Looking for practice material?

Find thousands of free archived packets for practice and study from the Quizbowl Packet Archive!

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Tournament announcements, results, and discussion about specific tournaments.
jcarkeys
Posts: 400
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2004 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by jcarkeys »

How did the WCA teams do?

And is there going to be a full stats spread posted online like there have been in years past?

DrRyan2011
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by DrRyan2011 »

Hello everyone!

First, a few announcements. Full stats are in the process of being posted online. They are coming along and will be up in the next day or two. We will update you when that happens.

Second, coaches whose team attended can request to have a set of the questions emailed to them. We look to get those emailed out at the end of next week. Between preparing for NAQT Sectionals this weekend and fixing a handful of typos, we need that extra time. But interested coaches can simply post a reply or email me at my personal address.

But really I need to thank a few people here, especially Sean Philips for his continued dedication to the event, the various WU alumni who came out, Paul Nelson, the entire UMR crew (especially Matt for getting the group together and Jeff for running some stats on short notice). Most of all, a big thanks goes out to all the coaches and teams who participated.

I was very impressed with all the matches I saw this weekend. Interestingly, of the top 4 teams, 3 of them did not attend WUHSAC in 2006.

Again, thanks for coming to Wash.U. Please continue to let me know how we can improve this event in the future.

AShoaib
Posts: 559
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by AShoaib »

We played Charles (yes, I refer to NKC's team as "Charles") and we were defeated. Badly. We were 8th seed (Eureka), and were mortified after learning that we had to play Charles. As a matter of fact, in the half, I left the room to spare myself the torture and didn't come back until it was all over.

If Conference in St. Louis and St. Charles is anything to go by for Districts, Eureka and Clayton will snatch it away. We were close to beating Clayton's A Team in Conference finals (30 point loss), and I think that we can do better. Watch out for Lafayette though, they're pretty good.

jonpin
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by jonpin »

FZW Coach wrote:
libertymark wrote: liberty was missing two of their main starters today.  i know john was out of it at the end of the quarter finals.  not much that could have been done.  good job to all the teams, there were some good matches today.
This was our second year competing. We will see what happens after this but this format tends to not play to our strengths. Last year SLUH anniliated us (similar to what NKC did to us . . . though not nearly as bad). However, in normal Missouri format, we will be fine.

I am quoting the Liberty player here because technically we only played one of our normal starters (Teresa). But, that was due to the format more so than their availability. It did not help us to have our math experts in when the format was what it was.

But, we shall see how it goes.
Just wondering, how much math is there in MSHSAA format? Out of 21/21, our packets had at least 2/2 mathematics with either another tossup or bonus in half the packets, though a decent number of the questions were non-calculation.

On the other hand, if you're saying that the math wasn't the right difficulty, that is another matter, and I admit that is something which has come up in the past and we've tried to improve on.

johnboy81918
Posts: 394
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by johnboy81918 »

Call me crazy, but I thought most of the math was pretty good actually. I made stupid probability mistakes and such, but it was definitely at a higher level than most tournaments, which doesn't really say much, though. I'm always of the opinion that the math needs to be made more difficult, in order to make it like other areas...when the questions are mostly pyramidal, knowledge should prevail over speed. Making the math more difficult would make that be the case. I only remember two specific calculus examples from the whole tournament, though there may have been more that I've forgotten. I remember an easy derivative bonus, and the MacLaurin (sp?) series bonus.

I think I'm the only one who ever asks for the math to be more difficult though, since I haven't had any of the stuff that comes up in quiz bowl math for a long time










:( That in turn leads to stupid mistakes, mostly due to forgetfulness.

User avatar
Jeffrey Hill
Posts: 6653
Joined: Fri Apr 30, 2004 12:00 am
Location: In between the bright lights and the far unlit unknown (aka Johnson County, KS)
Contact:

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by Jeffrey Hill »

MSHSAA is very heavy on math...

Breakdown:
Lit, Social Studies, Science, and Math: 10 Tossups and 4 Bonuses each
Language: 3 tossups, 1 bonus
Fine Arts: 3 tossups, 1 bonus
Miscellaneous (Trash, vocational stuff like home ec and other junk categories): 4 tossups, 2 bonus

jonpin
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by jonpin »

johnboy81918 wrote: Call me crazy, but I thought most of the math was pretty good actually. I made stupid probability mistakes and such, but it was definitely at a higher level than most tournaments, which doesn't really say much, though. I'm always of the opinion that the math needs to be made more difficult, in order to make it like other areas...when the questions are mostly pyramidal, knowledge should prevail over speed. Making the math more difficult would make that be the case. I only remember two specific calculus examples from the whole tournament, though there may have been more that I've forgotten. I remember an easy derivative bonus, and the MacLaurin (sp?) series bonus.

I think I'm the only one who ever asks for the math to be more difficult though, since I haven't had any of the stuff that comes up in quiz bowl math for a long time










:( That in turn leads to stupid mistakes, mostly due to forgetfulness.
I think that, and then I make them too hard for 15 seconds and my questions go dead










:D I'm also somewhat wary of putting anything too hard in the way of calculus in, because that's (for most people) the top of the high school chain. I think there was only one calculus tossup, and it was non-computation (Rolle's Theorem).

STPickrell
Posts: 433
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Vienna, VA
Contact:

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by STPickrell »

How many schools are offering Calculus BC these days? While Calc BC questions might be OK for an invitational, I'd be hesitant to include them in a state series tournament, which by design must be accessible to as many of the schools as possible.

I've had a few coaches from the tiny schools complain that my questions about Latin, French and upper-level physics are simply not gettable by their teams -- because their schools don't even offer those subjects. Plus, it's harder to get that advanced math and science knowledge from your random outside reading.

For VHSL competition, I put in a few calculus questions in Regions and States, 'cause I figure by the time those competitions roll around they have at least learned derivatives and a few of the other essentials.

Of course, we only get 10 seconds to figure this stuff out. I'm proposing to my advisory committee that we give 30 seconds.

jonpin
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by jonpin »

While individual stats were not officially kept in the playoffs, I think Charles got at least 10 in each of his four playoff matches and in fact improved on his round-robin PPG. Here's the playoff bracket with scores. The top 7 teams all won their preliminary group undefeated, the other group champion was #11 Parkway Central who were 3-1. All group runner-ups had one loss. The * indicates Clayton won their first playof game in overtime.

Code: Select all

Sd Rd of 16    Qtrfinals   Semifinals  Championship
.1 N Trier 365
16 Westmin 105 N Trier 420
.8 OFallon 200 OFallon 120
.9 SLUH-A  180             N Trier 250
.4 Clayton 170*            Clayton 200
13 SLUH-B  160 Clayton 230
.5 Ladue   250 Ladue   220
12 Priory  110                         N Trier 210
.2 NorthKC 535                         NorthKC 380
15 Zumwalt  65 NorthKC 490
.7 Eureka  170 Eureka   60
10 Hnbl-B   75             NorthKC 460
.3 Liberty 225             Liberty 110
14 N Dame  115 Liberty 330             3rd Place
.6 Bartlet 140 PwyCent 190             Clayton 350
11 PwyCent 200                         Liberty 110

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Columbia, MO

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by Charlie Dees »

AShoaib wrote: If Conference in St. Louis and St. Charles is anything to go by for Districts, Eureka and Clayton will snatch it away. We were close to beating Clayton's A Team in Conference finals (30 point loss), and I think that we can do better. Watch out for Lafayette though, they're pretty good.
You're forgetting that private schools also compete in your district. SLUH sticks out as the private school that seems to win their district frequently, so I wouldn't totally base an opinion on the public schools you've played.
Also, Ladue didn't play in conference. They barely lost to Clayton this weekend. I would say you are off about that judgement.

jonpin
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by jonpin »

Full team and individual results are now available on the WUAT website at http://sugroups.wustl.edu/~collbowl/wuhsac.html

KentB
Posts: 901
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 12:00 am
Location: Creve Couer, MO
Contact:

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by KentB »

awesome

FZW Coach
Posts: 874
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by FZW Coach »

Of local interest, Teri actually tied for 6th and was just 1 question behind Christina for 5th. When I told her about this (just 10 minutes ago), she became a bit irate. "Why didn't they announce me as 6th?!" "I don't know," I replied. "I am sure they were rushed."

Most of you don't know it, but Teri can be quite annimated at times. Thus, her nickname is Dictator Terisimo (from Chauvisimo, a term applied to the rule and tyrannical reign of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela). We even play the Venezualan national anthem in her honor.

She had a point. She actually was hoping to finish as the top female scorer for the 2nd year in a row. She finished 16th last year, but was good enough for top female score.

Well . . . .

as I said . . . if you had not messed up the Toni Morrison question . . . forgot about your childhood hero Ann Richards . . . . and big John Tessler from Montana (she is a strong Democrat). . . . then maybe things would have been different. (We still have some refining to do.)









;)

johnboy81918
Posts: 394
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by johnboy81918 »

After looking at the stats posted in the link, I saw that I was given credit for 4 tossups in game 1, when I actually got 12 XD

Oh well, there goes second place









^_^

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Columbia, MO

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by Charlie Dees »

New Trier just won the Illinois HSA state Championship.

ecks
Posts: 276
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 12:00 am
Location: Springfield, IL / Kirksville, MO
Contact:

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by ecks »

ashkenaziCD wrote: New Trier just won the Illinois HSA state Championship.
Good discussion here about the IHSA championship:

http://www.hsquizbowl.org/phpBB2/viewto ... &start=700

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Columbia, MO

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by Charlie Dees »

Something I just noticed that was really strange and should certainly be checked for next year is that the top 16 bracketing doesn't match the statistics from SQBS. Case in point:
Here was the seeding, according to how we actually played off:
1. New Trier (5-0)
2. NKC (5-0)
3. Liberty (4-0)
4. Clayton (5-0)
5. Ladue (4-0)
6. Bartlett (4-0)
7. Eureka (4-0)
8. O'Fallon (4-1)
9. SLUH A (4-1)
10. Hannibal B (4-1)
11. Parkway Central (3-1)
12. Priory A (3-1)
13. SLUH B (3-1)
14. Notre Dame (3-1)
15. Fort Zumwalt West (3-1)
16. Westminster A (3-1)
-17- Helias also went 3-1

I checked with the stats, and the top 8 are all correct. Here's where it gets weird. According to loss record, then PPG, the seeding should have been:
9. SLUH B (3-1), 292.5 PPG
10. Notre Dame (3-1), 285 PPG
11. FZW (3-1), 240
12. Parkway Central (3-1), 222.5
13. SLUH A (4-1), 210
14. Priory A (3-1), 210
15. Wesminster A (3-1), 207.5
16. Helias A (3-1) 192.5
-17. Hannibal B (4-1), 156

For teams that lost 1 game it obviously gave preference to those playing without a bye. But some of them seem pretty arbitrary, and it's too bad they weren't more accurate, although I submit it shouldn't ultimately make a difference. Is this intentional, or just a glitch in stats?

jonpin
Posts: 42
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by jonpin »

It was a glitch in stats we realized after the tournament. We saw that SQBS was nice enough to provide tournament-wide rankings in the sidebar and used those.
In looking now, the glitch seems larger than what we saw after the tournament. As I recall, for some reason that now pretty well escapes me, I think Helias-A was listed as 13th on SQBS's printout, which messed us up at first. Regardless, Hannibal-B made the playoffs over Helias-A because it was top two in each division, not top 16 overall. Other than that, yeah, my bad and a note has been made to future TDs to do the seedings on their own.

User avatar
Charlie Dees
Posts: 4134
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 12:00 am
Location: Columbia, MO

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by Charlie Dees »

Two things:

I counted through (kind of fast, but I think I'm about right) and I found 22 tossups and 22 bonuses in math (arguably more in bonuses if they throw in a random math part for science). And I would say math is obviously NOT nonexistant at these types of tournaments, because I would say NAQT had about the same distribution.

The other thing, particularly to Abdullah. THis tournament format (and variants like Rolla) are the most standard style of quizbowl in the nationa, and the only reason they seem odd is because we play a fairly odd specialized format in Missouri.

KentB
Posts: 901
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2005 12:00 am
Location: Creve Couer, MO
Contact:

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by KentB »

Tis true... it is Missouri that needs to adapt ... not the nation.

AShoaib
Posts: 559
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:00 am

WUHSAC IX (Washington University)

Post by AShoaib »

Ah, I'm not a hardcore bowla, so I wouldn't know.

Post Reply