DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Dormant threads from the high school sections are preserved here.
User avatar
First Chairman
Auron
Posts: 3875
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 8:21 pm
Location: Fairfax VA
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by First Chairman »

We have more pictures!
Emil Thomas Chuck, Ph.D.
Founder, PACE
Facebook junkie and unofficial advisor to aspiring health professionals in quiz bowl
---
Pimping Green Tea Ginger Ale (Canada Dry)

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

Could somebody please explain what happened in round 2 of Div II finals? There seemed to have been some misunderstandings or something.
We played one team we were supposed to play, then one we weren't, and then we went home.
I'm not exactly sure what happened to some specific teams, but as I alluded to before, teams started leaving (many without telling us) around Round 8-9. This really made it impossible to keep our schedule going (it relied upon people not quitting randomly), and there were a few other incidents (people going to the wrong rooms and "acting" as another team's place holder inadvertently, the buzzer abduction issue that compound this and sort of spent the pre-arranged series of Divivision II brackets spiraling out of control. We made the mistake of trying to fix things with consolation teams rather than fundamentally redesigning what we were doing with the top X division II teams. We tried to play a few games out for placement after the schedule derailed.

We apologize for not being as clear with the instructions for the changes we wanted to teams to make around Round 9 - we were caught quite off guard and had in fact just struggled to make the brackets work given that two teams never showed up at all. We should have realized the amount of teams who were leaving/detached in some way from the schedule made it unsalvageable, but we kept trying to fix it. That's our mistake,, and we apologize.

As for the teams who left early (not as in Blake, who left after the rounds had already broken down, but teams who left for no apparent reason): Perhaps I was deluding myself, but I imagined that a "Weekend of Quizbowl" wouldn't lend itself to teams leaving after a few questions or getting tired and going home and not finishing out their essential role in brackets. I'm going to try to solve this problem by switching Division II from the format we'd been using to a simpler, standard bracket/elimination playoffs distribution, so that teams leaving after not making the top bracket or after X number of games or whatever is happening will not be such a problem. I regret that this kind of situation in Division II prevented you guys from enjoying the full schedule Division I teams enjoyed.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

STPickrell
Auron
Posts: 1501
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 11:12 pm
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by STPickrell »

Many teams simply do not want more than 5-6 games, even among the better of the sub-elite teams.

On the other hand, if coaches didn't get back to you, saying something along the lines of, 'Well, we'd rather just play 6 games and go home,' it's on them.

User avatar
aestheteboy
Tidus
Posts: 570
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 5:07 pm

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by aestheteboy »

Boomerang Nebula wrote:Many teams simply do not want more than 5-6 games, even among the better of the sub-elite teams.

On the other hand, if coaches didn't get back to you, saying something along the lines of, 'Well, we'd rather just play 6 games and go home,' it's on them.
Given Chris's explicit request not to leave before the round robins are completed, it's utterly selfish to leave because you "simply do not want to" play anymore. The entire tournament's running smoothly depends on teams' being there to play, and each time a team decides to act whatever the way it wants to act, the tournament is delayed. While perhaps Chris should have been more clear with the initial announcement, it wasn't hard to infer that teams would be expected to stay for 10-12 rounds rather than just 5-6. So, I don't understand why teams would sign up for a 200$ tournament if they didn't want to play much anyway.
I'm not going to call anyone out, but I was disappointed that even the "elite" teams decided to not stay for the consolation bracket to play off 13-18 places. Though, if the question was the reason, I understand because it was just horrible compared to yesterday's questions. Personally, I enjoyed the normal IS sets more, and that says a lot.
Daichi - Walter Johnson; Vanderbilt; U of Chicago.
Daichi's Law of High School Quizbowl: the frequency of posting in the Quizbowl Resource Center is proportional to the likelihood of being overrated.

ieppler
Rikku
Posts: 479
Joined: Sun Jun 11, 2006 7:38 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD/Providence, RI
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by ieppler »

aestheteboy wrote: I'm not going to call anyone out, but I was disappointed that even the "elite" teams decided to not stay for the consolation bracket to play off 13-18 places. Though, if the question was the reason, I understand because it was just horrible compared to yesterday's questions. Personally, I enjoyed the normal IS sets more, and that says a lot.
I believe that one of those "elite teams" had to catch a plane, and another decided to watch their B-team play in the DII bracket rather than play consolation games. As far as I know, question quality (or lack thereof) was not a factor.
Ian Eppler from Brown University

wowitsquinthaha
Wakka
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 7:47 pm
Location: Rva
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by wowitsquinthaha »

Chase the Ace wrote: another decided to watch their B-team play in the DII bracket rather than play consolation games.
Yeah, we were supposed to play them, but we had great fun playing against RM instead.

EDIT: Who ended up winning? Because Mr. Huff told me that Dorman was going to leave before the final
Quint Carr
Maggie Walker A
GSAC XV Question Editor
GSAC XVI Chief Promoter/Celebrity

User avatar
Gonzagapuma1
Tidus
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 5:02 pm
Location: College Park, MD

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Gonzagapuma1 »

aestheteboy wrote:
Boomerang Nebula wrote:Though, if the question was the reason, I understand because it was just horrible compared to yesterday's questions. Personally, I enjoyed the normal IS sets more, and that says a lot.
I disagree. I thought yesterday's set was pretty bad and today's was slightly better, although it seemed to me that there was a dearth of lit in today's set.
Dan Puma
Gonzaga HS, Montgomery College, University of Maryland
MAQT President-ish, 2014-2015
Champion of the Modern World, 2014
Member, PACE

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

Quick Results:

For Sunday, we used NAQT's DII SCT set. It was kind of lame. We used a 6-game prelim card system to sort Division I teams into two brackets of six, and played a complete round robin within those brackets. Dorman A and B were unfortunately forced to head out after the playoffs and before the intended final series. This removed two of the final four (we had intended to do a PACE-style 2-game series, with the first team in one bracket playing the second of the other in semi-finals games and advancing the winners), which led us to award the two top teams from the other bracket "byes" and have them just advance to a final game. We played off equivalent bracket seeds for placement (the third teams in each bracket played for 5/6, for instance). Anyway, in the final, Wilmington Charter defeated TJ A 540 - 205 to win the second day.
Division II switched to a simple two bracket prelims/single-elimination playoff system Sunday given that it became abundantly clear that a few teams were going to be uninterested in staying for 11 rounds. It seemed to go over a lot better and Sunday experience limited problems (all rounds got played, nobody left without telling me, nobody stole buzzers, nobody vomited on a score sheet(!), and nobody got lost in an empty room. All in all, we were able to correct all of the problems Saturday.

Full results, with stats, will be posted soon. Here's what I know right now:

Sunday:

Division I
Left early because of flight-making reasons: Dorman A (11-0), Dorman B (7-4)
1. Wilmington Charter
2. TJ A
3. Stuyvesant
4. Whitman (minus teh Shantanu)
5. MLK
6. Hunter
7. Gonzaga
8. LASA
9. Maggie Walker A
10. James Island A
11. (Hilariously inaccurate suggestion of where Dorman A actually placed at this tournament)
12. (Hilariously inaccurate suggestion of where Dorman B actually placed at this tournament)
13. GDS
14. Walter Johnson
15. Richard Montgomery
16. TJ B
17. Chattahoochee (did not complete placement rounds)
18. GHHS (Lost a Cleveland Indians hat and were unable to bear competition in the wake of the tragedy)
19. Maggie Walker B
20. Whitman B
21. TJ E
22. New Trier

Division II
1. Robinson
2. St. Anselm's
3. LOT Academy
4. Chattahoochee B
5. Thomas Jefferson D
6. Stone Bridge A
7. Blake
8. Centennial
9. Langley
10. Howard
11. Thomas Jefferson E
12. Stone Bridge B

Top Scorers:
DI:
Dallas Simons, MLK 99.55
Guy Tabachnick , Hunter 87.78
TIE: Doug Yeatman, Stuyvesant and Henry Gorman, Charter 80.33

Some things to keep in mind:
-Dorman A was sporting a healthy 11-0 record when they left, and had notched victories over Charter, TJ A, Dorman B, Stuyvesant, Hunter, MLK, Gonzaga, etc.
-Dorman B finished 2nd in their playoff bracket (thus advancing to the semifinals), and had lost in that bracket only to Dorman A.
-Shantanu apparently became violently ill during doubles play Saturday evening and was unable to make it out Saturday. It seems likely he caught the same thing that caused James Island to quit the playoffs Saturday, which is also responsible for the. . . damaged. . . scoresheet and which now appears to have infected me. Whitman finished an impressive 4th, a feat I doubt too many teams can do when they lose a guy who knocks down about 70 ppg.
-New Trier decided to forego Sunday (I mean, I assume - I hope you guys are ok. . .) and is, in fact, better than 0 ppg.

Stats are done and will be uploaded tonight or tomorrow.

Saturday:

I don't have complete stats up for this right now given all the hilarious misadventures of Division II. DI should have complete stats and I'll post a finish order asap. Here are the scores from the finals series:

Whitman 200, Dorman 105 (10/10 play-in game)
Whitman 235, TJ A 145 (15/15 advantaged final)
Whitman 215, TJ A 170 (15/15 advantaged final)

More to come.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

User avatar
magin
Yuna
Posts: 973
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 5:50 pm
Location: College Park, MD

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by magin »

DumbJaques wrote:If you think you might fit this description, I'd encourage you to attend the University of Maryland.
This is a joke, right? If not, it's pretty embarrassing.
Jonathan Magin
Montgomery Blair HS '04, University of Maryland '08
Editor: ACF

"noted difficulty controller"

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

This is a joke, right? If not, it's pretty embarrassing.
Yeah I was just joking. Although one can never be sure, considering that
Brief Results:

After a six-round prelim and six total games of playoffs (with one rebracketing), TJ A emerged with the top record at 10-2. Whitman A and Dorman A were both 9-3 (Wilmington Charter was 8-4, and occupied the final spot in the top bracket, thus clinching a fourth-place finish). As per our announcement, a one-game advantage cannot outright with the field, so we had to resolve it. We had a total of 40/40 available in the forms of two Mike Sorice packets. We decided that since we needed to break the tie between Dorman and Whitman, as well as ensure that two games could be played in an advantaged final format between TJ and the winner, we would play a 10/10 playoff of Whitman vs. Dorman, and two rounds of 15/15 for the winner and TJ.

Whitman A defeated Dorman A in the 10-question minigame by a score that I believe was in the vicinity of 200-135 (Dave has the exact scores from this round. Whitman A then won both games against TJ (again, scores pending) to secure the championship.

Stats and trophies will actually be awarded tomorrow before play begins on the Second tournament, since most people opted to go home while the finals situation was resolved.

The division I field of the tournament ran very smoothly. There were problems with the Division II second playoff bracket that took the form of an avalanche of teams leaving randomly without telling anyone, telling us but still leaving while they were part of a round-robin bracket, packing up their buzzers when the rooms were still in use, and, once again, leaving randomly and not telling anyone. These problems were compounded by the fact that we were struggling to create a new schedule for Division II during the re-bracketing (owing two two teams not showing up this morning at all), and it caused some further delays.

Basically we are trying to sort through the stats of games that broke apart from their intended round robin brackets, games that apparnetly didn't occur, and games that seemed to involve one or more coaches playing as third teams. I'll post the stats (that is, I'll have someone who does such things) post them when we can best resolve these issues.

I"ll save most of this for discussion, but I just want to say I am absolutely overwhelmed with the quality of players at this tournament, You guys are seriously good, and a real testament to how serious, competitive, and legit quizbowl is gaining tremendous strength in the high school community. If you think you might fit this description, I'd encourage you to attend the University of Maryland.

I also want to say that the Doubles event didn't take place quite as planned since the main tournament finished around 9:00. A number of players elected to stay and play out some rounds, but as an organized event it didn't so much fly (a bummer, as I had put a decent amount getting things all set up for it). Consequently nobody was charged any money for it, but will still be playing those questions tonight and tomorrow somewhat.

Detailed resuts are being compiled.
I don't remember posting any of this. I'm not even joking. Sorry, I was in fact not drunk posting the results form my own tournament, but was just barely able to stay conscious enough to make the Sunday schedule after no sleep for 70 hours.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

User avatar
millionwaves
Auron
Posts: 1360
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 12:35 pm
Location: Urbana, Illinois
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by millionwaves »

Hey, all:

I hope you guys enjoyed the Saturday tournament, which used questions from the recent Matt Cvijanovich Memorial Novice Tournament.

The set of questions is freely available at this link.

Your feedback is solicited. If you'd like to provide some, please e-mail trygvemeade [at] gmail [dot] com.

Thank you.
Trygve Meade
Illinois, ACF

Above the Star-Apple Kingdom

User avatar
Whiter Hydra
Auron
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:46 pm
Location: Fairfax, VA
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Whiter Hydra »

Um, why was TJ C in Division I and St. Anselm's in Division II? I'm pretty sure that the entire point of having TJ C in DII was to allow it to advance to NAQT Nationals.

(N.B. I was only there for Saturday)

I don't think there were enough teams to allow for a functional two-division system. In theory, it was a great idea. Unfortunately, it didn't really work out, but I won't complain about that. However, I don't think it was a good idea to force all the teams to play a full 12 rounds, especially the ones that finished 1-5 and 2-4. It's hard enough to try to get teams to play for 7th place, much less 13th in Division II. Also, the idea of going straight to a tiebreaker game instead of using things like PPG, PPB, head-to-head, etc, didn't really work out that well, as it led to a lot of confusion among the teams and some teams dropping out. And props for the guys in the war room leaving Robinson B before the 12th round ended. Chattahoochee B ended up conceding rather than play potentially two more games in an already 12-hour tournament.

In other news, I now hate 16th Century Italian composers.
Harry White
TJHSST '09, Virginia Tech '13
VP of Technology, PACE
Owner of Tournament Database Search and Quizbowl Schedule Generator
Will run stats for food

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

Although we're still waiting on final stats (Sunday should be up tomorrow evening, Saturday hopefully by Tuesday or Wednesday, though depending on what I find when I open that box of scoreesheets, it may take longer), I thought I'd make the general wrap-up post.

Weekend of Quizbowl seemed to be well-received by teams, so I do hope you had a great time. I want to start by thanking everyone who helped with this tournament:
-ET Chuck, for providing the GMU campus and organizing that side of it, and for an unending willingness to do whatever we needed to (including pushing the building usage hours past those silly limits) to let teams get the experience they were looking for.
-Dave Bykowski, for taking over stats on Sunday after Saturday saw problems caused by the sudden cancellation of our own stat/logistics coordinator. You did an amazing job dude, and saved us an unending amount of hassle.
-Matt Weiner for bringing a contingent including George Berry, Andrew Alexander, and Evan Adams to reinforce our thinly-spread moderator pool.
-TJ's C team on Sunday, who really helped us out of a jam by switching divisions (and, by having alternates read in our last empty room).
-Coach Whipple from WJ, Coach Pflaum (I think) from Hunter, and Coach Barnes from Governor's for helping us through our staff shortage Sunday.
-George, Matt, Tom, Dave, Andrew, Evan, Jonathan Magin, Charles Meigs, Andre Joutz, Leonard Chang, Evan Silberman, John Gilbert, Casey Retterer, Tricia Southard, Dan Greenstein, Mike Sollosi, Tim from UVA, Tim who is a friend of Tricia's, and anyone else I might be forgetting.
-Teams who stayed and played out the placement rounds even though they might have wanted to go home because they didn't want to mess with our brackets.
-Trygve and UI for providing questions.
-Ted Gioia (and friends) for writing a great lit tournament.


I will make more detailed posts concerning my general thoughts about the event in a thread I'll be starting (if someone else doesn't) in the tournament discussion section. Please shift all discussion of the tournament. . . to the discussion thread. Issues with stats, questions about format, and other miscellany are fine here.
Um, why was TJ C in Division I and St. Anselm's in Division II? I'm pretty sure that the entire point of having TJ C in DII was to allow it to advance to NAQT Nationals.

Because they were awesome and switched to get us out of a jam. Also, I think TJ C's personnel might have been shifted to the top div II team for qualification purposes, and they were missing their big scorer Saturday anyway. I doubt this caused them to miss qualification, but if it did, I apologize sincerely.
Also, the idea of going straight to a tiebreaker game instead of using things like PPG, PPB, head-to-head, etc, didn't really work out that well, as it led to a lot of confusion among the teams and some teams dropping out.
Well, we were breaking a tie for the top bracket, and thus for championship contention. That kind of stuff just doesn't get done by ppg or ppb or whatever when you have questions instead. Whitman ended up being the winner in that tiebreaker and went on to win the tournament, in fact. I think it's a pretty fundamental idea that you break ties to get into a championship bracket like that with actual games, but you can feel free to disagree, I suppose.
However, I don't think it was a good idea to force all the teams to play a full 12 rounds, especially the ones that finished 1-5 and 2-4.
Interestingly, we had absolutely zero problems with all of division I playing 12 rounds, even the guys who were getting crushed most of the time. Were this a normal tournament I'd of course agree with you, but it's an entire weekend of quizbowl and I charged a lot of money for the sole reason that we were giving teams a lot of games (like 3-4 tournaments worth). If you want to pay that money, play prelims on Saturday, go home in the early afternoon and come back early Sunday morning to do so again, you have a qb philosophy I am unfamiliar with. We also weren't really forcing people to stay (as evidence by the mass exodus), but if you start playing in a round-robin and leave halfway through, it's obviously going to cause some problems. This was like improbable thing that caused the div II problems #46 though, so I wouldn't dwell too much on it.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

User avatar
Youse Da Force
Wakka
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2007 8:45 pm
Location: Princeton, NJ
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Youse Da Force »

aestheteboy wrote:I'm not going to call anyone out, but I was disappointed that even the "elite" teams decided to not stay for the consolation bracket to play off 13-18 places. Though, if the question was the reason, I understand because it was just horrible compared to yesterday's questions. Personally, I enjoyed the normal IS sets more, and that says a lot.
We were one of the teams that didn't stay, but we left because we had a very long drive home. I just got home half an hour ago despite our attempting to leave early. The questions weren't the reason.
Dan Humphrey
Princeton University (2008- ) Tournament Director, President Emeritus
Garfield Heights High School (2004-2008)

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

I'd like to make sure I point out that Garfield checked in with us, made sure it was ok with us that they skipped the rounds, and offered to play if not doing so would screw anything up. I told them it was fine since we had 6 teams playing for consolation placement and one was already gone, so it would enable everyone still playing to enjoy an extra game they would otherwise have to just wait through. Sorry if that messed things up anywhere.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

User avatar
btressler
Tidus
Posts: 618
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 7:23 pm
Location: West Chester, PA
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by btressler »

DumbJaques wrote: Some things to keep in mind:
-Dorman A was sporting a healthy 11-0 record when they left, and had notched victories over Charter, TJ A, Dorman B, Stuyvesant, Hunter, MLK, Gonzaga, etc.
This is not accurate. Charter went 11-1 on Sunday, with the loss coming from TJ in the first six rounds. We did play Dorman once on Saturday, however.

User avatar
Howard
Yuna
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 5:42 pm
Location: Ellicott City, MD

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Howard »

aestheteboy wrote:Given Chris's explicit request not to leave before the round robins are completed, it's utterly selfish to leave because you "simply do not want to" play anymore. The entire tournament's running smoothly depends on teams' being there to play, and each time a team decides to act whatever the way it wants to act, the tournament is delayed.
I cannot agree with this more. Surely, other priorities can come up if the tournament runs too late, but a team should never leave without making sure tournament staff is completely aware at the earliest possible instant of the impending departure.
John Gilbert
Coach, Howard High School Academic Team
Ellicott City, MD

"John Gilbert is a quiz bowl god" -- leftsaidfred

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

Sunday's stats are now available through our website. Saturday will be up asap.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

catsasslippers
Lulu
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by catsasslippers »

I know this isn't a huge deal, but I'd just like to point out that the personal stats are wrong at least for my team. There are games where the names are mixed up, and some games where points are missing entirely. ( I kept stats of my own some games. )
That being said, I'm very impressed that you managed to put up the stats so quickly.
"... but not so if you're a structuralist! You're happy. You're french. You're very good looking. Very overpaid." - Sandra Blakely
Nina Charap
Stuyvesant High School '08
Emory University '12

wowitsquinthaha
Wakka
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 7:47 pm
Location: Rva
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by wowitsquinthaha »

Honestly, Dan, 32 negs?! Lord...
Quint Carr
Maggie Walker A
GSAC XV Question Editor
GSAC XVI Chief Promoter/Celebrity

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

I'd just like to point out that the personal stats are wrong at least for my team. There are games where the names are mixed up, and some games where points are missing entirely. ( I kept stats of my own some games. )
I count one game where you and Aidan are switched. Sorry about that. As for the Whitman game, it appears personal stats were not kept. Sorry again.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

closesesame
Wakka
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 7:49 pm

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by closesesame »

On the same vein as that comment, I find that my personal stats are also botched (and probably for the rest of TJ, too). I definitely remember getting more than 0 points in the game against Dorman A yesterday. In fact, I remember getting something like 8 questions in the game against Dorman A (especially in the first half of that match). Anywho, I am also impressed by the speed with which all the stats have been digitally immortalized.

Naren
Naren Tallapragada
TJHSST '09
MIT '13

AdamL
Lulu
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2007 10:54 pm
Location: Alpharetta, GA
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by AdamL »

One small correction: Chattahoochee B defeated LOT in the consolation match to claim 3rd place in Div II on Sunday.

Also: Chattahoochee A only played 4 games on Sunday (somewhat accounting for the crappy-looking stats, but then again, we were doing quite terribly regardless) since we unfortunately happened to play "New Trier" (bye) twice in prelims. We were the other team people referenced that didn't stay to finish 13-18 consolation, instead choosing to watch our B team play in Div II. Along with that reason (wanting to go support our B team), we also had a long drive ahead of us (~11 hours total drive from Alpharetta to Fairfax, and we had to drive about 5 hours on Sunday before stopping for the night), and, in a minor-but-still-contributing reason, half our team (myself included) was feeling very sick. It wasn't about the questions. (But for that matter, I didn't like them very much: It felt like there were about 2-3 trash tossups in every round, and even more than that in bonuses. As a personal gripe, our team is totally awful at trash and it really showed.)
Adam Liem
Chattahoochee High '08
Georgia Tech '12

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

On the same vein as that comment, I find that my personal stats are also botched (and probably for the rest of TJ, too). I definitely remember getting more than 0 points in the game against Dorman A yesterday. In fact, I remember getting something like 8 questions in the game against Dorman A (especially in the first half of that match). Anywho, I am also impressed by the speed with which all the stats have been digitally immortalized.
Yeah, as the reader for that game, Naren turned in an excellent 3-5-1 personal performance to lead all scorers and that nearly won the game. Sorry it got switched up.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

Stat Boy
Rikku
Posts: 287
Joined: Mon Apr 30, 2007 3:20 pm
Location: Bethesda, MD / Waterville, ME

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Stat Boy »

Quint wrote:Honestly, Dan, 32 negs?! Lord...
I will not be outdone.
My game against Charter wrote:1-5-8
Take that, Stephen Hurley.
Adam Marshall,
Walt Whitman '08
Colby '12

User avatar
Gonzagapuma1
Tidus
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 5:02 pm
Location: College Park, MD

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Gonzagapuma1 »

wowitsquinthaha wrote:Honestly, Dan, 32 negs?! Lord...
It seemed like a lot more.
Dan Puma
Gonzaga HS, Montgomery College, University of Maryland
MAQT President-ish, 2014-2015
Champion of the Modern World, 2014
Member, PACE

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

A note on questions: All teams who attended WoQ will receive free copies of the Illinois questions (used Saturday). NAQT's questions can be purchased for $10 by any team that attended (teams that already paid will receive them, of course). You can send us $10, or if you're coming to PACE, you can just pay me then.

-Chris
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

Gunnells
Lulu
Posts: 96
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 11:09 pm
Location: The Mountains of North Georgia

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Gunnells »

DumbJaques wrote:
Also, the idea of going straight to a tiebreaker game instead of using things like PPG, PPB, head-to-head, etc, didn't really work out that well, as it led to a lot of confusion among the teams and some teams dropping out.
Well, we were breaking a tie for the top bracket, and thus for championship contention. That kind of stuff just doesn't get done by ppg or ppb or whatever when you have questions instead. Whitman ended up being the winner in that tiebreaker and went on to win the tournament, in fact. I think it's a pretty fundamental idea that you break ties to get into a championship bracket like that with actual games, but you can feel free to disagree, I suppose.
I don't have a dog in the fight (and I also have no idea if the two teams played prior to the mini-game), but head-to-head followed by PPG is the standard tiebreaker procedure throughout the Southeast, and in almost every non-quiz bowl type competition. Assuming the original winner loses the rematch, it seems arbitrary to declare the second match more significant than the first. This just introduces the occasionally maligned single elimination format into the proceedings.

It seems especially odd in this particular instance, since a standard length round is more likely to give a true result than a 10 question round.

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

I don't have a dog in the fight (and I also have no idea if the two teams played prior to the mini-game), but head-to-head followed by PPG is the standard tiebreaker procedure throughout the Southeast, and in almost every non-quiz bowl type competition. Assuming the original winner loses the rematch, it seems arbitrary to declare the second match more significant than the first. This just introduces the occasionally maligned single elimination format into the proceedings.

It seems especially odd in this particular instance, since a standard length round is more likely to give a true result than a 10 question round.
Well, I think what's arbitrary is to double-count a game, which is what you do if you use head to head. If Team A went 9-1 losing only to Team B, but Team B went 9-1 losing to a team Team A beat, why do we declare that Team B is somehow more worthy for the playoff spot? If you say you're going to count non head-to-head games for record (and you are, since obviously if team B went 1-9 but beat Team A they wouldn't make the playoffs), you can't count them selectively as more meaningful. Team B demonstrated it could beat Team A in one round. Team A demonstrated it more consistently beat the same opponents than did Team B. It's a tie, and when a place in the championship bracket is at stake, I think it's ludicrous not to play off to break the tie. For what it's worth, the team that lost the head to head going into the game not only won the tiebreaker but, as I said, won the tournament. Whether head to head is "THE" standard in non-qb isn't really relevant since quizbowl is quite different than other competitions (sports analogies should end right now), although I don't think this is really true in round-robin tournament formats. The southeast is free to do what they please, I suppose, but if anyone did that in, say, college quizbowl, I think it would make a whole lot of people pretty angry, for the already discussed reason of double-counting a particular round.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

scquizbowl
Wakka
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Charleston, SC

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by scquizbowl »

For James Island, we had to leave at 3:45 or 4, because we had to return our rental van, go to the airport, and catch our flight to Atlanta. We didn't get home until 12:30 in the morning, and because of the awkward slowness of the tournament, and for no buzzers, that is why we couldn't play our last two games.

Dorman also left early, because they had to drive all the way to BWI airport (over a 40 mile drive), and they had an earlier flight to catch. It could have been run better, with all of the waits during brackets, and they could have done that doubles tournament perhaps on Friday night, instead of making everyone else wait half an hour for it to finish.

Dallas Simons is a great player, but I think the best player out of this tournament was Daichi from Walter Johnson. He knew obscure science, lots of social studies, and an amazing amount of English. We (James Island) were exposed a lot during this tournament, as we had never done college-level questions, and the skill level of the teams up north is much different even from teams in Georgia or North Carolina, forget about South Carolina except for Dorman.

Even the lesser teams that we played (Maggie Walker B, Garfield Heights) had several good players, who would probably be leaders in South Carolina, but we beat Garfield Heights soundly on Sunday, which helped off-set it a little bit.
Joe
James Island '10

User avatar
aestheteboy
Tidus
Posts: 570
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 5:07 pm

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by aestheteboy »

scquizbowl wrote:Daichi from Walter Johnson. He knew . . . an amazing amount of English.
Thank you very much. English not being my first language, I feel extremely proud of this compliment. I'm willing to agree, too, that I was probably the best player among non-native English speakers at the tournament.
Daichi - Walter Johnson; Vanderbilt; U of Chicago.
Daichi's Law of High School Quizbowl: the frequency of posting in the Quizbowl Resource Center is proportional to the likelihood of being overrated.

wowitsquinthaha
Wakka
Posts: 127
Joined: Fri Aug 03, 2007 7:47 pm
Location: Rva
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by wowitsquinthaha »

Even the lesser teams that we played (Maggie Walker B, Garfield Heights) had several good players, who would probably be leaders in South Carolina, but we beat Garfield Heights soundly on Sunday, which helped off-set it a little bit.
I'll take that as a compliment...
Quint Carr
Maggie Walker A
GSAC XV Question Editor
GSAC XVI Chief Promoter/Celebrity

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

For James Island, we had to leave at 3:45 or 4, because we had to return our rental van, go to the airport, and catch our flight to Atlanta. We didn't get home until 12:30 in the morning, and because of the awkward slowness of the tournament, and for no buzzers, that is why we couldn't play our last two games.

Dorman also left early, because they had to drive all the way to BWI airport (over a 40 mile drive), and they had an earlier flight to catch. It could have been run better, with all of the waits during brackets, and they could have done that doubles tournament perhaps on Friday night, instead of making everyone else wait half an hour for it to finish.
Nothing was delayed for the doubles round. Matt organized that as something that players could do during the lunch break if they chose - we didn't wait half an hour for it to finish, any time after lunch where delays occurred was due to rebracketing. I'm sorry you guys had to leave, but there's pretty much no way a 13-round tournament is going to be over by 3:45. . . while Saturday did go slow, I'm not sure what "awkward slowness" you're referring to for Sunday. I do wish we could have gotten you all your games - I'm sorry you guys missed out on some of them.

EDIT:
Daichi from Walter Johnson. He knew . . . an amazing amount of Engrish.
Fixed.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

User avatar
Sir Thopas
Auron
Posts: 1330
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:10 pm
Location: Hunter, NYC
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Sir Thopas »

aestheteboy wrote:
scquizbowl wrote:Daichi from Walter Johnson. He knew . . . an amazing amount of English.
Thank you very much. English not being my first language, I feel extremely proud of this compliment. I'm willing to agree, too, that I was probably the best player among non-native English speakers at the tournament.
Hey my first language was Hebrew. I forgot it right as I stepped outside my house to preschool though. :(
Guy Tabachnick
Hunter '09
Brown '13

http://memoryofthisimpertinence.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Blackboard Monitor Vimes
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 2346
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 5:40 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Blackboard Monitor Vimes »

wowitsquinthaha wrote:
Even the lesser teams that we played (Maggie Walker B, Garfield Heights) had several good players, who would probably be leaders in South Carolina, but we beat Garfield Heights soundly on Sunday, which helped off-set it a little bit.
I'll take that as a compliment...
Seconded...
Sam (Sarah Angelo) Luongo,
Maggie L. Walker Governor's School 2010 / UVA 2014 / VCU School of Education 2016
President, PACE
Member, ACF

quizbowl
Lulu
Posts: 59
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 7:18 pm

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by quizbowl »

When will Saturday's stats be up?

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

When will Saturday's stats be up?
Some scoresheets from Saturday are missing or incomplete, and I'm doing my best to college all of them and figure out the problems. We'll post as soon as we can.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

catsasslippers
Lulu
Posts: 74
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 8:07 pm
Location: NY
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by catsasslippers »

I have all of Stuy's scores if you're missing any of ours.
"... but not so if you're a structuralist! You're happy. You're french. You're very good looking. Very overpaid." - Sandra Blakely
Nina Charap
Stuyvesant High School '08
Emory University '12

jbarnes112358
Tidus
Posts: 664
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 5:58 am
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by jbarnes112358 »

DumbJaques wrote:
When will Saturday's stats be up?
Some scoresheets from Saturday are missing or incomplete, and I'm doing my best to college all of them and figure out the problems. We'll post as soon as we can.
And while you are at it, could you send out the e-mail receipts for the entrance fee? I need to get reimbursed.

User avatar
Whiter Hydra
Auron
Posts: 1289
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:46 pm
Location: Fairfax, VA
Contact:

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Whiter Hydra »

DumbJaques wrote:
I don't have a dog in the fight (and I also have no idea if the two teams played prior to the mini-game), but head-to-head followed by PPG is the standard tiebreaker procedure throughout the Southeast, and in almost every non-quiz bowl type competition. Assuming the original winner loses the rematch, it seems arbitrary to declare the second match more significant than the first. This just introduces the occasionally maligned single elimination format into the proceedings.

It seems especially odd in this particular instance, since a standard length round is more likely to give a true result than a 10 question round.
Well, I think what's arbitrary is to double-count a game, which is what you do if you use head to head. If Team A went 9-1 losing only to Team B, but Team B went 9-1 losing to a team Team A beat, why do we declare that Team B is somehow more worthy for the playoff spot? If you say you're going to count non head-to-head games for record (and you are, since obviously if team B went 1-9 but beat Team A they wouldn't make the playoffs), you can't count them selectively as more meaningful. Team B demonstrated it could beat Team A in one round. Team A demonstrated it more consistently beat the same opponents than did Team B. It's a tie, and when a place in the championship bracket is at stake, I think it's ludicrous not to play off to break the tie. For what it's worth, the team that lost the head to head going into the game not only won the tiebreaker but, as I said, won the tournament. Whether head to head is "THE" standard in non-qb isn't really relevant since quizbowl is quite different than other competitions (sports analogies should end right now), although I don't think this is really true in round-robin tournament formats. The southeast is free to do what they please, I suppose, but if anyone did that in, say, college quizbowl, I think it would make a whole lot of people pretty angry, for the already discussed reason of double-counting a particular round.
The point of using head-to-head is to simulate (though in a rudimentary way) what would probably happen if the two teams were to play each other again. Of course, it has its faults, and I can see why that wasn't used, but what was wrong about using PPG or PPB?
Harry White
TJHSST '09, Virginia Tech '13
VP of Technology, PACE
Owner of Tournament Database Search and Quizbowl Schedule Generator
Will run stats for food

User avatar
Captain Sinico
Auron
Posts: 2857
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: Champaign, Illinois

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Captain Sinico »

The whole point of using large sample-size stats (PPB, PPG, etc.) is that they should be a better indicator in the mean of what would happen if both teams played again than one head-to-head result.

MaS
Mike Sorice
Coach, Centennial High School of Champaign, IL (2014-) & Team Illinois (2016-2018)
Alumnus, Illinois ABT (2000-2002; 2003-2009) & Fenwick Scholastic Bowl (1999-2000)
ACF
IHSSBCA
PACE

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

The whole point of using large sample-size stats (PPB, PPG, etc.) is that they should be a better indicator in the mean of what would happen if both teams played again than one head-to-head result.
What he said.

Also, the reason ppg/pptuh wasn't used (in this particular instance, we used it most times to break ties during the weekend) was that there was a place in the championship bracket at stake. I was under the impression that it's generally accepted that you should break those ties on actual questions when possible. Even if it's not generally accepted, I still think it's important to break crucial ties like that on actual questions. I think it's clear that ppg are a better indicator of how a team would play against another than one particular head to head game, but an even better indicator is actually playing those teams together again.

EDIT: The stats for Saturday have mostly been accounted for but were rife with problems and had to be pretty much entirely re-entered. We're doing this and they'll be up here as soon as we're done. Sorry for the delay.

If anyone wants a little preview, several teams had astoundingly impressive bonus conversion figures for this (college novice) set. Whitman in particular averaged 24 ppb through the prelims, if I'm reading this semi-completed stat sheet correctly.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

jbarnes112358
Tidus
Posts: 664
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 5:58 am
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by jbarnes112358 »

DumbJaques wrote: I think it's clear that ppg are a better indicator of how a team would play against another than one particular head to head game, but an even better indicator is actually playing those teams together again.
Doesn't this statement sound a bit self-contradictory?

Isn't the idea of breaking ties with actual questions going against the philosophy of large sample statistics mentioned above? Head-to-head tiebreakers are problematic. So why settle ties with head-to-head tiebreakers, especially with mini-matches, which are subject to the high uncertainty inherent in small-sample statistics?

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

I don't think it's contradictory. Since quizbowl involves teams playing each other, rather than teams just playing against empty chairs to score points (or just taking a test), the purpose of any tiebreaker would be to predict what would happen if those teams played off. If you can actually play those teams off, I think it trumps any tiebreaker. What I was saying was that ppg is a better indicator of total performance than one game, and that it's unfair to double-count one game. I mean, if two teams are tied after playing one final we don't give a trophy based on ppg. Ideally you'd play off all ties that disqualify one team from competing for the championship, and while that's obviously not possible (you really can't do that to pick playoff teams in most tournaments), I think when you could do it, you should. After all, I feel like we're saying "what's the best indicator of what would happen if those teams played?" But using statistics to extrapolate what would happen seems inherently inferior than letting it happen.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

jbarnes112358
Tidus
Posts: 664
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 5:58 am
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by jbarnes112358 »

I agree with what you are saying about not double counting. I also agree with playing off ties when feasible. I have a problem with a mini-match, however. I believe that stats have a greater chance of determining the better team in most circumstances than a short mini-match whose outcome can be so dependent on which questions might come up. This is especially true in round-robin tournaments where everyone is playing the same opponents where comparing stats is more valid. In 2004 and 2007 our teams had to endure three-way mini-matches to make the final playoffs at PACE. We did make the playoffs those years (and ultimately won the tournaments). But, a different question or two in those mini-matches and we would have been eliminated.

I suppose there is no perfect solution short of playing full games, but then you get tournaments that can run too long.

User avatar
Captain Sinico
Auron
Posts: 2857
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: Champaign, Illinois

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by Captain Sinico »

jbarnes112358 wrote:Isn't the idea of breaking ties with actual questions going against the philosophy of large sample statistics mentioned above? Head-to-head tiebreakers are problematic. So why settle ties with head-to-head tiebreakers, especially with mini-matches, which are subject to the high uncertainty inherent in small-sample statistics?
In my view, there isn't a contradiction, but rather a trade-off between strength of correlates and sample size. I'll start by saying that I think the goal of statistical tiebreakers should be to determine the mean outcome of a future match between A and B (or, in other words, if team A and team B play an infinite-question match, the tiebreaker should predict who'd win.)
The outcome of a past match between teams A and B should be a stronger predictor of the mean outcome of a future match between A and B than the outcome of a match between A and C (or B and D, etc.) However, though A vs. non-B and B vs. non-A matches are weaker predictors of the mean A vs. B match, there is generally a much larger sample of them, so the conventional wisdom is that polling that sample (via some tie-breaking figure of merit like PPB) will produce a better prediction of the mean outcome of an A vs. B match than will using the single A vs. B outcome that exists (assuming one does.)
It is clear, however, that at some number of A vs. B matches, the stronger correlation between A vs. B outcomes and the mean A vs. B outcome will cause the results of A vs. B matches to outweigh the tiebreaker (suppose, for example, that B and A have equal records but B holds the tiebreaker over A in, say, 10 non-A-vs.-B matches, but A has beaten B a lot to not very much in 10 A vs. B matches; no rational actor would select B as better by the given definition.) The question, then, is where is that point?

MaS
Mike Sorice
Coach, Centennial High School of Champaign, IL (2014-) & Team Illinois (2016-2018)
Alumnus, Illinois ABT (2000-2002; 2003-2009) & Fenwick Scholastic Bowl (1999-2000)
ACF
IHSSBCA
PACE

User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by DumbJaques »

I suppose there is no perfect solution short of playing full games, but then you get tournaments that can run too long.
Ideally, yes, of course. However I think you can get a definitive 10-question result IF the round you're using is an intended tiebreaker. That is, if the distribution closely approximates a half-distribution and is not skewed, I think you can do it rather effectively. Something like 2/2 each of the big three, 1/1 fine arts, 1/1 trash and CE, 1/1 SS and geography, and 1/1 RMP for the standard mACF format (that used Saturday) seems appropriate to me.
Chris Ray
OSU
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014
ACF, PACE

jbarnes112358
Tidus
Posts: 664
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 5:58 am
Location: Richmond, VA

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by jbarnes112358 »

DumbJaques wrote: ... However I think you can get a definitive 10-question result IF the round you're using is an intended tiebreaker. That is, if the distribution closely approximates a half-distribution and is not skewed, I think you can do it rather effectively. Something like 2/2 each of the big three, 1/1 fine arts, 1/1 trash and CE, 1/1 SS and geography, and 1/1 RMP for the standard mACF format (that used Saturday) seems appropriate to me.
I agree that you definitely want a carefully constructed mini-match distribution. The idea is to best simulate a scaled down version of an actual game. Such a mini-match is then similar to a 5-minute overtime in basketball, or an extra inning of baseball. The "better" team may often lose the extra play due to the uncertainty of small samples. But, I suppose one could argue that if two teams are tied, then almost by definition they are teams of similar quality. So, the team that ultimately prevails is basically a matter of chance anyway.

User avatar
aestheteboy
Tidus
Posts: 570
Joined: Sat May 13, 2006 5:07 pm

Re: DACQ Weekend of Quizbowl Goodness: BYO Dagger (3/15/08) @GMU

Post by aestheteboy »

DumbJaques wrote:EDIT: The stats for Saturday have mostly been accounted for but were rife with problems and had to be pretty much entirely re-entered. We're doing this and they'll be up here as soon as we're done. Sorry for the delay.
:mad:
Daichi - Walter Johnson; Vanderbilt; U of Chicago.
Daichi's Law of High School Quizbowl: the frequency of posting in the Quizbowl Resource Center is proportional to the likelihood of being overrated.

Locked