Matt, There are two things going on here, the first is that NAQT made an exception to its rule, the second is that the team in question happened to be a very good one and also have the top scorer in D2 despite not winning. I understand, as I'm sure others do as well, that we like a certain degree of accountability when it comes to competition of any kind - make it as fair as can be such that the winner is the team who truly did better. Given that NAQT is well within its right to pretty much do whatever it wants (and even still I guarantee that they have their own standards) it is of course unfortunate that what happened occurred such that it did but what are you going to do about it? The second more meaningful issue is that teams are understably a bit miffed over what happened but it is certainly no fault of UCLA's that they finished how they did - I wouldn't have told the UCLA D2 team last year something along the lines of "hey because you're an exhibition team can ya kinda just, oh I dunno, not play well?" As Jerry mentioned they are very good players and it is not very surprising that they did as well as they did at SCT this year. I played against Charles while he was in High School and I recall a game at a tournament (and I'm sure my teammates recall) being down 100 points at the half to him. Whether or not my team underestimated his or had a bad game I still think that's very impressive and in fact I would be more surprised if his team didn't do well at SCT - they are exactly where they should be. Chris, as the coach of last year's D2 runner-up at Valencia, is probably the first person we might expect to "cry foul" but instead, he thought the prognostication of a UCLA victory to be premature and it just gave him impetus to want to practice harder and be the best they can in time for the tournament. In fact, he thinks the experience factor doesn't matter - like it or not playing in the ICT versus the SCT is not the same as having been to the Super Bowl before. When it comes down to it Matt, you've had a seemingly non-stop bone to pick with NAQT since I can remember. You've blasted them on issues relating to format and question quality. I think I suggested close to a year ago that if you don't like NAQT then that's great, no one's forcing you to play in their tournaments. In fact if your problem with them is as big as it seems I would just say you might consider boycotting their events. Unfortunately that would mean one less national tournament you would have the opportunity to attend and not attending the sectional as well. If your demand for quizbowl is, as it appears to me, fairly inelastic with lack of many equivalent substitutes I'd imagine you might suffer some sort of withdrawal if you stopped participating in NAQT though I could be wrong. On that note, given that you feel very strongly about how quizbowl should work from the logistics on down to the questions I'd be very curious to see what you'd come up with if you founded a competitor to NAQT - maybe that's something you're even thinking about. Regards, Ross (enjoying his view of San Francisco, the Bay Bridge, the Golden Gate Bridge, and the San Rafael Bridge simultaneously) --- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, Matt Weiner <darwins_bulldog1138_at_y...> wrote: > I'm still unsure how Jerry's argument is relevant. I'm > sure any John Gradstudent could make the same claim > about his prior ICT experience or lack thereof having > no impact on his current abilities, but he still > shouldn't be able to play D2. Rules are rules--or at > least, rules WERE rules. > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. > http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:47 AM EST EST