--- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, barhubbard <no_reply_at_y...> wrote:
> But I was rather puzzled by your attempt at using NAQT standards to
> measure
> the content of ACF Regionals packets
It's the other way round. The You Gotta Know list summarizes what
comes up most often in NAQT packets. I was applying the suggested
difficulty test for ACF Regionals to the content of NAQT packets.
> Not that there's anything wrong with that, variety between formats
is
> cool, and,
> better yet, ACF lets you do something about it-- if you want to hear
> some
> questions about candide, moby dick, and macbeth write some for the
> next
> Regionals...
Right, the point is that it is absurd to suggest that anything that
hasn't come up in ACF Regionals in recent years must be too obscure to
be the answer to a tossup. Probably the main reason is that the
sample size is too small.