The Quizbowl Resource Center

Based on the discussion of the set used at Brookwood, I am concerned about using HSAPQ for our tournament on Dec. 6. Should I be? I thought that the set at Hoover was great, but moderators were definitely struggling. Now I'm concerned about how late I'm going to get the set, too. I will probably let me team(s) play, so I don't WANT the questions days and days in advance, but I think 24 hours before the tournament is reasonable, seeing as I have to copy them all and such.

Thoughts?

Use HSAPQ questions please!

If i'm correct, this set has already been written and edited (correct me if I'm wrong).

azngod1992 wrote:Use HSAPQ questions please!

If i'm correct, this set has already been written and edited (correct me if I'm wrong).

Yeah, according to the website, mACF set 2 has been used at UVA (October 25) and Kent State (November 22).

The set that will be used at the Brindlee Mountain tournament is already written. There is no need to worry about receiving the questions in time.

The issues that lead to the late delivery of questions for Brookwood and Indian Springs are being dealt with immediately as HSAPQ is inviting several more writers to join the group next semester. With the workload spread out this will not be an issue in the future. In fact, we have already begun to write the sets that will be used in the spring semester. HSAPQ is very sorry for any inconvenience that Brookwood and Indian Springs may have faced. As a first year company, HSAPQ has made a few mistakes in managing the progress of editing several sets. We hope these few missteps will not tarnish our reputation for any team considering using our questions in the future. From now on, HSAPQ gurantees we will have our questions finished and mailed one week before any tournament using our questions.

These questions were the best thing I have seen on the high school level all year. People should be using them no matter what time they arrive or whether they contain residual grammatical errors, or semi-professional bonus lead-ins. I find it hilarious that people think the above things aforementioned are so bad that they invalidate HSAPQ's product.

I'm hoping other people in Ohio besides me run a tournament with them. Someone needs to, as they are amazing.

Run your tournament on the HSAPQ questions. They're worth staying up all night copying packets.

Yeah the UVA set was just fine when it was run a month ago; by now it should be good to go.

Monday of tournament week is the very latest I need our questions to run my tournament in the most efficient manner possible. Running very large tournamernts (80-120) is different than running small tournaments (30-40 teams).

I think the BISB ran smoothly on Saturday, but I had to run it without my two most experienced players plus one of my best readers who were sequestered away editing questions all day. Those guys had other tournament day assignments which we had to scramble to fill.

Had the questions had even the most basic editing process put to them, they would have been fine. For the most part, I liked what was asked. But, needing that much editing, I needed to have them on Monday and not some on Thursday, some on Friday at midnight, and tiebreakers on Saturday at 6am. IT was more than a minor inconvenience.

Ike wrote:These questions were the best thing I have seen on the high school level all year. People should be using them no matter what time they arrive or whether they contain residual grammatical errors, or semi-professional bonus lead-ins. I find it hilarious that people think the above things aforementioned are so bad that they invalidate HSAPQ's product.

I don't think anyone said they "invalidate the product" in any way. I think Mr. Barry would agree that the question content was excellent. I'm pretty sure he was commenting on the inconvenience it caused him as tournament director. I don't think it's "hilarious" that he's upset that he received the questions so late; I think he has good reason.

EDIT: Fixed tags

I think this is a very real issue that HSAPQ is clearly taking seriously. Following our tournament (it was Hoover, not Indian Springs, that was being referenced earlier in this thread--Indian Springs has not hosted a HS event this year), I was contacted and asked for any critique I might provide for the company (which is far more than most providers would ever do.) I hope the feedback I offered was helpful, but it basically boiled down to this:

1) HSAPQ questions are excellent pyramidal questions, but make for a very, very long four-quarter format tourney, and if teams are looking for something in that vein, then the company might need to consider providing one quarter of slightly shorter questions, or suggest politely that the tourney director look elsewhere for questions.

2) The questions need to be delivered earlier so TDs have time to prepare effectively.

3) Questions with potentially difficult names or phrases should have pronunciations provided to minimize reader error.

4) Questions should be provided in a format other than PDF, as PDFs take forever to print.


It would certainly appear to me that HSAPQ is taking steps to deal with at least #2, and I think that #1 is as much an issue for states like mine who use a local format as it is for HSAPQ to deal with. I hope that #3 will also be included in future versions of the questions.

Honestly, Lee, I think that if you want to bring in high-quality questions, these are among the best I've seen. I would like to see more tourneys that use them, though I imagine I am going to see a huge drop in our tourney turnout next year from local teams because of the set. I thought scores for the tourney were reasonable and that the questions were good for everyone, and I'm willing to take that chance to make a step forward with Alabama's teams. I know that teams like yours and the other stronger teams will continue to come, and that'll have to do for now.

A lot of people post about good quizbowl vs. bad quizbowl, with the recommendation that one should simply refuse to play bad quizbowl. Down here, that's obviously not the most viable option, as we don't have a lot of readily accessible "good quizbowl" events to attend. A four hour trip doesn't seem that long for some people, but if you either have to get up at 4 AM to make an 8:30 tourney start or spend the night somewhere for $150 for three rooms, your budget goes quickly. We need all the local events we can to be "good" events, because we aren't going to be pulling trips to SC, NC, or the DC area on a regular basis anytime soon, especially not on Alabama prorated school funding.

I don't think anyone said they "invalidate the product" in any way.

I never said anyone said that. I don't think Mr. Barry thought that, but I was pretty shocked when Mr. Henry posted an inquiry about whether he should run a tournament due to time issues.

Had the questions had even the most basic editing process put to them, they would have been fine. For the most part, I liked what was asked. But, needing that much editing, I needed to have them on Monday and not some on Thursday, some on Friday at midnight, and tiebreakers on Saturday at 6am.

I can agree with this, there were a bunch of typos and etc, and that really needs to be taken care of.

I don't think it's "hilarious" that he's upset that he received the questions so late; I think he has good reason.

I wasn't referring to Mr. Barry in particular. But what sparked my thought was looking at Mr. Lee's field size and its not anywhere close to the magnitude of the size of Mr. Barry's tournament, therefore I was pretty puzzled when Mr. Lee made an inquiry about this (In no way was I trying to offend Mr. Lee.) I got these questions at 9:31pm the night before I ran my 9 team tournament, and it took one person two-three hours to put everything together. Maybe 12:30 is past the time I want to be up when running a tournament, but I don't think its such a big deal.

Hey,
There's no reason PDF's should take any longer to print than anything else. What are you using to print them?

MaS

OK. I now have no worries about the set. I didn't realize that the Brookwood set was a "custom" set. I was very impressed with the questions at Hoover, I know many of the people involved in HSAPQ and I have the utmost confidence now that some of these issues have been clarified.

Ike wrote: ...I was pretty shocked when Mr. Henry posted an inquiry about whether he should run a tournament due to time issues.

Ike wrote: But what sparked my thought was looking at Mr. Lee's field size and its not anywhere close to the magnitude of the size of Mr. Barry's tournament, therefore I was pretty puzzled when Mr. Lee made an inquiry about this (In no way was I trying to offend Mr. Lee.) I got these questions at 9:31pm the night before I ran my 9 team tournament, and it took one person two-three hours to put everything together. Maybe 12:30 is past the time I want to be up when running a tournament, but I don't think its such a big deal.

No offense taken. My concerns weren't only based upon the time the questions were received, but also the apparent number of typos, etc.

Also, though, while not on the level of Brookwood, our tournament has had fields as large as 60-70 teams in the past. However, we are nowhere near that this year. Even so, I have a million things that I have to take care of the morning of a tournament and I want to have the questions sorted and stapled before I leave the school Friday afternoon. Regardless of field size, I think that is a good rule of thumb.

If I don't get questions until late Friday night or early Saturday morning, I will be freaking out. I'm sort of anal in that regard.

Anyway, my mind has been set at ease. I'm looking forward to a great tournament on what I know will be great questions.

I don't like them. I read them at Vandy and found them awkard and pretentious. But there are those who love them; I don't know why. But they are still better than most questions that are written in house.
I think you will be fine at your tournament. And we all need to remember that if the question is screwy, it is the same screwy question for each team.
But I would check to make sure the numbering of the questions is correct (it wasn't always at Vandy).

Good luck at your tournament; I am sure all will go fine.

howlin wrote:I don't like them. I read them at Vandy and found them awkard and pretentious.

What makes them pretentious?

Sir Thopas wrote:

howlin wrote:I don't like them. I read them at Vandy and found them awkard and pretentious.

What makes them pretentious?

I too would love to know this.

howlin wrote:But I would check to make sure the numbering of the questions is correct (it wasn't always at Vandy).

How does this affect gameplay?

don't like them. I read them at Vandy and found them awkard and pretentious

I too would like to know how they are "pretentious", or indeed how it is possible for a question set to be pretentious or akward. I suspect length and/or answer selection might have something to do with it.

everyday847 wrote:

howlin wrote:But I would check to make sure the numbering of the questions is correct (it wasn't always at Vandy).

How does this affect gameplay?

ACF Fall 2005 had a round end with a question on the Cleveland Browns due to accidentally skipping the number 2 while numbering questions. It doesn't affect gameplay (unless there end up being fewer than 20 questions due to numbering problems), but can affect the distribution of what's heard.

howlin wrote:...questions...awkard (sic) and pretentious.

What does that even mean?

howlin wrote:And we all need to remember that if the question is screwy, it is the same screwy question for each team.

I doubt anyone's ever forgotten that, but it's a bad justification for anything. You could use that logic to justify hoses or... well, really, anything. That logic says there are no good questions whatsoever. The fact that everyone's getting screwed doesn't make anyone less screwed.

howlin wrote:But I would check to make sure the numbering of the questions is correct (it wasn't always at Vandy).

Yeah, I mean, yes, they should be numbered correctly but you certainly are focusing on this non-issue, this being the third time you've mentioned it.

MaS

At least Vanderbilt (presumably) stapled their packets.

Sir Thopas wrote:At least Vanderbilt (presumably) stapled their packets.

No we didn't. Made it easier for us readers, too.

rjaguar3 wrote:

Sir Thopas wrote:At least Vanderbilt (presumably) stapled their packets.

No we didn't. Made it easier for us readers, too.

Ha ha, that was accidental too by Jack, but actually worked out well since Kinko's fortunately placed dividers between each printed round. As for the misnumbering, I only remember one instance - it just happened to be in the first half of round 1, so probably stuck out more.