The Quizbowl Resource Center

This is the general announcement for the second annual VCU Winter High School Tournament. This is a high school academic quizbowl tournament to be hosted by the quizbowl club of Virginia Commonwealth University on Saturday, December 5 from 8:30 AM to 4:00 PM. The tournament is open to any high school team that wishes to attend.

The tournament will NOT take place at the VCU campus. It will instead be held at Douglas Freeman High School, located at 8701 Three Chopt Rd, Richmond, VA.

AFFILIATION: This tournament will seek affiliation with the Partnership for Academic Competition Excellence and will be an opportunity to qualify for the National Scholastics Championship (pace-nsc.org), which is run by PACE and will occur in June 2010. It will also be a qualifier for the High School National Championship Tournament run by National Academic Quiz Tournaments (naqt.com), which will take place in May 2010.

QUESTIONS: The questions will be NAQT Invitational Series #90. Participating teams must consult the NAQT schedule at http://naqt.com/schedule.jsp?hs=yes to be sure they are not playing IS-90 at any other tournament. We will use the NAQT rules, with the following three exceptions: math calculation tossups will be replaced with normal tossups from elsewhere in the packet, games will end after twenty tossups rather than being timed, and players will have five seconds to answer after buzzing in on a tossup rather than three. The questions will be given to participating teams for free in paper format.

FORMAT: Our ideal tournament format is for the maximum 24 teams. The teams will be divided into four brackets of six teams each and play five-game round robins in rounds 1-5. The teams will then be ranked. Over rounds 6-11, each first and second place team will play its counterparts in the other three brackets, each third and fourth place team will do the same, and each fifth and sixth place team likewise, to produce a final ranking. The tournament championship will be decided by a final of up to two games if necessary.

In the event that fewer than 24 teams register, or that we are able to expand the field and host more than 24 teams, the format will change accordingly. All teams will be offered a minimum of 9 games in any format. Trophies will be awarded to the top four teams, and book prizes will be awarded to the top eight individual scorers.

REGISTRATION AND FEES:
-The fee structure is as follows:
Base fee: $70 per team. There is no limit to the number of teams who can attend from one school.
Buzzer discount: $5 off school's total fee for each fully functional system (control box and eight activators all work); no limit to # of systems you can bring
Staff discount: $15 off school's total fee. This could be a coach, parent, student who is not playing, etc. Team-provided staffers will keep score for various games not involving the team with which they are affiliated. Volunteer staffers must stay through all the games (except finals) in order to receive credit for their school. There is no limit to the number of staffers you can bring.
Minimum fee: The minimum fee is $0 (you can bring enough buzzers and staffers to eliminate your entire fee via discounts, but you cannot have a "negative fee.")
-To register, e- mail me at [email protected] with the number of teams, buzzers, and staffers you want to bring, and an email address where you can be contacted with details. We are also requiring a cell phone contact number belonging to someone who will be attending the tournament, so that we can track you down if you are running late. Feel free to share this announcement with any schools that you think would be interested in attending. There is no further registration form or other action needed on your part in order to be officially registered; you only need to e-mail me at that address with the information requested. Posts made in this thread will not be considered official registrations; you must e-mail me.

METHOD OF PAYMENT: All teams must pay by the day of the tournament. We prefer to accept payment in person right before the tournament starts, but we will accept checks by mail ahead of time if your procedures require it. Teams who do not pay by the day of the tournament will be charged a $25 penalty and will have two weeks to pay their total amount before we start mailing letters to your school administration about it.

We can accept cash, personal checks, or checks from school, school district, or quizbowl club funds. We have no ability to process purchase orders, credit cards, Paypal, or any other forms of payment. Bringing forms of payment outside of the three listed will be considered nonpayment and subject you to the $25 late payment penalty.

We will contact registered teams with instructions on who to make the checks out to. If you require a pre-tournament invoice in order to have a check cut, let us know by November 15 so that we can send you the paperwork in time. If you do not let us know about this requirement by November 15, and it causes you to come to the tournament without your payment, then you will be subject to the $25 late payment penalty.

TEAM & ROSTER SIZE: There may be a maximum of six players on one team's roster, up to four of whom may play at one time. There will be no exceptions to this rule. If you bring more than six players, you must register a second team to have all of them play. There is a halftime substitution opportunity in each game. Each player may appear on only one team's roster throughout the day-no switching from the B team to the A team, etc. Teams may also play shorthanded with only three players. Teams consisting of fewer than three players may not play without my express prior permission.

FOOD: Neither breakfast nor lunch will be provided by the tournament. We will advise you on nearby restaurants and convenience stores once the exact tournament location is determined.

Please e-mail me if you have any further questions. I'm looking forward to seeing a wide variety of teams from Virginia and surrounding states on December 5.

Matt Weiner
Tournament Director, VCU Winter High School Tournament II
[email protected]

List of registered teams (to be updated as registrations come in):

Clover Hill
Collegiate
Douglas Freeman A
Douglas Freeman B
Georgetown Day A
Georgetown Day B
James River
JR Tucker
Maggie Walker A
Maggie Walker B
Midlothian
New Kent A
New Kent B
Richard Montgomery A
Richard Montgomery B
St. Anne's-Belfield
Faint Ants Realms
Walter Johnson

It's early, but we're thinking about going to this, largely because we love tournaments run at VCU no matter what questions are being read. I just need to find out what other sites this set might conflict with. Trying to find out what set will be used at the Delaware NAQT Championship, traditionally held in January.

We have confirmed that this tournament will take place at Douglas Freeman High School, located at 8701 Three Chopt Rd, Richmond, VA.

Matt Weiner wrote:We have confirmed that this tournament will take place at Douglas Freeman High School, located at 8701 Three Chopt Rd, Richmond, VA.

http://www.tinyurl.com/dsffood will give you a google map of nearby food. The subway is actually the school cafeteria, and I do not recommend Melito's for quizbowl lunch, as they take forever, have small tables, and take forever. Best bets involve: a) Einstein's b) Quizno's c) Hardee's d)ordering pizza, and assuming that the tournament wont have pizza already on sale there, I will have a list of pizza phone numbers to include in registration packets. Of course if you insist on a sit down place El Caporal is probably your best bet.

Just a reminder to teams considering this tournament that they not only totally should sign up, but also that this tournament will be far easier that the one we hosted today.

GDS is interested in bringing a nonzero amount of teams to this. Details forthcoming.

Frater Taciturnus wrote:http://www.tinyurl.com/dsffood will give you a google map of nearby food.

I would also suggest the food court in Regency Square Mall across Parham Rd.

Howard wrote:

Frater Taciturnus wrote:http://www.tinyurl.com/dsffood will give you a google map of nearby food.

I would also suggest the food court in Regency Square Mall across Parham Rd.

That food court sucks, and is really bothersome to get to from Freeman if you are on foot, which is how I assume the majority of quizbowl teams get to lunch.

Hey, to alleviate the food access situation, we will be selling you food at this tournament. You can still leave and find lunch on your own during the break if you want, but we think many teams will find this more convenient. Pizza Hut pizzas with any one topping of your choice will be sold for $11, which you need to pay us when you register in the morning since we have to commit to ordering them. We will also have cans of soda for 75 cents and bottles of water for $1 which you can buy ad-hoc during lunch.

Is the field up to date? I know WJ is going and I think we're registered, but I'm not quite sure.

wexs883198215 wrote:Is the field up to date? I know WJ is going and I think we're registered, but I'm not quite sure.

First I've heard of it...I'll put you on the list as soon as someone sends me an e-mail. The field is otherwise current.

A Bollinger-less St. Anselm's team will probably be at this tournament, but our registration will have to wait until we get back from break. Sorry.

Okay, thanks. I'll look into it.

GDS will be bringing a nonzero, non-one positive number of teams to this.

I would very much like to be in attendance, but it sort of depends on finding a ride there. Mark me as interested- as the date approaches, I'll find out more solidly if I can hitch a ride with a team at no inconvenience to them.

Couple of reminders:

1) The absolute field cap for this is 24, and we may cut registration off at any time before that, depending on staff availability. If you want to assure yourselves of a spot, the sooner you e-mail me is the better.

2) Posting on the board, starting rumors about your attendance that you hope get back to me, or talking to other people affiliated with VCU does not constitute registration. No e-mail to me = not listed in the first post = not registered. No exceptions will be made on this, so don't complain if you get locked out due to not following the instructions on how to register.

I know that there were some questions over whether or not we would be able to make this because of some transportation issues, but I am pleased to report that Grandma Mehigan has been successfully enlisted for this tournament and will be driving at least me down to Richmond on Saturday. Other people may be coming as well, but that's looking doubtful, so I guess this is where I have to ask about this:

Matt Weiner wrote: TEAM & ROSTER SIZE: Teams consisting of fewer than three players may not play without my express prior permission.

Would me playing solo, or possibly with one teammate be okay?

Also, our coach won't be able to be there, and apparently she doesn't want us going as "St. Anselm's" if she isn't, so I guess "Lewis County" will be making its triumphant return for this tournament. If that could get changed in the field, that'd be cool.

Prof.Whoopie wrote: Would me playing solo, or possibly with one teammate be okay?

Also, our coach won't be able to be there, and apparently she doesn't want us going as "St. Anselm's" if she isn't, so I guess "Lewis County" will be making its triumphant return for this tournament. If that could get changed in the field, that'd be cool.

Thumbs up on both counts.

For various reasons, Georgetown Day A would like to ask the same question as Aidan. Would me playing solo, or perhaps with Oliver, as GDS A be okay?

EDIT: For the sake of full disclosure, Georgetown Day A will be me playing solo, and Georgetown Day B will be the usual four. Thanks, Matt.

Matt Weiner wrote: Thumbs up on both counts.

Thanks, much appreciated.

RyuAqua wrote:For various reasons, Georgetown Day A would like to ask the same question as Aidan. Would me playing solo, or perhaps with Oliver, as GDS A be okay?

Yes.

WJ would also like to ask for permission to have a team of less than 3. We might get two players, but I'm not sure how likely three is. Ophir, our #2, has to take the SAT.

wexs883198215 wrote:WJ would also like to ask for permission to have a team of less than 3. We might get two players, but I'm not sure how likely three is. Ophir, our #2, has to take the SAT.

That's fine as well.

Barring any more last-minute drops, registration is now closed. I'll waitlist anyone who wishes to be notified of a spot opening up in the next 48 hours.

Also, we have someone who would like to help staff this tournament but needs a ride from the Maryland side of DC. Any teams who can help him out will get a substantial discount for their troubles.

It would be really cool if someone could also give me a ride, as my ride has disappeared due to some teammates being awesome and suddenly not being able to go due to unspecified reasons. Otherwise, WJ has to drop.

@Kuo-Kai: If you can get yourself to the main entrance of GDS by 6:30 AM, our bus should be able to get you there.

Okay. It's confirmed. I'll be there. Thanks a lot!

Prelim stats: http://results.scobo.net/SQBS.aspx?org= ... =standings
Playoff stats, right now only with the first round of playoffs: http://results.scobo.net/SQBS.aspx?org= ... =standings

stats wrote: Ontological Academy
Opponent Result PF PA 15 10 -5 BHrd BPts P/B
JR Tucker W 395 40 4 10 5 14 260 18.57
Midlothian W 375 40 4 9 5 13 250 19.23
Collegiate W 485 90 2 13 3 15 340 22.67
Georgetown Day A W 395 245 5 7 0 12 250 20.83
New Kent A W 340 60 4 11 2 15 180 12.00
Total 1990 475 19 50 15 69 1280 18.55

EDIT: Aidan and Jacob may have managed to beat him, but Matt Jackson looks as strong as usual. It'll be interesting to see the playoff results.

Playoff stats through Round 8 are updated at http://results.scobo.net/SQBS.aspx?org= ... =standings . Round 9 is now done and we're doing the last playoff round now.

So, how did this end?

Dr. Isaac Yankem, DDS wrote:So, how did this end?

We beat GDS (Matt Jackson playing solo) 395-270 in the first game of an advantaged final. "Ontological Academy" and WJ were 3 and 4, but I forget the order (sorry, guys).

Maggie Walker beat GDS A in the first game of an advantaged final about two hours ago. I'm getting the rest of the stats together now.

Final playoff stats are up at http://results.scobo.net/SQBS.aspx?org= ... =standings ; I'll put in finals and do a full-tournament file in just a moment.

OK, here's the combined stats with the round 11 scoreboard included: http://www.hsquizbowl.org/vcuwinter/2/a ... dings.html .

Maybe it would be a good idea to separate the standings into the playoff brackets, because RM did not make the playoffs and won the consolation bracket instead (despite having the third highest ppb, actually).

Thanks to VCU for being awesome at running tournaments, as always.
Congrats to Gov, GDS (which is awesome for giving me a ride, by the way), and "Ontological" for doing well.

I didn't like this set as much as IS-86, and there was some pretty awful common-link stuff, including two very similarly styled ones that were very bad ideas.

wexs883198215 wrote:Maybe it would be a good idea to separate the standings into the playoff brackets, because RM did not make the playoffs and won the consolation bracket instead (despite having the third highest ppb, actually).

Matt Weiner wrote:Final playoff stats are up at http://results.scobo.net/SQBS.aspx?org= ... =standings

wexs883198215 wrote: I didn't like this set as much as IS-86, and there was some pretty awful common-link stuff, including two very similarly styled ones that were very bad ideas.

Agreed. Overall I liked the tournament. Not a huge fan of the result; we almost always lose our first game, and we happened to play a very good GDS B team in that first round. I was glad and rather humbled to get to play Gov for the first time this year. They are just amazing.

Oh, sorry. I only went to the combined stats.
By the way, do we get the question set? The initial announcement had said something about that.

wexs883198215 wrote:I didn't like this set as much as IS-86, and there was some pretty awful common-link stuff, including two very similarly styled ones that were very bad ideas.

Details welcome, please.

It was very efficiently run, and I had no complaints about the questions. I was happy to pick up a nice copy of "The Joys of Motherhood" from "African Writers Series".

Congrats to Maggie Walker, who are still stupid good with their usual highest-scoring player missing.

My thoughts on the set: NAQT proved with IS-86 that they could do better than this, and proved with IS-85 that they could do a lot worse. It was, for the most part, decent quizbowl with easy bonuses and accessible, usually well-placed powers. I'll have more details in an email to Jeff, but my main complaints basically boil down to two things:

1) Tenuous common links only make interdisciplinary bonuses more annoying. Bonuses of this type should be purged from NAQT's database.

2) I sensed some confusion on the part of this set's writers as to what "hard clues" should be for academic questions, especially in science. "Hard clues" need not, and indeed should not, necessarily be "obscure clues". Instead, they should be difficult for someone with cursory knowledge of the subject at hand, but accessible to experts who've studied the topic and interesting to people who know the subject but not the clue. In lit and history, there were mostly good hard clues for leadins, but especially in the sciences, it seemed like some early clues were unbuzzable because they were obscure rather than difficult and academically significant. Some of this unbuzzability made tossups hit the right length for a sprinkling of poorly-selected answers throughout the set without actually making the tossups on those answers any better; the best solution is to just throw out the tossups with poorly-selected answers instead of trying to pad them with obscure clues. Again, I'll email Jeff with details.

EDIT: This email was actually just sent.

I look forward to seeing everyone's comments, especially identifying cases of problematic answer selection.

My thoughts on the set: NAQT proved with IS-86 that they could do better than this

I haven't seen the set used at VCU, but I ran a tournament on IS 86 and it was not a set I would remotely recommend NAQT emulate in the future. Actually, the praise for the set I'm seeing from top players just confirms my belief that the best players in the country are extremely biased when it comes to clues that are too hard, because all of the college players I have talked to who have seen 86 agree with me that the set was written poorly, mostly because there were tons and tons of tossups with one or two lines of clues that are completely unbuzzable. Again, I don't have a real horse in the race about the VCU set beyond that I hope NAQT produces a good set, but I am tired of hearing constant praise for IS-86 when in reality it bordered being unplayable for teams that aren't in the top 100 due to the difficulty of many clues.

Jeremy Gibbs Free Energy wrote:

My thoughts on the set: NAQT proved with IS-86 that they could do better than this

I haven't seen the set used at VCU, but I ran a tournament on IS 86 and it was not a set I would remotely recommend NAQT emulate in the future. Actually, the praise for the set I'm seeing from top players just confirms my belief that the best players in the country are extremely biased when it comes to clues that are too hard, because all of the college players I have talked to who have seen 86 agree with me that the set was written poorly, mostly because there were tons and tons of tossups with one or two lines of clues that are completely unbuzzable. Again, I don't have a real horse in the race about the VCU set beyond that I hope NAQT produces a good set, but I am tired of hearing constant praise for IS-86 when in reality it bordered being unplayable for teams that aren't in the top 100 due to the difficulty of many clues.

Understandable. But, correct me if I'm wrong Matt Jackson et al., but I think most of the qualms with set have more to do with answer selection and wording rather than straight-forward difficulty.

Not so. The problem was clue selection in many many many tossups being absurdly difficult for the first line or more. And I am not alone in this, as last night in IRC there was a pre-Festivus celebration of people who had recently run IS 86 at other school complaining right along with me.

Jeremy Gibbs Free Energy wrote:Not so. The problem was clue selection in many many many tossups being absurdly difficult for the first line or more. And I am not alone in this, as last night in IRC there was a pre-Festivus celebration of people who had recently run IS 86 at other school complaining right along with me.

This is true. I initially was one of the ones who praised IS-86 (maybe because my standards are kinda low) but i agree that a large portion of the questions were completely unbuzzable for the first line and mostly unbuzzable for the second line. This is a problem that i didn't realize until later. The answer selection for tossups appeared to be okay, which is why i had so much praise for the set at first.

I won't judge any other NAQT sets on the year, however, as we haven't seen any others. We'll run into IS-89A this weekend though, so it's our first look at what i hope are improved A-set packets.

I was referring to IS-90. I kinda agree with you regarding 86. It was well-written, but a little difficult.
EDIT: added actual substance.