I would have to agree that Deep Bench was something of a mixed bag. I enjoyed playing and seeing friends, and I didn't have many problems with the questions (though like others I found myself negging and hearing my answer a few words later occasionally). The "accumulating neg" rule was interesting, though I suspect it was made mostly for the singles matches. The "lie clue" was novel, but not the sort of thing I would like to play with again. I understand the handicap of hosting Deep Bench and TRASH Regionals the same weekend, but the schedule didn't seem to be well thought out. In 2nd doubles, there wasn't a South Dakota or Grinnell team, and the schedule led to us facing Chicago head-to-head twice. Essentially, we played rounds 1-7 backwards for rounds 8-14, while rounds 15+ was starting over at the beginning. Certainly there could have been other permutations of the schedule that would have allowed for a little more variety. On Saturday, we played Minnesota twice, which didn't serve any purpose to my knowledge. While I'm in favor of "getting our money's worth" as far as questions go, I think we would have been fine with 14 rounds Friday and one fewer on Saturday. My biggest problem with the tournament was the lack of a lunch break. It definately detracted from my enjoyment of the tournament, and I think it was a poor decision. The only moderator I had problems with was Levinson, as he fell into a "let's hurry this along" monotone with poor enunciation. However, it didn't affect the match and I realized I just wanted things to be over with by that point. Congratulations to Chicago and Carleton for their first and second place performances. Thanks to the Minnesota crew for hosting Deep Bench, all complaints aside. Paul Tomlinson
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:45 AM EST EST