Re: NAQT ICT in LA

• From: zundevil <no_reply_at_yahoogroups.com>
• Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2002 06:29:42 -0000
• Message-ID: <aob3sm+rj2d_at_...>

Ok, I've heard enough.

As a student at Arizona State and a member of the only "active" 
quizbowl team in the Mountain Time Zone for the past four years, 
EVERY single tournament required 5+ hours of travel, aside from 
those that members flew to by funding out of their own pockets.  The 
squad still managed to take trips to Evanston, Ann Arbor, Boston, 
and some of us went to Chattanooga.  That particular trip took me 
from Albuquerque to Phoenix to Nashville to Chattanooga, the last 
part by car, with each day's travel amounting to 9+ hours.

I'm not here for sympathy.  Last time I checked, we're all in this 
together.  Until video-conferencing comes along and teams are 
somehow able to use buzzers over the internet or something, travel 
is going to be part of the game.

Amazingly, the only people raising a stink about the upcoming ICT 
are those that come from teams who have the LUXURY of having a bunch 
of tournaments in their own backyard.  The sense of entitlement 
expressed in the post to which I'm responding (as well as several 
others) is downright appalling.  So you've got a bunch of teams in 
your neck of the woods...GREAT!!  The rest of us are happy for you.  
That doesn't mean you run the damn place.  It doesn't even mean 
you're more special than those of us "orphan" clubs (such as most of 
the teams in the west).  You're just fortunate to be in a good 
geographic location, which leads to more tournaments at your 
disposal, which can give your team an advantage over others who 
don't have it that easy.

Part of the argument that has been expressed is that, since there 
are so few teams out west (I'd put the number in the teens, not the 
3-5 that was expressed by an earlier post, but it's still a small 
proportion), that makes the travel less bearable.  Let's pretend 
there were 50 teams out west and 50 teams in the east.  Would that 
make the travel somehow more palatable?

To those of you that have expressed disappointment at the selection 
of LA: If the travel is too much, don't go.  If the cost is too 
much, don't go.  If the time-commitment is too much, don't go.  It 
might surprise you to know that you're not the only group that's had 
to make a big, cross-country trip in order to attend a national 
championship.  You are, however, the only group that's complained 
about it.  If you really want to participate in this year's ICT 
(UCLA and CalTech know how to run tourneys, btw), you CAN get 
there.  If you don't go, you'll have no one to blame but yourselves.

The fact is, the ICT is the _national_ championship in this game.  
To think that certain regions are entitled to something that extends 
beyond those regions is downright stupid.  Sorry guys, the rest of 
us have been there, and we don't want (nor deserve) to hear about it.

Jason

P.S. If we qualify, see ya at TRASHionals.  And I don't even know 
where it's going to be held.

--- In quizbowl_at_y..., kostovz <no_reply_at_y...> wrote:
> If I may add to this discussion: 
> I don't think it's a really great idea to hold national 
tournaments in 
> the worst possible places (locationwise) for most clubs. Let's 
assume 
> that airline tickets costs were negligible (and they aren't)
, it still 
> takes more than 5 hours to fly from coast to coast. Since most 
teams 
> are in the northeast/southeast/midwest, this means that most teams 
> will be spending almost two days in transit. 
> Let's do some reasonable estimation:
> >2 hours to airport(including the early arrival for checkin and 
such)
> >5 hours in flight
> >1 hour to hotel/tournament. 
> That's two 8-hour stretches for one tournament. 
> For those of us with senior theses due in April, spending four 
days to 
> play fifteen rounds of NAQT is sort of a questionable call. I 
mean, 
> would NAQT host the ICT in Hawaii or Guam, if those places could 
> provide a "fun" and "well-run" tournament"? There should be some 
> balance between a good host and a good host-city for the vast 
majority 
> of teams. Now, perhaps LA was the ONLY bid, and all others would 
have 
> brought disaster, then I can understand this decision, but 
otherwise, 
> it's shaky.
> 
> I won't dwell on the financial difficulties that clubs which don't 
get 
> any assistance (like Princeton) will face. We usually host 2 
> tournaments each year, and hosted three last year to have money to 
fly 
> to N.C., and we're still really short on cash. Hopefully, we'll be 
> able to bring a Div1 and a Div2 team this year (if we can qualify 
them 
> :) ), but it will be a close call. $2500 (which I estimate to be 
the 
> price tag for tickets, car rental, and fees) is not easily found.
> -Lenny Kostovetsky