the questioning patterns mentioned above in points 2 and 3?

If they wish to re-use the questions, giving the questions to coaches provides answers to teams, turning Scholastic Bowl into "Who can remember what question this is the fastest" Bowl (Much like the current state of the NAQT HSNCT podcasted games on my iPod...I'm almost at the point where I can answer a tossup before the previous bonus is finished because I'm so familiar with the packet). I know my coach has archives of every packet she's ever picked up from a Saturday tournament, plus all conference packets, plus state series packets from previous years. Very simply put, to re-use questions, one must keep them frozen.

5. And this is something that I've noted with this team in past years that reappeared today: any time there is a time out or half time, the WN coach takes the team out into the hallway away from the moderators and opposing team - no problem with this on the surface, except when you consdier the fact that the questions were written by a WN coach. In the final round, WN was trailing badly until the coach called time out and took the team outside the room. Following the conference, WN absolutely steamrolled auburn. I believe the score before the timeout was in the neighborhood of 75-0 Auburn, and WN ended up winning the round 250+ to 80 something. I apologize for not noting the exact numbers. Auburn had been dominant all day long, but after WN steppd into the hallway they got almost every single point for the rest of the match. This is something I've seen WN do in previous tournaments against my team specifically, in instances in which the WN coach had the only set of questions and was doing the reading throughout the match. I was very botherd by this in the past, but figured I must be imagining things. Could this be attributed to a great coach and a very motivational pep-talk? Possibly, but maybe not.

In a tournament where moderating is done by coaches, it is common practice, and I do believe even law, for coaches to come to an equitable agreement on the duties. If a coach finds fault with the WN coach reading the entire time AND taking the team out of the room during timeouts, they can take this issue up with Wheaton North. As this is the purpose of your post, I'll leave it at that.

6. Again, the questions were all written/chosen by the WN coach(es).

At best, this is nothing more than any other school's Saturday tournament. What is the difference between a school ordering a question set and asking for certain specifications and a school writing questions that, to a small extent, they have an advantage in? At the very worst, this would be, if it is the case, nothing more than a home-field advantage, something that Scholastic Bowl isn't used to, but shouldn't be absolutely taboo. Masonics is basically Social Studies bowl anyway. Is there a problem with New Trier's tournament randomly turning into Calculus Bowl next year? (This is not to say that it is, just to come up with an example.

And Trevkeeper, admit that it'd be nice to have Carlo write 160+ math tossups that you wouldn't be allowed to sit through

)

I hope other coaches will answer themselves, as I'm not a coach myself.

Stained Diviner · Post by **Stained Diviner** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 11:37 pm

Let me clarify some of the issues raised by AnonSchoBowlCoach. As many of you know, I do not work for Wheaton North.

The questions were not written by a Wheaton North coach. They were written by a Wheaton North alum. He is a lawyer by day, and I don't think that he works with the team on a regular basis.

If you go to Wheaton North's tournaments year after year, you find that many of the questions are repeats from several years ago. I don't know what system they use. Some of the questions are obviously updated, but many are not. That is why teams are not allowed to keep packets--so they can use some the same exact questions four years later.

I do agree that the questions got a little easier today in the afternoon rounds. Keep in mind, however, that Wheaton North was the #1 seed in the morning, so they can play pretty well on tough questions as well. Wheaton North's top Frosh/Soph player did extremely well at Scobol Solo and at the New Trier Varsity Tournament, so he has proven that he can handle varsity-level and varsity-style questions.

As a matter of fact, before going on their tear against Auburn starting one quarter of the way through the match, Wheaton North did worse in the afternoon than the morning. They beat Charleston, the #16 seed by less than 10 points on the last question, and they would have lost to New Trier, the #8 seed, had they been about a second slower on the last tossup.

There is a larger issue here, and that has to do with home teams playing in tournaments. In general, home teams do well. I've seen it at Wheaton North, Loyola, and with my own team at New Trier, among several others. When the home team does well, people get suspicious. Many coaches, however, do not want their teams to miss out on their own tournaments because they think their own tournament is a good experience. I don't know what the answer is. In my case, I know we don't cheat. At the other schools, I have a lot of trust in the coaches, whom I have known for many years and have seen take honorable measures many times.

popculture · Post by **popculture** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:19 am

Though it would be appealing to believe the trouncings I've received at the hands of Wheaton North is due to foul play and these five/six comments may seem suspicious to some, these insinuations are not valid when applied to this particular program.
The only reason I could see for cheating/advantage-giving in a Saturday frosh-soph tourney, which has absolutely zero long-term importance, is to solidify or create a reputation as a top-tier team. This is obviously not the case of Wheaton North, the New York Yankees of the Illinois Scholastic Bowl circuit. Their coach, if I'm not mistaken, is in or about to be in the Hall of Fame. Why would they break/stretch any rules?
I must say, however, at this year's kickoff, I looked at Wheaton North's division, and it looked ridiculously easy -- just them and some teams that would give them no trouble (I don't have their names). They were able to rack up the points (and they may have been shorthanded) and get a top or near-top seed. At the most recent varsity tournament they hosted, their division looked tougher than average (as I remember). I have no point.

As for the timeout in the hallway session, that's easy to explain: Ms. Martin just pressed the button behind Greg Gauthier's left ear that reads "Show No Mercy."

bigtrain · Post by **bigtrain** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:25 am

popculture wrote:Their coach, if I'm not mistaken, is in or about to be in the Hall of Fame.

I really hope that's a euphemism...

jagluski · Post by **jagluski** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:44 am

mlaird wrote: It will be a fun, competitive tournament, and a berth to the NAQT HSNCT is up for grabs. That's the big dance, folks. Last year 2 out of 3 Illinois teams attending ended up making the playoffs.

Not speaking for NAQT, but, actually, there is more than one berth up for grabs(depending on field size). See here: http://www.naqt.com/hsnct/qualification.html . The top 15% of teams will actually qualify for the HSNCT.

If anyone has any questions about the NAQT HSNCT, feel free to contact me at jagluski at yahoo com. I am the logistics coordinator for the tournament and as a former Illinois high school player(Stevenson '00), I would love to see as many Illinois teams there as possible and only wish I could have played at a national championship while I was in high school.

Stained Diviner · Post by **Stained Diviner** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 7:43 am

I really hope that's a euphemism...

It is not.

David Riley · Post by **David Riley** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 12:16 pm

Brad: Re NAQT Illinois State Qualifier:

So far, Bloomington, New Trier, Marist, Eisenhower, and Wheaton Academy have expressed an interest. Wheaton North and Auburn will not be there due to a conflicts. I'm hoping for at lesat 16 teams, and if Ms. Niemeier is willing, we'd be glad to have you.

defendant · Post by **defendant** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 3:22 pm

First of all, I am a former WN scholastic bowl team member a few years removed from the program. For obvious reasons, I am very familiar with WN coaching and the F/S tournament and also very offended for my coaches by the accusations made. I hope end all speculation about it now.

1. There are many possible reasons for this. First, it may have just been random and ended up that the afternoon packets just ended up easier. Another reason could have been they may have seemed easier because higher quality teams were playing them. Obviously, this gave our team no advantage because we (apparently) struggled against teams which statistically we should have beat easily. More so, an uneven distribution between bonuses in a round is probably one of the most frustrating things that can happen. I know as a player that I have no problem getting beat by a team better than me but if they beat us because their bonuses were easier than ours, that would get aggrevating.

2. Greg should sweep every F/S math bonusâ€¦plain and simple. If you saw him on the national math counts tournament, you too would realize how quickly he can compute things. Also, math F/S bonuses cannot go into more difficult computations so sweeping one (even instantaneously) is not that difficult.

3. I noticed this too in this question packet (Iâ€™m pretty sure I know which one it is based on the comments). I believe I played it and we got killed on the sports and even lost a playoff round match during it. It may just be bad question writing but I do agree it is bad. However, it does not favor our team at all.

4. This is probably the easiest to explain. Yes, we do have electronic copies of the questions so that we can change current events and sometimes sports question. However, giving the question out to other schools would clearly not allow us to reuse our questions. I know our F/S team practices with old F/S questions from tournament we attended and I assume that is common practice.

5. Halftime and time-outs: First, why does our team go outside? Fresh air. Most rooms our stuffy and hot while the halls are more comfortable. What do we do during those conferences? Basically joke around. If a strategic speech is ever given, it is usually given by a player. After the first tournament, we can usually recite Mrs. Mâ€™s speeches word for word.

6. As you now know, our questions are NOT written by our coaches. They are written by a lawyer who has also been an IHSA regional and sectional reader. He knows the game and what type of questions to ask.

7. Why do we participate in our own tournament? Simply put, there are not many F/S tournaments that have the type of field strength that ours does. Also, discussing success at our tournament, this was (and I am almost positive about this because it was an on-going joke among our team) the FIRST time we have won our own F/S tournament in its long (10+ year) existence. Also, this is simply a F/S weekend tournament. We gain NOTHING by attempting to cheat. All our team cares about is improving for Conference/State Series.

Iâ€™m done. I donâ€™t plan on posting any more regarding this or any other topic. Please donâ€™t question our coachâ€™s coaching style. Just look at State Series results where we simply cannot (nor would we ever) cheat.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 3:31 pm

jagluski wrote:
mlaird wrote: It will be a fun, competitive tournament, and a berth to the NAQT HSNCT is up for grabs. That's the big dance, folks. Last year 2 out of 3 Illinois teams attending ended up making the playoffs.

Not speaking for NAQT, but, actually, there is more than one berth up for grabs(depending on field size). See here: http://www.naqt.com/hsnct/qualification.html . The top 15% of teams will actually qualify for the HSNCT.

If anyone has any questions about the NAQT HSNCT, feel free to contact me at jagluski at yahoo com. I am the logistics coordinator for the tournament and as a former Illinois high school player(Stevenson '00), I would love to see as many Illinois teams there as possible and only wish I could have played at a national championship while I was in high school.

And of course, don't forget, if you want to travel, there is also the PACE NSC, at NC School for Science and Mathematics this year. We've also had a good showing from Illinois teams that have made the trip out.

mlaird · Post by **mlaird** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 3:50 pm

Just look at State Series results where we simply cannot (nor would we ever) cheat.

Not only do I put those forth as evidence for WN's case, but see here:
1st Fremd F/S
2nd Kaneland Varsity (Lost to Auburn)
Scobol Solo-G. Gauthier-1st among 99 Illinois competitors
4th WN Kickoff (Lost to Fenwick and NT)
1st Sterling F/S
3rd NT Varsity (Lost to Bloomington)
2nd WN Varsity (Lost to Fenwick)
1st Sterling Varsity
1st Fremd Varsity
1st WN F/S

With the exception of one tournament this year, I have been at every tournament that WN has placed in, Varsity and F/S. I have shared moderating duties with both of the WN coaches on many many occasions. I have lost to their teams, I have beaten their teams. If Ms. Martin or Ms. Kidd are dishonest coaches, then they both do a damn good job of hiding it behind a facade of two of the nicest ladies I've ever met.

I also find it sort of a cowardly strike to come and air your dirty laundry on a public message board, instead of going to straight to the persons you have a problem with. If you are who I think you are, then you have very little grounds to make any accusations. Your head coach has solid relationships with most of the coaches in the state, and should be able to approach any issue such as this in a fair manner. If you aren't that person, then disregard that. Not only do the WN coaches not even see this board, you also force their friends to defend them. It hardly seems fair. I recommend that you contact those who are affected by these accusations and confront them face to face.

Stained Diviner · Post by **Stained Diviner** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 5:32 pm

One side comment for AnonSchoBowlCoach that only the two of us will understand: Please read Rule 4-C-1b-2.
One side comment for the rest of you: don't ask.

harpersferry · Post by **harpersferry** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:42 pm

Um, Mr. Reinstein, with all due respect, why if you don't want anyone else asking, did you post this side comment and not PM it? Or, considering that you aparently know who this person is, why didn't you contact them some other way? I do not imply anything else past a question of board etiquette.

I will shortly add a few comments to the discussion of WN F/S final. First, to say that the type of math bonuses given were not complex computations, but memorization mostly. In most cases, the instantaeous sweeps were not unique to Greg, my team had all parts as well. Thus, to say that easy math bonuses were written to benefit him would be in fallacy considering that the TU in many cases was not mathematics, but some other type of quick buzz.

Re In-House. Auburn won their F/S on in-house packets. Is there someone that would be willing to accuse another well-respected program of breeching their integrity based only on this fact? I doubt it. Btw, I believe this is the first time WN has won their own tournament. The fact is that the F/S season is short. Any tournament is good for the schedule and why not have your team play as long as you are objective? In-house is a common practice to save money and control quality, nothing more.

Finally, WN won this match. I doubt this will be the only time that two teams of similar makeup meet. I hope we can put this issue to rest and concentrate on playing quiz bowl, and not arguing about cheating or whatever. As a player, I 'd rather forget it and move on. I hope anyone else who might want to do otherwise to drop it.

EDIT: I'm sorry, I wasn't aware PMing was disabled. My apologies.

Trevkeeper · Post by **Trevkeeper** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 10:56 pm

If it's possible for any Illinois teams to find the resources, I think they should go to WUHSAC. It was great, one of the best I've been at all year. Lots of a great competition, and great questions.

Siverus Snape · Post by **Siverus Snape** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 11:04 pm

In all fairness, (and as Auburn's captain, I think I have the right to say this), Wheaton North beat us. End of story. Do I really think the score was nearly indicative of the team's talents? No. However, I would rather lose by 300 points than be a sore loser. I'm just looking forward to when we get to play Wheaton North again in varsity.

Just an interesting note: It seems to me that if we had played Wheaton North during any of the other afternoon rounds, we would have won, probably convincingly. We played excellently in all of the other ones. I had two straight 8-tossup rounds (out of 16). Of course, no one accused me or the team of cheating.

Siverus Snape · Post by **Siverus Snape** » Sun Jan 29, 2006 11:06 pm

And on a completely different note, what are the available subjects for the Team Illinois tryouts?

mlaird · Post by **mlaird** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:34 am

Siva, they're Math/Sci, Humanities, and Social Studies.

Tegan · Post by **Tegan** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 9:05 am

Without going into reems of details (many of which are unproven), and only mentioning accusations leveled at me for "stacking", I am concerned that we have a coach who is coming out and rather playfully broadsiding tournament hosts. I've known these Wheaton North folks, and cheaters they are not!

The fact is, over the last few years, there have been a string of questionable behvaiors (not necessarily even rules violations) by many coaches and TD's......among them:

1. Playing players who are nominally varsity players at the frosh-soph level. A number of coaches claim this to be questionably ethical

2. TD's placing their own teams in "easy" brackets, while placing far more competitive teams together in an attempt to not only pave the way to the finals, but to make sure the path is easy once they get there.

3. Coaches not making their "A" team the best team (this is what I got burned on....though I contend that this was an error on my part, and was not intentional).

3. TD's insisting on reading the entire match for their own team in semifinal/final rounds.

4. Questions provided by the host team which seem to "play" to the strengths of particular teams.....in some cases the home team finishes in the top 4 of their own tournament against top competition, but fails to make the final 8 of any other tournament all year.

I will be recommending soon to the IHSSBCA that we begin looking at forming a standing ethics committee to draw up a uniform document on how coaches/TD's are to act, and then to respond to allegations in a way that does not turn into a witch hunt, but where (hopefully) at least a spotlight gets turned on people to "knock off" what they are doing.

For the record: I read for the entire playoffs at Wheaton North. Had anyone of New Trier's kids ever seen Casablanca, Wheaton North would not have seen the finals...it was one of the best knock-out-drag-out street fight brawls I had seen in a long time. In the semifinals, there were only two readers available (myself, and a WN alum). The WN coaches decided that to avoid impropriety, that I should read for the WN match, and for which ever match WN played in the final round. Thus, I read WN's semifinal, and then read the final. It is quite possible that they were used to my rhythm, and that this may have had as much an effect as any. Ironically, doing the improper thing (allowing the alum to read for the home team) would have been the wrong thing to do, but may have benefited the visiting team.

Coach Woodward: you may be a rookie, and unaware of procedures, but in the future, before you go leveling accusations as serious as this in public, please contact the Coaches Association, and ask to be put in touch with the Ombudsman who takes care of things like this. The two coaches whom I did see lose to Wheaton North: Coaches Reinstein of New Trier and Greene of Auburn are top flight pros who would never sink to lows like this, despite being placed in pressure packed games (which for the record, and with due respect for the players, were not even varsity matches). You could take a lesson from them!

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 1:11 pm

Tom,

Certainly if you would like some external advice on the ethics subject, I would be happy to contribute a penny or two.

Sometimes I'm just amazed but not surprised at "unethical" behaviors. The reality is that I don't think that people deliberately try to break the rules, but ignorance of appearances of impropriety really do trouble me. If we actually offered "money" for tournament wins, I'm sure that some teams would do what they could do bend the rules beyond the spirit of the rule.

It should be noted that teams and captains have "rights" too. If a coach reads a "real" match with his/her team being one of the competitors, the other coach or the other team must approve of that arrangement. More specifically, they have a right to delay the game and ask the TD to change out the moderator for conflict of interest. I don't know if there is really any purpose for playing a game under protest, but a document on ethics has to be clear on what teams CAN do as much as what coaches and TD's should NOT do.

Again, I would hate to go to the point where we have to document and verify every single student's academic status, but I think that a coach who believes that there is impropriety regarding freshman-sophomore status should have a right to petition the TD to request transcripts from student members of that team. Now, you can have really academically gifted sophomores who take AP classes or took some summer school classes for gifted youth, so perhaps some of the more skeptical coaches out there may think the student isn't really f/s eligible because he/she is so academically accelerated compared to the norm. That's not the fault of the student or his/her coach.

As for TD's setting up brackets of death for other "hard core teams" except their own, that to me is just plain inexcusable. Of course, what is a team to do about that? In some instances, the TD just plain doesn't know because he/she is not networked in to the circuit. In this case, I would pretty much say the rule of thumb is... don't go. Leave prematurely, or have all the hard core teams stage a walkout. Even write a scathing letter to the principal and report to the IHSSCBA ombudsman as a collective group. If it is that obvious and was not advertised (because there are some tournaments I know who want to have specific "elite" divisions compared to "non-elite", but they keep with division champions), then it's against the spirit of competition. I suppose what could be done is to adopt a white paper on how to properly seed the top teams in a tournament, assuming people actually read it. The more important thing is the nature of any punishment.

And above all, if the host coach, team, or faculty write the questions, the host team NEVER plays. Period. If they outsource questions, then the TD has to ensure or explicitly state the secure chain of possession of those questions. It is expected the coach will never hint to his/her students about the content or difficulty of those questions. Anything that does not meet this standard is cheating.

I can go on.

Stained Diviner · Post by **Stained Diviner** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 3:53 pm

These issues are complicated.

I, the Chair of our Association, write questions which my students play on. I believe that Mr. Egan, our Ombudsman, does the same. (He can correct me if I'm wrong.) Mr. Riley, our former Chair, followed the same practice and now has his students play on questions he edits. We have our reasons, and I can get into mine if anyone cares. I probably should advertise better the fact that I do it, but I will not stop doing it.

As far as the brackets are concerned, this can get messy. I remember many years ago when New Trier played Wheaton North in the morning at a Wheaton North Frosh/Soph and gave them their second loss, which prevented them from making it to the afternoon. Why would Wheaton North put themselves in the same bracket as New Trier, the Michelle Kwan of Illinois Scholastic Bowl? (We usually get easy rides into the afternoon rounds.) Because at the time, Wheaton North was not the best team and a fair breakdown of divisions put them in with some good teams. Why are they never in our division any more? Because fair divisions demand placing Wheaton North, a great team, with generally easier opponents. I don't think it would be fair to either team to put Wheaton North against a great team in the morning.

As far as moderators are concerned, it can be difficult to find good moderators not associated with the school. There have been times when IHSA Regional hosts have played their matches without coaches because their coaches were moderating either their match or the match next door. In general there are not that many people around here willing to give up a Saturday for Scholastic Bowl other than players and coaches. If a coach is a clearly better moderator than the alternatives, or the only alternative, then he should moderate.

Tegan · Post by **Tegan** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:20 pm

Let me try and respond to Coach Chuck and Coach Reinstein at the same time.

First, Coach Chuck: I am always interested in any input you can give. I think I can always learn a lot from people coming from different perspectives and who have done this longer than me.

Second.....you're both right (and Coach Reinstein is correct....I do write questions for a tournament that I do enter my own team in....still haven't won it, but I do have mechanisms to overcome any perceived bias...among them: I am not in the room with my team at any point, and the teams randomly draw for position on the morning of the tournament. I have advised this practice in the past to tourament hosts (seed the top 6-8 teams, and allow coaches to randomly draw for the remaining positions. Letting the coaches do it removes all chances of accusing the host of presetting the brackets.

It is complicated, as Coach Reinstein put it, but as Coach Chuck said, a vast majority of the problems are people who don't realize the situation they are in. For one, I am defending the WN folks.....they did go out of their way to avoid the look of impropriety (the fact I read the final round was part of that).

I am not advocating a witch hunt.....I think there is a better way: starting with a small group of colleagues telling person "X" something to the effect "Hey...someone saw you doing this....it might have been nothing, but it could also give the appearance of being shady....be careful in the future." I think the first step is always a friendly warning.
In addition, you can't send a friendly letter every time someone screams "foul!"...to be honest, I think there are far more false accusations of cheating than their are actual cases of cheating. Evaluate the case, and tak it out.....I would guess that in many cases it is based on a misunderstanding. Perhaps an ethics committee could be more of a facilitator instead of an actual "jury and executioner".

I am just concerned that there is a lot of "he said-she said" going on out there and that it could lead to some real blow ups unless there is a mechanism in place to help sort out problems.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 4:25 pm

Thanks Tom. Of course, an ombudsperson mediates those types of issues whenever there is conflict. I think an ethics panel is useful for drafting simple guidelines or processes whenever conflicts occur.

I agree that blacklisting and witchhunts are not very useful or productive. While I don't want to say we leave those who engage in those activities without impunity, I do think there are always lessons to be learned with each incident, including how to address those issues and communicate how the solution resolves those issues.

Trevkeeper · Post by **Trevkeeper** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 6:17 pm

Tegan wrote: 1. Playing players who are nominally varsity players at the frosh-soph level. A number of coaches claim this to be questionably ethical
doing.

For the record: I read for the entire playoffs at Wheaton North. Had anyone of New Trier's kids ever seen Casablanca, Wheaton North would not have seen the finals...

For part 1: If you mean Juniors or Seniors who are playing in a frosh/soph tournament, then that is most certainly cheating. But if you mean freshmen or sophomores who normally play with the varsity, then I don't see anything wrong with that. They are still of the frosh/soph age, even if they don't normally play there. Plus, with so few F/S tournaments, they should especially be allowed to play with their peers.

For part 2: Our Frosh/Soph team will have some 'splaining to do at practice.

mrs. dalloway · Post by **mrs. dalloway** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:47 pm

Having played against WN for almost four years now, I have nothing but respect for them and their coaches for their perennial success; any disappointment at losing to them (or any other team) has never developed into reckless accusations. I hope that the comments of a certain anonymous coach won't engender any undue hard feelings against Auburn: most of us try to preserve good relationships with other teams that stay at the level of friendly rivalry, not resentful paranoia.

Siverus Snape · Post by **Siverus Snape** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:58 pm

Amen.

AnonSchoBowlCoach · Post by **AnonSchoBowlCoach** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 9:55 pm

Thanks all for your replies. To answer a few of the questions directed at me and my credibility:

As I stated in my original post, the reason I posted anonymously was entirely to avoid getting anyone too upset over this whole thing. I know how small the community is, and I was afraid officially airing my feelings on the situation would put me (and more importantly, my students), in a bad light for years amongst other coaches. The forum allowed me to post in a non-official, casual capacity that would not engender bad feeings between myself and the other coaches involved. I chose to post on a public forum because by doing so I knew I would get immediate feedback from others without having to file any kind of official complaint or offend any of those involved. My aim was not to "playfully broadside" the tournament hosts nor to "air my dirty laundry", but rather to present some very specific issues I noted on a particular day, in hopes of being able to avoid such issues recurring in future events. I truly just wanted to see what others in the community thought about the issues raised, and, in particular, about the larger issues key to the discussion. As others have stated before me, there would be easy solutions to end possible future questions of impropriety such as using outside question resources, not reusing questions from previous years, randomly selecting brackets, and potentially excusing your own teams from tournaments you host (not something I think particularly necessary btw).

For the record, I am not an inexperienced rookie, and my teams have been beaten by far superior WN teams dozens of times over the years. I've always had nothing but the utmost respect for their coaches, both personally and professionally. It's just that on this particular day, I noticed a number of very specific details that rubbed me the wrong way, and I thought I'd see if others in the community had ever had similar thoughts or experiences (whether with WN or any other team). I had been given some inaccurate information from a reputable source that the WN coaches had written each individual question themselves. The responses I've received from the board have made it abundantly clear that this is not the case, and that I was mistaken in my concerns. I hope no one was too terribly offended by anything I said, and I am glad that I have spurred on some interesting conversation regarding these issues.

The responses here have assuaged my concerns in this particular instance, but there are still unresolved issues that remain in place for these types of events. Those of us who give our time and commit ourselves professionally to the development of young people should take these events seriously, and shrugging them off as "it's just a f/s event," or "it doesn't count for anything anyway," is a terrible disservice to the students involved. I understand that in the scope of a scholastic bowl season a f/s weekend tournament means absolutely nothing, but in a larger sense, it is important that we instill ideals of fair play and working hard at whatever it is you do, even if it is 'meaningless.' It IS important for coaches and teams to ensure that there is no possible grounds for anyone to raise these types of questions regarding tournaments they host.

One thing I've learned from this is that it is better to sleep on something before reacting to it emotionally, and this is a lesson that will make me better prepared to deal with potentially upsetting situations in the future.
Thanks all for your attention to this matter, WB

-edit: I've removed my original post as a result of the valid and understandable responses to it.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:17 pm

I do think that the point of the discussion is that ...

1) yes, it's good to sleep on an emotional topic before launching. Even if your source is reputable, find out from others. We have plenty of people who can share the horror stories if they are in fact true.

2) it is very important that quiz bowl remain a collegial community. Despite the fact our activity is competitive, we are here for the enjoyment of the activity and its eclectic aspects.

3) there are many of us who do strongly think about these issues in one fashion or another, and we do care to maintain the integrity of this activity.

For my own opinion, if a team hosts a tournament with questions written by faculty or themselves, it is a wonderful learning opportunity for the students to learn how to actually organize a tournament. See from the opposite side how easy or hard it is to run such an event. Most of the very competitive high school teams along the east coast do just that, and I would be someone who strongly encourages coaches to help develop their students' skills in leadership and program management by running a competition. Certainly the advisor has to have some oversight and make sure the kids don't go nuts with things (like write really tasteless questions or spend a million dollars), but running events is part of the three major learning elements that every quiz bowl participant should have some experience... high school or college.

P.S. Is there a reason why there is no freshman/sophomore state championship? We have a "JV" state championship title in North Carolina for the last few years to make sure teams don't just disregard freshman/sophomore competition throughout the year.

Tegan · Post by **Tegan** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 8:56 am

E.T. Chuck wrote: P.S. Is there a reason why there is no freshman/sophomore state championship?

Its been discussed over the years. I last brought it up about 2-3 years ago (my experience in wrestling triggered the idea: Illinois does have a frosh-soph state wrestling championship each year). I think the main reasons it did not go:

1. We had bigger fish to fry, and it kept getting bumped to the back burner. (for examle, this year we are kicking off our first (hopefully annual) banquet to give away All-State Awards, the Grierson Award, and induct our Hall-of-Fame class (the Hall-of-Fame and All-State took prescedence over Frosh-Soph state).

2. There were many coaches who did not see a point to it, because it would be the same 4-5 teams all of the time (I wouldn't be one of those)....I think this is part of the reason for the apathy across our state to begin with).

3. There was some question as to who to invite (many upstate coaches are against any form of mandated geographic representation, and many downstate coaches absolutely insist on it).

4. The question was "when"? We can't hold it after our own real state tournament (violates IHSA by-laws), and to hold it too close to the state finals means that we would be intruding on dates set aside for conference tournaments (not to mention times when varsity teams are getting in their last minute preps for state). To go earlier means that frosh-soph state would occur before some of the currently run frosh-soph tournaments. In addition, the Masons sponsor a big statewide tournament which is held the two weeks or so before conference tournaments.

jagluski · Post by **jagluski** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 12:32 pm

Good morning.

As the logistics director of the 2006 NAQT HSNCT, I'm beginning to look for staff for the tournament to be held June 2-4 at the Crowne Plaza O' Hare. I know that several local Illinois high school players/coaches were staff for the tournament last year, and I believe that most of them enjoyed it. Aside from staffing, you will have the ability to see some of the finest high school players in the country. More details can be found at naqt.com.

If any coaches or current players would like to staff the tournament again or for the first time, please send me an email to gluskin at naqt dot com . Staff is most needed for Saturday, June 3rd. I am also happy to answer any questions that anyone may have.

Thanks,

Joel Gluskin
2006 NAQT HSNCT Logistics Director

David Riley · Post by **David Riley** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:38 pm

Joel: My health having vastly improved since last year, I or my assistant coach (Matt Laird, who also posts to this board) would be happy to moderate/score; whichever one isn't coaching our team.

David Riley
[email protected]

jagluski · Post by **jagluski** » Tue Jan 31, 2006 2:34 pm

David Riley wrote:Joel: My health having vastly improved since last year, I or my assistant coach (Matt Laird, who also posts to this board) would be happy to moderate/score; whichever one isn't coaching our team.

David Riley
[email protected]

Coach Riley, glad to hear you're feeling better. Good luck to Loyola at the tournament; I'm glad to hear that you guys will be attending this year. I'll send you the specific volunteer info when we have it in an email format.

Trevkeeper · Post by **Trevkeeper** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 6:52 pm

Dr. Chuck, how does North Carolina get around the problems Mr. Egan mentioned? I'm just curious.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:08 pm

The significant difference is that scholastic bowl in Illinois is overseen by the Illinois High School Association (IHSA), which governs scholastic athletic and extracurricular activities. There is also the coaches association but it does not run the statewide event.

At least for North Carolina, the organization that we are forming is going to be a statewide organization open to coaches AND STUDENTS (both high school and college, rationale will come later). The statewide organization that runs our "quiz bowl" event is the Department of Cultural Resources, a branch of the state government... specifically it is the state public libraries commission that oversees the event. However, this is different from the separate state championship tournament that our organization has hosted for the last 3 years for both "junior varsity" and "senior varsity" titles.

So as it stands, we don't have some of the scheduling problems because we do not have a governing body that dictates the "legal" activities of teams that engage in academic competition as Illinois does. Consequently we're more like our southeastern brethren in that various organizations will run events on their own, but we lack coordination.

Trevkeeper · Post by **Trevkeeper** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:14 pm

When you say open to students as well, what do you mean? Like, do they help make decisions and the like? If so, that's pretty nifty.

First Chairman · Post by **First Chairman** » Wed Feb 01, 2006 7:58 pm

Trevkeeper wrote:When you say open to students as well, what do you mean? Like, do they help make decisions and the like? If so, that's pretty nifty.

It is my goal to have students become more involved because the transition from a high school team to a college team is a real difficult one for students who have never run high school or college competitions before. To that extent, I want our group to act as a resource for high school students and college students so that they can gain experience and confidence in running events and develop management and leadership skills. So yes, I would like their input with decision-making and future involvement.

Stained Diviner · Post by **Stained Diviner** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 4:08 pm

As far as I know, here is the Homewood-Flossmoor field: Auburn (Rockford), Aurora Central Catholic, Beecher, Bradley-Bourbonnais, Detroit Catholic Central, Eisenhower, Evanston, Evergreen Park, Fenton, Fenwick, Hoffman Estates, Homewood-Flossmoor, Joliet, Kaneland, Latin, Lincoln-Way Central, Lincoln-Way East, Lisle, Loyola, Maine South, Marist, Naperville Central, New Trier, Notre Dame, Providence, Quincy, Richards, St. Ignatius, Timothy Christian, Von Steuben, Waukegan, Wheaton Academy, Wheaton North, and Wheaton Warrenville South

Trevkeeper · Post by **Trevkeeper** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:13 pm

That's one of the toughest fields I've seen all year.

bigtrain · Post by **bigtrain** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 6:25 pm

Will that tournament be using "Illinois style" questions? DCC is really trying to make itself America's quizbowl measuring stick by playing just about everywhere.

mlaird · Post by **mlaird** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:29 pm

To the best of my knowledge it will be a traditional Illinois format tournament.

20 Qs/ 20 Bs with bounceback on both.

Tegan · Post by **Tegan** » Thu Feb 02, 2006 7:51 pm

Trevkeeper wrote:That's one of the toughest fields I've seen all year.

DCC and any one other team would make a pretty impressive field.

Seriously: The Ultima and Fenwick bloodbath are two of the most granite looking fields in our state this year....though this one is pretty darn good.

Trevkeeper · Post by **Trevkeeper** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 6:34 pm

Tegan wrote:
Trevkeeper wrote:That's one of the toughest fields I've seen all year.
DCC and any one other team would make a pretty impressive field.

Seriously: The Ultima and Fenwick bloodbath are two of the most granite looking fields in our state this year....though this one is pretty darn good.

I guess I discount Ultima from "toughest field", since it is meant to have the toughest field. Like, it goes without saying.

Also, for anyone at H-F today...I'm not going crazy, and Santa Fe is the capital of New Mexico, correct?

LadyInBlack · Post by **LadyInBlack** » Sat Feb 04, 2006 8:58 pm

Nick, you're fine on this one. Sante Fe is the capital.
Nice tournament, with good questions but that and some other errors, such as No.36=Xe. I don't think so.

Irreligion in Bangladesh · Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 pm

So what happened?

Anywho, Streator Rotary:

1. Bloomington
2. Springfield
3. La-Salle Peru
4. Maine East
5. 'Bago
6. IMSA
7. Streator
8. Prairie Central

Playing Bloomington in the quarterfinals did us in - otherwise I'm sure we would have placed higher (funny how being guaranteed 4th place makes it higher than 5th). Good questions for the most part, and everything ran rather smoothly.

Trevkeeper · Post by **Trevkeeper** » Sun Feb 05, 2006 12:22 am

Good luck to all those trying out for Team Illinois tomorrow!

Tegan · Post by **Tegan** » Sun Feb 05, 2006 10:42 am

LadyInBlack wrote:Nick, you're fine on this one. Sante Fe is the capital.
Nice tournament, with good questions but that and some other errors, such as No.36=Xe. I don't think so.

There were a few clunkers, but as a coach who writes questions: the more ambitious you are to make a good question set (good topic distribution, mostly pyramid style, etc) the more likely there are clunkers. NAQT has the benefit of many editors, but Coach Sacks at H-F (and I) do not. I thought that this tournament's questions were definitely among the best I've seen all year (typos and edits not withstanding).

The saddest occurance was when my B-team was playing a (team not to be named). I was not in the room, and the other coach was reading. His team gets a toss-up, and then gets the bonus that was a repeat on the 2006 Olympics. My team howeled for it to be replaced. The coach said something to the effect of "each team had a chance to get this bonus, so it is fair." Another of my players spoke up, and their captain responded with "if you guys had gotten it, you wouldn't be asking to throw it out." All I have to say is, they are lucky I wasn't there...there would have been a defrenestration!

bigtrain · Post by **bigtrain** » Sun Feb 05, 2006 4:21 pm

What were the results of the Homewood-Flossmoor tournament?

Irreligion in Bangladesh · Sun Feb 05, 2006 8:46 pm

HF: Results

1. Wheaton North
2. Detroit Catholic Central
3. Rockford Auburn
4. Fenwick

WN over Auburn in the semis in a rout, from what I hear. Others can post more, I'm just doing this cause I know bigtrain wants to know how DCC did.

The Quizbowl Resource Center

Illinois 05-06

Questions regarding WN FS tourney

Re: Questions regarding WN FS tourney

re: WN F/S

2006 NAQT HSNCT