Difference between revisions of "ABC"
Darrell Frye (talk | contribs) |
Darrell Frye (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | The Academic Bowl Contest (ABC) was hosted by [[Vanderbilt]], and it was one of the largest and longest-running high school invitational tournaments in the country. Throughout the 20 year history of ABC, there have | + | The Academic Bowl Contest (ABC) was hosted by [[Vanderbilt]], and it was one of the largest and longest-running high school invitational tournaments in the country. Throughout the 20 year history of ABC, there have been many thousands of competitors from more than 1,300 teams from 15 different states across the South and Midwest compete in this tournament. |
==History== | ==History== | ||
| − | ABC was the brainchild of | + | ABC was the brainchild of of the 1990-1991 Vanderbilt quiz bowl club. Team member Randy Buehler was the driving force behind the creation of the tournament. The idea was to host a contest for a large number of teams on the Vanderbilt campus as a fundraiser for the university club. The tournament format was engineered to leverage a number of advantages that Vanderbilt possessed, such as: |
| + | * Nashville's central location in the southeast | ||
| + | * Vanderbilt's prestige as a university | ||
| + | * the organizational prowess of the team members at the time | ||
| + | * abundant classrooms in a compact area on campus that allowed for easy movement of teams and officials between buildings as needed | ||
| + | * a thriving culture of community service on campus that provided a large number of volunteers to help staff the tournament | ||
| − | The tournament was so successful that the club decided to host the tournament twice each year and the second ABC followed in the fall of 1991. | + | The first ABC was run in the spring of 1991 for 40 teams. The tournament was so successful that the club decided to host the tournament twice each year and the second ABC followed in the fall of 1991. Both of the first two editions featured house-written questions. The questions at ABC were generally judged to be too difficult and teams' final scores were too low and the club felt their efforts could be better deployed on tasks other than question writing. |
| − | ABC III in the spring of 1992 | + | As a result of these problems, ABC III in the spring of 1992 (referred to as the "Bastard Child" of ABCs) purchased the question set from a vendor called "Triple Q". Quality and difficulty varied wildly from one question to the next. In addition, the vendor required the tournament to use an unfamiliar rulebook; among the quirks of the rules was the requirement that a team correctly answer two consecutively numbered tossup questions before earning a bonus. However, the rules also included a provision that if the team answering a bonus missed a part, the other team got a chance to answer. The "bounceback bonus" would become one of the most popular and enduring traditions at ABC. |
| − | The tournament really took off in the fall of 1992 with ABC IV. | + | The tournament really took off in the fall of 1992 with ABC IV. The 84 teams in competition witnessed the addition of a number of features and organizational elements that gave ABC it's unique feel. For the first time, the tournament began on Friday evening with four optional power-matched rounds. The Friday rounds allowed the organizers to efficiently sort the participating teams for Saturday morning's main event - six-team, seeded round-robin groups. The top teams from each group advanced to the 32-team single-elimination playoffs on Saturday afternoon to decide the overall champion. |
After Buehler's graduation, [[Darrell Frye]] assumed most of the responsibilities for organizing the tournament each semester, with other club members filling in as needed during his occasional absences from school. The tournament continued to grow in prestige and popularity throughout the rest of the 1990's and regularly drew 80 to 120 teams each edition. | After Buehler's graduation, [[Darrell Frye]] assumed most of the responsibilities for organizing the tournament each semester, with other club members filling in as needed during his occasional absences from school. The tournament continued to grow in prestige and popularity throughout the rest of the 1990's and regularly drew 80 to 120 teams each edition. | ||
| Line 19: | Line 24: | ||
ABC XLI was held in 2011 and appears to have been the final installment. | ABC XLI was held in 2011 and appears to have been the final installment. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==Competition format== | ||
| + | The format ABC used to arrive at a champion was unique for it's time. Each tournament from ABC IV on was staged in three unique phases. The three phases took place on Friday evening, Saturday morning, and Saturday afternoon. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Friday evening=== | ||
| + | |||
| + | The first phase was held on Friday evenings. The Friday evening phase was optional, but typically 80% of teams chose to participate. The teams would be separated in to 16-team pools. Each pool would play four power-matched rounds. The power matching was in the form of Swiss pairs. (The Swiss-pairs method was adapted from chess tournaments. Vanderbilt's application of the system was perfected by Randy Buehler, Andy Lipscomb, and Keith Hudson while in the back seat of a car riding to a tournament in September 1992. They used a stopwatch to generate random numbers that simulated scores.) The power matching ensured that in each round a team always played another team with the same record. Typically, local schools with numerous teams would send or hold back their lowest-ranked teams on Friday to allow the organizers to ensure each pool had exactly 16 teams. | ||
| + | |||
| + | After the conclusion of play on Friday night, the organizers would gather to review the results and rank all the teams. For teams that didn't play on Friday evening, the organizers would estimate their level of ability based past results or reputation . The teams were then sorted in to six-team pools using the "S-curve" method: | ||
| + | # The top ranked team would be the #1 seed in Pool 1, the second ranked team would be the #1 seed in Pool 2, and so on until every pool had a #1 seed | ||
| + | # The highest remaining team would be the #2 seed in the highest numbered pool. Teams would be added added to pools in reverse order until every one had a #2 seed. | ||
| + | # This back-and-forth procedure would be repeated with #3, #4, etc seeds until there were no more teams to be seeded. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The pools were then examined individually to eliminate any obvious flaws in seeding and to ensure geographic balance in each pool. After the pools were finalized, a personalized schedule was created for each team, each room, and each pool captain. | ||
| + | |||
| + | ===Saturday morning=== | ||
| + | |||
| + | The second phase of the tournament was held on Saturday morning. Teams would compete in a round robin within their six-team pool. The small pools used by Vanderbilt had a number of practical and tactical advantages: | ||
| + | * The round-robin could be completed with just five rounds of questions, three adjacent rooms, and three people. | ||
| + | * The format was easily scalable for any number of teams from 12 to 144. | ||
| + | ** The only limiting factor was the number of rooms available on campus. | ||
| + | * Even the slowest of readers wouldn't significantly delay the tournament. | ||
| + | ** If one pool finished more than one round earlier earlier than another, the fast readers could parachute in to the delayed pool and complete them quickly. | ||
| + | * An experienced club member could captain two or three pools at once without being overtaxed. | ||
| + | * The various pools were segregated within different buildings across campus, so there was little chance that question security could be compromised. | ||
| + | * The seeding process ensured that the top teams didn't have to compete against each other too early in the tournament. | ||
| + | * The geographic balancing allowed teams to compete against schools they didn't typically meet throughout the rest of the year. | ||
==Results== | ==Results== | ||
Revision as of 20:56, 1 June 2012
The Academic Bowl Contest (ABC) was hosted by Vanderbilt, and it was one of the largest and longest-running high school invitational tournaments in the country. Throughout the 20 year history of ABC, there have been many thousands of competitors from more than 1,300 teams from 15 different states across the South and Midwest compete in this tournament.
History
ABC was the brainchild of of the 1990-1991 Vanderbilt quiz bowl club. Team member Randy Buehler was the driving force behind the creation of the tournament. The idea was to host a contest for a large number of teams on the Vanderbilt campus as a fundraiser for the university club. The tournament format was engineered to leverage a number of advantages that Vanderbilt possessed, such as:
- Nashville's central location in the southeast
- Vanderbilt's prestige as a university
- the organizational prowess of the team members at the time
- abundant classrooms in a compact area on campus that allowed for easy movement of teams and officials between buildings as needed
- a thriving culture of community service on campus that provided a large number of volunteers to help staff the tournament
The first ABC was run in the spring of 1991 for 40 teams. The tournament was so successful that the club decided to host the tournament twice each year and the second ABC followed in the fall of 1991. Both of the first two editions featured house-written questions. The questions at ABC were generally judged to be too difficult and teams' final scores were too low and the club felt their efforts could be better deployed on tasks other than question writing.
As a result of these problems, ABC III in the spring of 1992 (referred to as the "Bastard Child" of ABCs) purchased the question set from a vendor called "Triple Q". Quality and difficulty varied wildly from one question to the next. In addition, the vendor required the tournament to use an unfamiliar rulebook; among the quirks of the rules was the requirement that a team correctly answer two consecutively numbered tossup questions before earning a bonus. However, the rules also included a provision that if the team answering a bonus missed a part, the other team got a chance to answer. The "bounceback bonus" would become one of the most popular and enduring traditions at ABC.
The tournament really took off in the fall of 1992 with ABC IV. The 84 teams in competition witnessed the addition of a number of features and organizational elements that gave ABC it's unique feel. For the first time, the tournament began on Friday evening with four optional power-matched rounds. The Friday rounds allowed the organizers to efficiently sort the participating teams for Saturday morning's main event - six-team, seeded round-robin groups. The top teams from each group advanced to the 32-team single-elimination playoffs on Saturday afternoon to decide the overall champion.
After Buehler's graduation, Darrell Frye assumed most of the responsibilities for organizing the tournament each semester, with other club members filling in as needed during his occasional absences from school. The tournament continued to grow in prestige and popularity throughout the rest of the 1990's and regularly drew 80 to 120 teams each edition.
ABC XXV was held in the spring of 2003, and for the first time a team from Tennessee, Ezell-Harding won first place.
ABC XXXVII was held March 21, 2009. Hoover A took first; Dunbar took second.
ABC XXXVIII was held November 7, 2009.
ABC XLI was held in 2011 and appears to have been the final installment.
Competition format
The format ABC used to arrive at a champion was unique for it's time. Each tournament from ABC IV on was staged in three unique phases. The three phases took place on Friday evening, Saturday morning, and Saturday afternoon.
Friday evening
The first phase was held on Friday evenings. The Friday evening phase was optional, but typically 80% of teams chose to participate. The teams would be separated in to 16-team pools. Each pool would play four power-matched rounds. The power matching was in the form of Swiss pairs. (The Swiss-pairs method was adapted from chess tournaments. Vanderbilt's application of the system was perfected by Randy Buehler, Andy Lipscomb, and Keith Hudson while in the back seat of a car riding to a tournament in September 1992. They used a stopwatch to generate random numbers that simulated scores.) The power matching ensured that in each round a team always played another team with the same record. Typically, local schools with numerous teams would send or hold back their lowest-ranked teams on Friday to allow the organizers to ensure each pool had exactly 16 teams.
After the conclusion of play on Friday night, the organizers would gather to review the results and rank all the teams. For teams that didn't play on Friday evening, the organizers would estimate their level of ability based past results or reputation . The teams were then sorted in to six-team pools using the "S-curve" method:
- The top ranked team would be the #1 seed in Pool 1, the second ranked team would be the #1 seed in Pool 2, and so on until every pool had a #1 seed
- The highest remaining team would be the #2 seed in the highest numbered pool. Teams would be added added to pools in reverse order until every one had a #2 seed.
- This back-and-forth procedure would be repeated with #3, #4, etc seeds until there were no more teams to be seeded.
The pools were then examined individually to eliminate any obvious flaws in seeding and to ensure geographic balance in each pool. After the pools were finalized, a personalized schedule was created for each team, each room, and each pool captain.
Saturday morning
The second phase of the tournament was held on Saturday morning. Teams would compete in a round robin within their six-team pool. The small pools used by Vanderbilt had a number of practical and tactical advantages:
- The round-robin could be completed with just five rounds of questions, three adjacent rooms, and three people.
- The format was easily scalable for any number of teams from 12 to 144.
- The only limiting factor was the number of rooms available on campus.
- Even the slowest of readers wouldn't significantly delay the tournament.
- If one pool finished more than one round earlier earlier than another, the fast readers could parachute in to the delayed pool and complete them quickly.
- An experienced club member could captain two or three pools at once without being overtaxed.
- The various pools were segregated within different buildings across campus, so there was little chance that question security could be compromised.
- The seeding process ensured that the top teams didn't have to compete against each other too early in the tournament.
- The geographic balancing allowed teams to compete against schools they didn't typically meet throughout the rest of the year.
Results
| Year | Overall Champion | Overall Second Place | Teams |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1996 XII | Henry Ford II A | James Island | 91 |
| 1997 XIII | Auburn A | Henry Ford II A | 89 |
| 1997 XIV | Brookwood A | Irmo | 106 |
| 1998 XV | Results Missing | Results Missing | Results Missing |
| 1998 XVI | Dunbar A | Dorman A | 111 |
| 1999 XVII | Walton A | Dorman A | 84 |
| 1999 XVIII | Dorman A | Walton A | 84 |
| 1999 XIX | James Island | Liberty B | 52 |
| 2000 XX | Irmo | Dunbar A | 83 |
| 2001 XXI | Edmond Memorial | Results Missing | 44 |
| 2001 XXII | Dorman | Results Missing | Results Missing |
| 2002 XXIII | Results Missing | Results Missing | Results Missing |
| 2002 XXIV | Dorman A | Walton A | Results Missing |
| 2003 XXV | Ezell-Harding A | Apollo A | 34 |
| 2003 XXVI | Dorman A | Walton A | 53 |
| 2004 XXVII | Brookwood | Detroit Country Day | 43 |
| 2004 XXVIII | Dorman A | Brookwood | 73 |
| 2005 XXIX | Dorman A | Detroit Catholic Central | 44 |
| 2005 XXX | duPont Manual A | Walton A | 62 |
| 2006 XXXI | duPont Manual A | Dorman A | 31 |
| 2006 XXXII | Dorman A | North Kansas City | 74 |
| 2007 XXXIII | Central Gwinnett A | Norcross | 16 |
| 2007 XXXIV | Dorman A | North Kansas City | 65 |
| 2008 XXXV | Ezell-Harding | Brindlee Mountain | 31 |
| 2008 XXXVI | Dorman A | Chattahoochee | 57 |
| 2009 XXXVII | Hoover A | Dunbar A | 21 |
| 2009 XXXVIII | Dorman A | Dorman B | 28+ |
| 2010 XXXIX | Dunbar | Hume-Fogg | 14 |
| 2010 XL | Johnson County | duPont Manual A | 37 |
| 2011 XLI | University School of Nashville | Ezell-Harding | 10 |