The Quizbowl Resource Center

We read 15 rounds of toss-ups from an NAQT College DI packet. We kept track of points per subject area, and developed a team based upon specialists and generalists that we thought gelled well together.

We had 16 kids show up, so we divided them into 2 groups of 8, where they played toss-ups as individuals. After every three rounds, we shuffled the rooms to see how, for example, the top science player in one room faired against the top science player in another. It seemed to work very well, and got us done after about 6 hours, which included an hour break for lunch.

Thanks--sounds like a good plan, unfortunately we won't have that much time available.

That does sound like a good plan. I think Ohio just showed a good way of how to do this, even without using the questions HSAPQ is producing as their "tryout" packets.

I hope other states consider this model.

Unfortunately, in Delaware, we have the problem of just not having enough schools that do this seriously... so it might just be one or two kids from CR (almost certainly just one) and the rest from Charter (and perhaps one student from Mount Pleasant)... and i have no idea how we're going to officially determine this grouping.

Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:That does sound like a good plan. I think Ohio just showed a good way of how to do this, even without using the questions HSAPQ is producing as their "tryout" packets.

I hope other states consider this model.

Unfortunately, in Delaware, we have the problem of just not having enough schools that do this seriously... so it might just be one or two kids from CR (almost certainly just one) and the rest from Charter (and perhaps one student from Mount Pleasant)... and i have no idea how we're going to officially determine this grouping.

Could Delaware determine a team without hosting a tryout? I think in your state it's pretty clear who the best players are, since there are 2-3 teams that actually do things. Maybe a group of coaches could get together and decide on the best team to represent the state? I think that's viable in smaller or less-active states like Delaware and Pennsylvania.

Inkana7 wrote:

Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:That does sound like a good plan. I think Ohio just showed a good way of how to do this, even without using the questions HSAPQ is producing as their "tryout" packets.

I hope other states consider this model.

Unfortunately, in Delaware, we have the problem of just not having enough schools that do this seriously... so it might just be one or two kids from CR (almost certainly just one) and the rest from Charter (and perhaps one student from Mount Pleasant)... and i have no idea how we're going to officially determine this grouping.

Could Delaware determine a team without hosting a tryout? I think in your state it's pretty clear who the best players are, since there are 2-3 teams that actually do things. Maybe a group of coaches could get together and decide on the best team to represent the state? I think that's viable in smaller or less-active states like Delaware and Pennsylvania.

This is almost certainly what we're going to do. I imagine that the decision will end up being a joint effort by myself and Mr. Bill Tressler.

As of this moment, i think it's pretty clear that David and Alex from Charter belong on the team, and Trey from CR does as well. Peter from Mount Pleasant is a good player as well with general knowledge in many categories (and can put up 60ppg with no effort), but relatively little depth compared to others. John and Meg on Charter are also really good, and might be the best (or one of the best) players on every team in the state but the one they play on, CR, and Mount Pleasant, so even they deserve consideration. And heck, you never know, there might be another random star on Charter's B team who's quite good that just doesn't get recognition. CR's Seth is a very good science player, but if we have David on the team, he might not get many questions. And finally, a player from AI DuPont named Jacob put up 76ppg on an A set recently, but this is a relatively inexperienced team that has never played a tournament outside of Delaware. Those are the only serious considerations for the team, in my opinion.

Question: If KAAC does not field a team to represent Kentucky (it seems like right now they are only sending a team to Panasonic), does that mean we can just combine a few of the best players from the state and play as Team Kentucky?

Yes, but also I would hesitate to say anybody is sending a team to the PAC/NTAE this year.

dbarman wrote:Question: If KAAC does not field a team to represent Kentucky (it seems like right now they are only sending a team to Panasonic), does that mean we can just combine a few of the best players from the state and play as Team Kentucky?

If you intend to do this, you need to organize, talk to your potential teammates and/or decide upon a selection process (if necessary) quickly. The deadline to submit a bid for a team is in mid-March sometime. (March 17, I think.)

Katamari Damacy wrote:Yes, but also I would hesitate to say anybody is sending a team to the PAC/NTAE this year.

Since it appears not to be happening at all... http://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic. ... ce#p173296

dbarman wrote:Question: If KAAC does not field a team to represent Kentucky (it seems like right now they are only sending a team to Panasonic), does that mean we can just combine a few of the best players from the state and play as Team Kentucky?

Kentucky definitely needs a team there, especially considering that Nashville is not that far away. Realistically, we should just throw the best players from Dunbar and Manual in with 2 or 3 others in the state and figure out who the best team would be.

Gerd Bockmann wrote:

dbarman wrote:Question: If KAAC does not field a team to represent Kentucky (it seems like right now they are only sending a team to Panasonic), does that mean we can just combine a few of the best players from the state and play as Team Kentucky?

Kentucky definitely needs a team there, especially considering that Nashville is not that far away. Realistically, we should just throw the best players from Dunbar and Manual in with 2 or 3 others in the state and figure out who the best team would be.

I think a 4-player Kentucky team would perform better than a 6-player Kentucky team.

If I might interject, I think Sandy is right about this. Some one alwayas argues "well what if someone get's sick?" and my response is 1) I think HSAPQ would make allowances for that and 2) like Miss America runner-up, that rarely happens (Vanessa Williams nonwithstanding).

Also, isn't HSAPQ accepting open bids in case a state doesn't have an association or some such selecting a team?

Huang wrote:

Gerd Bockmann wrote:

dbarman wrote:Question: If KAAC does not field a team to represent Kentucky (it seems like right now they are only sending a team to Panasonic), does that mean we can just combine a few of the best players from the state and play as Team Kentucky?

Kentucky definitely needs a team there, especially considering that Nashville is not that far away. Realistically, we should just throw the best players from Dunbar and Manual in with 2 or 3 others in the state and figure out who the best team would be.

I think a 4-player Kentucky team would perform better than a 6-player Kentucky team.

To clarify: I mean that the team should be chosen from that number of players, not that Kentucky should field a team with that many players.

David Riley wrote: Also, isn't HSAPQ accepting open bids in case a state doesn't have an association or some such selecting a team?

This is correct. They'll look at any and all bids submitted and pick the strongest one.

Does anyone know if Connecticut is planning on fielding a team to this?

Cantaloupe (disambiguation) wrote:

FredMorlan wrote:Well, as an outsider, I think I can answer that. Beyond the fact that DC and Maryland are different polities*, Maryland has Blake, Richard Montgomery, Walt Whitman & Walter Johnson, and D.C. has Georgetown Day School, Gonzaga College and St. Anselm's. I think very good teams can be formed from those few schools.

West Virginia has very few schools involved in circuit quiz bowl. Ditto New Mexico. Same with Azerbaijan. Why not form a Washington D.C./West Virginia/New Mexico/Azerbaijan team?

*Now everyone in quiz bowl has used that word. Let's stop.

The problem is that Gonzaga has verbally expressed a reluctance to travel anywhere more than an hour away this year(hence their absence from QuAC, both VCU tournaments, and GSAC). Most of GDS's team is unavailable that weekend due to graduation (Matt J. can certainly correct me on this, but I was under the impression that GDS A was made up completely of seniors). I'm uncertain of how much support (financially and quizbowl...ly...) St. Anselm's can get for this tournament as it stands.

I would like to point out that Wilson SHS also has a quiz bowl team. IF GDS and Gonzaga are not able to attend for various reasons, then it is possible that 2 of my players, who had not previously expressed interest due to the obvious supriority of a number of Gonzaga and GDS players, could be among the best 5 or 6 in DC (or maybe not, but it would be good to find out), and it is possible that Wilson could get money for this.

Wow. That sounds whiny, but I'm just pointing out that there are other possible options for a DC team.

wilsonmathteacher wrote:IF GDS and Gonzaga are not able to attend for various reasons, then it is possible that 2 of my players, who had not previously expressed interest due to the obvious supriority of a number of Gonzaga and GDS players, could be among the best 5 or 6 in DC (or maybe not, but it would be good to find out), and it is possible that Wilson could get money for this.

I like money.

But yeah, a GDS B/Wilson/St. Anselm's team is certainly something to consider. GDS people have expressed interest in trying to get something together for this.

Yeah, even though that proposed DC team is not the strongest imaginable DC team it would still probably do well.

Prof.Whoopie wrote:

wilsonmathteacher wrote:IF GDS and Gonzaga are not able to attend for various reasons, then it is possible that 2 of my players, who had not previously expressed interest due to the obvious supriority of a number of Gonzaga and GDS players, could be among the best 5 or 6 in DC (or maybe not, but it would be good to find out), and it is possible that Wilson could get money for this.

I like money.

But yeah, a GDS B/Wilson/St. Anselm's team is certainly something to consider. GDS people have expressed interest in trying to get something together for this.

I'd be willing to try and help pull it together from the Wilson end. I only have 2 people who might reasonably have a chance of even being competitive, depending on where subject strengths are. It might or might not be doable from our end, and quite honestly my kids are both seniors and might want to *gasp* enjoy senior week . I'll talk to them

So when I submit a bid for a team, can/should I include the extra people who would replace a player on that roster if they unexpectedly have to drop from the tournament?

We've been getting a lot of inquiries about this lately, so I'll bump this post to the top of the thread:

cvdwightw wrote:We would obviously like states to attend even if they cannot put a team together until after the deadline. To that end, states from which no bids are submitted by March 18 must notify us by the official deadline of their intent to attend the tournament, and give us a definitive date by which at least one bid will be submitted. We will review all bids from that state and notify the accepted team within one week of that date.

I submitted a bid for Pennsylvania awhile ago-- could I get some sort of confirmation you guys received it?

If you are not from Oklahoma and you tried to send me an official bid, something has happened and I cannot find your e-mail. Please re-send these bids; if you do not see a response from me within 72 hours acknowledging bid acceptance, either something happened again or it got stuck in my trash folder. In that case please re-send the bid to the address in my profile (dpwynne@(spam prevention)gmail.com) I apologize for any inconvenience.

This is also a reminder that states that have conducted official tryouts for NASAT need to send me an official bid. Posting on the forums does not constitute an official bid.

This is a reminder that there is less than one week until the March 18 bid deadline. We have received official bids from six states so far (contact me if you want to make sure you are one of those six states).

We know several states would like to participate but will not be able to form a team in time for the March 18 deadline. If this is the case, one or more people from that state should contact me at [email protected] stating something along the lines of "[State X] is planning to send a team to NASAT. We will submit a bid no later than [Date Y]." The reason for this is that HSAPQ would like to know, by the bid deadline, how many states are planning to participate in the competition.

Are the questions for this tournament finished? I thought that HSAPQ stated that if the questions were not done by March 15th, the tournament would be canceled.

Also, i really have no idea what Delaware is doing. I can tell you that CR (the admin/district) will give zero money towards this, and i've heard that Charter will have a difficult time getting any funds as well. Additionally, i will not be attending this tournament, so that pretty much leaves one respectable coach in the state left. I wouldn't be surprised to see Delaware without any representation at NASAT. It's just too expensive, altogether.

So...is this happening? Should teams start finding money to pay the entry fee and transportation costs, or would that be an enormous waste of effort?

I am fairly certain it is happening, as Dwight wouldn't have announced the deadline for less than one week remaining at the time he announced it. Either they are nearly done or done with the set used at this NASAT would be the most likely answer.

Since we're in a bit of a transitional period regarding our communications team, I'll announce on behalf of HSAPQ that we have written 482 questions for this tournament as of the last time I checked the set 20 minutes ago. This is not the 100% we hoped, but we believe, and hope that those considering attending agree, that it represents the fruits of a very significant effort to get work done well before the last minute and means that we are on track to have a full tournament set written, edited, and proofread before the exams & nationals season begins competing for quizbowl's focus.

The National All-Star Academic Tournament will happen on the announced weekend at Vanderbilt, and we expect it to be a high-quality event. We hope that all potential teams, armed with the information above and the sample packet which we will be releasing within the coming weeks to demonstrate the difficulty and style of this event, can make an informed decision about whether they would like to participate in the tournament.

We will be providing approximately weekly updates on the set's progress in this thread. Furthermore, any member of HSAPQ is authorized to share the total number of completed questions with any person who asks at any time by private channels. We hope that this openness will allay any remaining concerns about set progress. Please direct any specific further inquiries about NASAT to tournament director Dwight Wynne at [email protected]. I and the rest of HSAPQ look forward to announcing the first bid acceptances over the coming weeks.

I'd also like to add that there are a lot of rumors and misinformation floating around about this tournament, and about HSAPQ in general (as well as about other organizations in quizbowl). I have no idea what some of the posts in this thread are about, because oftentimes people don't think to mail Shawn with their concerns about HSAPQ. I can only imagine that NAQT, PACE, ACF, and other organizations often feel similarly confused. Please, by all means, contact Dwight with NASAT-specific queries or Shawn with other/general questions about HSAPQ so we can make sure you have the latest, correct information about the event, and contact the appropriate people at other groups when necessary. You can also post in this thread and we will do our best to respond, but specific information directed to an e-mail address is always more likely to garner a quick response.

Matt Weiner wrote:sample packet which we will be releasing within the coming weeks to demonstrate the difficulty and style of this event, can make an informed decision about whether they would like to participate in the tournament

Given that bids are due in two days, how are people supposed to make an informed decision using a sample packet that will be made available after the bid deadline?

jonah wrote:

Matt Weiner wrote:sample packet which we will be releasing within the coming weeks to demonstrate the difficulty and style of this event, can make an informed decision about whether they would like to participate in the tournament

Given that bids are due in two days, how are people supposed to make an informed decision using a sample packet that will be made available after the bid deadline?

We trust that most of the teams who have already decided to send in a bid are familiar with what "ACF Regionals-like tournament" means; the sample packet is intended for less active states who may still be deciding whether or not to attend.

Matt Weiner wrote:

jonah wrote:

Matt Weiner wrote:sample packet which we will be releasing within the coming weeks to demonstrate the difficulty and style of this event, can make an informed decision about whether they would like to participate in the tournament

Given that bids are due in two days, how are people supposed to make an informed decision using a sample packet that will be made available after the bid deadline?

We trust that most of the teams who have already decided to send in a bid are familiar with what "ACF Regionals-like tournament" means; the sample packet is intended for less active states who may still be deciding whether or not to attend.

This tournament is behind as it is. Might it be better to link prospective teams to some ACF Regs packets and use this sample packet as Round 1?

EDIT: And this still doesn;t explain how these "less active states" can make the informed decision to submit a bid when the sample doesn't exist.

Matt Weiner wrote:

jonah wrote:

Matt Weiner wrote:sample packet which we will be releasing within the coming weeks to demonstrate the difficulty and style of this event, can make an informed decision about whether they would like to participate in the tournament

Given that bids are due in two days, how are people supposed to make an informed decision using a sample packet that will be made available after the bid deadline?

We trust that most of the teams who have already decided to send in a bid are familiar with what "ACF Regionals-like tournament" means; the sample packet is intended for less active states who may still be deciding whether or not to attend.

Right, but aren't those less-active states still required to send their bid by Thursday, before said packet will be available—thus having to make the decision without it?

As Dwight has explained upthread, bids will be accepted after March 18 under the listed conditions.

Matt Weiner wrote:As Dwight has explained upthread, bids will be accepted after March 18 under the listed conditions.

This system of "tell us when you plan to officially submit a bid" sounds like it could lead to many cancellations and/or uninformed teams. Moreover, neither the set nor the sample packet is completed. NASAT is coming together slowly, both team-wise and question-wise. It seems like things are unraveling over at HSAPQ headquarters (if there is such a place). Not that this really concerns me (I'm not a part of HSAPQ or a NASAT player), but are you sure this will not lead to the cancellation of NASAT, or worse, the downfall of HSAPQ? I want to see you guys around next year...

EDIT: clarity

Dan-Don wrote:

Matt Weiner wrote:As Dwight has explained upthread, bids will be accepted after March 18 under the listed conditions.

This system of "tell us when you plan to officially submit a bid" sounds like it could lead to many cancellations and/or uninformed teams. Moreover, neither the set nor the sample packet is completed. Not that this really concerns me (I'm not a part of HSAPQ or a NASAT player), but are you sure this will not lead to the cancellation of NASAT, or worse, the downfall of HSAPQ? I want to see you guys around next year...

Given that we have 482 questions three months in advance of the event and are continuing to write, the tournament is going to happen and is going to be complete, and completely edited, in advance. I want to make that clear once again. I think this represents progress for HSAPQ in comparison to times when we have been working at the last minute. I, Shawn, Eric, or Dwight will continue to answer any specific concerns.

Dwight will have some clarifying information this week about late bids from states that have not yet gotten organized.

Just to be clear, since it may have been one of my comments that caused Matt to set the goal of having this tournament done by March 15: that deadline was self-imposed and well beyond what other tournaments promise. Though we will monitor progress, IHSSBCA has confidence in this tournament and will send a team. There are many reasons to believe that this will be an outstanding tournament.

I am pleased to announce a slight change in HSAPQ's bid policies.

We would still prefer for teams to send in bids by March 18 if at all possible; because we do not have a set cap for this tournament, it is important for us to be able to budget the amount of staff needed for this tournament as early as possible. Decisions on all bids received by March 18 will be made, and teams notified, no later than April 1. States should contact me (at either [email protected] or [email protected]) as soon as they know that they plan on sending a team, regardless of when their actual selection procedure finishes.

We will review all other bids on a rolling basis. Decisions on all bids received between March 18 and April 1 (without prior knowledge that they are coming) will be made, and teams notified, no later than April 8. Decisions on all bids received between April 1 and June 1 (without prior knowledge that they are coming) will be made, and teams notified, within one week of their receipt. We reserve the right to reject bids submitted after April 1 based on our ability to secure staff; however, we will make every attempt to secure enough staff to allow all interested states to participate. In order to best plan for the tournament, we will not accept any bids submitted after June 1.

Teams from state-equivalents in countries outside the United States (e.g. Canadian provinces) are allowed to use their country or state-equivalent's definition of high school eligibility instead of our standard of "9th through 12th grades"; however, we reserve the right to inquire about or reject bids that contain players we believe to have completed the equivalent of 12th grade.

Just wondering, after the bids get submitted will like a field with the players be posted and updated?

Tomorrow, teams who submitted bids by March 18 will receive official notice on the status of their bid. A list of accepted bids, including team members, will be posted in this thread as well. Over the next week, teams whose bids are accepted will receive additional information about the tournament itself, including hotel and transportation information, a sample packet, a list of planned schedules for a wide number of registered teams, and registration information. Acceptance of a team's bid only gives that team first right of refusal; that is, the accepted bid from each state represents the team HSAPQ feels is strongest from that state, given any and all other bids from that state, but does not commit that team to attending NASAT. Additional registration information, including what to do if team composition must change, will be sent out over the next week.

Questions about tournament logistics should be sent to Dwight Wynne at either [email protected] or [email protected]. Questions about the Vanderbilt campus or Nashville itself should be sent to Daichi Ueda at [email protected].

If you are interested in staffing at NASAT, please contact me at either of the above e-mail addresses with the following information:
1. Your name and, if applicable, school affiliation
2. Previous tournament staffing experience
3. Where you would be traveling from, and where you would be traveling to after the tournament. HSAPQ has a strong preference for local staffers and staffers that would be able to carpool to the tournament location.
4. Whether you would require a hotel for one or more nights

Matt Weiner wrote:We will be providing approximately weekly updates on the set's progress in this thread.

Can't hurt just to check in. How is this coming?

Prof.Whoopie wrote:

Matt Weiner wrote:We will be providing approximately weekly updates on the set's progress in this thread.

Can't hurt just to check in. How is this coming?

679 questions as of now.

Matt Weiner wrote:

Prof.Whoopie wrote:

Matt Weiner wrote:We will be providing approximately weekly updates on the set's progress in this thread.

Can't hurt just to check in. How is this coming?

679 questions as of now.

As a point of reference how many are you looking to write total?

Update: we hit 700 questions a few minutes ago. We are planning to write a total of 924 questions, 44 of which will go in the sample packet and 880 of which will be used to make 20 packets of 23/21 for the tournament proper. This puts us at a little over 200 questions to write (I'm not giving an exact number because we may have to rewrite or replace a couple of questions that are as-yet-undiscovered repeats).

HSAPQ writers have written a total of 219 questions since the March 15 post. If HSAPQ keeps to that pace we will finish writing the tournament in mid-May, leaving 3-4 weeks to edit and polish the set.

Here is the sample packet for the 2010 HSAPQ National All Star Academic Tournament:

http://www.hsapq.com/sample.pdf

Because this tournament is for all-star teams, it will be harder than NAQT HSNCT or PACE NSC, and much more difficult in comparison to normal high school tournaments. This sample packet reflects the difficulty of the tournament; teams should be prepared for its rigor.

Do we have a current field, at least as far as states with accepted bids goes?

Dresden_The_Moderator wrote:Do we have a current field, at least as far as states with accepted bids goes?

I believe that can be found here: http://hsquizbowl.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=9731

So apparently this is going on at the same time as NASAT will be, making hotels expensive/hard to find. Will HSAPQ be making any arrangements with local hotels so that teams can get some kind of discount? Alternatively, could HSAPQ offer any advice as to how teams could best find lodging for this tournament?

Cantaloupe (disambiguation) wrote:So apparently this is going on at the same time as NASAT will be, making hotels expensive/hard to find. Will HSAPQ be making any arrangements with local hotels so that teams can get some kind of discount? Alternatively, could HSAPQ offer any advice as to how teams could best find lodging for this tournament?

HSAPQ is not having an official hotel this year. I just checked several sites like hotels.com, Orbitz, and Expedia, and they all list numerous hotels available for the weekend of NASAT at economical prices in the Nashville area.

Teams are advised to make arrangements as soon as possible, but there is no reason for teams to panic because of the country music event. Nashville's a big tourist city, and there will be affordable hotels for everyone who makes proper arrangements. Feel free to contact me or Shawn if you have any other questions about NASAT.

Speaking of hotels in Nashville, the Opryland Hotel (which is nice to tour, although too expensive to stay in IMO) is dealing with some serious flood issues right now and may not be fully re-opened for several months.

Will this set be open for delayed college mirrors (like HSNCT)?