> Hm. It appears that "this year, there's maybe > six teams, and that's being generous" that can > win NAQT. And Pitt isn't one of them. That's true. It's true of any tournament containing the teams you stated. I've never played CBI, but...more buzzer races is always bad. And either you like trivia, or you don't. Matt's problem, speaking as his teammate, is he's tired of too many things, having heard too many questions. I've been to, um, probably eight tournaments, and heard three or four packets every week at practice since fall of 2000, and the old guys on our team (including Matt) complain about things coming up over and over when I've never heard a question about them(example from tonight: Klein Bottle). New players/programs don't care if the question has been written before. Different formats suit different people. And the interesting clue that's unrelated to the actual importance of the tossup's answer (Silver nose...Olivia Newton-John's grandfather...William Faulkner having a "u" accidentally put in his name by some office in his 20's) is something that people get tired of most easily, but which people find most enjoyable to write about if they haven't heard many questions written by people other than themselves. Short answer: no more tossups with the answer "new car smell", anywhere. And CBI can use tossups on Chinua Achebe and special relativity, but no one else can. I think that would be good. For a year's test period. Michael davies mld6_at_...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:45 AM EST EST