Re: 2003 NAQT ICT to be held in Los Angeles: A Bet

Some thoughts on travel:

Being in the middle of nowhere (i.e. Iowa) and with a contingent of 
players who could not miss more than one day of class to drive down, 
the Grinnell team was more or less forced to fly down to last year's 
ICT, and while we still had to pay a pretty hefty amount of money to 
do so, the damage to our pocketbooks could have been a lot worse than 
it was. There are a whole bunch of low-cost airlines out there 
besides Southwest that I assume serve LAX, and even if you fly one of 
the major carriers the damage isn't necessarily that high if you fly 
off-peak. The various travel websites (Orbitz, Expedia, Travelocity, 
etc.) were very helpful for us as well, and they can come up with 
some good rates. Jason's suggestion that you drive to the nearest 
major airport if you're in a place like Urbana-Champaign is also a 
good one-- we were able to knock off about $70 from our ticket price 
and a good portion of that out of our overall expenses (once you 
factor gas, parking, etc. in) by flying from O'Hare instead of Des 
Moines International. (Incidentally, just typing some information in 
on one of the aforementioned websites for an O'Hare-LAX round trip 
came up with a price of $196-- still pricey, but nowhere near the 
$500 figure quoted earlier, and a price that is likely to drop as the 
ICT approaches.) Getting to L.A. relatively affordably is possible, 
if our experience last year is any indication.

That said, the Grinnell team did have a sizable portion of our 
airfare and our entire entrance fee paid for by the Student 
Government discretionary fund, and had this money not come through it 
would have been very unlikely that we would have been able to go. As 
such, I hope that NAQT is considering measures that will make it more 
possible for financially-strapped organizations in the Midwest and 
East Coast to attend, as those regions are where most of the teams in 
the country are located. I do think that a full 64 teams will end up 
being fielded, but I wonder whether putting the ICT in L.A. will 
produce an abnormally high occurence of teams declining their bids.

In any case, I do think it's good to have some geographical diversity 
in ICT hosts, and I think it's reasonable for non-west coast schools 
to make the effort to get to L.A. if at all feasible.

Cheers,
Brad Houston


--- In quizbowl_at_y..., jpaikman <no_reply_at_y...> wrote:
> To Adam:
> 
> <<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>
> Anyway, while I think it is fair to hold the ICT in LA, 
economically, 
> some teams like Sudheer's Illini (and especially teams from farther 
> east) will find it difficult to pay for transcontinental flight. 
> Further, it's probably not wise to book a supersaver flight until 
you 
> qualify (unless you know you are a Top 10-15 team).
> <<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>
> 
> A:  Fly anyways and play standby. [see WashU _at_ 2000 BU]
> 
> B:  You self-answer your argument by stating that not enough teams 
> will sign up.
> 
> C:  Any flight out of Boston/LaGuardia/Philly is expensive to any 
> other location in the US not served by Southwest, regardless of 
> transcontinental nature.
> 
> 
> Matt writes:
> 
> <<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>
> Southwest flies only to selected large cities. The
> average college town, and even such major cities as
> Boston, need to fly with a full-fare airline. So far
> it's been made known that Princeton, Illinois, and
> Harvard will have enormous difficulties getting to the
> event.
> <<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>
> 
> A:  Drive to a southwest-served city like Hartford, BWI, or
> Long Island, then fly. [see WashU STL-->Hartford, ICT 2000]
> 
> B:  Flying out of Boston/other east coast is inherently expensive 
> to ANYWHERE it's not served by Southwest/"your favorite low
> cost carrier".  This means ICT's should never be hosted in the 
> deep south, southwest, or upper midwest because it takes too 
> long to drive there for poor Cornell or Penn State.
> 
> C:  Southwest isn't the only low-cost alternative.
> 
> D:  Fundraise or host more tournaments.
> 
> <<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>
> I did a quick check of prices from several major
> Eastern air hubs. Los Angeles is on average $150 more
> expensive per person than a central city such as
> Chicago or St. Louis. The situation is more severe for
> teams in less populous areas.
> <<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> 
> A:  Airfares now aren't always the lowest airfares available; wait 
> for a sale.
> 
> B:  Fundraise or host more tournaments.
> 
> 
> To Mysterious Packet_Ops:
> 
> A) You beg the question that Southwest Airlines flies to all the 
> major cities from which college teams will be leaving. Amazing as 
it 
> may sound, the majority of Southwest Airlines cities are found in 
the 
> South and in the West. A quick look at a map of SOuthwest cities 
> (<http://www.iflyswa.com/travel_center/routemap.html>) shows such 
> major cities as Boston, New York, Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Newark, 
> Atlanta, and Charleston aren't even served by Southwest. A lot of 
> colleges are located around area of those cities and won't have 
this 
> wondrous, affordable option you're talking about. Hell, I bet a 
some 
> teams will have trouble finding a flight that goes both in and out 
of 
> LAX. In our specific case, nearly every ticket option I looked at 
on 
> numerous discount flight plan websites required us to go LAX one 
way 
> and SNA (John Wayne airport... that's in Orange County... I've 
driven 
> from L.A. to Orange County many times before... that's a very long 
> and tedious drive). So seeing as how Southwest doesn't even serve a 
> large host of major cities, especially in the east, that 
effectively 
> kills your point.
> <<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>
> 
> A:  Airfares now aren't always the lowest airfares available; wait 
> for a sale.
> 
> B:  You beg the question that Southwest is the only low cost 
carrier 
> out there.
> 
> C:  Drive to a Southwest served location. [can't do anything about 
> Charleston :-(]
> 
> D:  Fundraise or host tournaments.
> 
> E:  Fly multiple cheap airlines.
> 
> F:  Call your travel agent if you have problems.
> 
> G:  In general, please get more creative.
> 
> 
> <<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> B) The return flight is made easier for west coast schools because 
> they at least gain 3 hours back due to time zone changes, as 
opposed 
> to all the east coast schools, who will lose an extra 3 hours of 
time 
> in addition to the large amount of travel time required. When the 
> teams are in L.A. they will pretty much have to conform to the 
> tournament's Pacific Time schedule, nullifying any hours saved from 
> the time zone change on the flight to L.A. People have other things 
> to do too, and 3 hours of time is not an insignificant amount. Some 
> of the flights I quoted in my initial search efforts actually 
arrived 
> early Monday morning, and for people who have class/work Monday 
that 
> is unacceptable, let alone considering the hassle it would be to 
find 
> affordable transportation home from the airport when arriving at 
such 
> late hours.
> <<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>
> 
> I'm sorry if you can't "conform" to the west coast schedule, and 
that 
> you can't waste three hours of time.  I'm sure we all aren't 
> procrastinators at one point or the other; would you consider not 
> going to your favorite tournament because of a loss of three 
hours?  
> Well, I guess I just won't attend that party on Thursday...
> 
> In my opinion, after flying many many places for med school 
> interviews, quiz bowl & debate tournaments, and conferences, travel 
> days are not days to plan to do much of anything, going to any 
> destination regardless of coast.  I don't know what experiences 
> you've had, but I guess it varies from person to person. You're 
> entitled to your own opinion.
> 
> This ends my two cents on the matter.  I don't have time to answer 
> anything anymore, so I hereby concede all arguments [that includes 
> you Matt].
> 
> Yours,
> 
> Jason Paik
> who won't be attending the ICT or the SCT because he has no team

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST