Subject: ACF Newsletter III.3 (Nov)
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 02:05:18 -0800 (PST)
From: Gaius Gracchus <gaius@uclink2.berkeley.edu>
To: 3bl13@qlink.queensu.ca, adaswani@ucsd.edu, adhawan@CCTR.UMKC.EDU,
aeabbott@ucdavis.edu, alt0365@unix.tamu.edu, amasinto@du.edu,
arogers@NMSU.Edu, asebesta@mozart.helios.nd.edu, asood@pomona.edu,
atongg@whitworth.edu, avp@thesun.ess.ucla.edu, bhiggins@pomona.edu,
blackl@ecst.csuchico.edu, bone@snowmass.Stanford.EDU,
branvan@cco.caltech.edu, brian.moore@asu.edu, briareus@feist.com,
bueh0007@maroon.tc.umn.edu, candace@tamvm1.tamu.edu, cargoro@UDel.Edu,
cbedstro@midway.uchicago.edu, cbishop@pcc.edu,
Chris_Moody@ccmail.ntrs.com, cleff@haleakala.jpl.nasa.gov,
cmgolde@facstaff.wisc.edu, daedalus@leland.stanford.edu,
dcd120@mail.usask.ca, ddorman@vax.bhs.umn.edu, dfarris@netcom.com,
dinoeb@ea.oac.uci.edu, dwhiting@cc.weber.edu, ebell@uoknor.edu,
ecrane@violet.berkeley.edu, ehillema@carleton.edu, elliottl@byu.edu,
emfletcher@ucdavis.edu, ETOWENS@WSUHUB.UC.TWSU.EDU,
giannar@pwa.acusd.edu, grrrrr@ecst.csuchico.edu,
gsmith@londo.caltech.edu, H0L0147@ACS.TAMU.EDU,
harrisb@elaine49.Stanford.EDU, HGHERRON@WSUHUB.UC.TWSU.EDU,
hsjackson@ucdavis.edu, imorgan@umr.edu, jayg@seas.ucla.edu,
jbates@cc.weber.edu, jdinan@webspan.net, jedwards@wwa.com,
jeffreyb@gwis2.circ.gwu.edu, jluebke@ea.oac.uci.edu, joen@uci.edu,
jpgreen@students.uiuc.edu, JUDYW@elder.csrv.uidaho.edu,
jwalls@cco.caltech.edu, kane0447@utdallas.edu, kasibhot@scf-fs.usc.edu,
kellerw@cae.wisc.edu, Kubiwan@iastate.edu, la.wilson@m.cc.utah.edu,
LAG2471@ACS.TAMU.EDU, lakenyon@leland.stanford.edu, LarryS@cc.snow.edu,
lbailey@joss.ucar.edu, leia@csulb.edu, LRubinow@valleynet.com,
"Mark K. Day" <hfusu022@email.csun.edu>, MARTI@uci.edu,
mason@robby.caltech.edu, mbender@pomona.edu, mhkbeest@owlnet.rice.edu,
mikez@tiac.net, mill9222@utdallas.edu, mngrover@juno.com,
mosstys@aloha.net, mosstysn@hula.net, nabel@lamar.colostate.edu,
napaxton@ucdavis.edu, nnkumar@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu, npietila@ucsd.edu,
number6@grove.ufl.EDU, olano@scf-fs.usc.edu, paris@byu.edu,
peterf@hydro.la.asu.edu, petermc@math.mit.edu, ptolemy@wam.umd.edu,
pwa10@lennon.pub.csufresno.edu, rache@leland.stanford.edu,
ramesh@nova.umuc.edu, rbinouye@acs2.byu.edu, rcgrant@earthlink.net,
redd5873@utdallas.edu, redling@utdallas.edu,
riddick@jeeves.la.utexas.edu, rogerlee@leland.stanford.edu,
rtrent@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu, s.kuch@ix.netcom.com,
samer.ismail@yale.edu, schmidt@math.uiuc.edu,
sdixon@OREGON.UOREGON.EDU, sebruce@midway.uchicago.edu,
Shawn.Askew@mailport.delta-air.com, smahurnm@nexus.mwsu.EDU,
ssolidarios@ups.edu, st5c7@bayou.uh.edu, starsinic.1@osu.edu,
swiatek@coewl.cen.uiuc.edu, swinters@pomona.edu,
swisdak@ucsub.colorado.edu, tnmasters@aol.com, tom@hwr.arizona.edu,
topquark@iastate.edu, tschultz@blue.weeg.uiowa.edu,
tstark@dsp.sunion.arizona.edu, USLKENDALL@MSUVX1.MEMPHIS.EDU,
USSU_VPACAD@SASK.USASK.CA, USSU_VPADMIN@SASK.USASK.CA,
vasuk@cadence.com, vscampbe@uci.edu, walter@riogrande.cs.tcu.edu,
wang@galton.uchicago.edu, was@cs.rice.edu, Zach.Weenig@m.cc.utah.edu,
zsa7044@maia.oscs.montana.edu
CC: quiz-bowl@csua.berkeley.edu, quizbowl@a-afh.resnet.ucsb.edu
Hello all. This issue is largely tournament results, but there are a few
other things of interest. In order the articles are
results from Iowa State Beautiful and Damned UC Berkeley WIT 4
UT-Dallas DDB Caltech Technophobia
info on a new, cheap buzzer company NAQT and the net silence
recent ills of the quizbowl maillist and newsgroup
- - - - - - - - -
CHICAGO WINS IOWA STATE
Here are the final standings from the 1996 ISU Beautiful and Damned
Tournament. Congrats to Chicago for the win. Please note:
Due to a bizarre format, strength of schedule varied greatly and thus
won-lost record is not a good indicator of team strength.
1. Chicago A 13- 2 (Champion)
2. Illinois B 12- 3
3. Illinois A 10- 3
4. Brigham Young A 9- 4
5. Stanford 10- 4
6. Oklahoma 8- 6
7. Illinois C 8- 6
8. Michigan Militia 8- 6
other schools include Saint Olaf, Carleton, Iowa State JV, Iowa,
Memphis, Northwestern, Wichita State, Minnesota, Washington University in
St Louis, and Garden City Comm. College.
The tournament featured the advertised lightning round. The
winners were
1. John Sheahan, Chicago A
2. James Anderson, Illinois A
3. Norm Gillespie, BYU A
4. Johnathan Green, Illinois C
5. Patty Dark, Michigan Militia
The other three finalists were, in no particular order, Eric Bell
(Oklahoma), Benoy Chacko (Michigan Militia), and Roger Lee (Stanford).
Robert Trent (Iowa A) qualified but was unable to compete due to injury.
The tournament MVPs were as follows:
Name School TUs Ints Total
John Chicago A 129 23 1175
Robert Iowa SG 102 32 860
Eric Oklahoma 89 31 735
Benoy Michigan M 82 26 690
Norm BYU A 59 11 535
James Illinois A 69 12 630
Jonathan Illinois C 73 19 635
Karl Illinois B 66 9 615
As one can see, this was an exceptionally strong performance by the
Illinois squad, whose already strong line-up has been improved by the
acquisition of Jonathon and Vishnu. Kudos also to John S. from Chicago
for again getting tourney MVP and leading his team to a first place
showing.
UT DALLAS WINS WESTERN INVITATIONAL IV at Berkeley
The five player team from Texas battled their way from behind to take the
title at WIT 4 this year. With two rounds to go in the round-robin, it
looked as though the team of Cal-Hypocrisy might sweep a clean victory and
avoid a play-off. UT-Dallas, ASU, and Cal-Heresy were all two or more
games behind. Since the rules state that a play-off can be avoided if the
leading team is two wins ahead of the #2 team, the play-off appeared to be
a contest for 2nd place, rather than the gold.
However, BYU upset Cal Hypocrisy and Caltech followed suit.
UT-Dallas won their remaining two games and earned the rematch in a 2/3
series (counting prelim). UT-Dallas won both games and thus the
championship, finishing the tournament with a 13-2 record.
(Stats after pre-lims)
TEAM W L B TO INT TP TPA OP.T OP.I OP.P OP.AV
---- - - - ---- ---- ---- ----- ---- ---- ---- -----
UT - Dallas 11 2 2 11.23 1.77 3680 283.1 6.46 1.54 1885 145.0
Cal Hypocrisy 11 2 2 10.62 1.31 3160 243.1 6.46 1.54 2140 164.6
(UT-Dallas finished 13-2 overall; Cal Heresy 11-4)
Cal Heresy 10 3 2 10.00 1.46 3365 258.8 6.46 1.46 1770 136.2
Stanford A 9 4 2 10.08 2.08 3300 253.8 6.85 1.54 2040 156.9
ASU 1 9 4 2 9.62 1.31 2720 209.2 7.08 1.15 2000 153.8
Cal Narcolepsy 8 5 2 10.08 1.92 3425 263.5 7.15 1.46 2050 157.7
BYU 1 7 6 2 7.08 1.15 2070 159.2 9.23 2.08 2765 212.7
Cal Apostasy 6 7 2 8.23 2.31 2715 208.8 8.00 1.62 2380 183.1
Caltech 5 8 2 7.23 2.31 2120 163.1 8.92 1.46 2710 208.5
UCLA 4 9 2 7.46 1.77 2105 161.9 8.46 2.08 2645 203.5
BYU 2 4 9 2 6.38 1.00 1640 126.2 9.77 2.08 2985 229.6
ASU 2 4 9 2 6.54 1.69 1555 119.6 8.85 1.85 2635 202.7
Stanford B 2 11 2 5.46 2.31 1455 111.9 9.31 1.38 2820 216.9
UMKC 1 12 2 4.08 0.69 910 70.0 11.08 1.85 3395 261.2
Six MVP awards were given out. The top twelve were
TUs-
Player Team TO INT RD AVG T AVG I ADJ AV INT
------ ---- -- --- -- ----- ----- ------
1 Robert UT - Dallas 130 15 13 10.00 1.15 9.42 8.67
2 Peter ASU 1 125 17 13 9.62 1.31 8.96 7.35
3 Phil Cal Narcolepsy 94 16 13 7.23 1.23 6.62 5.88
4 Partha Cal Hypocrisy 90 10 13 6.92 0.77 6.54 9.00
5 Pat UCLA 68 10 13 5.23 0.77 4.85 6.80
6 Brian ASU 2 72 20 13 5.54 1.54 4.77 3.60
7 Michael Cal Heresy 55 3 12 4.58 0.25 4.46 18.33
8 Brad Stanford A 59 11 13 4.54 0.85 4.12 5.36
9 Sherman Stanford A 57 10 13 4.38 0.77 4.00 5.70
Dhammika Cal Heresy 39 4 12 3.25 0.33 3.08 9.75
Ben Cal Apostasy 40 7 12 3.33 0.58 3.04 5.71
David Farris Cal Apostasy 36 3 12 3.00 0.25 2.88 12.00
Special congrats to Robert Margolis for a stellar performance as
tournament MVP. Also congrats to Patrick (UCLA) and Brian for their
strong performances as MVPs at their 1st and 2nd respective Berk events.
Also the top eight players all hailed from different teams. Special
attention is due to David Farris, a high school junior we invited to
participate at WIT 4. His performance as 12th MVP is truly worth
recognition. Special note: Berkeley has come in 2nd and 3rd two years in
a row at the Western Invitational.
Finally, a congratulations to Kathy, Robert, John, Drew, and Chris
who travelled half way across the country to play in WIT 4.
OKLAHOMA UNIVERSITY WINS DALLAS DOES BERKELEY TOURNAMENT
This tournament used the rounds previously played at WIT 4 and the
MD Terrapin '96. Teams played a full round-robin of 9 rounds.
At the end of the prelims, the Masters team graciously volunteered
to step aside to allow the regular teams to compete in the finals.
The University of Memphis (7-1) and the University of Oklahoma (6-2)
played a best-2-out-of-3 series with their round-robin match-up counting
as the first game.
Match 1 (round-robin) MEMPHIS 290 Oklahoma-a 240
Match 2 Memphis 145 OKLAHOMA-a 355
Match 3 Memphis 170 OKLAHOMA-a 235
Oklahoma (8-2) wins, Memphis (7-3) comes in second.
Team Standings following Round-Robin
Team Wins Losses
Masters 8 0 DECLINED TO PLAY IN FINALS
Memphis 7 1
Oklahoma - a 6 2
Houston 5 3
Wichita State - a 3 5
Oklahoma - c 3 5
UT-Dallas (JV) 2 6
Oklahoma - b 2 6
Wichita State - b 0 8
The Tournament top ten players were
Player School # Rds Tossups Ints TU/rd Ints/rd Tot Pts Avg
Pts.
Eric B OU - a 8 65 12 8.125 1.5 590 73.75
Seth K Memphis 8 56 2 7 0.25 550 68.75
Chris M Master 8 52 8 6.5 1 480 60
Narayan K Houston 8 45 11 5.625 1.375 395 49.38
Chris G Master 8 36 2 4.5 0.25 350 43.75
Emily M OU - c 8 36 10 4.5 1.25 310 38.75
Keith H Memphis 8 26 2 3.25 0.25 250 31.25
Henry H WSU - a 8 24 3 3 0.375 225 28.125
Vic D'Amico WSU -b 8 23 2 2.875 0.25 220 27.5
Ryan W UTD(JV) 5 9 0 1.8 0 90 18
Congratulations to the University of Oklahoma Team A, Eric (Tournament
Top-scorer), Louis, David, and Sarah.
BRIGHAM YOUNG WINS CALTECH TECHNOPHOBIA I
In a continuation of the trend that the furthest travelling team
wins the show, BYU topped UC Berkeley to win Caltech's first annual
tournament, Technophobia I. Each round consisted of 24 questions in an
untimed format, following usual ACF distribution with the addition of up
to 4 trash questions per game. Craig Leff comments on the strong
competition among the top four teams. BYU, Stanford, and Cal-Berkeley are
perennial powers. UCLA A made a strong showing in their second tournament
as a team.
Team Rankings after 11 prelims
Cal-Berk. 9 1 Lost to UCLA A
BYU 9 1 Lost to Cal
StanfordA 8 2 Lost to BYU, Cal
UCLA A 8 2 Lost to BYU, Stanford A
Caltech C 6 4
Caltech A 5 5
ASU 4 6
StanfordB 2 8
Caltech B 2 8
Fresno 1 9
UCLA B 1 9
First Finals match: BYU, 260 Cal, 235 Cal led 240-140 after TU 20.
Second Finals match: BYU, 425, Cal, 120 BYU wins Technophobia One
Player Rankings
Players marked with an (R) were rookies, having been playing for no more
than one semester.
Roger Stanford Bad Boy 77 7 735 10 7.7 0.7 73.5
Dave D. Berkeley 74 12 680 10 7.4 1.2 68.0
Brian ASU 74 17 655 10 7.4 1.7 65.5
Patrick UCLA A 65 5 625 10 6.5 0.5 62.5
Adam (R) Caltech Pathetic 45 2 440 8 5.6 0.2 55.0
Norm BYU 47 8 430 8 5.9 1.0 53.8
Nick Berkeley 52 4 500 10 5.2 0.4 50.0
Geoff Caltech Apathetic 41 10 360 10 4.1 1.0 36.0
Sanjoy Caltech Sympathetic 40 16 320 10 4.0 1.6 32.0
Brian (R) Caltech Sympathetic 13 1 125 4 3.2 0.2 31.2
A small problem arose in that a few questions came from back East
from two other schools' tournaments. This created a problem for Stanford,
one of whose players played the circuit in the East this previous fall.
NEW BUZZER COMPANY ADVERTIZES INEXPENSIVE NEW SYSTEM
Groupics is advertizing a new $200.00 buzzer system for 8+ players
which measures 7 x 5 x 1.5 inches. This system is lightweight and easily
transportable. They encourage teams to visit their web page at
http://www.groupics.com or call them toll free at 1-888-497-2637.
I have not seen the system myself, so I am not in a position to
evaluate it. Please let Groupics know you heard about the system in the
newsletter.
NAQT REQUESTS NET SILENCE UNTIL 11/24
NAQT has asked participants not to discuss the questions used at
NAQT sectionals until the last sectionals is completed. This year NAQT
has/will run 7 sectionals around the country in New England, the
Mid-Atlantic, the South-East, the Southwest, the West Coast, the Midwest,
and North-central (Great lakes area). The last sectionals will be held
in California on 11/22 and 11/23, after which teams may critique the
questions at will.
NAQT reminds participants and curious teams alike that this year
NAQT will host a national tournament in January. Teams who did not play
at NAQT sectionals may still eb invited to NAQT nationals under certain
conditions (contact NAQT to learn more). NAQT also reminds teams that
participation in NAQT should not threaten a school's participation in any
other national quizbowl organization.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THE NEWSGROUP ???
Early in the summer, owing to the unwise crosspostings of Matt
Bruce, a number of hostile or off-topic posts have been made to
alt.college.college-bowl, so thoroughly jamming the newsgroup that the
volume of inappropriate posts outnumbers the legitimate by 10 to 1. At
this point, a.c.c-b has become so overrun with obscene posts that many
memebrs have stopped using the newsgroup, thereby reducing inter-team
communication.
More recently, the quizbowl@papyrus maillist has been attacked by
some unidentified hostile who sent over 200 useless messages to every list
member. The list has been moderated, which will prevent future useless
posts. If you have unsubscribed, resubscribe. The list creater assures
me that this can not happen again now that the list is moderated. In the
meantime, a new newsgroup will soon be created which will allow
communication and discussion of the game between teams as previously.
When more details are available, they will be included in the
newsletter.
Gaius
Nov 1996
- - - - - -