Kentucky 2006-2007

Dormant threads from the high school sections are preserved here.
User avatar
mentalchocolate
Wakka
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: the thermosphere

Post by mentalchocolate »

My prediction on who will make it to the quarter finals (in order of the bracket, starting with the top left):

Simon Kenton
Johnson Central
Paul L. Dunbar
Danville/Central Hardin
duPont Manual
Mad. N-Hopkins
Daviess Co.
Russell

This is just how I see things at the moment. I've heard of the potential for more pyramidal type questions at Governor's Cup state this year. Hopefully Sunday afternoon's match will be a good indicator of the question style/length/depth used for the rest of the rounds.

As far as NAQT nationals goes, how many teams from Kentucky will be in the top 10? Top 20? Will make it into day 2?
The Answer
Lulu
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:15 pm
Location: duPont Manual High School

Post by The Answer »

yea i would agree with those predictions for the quarterfinals. As for Naqt I could see 1 maybe 2 in the top 10 but thats a stretch bc of the amount of good teams out there, but 3 in the top 20 is very realistic.
I'm not a businessman, I'm a business, man
Let me handle my business. -Kanye West
User avatar
mentalchocolate
Wakka
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: the thermosphere

Post by mentalchocolate »

I was thinking along similar lines. I was thinking one would just crack the top 10. And 2 or 3 making the top 20. It wouldn't surprise me to see around 5 teams make the second day.
EricLeMaster
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Paintsville, KY

Post by EricLeMaster »

I'm betting it will be longer-style questions too, but pyramid-style is a stretch. I really don't foresee KAAC using pyramidal questions at Gov. Cup. If they're like the questions at Districts... great!

I see that the PLD Tourney gave way to 4 NAQT qualifications: Central Hardin, Johnson Central, Simon Kenton, and duPont Manual. Great schools to represent KY at the NAQT National tourney... and I am sure that a few more schools will qualify. It looks as if Paintsville Independent qualified under the small-school division; that's cool, too.
brownboy79
Rikku
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 7:22 pm

Post by brownboy79 »

I responded to that 4 thing on the Tournament page, there are actually 6 teams qualified. But that possible Central Hardin Danville matchup in the second round looks pretty interesting.
EricLeMaster
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Paintsville, KY

Post by EricLeMaster »

brownboy79 wrote:I responded to that 4 thing on the Tournament page, there are actually 6 teams qualified. But that possible Central Hardin Danville matchup in the second round looks pretty interesting.
Yep.. that is very interesting. I would love to see how that turns out...
EricLeMaster
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Paintsville, KY

Post by EricLeMaster »

Papa, you may wanna check on possibly sending the other qualifiers to PACE to see if they can qualify for it... it really does seem like NAQT is closed now unless a spot becomes open...
Byko
Auron
Posts: 1039
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2003 1:54 pm
Location: Edgewater, MD

Post by Byko »

EricLeMaster wrote:Papa, you may wanna check on possibly sending the other qualifiers to PACE to see if they can qualify for it... it really does seem like NAQT is closed now unless a spot becomes open...
Considering that it appears most, if not all, of Kentucky's top teams have made it to State for Quick Recall, and all qualifiers for state finals automatically qualify for PACE, I'd certainly encourage any of you to register.

I'll try to provide a much more substantive update once I finish some last-minute writings for North Carolina's state tournament this week.
Dave Bykowski
Furman '00
Michigan '02
PACE 1998-2009
Director, JROTC National Academic Bowl Championship
User avatar
ericblair
Wakka
Posts: 249
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 10:19 am
Location: Kentucky

Post by ericblair »

EricLeMaster wrote:
ericblair wrote:Unfortunately I haven't been able to keep up with the season this year. From what I gather it's pretty much the same schools making the same noise. I plan to attend the state tournament coming up just to see how it all plays out given the new changes of KAAC (PAC team and question writing). As far as predictions, though, I'm not really at liberty to say. I hear that Johnson Central has been pretty good, but I hear that Russell has been the powerhouse in the state for the most part. Also, word has it that Pikeville wasn't so far behind Johnson Central at regionals. I'm sure this year will be an interesting one at the state level. Good luck to everyone.

Not meaning to be rude... but in all honesty, it was a pretty big defeat... We beat Pikeville by around 20 to 30 points. Russell has been very good this year, but I'm not so sure that they would be the state powerhouse.
I think there may've been a little confusion here. I was meaning that Pikeville didn't lag far behind Johnson Central in the quick recall matches. Overall, yes, I think it was around 20 points. I should have clarified.
Eric Blair
Pikeville '04
Georgetown College '08
Currently vagabonding in other countries
User avatar
quizbowllee
Auron
Posts: 2179
Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 2:12 am
Location: Alabama

Post by quizbowllee »

I hate to hi-jack the Kentucky thread to ask a question, but... well, I don't hate to do it too much.

I noticed that Danville is not on the NAQT HSNCT field list. Does anyone know if they are wait-listed or if they just don't plan to attend this year. I ask because Danville has been our biggest challenger (and victor) for the Small Schools title.

Thanks for any info.
User avatar
mentalchocolate
Wakka
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: the thermosphere

Post by mentalchocolate »

I'm quite sure Danville is attending NAQT state--I think that is their only shot at qualification for HSNCT. I think they want to attend, but got caught by surprise by the field closing.
User avatar
First Chairman
Auron
Posts: 3875
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 8:21 pm
Location: Fairfax VA
Contact:

Post by First Chairman »

Well, Danville still has some time to request an at-large bid to PACE NSC, which can be converted to an auto bid if they finish in the top 4.
Emil Thomas Chuck, Ph.D.
Founder, PACE
Facebook junkie and unofficial advisor to aspiring health professionals in quiz bowl
---
Pimping Green Tea Ginger Ale (Canada Dry)
EricLeMaster
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Paintsville, KY

Post by EricLeMaster »

I think there may've been a little confusion here. I was meaning that Pikeville didn't lag far behind Johnson Central in the quick recall matches. Overall, yes, I think it was around 20 points. I should have clarified.
Oh, okay... sorry. I misunderstood. :)
EricLeMaster
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Paintsville, KY

Post by EricLeMaster »

With the Governor's Cup starting tomorrow, I would like to wish everyone good luck. :)
brownboy79
Rikku
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 7:22 pm

Post by brownboy79 »

Yeah, everyone. Knock em dead. Not that it's possible for everyone to knock everyone else dead, but eh. You guys know what I mean.
The Answer
Lulu
Posts: 19
Joined: Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:15 pm
Location: duPont Manual High School

Post by The Answer »

Congratulations to Danville and Madisonville for making it to the finals. I don't know if Ben McCullough will see this but I'd like to apologize to him for being a bad loser after our match. I wasn't happy with how Madisonville conducted the match towards the end, but they played a great match.
I'm not a businessman, I'm a business, man
Let me handle my business. -Kanye West
User avatar
mentalchocolate
Wakka
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: the thermosphere

Post by mentalchocolate »

Well, I guess my predictions on quarterfinalists were right...
We played Danville in the second round and they came from behind and beat us by four, but they played well the entire tournament. Congrats to Dunbar as the overall winners and Danville for winning QR.
brownboy79
Rikku
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 7:22 pm

Post by brownboy79 »

Props to KAAC on those questions. Not even I can complain about them, solid job. Well run tournament, too. Three Cheers for KAAC.
Randomnumber11235
Lulu
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:18 am

Post by Randomnumber11235 »

Before anything else I'd just like to congratulate Dunbar and Danville on their first place overall and first place quick recall wins respectively.

With that out of the way, I'd just like to say that there were some aspects of the tournament that could have been improved upon. The first and lightest of these is that I found it unfortunate that so many of the "better" teams were grouped in the same bracket.

My second complaint lies with the buzzer systems used. I have long been a fan of the foot pedal Inquisitor system, and I may sound old-fashioned by saying this, but I much prefer it. The new system would be fine if it didnt have a .9 second delay between the time you buzz in and the time the system recognizes the buzz. Although this typically won't cause a problem, there are instances where getting those extra 2-3 words could cause one to change one's answer.

On a final note, and, in my opinion, what was the saddest part of the tournament was the "double standard" (for lack of a better word) used in the final matches. Not to go into anything too specific, I'll suffice it to say that an inquiry was filed and upheld by the chief official, and was, in a later match, ruled by a different standard. In both of these matches the difference in score was 1 point, and this flagrant injustice still bothers me.
User avatar
prewitt81
Lulu
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 12:23 pm
Location: Brownsville, KY (Edmonson Co. MS/HS)
Contact:

Post by prewitt81 »

Randomnumber11235 wrote:Before anything else I'd just like to congratulate Dunbar and Danville on their first place overall and first place quick recall wins respectively.
Ditto. These are two fine programs!
Randomnumber11235 wrote:With that out of the way, I'd just like to say that there were some aspects of the tournament that could have been improved upon. The first and lightest of these is that I found it unfortunate that so many of the "better" teams were grouped in the same bracket.
A blind draw is a blind draw is a blind draw. I would find it equally unfortunate if some teams were afforded some sort of special treatment because they were considered "better". In a perfect world, teams would be seeded based upon district and regional performance, but quick recall is too fast paced for that, IMHO.
Randomnumber11235 wrote:My second complaint lies with the buzzer systems used. I have long been a fan of the foot pedal Inquisitor system, and I may sound old-fashioned by saying this, but I much prefer it. The new system would be fine if it didnt have a .9 second delay between the time you buzz in and the time the system recognizes the buzz. Although this typically won't cause a problem, there are instances where getting those extra 2-3 words could cause one to change one's answer.
You make a good point here. Hopefully this will be addressed before next year.
Randomnumber11235 wrote:On a final note, and, in my opinion, what was the saddest part of the tournament was the "double standard" (for lack of a better word) used in the final matches. Not to go into anything too specific, I'll suffice it to say that an inquiry was filed and upheld by the chief official, and was, in a later match, ruled by a different standard. In both of these matches the difference in score was 1 point, and this flagrant injustice still bothers me.
I think "double standard" is harsh. All that any official can do at any point is rule on the question at hand. If you have ever had to make a tough call in any sort of competition, you know what I'm talking about. No person or panel is going to be 100% right all the time. That said, I think KAAC has done an outstanding job with its volunteer team of officials. As for "flagrant injustice", I'm going to put on my Carl Sagan hat and say "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." If you are concerned that your team was discriminated against in the inquiry process, let me assure you that it is, and must be, anonymous.
"Believe those who seek the truth. Doubt those who find it."

Jeff Prewitt
Head Coach
Edmonson County HS Academic Team
Brownsville, KY
User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Post by DumbJaques »

If you're going to discuss specific rulings, please explain what they were so those of us not from KY can know which person we should be pointing and laughing at.

Joking aside, I can't imagine why nebulous "it wasn't fair" - "it was fair" arguments are superior to a factual discussion of a specific issue. That doesn't need to involve calling anyone out or anything, but it tends to lend itself to a much more informed discussion.
freefall09
Kimahri
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:44 pm

Post by freefall09 »

First of all, congrats to everyone who placed this weekend. I agree that the questions were the best they have ever been while the matches as intense as ever.

One quick point, during the Johnson Central-Danville match (I think) they upheld an inquiry that "federalism" was an acceptable answer in place of "dual federalism." I don't remember the wording of the question and I don't think it affected the match's result or not but I was a bit skeptical about that. I was also disappointed in the quality (for lack of a better word) of the final match. Any speculation's of why it wasn't close (Mad-North did beat Russell who beat Johnson Central who almost beat Danville)?

As for any "flagrant injustice" I'm not so sure. From what I hear the buzzer systems were sketchy but Danville, Mad-North, Russell, and Johnson Central were all great teams. As long as inquiries exist you can not eliminate the bias involved in upholding/denying them. More often than not they are determined by the sources available to the judges at the time.
EricLeMaster
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Paintsville, KY

Post by EricLeMaster »

DumbJaques wrote:If you're going to discuss specific rulings, please explain what they were so those of us not from KY can know which person we should be pointing and laughing at.

Congrats to Danville, Dunbar, Madisonville- North Hopkins, Russell (and other participants from Johnson Central), for great skill presentations at the 2007 KAAC Governor's Cup.

This is not against any of the teams we played: it is not you who we are upset about, it's just... well, unfair in my team's point of view:

Joking aside, I can't imagine why nebulous "it wasn't fair" - "it was fair" arguments are superior to a factual discussion of a specific issue. That doesn't need to involve calling anyone out or anything, but it tends to lend itself to a much more informed discussion.
Reviews of Inquiries:

In our match against Danville, our team made several inquiries:

1: 'Federalism' is acceptable, given the question, for 'Duel Federalism': ACCEPTED.

2: Cepheid is acceptable for Cepheid Variable as it is a variable star. According to both Van Norstrand's Scientific Encyclopedia and an MW Dicitionary, CEPHEID should be ruled correct with VARIABLE being optional: DENIED. (Why? I don't know. It didn't ask for 'two word' answer or anything like that)...

3: Newton's First Law acceptable for Law of Conservation of Momentum: According to the NY Public Library Science Desk Reference, 'Newton's First Law' is cited as the basis for Law of Conservation of Momentum and is an acceptable answer. Upon reviewing the law itself, as written in the inquiry, it is basically read to review what the question asked for.: DENIED.

4: We were counted off, ex facto of the inquiry, for saying (-5, 19) without the word 'comma'. It was understood, apparently, to be -519 by "KAAC Rules".

And after moving to an odd bounceback bonus, we lose by 1.

...keep that last inquiry in mind;

Against Russell:


Okay... remember how we were counted off for the (-5,19) w/o the comma? Well... Russell makes the same mistake except maybe for the word 'and' or something.... We file inquiry. With an almost 'exactly same' inquiry, the chief official denies our claim saying that it was not necessary to include anything like a comma or an 'and' in the student's answer...

Yeah...
Last edited by EricLeMaster on Tue Mar 20, 2007 10:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
brownboy79
Rikku
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 7:22 pm

Post by brownboy79 »

There was a lot of stuff like that which really gets on my nerves. And while some teams may be considered "better" and don't deserve better treatment, the fact is, some times those teams actually are better. I really would rather that there is some form of seeding, especially after considering the way the playoffs worked out. How is it that Danville wins by 3 in the second round, goes to overtime in the third, and plays a match decided by 1 point, after a bunch of inquiries, in the semis, and beats the what is supposed to be the second best team by a ridiculous number?
In short, the bracket irritated me.
User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Post by DumbJaques »

Thanks for posting the actual issues.

Also, that blows. In particular, how "Cepheid" isn't acceptable is ridiculous, as they're frequently just called "Cepheids." Also, any moderator who stares at an answer that says (-5, 19) and hears "-5 19" and thinks someone meant negative five hundred nineteen is being incompetent or needlessly stingy about the rules. It's unfortunate that there's no real way to hold organizations that do this kind of thing accountable (. . . or is there?)
captainmatt
Kimahri
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 4:51 pm
Location: Near Cincinnati
Contact:

Post by captainmatt »

I have to say that the single elimination sans seeding consistently falls short. However, seeding would be a monumental task. Any ideas on how it could work? Maybe accumulated points from Dunbar, Fleming, or other invitationals?
IMO, Madisonville is very good. Second in the state though? The finals match made it obvious that, transitively, Johnson beat them.

Concerning the inquiries in the Johnson-Russell match, I agree that requiring a player to say "-5 comma 19" or something like that is ridiculous. However, it is consistent with other rules, because if you insert an "and" in a number (ex. "a hundred and five" for 105), the answer is technically wrong. The rule in question is merely a logical, if not stupid corrolary. The consistency here is in question. I personally wouldn't care if KAAC required all math responses to be in the form of a question delivered during a handstand as long as they required it every time. Then again, I'm not the math guy. But you must see where I'm going with this.
This.... is... SPARTA!!!
freefall09
Kimahri
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:44 pm

Post by freefall09 »

I agree that the "random" seeding system needs to be revised. I also think that inquiries in general should be eliminated, and the initial ruling by the judge and moderator should be final. This would have prevented a lot of the problems caused by inquires (like the -519 ruling). I don't think Cepheid was accepted because the answer was variable star, and Cepheid is too specific (novas and protostars are also variable stars). So if the judges were to rule Cepheid as correct, they would also have to rule nova (Danville's answer?) as correct.
Red_Shift
Lulu
Posts: 8
Joined: Fri Jun 09, 2006 12:27 am
Location: KY

Post by Red_Shift »

First, I would like to congratulate both Dunbar and Danville on their
successes this weekend along with everybody who got a chance to go on
stage.

Second, I'm going to be the first to criticize the questions this weekend.
As was expected there was about one crap question per match, the best
of which was The Dancing Outlaw. That was fine with me. However, there
was quite a bit of question linking from round to round that made things
far too easy: gametophyte and sporophyte; convex and concave mirrors;
concordance and discordance; etc. Those are not good questions for state
the state finals, especially when they come in consecutive matches.

I liked the longer questions, but felt that they detracted from some of the
matches themselves. I know that in the last two rounds we got through
fewer than 80 questions in each game. I don't know that it would have
affected the outcome of any of them, but there needs to be some changes
made. (I would suggest that upon the missing of a toss-up, the moderator
would only have to go back to the beginning of the sentence, not the
beginning of the question.)

I suppose overall it was not a bad effort for the first venture in the new
style. But let's be honest there is quite a bit of room for improvement.

Switching gears, I too would like to echo what others have said: the
buzzer systems in use this year left something to be desired and in terms
of going to seeding the tournament, I think that a round-robin tourny on
Sunday would really help alleviate a number of problems. On the former,
I am all for the footpedal style buzzer. As for the latter, the QR tournament
should not be designed to find just the first place winner - there are too
many points riding on that segment of the Governor's Cup Competition.

I'm going to close with comments about Madisonville. Let's face it, Ben made
that team run. If he had a bad match, or came up against somebody who
was both fast and accurate (i.e. Rachel Beckman) it was going to get ugly.
Madisonville really didn't have the speed of any of the other teams in the
top four for a range of subjects, but they didn't miss a whole lot if the
question was read to completion. If someone is looking for an answer as
to why Madisonville beat us (Russell) in the semi and was consequently
crushed in the final, I think it has to do with the flow of the match. Just as
a team can hold the ball in high school basketball, Madisonville went with
a slowdown. That got us (me) all jumpy and out of rhythm, and I have to give
props to them on that. They were also able to capitalize on our mistakes
and beat us on a few questions. As I said earlier, they slowed it down so
what was a 5 point lead felt more like a 10 point lead as the last few
minutes of the game wound down. This stategy worked very well against
us and apparently not so well against Danville.
User avatar
prewitt81
Lulu
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 12:23 pm
Location: Brownsville, KY (Edmonson Co. MS/HS)
Contact:

Post by prewitt81 »

EricLeMaster wrote:Okay... remember how we were counted off for the (-5,19) w/o the comma? Well... Russell makes the same mistake accept maybe for the word 'and' or something.... We file inquiry. With an almost 'exactly same' inquiry, the chief official denies our claim saying that it was not necessary to include anything like a comma or an 'and' in the student's answer...
Yikes. I moderated matches at state, and I NEVER put the comma in. I can definitely see the frustration there. Though it can't affect the outcome of the match, has your team considered writing a formal complaint to KAAC on this matter?
brownboy79 wrote:I really would rather that there is some form of seeding, especially after considering the way the playoffs worked out.
What would this seeding be based on? I am for pool play or Swiss pairing, or some other way to let the cream rise to the top. This merits further discussion.
DumbJaques wrote:Also, any moderator who stares at an answer that says (-5, 19) and hears "-5 19" and thinks someone meant negative five hundred nineteen is being incompetent or needlessly stingy about the rules.
Unfortunately, frivolous inquiries are a problem in Kentucky. One team in particular that I remember playing against could always be counted upon to produce a stack of protest forms at the conclusion of each half. If the question asked which two words should be capitalized in the first sentence of "Jack and Jill" and we buzzed in with "Jack and Jill", it was protested because by saying "and" we supposedly gave three answers. Things like this are needless and quite against the spirit of the game, if not the rules.
captainmatt wrote:I have to say that the single elimination sans seeding consistently falls short. However, seeding would be a monumental task. Any ideas on how it could work? Maybe accumulated points from Dunbar, Fleming, or other invitationals?
That's a problem. You can't seed based upon seasonal performance for a number of reasons. Teams don't play equal amounts of games, the format differences make comparisons impossible, etc. The move to make Regionals double elimination (frustratingly passed after I graduated) was a big improvement. That won't work with 32 teams, but surely there is something that would.
Red_Shift wrote:I liked the longer questions, but felt that they detracted from some of the matches themselves. I know that in the last two rounds we got through fewer than 80 questions in each game. I don't know that it would have affected the outcome of any of them, but there needs to be some changes made.
The longer questions did make getting through the rounds tougher. I do like the move to pyramid questions, but other changes need to be made. I personally would like to see Kentucky go to ACF style (20 questions, untimed, etc.). I know this would be a huge change, and a lot of the state would not approve (especially at the elementary level), but I think it would be beneficial all around.

Edited to correct bbcode
"Believe those who seek the truth. Doubt those who find it."

Jeff Prewitt
Head Coach
Edmonson County HS Academic Team
Brownsville, KY
captainmatt
Kimahri
Posts: 2
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 4:51 pm
Location: Near Cincinnati
Contact:

Post by captainmatt »

Admittedly wasnt a great idea. Not everybody can make it to every invitational. I do like the idea of Swiss pairing, though.
This.... is... SPARTA!!!
EricLeMaster
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Paintsville, KY

Post by EricLeMaster »

freefall09 wrote:I agree that the "random" seeding system needs to be revised. I also think that inquiries in general should be eliminated, and the initial ruling by the judge and moderator should be final.
Wow. I disagree... I think that inquiries on the whole are beneficial because you can't always have competent moderators let alone competent judges, etc. I think without them, there will would be more bias and unfair answers accepted/denied than ever though possible. But, perhaps new rules need to be set... fair ones.



I think pool play might be an okay way to determine seating... or at least we could organize the brackets better....



I don't know about ACF format for the questions, but I do like the idea of untimed halves. Of course, less competent schools playing these rounds = tedious halves, which moderators, onlookers, and officials frown upon (myself included.)
User avatar
prewitt81
Lulu
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 12:23 pm
Location: Brownsville, KY (Edmonson Co. MS/HS)
Contact:

Post by prewitt81 »

captainmatt wrote:Admittedly wasnt a great idea. Not everybody can make it to every invitational. I do like the idea of Swiss pairing, though.
Hey, I'm not knocking you at all. Anyone can complain, but you went beyond that to offer suggestions/solutions. Kudos!
"Believe those who seek the truth. Doubt those who find it."

Jeff Prewitt
Head Coach
Edmonson County HS Academic Team
Brownsville, KY
EricLeMaster
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Paintsville, KY

Post by EricLeMaster »

On an unrelated note... who all is graduating from the powerhouses?

Johnson Central is losing Matt, Bobby, and Kevin in edition to several other key members... it was a tear-fest on the way back home... lol.
freefall09
Kimahri
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:44 pm

Post by freefall09 »

Not only would eliminating inquiries cut down match time significantly, I also think it would prevent matches from being decided on whether or not a team can correctly pronounce Areopagus ("Areopajus" was counted wrong). I think it would be much better if moderators were allowed to prompt on similar answers (like at out-of-state tournaments). It was unfair to Johnson Central and Danville to have to wait so long in between the "end" of the match and the time inquiries came back.
EricLeMaster
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Paintsville, KY

Post by EricLeMaster »

freefall09 wrote:Not only would eliminating inquiries cut down match time significantly, I also think it would prevent matches from being decided on whether or not a team can correctly pronounce Areopagus ("Areopajus" was counted wrong). I think it would be much better if moderators were allowed to prompt on similar answers (like at out-of-state tournaments). It was unfair to Johnson Central and Danville to have to wait so long in between the "end" of the match and the time inquiries came back.
I believe it was Areopagitica by Milton, but that's irrelevant. Sure it would cut down on time, but I still think it would be more fair to include inquiries, but try to rule out the unfair ones as presented.
User avatar
mentalchocolate
Wakka
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: the thermosphere

Post by mentalchocolate »

Swiss pairing would work amazingly well. Firstly, there are exactly 32 teams...Swiss pairing works best with 2 to the N power; in this case n is 5. There would be five rounds for all teams, which is quite feasible. One team would come out on top at 5-0, five teams at 4-1, ten teams at 3-2, ten teams at 2-3, five at 1-4 and one at 0-5.

Or perhaps this way: If you go at least 2-1 through the first three rounds of Swiss pairing then you qualify for a seeded single elimination bracket. Seeding is determined by W-L then PPG maybe? I'm sure a somewhat fair methodology of seeding can be found. Exactly 16 teams (twelve 2-1 and four 3-0) would then play in the single elimination bracket. That is a total of seven rounds. It is more than normal, but with a 3 day tournament that should not be a problem. Just play 3 matches Sunday afternoon/evening instead of one.

I do not have an issue with inquiries, but with no prompting and not accepting varying word forms, which causes many of these inquiries. (I.E. we said "liquidification" instead of "liquidity". )

I believe the questions did improve, but I believe they could be more pyramidal. I think KAAC is gradually shifting in that direction, although it will take some time.

Well, I'm definitely looking forward to NAQT states. It looks like the field will be pretty stacked and there will be several tough matches for each team. 8 would be a great number. 7 round round-robin in the morning followed by single elimination in the afternoon would be awesome. That would ensure 8 matches for everyone and I think that would be ideal.
User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Post by DumbJaques »

Not permitting protests is a surefire way to make a bad tournament. Nobody is perfect. I think a lot of tournaments that have these kind of conflicts about protests tend to run into problems because it becomes so formal. In most invitationals, you make a protest based on the rules, someone pulls out the rules, TD makes a decision, done. When issues like who has more authority or a moderator wanting to feel empowered or even a protest constituting some kind of challenge against the people running the tournament, bad things are going to happen.

Overly frivolous protests > legitimate protests not being allowed. Always. If a team repeatedly does that, the TD should reserve the right to threaten them with various consequences. And there's no reason to think that people can't all use some common sense, with all of this. I'm a big fan of common sense, and would like to see it used more in quizbowl. I'd also like someone to found a chain of bars marketing discontinued soda, but certain things aren't very likely.
User avatar
ericblair
Wakka
Posts: 249
Joined: Mon May 12, 2003 10:19 am
Location: Kentucky

Post by ericblair »

DumbJaques wrote:I'm a big fan of common sense, and would like to see it used more in quizbowl.
Quoting for thruth.

I'm going to agree with everyone who disagreed with all the frivolous protests (Jack and Jill). These are just terrible for the game. In addition, the "power trip" among some of the judges and moderators is absurd, too (eg. not going (-5 19) for (-5 COMMA 19). This is where the common sense MUST come in to play. If you know the answer (and the people who provided the answers in the previous examples surely did) then they should not be penalized. They should naturally be rewarded. And yes, I realize that not all teams do this, but there are some who make an art of this, which is indicative of poor sportsmanship and not being really as good as you think you are at quick recall. Anywho, I'm sure something will be done about this in the coming years.

Also, I do not agree with the idea that the halves should be untimed because that really takes away from part of the thrill that so often comes with the games. Since I've graduated and played only untimed tournaments in college, I must say that it is substantially more boring.

The questions: I'm glad to hear that they are better than in recent years. By giving tougher clues closer to the beginning of the question, this really rewards those who are more knowledgeable, as well as those who don't focus on mere cliche clues to answer questions within the first few words ("Composed for the opening of the Suez..." "Written in 1906..." "Born on the island of Crete...") I imagine this is one key reason to Mad-North Hopkins' and Danville's excellent showings. Their opponents buzzed in so early, not really knowing and trying to pull old word-association tactics, and allowed the two teams to hear the whole question; thus, being victors and runner ups. Props to those teams who were able to play the questions remarkably.

I saw in a post earlier that some team only finished about 80 questions because of the length and the rule that moderators must reread the questions. In regards to this, I'd much rather see 80-qeustion matches with better and longer questions (still timed of course) rather than 100-question matches with mediocre questions. And yes, I agree that they should only reread from the beginning of the last sentence started. I think this would certainly reduce some of the problems and still make some pretty interesting matches.
Eric Blair
Pikeville '04
Georgetown College '08
Currently vagabonding in other countries
Randomnumber11235
Lulu
Posts: 7
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:18 am

Post by Randomnumber11235 »

I'm not very good at BBC code, so I'll merely use old-fashioned quotation marks.


"I think "double standard" is harsh. All that any official can do at any point is rule on the question at hand. If you have ever had to make a tough call in any sort of competition, you know what I'm talking about. No person or panel is going to be 100% right all the time. That said, I think KAAC has done an outstanding job with its volunteer team of officials. As for "flagrant injustice", I'm going to put on my Carl Sagan hat and say "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." If you are concerned that your team was discriminated against in the inquiry process, let me assure you that it is, and must be, anonymous."

I didn't want to say anything to detract from Danville's win, but I believe the evidence provided could be classified as "extraordinary.

"I was also disappointed in the quality (for lack of a better word) of the final match. Any speculation's of why it wasn't close (Mad-North did beat Russell who beat Johnson Central who almost beat Danville)? "

I would guess that Madisonville made it to the finals because there were less "good" teams in their bracket. Again, I don't want to offend anyone, but it seems like a good assumption. As for Russel-Johnson- I'm pretty sure that Johnson had lost all heart and will after losing to Danville in the way they did.

"The consistency here is in question. I personally wouldn't care if KAAC required all math responses to be in the form of a question delivered during a handstand as long as they required it every time. Then again, I'm not the math guy. But you must see where I'm going with this."

I agree entirely. I'll go ahead and say I'm from Johnson Central and I'm not upset about the ruling of the inquiry. It's the inconsistency that really irritates me.

"I do not have an issue with inquiries, but with no prompting and not accepting varying word forms, which causes many of these inquiries. (I.E. we said "liquidification" instead of "liquidity". )"

The problem with this argument is that liquidification isn't a form of liquidity. IIRC liquidification isn't an actual word.
brownboy79
Rikku
Posts: 329
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 7:22 pm

Post by brownboy79 »

Dunbar loses Shima and Rohit. Shima placed 3rd in lit and started. Rohit will be starting for NAQT states. Myself, Victor, Amit, and Sagar return as seniors for next year.

As for seeding, I think Swiss pairs are the way to go. Definitely.

I think 90% of GovCup protests are unnecessary and trivial. Another 5% (IMO) gets misgraded at some point during the chain oc command.

I am 100% certain that teams get discriminated against. Often.
User avatar
mentalchocolate
Wakka
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: the thermosphere

Post by mentalchocolate »

"I do not have an issue with inquiries, but with no prompting and not accepting varying word forms, which causes many of these inquiries. (I.E. we said "liquidification" instead of "liquidity". )"

The problem with this argument is that liquidification isn't a form of liquidity. IIRC liquidification isn't an actual word.
Our player responded with "liquidation" not "liquidification", as I had posted earlier, but it was not accepted, because the question's wording asked for an adjective.
EricLeMaster
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Paintsville, KY

Post by EricLeMaster »

I am 100% certain that teams get discriminated against. Often.
I agree.
User avatar
prewitt81
Lulu
Posts: 37
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 12:23 pm
Location: Brownsville, KY (Edmonson Co. MS/HS)
Contact:

Post by prewitt81 »

brownboy79 wrote:I am 100% certain that teams get discriminated against. Often.
Evidence?
"Believe those who seek the truth. Doubt those who find it."

Jeff Prewitt
Head Coach
Edmonson County HS Academic Team
Brownsville, KY
slimjim07
Kimahri
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:18 am

Post by slimjim07 »

For those of you who keep complaining about the Johnson/Danville match, remember that the only reason Johnson had a chance to win it is because they accepted the federalism inquiry. Dual federalism is not the only type of federalism so federalism should not be accepted for that. That would have made the -519 inquiry irrelevant. Also, remember that Johnson had the final chance to win the game but they blew it. They should not have even heard that last bonus in the first place.
User avatar
mentalchocolate
Wakka
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: the thermosphere

Post by mentalchocolate »

slimjim07 wrote:For those of you who keep complaining about the Johnson/Danville match, remember that the only reason Johnson had a chance to win it is because they accepted the federalism inquiry. Dual federalism is not the only type of federalism so federalism should not be accepted for that. That would have made the -519 inquiry irrelevant. Also, remember that Johnson had the final chance to win the game but they blew it. They should not have even heard that last bonus in the first place.
The complaints were about the inquiry rulings themselves, not necessarily their relevance to the match. Just because you claim it would be irrelevant does not excuse a poor decision on an inquiry. The point being, the inquiry process needs to be improved. But you still have failed to realize that if -519 was accepted, the possibility of a bonus point also existed, thus, even with your reasoning, it was still quite relevant.
User avatar
DumbJaques
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 3084
Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2004 6:21 pm
Location: Columbus, OH

Post by DumbJaques »

For those of you who keep complaining about the Johnson/Danville match, remember that the only reason Johnson had a chance to win it is because they accepted the federalism inquiry. Dual federalism is not the only type of federalism so federalism should not be accepted for that. That would have made the -519 inquiry irrelevant. Also, remember that Johnson had the final chance to win the game but they blew it. They should not have even heard that last bonus in the first place.
You wouldn't happen to go to Danville. . .

Not having heard the question, it's difficult to say whether "federalism" would have been a correct answer. They aren't the same, but depending on what the question said, it might have been a correct answer. Also, depending on the question, it probably should have been at least promptable.

Everyone here seems to be talking about the matter in which an answer/protest was handled rather than saying "man, X team isn't really good because. . . " So, don't take anything personally. In any event, "Johnson had the final chance to win the game and they blew it" is uncalled for and completely irrelevant to like the last 20 posts. Don't be a jerk. That's my job.
User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8422
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by Matt Weiner »

DumbJaques wrote:Not having heard the question, it's difficult to say whether "federalism" would have been a correct answer. They aren't the same, but depending on what the question said, it might have been a correct answer. Also, depending on the question, it probably should have been at least promptable.
Unless the question started with "this form of federalism" or something that clearly rules out "federalism" as the answer, I don't see any way in which such a nebulous concept as "dual federalism" could be defined without also making "federalism" by itself correct.
User avatar
mentalchocolate
Wakka
Posts: 119
Joined: Thu Jul 08, 2004 10:06 pm
Location: the thermosphere

Post by mentalchocolate »

DumbJaques wrote:Also, depending on the question, it probably should have been at least promptable.
I agree, but they don't prompt in Governor's Cup format. Quite ridiculous, but still the rule.
bereabeast
Kimahri
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:05 am

Post by bereabeast »

"And after moving to an odd bounceback bonus, we lose by 1. "


i find the question they lost on really funny
something to the extent of: A unit of distance, varying at different periods and in different countries, in English-speaking countries usually estimated roughly at 3 miles (4.8 kilometers) or also known as a loose group of individuals with a common goal.

... ... ...hmmmm is that a queue?
... ...no, its a league,
middle school question.
EricLeMaster
Wakka
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Aug 01, 2006 11:31 pm
Location: Paintsville, KY

Post by EricLeMaster »

Matt Weiner wrote:
DumbJaques wrote:Not having heard the question, it's difficult to say whether "federalism" would have been a correct answer. They aren't the same, but depending on what the question said, it might have been a correct answer. Also, depending on the question, it probably should have been at least promptable.
Unless the question started with "this form of federalism" or something that clearly rules out "federalism" as the answer, I don't see any way in which such a nebulous concept as "dual federalism" could be defined without also making "federalism" by itself correct.
It didn't start with "this form of federalism"... It gave a relevant description of federalism and with a clue that seemed to denote duel federalism, but was COMPLETELY acceptable for federalism. (I researched the inquiry in The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition.)
Locked