Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

A place to discuss topics affecting quizbowlers as a community rather than quizbowl as a game.
Post Reply
User avatar
Adventure Temple Trail
Auron
Posts: 2754
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:52 pm

Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Adventure Temple Trail »

Special thanks to Rob D, Patrick F, Alan L, Fred M, Pam M, David P, and Austin R for their input and feedback as I drafted this post.
I, in the Quiz Olympiad thread wrote:More thoughts about the disconnects between qb and "the 'trivia' community," and how and whether we want to bridge them, coming soon.
I also wrote:I haven't written more fully about my experiences... yet—and I probably should ...there's certainly some interesting compare-contrast between that community and this one.
As promised!


Intro

If you went back in time a decade and told me I was going to write this post, past-me would likely snort and drop his lemon poppyseed muffin in surprise.

In my years playing quizbowl, I was pretty unfamiliar with other forms of trivia, and vaguely disdained game shows and their most ardent fans. I started out in the mid-Atlantic high school circuit, which came to dominate the country as (because?) many teams started blowing off the local show, It’s Academic. I also dislike most bars and am not a drinker; playing in a dim, crowded, loud place didn't appeal to me (it largely still doesn’t). I hadn’t intently studied “trash”, and am not a fan of any sport, so little appealed to me about non-pyramidal questions on stuff I didn’t know.

A few things changed my outlook. For various reasons, I burned out pretty fully on quizbowl in mid-2015. Around then, I got the call to go on Jeopardy, which I prepped for intensely by cramming years of neglected pop culture. That experience burned me out further.

After the taping of my Tournament of Champions, I was greeted by Brad Rutter and Pam Mueller, who had been in the studio audience. They invited me to go that evening to a place called “O’Brien’s” for trivia with a bunch of other Jeopardy people. Having just exhausted myself, I said something like “I’m too tired, but thanks” and didn’t think more of it.

I did almost no quiz activities from 2016 to 2018, and started slowly dipping my toe back into other parts of the question-answering world in the spring of 2019. Through the Jeopardy All-Star Games taping experience, I met people who do non-quizbowl trivia pretty intensely in LA. Those folks invited me to a thing in Las Vegas called Geek Bowl, where I in turn got invited to Trivia Nationals, a conference event also in Vegas (where I met Steve Perry!) I asked for a referral to LearnedLeague that same spring.

Since then, I’ve been thinking over what I’ve seen and mulling over a potential post. I'm glad I didn't write it 2019, though—because a ton has changed since. COVID spurred a massive boom in Web-based question-answering, and many people whom I assumed would never meet were thrown together as a result.

I’ll run through some differences I’ve seen, then turn to thinking about the current moment and what, if anything, these worlds can learn from and do for each other, as each tries to be the best it can be.

Note 1: I’m just one person with a pretty atypical social status and perspective. Please take this as just one person’s thoughts rather than gospel, and disagree where you think I’m off-base. This is an open-ended invitation to discussion, not a polemical essay or a prescriptive agenda.

Note 2: I write this mostly as a quizbowl person talking to other quizbowl people. I do aim to make this readable for those of other backgrounds, and will be sharing it with some non-quizbowl people.


Some Pre-emptive Caveats: Or, What I Talk About When I Talk About “Trivia”

I’ll focus on the U.S.-based community. Though engagement across countries and continents has soared in the past 2 years, I simply don’t know much about conditions on the ground elsewhere.

Some people don’t love the word “trivia,” which can connote unseriousness. But the only other name I’ve seen in wide use for the cluster of activities I’m talking about is “quizzing”, which looks a lot like “quizbowl” and could be confusing. In the absence of other generally-used names, I’ll call it the “trivia” community, with the T-word in quotation fingers.

In discussing his own game, Magic: the Gathering lead designer Mark Rosewater uses the term “enfranchised players” for the small minority who are most vocal online, visit stores for organized play, etc. Over 90% of Magic players never attend an event beyond their friends’ kitchen tables; a similar portion of bar trivia players never venture beyond their bar. In this post, I use “trivia” as shorthand for the set of people who are “enfranchised” in Rosewater’s sense—the small sliver for whom attending local trivia nights and/or watching game shows is not enough, or for whom the game is part of their identity. (Also, some “trivia” people rarely if ever go to their local bar. It’s not a requirement.)

Major U.S. “trivia” institutions include:
  • Nationally syndicated pub quiz vendors (e.g. Geeks Who Drink, Sporcle Live)
  • Online single-player leagues (LearnedLeague, the nascent BPTrivia, Mimir’s Well (since 2020)).
  • Ex-contestant groups for knowledge-based shows (Jeopardy, Millionaire, The Chase; niche-er ones like Master Minds and the late 500 Questions)
  • Fan sites and forums for same (e.g. JBoard, WWTBAMBored, TheJeopardyFan)
  • Big pub-style events with cash prizes (e.g. King Trivia Tournament of Champions, Geek Bowl)
  • Power users of cash-prize phone apps when those existed (HQ, Confetti)
  • Multi-day conferences (the late TCONA, Trivia Nationals, the upcoming SporcleCon)
  • Quiz-show podcasts, often with fan contestants (e.g. Trivial Warfare, Miss Information, Recreational Thinking)
  • Select local bars and leagues with many “trivia” community members involved (most notably O’Brien’s Irish Pub in CA)
  • Team-based online leagues (OQL USA) (since 2020)
Though the community obviously scaffolds off of institutional game shows, I’m mostly not talking about the shows themselves, as they’re run at a remove from players. The things I mention here are run by, and more directly accountable to, folks in the core group of enthusiasts who regularly participate.


The Two Cultures: A Compare-Contrast

Much of this may be obvious, but I don’t know how familiar all readers are with these communities, so I’ll err on the side of prolixity.

Demographics

“Trivia” is much older than quizbowl, as are most people who do it. The bulk of attendees at an event like Trivia Nationals are between 40 and 60, whereas almost all players at ACF tournaments are under 30, and most are between 17 and 25*. This makes sense—U.S. bars don’t let you in until you’re 21, the average game show watcher is in their late 60s, and to get to something like Trivia Nationals you have to use disposable income, which younger people have less of.

(*It’s very amusing to me that by about age 25, you’re “a dinosaur” in quizbowl and a “baby” in “trivia.” I was 23 when I last played a quizbowl open, and did my first serious “trivia” events at 26—very much at this bizarre saddle point.)

I suspect these age differences make for differences in vibe. Many “trivia” crowds seem comparatively chill, more set in their personalities and interests and place in life; there are fewer outward displays of ambition, even among skilled players who try hard. Tantrums and outbursts do happen, but seem rarer.

The “trivia” world is quite gender-imbalanced, though less overwhelmingly male than quizbowl. The Jeopardy contestant pool, from which “trivia” draws, is about one-third women; LearnedLeague, by recent tally, is about 68% men, 30% women and 2% nonbinary. Every Chicago Open or ACF Nationals I remember attending was about 95% men to 5% not.

“Trivia” also seems noticeably whiter, and in particular less Asian American, than quizbowl. (I imagine this is partly because older generations in the U.S. have a higher percentage of whites than Millennials and Gen Z, and partly because “trivia” has its own history of bigotry and racist exclusion, some of it quite recent.)

I’ve also played “trivia” with people from a wider variety of hometowns/states than have quizbowl circuits. This may be in part because game shows seek geographic diversity in casting, so smaller towns and/or places with little academic quizbowl (but, often, at least one bar!) eventually produce someone who makes their way to “trivia.”

Event length

A huge cultural difference between quizbowl and “trivia”: with regards to volume of questions, quizbowl largely acts as if “more is better” and “trivia” doesn’t.

A well-run quizbowl tournament goes from about 9 AM to 5 PM on a Saturday (or later, depending on reader speed and schedule length). At in-person events, all teams are expected to play 10+ rounds, and online at least 7 or 8; forfeiting or leaving early is a big faux pas. The norm of “more rounds = more fun” makes sense given the context in which quizbowl grew; since school teams drive themselves long distances to compete, and often pay out of pocket, getting bounced from an elimination bracket early in the day really stings. So tournaments offer everyone a full day of games, and the people who stick with the activity are those who want to play all day, regardless of how they do.

Most “trivia” contests are much shorter. A typical pub quiz is 1-2 hours on a weeknight, constrained by the presumed hours of a “typical” “day job” and the need for people to commute home and sleep before their next workday. The regular season of LearnedLeague offers 6 questions a day, five times a week, for five weeks; you theoretically have all day to think about them. Geek Bowl, which leaned heavily on high production values, live bands, and ornate video clues, only asked 64 questions in a ~3-hour time span. Even at multi-day conventions like Trivia Nationals, the schedule divides into smaller events that usually last 1-3 hours apiece.

Many people in “trivia” have major life commitments, including full-time jobs, spouses, and kids. Quizbowl is built largely for students who don’t have those yet (though of course many active players do). The differences in scheduling preferences reflect that to a degree.

The rate of “clues per minute” is far lower in “trivia” than in quizbowl, too. Depending on question length and difficulty, a well-moderated quizbowl match takes 20 to 40 minutes, and uses a packet with 140 to 200 sentences in it. Live events like OQL USA or Mimir’s Well give the initial addressee of a question more like 15 to 30 seconds to give their answer, with something more like 80 to 120 sentences total; a usual pub-style or written competition gives even more time to process each sentence.

Some of this difference may trace back to effects of aging on recall speed; in events with conferring, giving more time also lets teams talk, think through hints, and just goof around and bond (which is largely shunted to time between games at quizbowl tournaments). I’ve seen many “trivia” people complain about feeling rushed when readers from the quizbowl community moderate at what I’m used to as a normal quizbowl pace. (I assure you, it could be much worse.)

Question content and emphases

First off: the “trivia” community values, and asks about, pop culture to a far greater degree. (I’ll try to avoid the word that rhymes with the Best Picture Oscar-winning film released in 2005.) The usual biggest categories are TV, film, pop music, and sports. Because question writers often appeal to nostalgia, and most “trivia” players are older, you’re often asked about older pop culture, with occasional dives into things like kids’ shows (to reward parents). And many people get on a trajectory towards a more pop-heavy knowledge base as they get further from school.

The balance varies. Jeopardy is about 30-40% academic, 30% pop culture, 20-30% “general knowledge” in neither bucket, and 10% wordplay. LearnedLeague is about 60% academic, 30% pop, and 10% GK. Online Quiz League USA aims for an even 50-50, and many syndicated bar games are between 50 and 100% pop culture.

In “trivia,” unexpected links between categories, and questions with both academic and pop culture elements, are encouraged. In quizbowl, such crossovers sometimes induce groans when asked by NAQT (as Mixed_Impure_Academic) and are all but banned by ACF. I once inveighed against Mixed_Impure_Academic questions on this site, and now wonder why I thought they were an issue.

On the academic side, “trivia” often asks some kinds of clue that quizbowl largely stamped out over the last two decades, including:
  • Award winners by calendar year (Nobels, Pulitzers, TIME Person of the Year, etc.)
  • State and world capitals, symbols, currencies, etc.
  • Screen adaptations of literature or history
  • Biographical clues (though qb has loosened up to allow more of them lately)
  • “Almanac clue” geography: high points, long rivers, etc.
  • Animals
  • “periodic table Scrabble”: elements’ chemical symbols, etymology, atomic number, place on periodic table, etc.
  • High-ranking works on subjective rankings (TIME Top 100 All-Time Novels, etc.)
  • kinds of content that hard to ask pyramidally, such as wordplay and state/national flags
As someone with memories of people fighting to exclude these things, the change in emphasis was a bit of a psychological adjustment for me. But I’ve also learned interesting, amusing things that quizbowl wouldn’t have taught me, including whimsical biography cues and unexpected connections between notable people in different fields. I wonder if quizbowl threw out some babies as it drained the CBI bathwater.

The difficulty of academic “trivia” caps out lower, and when studying, it’s usually wiser to study a breadth of basics than to engage with any one work in depth. (The unofficial ACF motto of “Read a book” doesn’t apply as strongly.) If you know enough to go toe-to-toe with an All-Star at HSNCT or the lead scorer on a team in an ACF Fall playoffs, you’re in good shape.

In contrast to “Weiner’s Law #1,” which admonishes quizbowl writers for trying to be “cute” or “clever,” “trivia” writers get praise for adding clever hints and providing “ways in” for people who might not know substantive information. I think some gameplay differences explain this. In quizbowl, clues fly by fast, and you have little time to think or react to each clue; expecting people to unpack your hint at gameplay speed is unrealistic, and the hint takes up space that could be used for a more concretely buzzable clue. In most “trivia” formats, there are fewer clues total, you have more time to think about each, and you don’t always have to include the basic information that’d be in a pyramidal giveaway or easy part. (Even Jeopardy, with its split-second signaling device, gives contestants a few seconds to scan over the clue as the host delivers it.)

Whimsy, vanity, and variety

It’s much more accepted in “trivia” that different events will reflect the whims and wheelhouses of their writers; barring serious quality issues, this variety is mostly celebrated. Aside from the most mainstream content, writers are less constrained by distributions, and can freely turn the things they find exciting and interesting into questions. This means you often feel a direct injection of what “sparks joy” for a particular writer by playing their content. Most don’t mind when, say, you got their question from browsing their blog or reading their status last week. If anything, a touch of vanity is encouraged, on the grounds that if you don’t ask a thing, there’s no guarantee anyone else will. (“Know your quizmaster” is a common adage.)

By contrast, if a quizbowler pushes the same interest too hard, or repeatedly asks about stuff they’ve talked up, it’s frowned upon and treated as a fairness issue. (Some of that is likely a legacy of an era with more packet submission tournaments and lighter editing; active players had to be cagey about what they were actively reading/studying, lest they give others an unfair advantage.) And at regular-season quizbowl events, there’s far less formal experimentation with distributions and question format—almost every tournament uses mild variations on the ACF distribution, about 20 tossups and 20 bonuses per game, and questions that are 5-6 (HS) or 7-8 (college) lines long. In a world where improvement is writers’ main motivation, game theory suggests they’ll converge on writing in a similar way about similar topics. But it does softly discourage distributional whimsy and relegate it to “side events.”

Studying, getting good, and the artifice of excellence

I’ve also seen differences in how the communities treat seemingly “innate” levels of skill and the process of improvement. Those differences seem to narrow at more serious levels of competition.

Historically, quizbowl has been pretty honest that there’s an art and artifice to getting good. Every serious school team practices multiple times a week, with the express expectation that exposure to past questions will improve future results. Because people’s stats are preserved going back years, it’s easy to see that people can in fact improve over time. Our game’s legends include Subash of the 32,000 Leadins and many other “epic study binges.”

My impression is that for a long time in “trivia,” at least in less enfranchised locales like bars, if you said you deliberately worked to get better, people would look at you like you sprouted an extra head—or think of your efforts as somehow unfair, unnatural, or unjust. It’s far less socially accepted, perhaps in part due to normative expectations at the life stage most participants are in—don’t you have a job to go to, kids to raise?—and perhaps because studying alone codes as socially ill-adjusted or “loser”-ish. Even among those who love the game, some say that “trivia” people possess an uncommon “neurological quirk”.

Some of that attitude might also reflect the norms of American game shows. For decades, U.S. TV producers crafted an ethos of amateurism. This is why Jeopardy announces each contestant by their day job and hometown (“A plumber from Walpole, Massachusetts...”), and likely motivates the clauses in contestant contracts that bar you from going on a different game show for 6-12 months. When contestants are relatable, ordinary people—not ringers with flashcard decks—more people feel comfortable coming forward to try out. (I’m told that in British media, norms are a bit different, and for decades semi-professional quizzers have become notable to the public by appearing on show after show.)

But it seems the “ordinary people Just Like You” ideal is starting to crumble. The Experts on Master Minds, chasers on The Chase (a British import), and the “What makes them a genius?” introductions on the short-lived 500 Questions are all presented as people who stand apart from you, not as something anyone can become. The Jeopardy All-Star Games and Greatest of All Time series ditched career introductions, leaving mostly unmentioned that several participants ditched traditional careers to live off game show winnings and/or pursue full-time vocations in the question-answering realm. (The show’s ratings also go up during long winning streaks.)

Interestingly, contestants themselves are getting more candid about doing work to improve. Many Jeopardy superchampions mention J-Archive in interviews; Ken Jennings’ Brainiac discussed a precursor that posted most clues from the 2002-03 season. (My infamous “364,878 flashcards” are digital Anki flashcards with a Web-scraped J-Archive clue on the front and its correct response on the back. I excluded cards in categories that I already knew cold, and reviewed the remainder for about three months. I only got through ~4% of the remaining deck.)

Enfranchised players off the TV aren’t hiding much, either. There’s now a “Trivia Studying Support Group” with about 300 members on Facebook. If you know who to ask, Anki decks for recurring topics such as fashion can be traded to you. The by-season and by-category stats on LearnedLeague make progress visible in real time. People who make huge strides later in life inspire others to do the same. Victoria Groce, who upset a 19-time champion during her sole win on Jeopardy in 2005, went supersonic a few years ago; she’s now among the top five active “trivia” players in the country. (Quizbowl resources help here. Many “trivia” people use NAQT’s You Gotta Know pages as a resource for academic topics. More regrettably, some have found Pr*t*b**l.)

Notably, more quizbowl players are opening up about the toll that “epic study binge” type questing can take on mental health. At least at the college level, there seem to be fewer stars all-consumed with the will to power tossups. It’s settled now that one can cram one’s way to greatness; whether it’s worth it is a different question.

Community gathering places

“Trivia” is more diffuse than quizbowl geographically, and its social world seems more diffuse too. There’s no clear online signpost pointing those who want to get serious about “trivia” to a specific meeting point, the way quizbowl has had these boards, QBWiki, and the Discord (and before that the IRC) for years. It’s hard to figure out where to start.

Facebook is a major gathering place, including groups for former game show contestants (the most active being Jeopardy groups for people who share an identity characteristic). In general, using Facebook for community discussion makes me sad. The site deliberately scrambles the post order in Groups and makes search hard to use for threads on people’s walls; it’s hard to build stable repositories of tacit knowledge in such “shifting sands” conditions.

Game show-specific discussion fora, like JBoard, collect some enthusiasts.

Though LearnedLeague has a big message board, LL is invitation-only and the league size was recently capped; it excludes a lot of people getting their start. Some have said that a combative, toxic, and sometimes sexist atmosphere keeps them from wanting to post on the LL boards. (It says... not-great things about that the first time I saw those reactions, my thought was “this is nothing compared to vintage HSQuizbowl”.)

There weren’t many national in-person gatherings, even before the pandemic knocked out those that did exist. Some major cities have semi-regular game show alumni meetups, and there’s a patchwork of local proctored sites of World Quizzing Championship each year.

That said, I’m told there’s been more splitting of qb discourse into regional, age-gated, or identity group-specific spaces lately, so the communities may be evolving in a convergent manner here.

Discourse, criticism, and argument

In general, I’ve seen more discomfort with a culture of criticism in “trivia” spaces. This could just be that my reference standard (these boards) was toxic for far too long, but I’ve often seen what seem like pretty mild criticisms of questions get perceived as personal attacks on the writer. Trends I mentioned in the “Vanity...” section above might explain this; with more variation and individuality expected across games, it looks pettier to object to any one person’s approach, and there’s less chance that your critique will get the community as a whole to change its ways. If you didn’t like something, that’s just your opinion, and the next thing you do might be different.

I’m pleased to see the quizbowl community interrogating and reshaping some of its bad discursive habits. I’m certainly displeased looking back at my own sharp words about things that were, in the big picture, not that important. But it’s still a fundamental value of quizbowl discussion that it’s fair to note what you didn’t like, so long as your comment is aimed at helping future contributors do better. I don’t really see that in “trivia,” in which non-positive feedback is often treated as more inherently rude. There’s also less of a culture of “Theory” discussion in general, in part because there’s so many different formats and fewer people see themselves as stewarding the “trivia” ecosystem in a more holistic manner.

I love that both communities have people who get beyond small talk to intriguing conversations filled with fascinating stories, intriguing hypotheticals, and personality-probing questions. I’ve had some of the best discussions of my life with quizbowl people and “trivia” people, and I want to see more meetings between you in part because I know you all could have more with each other.


The Twain Meets

How have these two communities interfaced recently?

The twain was always already met

A lot of today’s most active “trivia” people were quizbowlers of an earlier era. If you look back at Best Quizbowl Players threads of years past, you’ll see some of their names: Joon Pahk, Steve Perry, Shane Whitlock, Patrick Friel, Raj Dhuwalia, David Dixon, Steve Bahnaman, Richard Mason (the late-90s Caltech one, not the late-00s Yale one), Guy Jordan, Jonathan Hess, Yogesh Raut, Andrew Ullsperger... Because question styles have since diverged (as I discuss above), it may be easier to excel at “trivia” if you optimized for the quizbowl canon of the 90s, rather than the canon of today. That said, some more recent quizbowl alumni, such as Andy Kravis, Greg Peterson, and Drew Scheeler, are already quite accomplished. And many others who were second- or third-scorers or on non-contender quizbowl teams have since surged to “trivia” stardom.

I don’t know much about the era when standalone pop culture tournaments like TRASHionals happened in person during the quizbowl regular season. My impression is that many regulars at those events were former academic quizbowl players, and some disliked the direction academic quizbowl was taking. There was a time when “Trash capture” was considered a serious danger for school clubs, and that time seems to have largely passed. I’d welcome more background information here, as it may be important for understanding quizbowl-”trivia” relations since.

Quizbowl: The Next Generation

Some “trivia” people now have kids old enough to do middle or high school quizbowl. A few have informal coaching roles with their kids’ teams and/or staff local events in their kid’s circuit.

Staffing championships

I talked above about the 2011 and 2012 History Bowl championships, which relied heavily on quizbowlers on one hand, and Jeopardy community people on the other. I haven’t paid attention to NHBB-world for years, but I gather they now relied less heavily on either of these groups, and have built up their own roster of players and volunteers. That’s probably for the best. In any event, the founder of NHBB being a major Jeopardy person likely brought some J-connected people into closer contact with pyramidal questions.

NAQT has also turned to “trivia” community members to staff its national championships as they got huge in the past decade or so. I believe this was driven in large part by staff recruiter extraordinaire (and sometime J contestant) Nathan Murphy. The first QANTA human-vs-robot exposition match, in 2015, used recent Jeopardy superchampions for Team Humanity in an attempt to draw media interest.

In both cases, welding an open pop culture tournament to the weekend was a key recruiting tactic and reward. ACRONYM now abuts HSNCT, and NHBB long had a “Sports and Entertainment Bee” aimed largely at staff. (The 2015 rescue crew was not required to produce that year’s edition.) Compared to 15 years ago, there's probably more institutional acceptance now of pop culture as a body of knowledge that can lie alongside academic quizbowl without “infecting” its institutions or threatening its teams with “trash capture” .

Going back further, some form of “CO Trash” has sometimes (not every year) abutted the smaller, ultra-hard academic event Chicago Open; sometimes players who are only interested in one CO weekend event have volunteered to staff the other.

The inf-LL-ationary epoch

LearnedLeague began in 1997 as 20 coworkers in New York, and expanded slowly as existing members invited new people. By April 2010, LL had 350 members. From a few early adopters, including Pam Mueller, it quickly spread to the “trivia” and game show communities, and exploded in size and importance. By the middle of the 2010s, it was quasi-compulsory for serious “trivia” people to be on LL, though some disliked it or quit for other reasons.

Many recent quizbowlers have found their way to LL, treating it with varying degrees of seriousness. The site’s “offseason,” in which members write One-Day Special quizzes or MiniLeagues on specialty topics, lets quizbowlers share academic content with “trivia” audiences that meets quizbowl standards of “importance.” For example, I edited a MiniLeague on Philosophy in 2020.

The site’s membership is now capped at about 25,000; new people come off a waitlist as existing users leave. It remains to be seen what effect this cap will have on LL as a core entry point to the “trivia” community; wait times are currently minimal.

Trivia Nationals does “Quiz Bowl” [sic]

Fans and occasional contestants once gathered at an event called the Game Show Congress. It had a component where attendees got to play simulated shows; some participants found that the most fun, and decided it could stand alone. That led to the annual TCONA (Trivia Championships of North America) in Vegas. Its manager ceded control of the event in 2018, citing the growing difficulty of running it; another attendee took it on herself to organize a spiritual successor, Trivia Nationals.

“Quiz Bowl” was a marquee event at this conference. Written by Mike Burger, a former NAQT member whose views have been criticized on these boards before, it had a lot of pop culture and used rather short questions. (Here’s an old round I found. I tried to dig up another video, with (I think) Ken Jennings and Drew Scheeler in a (semi?)final, and someone (Drew?) proudly crushing a question on the term “manic pixie dream girl,” but I can’t find it. Anyone?)

For personal life reasons, Burger stepped back from writing the set for Trivia Nationals, which instead used an adapted version of the 2019 NAQT SSNCT. The main adaptation was to add pop culture tossups that would have been out of place in a high school set, such as one on Captain Janeway from Star Trek: Voyager (a show that ended before most of the 2019 SSNCT field was born). Teams played six rounds, divided into three-round “flights” at separate times. Stats were never kept.

Since I had questions in the set, I wasn’t eligible to play. (I wouldn’t have played if I were; as a former high school star, I don’t believe I should keep competing on high school questions.) I did watch a game or two between teams in the middle of the field. There weren’t many powers or 30s in the games I saw—but boy, were people proud when they did get them, especially on hard sciences. This excited engagement suggests to me that many people enjoy the unique thrill of buzzing on early academic clues before other players can get the late clues. This is hard to come by as an adult, since most academic opens are, by “trivia” standards, crushingly hard and largely unadvertised. If an active quizbowl community member can keep offering au courant quizbowl questions to future Trivia Nationals-type gatherings, that’d be a great gesture of good will.

Nick Clusserath of ACE Quizbowl Camp also hosted a demo of “Let’s Play Pyramidal!,” an automated reading/scorekeeping program that ran rounds in shootout format. Official stats weren’t preserved for that either. (Nick and ACE seemingly disappeared shortly thereafter; I’m not sure why.)

Trivia Nationals also had a pyramidal Trash tournament by Bill Patschak, the “BP” in “BPTrivia.” Most attendees played and reportedly enjoyed both events.

The Online Era (2020-)

On March 7, 2020, with word of a deadly epidemic circulating, the hosts of Geek Bowl XIV jokingly welcomed teams to “the last in-person event... ever.” Days later, huge swaths of the U.S.—including most bars—shut down.

About as quickly, TONS of trivia hosts moved games online. The amount of content that anyone with high-speed Internet could play from anywhere skyrocketed. Many people on the edges of the enfranchised “trivia” community dove right in. Others who were already decently involved made “trivia” a more or less 24/7 lifestyle. Though the hectic pace of the earliest months gradually slowed, some stalwarts kept quizzes going for over a year. In late spring 2020, before quizbowl fully figured out its move online, several quizbowlers found their way to this frenzy; some (such as Play Quiz Bowl) contributed events to it.

Another COVID-era convergence of the twain: British formats got attention and buy-in from U.S. enthusiasts. Adapting games that had existed in the UK for decades, the team-based Online Quiz League and the individual competition Mimir’s Well opened to American players.

The spun-off OQL USA, run by sometime quizbowler Steve Bahnaman, has been an especially fertile site of cross-contact. Like quizbowl, its matches involve two teams of four. With each season (it’s now Season 5), more quizbowlers past and present make their way to OQL, having (mostly) pleasant pre- and post-game banter with people of different eras. Each week, there’s also an unofficial but playtested “friendly” packet by a rotating league member, which any number of the league’s ~400 members can play for fun with whomever they want.

In the same stretch, quizbowler-run events such as ACRODEMIA, PAVEMENT, and Dede Allen caught the eye of “trivia” folks, and teams of quizbowlers entered pyramidal events by people largely unaffiliated with quizbowl, such as BPTitans. Likewise, the “Open” and Pop Culture divisions of NAQT’s Buzzword led many players with little recent quizbowl engagement to the largest pyramidal question vendor.

It's very cool to me that QB League leapt into this breach to introduce quizbowl proper to online “trivia” audiences, and that world quizzing stalwarts with less pyramidal experience, such as Pat Gibson and Olav Bjortomt, did well at it. I hope its creators enjoy their well-earned hiatus.


Preliminary Thoughts on Quizbowl-”Trivia” Relations

Does the “trivia” community have anything to teach quizbowl about how to be? The reverse?

No one has to do anything they’re not interested in

These are all leisure activities. If what you value about quizbowl is the chance to engage deeply with academic fields of study, and you don’t get that elsewhere, that’s all very well. If you’ve been doing pop “trivia” events for years and don’t see the appeal of a tournament that might have 20 pop culture questions strewn across 12 rounds, no one’s forcing you to sign up.

Not everybody grew up having what you had

“Good quizbowl” as we know it today coalesced in the mid-2000s. Everyone who graduated before that didn’t have a serious chance to do it in school. I firmly believe some of the more academically-oriented people in the “trivia” world would have crushed at quizbowl if it had existed. (Jerome Vered, with his fearsome knowledge of world Jewish history, comes to mind.)

Many people today don’t get a chance either, as quizbowl is still highly concentrated in specific states and urban areas (far more so than bars, broadcast TV, and the Internet, anyway), and it’s often pretty arbitrary which schools in a given area have serious teams. In my generation, I imagine Brandon Blackwell, lately of University Challenge, would have been excellent if we had found him at Bronx Science or NYU. I think often about the alternate universe where Alan Lin, who reads tons of fiction and cares a lot about visual art, went to a school with a strong quizbowl program.

If a person’s tastes tend toward animals or elements or Pulitzers, it’s in part because that’s what the game they’ve gotten to play has asked them to know. The glint of joy in someone’s eyes when they feel the thrill of figuring out a tough question is very similar. So is the joy of creating an exciting question out of a fact that’s never been done before (and the crumple of dissatisfaction upon finding out it totally has been done). These feelings are perhaps even more precious in Gen-Xers and Boomers, who are often further, geographically and chronologically, from places that validate brainy interests. There’s a lot to empathize and bond with here.

Wide swaths of adult American culture are quite anti-intellectual, and “trivia” is as close as most people get to a place that validates them for caring about things beyond ongoing cultural ephemera. For some who grew up without well-resourced schools, it’s their first real chance at a well-rounded education.

People have interesting stories, if you want to hear them

So much quizbowl history is lost to time. Matt Weiner once expressed desire for more recorded interviews with people from earlier eras; those largely haven’t happened. There are precious few people still in the collegiate quizbowl orbit who witnessed the series of changes the community has undergone from the 90s to now. Many active quizbowlers, focused on the present day, are incurious about the deep history of the game. (I’m told that in the Discord, today’s players are sick of “Olds” reminiscing about events ...that I was at!)

But if you’re willing to approach people from a different era and ask questions, you may hear some pretty wild stuff. Here’s a thing I learned while at the Olympiad: There was a 5,000 person trash tournament, held on buzzers, happening at the University of Colorado-Boulder, as far back as 1980! People across the campus watched this annual “Trivia Bowl” on local closed-circuit television. And some of the people involved in it (such as Team USA coordinator G. Paul Bailey) are still quizzing today. That's utterly wild to me, especially given that CU was largely unconnected to the academic circuit until the mid-2010s. (I have a paper pamphlet detailing the history of Trivia Bowl that I can scan if there's interest.)

More generally, many “trivia” people have pretty incredible life stories. I haven’t met many people with a life path like Jackie Fuchs (Jackie Fox), a trailblazing bassist turned patent attorney turned board game designer and question-type innovator. If you adopt a warm, non-dismissive attitude, you may learn from all kinds of perspectives you’d otherwise not get.

People remember how you treated them

As Alex Damisch alluded to in this post sharing empirical testimony from women, many people quit quizbowl because it wasn’t welcoming to them. At least one “trivia” participant mentioned to me that the demeanor of this board’s founder drove them from further involvement in quizbowl—and has kept them from wanting to check back in. Many other people absorbed that rhetorical style. (I count myself in that set, and have had to work to unlearn it.)

By now the heat of the "format wars" has largely subsided, and in many areas, good quizbowl is largely free to chart its course. So let’s say some people who want to read at your high school tournament played the bad format twenty years ago. Or you find out a new friend’s high school only did Chip back in the day, and they have fond memories of it by virtue of never getting to do anything else. Must we give a :capybara:? They’re not out here trying to upend our game, and our institutions are resilient enough that they’d fail if they tried, so it seems prudent to just let it rest. (I don’t think you’re obligated to absolve specific people’s acts of harm, ethical misconduct, or bigotry. I just ask for shifting the default view of new-to-you people away from “suspicious interloper” towards “possible asset.”)

Upon entering a community that’s new to you, it’s usually wise to leave your presumptions at the door. Declarations like “I don’t care about the periodic table” likely won’t get you far if you’re being asked about the etymology of dubnium. (I’d know.) In the other direction, complaining that pyramidal questions are “so LONG” isn’t endearing if you sign up to read them to teams.

Let’s maybe do less to stereotype and mock “game show people,” too. I’ve met only a handful who are egregiously socially maladjusted, and even the most infamous of those have accrued friends and defenders after persisting for many years.
  • Especially if you belittle someone you’ve barely met by diagnosing them from afar as “autistic,” as if there’s something wrong with that even if they are. Get ALLLLL the way outta here.
  • Perhaps the most alarming discourse I used to hear referred to people who preferred “trash” or “trivia” to quizbowl as “sewer mutants” (!!!!!!!). Let’s bury that one permanently if we haven’t already, please??
If you show up to help out, remember: it’s not about you

Some of the unease about Jeopardy fandom staff at early NHBB championships (as discussed in this post on down) came down to a sense of misplaced priorities: it felt to some like the event catered more to the experience of those people than to the kids competing. Though this perception had subsided greatly by the time of the one History Bowl championship I staffed (in 2015), I think the discussion helps illustrate a worthwhile general precept.

Whenever you’re at an event outside the community you’re most familiar with: It’s not about you; it’s about the players. Nobody owes any deference to your game show connections or your LL Rundle or whatever, especially if you’re doing badly at the task the TD assigned you. Teams play things they want to play, not as a feeder for Geek Bowl or what have you. (No one’s stopping you from hanging out with people you know who are there, of course.)

If you’re genuinely famous, people might make it about you for a bit anyway. (There’s a funny story about an HSNCT where some attendees wanted a photo with 2013 Jeopardy TOC champion Colby Burnett, and the random passerby to whom they handed their camera was ...2014 Jeopardy TOC champion Ben Ingram.) Just endure for a bit, then get back to the business of the event.

(Sometimes the “not getting it” takes more bizarre forms. I staffed one championship where a person at the staff meeting was in full cosplay as the Tenth Doctor from Doctor Who. Like... yes, this is a conference hotel; yes, we’re nerds; no, we’re not a sci-fi geek convention... what...)

On the origin of species

Professional tennis players don’t diss squash as “bad tennis.” (At least I don’t think many do.) We accept uncritically that different people play those sports, which share features and historical precursors. Maybe a similar re-framing is in order here: “Trivia” contests aren’t “bad quizbowl”, they are simply not quizbowl. They’re closely related activities with common ancestors, but speciation processes have rendered them distinct.

And just as is the case with phylogenetic trees of organisms, our notions that some species are “more evolved” or “less evolved” are misguided. Academic quizbowl has developed into its own thing, with a distinctive canon and somewhat different communal values. But those who are so inclined can traverse other branches of the "tree" linking us to other activities, without treating other species of knowledge-contest as less valuable.

(Maybe everybody already has accepted this, and I’m hesitant because part of me expects to get yelled at by a voice from an earlier era. I dunno.)

Broken recruitment “pipelines” in both games

I probably never would have participated in “trivia” if I hadn’t done well on Jeopardy and been invited in by Jeopardy alums.

There seem to be only three ways to get into enfranchised “trivia”:
  • Go on a high-profile knowledge-based game show (usually Jeopardy) and join its contestant community.
  • Get a referral to LearnedLeague.
  • Be personally/socially close to someone who has done one or both of the above—close enough that you feel comfortable accompanying them.
Though there are some edge cases, I'm pretty sure that list covers every person I met at Geek Bowl and Trivia Nationals. The "pipeline" is almost entirely broken otherwise. (Bucket 3 encompasses game show message boards, close IRL friends, significant others.) A majority of Trivia Nationals attendees are former game show contestants, though some were last on in the 1980s or 90s. Those who hadn’t been on a show yet were almost all at the on-site Jeopardy tryout.

Though pub trivia is everywhere, I’ve heard of almost nobody who became a “trivia” stalwart just from enjoying their local bar and seeking out more. Even being a longtime trivia writer/host is often not enough without a push from a game show or LL; Austin Rogers wrote bar trivia every week for 15 years before going on Jeopardy, but as far as I know didn’t connect socially with this world until after his run on the show.

Maybe I’m a hypocrite to say so, but I’d suggest that the “trivia” community de-center game show experience a bit, or do more to assure people that it isn’t necessary for joining the fun. So much chance goes into how contestants get selected and which ones win. Some of the best “trivia” players ever (and many of the best quizbowlers) did not win their lone game show appearance; others have never done one, and others still (such as LearnedLeague commissioner Shayne Bushfield) have said they don’t want to.

People are social creatures who come to communities via networked acquaintances. There are likely many potential “trivia” whizzes out there who just never make the connections to get discovered. But this is also true of quizbowl due to ongoing de facto school segregation, property tax disparities, uneven distribution of preexisting good teams, etc.

In both cases, the key questions are: How do we get people who don’t know about this at all to hear about it? And how do we get people who kinda enjoy this sometimes to become enfranchised? (These are the ur-questions of outreach and marketing.) A lot of “trivia” is decentralized and amateur, and I don’t know if anyone’s been well-positioned to do a survey of how people got there, or crowd-source thoughts on appealing to people it’s not reaching. A huge operation that gathers data from hosts, like Sporcle Live, might have some insight, but I don’t know what data they keep, or what they’d share, or what if anything it shows about people going on to broader participation in other brands.

A hare-brained idea

It’s interesting that no one’s set up a high school or college circuit for confer-and-write pub-style trivia minus the pub. Part of me hopes no one does, if only because it could cut into quizbowl recruitment. But given current U.S. law banning under-21s from bars, that’s what you’d want to do if you wanted a reliable pipeline into “trivia,” right...? Rent a basketball court, fill it with tables, invite local schools, keep all alcohol off the premises, offer prizes, watch students prepare seriously, ...profit?


Can We Do More to Encourage Crossover? Should We?

We probably should. For one thing, if more “trivia” people want to do quizbowl, that’s more money into the Quizbowl Economy. For another, at least a handful of new people might staff events if they know when those events are and where to go. (They aren’t on the forums or in the Discord; you have to find them and develop real relationships.)

“Trivia” has some resources that quizbowl groups could ask to draw on. I’ve mentioned the Toutant Fund as one entity whose interest in leading people to “trivia” might overlap with quizbowl outreach. It may also be courteous to let people from other games/organizations leave fliers at the info desk at national tournaments. “Graduating? NAQT/PACE/ACF Won’t Be There For You, But Here’s This Other Challenge You Can Try...

Open tournaments, for people who never go to open tournaments

I once had an argument with Ryan Westbrook, in which Ryan (not a student at the time) said he wanted most or even all college tournaments to become open, and I (a student at the time) disagreed. I now think we were both somewhat wrong.

Currently, only 2 or 3 pre-nationals college tournaments per year are open, with maybe 2 or 3 more in the summer. These are usually high-difficulty tournaments. The main reason for this is that there aren’t usually enough teams interested in hard quizbowl to fill fields otherwise. It also rewards Olds for their continued service to the game by giving them something they can play.

Existing collegiate opens are totally unsuited to the task of welcoming people from non-quizbowl backgrounds to quizbowl. They’re way too hard and last way too long. A “casual open” circuit (where “casual” encompasses many people who are quite serious about “trivia”) would have to be built totally differently, from the ground up.

As I considered making this post, I often wondered what a “crossover event” designed to bring “trivia” people into academic quizbowl should look like. For reasons discussed above, it’d be far shorter than a standard tournament, probably around the 6 rounds that BP Titans settled on. To adjust for what people know, we might want more pop culture per packet (perhaps 15-20%, up from the typical 0-10%). Tossups should be closer to NAQT’s 4- or 5-line length, with single-line bonus parts, so the game goes right on to the next question if one goes dead.

This is more pipe dream-level, but while we’re talking about bringing people in, it’s worth thinking about how quizbowl is largely built atop selective universities and functionally selective high schools (magnet, charter, and private). As acceptance rates decline and some schools downsize or close, a more inclusive game should have options for people who don’t take the university path. If, say, Marco Rubio’s old dream of educating “more welders and less philosophers” comes about, or more teens eschew college to do tech boot camps or found startups, what could we offer interested people in those populations?

The “Quick Bites of Snackable Content” Model

To my surprise, a bunch of online events found an even better model. OQL USA and Mimir’s Well have weekly matchups; in lieu of top-down scheduling, players in a given match find a time that works for all involved (plus a moderator). Though large time zone differences can make this tricky, and many people are busier as in-person life resumes, the model in principle fits the rhythms of adult life pretty well.

In quizbowl proper, NAQT’s Buzzword releases 50-tossup rounds weekly, and has lured back some people who haven’t played quizbowl in years. (It’s been a delight to catch up with Anu Kashyap, who was fearsome at Rancho Bernardo HS in 2009.) “Asynchronous” events allow matches without needing any players to be free at the same time. Most notably, the first two seasons of QB League brought many new people to modern quizbowl with the weekly-scheduling model, an apparent smashing success.

Is there any way to translate this model to in-person space? Perhaps not. But we shouldn’t let these online institutions disappear altogether, precisely because they allow for such flexible scheduling. They’re also very good for people who are located far from everyone else, and/or lack the time and money to travel to in-person tournaments and conferences.

Who remembers the rememberers?

Like quizbowl history, a lot of “trivia” history fades as older people retire and old websites break. Activities like LL and Geek Bowl archive their own results, but many are password-gated or presented in unstandardized formatting. Some institutions like the online Trivia Hall of Fame preserve select stories, but aren’t comprehensive. Sadly, this problem is likely to get worse, as newer communities default to putting results in Facebook groups, which are all but unusable for archival purposes (and locked to those not on Facebook).

Though Quizbowl Wiki has its flaws, I’m glad it exists, and that there’s a unified Quizbowl Resource Database for past questions and stats. Maybe building a distinct “Trivia Wiki” with a similar archival focus would be beneficial. (There are game show-specific wikis, but they aren’t doing the same thing.) I couldn’t administer such a website, but if it were set up, I’d happily contribute articles.

Knowledge contest “cross training”...?

Perhaps trying other activities has practical benefits, like cross training or something. There may be some analogy here to teens who are getting repetitive stress injuries by hyper-preparing for one sport, whereas back in Michael Jordan’s era more star athletes lettered in three different sports in fall, winter, and spring. I certainly found myself quite lopsided when I got thrown into an environment that demanded a breadth of pop culture knowledge.

For “trivia” folks, academic quizbowl can hyper-prepare you for subjects that are harder to osmose in adult life; it can also get you used to pulling answers in a matter of seconds rather than minutes, and demonstrate how “canonical” answers are likely to recur. For quizbowlers, doing other kinds of “trivia” can provide refreshing topics for question writing that may not have come up much before; it can also build skill at conferring or using lateral thinking. If nothing else, taking time off from your main pursuit to do something less familiar can be pleasantly humbling; it reminds you that there’s always more to know.

I’ve also made some forays recently into competitive crosswords and “puzzle hunting,” which are seeing similar explosions of online activity. I feel like I see the edges of a sort of Grand Unified Theory of Clue-Answering Activities, where a few variables (team size, answering time limits, whether outside resources are allowed, etc.) have robust, reliable effects on the social values and community ethos around a game. But I don't want to be Edward Casaubon and promise more than I can deliver...so I won’t. Not anytime soon, anyway.

Can we have a section on these forums for “Non-Quizbowl Trivia Events”?

It’d be cool if things like Quiz Olympiad, International Culture Challenge, etc. could announce here, so long as they don’t compete for space with quizbowl event announcements. Quizbowlers could also alert friends if they make the finals of a streamed event like Highbrow Mimir International Culture Challenge. I’m not worried that a siloed-off subforum would Pied Piper away quizbowlers; it’d be there for those who want to look, and easily ignored for those who don’t.

“Wait, he isn’t dead!”: Would this help the bad quizbowl monster get back up?

Do we need to worry about people with nostalgia for archaic formats diverting people from good quizbowl to bad quizbowl? Or resuscitating those formats? Probably not. Most people with adult lives are not intensely dogmatically committed to pushing out events that currently exist. And most people get pretty used to whatever questions they’re exposed to; if we invite people to staff events on well-written pyramidal questions, that’ll just be the expectation. It’s unlikely anyone will throw a fit; if someone doesn’t like the experience, they’ll just quietly decline your next invitation.

This community has long overestimated its ability to “kill” competitors; NTAE (formerly “Panasonic”) came back a few times, Academic Hallmarks is back with more Auk-cellent virtual content, Bryce Avery still comes around here, and nothing has ever stopped Chip Beall. Richard Reid is a credited co-producer on the televised College Bowl! It may be unpopular for me to say it here, but let’s be realistic: The day of ultimate victory of good quizbowl over bad will probably never come. That said, quizbowl institutions are much stronger than they used to be, and the tenets of our game are much more firmly rooted; as long as our organizations are electing their own officers based on track records of accomplishment, it’s unlikely that any will be “captured.”


What Do You Think?

As pandemic conditions (hopefully) subside, some individuals who have been exposed to new things may be torn about which activities to prioritize. On a community level, it’s unclear how either community will incorporate online and offline components moving forward. We’re very much headed Into The Unknown.

In that spirit: I don’t have all the answers. I’m distant enough from current HS and college quizbowl, and new enough to “trivia,” that I may not be accurately describing either. Maybe I’m totally wrong about something!

Did you once play quizbowl and then get involved in “trivia”? The reverse? Is this your first time here? I’d love to see your thoughts below.
Last edited by Adventure Temple Trail on Mon Jan 31, 2022 11:08 am, edited 1 time in total.
Matt Jackson
University of Chicago '24
Yale '14, Georgetown Day School '10
member emeritus, ACF
User avatar
everdiso
Wakka
Posts: 115
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2015 10:36 pm

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by everdiso »

This is a very interesting post and I appreciate the spirit in which it was made. I learned a lot of from reading it. I’ll give some of my own thoughts, about the part that was most relevant to me.
Professional tennis players don’t diss squash as “bad tennis.” (At least I don’t think many do.) We accept uncritically that different people play those sports, which share features and historical precursors. Maybe a similar re-framing is in order here: “Trivia” contests aren’t “bad quizbowl”, they are simply not quizbowl. They’re closely related activities with common ancestors, but speciation processes have rendered them distinct.
I was very happy to read this.

I’ve been on the Canadian quizbowl circuit for about seven years now, and have been very involved in playing and staffing for most of that time. Like most members of this circuit, my first experience with competitive trivia was Reach for the Top in high school; like most of those people, I still love Reach. There’s no contradiction for us here: we play both games, staff tournaments of both games and write questions for both games (and many of us have put lots of work into reforming Reach in recent years, ending old practices like recycling questions and not using distributions).

I think the quizbowl community should drop the idea that quizbowl is in some way the “ultimate” trivia game, better than any others, as well as the related ideas that nobody should want to play any other formats after discovering quizbowl, and that we should try to pull people away from other formats and into quizbowl, shutting those other formats down in the process.

To be clear, this is not a criticism of quizbowl, but rather a statement about its nature: quizbowl isn’t the ultimate form of trivia because it isn’t trying to be. Quizbowl is great at testing deep knowledge and understanding of academic subjects. It is not, however, any good at testing knowledge of popular culture or “general” knowledge, nor at testing puzzle-solving ability or split-second thinking and quick reactions. In other words, while it’s great at testing for what it cares about, quizbowl completely ignores a lot of knowledge and skills that many trivia players consider integral. This is not a bad thing at all – unless, that is, quizbowlers ignore it and act like quizbowl is the be-all and end-all of trivia games and all other games are just failed imitations, just “bad quizbowl”. Indeed, I think it’s time to retire the use of the term “bad quizbowl” to refer to other trivia formats. It makes no more sense than calling quizbowl “bad Jeopardy!” because it doesn’t ask about sports and musicals, or “bad LearnedLeague” because it only gives players 5 seconds to remember names.

Quizbowl is what it is: a trivia game with a very specific identity. Its niche is competing on greatly in-depth knowledge of exclusively academic topics, and it’s fantastic at that. Having a niche is not a bad thing at all – to return to Matt’s sports analogy, the specific skills required by soccer (speed, endurance, agility, extremely advanced dexterity with one’s feet) do not make it at all inferior to other sports that might put more value on brute strength or hand-eye coordination, just different. And as silly as it would be for soccer to dismiss upper-body strength as something that only “bad sports” value, I think it is also silly for quizbowl to take that attitude towards, say, knowledge of movies as opposed to medieval poetry. Quizbowl has a niche, a niche that’s absolutely fascinating and very much worth pursuing with passion. I just think the quizbowl community would do well to remember that.



*(On a final, more quizbowl-centric note, I think quizbowl should embrace this identity. There always seems to be some discussion about slightly increasing the amount of popular culture that comes up in quizbowl. I think this would be a mistake. In order to truly capture the significance of pop culture, I think it would have to take up a large share of a distribution – not just the 1/1 or 2/2 it sometimes gets, but a large chunk that would require significantly rearranging the current distro. Putting in 1/1 popular culture doesn’t give it anywhere close to its due, but prevents the game from being purely academic trivia. I think it’s much better to either make popular culture a major, central part of the game or to just embrace the idea that quizbowl is an academic game, and that while popular culture is valuable and worth knowing, it is not part of quizbowl. Including small amounts of it, to me, seems like the worst of both worlds.)
Paul Kasiński
University of Toronto, 2020
User avatar
username_crisis_averted
Lulu
Posts: 51
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2017 11:12 pm

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by username_crisis_averted »

This is something I've been thinking about for a while now, and I'm happy to see someone posting about it. I think the best way that quizbowl and trivia can "cross over" is by marketing "niche" packets (such as packets just on Pokémon, Simpsons, etc.). There are a lot of people in quizbowl who enjoy writing niche packets, but there are also comparatively less uses for niche packets in quizbowl (especially ones that are monetized). So a trivia scene could be a good outlet for those.

But more importantly, quizbowl is a lot less intimidating when the questions are on topics you know. I usually find that the scope of quizbowl (not the raw difficulty) is the biggest hurdle when trying to convince people to play. When non-quizbowl players hear questions on topics that they know a lot about, they usually do amazing. I would suspect that the average group of Simpsons trivia players would be able to crush a Simpsons quizbowl packet. If a trivia player's first introduction to quizbowl is something like that, where they can fully benefit from the pyramidal question structure, then they're much more likely to walk away with a positive impression.
Kevin Kodama
University of Washington '23
User avatar
stevebahnaman
Wakka
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 1:25 pm

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by stevebahnaman »

You can sometimes FEEL OQLUSA's quizbowl background pretty intensely in some of the canon we cover in our academic subjects. My whole writing training came from quizbowl, and you can feel a sort of "bonus part" style in my writing which has bled out somewhat into the format.

Check out our stuff (only recent packets are passworded) and a sample match to see what the hell Matt is talking about at quizcentral.net/league/oqlusa . We're roaming all over the difficulty and subject map, and we like it that way.

There is no one who would mistake one of our games for a trivia night, or even a Jeopardy round, and this format coming from Britain has really opened some eyes as far as "other ways to do this activity that are both serious and not-that-serious at the same time."
Steve Bahnaman, Campbell University
Commissioner, Online Quiz League USA (quizcentral.net)
NC Wesleyan College, Librarian and Quiz Bowl Advisor/Coach 2009-2011
Emory Academic Team, 1999-2004
Pretty trashy
User avatar
Skepticism and Animal Feed
Auron
Posts: 3238
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 11:47 pm
Location: Arlington, VA

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Skepticism and Animal Feed »

I think it's impossible to understand my era of quizbowl (I played 2004-2010 and was involved in ACF and open tournaments for a few years after that) without understanding the "bad quizbowl monster" that Matt talks about at the end. College quizbowl circa 2004 had, within living memory, "liberated" itself from a very bad, very bureaucratic CBI format and both ACF and NAQT have their origin as more or less rebel groups. mACF College quizbowl at the time was still very much competing for adherents with not only TRASH tournaments but also things like tournaments for college players that were played on high school questions. There was a real fear that college quizbowl teams would be "captured" by people who just wanted to play TRASH or play NAQT IS set tournaments.

Today on HSQB, you can see a lot of Gen Z players more or less saying "what the fuck, why are you like this, college quizbowl?" and a lot of the answer requires you to understand this ancient history.

Why is ACF so weirdly amateurish, with crappy old used books and prizes instead of trophies and with an ever-changing junta of editors instead of a professional "deep-state" bureaucracy? In part because it was founded as an alternative to corporate CBI and things like "being organized" or "people other than the question writers being in charge of finance and logistics" were CBI-ish and suspicious.

Why don't teams have coaches and active academic advisors instead of being run by 19-20 year olds? In large part because breaking away from CBI required breaking away from formal university structures.

Why is the mACF format so standardized, why is there so little innovation in quizbowl formats? In part because format innovation was associated with "bad quizbowl". As a specialist with deep but not broad knowledge, I fantasized about one day playing an academic tournament with Ann B. Davis rules (Ann B. Davis was a TRASH tournament they used to have in Michigan over MLK weekend) because it had a feature where if one person got all 3 bonus parts with no help that was 60 points, but deviation from the mACF format was TRASHy and bad.

I could go on: probably part of the reason why there are fewer easy tournaments as the year goes on stems from a desire to prevent college quizbowl teams from being captured by the kinds of people who just want to play IS sets and never improve, part of the reason why there are such few open tournaments is because old people were associated with bad quizbowl (though a bigger part of the answer there is limited question writing capacity and needing to focus that on college tournaments).

Anyway I agree with Matt that this monster isn't really all that threatening anymore, and college quizbowl should feel free to explore things like professional bureaucracy and even the four quarter format (!). "But bad people liked this 20 years ago!" really isn't a valid excuse anymore in 2022. To the extent that other kinds of "taking tests for fun" like trivia or gameshows can provide examples of things that might make sense for quizbowl to do, they shouldn't immediately be discarded.

I know if I could live my life over again, I would have created a side income stream for the Harvard quizbowl team by writing and hosting pub-style trivia quizzes and fundraisers and social events. Who knows, this might have gotten us a few additional team members as well or an extra moderator.
Bruce
Harvard '10 / UChicago '07 / Roycemore School '04
ACF Member emeritus
My guide to using Wikipedia as a question source
User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 7220
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Cheynem »

This is an exhaustive (but not exhausting!) post on an interesting topic. I'm not fully experienced in the "trivia" world, but I do have a few thoughts:

1. I totally agree that things like Buzzword, QBlitz events (like Dede Allen or PAVEMENT), and even breezy side events (Acro-Demia, etc.) that are done online are excellent ways to bring in a variety of people. Just like I, who am not into trivia, would be reluctant to drive a great distance and kill a whole day at a trivia event, I would not expect people who are not into quizbowl to do the same. But to play an online event, especially a short or asynchronous event...that's another story. I write for Buzzword and have played a lot of the QBlitz events, and hopefully they're having that impact. The recent Dede Allen, in which I think there were a fair share of trivia world people playing, was a fantastic event.

2. I would say the best way to think of quizbowl and trivia worlds as related and overlapping yet still inherently different. That's a good thing. I can't think of a good analogy in my head, but a simplistic one would be something like "a lot of people who are into Sport X probably like Sport Y, which is cool, but Sports X and Y don't have to change to match the other." At their heart, quizbowl and trivia are very different, which makes sense. When I play pub trivia, my friends and I aren't expecting ACF Regionals-style questions, and when I play CO, I don't want to play pub trivia.

3. I think Matt is correct that people who like knowledge-based games, even as simple as Trivial Pursuit or bar trivia, like showing off their knowledge. I would wager that the biggest stumbling block encountered by people who prefer "simpler" trivia games (and I'm talking more casual people here, not the top trivia players) in regards to quizbowl is not so much the difficulty (many trivia questions are INSANELY hard), but rather how different the format is, particularly the length. When I've read some tossups to my non quizbowl friends, they almost inevitably just wait until the end--it's ingrained in them to do so, I think. I've had more success breaking the tossups down into 30-20-10-bonus like questions, and reading them a clue at a time and allowing a guess. I'm not sure what my point is here, other than to indicate that the format is frequently what trips a lot of people up in coming from trivia to quizbowl.

4. I think quizbowl is getting much, much better at producing high-quality pop culture events that can be enjoyed by both people in the trivia and quizbowl world. With all due respect, when I started playing, this didn't really exist--you had some slapdash house-produced trash tournaments, the rather erratic quality of the TRASH sets, and the entertaining if esoteric at times CO Trash (this is not to say that these events were not fun and that there especially weren't some great side events). But now, things are much better. The Play Quizbowl sets, particularly the various ACRONYMs, are enjoyable to a broad audience. CO Trash has been very entertaining (particularly because I've started to win). Buzzword-PC, at least from what I hear, provides some enjoyment. I've loved the hell out of the various QBlitz sets. These are all sets I could easily imagine a good deal of trivia players and quizbowl players equally enjoying.

5. I think the temperature has gone down in terms of the bombast and attacks. A prime reason for this that I think of is that the idea of "trash/trivia capture" has fallen out of style. I'm sure this happens still on programs not on the national radar, but there were definitely a lot of programs back in the day that basically wanted to become a college team wholly focused on trivia, pop culture, and other non-quizbowl-y stuff (while teaching at U of Minnesota-Morris, I noted this basically happened to the team there). I don't think this happens as much now, for a variety of reasons, and that helps in improving relations, so to speak, between the two worlds.
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger
User avatar
Adventure Temple Trail
Auron
Posts: 2754
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:52 pm

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Adventure Temple Trail »

Cheynem wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 12:01 pmI've had more success breaking the tossups down into 30-20-10-bonus like questions, and reading them a clue at a time and allowing a guess.
There is some precedent for this in "trivia" events! You sometimes see questions that give teams multiple (usually 3) chances to submit, which are worth fewer points with each clue that has passed by. The SoCal set dubs this the “Alan Bailey question,” after a man who sadly had to break contact with many "trivia" friends upon being hired as a TV game show writer. It was also used by the Play Quiz Bowl set for their Web offering Pub Quiz Bowl, and I think Andrew Hart has even written law trivia in this format for an audience of judges in the Minnesota court system.

I had a mention of this in the OP, but had to cut it due to space constraints.
Matt Jackson
University of Chicago '24
Yale '14, Georgetown Day School '10
member emeritus, ACF
User avatar
Mike Bentley
Sin
Posts: 6461
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:03 pm
Location: Bellevue, WA
Contact:

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Mike Bentley »

I'll post more later, but wanted to quickly note that lower difficulty open tournaments have existed for quite some time in the form of the online playtest mirror. In practice, most of the events end up having very stacked fields that wouldn't be fun to play against for casual quizzers. But it wouldn't take more than a few teams to join one of these mirrors to have an enjoyable experience on lower difficulty questions. (And this would probably be a net-good thing for playtest mirrors as the feedback today is very skewed towards the best teams.)

Yes, these tournaments are online and many people don't like online quizbowl. But other trivia formats are entirely online and that's not necessarily keeping people away. As Mike mentioned earlier, I think the bigger barrier is the time commitment.
Mike Bentley
Treasurer, Partnership for Academic Competition Excellence
Adviser, Quizbowl Team at University of Washington
University of Maryland, Class of 2008
User avatar
The King's Flight to the Scots
Auron
Posts: 1645
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by The King's Flight to the Scots »

Another big difference between quizbowl and most trivia formats I've played is that trivia gives you more to do when you're losing. If you play a quizbowl tournament and you're not one of the best teams there, you're likely to lose several games by margins of 500 points. In those situations, you're basically sitting in a smelly classroom for 40 minutes watching the other team answer questions. It's become oddly common to dismiss concerns about players being "discouraged" by losing, but it seems more surprising to want to continue with QB if that's your typical experience.

In OQL or bar trivia or whatever, even if you lose decisively, you at least have the opportunity to answer all the questions directed to your team. Those formats also tend to give secondary players on the team more of a chance to participate, and bar trivia, at least, allows some room for social interaction in between questions.

Online formats like Buzzword are doing a good job, at least, of giving players below the top echelon a chance to actually play the questions. I think it would be cool if we could do more experimentation with formats as well to allow more people to participate.
Matt Bollinger
UVA '14, UVA '15
User avatar
naan/steak-holding toll
Auron
Posts: 2515
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2011 11:53 pm
Location: New York, NY

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by naan/steak-holding toll »

Mike Bentley wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 12:42 pm I'll post more later, but wanted to quickly note that lower difficulty open tournaments have existed for quite some time in the form of the online playtest mirror. In practice, most of the events end up having very stacked fields that wouldn't be fun to play against for casual quizzers. But it wouldn't take more than a few teams to join one of these mirrors to have an enjoyable experience on lower difficulty questions. (And this would probably be a net-good thing for playtest mirrors as the feedback today is very skewed towards the best teams.)

Yes, these tournaments are online and many people don't like online quizbowl. But other trivia formats are entirely online and that's not necessarily keeping people away. As Mike mentioned earlier, I think the bigger barrier is the time commitment.
This is a good point. In general, I think we could get a lot more out of the easier tournaments we currently have. There's always pressure to post tournaments as quickly as possible, but I think there's some solid business opportunities for editors to get more revenue and players for their sets. For example, you could license a set to an organization with a pre-existing infrastructures and audience (say, QB League) to run a mini-tournament on it.

To solve the problem of "new players being brutalized" especially when trying to bring in new audiences, I would strongly encourage power-matching systems, such as a Swiss system (with some kind of modified Buchholz-style tiebreaker) or NAQT's card system. You'd have a bit more lag between rounds, but with the assistance of a simple application or programmed Google Sheet, it should be possible for a TD to get pairings out relatively quickly after all rounds finish. This would make shorter tournaments more viable - in a field of 32 teams, only one should be undefeated after five rounds. Add in another round or two to allow for some leeway for losses and a cut to a single-elimination top 4 or something and you should have a fair format that can sort out 32 teams in 6-7 rounds, with only two more for semifinals and finals. I think this might be an ideal format for large ACF Fall fields as well.
Will Alston
Dartmouth College '16
Columbia Business School '21
STPickrell
Auron
Posts: 1350
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 11:12 pm
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by STPickrell »

A few random thoughts:

1) I've always wondered at what point yesterday's "trash" becomes today's "history/fine arts" (or other topic). I attempted during my years at the helm of writing VHSL questions to separate that into "classic pop culture" and "current pop culture", with a delineation of "when were HS freshmen that year born". A question on say Elvis Presley, Jackie Robinson, or Billie Jean King just seemed less non-academic than a question on current, potentially more ephemeral trends.

2) I do like the differentiation between "masters" tournaments (i.e. tournaments at which the greats of the game can roam once more) and "open" (playing on IS sets, wider age/talent spam.) I think someone that goes along and gets 3-5ppg at a "masters" tournament shouldn't be shunned at an "open" tournament, but some self-selection has to be at play here.

2a) I liked Bruce's mention about variation in formats - the four quarters format isn't necessarily conducive to "bad quizbowl" and living in fear of things that happened 20-25-30 years ago isn't always the best option.

3) There's a great deal of variation among the bars. O'Brien's, I saw once on FB, is like the Rucker Park (legendary park in Harlem where the streetball greats roam/ed) of pub trivia. You've got random small-town bars where someone of even my caliber can go in solo and win a majority of the time (I'm a B Rundler in LearnedLeague), and others where I'd be lucky to finish top half playing solo. At O'Brien's, I might end up being fit to be the waterboy for a team there.

4) I'd add there are at least some post-college late 20s/early 30s players at the bar trivia events I do go to on occasion with my wife. This might be a quirk of where I live (Frederick MD, an edge city to DC/Baltimore), but I suspect as people have younger kids, they're reluctant to give up *every* Tuesday/Thursday night. But then they're happy to pick up again as their kids get older.

I enjoyed reading this a great deal. Thanks for posting this, Matt.
Shawn Pickrell, HSAPQ CFO
alanlin91
Kimahri
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2022 2:45 pm

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by alanlin91 »

I sent this to Matt privately after reviewing a draft of his post and he invited me to post here. For some context, I played and enjoyed collegiate quizbowl at Caltech 2008-2012, but that was a particularly dead period for the West Coast, so I never really joined the community of what Matt has termed 'enfranchised' QB players. For the past five years, I have been pretty deep in the trivia community. As someone whose interests have always tended more toward the academic side, I'm glad that the two activities and their respective communities are reaching a detente.

- Alan Lin

I’m definitely interested in the conversation you’re starting. You do a great job of outlining the two different worlds and how they came to be what they are, and I think you make some good suggestions about how they can better speak to one another. What I find to be kind of conspicuously missing, though, is what one might find *positively* good about trivia vs quizbowl outside of practical and logistical considerations. You do a lot of ground-clearing to break up existing pre-conceptions of trivia (which is probably necessary) but it still feels like there’s no real incentive for somebody reading this from the quizbowl side to do trivia besides “I literally cannot participate in qb any more because I graduated and have a job.” There’s a few sentences about learning things in trivia that you had never encountered in qb, and while that is certainly its own reward, it also seems to be damning with faint praise.

On a philosophical level (and with the understanding that I am deliberately being a little provocative and that many will probably disagree), I propose that the fundamental difference is that QB elevates what is *important* while trivia elevates what is *interesting*. Hopefully, these two qualities have self-evident value and don’t need further justification. There is obviously a lot of intersection—something can be important because many people are interested in it and it can be interesting to know why people consider something important—but, there is also a lot of disjunction. I accept that organic chemistry is important but I have never, ever been interested in a question about functional groups. Conversely, it is interesting that Samuel Beckett (allegedly) drove Andre the Giant to school but that is not terribly important in the grand scheme of things. While neither format always (or even usually) lives up to this Platonic ideal, and while the two goals coexist in both places, I think the priority of one over the other can explain at least some of the differences that you’ve outlined.

In terms of content, a lot of pop culture is obviously more interesting than it is important (though I do think that QB vastly under-represents certain film/television/pop music in proportion to its cultural importance, even just going by the academic attention they receive). Even in academic categories, we can see the difference (especially clear in sciences, as you’ve noted, with things like animals and biographical clues being verboten in QB). We allow ‘vanity’ content in trivia because it is presumably what the writer is interested in, and when done well, they are able to communicate and perhaps even inspire some corresponding interest in the person answering the questions. That is to say, (again, when done well) vanity content is a feature, not a bug. This extends to question formats as well. More puzzle-ish content, which might rely on coincidences and similarities between two things, or some kind of wordplay, is decidedly unimportant, but it can be interesting.

There is another axis that I think is also entangled with these issues, and maybe not so cleanly divided between qb/trivia—that is, whether these hobbies are supposed to be educational or competitive. While it might seem a bit strange to say that about activities that are, after all, fundamentally competitions, I know that there are people out there for whom the competitive aspect of trivia is incidental or even actively detrimental to their enjoyment and I would be surprised if the same were not true in QB. And curiously, in both activities, there seems to be a constant push against overemphasizing the competitive aspect. I know that there is a kind of arms race in QB between writers and players trying to reward ‘real’ knowledge vs. ‘fake’ knowledge imbibed specifically for the purposes of winning a tournament. This is mirrored in the trivia world by the idolization of ‘amateurism’ (which is to say, the impression, however false, that somebody has not specifically trained for Jeopardy or whatever other contest), which you noted. In that respect, both have similar goals, and yet the two sides will deride each other for what are in reality, similar concessions to the way that such competitions reward knowledge.

For the average QB and trivia player, respectively, is memorizing functional groups really that much different from memorizing flags? I would argue not—outside of a select group of legitimate QB chemists and trivia vexillologists, most players do not actively engage in these fields outside of the competitive environment, even in conversation. QB will fairly say that functional groups are important if uninteresting and trivia will fairly say that flags are interesting if unimportant, but the reality is that many QB players memorize functional groups without a sense of why they are important and many trivia players memorize flags without a sense of why they are interesting as a sort of basic obligation in order to do well in their respective competition. The upshot here is not that we should necessarily try to stamp out these question topics, but to re-emphasize the ways in which they promote the respective qualities (importance and interest) championed by their competition.
Alan Lin
Caltech '12
User avatar
Good Goblin Housekeeping
Auron
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 10:03 am

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Good Goblin Housekeeping »

Alan makes an excellent post, which also highlights an even more important point (that even chemists do not have any fucking interest in learning shit about functional groups, but whether or not ochem can be written in fact "well" or even "better" than stupid name reaction stuff is its own discussion that has fortunately grown into much more playable stuff than the andy watkins hard name reaction glut of the late aughts and early 2010s).

so we beat on, boats against the current blah blah blah
Andrew Wang
Illinois 2016
User avatar
Mike Bentley
Sin
Posts: 6461
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2006 11:03 pm
Location: Bellevue, WA
Contact:

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Mike Bentley »

Good Goblin Housekeeping wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 4:51 pm Alan makes an excellent post, which also highlights an even more important point (that even chemists do not have any fucking interest in learning shit about functional groups, but whether or not ochem can be written in fact "well" or even "better" than stupid name reaction stuff is its own discussion that has fortunately grown into much more playable stuff than the andy watkins hard name reaction glut of the late aughts and early 2010s).

so we beat on, boats against the current blah blah blah
Yeah in my opinion quizbowl science has gotten a lot more interesting in the past few years to someone who otherwise hates science questions. I'm still not really answering most of them, but we're a long way from the days of memorizing the Rosenmund-von Braun reaction. That being said, science is still going to be one of the biggest barriers to casual play for non-scientists.
Mike Bentley
Treasurer, Partnership for Academic Competition Excellence
Adviser, Quizbowl Team at University of Washington
University of Maryland, Class of 2008
User avatar
Good Goblin Housekeeping
Auron
Posts: 1100
Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 10:03 am

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Good Goblin Housekeeping »

Good Goblin Housekeeping wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 4:51 pm Alan makes an excellent post, which also highlights an even more important point (that even chemists do not have any fucking interest in learning shit about functional groups, but whether or not ochem can be written in fact "well" or even "better" than stupid name reaction stuff is its own discussion that has fortunately grown into much more playable stuff than the andy watkins hard name reaction glut of the late aughts and early 2010s).

so we beat on, boats against the current blah blah blah
Perhaps to add a more meaningful contribution to the discussion, this also is a good way to illustrate that one’s experience may also be heavily skewed on the quality of what you’re playing. Often qb stuff isn’t good at what might be “important” or “interesting” and unfortunately a lot of trivia does a great job of emphasizing the trivial parts (lol periodic table spelling, a binary from a year with nothing else) but when done well is very enjoyable (unfortunately the market for boutique trivia Qs probably isn’t really pub quiz level?)
Andrew Wang
Illinois 2016
User avatar
marnold
Tidus
Posts: 706
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 12:32 pm
Location: NY

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by marnold »

Interesting post. I'm too disconnected from both the trivia and quizbowl communities to say anything of much value. I've played Geek Bowls, TRASHionals, WQCs, TCONAs (not to reminisce about various OLDs, but David Seal, Andrew Hart and I were the core of a team that lost the last prelim round to qualify for the playoffs in a round with two figure skating questions... then the semis and finals were out of nowhere a few packets of NAQT questions (I believe?) where I'm pretty confident we would have won handily, but so it goes). I even played some CU Trivia Bowls (more on that below). Broadly, I think these events are all fun on their own terms, and I think this post is a useful and interesting way of explaining the work "on their own terms" is doing in saying that. I don't really do any sort of trivia or quizbowl related activity now, but I'm also glad to learn from this post the pandemic didn't kill them off.

Just two points. First, on this:
Here’s a thing I learned while at the Olympiad: There was a 5,000 person trash tournament, held on buzzers, happening at the University of Colorado-Boulder, as far back as 1980! People across the campus watched this annual “Trivia Bowl” on local closed-circuit television. And some of the people involved in it (such as Team USA coordinator G. Paul Bailey) are still quizzing today. That's utterly wild to me, especially given that CU was largely unconnected to the academic circuit until the mid-2010s. (I have a paper pamphlet detailing the history of Trivia Bowl that I can scan if there's interest.).
CU Trivia Bowl is definitely older than the '80s. My dad played when he was a CU undergrad in the 70s, making me a second generation participant, and he confirms it was an enormously popular event at its peak. I think it dates to the late '60s, though I'm not entirely sure. As you say, Paul would certainly know.

Second, lol at this:
the entertaining if esoteric at times CO Trash
I think that's a fair summation of what Andrew was going for at its founding, and I can only hope the iteration of it I wrote qualified as that as well. I think Matt's point about "know your quizmaster" being more of a trivia phenomenon is right, especially since it seemed like the tolerance for the auteur in quizbowl regrettably declined even over the course of my time in the game.
Michael Arnold
Chicago 2010
Columbia Law 2013

2009 ACF Nats Champion
2010 ICT Champion
2010 CULT Champion
Member of Mike Cheyne's Quizbowl All-Heel Team

Fundamental Theorem of Quizbowl (Revised): Almost no one is actually good at quizbowl.
jsontchi
Kimahri
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2014 3:44 pm

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by jsontchi »

This has been an incredibly interesting thread. I’ve played a fair amount of pub quizzes, particularly in the UK, and while they’re good fun, I’ve also sometimes found them less intellectually satisfying. I do not mean with relation to the subject matter being asked about but rather the format of questions as a knowledge binary. Do you know this one clue or not? By comparison, I’ve long enjoyed the learning experience of quizbowl, whereby long questions reinforce information about a common topic. While Alan’s point about a subject focus of important vs. interesting is valid, the more relevant distinction for me when it comes to keeping my interest and justifying commitment is a format that rewards and produces deeper knowledge of a subject.
Jeremy Sontchi
Wilmington Charter '17
Yale '21
Oxford '23
User avatar
stevebahnaman
Wakka
Posts: 110
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2009 1:25 pm

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by stevebahnaman »

jsontchi wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 7:03 pm This has been an incredibly interesting thread. I’ve played a fair amount of pub quizzes, particularly in the UK, and while they’re good fun, I’ve also sometimes found them less intellectually satisfying. I do not mean with relation to the subject matter being asked about but rather the format of questions as a knowledge binary. Do you know this one clue or not? By comparison, I’ve long enjoyed the learning experience of quizbowl, whereby long questions reinforce information about a common topic. While Alan’s point about a subject focus of important vs. interesting is valid, the more relevant distinction for me when it comes to keeping my interest and justifying commitment is a format that rewards and produces deeper knowledge of a subject.
One of the biggest problems, most likely, with a "trivia is X way and quizbowl is Y way" conversation is that the things good trivia writers hate the most about bad trivia writing are being lumped in as typical of "trivia." I hate that shit too, and find most bar trivia to be enjoyable for what it is but not much beyond that.

I think I would maybe agree with Alan above that "interestingness" has more clout in trivia than quizbowl, but I wouldn't say trivia doesn't care about what is important or would always prioritize "interestingness". LearnedLeague has many questions about things that are important and, crucially and more recently, things that have been underrepresented in their importance. It's possible that LL and OQL fall into a category of elevated or "hybrid-academic" trivia that bar companies don't, a sort of "Jeopardy-plus" type canon that is more exploratory with pop culture AND academic culture than syndicated TV can afford to be.

I think trivia overall has a more "democratic" bent to a degree, and that's probably not a bad thing. I'd probably have a long hard argument over whether literature is more "important" than film, for instance, or whether Ralph Vaughan Williams is more important than the Beatles. I don't think the academic side would win those arguments without resulting to some argument from trickle-down cultural economics.

OQL and OQLUSA have positioned ourselves pretty heavily at the nexus of important and interesting, where LL tried to be. It's a hell of a lot more fertile for a lot of people than bar trivia, whose best companies can still leave a player drunk and unchallenged because of what their goals are.
Steve Bahnaman, Campbell University
Commissioner, Online Quiz League USA (quizcentral.net)
NC Wesleyan College, Librarian and Quiz Bowl Advisor/Coach 2009-2011
Emory Academic Team, 1999-2004
Pretty trashy
User avatar
Cheynem
Sin
Posts: 7220
Joined: Tue May 11, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Grand Rapids, Michigan

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Cheynem »

I think Matt Bollinger upthread got at a good point that a lot of "trivia" really highlights more of the *experience*, not just the competition. Like when I go to a pub trivia-Geeks Who Drink-like event, I want to win, of course, but I think a lot of people there, including some people on my team are just more for the experience. They want to hang out with friends. They like the quizmaster's jokes and repartee. Their night can be made by hearing one question on their pet topic (and as Matt pointed out, in this trivia format, they can answer it and be correct even if it's "not their bonus" or they're not the first to buzz in). They like hearing questions on things that prompt that classic trivia "aw man, remember Metroid?" type conversations.

Of course, quizbowl has that stuff too, but we for good reason downplay these things. We want the moderators to cut down on the jibber-jabber and keep the game moving. I wouldn't want quizbowl to alter these things, but I suppose that's where more slightly more informal contests might work out.

Also: Independent of anything...they just announced a quizbowl match for next week's Monday Night Raw episode! Will they use pyramidal questions!?
Mike Cheyne
Formerly U of Minnesota

"You killed HSAPQ"--Matt Bollinger
User avatar
Stained Diviner
Auron
Posts: 5085
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2004 6:08 am
Location: Chicagoland
Contact:

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Stained Diviner »

Thanks to Matt for starting this discussion. Personally, I don't have to look up old threads to know about Yogesh Raut, Andrew Ullsperger, and Greg Peterson, because I coached against them when they were in high school.

The connection between quizbowl and bar trivia is old and common--a few generations of quizbowl moderators and coaches have played bar trivia. I don't do it, but I know people who do.

One thing I'll add is that one reason quizbowl and "trivia" have the different constituencies they do is because brains work differently at different ages. For an old person (of which I am one), listening to clues all day long and anticipating where they are going isn't going to work well. Also, when a young person loads up on caffeine and energy drinks it is unhealthy, but when I do it I can actually feel how unhealthy it is.

There probably is a place for trivia within quizbowl, just as there seems to be a growing place for quizbowl within trivia. Having an occasional worksheet in practice or on non-practice days can give students a chance to get answers right, which doesn't happen often for somebody who is not as strong as their teammates. Additionally, if the time worked out and if the quizbowl tournament didn't suffer too much from losing a round, it might be fun to have some trivia contests during/after lunch of a quizbowl tournament. I'm not saying that everybody needs to do this now--I'm just saying that it could be a worthwhile experiment. Also, trivia could be used as a fundraiser for a quizbowl team--in fact, that idea has been done successfully a few times.

I think that the current dichotomy probably is as it should be to a large extent. It makes more sense for academic institutions to sponsor quizbowl than trivia, both because it focuses on important information and because it covers more ground in a given day. It makes more sense for trivia groups to sponsor trivia than quizbowl for a few reasons, probably most of which have already been said here. That being said, we should respect each other and occasionally help each other out.
David Reinstein
Head Writer and Editor for Scobol Solo, Masonics, and IESA; TD for Scobol Solo and Reinstein Varsity; IHSSBCA Board Member; IHSSBCA Chair (2004-2014); PACE President (2016-2018)
User avatar
Scipio
Wakka
Posts: 169
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2003 4:12 pm

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Scipio »

As someone who isn't really part of the trivia community, I have nevertheless been following this thread with great interest. For entirely predictable reasons, this part in particular caught my eye:
I once had an argument with Ryan Westbrook, in which Ryan (not a student at the time) said he wanted most or even all college tournaments to become open, and I (a student at the time) disagreed. I now think we were both somewhat wrong.

Currently, only 2 or 3 pre-nationals college tournaments per year are open, with maybe 2 or 3 more in the summer. These are usually high-difficulty tournaments. The main reason for this is that there aren’t usually enough teams interested in hard quizbowl to fill fields otherwise. It also rewards Olds for their continued service to the game by giving them something they can play.

Existing collegiate opens are totally unsuited to the task of welcoming people from non-quizbowl backgrounds to quizbowl. They’re way too hard and last way too long. A “casual open” circuit (where “casual” encompasses many people who are quite serious about “trivia”) would have to be built totally differently, from the ground up.
Selfishly, I am very enthusiastic about this idea for the simple reason that I would really like there to be more tournaments at which I can play over the course of the calendar year. I'm not particularly picky about the difficulty level, either, though easier tournaments would probably be better suited for my current level of skill (or lack of it), and if it had the added bonus of potentially introducing non-quizbowl people to the game, so much the better.

In a similar vein: I've often thought - and have expressed in the past - that there would likely be a way for the regular quizbowl community and its superannuate members to be of better use to each other (beyond the value added by staffing and occasionally editing). For example: consider ACF Fall. If there were an "Open" Division at something like this (or an open version of it), and it were hosted near me, I'd go and play in it, which would add to the host's coffers; I would even write for it, and even if my questions are hopelessly old fashioned, I'm sure that some use could be made of a few bonuses or something. This might also draw new potential teams from outside the community, who could get a glimpse of quizbowl at its least daunting level of difficulty.

Or if NAQT were somehow to arrange for an open version of sectionals, a) I am reasonably sure that there would be a field for it (increasing revenue for the company and for the host schools), and that these could possibly, again, come from outside of the community; b) it could function as a playtest for the collegiate sectionals, and c) a pitch could easily be made to that field to volunteer at a collegiate sectionals to go and read for it.

I'm sure there are problems with these suggestions that are currently escaping my vision, but I would be heartened if this element of the conversation would continue.
Seth Lyons Kendall
University of Memphis, 1993-1997
University of Kentucky, 1997-1999, 2000-2008
User avatar
Skepticism and Animal Feed
Auron
Posts: 3238
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 11:47 pm
Location: Arlington, VA

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Skepticism and Animal Feed »

I think the reason you don't see an open division at ACF tournaments is resource constraints: there are limited moderators, limited numbers of game rooms, etc. and it makes sense for ACF to focus this on collegiate players. There'a also, frankly, an ick factor where college students don't really want a bunch of old people at their tournament. I think the only way this would work is for ACF to simply sell its questions to some third party, which would then host open events using entirely separate infrastructure. It is quite likely that this would require ACF taking on some reputational risk: if the third party holding an open trivia tournament on ACF Fall questions did something bad, it might threaten ACF with its core constituency of college players and important constituency of college administrators.

But it could be a source of cold hard cash for ACF.
Bruce
Harvard '10 / UChicago '07 / Roycemore School '04
ACF Member emeritus
My guide to using Wikipedia as a question source
alexdz
Rikku
Posts: 458
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 7:29 pm
Location: Conshohocken, PA

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by alexdz »

Shawn Pickrell wrote:I've always wondered at what point yesterday's "trash" becomes today's "history/fine arts" (or other topic). I attempted during my years at the helm of writing VHSL questions to separate that into "classic pop culture" and "current pop culture", with a delineation of "when were HS freshmen that year born". A question on say Elvis Presley, Jackie Robinson, or Billie Jean King just seemed less non-academic than a question on current, potentially more ephemeral trends.
I try to do the same with my SAGES elementary/MS questions. Particularly since there is less room for harder science, social science, and fine arts, I tend to incorporate a chunk of what I usually call "general knowledge." This includes generally mixed academic questions, but also things like the "classic pop culture" Shawn mentions. For the children playing the games I write, a person like Elvis is essentially irrelevant to their idea of popular culture and instead factors into their lives in a much more 'historical' sense. And these sorts of questions, when done well, can actually provide some really great connections to academic topics like history or social sciences. A question about Billie Jean King or Arthur Ashe could certainly revolve around their tennis game, but could also be an opportunity to learn about their work in social justice.
Alex Dzurick
====
Owner/Editor, SAGES Quizbowl Questions
Middle school teacher, Rohan Woods School
====
South Callaway '08 -- Mizzou '12 -- Illinois '17
SCMS coach '12-'13 -- EFIP coach '20-'21 -- RWS coach '22-present
gpaulbailey
Kimahri
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2022 11:48 pm
Location: Boulder CO
Contact:

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by gpaulbailey »

marnold wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 5:55 pm
Here’s a thing I learned while at the Olympiad: There was a 5,000 person trash tournament, held on buzzers, happening at the University of Colorado-Boulder, as far back as 1980! People across the campus watched this annual “Trivia Bowl” on local closed-circuit television. And some of the people involved in it (such as Team USA coordinator G. Paul Bailey) are still quizzing today. That's utterly wild to me, especially given that CU was largely unconnected to the academic circuit until the mid-2010s. (I have a paper pamphlet detailing the history of Trivia Bowl that I can scan if there's interest.).
CU Trivia Bowl is definitely older than the '80s. My dad played when he was a CU undergrad in the 70s, making me a second generation participant, and he confirms it was an enormously popular event at its peak. I think it dates to the late '60s, though I'm not entirely sure. As you say, Paul would certainly know.
Indeed the CU Trivia Bowl started in 1968 by the professor who coached the University of Colorado to 5 straight GE College Bowl victories in 1967.

Concern for "important" information is an expression of responsibility to the culture. Concern for trivia is an expression of affection for that culture.
Dr. David Bowen, Trivia Bowl Founder

A full Trivia Bowl definition of "What is Trivia" can be found on page 3 of the 50th Anniversary Program.
a general balance of movies, television, music, sports, and miscellaneous pop culture.

In the early 80s, perhaps 100 teams would take a seeding test to select the top 64 to play a single elimination tournament, and there could be up to 2000 people in the Glenn Miller Ballroom watching in person and more around campus on closed circuit TV. Biggest audience may have been when I tested a low power UHF station in 1993 and broadcast the final day (Neilsen rating share not available).
G. Paul Bailey
ex-Boulder HS, ex-University of Colorado
Founder GSC, TCONA
User avatar
The King's Flight to the Scots
Auron
Posts: 1645
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 11:11 pm

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by The King's Flight to the Scots »

With apologies for coming to the thread so late, I wanted to post a couple issues I have with the "importance vs. interest" framing that's been brought up here. Although I'm interested in the prospects for a rapprochement between the quizbowl and trivia worlds, I don't think that framing does much justice to what quizbowl tries to be. Most quizbowl tournaments strive for a balance between importance in the academic world and "interest" along the lines that Alan defines it. Current tournaments ask about lots of things for reasons other than their classroom "importance," including several of the types of clues, e.g. flags, that Matt mentions in his first post.

I would also question whether what's been defined above as "interesting" is really universal. Personally, I tend to find the world of popular culture knowledge rather overwhelming and unpleasant. It's pretty dull to me to know all the prominent actors + what awards they've won, or remember baseball guys, or keep up with the Billboard 100. The stuff quizbowl tests tends to be much more interesting for me than that, at least. Conversely, though, it's pretty rare that quizbowl knowledge is "important" to getting through my actual life. Having a baseline familiarity with popular culture is incomparably more "important" in that department, even when I don't find it very fun.

I expect that I'm an extreme case, but I don't think I'm alone, particularly with regard to the way popular culture tends to be asked in trivia events. I think the difference between quizbowl and trivia is just as much in the different topics the audiences find interesting.
Matt Bollinger
UVA '14, UVA '15
User avatar
Sam
Rikku
Posts: 338
Joined: Sat Nov 07, 2009 2:35 am

Re: Quizbowl-"Trivia" Community Relations: What Are They? What Should They Be?

Post by Sam »

Matt Jackson's description of the particulars of these two communities was interesting and accurate (at least as far as I could tell), and I think many of the points he makes have implications for how we treat all people not yet "enfranchised" in the community.

The issue of amateurism was especially interesting to me. I think Matt is right that trivia has maybe more of a "amateur" spirit, but there's a version in quiz bowl. Alan Lin explained it well:
alanlin91 wrote: Mon Jan 31, 2022 4:00 pm There is another axis that I think is also entangled with these issues, and maybe not so cleanly divided between qb/trivia—that is, whether these hobbies are supposed to be educational or competitive. While it might seem a bit strange to say that about activities that are, after all, fundamentally competitions, I know that there are people out there for whom the competitive aspect of trivia is incidental or even actively detrimental to their enjoyment and I would be surprised if the same were not true in QB. And curiously, in both activities, there seems to be a constant push against overemphasizing the competitive aspect. I know that there is a kind of arms race in QB between writers and players trying to reward ‘real’ knowledge vs. ‘fake’ knowledge imbibed specifically for the purposes of winning a tournament. This is mirrored in the trivia world by the idolization of ‘amateurism’ (which is to say, the impression, however false, that somebody has not specifically trained for Jeopardy or whatever other contest), which you noted. In that respect, both have similar goals, and yet the two sides will deride each other for what are in reality, similar concessions to the way that such competitions reward knowledge.
Amateurism can make a community more welcoming in some ways. There's a lower upfront investment to reach a level of skill where the activity is fun. It may take less time out of a busy weekend. And many people do find competition to be stressful no matter what. They are probably more likely to enjoy an activity they do for half a day once or twice a month where everyone agrees the stakes don't matter much. I think it's worthwhile to do a few events specifically for this group: maybe they're enfranchised trivia players, maybe they're undergrads already busy with other clubs, but it probably wouldn't hurt to reach out even if it doesn't grow "quiz bowl" quiz bowl.

But amateurism can also be off-putting, especially if it's a creed followed more in theory than in practice. If I get blown out of the water my first tournament and we're all "amateurs," what does that say about my future prospects? Or about me as a person whose self-image is very likely wrapped up with being unusually knowledgeable? In quiz bowl there's a tradition of improvement through hard work, like Matt's example of Subash's lead-ins, but there's also been a tradition, less prominent but definitely there, of treating studying "for quiz bowl" as a little gauche. The team who studies hard and consistently comes in first is admirable, but not quite as...elegant, maybe? as the team of scholars who consistently come in fifth through knowledge they would have come to even absent the competition.

I wonder if part of the issue is we don't spend as much time talking about the game play itself beyond mechanics of who wins and who loses. Say a team wins by pure binary associations, they truly have no deeper understanding beyond hearing A and saying B. This is unsatisfying. In a sport or another game (and maybe even "trivia" is better at this) we might say they won but played "ugly," and have vocabulary to describe why their playing was ugly and why it wasn't in the spirit of the game. Others may disagree with the judgment but we would all agree a judgment could be made, and that this judgment would not be just a restatement of who got the most points. Without this vocabulary, I think play that is ugly gets treated as a result of studying, and amateurism as the solution. I don't know if this affects the writing at all: writing to reward "real knowledge" and writing to produce satisfying game play will probably often lead to the same types of questions. But it may be healthier for writers to view their task as the latter, rather than to separate the truly enlightened from the striving Babbitts. Again, there is also a culture of self-improvement in quiz bowl, though I think even here it may be healthy to think of it less mechanically as a way to rack up points and as way to "improve as a quiz bowler," leaving that phrase purposely vague. (One of the nice things about quiz bowl is there are many different roles to serve and many different ways to improve: as a player, as a writer, even as a reader.)

In conclusion: there's a place for amateurs in the larger quiz bowl community. But there's nothing wrong with working to improve. If a team improves in a way that's "bad," the reason it's bad is not because of the desire to win, there's something else. To say questions are good because they reward "amateurs" is unnecessary (they're good because they lead to good game play) and can also be harmful by discouraging newcomers who truly believe veteran players are just preternaturally gifted and the veterans themselves who are sheepish and embarrassed about studying "for quiz bowl."
Sam Bailey
Minnesota '21
Chicago '13
Post Reply