That's "tried and true" in its use as a stereotype. The language may be ambiguous, but that's what a little thing called context is for. I'm confused as to where you got the idea that a team has to shell out "a few hundred bucks" to play ACF. Rates for ACF tournaments have consistently been on the low end of the scale, and can be much lower (-$30 at ACF Nationals, for instance) if a team chooses to submit an early packet. As a comparison, there is a certain non-ACF tournament this year who can afford to gouge teams for $135 simply because they know teams will suck it in and go anyway. You admit that "Of course a newbie team isn't going to do well." But did you actually talk to them? Did you ask them if they had fun? You may be surprised. At almost every tournament I've ever been at, there's a team that goes 0-x and puts up similar numbers, regardless of the tournament format. That does not necessarily imply that they are unhappy; in fact, often, new teams have a blast just getting a chance to play, and recognize that, while they are not deserving of a trophy or recognition right now, they will get better at some point. That doesn't necessarily mean that they aren't having a good time playing right now. As Charlie and Raj mentioned earlier, ACF did in fact offer deep discounts and trophies for inexperienced teams. On the other hand, no TD can afford to give every team a trophy just so no one feels bad, nor does that seem like a good idea. This is not self-esteem bowl; this is academic competition - there will always be a last place team, there will be a few teams whose performance merits a trophy, and there will be many more whose performance doesn't. The prospect of shiny trinkets and gewgaws is nice, but the decision for a new team to come back or not is really decided by internal factors, for the most part, beyond the control of the question editor or the tournament director. The sole reponsibility of the editor is to produce a set of quality set of questions at a level of difficultly appropriate for the event, and just about everyone acknowledges that Kelly did a fanstatic job of it. If you're _really_ worried about whether this team comes again, why don't you actually ask them if they had a good time, and, if not, offer them constructive advice and mentor them for a while? Despite blaming the problem on ACF, that's the sort of thing that really determines if a teams sticks with it or not. The idea that ACF is actively trying to "push the newbies away" is untrue and insulting to those who work so hard to edit ACF tournaments. ACF has already made changes to encourage younger teams to come. It's up to schools to shed their preconceptions of ACF and take them up on the offer. BTW, Stephen, I assume you will be playing at ACF Regionals this year, right?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:45 AM EST EST