If you want to be specific, it's mACF. Most of our ACF/mACF stockpile is from UTC. We've exposed our younger players to packets from COTKU and Live Aid from around 1999 and 2000, and it was pretty obviously over their heads. (Conflicts kept us out of COTKU this year.) The few veterans that we have are noticably worse on those questions than they are on NAQT. There were plenty of questions in those packets where I was thinking "WTF?". Our current veterans were on the pair of Clemson teams at the 2000 NAQT sectional at UGA and were our highest scorers with about 15 to 20 ppg. The young players are ok on NAQT invitational series but not great, so I don't have high hopes for anything other than CBI this year, but they'll be more comfortable with NAQT than mACF for now. As I said earlier, we do expect to do some (m)ACF this year, it's just not a main interest. --- In quizbowl_at_y..., tgallows <no_reply_at_y...> wrote: > To come back to an earlier point, I think you might be a bit off track > when you refer to "ACF." There's an enormous difference between ACF > Regionals/Nationals and something like Sword Bowl, COTKU, or Moon Pie, > which are modified-ACF (as are most invitationals). Those tournaments > aren't THAT much different from an NAQT tournament, and Sword Bowl > _should_ be easier than NAQT Sectionals. [You may or may not be aware > of this, but NAQT Sectional packs are noticeably harder than the > Invitational Series packs used in most HS tournaments.] The UTC > tournaments don't have power tossups, but some invitationals even have > powers now. So the distinction you're making between "ACF" and NAQT > may not be valid. What ACF questions have you stockpiled? > > Maybe the thing to do is identify what aspects of "NAQT" you like > better than what you're calling ACF, and maybe some helpful non-me > person can suggest a nearby modified-ACF tournament y'all might like. > If it's the lack of trash in "ACF" tournaments that your fellow > Clemsonians dislike, a UTC tournament tends to have an ample sprinking > o' trash. If it's current events you want, there's probably some > invitational which emphasizes current events, though maybe not to the > excess of an NAQT pack or grotesque excess of a CBI pack. > > Last, if your goal in running the Wonky Bowl is to have a tournament > for your new players to play in ... well, usually when a tournament is > run, the first priority of the hosting team is to staff the > tournament, which I suppose is why you brought it up. Another option > is to do what we;ve often done in Florida because of the traditional > lack of tournaments. We get a set of questions from somewhere, get > anywhere from 15 to 25 people [from various schools] together at > someone's house, and play a sort of improvised tournament -- we > assemble teams of roughly equal strength, play for pretty much a whole > Saturday, eat a bunch of pizza, and drink a bunch of beer. As for > readers, we pretty much do what you suggested -- one person from the > two teams sits out to read a round. If you want to use NAQT > questions, you could do the same thing with a set of NAQT IS questions > -- past ones only cost 35 bucks for an entire tournament, I think. > It's not a fancy 'recruiting tool,' unless you're supplying free food > (that'll get college students in the door for sure), but if you just > want a tournament-ish thing for the new players, it's another option. > > --Raj Dhuwalia > > > --snip-- > > Our younger players cut their teeth on NAQT in high school, including > > a number of players who haven't dedicated themselves but are > > potential recruits. Giving them a chance for regional competition on > > a familiar format without dedicating a weekend to travel is a good > > recruiting tool to draw them in. (And of course, allowing those guys > > to play means less volunteers available.) Besides, even our veterans > > do poorly on the ACF questions we've stockpiled. > > > > I'm aware of G. Tech's MLK, Sword Bowl, and the likelihood of Moonpie > > Classic, and I plan for us to pick at least one of them to go to in > > addition to the NAQT sectional. But with my past experience and the > > level of this program, the style to focus on at the moment is NAQT, > > not ACF. If I push ACF too hard this early, interest will die. > > Growing this program thrives on fun, not hardcore competition, and > > the necessity is to grow right now.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST