In accord with Maribeth's post, no real gripes here: I've seen it happen in all the ACF tournaments I've attended, and I should have learned the lesson beforehand. I was naive enough to schedule 30 minutes per round. With a field so deep as the West, teams will answer 17-21 tossups per game, hear all the bonus parts, and wait 5 seconds per part to be prompted for an answer. Add on the fact that one local team arrived 30 minutes late and teams chose to have an hour and 15 minutes for lunch, we finished all 13 rounds at 7:45 PM in lieu of the intended 5:00 PM. That comes out to approximately 10 extra minutes per round. For future reference, I think hosts of ACF tournaments should allot a minimum of 40 minutes per round. Another point: The inclusion of more trash in the distribution sure enlivened the spirit a bit; however, if the point of adding trash is to make ACF more accessible and user-friendly, then what's up with those hardnosed trash questions (that I'd like to label as "ACF Trash")? Granted there weren't any absolute bombs like "Robocop III" from a few years back, to see good trash-playing teams bagel trash bonuses is a bit disconcerting. But, overall, I was pleased with the way things went. Teams showed much professionalism by not protesting silly details in runaway games. I also saw some teams shaking hands after matches, which I normally don't see outside of CBI tournaments. Willie Chen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:45 AM EST EST