Re: Sectionals questions

• From: Dormendomegapopphobia <romangarnett_at_Dormendomegapopphobia.yahoo.invalid> <romangarnett_at_Dormendomegapopphobia.yahoo.invalid>
• Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 02:06:56 -0000
• Message-ID: <b2ca80+prj2_at_...>

--- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, jpahk <no_reply_at_y...> wrote:
> --- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, jp_lien <no_reply_at_y...> wrote:
> > In the name of balance let me say that the question on surjective 
> > mappings was mmm, tasty.
> 
> augh. i appreciated the existence of such a question on a 
theoretical 
> level, but the actual question was rather grieviously flawed. it 
> began with something like "On the real line, this property applies 
to 
> the functions x cubed minus x and tangent of x, but not to e to the 
> x." this lead-in caused an opponent to buzz in and say "oddness," 
> which is a very good answer at this point. (actually he may have 
> buzzed before e to the x, but that's irrelevant.) why was x^3-x 
> chosen instead of saying "any cubic polynomial" (since all cubics 
are 
> surjective)? it definitely wasn't 100% clear that the answer 
> was "oddness" at the point where he buzzed, but the functions 
chosen 
> did have that property in common and it jumped out a little more 
than 
> surjective. certainly it wasn't incorrect, but it was misleading, 
and 
> qualified as a hose nevertheless. i felt bad for my opponent, but 
> then they won the match anyway, and i felt worse. :)

I also buzzed with "odd" after x^3 - x and tan(x) were given.  
Needless to say, I was quite annoyed when I was awarded my third -5 
of the match and ended up losing.

Roman Garnett