A Harebrained Scheme for an Online Tournament

Old college threads.
Locked
User avatar
ThisIsMyUsername
Auron
Posts: 1005
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:36 am
Location: New York, NY

A Harebrained Scheme for an Online Tournament

Post by ThisIsMyUsername »

It appears that recent events may cause this season’s spring tournament schedule to be bare, to put it mildly.

Given this, I wonder whether it might be possible to use advanced stats to run a tournament of sorts—admittedly one that is not a fully adequate substitute, but which should be more fun than not playing anything at all.

My basic proposal is this: each team plays a tossups-only packet in isolation, with buzzpoints noted, and negs still locking out all of the other teammates. Points are awarded for each question based on how many other teams that buzz beats. Whichever team scores the most points wins the round. There could be one round a week, or two a week, or whatever makes sense logistically.

I presume that rather than having all teams compete against each other at once, some other format would need to be devised. Perhaps teams are broken into prelims brackets, with buzz values calculated only against the other teams in each bracket, followed by a rebracket for playoffs? Or some kind of modified round robin or swiss pairing, where you’re playing a different set of opponents each week? (I don’t think pure head-to-head works.) I haven’t decided this.

There could be an open division in addition to the in-school team main division. Or we could do only open teams. Either way, I’d want this to be at about Regionals difficulty, no higher. Teams whose players are not able to play in the same room can play the packets individually and have their results pooled. The earliest buzz from anyone on the team counts as the whole team’s buzz, whether it’s a get or neg.

Anyway (as the title of this thread indicates), this is a completely harebrained scheme that I just cooked up (and typed up) while sitting on a bus. I understand all the reasons why removing the in-person interaction makes this not true quizbowl. But it’s what I came up with given current constraints. I’m vague about many details still because I want to gauge interest before I devote more time to further conceptualizing this.

Here is the link to a Google form. It asks you your name, whether you’d prefer that there be both closed and open divisions or only open, and how many packets you’d potentially want to play a week. If there is sufficient interest, I’ll happily head-write this, although I’d obviously need collaborators for several categories.
John Lawrence
Yale University '12
King's College London '13
University of Chicago '20

“I am not absentminded. It is the presence of mind that makes me unaware of everything else.” - G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 7220
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: A Harebrained Scheme for an Online Tournament

Post by Cheynem »

I'd certainly do some questions for this if this came to pass.

What is the reasoning behind just tossups? You could conceivably have teams play the bonuses if they get the tossups, but they only get the bonus points for a tossup if they "beat" the other teams in question. This would obviously result in longer and more wasted time, but would allow for bonuses and could also potentially serve as a tiebreaker of sorts.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger
User avatar
Good Goblin Housekeeping
Auron
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 10:03 am

Re: A Harebrained Scheme for an Online Tournament

Post by Good Goblin Housekeeping »

So a goldfish tournament?
Andrew Wang
Illinois 2016
User avatar
ThisIsMyUsername
Auron
Posts: 1005
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:36 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: A Harebrained Scheme for an Online Tournament

Post by ThisIsMyUsername »

I was unaware of plans for the Internet Charity Tournament when I proposed this. However, seeing as that tournament seems like it's going to be for individuals rather than teams, and not all-subject, I hope there is room for both. Let's say that my Google Form will remain open until this Saturday (03/14) at 11:59 PM Eastern. If at least 32 people sign-up, this tournament will go ahead, pending putting together a writing team. If not, I'll scrap the plans.
Cheynem wrote: Thu Mar 12, 2020 12:00 am I'd certainly do some questions for this if this came to pass.
Thanks, Mike.
What is the reasoning behind just tossups? You could conceivably have teams play the bonuses if they get the tossups, but they only get the bonus points for a tossup if they "beat" the other teams in question. This would obviously result in longer and more wasted time, but would allow for bonuses and could also potentially serve as a tiebreaker of sorts.
You've answered your own question somewhat with "longer and more wasted time." Tossups-only strikes me as easier to produce (especially to produce quickly, as I'd hope to do), easier to control subdistributions for, easier to tabulate results quickly for (to keep things moving), and more easily played by teammates who are geographically isolated from each other (thus making collaboration on bonuses onerous).
Banned Tiny Toon Adventures Episode wrote: Thu Mar 12, 2020 12:00 am So a goldfish tournament?
I don't know what that means.
John Lawrence
Yale University '12
King's College London '13
University of Chicago '20

“I am not absentminded. It is the presence of mind that makes me unaware of everything else.” - G.K. Chesterton
User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 7220
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: A Harebrained Scheme for an Online Tournament

Post by Cheynem »

In 2008, Culver "hosted" a Goldfish Tournament on NAQT questions. Teams participate at their home schools, making note not only of the questions that are answered correctly, but at the point in the questions where the question is answered. Theoretically, the results will not only permit a ranking of participating teams, but will permit "head-to-head" comparisons of each team. While not the same as a true "head-to-head" match up, and limited to a single round, the tournament attracted several dozen teams.

From qbwiki
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger
User avatar
Dominator
Tidus
Posts: 636
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:16 pm

Re: A Harebrained Scheme for an Online Tournament

Post by Dominator »

If you're looking for someone who can help with the logistical and technical aspects of running a goldfish tournament, I know a guy.
Dr. Noah Prince

Normal Community High School (2002)
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (2004, 2007, 2008)

Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy - Scholastic Bowl coach (2009-2014), assistant coach (2014-2015), well wisher (2015-2016)
guy in San Diego (2016-present)
President of Qblitz (2018-present)

Image
User avatar
naan/steak-holding toll
Auron
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: A Harebrained Scheme for an Online Tournament

Post by naan/steak-holding toll »

I was unaware of plans for the Internet Charity Tournament when I proposed this. However, seeing as that tournament seems like it's going to be for individuals rather than teams, and not all-subject, I hope there is room for both.
Yeah - my intention was for this to cater more to people who have ideas for packets lying around, rather than who would be able to cobble together a full-force event like this. So far I think the signup sheet for submissions accurately reflects this, but if some people peel off their planned contributions in order to write for this tournament John is proposing, I wouldn't be salty in the slightest (on the contrary, I'm delighted this is happening)
Will Alston
Dartmouth College '16
Columbia Business School '21
User avatar
ThisIsMyUsername
Auron
Posts: 1005
Joined: Wed Jul 15, 2009 11:36 am
Location: New York, NY

Re: A Harebrained Scheme for an Online Tournament

Post by ThisIsMyUsername »

This got a low response rate. So, I'm scrapping this plan due to lack of interest. I'll scheme to write something else simpler instead.
John Lawrence
Yale University '12
King's College London '13
University of Chicago '20

“I am not absentminded. It is the presence of mind that makes me unaware of everything else.” - G.K. Chesterton
Locked