The Quizbowl Resource Center

Dibs on starting the newest iteration of the most active thread on HSQB!

OK, predictions?

Prediction: Greg Peterson and I find a loophole in IHSA rules and return to another year of eligibility as a "Midwestern University Cooperative," handily winning the Class A title.

You have fewer than five players, so you are disqualified.

I'll join to give them a handicap.

I had suggested waiting until after Panasonic was done with first... oh well... you aren't the only one.

Just didn't want to get beaten to the punch.

Actually, Carlo, if I had just failed English my senior year, I could've stayed and played quizbowl, as I didn't even walk into a practice my freshman year and am therefore still eligibile. This came surprisingly close to happening... wow, would that have annoyed NT and Loyola.

Although there would've been the whole getting-Egan-not-to-run-me-over-repeatedly-with-his-car thing to deal with.

P.S. Are you still eligible?

cornfused wrote:...if I had just failed English my senior year, I could've stayed and played quizbowl...

This may be a ridiculous question, but to anyone's knowledge has anybody ever actually done this before? A 5th year quizbowl player who was also the laziest SOB on earth when it came to schoolwork?

Caesar Rodney HS wrote:

cornfused wrote:...if I had just failed English my senior year, I could've stayed and played quizbowl...

This may be a ridiculous question, but to anyone's knowledge has anybody ever actually done this before? A 5th year quizbowl player who was also the laziest SOB on earth when it came to schoolwork?

IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO HAPPEN!

dyetman89 wrote: IT'S BEEN KNOWN TO HAPPEN!

oh lord.

cornfused wrote:OK, predictions?

Auburn definite preseason #1, NT and Carbondale good too.

cornfused wrote:Although there would've been the whole getting-Egan-to-not-run-me-over-repeatedly-with-his-car thing to deal with.

I could defintely see this as a possibility.

cornfused wrote:if I had just failed English my senior year...... to not run

Ironic?

JohnGlerum wrote:

cornfused wrote:if I had just failed English my senior year...... to not run

Ironic?

It is 8 pm, why aren't you in bed, sonny?

cornfused wrote:Although there would've been the whole getting-Egan-to-not-run-me-over-repeatedly-with-his-car thing to deal with.

Boy, you more damn right than you know.

BTW .... how did Russian go?

>>sound of key turning in the ignition<<

I would love to see Illinois break page 2 before July. It would make me laugh.

cornfused wrote:Dibs on starting the newest iteration of the most active thread on HSQB!

OK, predictions?

I predict this thread will exceed 1100 posts by June 7, 2009.

BarringtonJP wrote:

cornfused wrote:Dibs on starting the newest iteration of the most active thread on HSQB!

OK, predictions?

I predict this thread will exceed 1100 posts by June 7, 2009.

Pssshhh, NERDS!

evilmonkey wrote:I would love to see Illinois break page 2 before July. It would make me laugh.

I smell a dare! $10 bucks .... done!

JohnGlerum wrote:

cornfused wrote:if I had just failed English my senior year...... to not run

Ironic?

From Wikipedia:
"However, most experts on language now agree that the split infinitive is sometimes appropriate. Those who use it consciously may see it as a form of hyperbaton, and some major poets have employed this to good effect."
"Hyperbaton is a figure of speech in which words that naturally belong together are separated from each other for emphasis or effect."

Intentional: the split infinitive adds extra emphasis to the "NOT."

Caesar Rodney HS wrote:

cornfused wrote:...if I had just failed English my senior year, I could've stayed and played quizbowl...

This may be a ridiculous question, but to anyone's knowledge has anybody ever actually done this before? A 5th year quizbowl player who was also the laziest SOB on earth when it came to schoolwork?

Honestly, this came within a week of happening.

Tegan wrote:BTW .... how did Russian go?

Uh, working on it.

Tegan wrote:BTW .... how did Russian go?

cornfused wrote:Uh, working on it.

>>engines roars to life<<
>>leather gloves, on<<
>>sunglasses, on<<

FYI: Team IL won its first round versus colorado and california by a good margin. We don't play till tuesday again.

Expect BIG things from New Trier. If you count us out, I have a feeling you'll be wrong, and it would be such a shame if someone in a forum were wrong...

Chichono wrote:Expect BIG things from New Trier. If you count us out, I have a feeling you'll be wrong, and it would be such a shame if someone in a forum were wrong...

Welcome to the boards, Ben. I look forward to the many amusing posts you will make this year!

By the way, guys, Illinois has apparently won their first two games to make the Panasonic final. The tournament can best be described as "Cronk SMASH!!" so far, with Illinois and Maryland eating people.

Looking forward to seeing that final matchup - anyone at the tournament care to comment?


(Repeat champs would be preeeetty awesome, guys...)

cornfused wrote:By the way, guys, Illinois has apparently won their first two games to make the Panasonic final. The tournament can best be described as "Cronk SMASH!!" so far, with Illinois and Maryland eating people.

Looking forward to seeing that final matchup - anyone at the tournament care to comment?


(Repeat champs would be preeeetty awesome, guys...)

Remember, you are playing a pretty darn awesome SC team, not to mention a MD team that has something to prove after someone accidentally tripped on the "self destruct button" last year.

I will pick IL for third this year, though it is difficult to tell.

OK, in a slightly less crowded field, they have a shot.

good thing I made the change when I did.

Congratulations to Illinois again!

Dy-nas-ty! Dy-nas-ty! Dy-nas... no? Oh, ok. But two in a row is great. Congrats to all, especially Greg and Hunter for their second titles.

Hunter wasn't there.

Then I withdraw my congratulations to him.

Hey ...

I know this is a bit off-topic but I was wondering if anybody knew where GG was headed to college. He sat in on my math class at UChi, and I was wondering if anybody knows which school he decided on.

Congrats to team Illinois!

On to real quiz bowl. Can't say much about anywhere else, but I do know OPRF will be returning their best player this year. I'm predicting them for another conference win and possibly a sectionals bid, but I doubt they will do better than 4th at sectionals given that NT/Loyola/MS will be returning very strong players also.

Best,
JB

I read somewhere Greg is going to Vanderbilt, following in the steps of his brother.

Also, is turnabout a different format of tournament? Or does it just have a seasonally inspired name?

Greg is going to Vanderbilt.
Turnabouts follow a standard format, but the top teams are not invited. If your team wins a tournament or IHSA or Masonic Sectional, then you don't get an invite. If your team repeatedly comes close to doing those things, then you're also not invited. Each year, there are about 50-60 teams that are ineligible. The 'blacklist' for next year has not yet been decided.

I'd like to point out to everyone here that the mere existance of this thread: viewtopic.php?f=29&t=5759 shows that the availability of mirrors and questions increases a ton if IL were to adopt 30 point, 3 part bonuses. Hopefully, this argument can be used to make that switch eventually.

pasedpawn wrote:I'd like to point out to everyone here that the mere existance of this thread: viewtopic.php?f=29&t=5759 shows that the availability of mirrors and questions increases a ton if IL were to adopt 30 point, 3 part bonuses. Hopefully, this argument can be used to make that switch eventually.

John,

To a certain extent, this was the argument we used this year (I didn't use the term "mirror" because the other people at the AdCo meeting wouldn't have known what that is!

The argument that I used to move to the ACF/NAQT style bonuses (BTW, retaining rebounds & still "Illinois style" for computation bonuses) were:

1. The number of companies that write to the "Illinois distribution" are getting fewer and fewer, and many of the people who run those companies are approaching retirement age or are long past it (Answers +, Platypus, etc).

2. The fewer the question providers, the more they can charge for questions.

3. States that insist on having a "niche" format (I cited Missouri and Kentucky) are having a harder and harder time finding a good question writer. I cited that Missouri will be looking for their third new writer in as many years, and that Kentucky will be doing the same.

4. I admitted that Illinois is lucky having "in house" written questions, and that we could (for the state tournament) change on a dime if we had to (though I did not advocate that).

5. I am mostly thinking about conferences and local tournaments .... that making this change will make it much easier and cheaper to run their tournaments and conferences, as there is a more plentiful supply of questions in this format nationwide.

6. Illinois >>will<< have to make this change one day .... it is a matter of inevitability. We can choose to lay the ground work now, and control how it happens, or be stuck one day when conferences can no longer find a good question provider in their price range, and then be forced to change formats at the drop of a hat.

7. My recommendation was to adopt the new format for the 2009-2010 season. This will give people a chance to get used to the format, and give question writers a chance to adapt (if they choose to).

8. I also noted that it would end up saving time, as three part bonuses would take less time than four-five part bonuses.

On a vote of 2-2, the resolution failed, with votes strictly based on geographic lines.

I had done the courteous thing and about three weeks before the meeting, sent out an outline of my arguments to the other coaches on the board. They in turn had sent them out to their constituency. This in turn prompted letters from people who had problems. Their concerns were:
1. It takes away from the "team" aspect (I had refuted that in my arguments which I had sent out; they were ignored)
2. One coach cited Missouri as an example of a successful state that didn't use this format, and if they didn't we didn't (I can only assume he neglected to read what I included about Missouri)
3. "My kids need all 30 seconds to contemplate their answers ... now you are only giving them 5-6 seconds per part.

I think what it comes down to is: we need to find coaches in those areas of the state who support the change, and they must send letters to their representative on the AdCo Board. This seems to be their ammunition. It is especially difficult, because older people, in general, don't like to change. There are a lot of older coaches downstate, and they don't want to change.

This is part of the impetus for changing the format of the Kickoff next year .... people will get a chance to try it out.

I can tell you right now .... a lot of the old folks will freak .... as you know it makes the life of a moderator a zillion times easier, and really opens the game.

The other reason this is not going to work is because (especially) in the part of the state where we need to convince people there are next to no moderators who will know what to do. It will be a mess, and people will say that it was bad, and they want nothing to do with it. I hope I am wrong about this .... but I have been having less and less faith in humanity these last few years.

Even up here ...... The number of people with experience in ACF format is limited ... a few folks at Auburn, New Trier, Wheaton North, Loyola, ...... the list is already getting thin ... and how many of the alums can come back and moderate? I'm only about 50% sure that I will be eligible to moderate (depends on my football schedule for next year).

Are you looking to move to NSC-style bouncebacks, as well? The constraint on types of bonuses that can be written under the "read the whole bonus first" rule is really severe and has direct consequences for question difficulty and scope of interesting answer selection.

Matt Weiner wrote:Are you looking to move to NSC-style bouncebacks, as well? The constraint on types of bonuses that can be written under the "read the whole bonus first" rule is really severe and has direct consequences for question difficulty and scope of interesting answer selection.

More like the NSC (as I recall ... this is more in David Reinstein's hands now)... read the leadin, and then one part at a time. One of the main reasons is exactly what you noted: the "read the whole bonus first" is somewhat limiting. I get sick and tired of writing bonuses like.

1. Who was the inventor of the first practical light bulb?
2. This man worked for the-person-who-was-the-answer-to-number-one .....

They are time consuming to read ..... they are necessarily poorly written (within the confines of the format).

Yes. The Kickoffs in November will have one bonus part at a time with bouncebacks, and the proposal to IHSA that failed to pass last year and will be resubmitted next year (going into effect for 2009-10 or later) also has bouncebacks. The exception (to the NSC format) will be bonuses that include computation, which will continue to be in the old IHSA format (all read at the beginning and then allowing 30 seconds) except that they will be three parts worth ten points each to be consistent with the rest of the questions.

The Rep in John's district is the one who needs to be convinced of the change, unless some people favorable to our opinion get added to the committee to replace the people who don't show up.

John's going to be gone, but the rest of the Rockford area should be reminded when and to whom to address letters of support ,,, provided that she will bring all of the letters along.

Chichono wrote:Expect BIG things from New Trier.

Do elaborate! Any surprises your "friends" across the highway should know about?

JohnGlerum wrote:

Chichono wrote:Expect BIG things from New Trier.

Do elaborate! Any surprises your "friends" across the highway should know about?

I'm teaching him science and math.

Who's going to beg him to go to practices and tournaments?

ReinsteinD wrote:Who's going to beg him to go to practices and tournaments?

You and Gerhardt. But I don't honestly think he'll require too much begging, given the ambition he expressed above.

ReinsteinD wrote:bonuses that include computation, which will continue to be in the old IHSA format (all read at the beginning and then allowing 30 seconds) except that they will be three parts worth ten points each

I understand maintaining lots of computational math is necessary to have any hope of passing this, but isn't that kind of...weird? (Hey, it looks like computational math and good questions are mutually exclusive! Alright, I'll be quiet now.)

Also, Aegis Questions has a new quizbowl blog. You should all check it out.

Tegan wrote:Even up here ...... The number of people with experience in ACF format is limited ... a few folks at Auburn, New Trier, Wheaton North, Loyola, ...... the list is already getting thin ... and how many of the alums can come back and moderate? I'm only about 50% sure that I will be eligible to moderate (depends on my football schedule for next year).

If needed, I'd be willing to moderate at the central or northwest kickoff. I can be e-mailed at ralphus84 AT yahoo.com.

With Ms. Martin gone, a starting five consisting of all seniors (last season), and no more Gauthier children left in the tank... will Wheaton North remain competitive/return to glory/never be heard of again?

JohnGlerum wrote:With Ms. Martin gone, a starting five consisting of all seniors (last season), and no more Gauthier children left in the tank... will Wheaton North remain competitive/return to glory/never be heard of again?

I would be more worried about a Loyola team without John Glerum ... IF you catch my drift.

Ms. Kidd is a good coach - while I don't think they'll be top 4 in state this coming year, they won't disappear.

So the question remains: Who ARE the top four in the state? As an interested party, I'll keep my opinion to myself...