CBI rules shafted me

Old college threads.
Locked

Do you think there should be a minimum number of players on a team in college bowl?

Yes
1
2%
No
40
98%
 
Total votes: 41

emactruman
Wakka
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 11:18 am

CBI rules shafted me

Post by emactruman » Mon Feb 02, 2004 4:39 pm

I was playing in Wayne State's IM tournament last week and got shafted by the damn 3 person min. rule. We won are first two then lost the next game. We were supposed to play another team to see who goes to the finals, however, one of my players had an exam and left.

User avatar
Captain Sinico
Auron
Posts: 2840
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: Champaign, Illinois

Post by Captain Sinico » Mon Feb 02, 2004 5:04 pm

Stop playing CBI.

MaS

User avatar
Leo Wolpert
Rikku
Posts: 309
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 1:37 pm
Location: Henderson, NV
Contact:

Post by Leo Wolpert » Mon Feb 02, 2004 5:09 pm

^^^ We have a winner. ^^^

Moronic CBI rules fucking people over?

Well I never!

User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by Matt Weiner » Mon Feb 02, 2004 6:11 pm

Whoever called you on a stupid rule like that at a goddamn intramural tournament is a royal prick. Also, stop playing CBI.

mujason
Wakka
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 12:47 am
Location: Missouri

Post by mujason » Mon Feb 02, 2004 6:46 pm

CBI does suck. Too bad Mizzou's been reduced to a CBI-only school by our lack of transportation and pathetic leadership. Anyway, my team won our campus intramural Saturday, so I'll be coming with my posse (hopefully I'll have a higher-scoring posse than last year). I hope we don't get fifth again.

Jason Mueller

User avatar
Dan Greenstein
Auron
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 8:26 pm
Location: Takoma Park, MD

Post by Dan Greenstein » Mon Feb 02, 2004 11:13 pm

Not that it affects me, since hopefully I will be at a mACF tournament, but where is CBI Nationals this year?

Susan
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 1817
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 12:43 am

Post by Susan » Mon Feb 02, 2004 11:32 pm

I believe it's at Auburn.

mujason
Wakka
Posts: 246
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 12:47 am
Location: Missouri

Post by mujason » Mon Feb 02, 2004 11:43 pm

Yeah, but Auburn-Montgomery, not Auburn-Auburn.

Jason Mueller

User avatar
QuizbowlPostmodernist
Wakka
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 12:22 am

Post by QuizbowlPostmodernist » Tue Feb 03, 2004 1:42 am

AUM is not the most pathetic nationals site for CBI. [See Akron.]

And for what it's worth, AUM is the site because several years ago, someone noticed that 2004 was an important anniversary in College Bowl history and made a bid for the tournament a year or two earlier than normal.

User avatar
cvdwightw
Auron
Posts: 3446
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 12:46 am
Location: Southern CA
Contact:

Post by cvdwightw » Tue Feb 03, 2004 3:01 am

Auburn-Montgomery is bad? This year CBI Regionals Section 15 is being held at UC Davis, which I just found out reserved 6 rooms for a 17-team tournament. Why? Because there's an ACUI-affiliated billiards tournament there the same day!

Draw conclusions where you see fit.

tfmichael
Lulu
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 2:43 am

Post by tfmichael » Tue Feb 03, 2004 3:10 am

Of the ten or so College Bowl NCT's I've been to, the one I regard as the best was at the College of DuPage, in Napierville, Illinois (1989). From a non-game perspective, it's not the location but what the host provides that defines the tournament. Akron (1995) ain't the greatest city in the world, but the game rooms were fine, the meals were good, and the opening reception, even with Zippy the Kangaroo, was quite nice. That's what the host provides for a College Bowl NCT: facilities, meals, and entertainment functions. CBCI and ACU-I provide questions and moderators - if you have complaints with either direct them to the source, not the tournament host. As 2004 is both the 50th anniversary of College Bowl and NCT XXV, though, one can reasonably expect AUM to try to do a little extra.

AUM has hosted the first NAQT Southeastern sectional, four or five all-Alabama collegiate invitationals, and two College Bowl RCT's. I'm confident we'll have some good surprises for the College Bowl NCT. Quite confident, in fact. :)

Tom

User avatar
Captain Sinico
Auron
Posts: 2840
Joined: Sun Sep 21, 2003 1:46 pm
Location: Champaign, Illinois

Post by Captain Sinico » Tue Feb 03, 2004 11:05 am

tfmichael wrote:...Napierville, Illinois...
That's "Naperville." Residents call it Naperthrill, but only if they're teenage girls. Those are the only residents that I care about, though.
tfmichael wrote:...if you have complaints with either direct them to the source, not the tournament host.
I couldn't agree with this more. Quit playing CBI. Only then will they understand.

MaS

User avatar
bucktowntiger
Lulu
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2003 10:39 pm
Location: Arkansas
Contact:

Post by bucktowntiger » Tue Feb 03, 2004 11:59 am

cvdwightw wrote:Auburn-Montgomery is bad? This year CBI Regionals Section 15 is being held at UC Davis, which I just found out reserved 6 rooms for a 17-team tournament. Why? Because there's an ACUI-affiliated billiards tournament there the same day!
Last year in Region 12, there were eighteen teams and four rooms. Twice we had two byes in a row. Maybe CBI does this on purpose to artificially lengthen the tournament (the tourney would be over in less than five hours without the artificial byes). Also, there's staff limitations, as per CBI rules, each room is required to have three tournament officials.

Edit: One reason for the paucity of rooms is because moderators are required to pre-read the packets before each round. Even if enough rooms were set up, teams will still end up waiting about the same amount of time as they would if they were just given byes instead.

--Josh, P. t. altaica
Last edited by bucktowntiger on Sun Feb 22, 2004 10:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
First Chairman
Auron
Posts: 3875
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 8:21 pm
Location: Fairfax VA
Contact:

Post by First Chairman » Tue Feb 03, 2004 12:53 pm

tfmichael wrote:AUM has hosted the first NAQT Southeastern sectional, four or five all-Alabama collegiate invitationals, and two College Bowl RCT's. I'm confident we'll have some good surprises for the College Bowl NCT. Quite confident, in fact. :)

Tom
You got Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake to guest moderate???!!! :shock: (kidding)
Emil Thomas Chuck, Ph.D.
Founder, PACE
Facebook junkie and unofficial advisor to aspiring health professionals in quiz bowl
---
Pimping Green Tea Ginger Ale (Canada Dry)

User avatar
MLafer
Tidus
Posts: 520
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 7:00 pm

Post by MLafer » Tue Feb 03, 2004 1:41 pm

CBI Nats is the weekend of April 23-25.

pakman044
Rikku
Posts: 408
Joined: Sun Nov 23, 2003 3:56 am
Location: Carrboro, NC
Contact:

Post by pakman044 » Tue Feb 03, 2004 3:46 pm

[Tom[/quote]

You got Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake to guest moderate???!!! :shock: (kidding)[/quote]

Knowing how sick and twisted *you* are Dr. Chuck, you might decide that next October's HS Celebrity Shootout needs some of the real deal and invite *them* to come to Durham ;-).

Patrick King

User avatar
First Chairman
Auron
Posts: 3875
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 8:21 pm
Location: Fairfax VA
Contact:

Post by First Chairman » Tue Feb 03, 2004 4:18 pm

pakman044 wrote:[Tom
You got Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake to guest moderate???!!! :shock: (kidding)[/quote]

Knowing how sick and twisted *you* are Dr. Chuck, you might decide that next October's HS Celebrity Shootout needs some of the real deal and invite *them* to come to Durham ;-).

Patrick King[/quote]

Oh that would be SO "Jeopardy!" :wink:
Emil Thomas Chuck, Ph.D.
Founder, PACE
Facebook junkie and unofficial advisor to aspiring health professionals in quiz bowl
---
Pimping Green Tea Ginger Ale (Canada Dry)

User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by Matt Weiner » Tue Feb 03, 2004 5:22 pm

The amenities at CBI nationals were, in the two years I played the format, the only thing I thought was done well. Both Cal State-LA and Kansas State exceeded what I'd expect from a tournament host in terms of the room setup, food, and frills. If only the quality of CBI's staff, statisticians, schedulers, and WRITERS was one millionth the quality of the chefs working for CBI's host sites, the tournament might not be completely worthless.

emactruman
Wakka
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 11:18 am

Post by emactruman » Tue Feb 03, 2004 7:22 pm

To answer the questions posed:

1) I'm at Wayne State, CBI is the only thing they'll support because it's cheap and college bowl is not a student org.

2) Gretchen Symmons is the IM tournament coordinator who enforced the vicious rule.

Funnier still, We (The one remaining teamate and I) scrimaged the first half of a packet out against the team we were supposed to play and led 60-50. The forfiet in question gave them a spot in the championship series, which they won. Therefore, we actually probably got jipped by $200. Furthermore, even if we had lost in the championships that meant would still be a $50 dollar increase.

User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by Matt Weiner » Tue Feb 03, 2004 9:02 pm

emactruman wrote:To answer the questions posed:

1) I'm at Wayne State, CBI is the only thing they'll support because it's cheap and college bowl is not a student org.
CBI is, by far, the most expensive of any of the "corporate" formats, and those formats are, in turn, far more expensive than any standalone invitational. Where do you get the above information about it being cheap?

emactruman
Wakka
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 11:18 am

Post by emactruman » Wed Feb 04, 2004 10:31 am

That was their reasoning for not doing any NAQT or ACF

User avatar
Theory Of The Leisure Flask
Yuna
Posts: 843
Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2003 11:04 am
Location: Brooklyn
Contact:

Post by Theory Of The Leisure Flask » Wed Feb 04, 2004 11:25 am

Normally I'd stay out of this, but when one is working off almost no sleep and then sees probably the single most ridiculous possible assertion one can make in the quizbowl world (CBI is cheap!), one feels compelled to respond.

Um... one can attend approximately five NAQT/ACF/independent tournaments with the money it takes to "qualify" for and attend CBI with their ridiculous $60 per-intramural-packet charge. (More if they buy more than the minimum 10 packets.)

One doesn't need to buy intramural packets to go to NAQT or ACF, and if one does wish to but NAQT IM sets, they're about a third of the price of CBI, even cheaper if you order last year's.

I just want to know three things:

1)Why don't you just show them the numbers, disabusing them once and for all of any notion of CBI as "cheap"?

2) What the hell are they smoking?

3) Where can I get some?

Issues of question quality aside, the sheer cost of CBI is reason enough to deafilliate.

emactruman
Wakka
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 11:18 am

Post by emactruman » Wed Feb 04, 2004 12:57 pm

At Wayne State, anything that requires motivation does not happen. Secondly, I showed them those figures. I also showed them how hosting a high school tournament could increase revenue. The snubbed all these ideas.

User avatar
Dan Greenstein
Auron
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 8:26 pm
Location: Takoma Park, MD

Post by Dan Greenstein » Wed Feb 04, 2004 1:15 pm

At Wayne State, anything that requires motivation does not happen. Secondly, I showed them those figures. I also showed them how hosting a high school tournament could increase revenue. The snubbed all these ideas.
You are going to have to work harder than that. These must be reasonable people you are dealing with; how would they be in such positions of power if they were not (I know, I know...).

You need to break this trend of mediocrity (see first sentence of quote) and persuade the administration how positive playing ACF, NAQT and invitationals can be. Remember, let them know what they get out of it. The high school tournament is a great idea and I am not sure why they fail to grasp that. If you need some kind of endorsement or reference, you can probably find someone on this board.

User avatar
AKKOLADE
Sin
Posts: 15274
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2003 8:08 am

Post by AKKOLADE » Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:08 pm

Dan Greenstein wrote:
At Wayne State, anything that requires motivation does not happen. Secondly, I showed them those figures. I also showed them how hosting a high school tournament could increase revenue. The snubbed all these ideas.
You need to break this trend of mediocrity (see first sentence of quote) and persuade the administration how positive playing ACF, NAQT and invitationals can be. Remember, let them know what they get out of it. The high school tournament is a great idea and I am not sure why they fail to grasp that. If you need some kind of endorsement or reference, you can probably find someone on this board.
I know that at WV Wesleyan, for example, we've been able to pitch our tournaments to the Admissions office as a way of them to get access to kids that they might not normally pull in. In return for the right to give a speech about the school and having pamphlets out, they've provided us with free breakfast at our last two tournaments.

Basically, what you need to do is to be able to present to the administration what the positives of your team are, especially with hosting. If those dopes can't see it, try others. If they're all dopes, transfer.

User avatar
Howard
Yuna
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 5:42 pm
Location: Ellicott City, MD

Post by Howard » Wed Feb 04, 2004 2:16 pm

When UMBC held its last high school tournament, the prize for the top team included four full tuition scholarships! What a great idea! Cost to school -- zero. You've simply allowed in a few more students for free. Possible benefit -- becoming more well known as an academically challenging college.

User avatar
Dan Greenstein
Auron
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 8:26 pm
Location: Takoma Park, MD

Post by Dan Greenstein » Wed Feb 04, 2004 4:35 pm

When UMBC held its last high school tournament, the prize for the top team included four full tuition scholarships! What a great idea! Cost to school -- zero. You've simply allowed in a few more students for free. Possible benefit -- becoming more well known as an academically challenging college.
I remember receiving a $1500 scholarship to UMBC from winning their tournament in 1999. Too bad I never seriously considered going there. Their quizbowl program disappeared by 2001 and I might have kept it going.

User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8411
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by Matt Weiner » Wed Feb 04, 2004 4:46 pm

Howard wrote:When UMBC held its last high school tournament, the prize for the top team included four full tuition scholarships! What a great idea! Cost to school -- zero. You've simply allowed in a few more students for free. Possible benefit -- becoming more well known as an academically challenging college.
A friend of mine was offered a chess scholarship there. They seem very serious about their competitive academic programs, yet their qb team has blinked out of existence. It's a puzzle.

User avatar
First Chairman
Auron
Posts: 3875
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 8:21 pm
Location: Fairfax VA
Contact:

What I told our admins today about CBI

Post by First Chairman » Wed Feb 04, 2004 5:55 pm

So at the Student Organizations Advisor Orientation session today, one of the people from the office accosted me because he was surprised we had a College Bowl team. He had been pitched by ACUI about the merits of College Bowl (TM) and wanted to ask me why we (Duke) didn't get involved. I pretty much told him the entire story. Thankfully, this person is not a ACUI loyalist as Gretchen at Wayne State is (from what I know of her... she is a nice person but I guess there are other issues to understand with her). He wondered if even having the OSAF subsidize all costs for participation would work; I pretty much said, our group decided that the cost was not worth any benefits of participation and that we'd prefer competing in other events that we felt were more meaningful and satisfying. That said, I did tell him I was keeping my eyes open to see if there would be any changes that could make us change our mind. But I nicely said, that door was closed by people who came before me and by others around the country who have made similar decisions.

But he was impressed on how active we are in general. So hopefully I won't expect any pressure to have us return to CBI anytime soon.
Emil Thomas Chuck, Ph.D.
Founder, PACE
Facebook junkie and unofficial advisor to aspiring health professionals in quiz bowl
---
Pimping Green Tea Ginger Ale (Canada Dry)

User avatar
Howard
Yuna
Posts: 967
Joined: Fri May 09, 2003 5:42 pm
Location: Ellicott City, MD

Post by Howard » Thu Feb 05, 2004 1:20 am

Matt Weiner wrote:
Howard wrote:When UMBC held its last high school tournament, the prize for the top team included four full tuition scholarships! What a great idea! Cost to school -- zero. You've simply allowed in a few more students for free. Possible benefit -- becoming more well known as an academically challenging college.
A friend of mine was offered a chess scholarship there. They seem very serious about their competitive academic programs, yet their qb team has blinked out of existence. It's a puzzle.
I think the student organizers left the club and it crumbled. The chess scholarship was indeed very similar to the academic team scholarship. I forget whether it was just the top Maryland student or more, but I know they offered at least one chess scholarship a year for a period to the Maryland Scholastic Champion. The have one of the best chess teams in the country to show for it.

BigFlax
Lulu
Posts: 85
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 10:04 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Post by BigFlax » Wed Feb 11, 2004 2:49 am

We actually stopped playing CBI this year because we don't have $600 to spend on lousy questions and none of us really like playing it anyway.

Here's my question: it seems that some programs have stopped playing CBI because of the cost. Certainly we have, at least for this year. Yet there are plenty of schools with no regular QB programs that play CBI every year (see: almost every other team in our region, save Chicago). Since there aren't clubs paying for it, I can only assume that the school pays for it.

So why do schools seem to think that if a quiz bowl program exists, suddenly it has to pay the exorbitant CBI fee? I mean, it's conceivable that we could pay $600 for questions and then lose our campus tournament to some random team, meaning for the cost of several worthwhile tournaments we're paying not to play. (Not that this would be likely or a common occurrence, but it does exist as a possibility.) What kind of sense does that make? Why isn't the administration paying for this as it seems to everywhere else, especially considering that it makes sense to do it that way based on the way CBI is run? Has anyone else had this problem?

tfmichael
Lulu
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 2:43 am

Post by tfmichael » Wed Feb 11, 2004 11:57 am

BigFlax wrote:I mean, it's conceivable that we could pay $600 for questions and then lose our campus tournament to some random team, meaning for the cost of several worthwhile tournaments we're paying not to play. (Not that this would be likely or a common occurrence, but it does exist as a possibility.) What kind of sense does that make? Why isn't the administration paying for this as it seems to everywhere else, especially considering that it makes sense to do it that way based on the way CBI is run? Has anyone else had this problem?
If you're paying for and running your intramural, you get to decide who goes to the RCT. The relevant eligibility rule is that all players sent to an RCT must have played in the intramural; they need not have been on the winning team. There is a rule that the team winning the IM is automatically apart of the "Varsity Squad," but that nebulous construct can consist of up to eight players declared eligible in a year, and you only need send three or four to the RCT - without having to declare the others eligible. Still, the team that wins the IM, in order to win, contains some good players that you may want to try to integrate into your existing program; and to win any tournament, you'll want to send the best combination of players you have (and that best combination isn't necessarily your four best individual players - but I digress).

Were you running your IM free? As you're paying for the questions, you can certainly charge IM teams a small fee in order to recoup all or most costs - true for any format using questions from any source. In fact, my experience has been that running a tournament with free admission results in a lot of no-shows,and that charging a fee cuts down that problem considerably. And by taking advantage of early order discounts, you can cut the cost down by about 20%.

Why your administration isn't chipping in for the cost is a local issue only you can answer. If you're interested in participating in College Bowl, then there are various ways to network with administrators or whomever gives out money to student organizations. There are strategies for getting those funds at http://www.zebra.net/~tfm/funding.html . That essay is about four years old, and needs an update, but I think is still essentially sound. And if you don't want to play College Bowl because you don't like it, that's cool. No one is forcing you to. :)

User avatar
QuizbowlPostmodernist
Wakka
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 12:22 am

Post by QuizbowlPostmodernist » Thu Feb 12, 2004 4:30 am

BigFlax wrote:So why do schools seem to think that if a quiz bowl program exists, suddenly it has to pay the exorbitant CBI fee?
In a nutshell, ACU-I. My guess is that the teams with great financial support from their schools are likely those teams who have acquired funding outside of whatever part of the administration is or would be part "student activities" or whatever part of a school joins ACU-I. Either that, or someone wentto the trouble to establish excellent personal relations with the people who control purse strings.

User avatar
First Chairman
Auron
Posts: 3875
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2003 8:21 pm
Location: Fairfax VA
Contact:

How QB teams running CBI-IM's can be RCT eligible...

Post by First Chairman » Thu Feb 12, 2004 11:58 am

tfmichael wrote: If you're paying for and running your intramural, you get to decide who goes to the RCT. The relevant eligibility rule is that all players sent to an RCT must have played in the intramural; they need not have been on the winning team. There is a rule that the team winning the IM is automatically apart of the "Varsity Squad," but that nebulous construct can consist of up to eight players declared eligible in a year, and you only need send three or four to the RCT - without having to declare the others eligible. Still, the team that wins the IM, in order to win, contains some good players that you may want to try to integrate into your existing program; and to win any tournament, you'll want to send the best combination of players you have (and that best combination isn't necessarily your four best individual players - but I digress).
Again a very good point. Just because you run the IM tournament doesn't mean you don't get to be on the Varsity Squad. Once upon a time at Duke, our staff got to be RCT-eligible because we decided we'd hold a "sample game" with one of the packets to give everyone an idea how the game is played and what "consultation" is or is not. Yeah, that's burning one packet, but that's how we got our staff to be eligible for our RCT team. :)

You could also do a "winners" vs. "staff" exhibition final, but only if you really wanted to. :)

But the point is for the IM tournament ought to be (for a qb team) to identify people that you otherwise wouldn't who could be a good player for your team, no matter what format.
Emil Thomas Chuck, Ph.D.
Founder, PACE
Facebook junkie and unofficial advisor to aspiring health professionals in quiz bowl
---
Pimping Green Tea Ginger Ale (Canada Dry)

tfmichael
Lulu
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 2:43 am

Re: How QB teams running CBI-IM's can be RCT eligible...

Post by tfmichael » Thu Feb 12, 2004 1:28 pm

E.T. Chuck wrote:But the point is for the IM tournament ought to be (for a qb team) to identify people that you otherwise wouldn't who could be a good player for your team, no matter what format.
The IM should primarily be a recruiting tool. It can also be a good source of local publicity and good will from adminstrators and faculty. And it can serve as a fundraiser, both through entry fees and as a way to get campus activity funds by holding an event open to all students.

There's also no reason to be limited to just one IM per year. The same questions can even be used for a second IM if it's designed for a particular group, e.g. Greek organizations, who haven't seen the q's before; or packets can be conserved and formats adjusted to allow the same teams to compete in both. The first time I held one at Virgina, a 20 team tournament in the Fall of 1981 sparked enough interest to hold a second IM for 32 teams in the Spring of 1982.

A frequent but often unexpected extra benefit is that IM's can occasionally attract students to your club who aren't interested in playing so much, but are interested in moderating, statkeeping, editing, and the tournament organization side of things. If you keep your eye out for such volunteers when they appear, and can find a way to include them in your club, they can bring some additional focused skills to help take your program to the next level.

For College Bowl eligibility purposes, in particular with regard to making students who are staff eligible, there are lots of things that have been done over the years that are within the rules. Dr. Chuck mentions exhibition games. The eligibility requirement is participation in the IM, which can be participation in a single game, or even a separate tournament for staff. In one notorious incident from the mid-1980's, a team from Rice qualified one of their players with a special official IM match held in a van on the way to the tournament. That's stretching the intent of the rule, to be sure, but was technically within it. (Today, because of eligibility form requirements, I think such a match would have to be held at least a couple of days before the RCT.)

STPickrell
Auron
Posts: 1501
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 11:12 pm
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

Re: How QB teams running CBI-IM's can be RCT eligible...

Post by STPickrell » Thu Feb 12, 2004 4:17 pm

Other methods to prevent the IM tournament from being a glorified intramural scrimmage are to either: (1) allow only 1-2 team members per IM team or (2) have a special scrimmage at the end of the tournament against the pre-existing A team.
Shawn Pickrell, HSAPQ CFO

emactruman
Wakka
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 11:18 am

Post by emactruman » Tue Feb 24, 2004 12:36 pm

Wayne State does things quite a bit different. The staff are actual staff taken from the Dean of Students office. And they chose to take only the top five points scorers in the IM tournament. So, I guess the are the ACUI's perfect model of the way things should be done. I feel that this is extremely punishing when we go to RCT's since we don't even have a permanent program.

PS the last staement may change soon.

tfmichael
Lulu
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2004 2:43 am

Post by tfmichael » Tue Feb 24, 2004 10:10 pm

emactruman wrote:Wayne State does things quite a bit different. The staff are actual staff taken from the Dean of Students office. And they chose to take only the top five points scorers in the IM tournament. So, I guess the are the ACUI's perfect model of the way things should be done. I feel that this is extremely punishing when we go to RCT's since we don't even have a permanent program.
No, that is not the perfect model. Neither ACU-I nor CBCI (nor for that matter NAQT, ACF, or TRASH) has the power to compell schools to select their teams a certain way. All they can do is recommend and suggest. And just taking the top five point scorers is not what's recommended.

The suggested way to select a team is on pages 4 and 5 of the Coach's Manual, which are numbered pages 46 and 47, at http://www.collegebowl.com/pub/coachingyourteam.pdf . Those suggestions include taking the winning team plus 4-8 other all stars as a practice squad, holding lots of practices, building a team balanced across many subject areas, and trying different player combinations before deciding on the best one. Page 7 (numbered page 49) suggests having team members prepare by writing practice questions. The packet distribution is spelled out on page 8 (numbered page 50), to help with question writing and selecting players across subject areas. And then on page 10 (numbered page 52) teams are urged to play in invitationals prior to the RCT. The rest of the manual is concerned with question types and game strategies.

It's an official CBCI publication, so don't expect it to be promoting other formats. But schools following the suggestions will create long-lasting, competitive teams that discover the circuit rather quickly.

What is described at Wayne State is quite far from the model ACU-I wants schools to follow. But, as is noted on page 4 (numbered page 46), "Your Regionals team may be selected however you choose." It's unfortunate that many schools aren't willing to put the effort in to do it right, or even support the efforts of students who want to do it right. One of the jobs of an ACU-I Regional Coordinator is to educate schools on how to build successful programs. For a variety of reasons, some schools or school administrators are harder to reach than others.

Perhaps you can take the manual and the Program Guide available in the same directory, and use them as a basis for discussing with your Dean of Students staff what the model is. If they see where you're coming from, some administrators could be willing to turn over a large part of developing a new program to a group of interested students. That could allow you to build a program with official backing, and more importantly, some official funding.

The Coach's Manual is also worth checking out for another reason: the photos on page 2 (numbered page 44).

Tom

STPickrell
Auron
Posts: 1501
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 11:12 pm
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

Post by STPickrell » Wed Feb 25, 2004 9:57 am

tfmichael wrote:The Coach's Manual is also worth checking out for another reason: the photos on page 2 (numbered page 44).

Tom
I found that photo to be very interesting indeed.

The CBI coaches' manual contains lots of useful information for a HS coach certainly and is a good beginning for any student or faculty coach at the college level.

At the short-lived R-MC team, the top job was called "Coach". I had in place a triumvirate to run the show after I left but two of the three members left the school and things just kinda fell apart.

At the short-lived GMU team, the position of Coach and President were separated. Basically, the Coach was responsible for in-game stuff and training to become better and was usually the team captain, and the President was responsible for administrative stuff.

I deliberately set things up that way so the other players would be involved and it wouldn't be a one-man organisational show like it was at R-MC. It did work as the GMU team survived for a year after I left.

I'd also advise any other would-be Johnny Appleseeds of the college circuit to do this.
Shawn Pickrell, HSAPQ CFO

emactruman
Wakka
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 11:18 am

Post by emactruman » Mon Mar 01, 2004 11:21 pm

First of all, tfmichael must be a CBI junky because it is insane to be able to cite that material.

Next, I was being somewhat sarcastic. Also, CBI does not care about the teams, just the money. Hence, since Wayne State is nothing but a slow, brown nosing, bureaucracy when it comes to anything ACUI related.

STPickrell
Auron
Posts: 1501
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 11:12 pm
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

Post by STPickrell » Tue Mar 02, 2004 10:39 am

emactruman wrote:First of all, tfmichael must be a CBI junky because it is insane to be able to cite that material.

Next, I was being somewhat sarcastic. Also, CBI does not care about the teams, just the money. Hence, since Wayne State is nothing but a slow, brown nosing, bureaucracy when it comes to anything ACUI related.
The money's the same whether or not Wayne State follow the suggestions in the CBI coaches' manual. All things being equal, why *wouldn't* Wayne State let

I fail to see how Wayne State would get extra brownie points with ACU-I by doing things the way they do. Seriously. The team selection standards are backwards, even by CBI/ACU-I standards.

But then again how are teams decided on the circuit? Whoever has a car is in. Whoever's not hung over that Saturday is in.

*shrugs*
Shawn Pickrell, HSAPQ CFO

emactruman
Wakka
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 11:18 am

Post by emactruman » Fri Mar 05, 2004 10:58 pm

Nice point Shawn about the whole have a car your in thing. Not quite true but funny. Also, I'm not saying Wayne St. does or should get brownie points. As a matter of fact, I think most people who have read this thread do not understand what I meant.

I meant that the ACUI/CBI does not care about the teams so long as they fork over the dough and don't go to other tournaments or raise to much of a fuss.

In that sense Wayne State is the perfect ACUI suck-up. This played a big factor in me recent decision to retire of actively playing at the colliegate level. Which if you ask most people who know my passion for quiz/college bowl as a whole, they would probably tell you that it is a shame that they have turned someone as devout as me away.

As for those of you who do know me, I guarantee that the whole incident has not changed my resolve for the game at the high school level and I will continue to remain a presence behind the scenes.

User avatar
Chris Frankel
Rikku
Posts: 369
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 12:52 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Post by Chris Frankel » Fri Mar 05, 2004 11:40 pm

I'm sure Wayne State will really miss that hefty 15 ppg contribution that helped lead it to a dominant 9th place finish on superlatively academic and challenging CBI questions against top notch competition. It's just tragic that we won't ever get to see another 300 posts about your good fight to build Wayne State into a top 3 team that can crush Chicago and Berkeley. What a crying shame that the awful manipulative machines there are driving another top notch player out of the game.

Perhaps there's still time to transfer to Michigan; I hear they're just DESPERATE for a fourth player to fill Zeke's shoes when he edits ACF Nationals. And hell, I hear even Zeke could never break the mighty 13 ppg barrier; had you not retired at such a premature time, you could have rode in on a white horse and saved the day for Michigan by assuring them a national title. Only 8 teams could beat Wayne State at CBI Regionals; surely that means such a team at ACF Nationals would be untouched!

User avatar
Dan Greenstein
Auron
Posts: 1034
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 8:26 pm
Location: Takoma Park, MD

Post by Dan Greenstein » Sat Mar 06, 2004 2:02 am

I wonder how Wayne State would do against Athens State at ACF Nationals.

STPickrell
Auron
Posts: 1501
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 11:12 pm
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

Post by STPickrell » Sat Mar 06, 2004 10:57 am

ater wrote:I'm sure Wayne State will really miss that hefty 15 ppg contribution that helped lead it to a dominant 9th place finish on superlatively academic and challenging CBI questions against top notch competition. It's just tragic that we won't ever get to see another 300 posts about your good fight to build Wayne State into a top 3 team that can crush Chicago and Berkeley. What a crying shame that the awful manipulative machines there are driving another top notch player out of the game.

Perhaps there's still time to transfer to Michigan; I hear they're just DESPERATE for a fourth player to fill Zeke's shoes when he edits ACF Nationals. And hell, I hear even Zeke could never break the mighty 13 ppg barrier; had you not retired at such a premature time, you could have rode in on a white horse and saved the day for Michigan by assuring them a national title. Only 8 teams could beat Wayne State at CBI Regionals; surely that means such a team at ACF Nationals would be untouched!
After all if you can't dominate, what's the point of playing?

In fact, if any team goes below .500 at any tournament, the players who were on that team should not be permitted to play college quizbowl again. These miscreants should be branded on the hand with an "L" brand, personally administered by the ACF Editors while wearing the scarlet robes befitting their office.

I'd also like to apologise for foisting upon the college circuit the teams from Randolph-Macon and George Mason, who spent most of their time holding up the tables. I now know, in retrospect, that I shouldn't have done that.
Shawn Pickrell, HSAPQ CFO

STPickrell
Auron
Posts: 1501
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 11:12 pm
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

Post by STPickrell » Sat Mar 06, 2004 11:02 am

emactruman wrote:I meant that the ACUI/CBI does not care about the teams so long as they fork over the dough and don't go to other tournaments or raise to much of a fuss.
Do you think NAQT or any other tournament cares aboot the team as long as they fork over the money? The only difference is that the money is a bit less.

CBI encourages teams to go to invitationals as prepartion for Regionals. Their attitude toward the rest of the circuit has gotten better -- permitting Honda schools to play, removing the "official licensing fee", etc. I will admit in the mid-1990s it sucked eggs.

What is stopping you from forming a academic trivia team on your own accord? Plenty of people have done it. In fact, I've done it twice, once at a small liberal arts school and once at a large state school. So Wayne State's CBI team selection process stinks. Are you trying to say they'll make you pick which students to go to Penn Bowl or Michigan MLK?

BTW, I've never played CBI. The cost is simply too much for starting schools to bear.
Shawn Pickrell, HSAPQ CFO

User avatar
Chris Frankel
Rikku
Posts: 369
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 12:52 pm
Location: Houston, TX

Post by Chris Frankel » Sat Mar 06, 2004 12:01 pm

StPickrell wrote:
ater wrote:I'm sure Wayne State will really miss that hefty 15 ppg contribution that helped lead it to a dominant 9th place finish on superlatively academic and challenging CBI questions against top notch competition. It's just tragic that we won't ever get to see another 300 posts about your good fight to build Wayne State into a top 3 team that can crush Chicago and Berkeley. What a crying shame that the awful manipulative machines there are driving another top notch player out of the game.

Perhaps there's still time to transfer to Michigan; I hear they're just DESPERATE for a fourth player to fill Zeke's shoes when he edits ACF Nationals. And hell, I hear even Zeke could never break the mighty 13 ppg barrier; had you not retired at such a premature time, you could have rode in on a white horse and saved the day for Michigan by assuring them a national title. Only 8 teams could beat Wayne State at CBI Regionals; surely that means such a team at ACF Nationals would be untouched!
After all if you can't dominate, what's the point of playing?

In fact, if any team goes below .500 at any tournament, the players who were on that team should not be permitted to play college quizbowl again. These miscreants should be branded on the hand with an "L" brand, personally administered by the ACF Editors while wearing the scarlet robes befitting their office.

I'd also like to apologise for foisting upon the college circuit the teams from Randolph-Macon and George Mason, who spent most of their time holding up the tables. I now know, in retrospect, that I shouldn't have done that.
Let's not get carried away here; obviously I wasn't saying that only top-tier teams should be allowed to play. What I was saying, however, is that many of us are really sick of daily drama queen posts about Wayne State's noble struggles as an up and coming team bound to reach the pinnacle of QB success and of the tragically early retirement of future hall-of-famer Mr. Nagy.

Its newsworthy if Subash or another elite player decides to retire, because it is a major impact on the competition and on the rankings. Likewise, nobody cares if someone who isn't even a top scorer for Bumblefuck University wants to make an unsolicited and self-aggrandizing retirement announcement; seeing how the team has never been to a tournament outside of CBI Regionals. Well, I did lie there. I didn't care at first, but the continuous posts got so annoying that I did care enough to make the above flame.

In conclusion, self-promotion and unsolicited retirement posts are bad. If people care enough to ask, ok, but if you're going to keep bumping a dying thread to post needless drama, then that's just overkill.

emactruman
Wakka
Posts: 189
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 11:18 am

Post by emactruman » Tue Mar 09, 2004 2:35 pm

Look, perhaps you are right. people just don't care. Perhaps I was a fool to think that we could even come close to the "top-tier" teams. I just had the remote hope that we could someday dethrone UofM. Also, as far as my "13ppg" that is only due to my restricted playing style, which I was forced to follow. Earlier in the tournament, I was averaging in the 25-30 ppg range. Granted that may not be alot to you "top-tier" teams, but in the case of Wayne State, that is respectable. As far as retirement is concerned, I have given them everything I could and was turned aside. Reguardless of how "good" a player might be, I think it still speaks volumes when the programs greatest advocate is driven away.

SethAtCal
Lulu
Posts: 36
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2003 12:20 pm
Location: Berkeley, CA

Post by SethAtCal » Tue Mar 09, 2004 6:12 pm

StPickrell wrote:
emactruman wrote:I meant that the ACUI/CBI does not care about the teams so long as they fork over the dough and don't go to other tournaments or raise to much of a fuss.
Do you think NAQT or any other tournament cares aboot the team as long as they fork over the money? The only difference is that the money is a bit less.
Shawn's statement seems blatantly ridiculous to me. I am a little surprised no one else jumped on this yet--perhaps I'm misinterpreting his statement. It seems to me that Shawn is implying that NAQT tournaments and all other tournaments are run solely for the purpose of garnering money; if the tournament hosts/writers spend time working to improve the quality of the tournament experience, it is only in the interest of attracting more customers.

R. Hentzel has pointed out multiple times that NAQT ICT is a consistent money-loser. And yet, year after year, hundreds of person-hours are put into writing, organizing and running ICT. Perhaps NAQT is getting closer each year to breaking even, and hopes to start turning a profit on ICT in the future, but I doubt it. Perhaps most of the people reading this board feel that ICT is not a high-quality tournament, but I think my point is still valid--I think it's fairly clear that a large part of NAQT's motivation in running ICT is "the general good of the circuit." Again, maybe the people reading this will feel that ICT is actually hurting the circuit by not encouraging teams to write questions, but I think NAQT's behavior does not fit Shawn's view.

Taking a smaller example, consider QuESADILLA, the annual guerilla-style tournament at Caltech. This tournament is free to all teams who bring a packet to share. Admittedly Caltech doesn't really have to invest much into running the tournament, but Caltech's interest in running QuESADILLA is obviously not tied to making money. And I would say, based on my own experiences at the last few QuESADILLAs, that the fine folks at Caltech do care about the attending teams, even though those teams don't fork over any money.

In general, it seems like most house-written and packet-submission tournaments generate a relatively small profit, given how much time the hosts invest. If clubs really just wanted money, I think they wouldn't bother running invitationals.

Finally, I guess I should note that I have no experience with CBI/ACUI, so far all I know emactruman's quoted statement is also blatantly ridiculous.

-Seth

STPickrell
Auron
Posts: 1501
Joined: Fri Nov 28, 2003 11:12 pm
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

Post by STPickrell » Tue Mar 09, 2004 7:38 pm

Tom Michael has pointed this out that even CBI consider WSU's team selection methods to be outdated. If WSU took its Paleolithic team selection methods and decided to ship that team off to NAQT regionals or a circuit tournament, I don't think any teams would refuse them entry on that basis alone. Now, if they had a policy such as "No Blacks" or "No Jews" on their teams, people might object to that team's presence. But NAQT, CBI, and any independent tournament would happily take WSU's money despite their Paleolithic team selection methods.

This is what I mean by caring about the team or more accurately the team selection process.
Shawn Pickrell, HSAPQ CFO

Locked