QuizBowl: Teams that are serious and teams that play for fun

[Warbourne]

Is there really any difference between teams that consider competition in quizbowl events in any format a serious deal and teams that participate just for the 'fun factor' or so to speak?

I usually see that the 'serious' teams always wear ties and are so intense during the whole match that they seem to forget about smiling sometimes when they get things right. The 'fun' teams dress casually and laugh all the time. I guess it's just my imagination though.

Opinions and added thoughts?

[Sir Thopas]

I guess it's just my imagination though.

[Warbourne]

Or they could be both. :P

[AlphaQuizBowler]

I would say that the 'serious' teams you speak of probably derive their fun from beating the 'fun' teams and winning tournaments. There's no reason why you can't take the competition seriously and enjoy yourself.

[kCobain911]

I would say that the 'serious' teams you speak of probably derive their fun from beating the 'fun' teams and winning tournaments.

Our team definitely plays for fun.

[Tegan]

I think there is a disparity (I agree with you), but in some ways it is more and less than you are saying.

First, I think that you can't always tell a serious team at a tournament. The serious teams are the teams that are putting in hours of preparation as a team, and as individuals. They can have a good time at tournaments (in Illinois, Wheaton North wears Hawaiian shirts, and are hardly the most serious looking team, but in their preparations, they don't screw around). And yes, there is a certain enjoyment that I think serious teams take in beating up on teams that kind of show up and go through the motions .....

..... Why? Isn't it more fun to beat a great serious team? Not necessarily. My team always had a world of respect for New Trier. They are a serious team. When you beat them, it is more businesslike ..... relief ..... kind of like when Ridley killed the alien at the end of the movie ..... you are a dealing with a dangerous animal, and you don't get happy about that in a conventional sense .... its more like a sense of accomplishment. You bow, and you hope you can do it again some other day.

... The issue with some (not all) fun teams, is that they are the teams most likely to complain about questions, and the competition, and "why can't we win?????" Its kind of like the guppy coming into the piranha tank and the first thing they do is complain and start dictating terms. There is a certain mischievous enjoyment to beating a team like that. Ironically, you hope that team does start to take things seriously, and does get better, knowing that your chances of winning are diminished. That's cool. There's no shame in losing to a team that is trying to get better and trying to work.

... I think the worst thing in the world is losing to a fun team. Sometimes, a fun team gets a player ..... and that player can get some questions .... the team doesn't work, and the team doesn't really improve, but for whatever reason your team can't catch that one player. And you feel like someone put a gun in your back and stole your wallet and your puppy. Those teams can go far for a while, but ultimately never that far ..... and the legacy is rarely very long. That's about all you can hope for.

My first year coaching, there was a team in our league that was pretty bad. We lost to them twice. Both times in low scoring games, and both times with horrific readers. My blood was on slow boil the whole of the two matches. Should we have won? Probably not, but we were just restarting the team, and we were working our butts off, and I knew that this team was doing diddly squat but showing up and having fun!

[First Chairman]

Not all serious teams dress up in ties, and a lot of fun teams do dress up. Many serious teams are also very relaxed and sociable (State College, Gov School), some will carry name plaques with them (DCC because Michigan does that), some wear uniforms (but you're in Illinois so everyone wears uniforms), and Richard Montgomery MD does a battle chant (or whatever they call that now). The thing is that you remember being competitive at a higher level does not mean that you forfeit the enjoyment of the game. It should never mean that (IMO).

Come to PACE NSC, and you'll see what we mean. Even though it is perhaps the most demanding of the nationals, teams and staff really try to keep the perspective of the event as a collegial one.

[Auks Ran Ova]

The thing is that you remember being competitive at a higher level does not mean that you forfeit the enjoyment of the game. It should never mean that.

Quoted for absolute truth.

[theMoMA]

At any level, I really don't mind when players say that they don't put in the time to become competitive players because they just enjoy competing and occasionally winning a few games. However, I will vehemently object when this turns into admonishing top teams for being good and working hard at this game. So be careful not to cross that line, internet.

[TheCzarMan]

I'd say my B team is all fun, while the A team is serious/fun.

[STPickrell]

Norms vary by region. Some states might have their serious teams be in three-piece suits, while the 'gimmicky' teams are those in random t-shirts. Other states are the other way around.

[Captain Sinico]

"Fun is winning and winning is fun." - O. Guillen

[The Atom Strikes!]

I would say that taking a look at the top teams at last year's HSNCT, many of the most serious competitors were dressed very casually (Will Butler's hat comes to mind here).

[Quantum Mushroom Billiard Hat]

At least in mid-Michigan, it seems like most of the people who dress up for tournaments are from smaller schools, especially the better small schools. Is this the case in some other parts of the country, or just something strange in the area?

[theattachment]

We garner fun from coming up with clever nicknames like "Uriah the Hittite," the Dead Kennedys (including Rosemary), and the Fantastic Four. That said, we also garner fun from winning. Fun/dedication is kind of a J curve for me in the sense that really good teams enjoy playing because it's fun to win, while teams that may not be that good just enjoy playing and coming up with hilarious negs.

[Blackboard Monitor Vimes]

I would say that taking a look at the top teams at last year's HSNCT, many of the most serious competitors were dressed very casually (Will Butler's hat comes to mind here).

It was a Naitonal Guard hat, so for Nationals, it worked.

[The Atom Strikes!]

I would say that taking a look at the top teams at last year's HSNCT, many of the most serious competitors were dressed very casually (Will Butler's hat comes to mind here).

It was a Naitonal Guard hat, so for Nationals, it worked.

The greatest thing about the way that will dressed, though, was the way that his ridiculous hat, and rumpled t-shirt and shorts contrasted with the garments of his more classily dressed teammates.

(I'm not really criticizing Will here. My teammates and I really fit more into the slob category. At Nationals last year, we had 2 members play the first 4 prelim rounds barefoot)

[Nine-Tenths Ideas]

I notice this. I like fun teams, obviously, both as a reader and playing them. As a reader, they let mistakes slide and will even grin at my occasional wimpy jokes after questions. Serious teams tend to be fun to read for only if it's two serious teams playing each other. Also, some insist I don't read.
Playing serious teams is obviously less fun, because they tend to kick our arse. Fun teams keep a nice dynamic going on, and even some friendly camaraderie between teams. I always feel like the serious teams hate us.
We're on the border between serious and fun. On the one hand, we'll chat occasionally. On the other hand, I'm competitive to the point of being psychotic and will scream at my teammates.
I think I've convinced a lot of people we've played that I'm insane.

[rchschem]

We garner fun from coming up with clever nicknames like "Uriah the Hittite," the Dead Kennedys (including Rosemary), and the Fantastic Four.

For the love of God, please stop using aliases. Everyone.

Though, as a huge Browncoat I give props to State College for their appearance at last year's HSNCT.

[Tegan]

For the love of God, please stop using aliases.

Quoted for absolute, unadulterated, 100%, unfaltering truth.

It comes across as really kiddy-like. Fun is one thing. That's cool (good team/ bad team). Cracking yourself up at inane little inside jokes is another. It makes you look bad. Play the game, score points win. Keep the inside jokes for the meta humor section on Quizbowl wiki or for practice.

The other problem is .... its practically all been done before, so even when teams think they are being cute and original, they are being tired and hackneyed.

[BuzzerZen]

Yeah, back in the day, the reason TJ A did pseudonyms was so they could be rotated amongst the players and individual stats could be rendered meaningless. Pseudonyms jumped the shark a while ago, and I no longer endorse their use. As for being on topic, I'm pretty sure that ties and jackets do not a serious quiz bowl team make. Notable non-jacket-and-tie-wearing teams of recent years include recent national contenders Gov, Richard Montgomery, State College, Whitman, and TJ. I don't see how seriousness of purpose detracts from fun at any rate.

[Tegan]

Yeah, back in the day, the reason TJ A did pseudonyms was so they could be rotated amongst the players and individual stats could be rendered meaningless. Pseudonyms jumped the shark a while ago, and I no longer endorse their use. As for being on topic, I'm pretty sure that ties and jackets do not a serious quiz bowl team make. Notable non-jacket-and-tie-wearing teams of recent years include recent national contenders Gov, Richard Montgomery, State College, Whitman, and TJ. I don't see how seriousness of purpose detracts from fun at any rate.

The first time I moderated for TJ at PACE years ago, I asked them why this cute subterfuge. When they told me, I had to apologize. I respected them for going with a "team" thing, and throwing out the "individual" stats thing.

[STPickrell]

Yeah, back in the day, the reason TJ A did pseudonyms was so they could be rotated amongst the players and individual stats could be rendered meaningless. Pseudonyms jumped the shark a while ago, and I no longer endorse their use. As for being on topic, I'm pretty sure that ties and jackets do not a serious quiz bowl team make. Notable non-jacket-and-tie-wearing teams of recent years include recent national contenders Gov, Richard Montgomery, State College, Whitman, and TJ. I don't see how seriousness of purpose detracts from fun at any rate.

The first time I moderated for TJ at PACE years ago, I asked them why this cute subterfuge. When they told me, I had to apologize. I respected them for going with a "team" thing, and throwing out the "individual" stats thing.

Can't this be done by just asking officials and TD's not to keep individual stats for that team?