I had always thought that bonuses were designed so that any team could get 5 or 10 points but very few could get more than 20 or so (regardless of the format) by putting in some very easy and very hard questions as follows - e.g. you could do a 30 pt simpsons bonus as follows: 5) Who created the Simpsons? - EASY 5) What town do they live in? - EASY 10) In the mid-nineties the Simpsons had a ___th episode special; what number belongs in the blank? - CHALLENGING 10) On what date did that episode air? - VERY HARD so in reality the spread is between 10 and 20 points; the bonus distribution is effectively as follows: 10 points are just a giveaway and practically a tossup bonus 10 points may or may not be given depending on the strength of the team and 10 points are only given to teams who really know their stuff So... the current system seems to have tossups effectively worth 20 and bonuses worth 10 or possibly 20 (a suggestion to keep the excitement but not cut off the bonuses might be to keep the distribution, BUT require that at least 5 points are 'very easy' and 5 points are 'very hard' - up to a point this CAN be enforced as no questions on minor Assyrian deities are very easy; this would also prevent the myriad of bonuses to be reduced to 2 or 3 types) mmailliw On Sun, 26 Jan 2003, r2aslet wrote: > Hey all, > > After much thought and some debate, we have decided to change the > value of bonus questions for the March tournament to a maximum of 15 > points per bonus question. Because we haven't received any packets > yet, and because this format change does not alter the initial > distribution, we figured it wouldn't harm anyone to institute it. > > The thought behind making bonuses worth a maximum of 15pts rather than > 30pts is that the number of points currently awarded to bonuses is so > high as to almost break the game of quiz bowl. Frankly, the members > of our organization--myself included--agree that the often wildly > uneven difficulty of bonus questions makes for unreasonable swings in > score, often awarding victories to teams who receive a lucky bonus > distribution rather than teams who possess better speed and more > knowledge. While we agree that greater speed and knowledge will > result in more wins in the long run, the present setup allows for all > too bitter and disappointing defeats. > > Currently, in NAQT play, it is possible for a team to answer 10 > tossups correctly during a game and earn an average of 10pts per bonus > question, making for a total of 200pts, and yet have that matched by a > team that answers only 5 tossups but sweeps every 30pts bonus > question. Though, admittedly, this occasionally makes games exciting > for spectators and may result in some dramatic wins for underdogs, we > don't feel such things make up for demoralizing runaway victories with > inflated final scores (where the added bonus points often belie the > true difference in skill between the teams) and last-minute defeats > caused by a well-timed Kevin Spacey bonus and an ill-timed amino acids > one. > > We understand that this problem could be mitigated by doing more to > ensure that difficulty remains the same between questions. Frankly, > though, we don't see how we could do that. First, difficulty is very > subjective--what we consider easy, another team may consider hard; > second, assuming we could even identify questions that met a set > difficulty level, it would require too much effort on the part of > packet organizers and question writers to see that relative difficulty > remain the same across 12 or so rounds. > > The easiest way to get around these problems (other than eliminating > bonuses entirely) is to make the bonus worth less. We know that quiz > bowl is a game of speed and individual knowledge, but we also agree > that collaboration is important. However, we also agree that bonus > points should not make up 75%(!) of all possible points as they do > now. [20q x 10pts = 200pts, 20b x 30pts = 600pts, 600pts/800pts= 75%] > Reducing the maximum bonus total to 15pts will allow the > collaborative component of the game to be kept without making it > irrelevant. It will also, hopefully, mitigate uneven bonus > distribution and stop teams from committing hari-kari when they've > gotten a bonus on minor Assyrian deities and the other team gets a > bonus on Civil War battles or the TV show "Friends." [20q x 10pts = > 200pts, 20b x 15pts = 300pts, 300pts/500pts = 60%] > > Because bonuses will only be worth 15 and we don't want to have > fractional scores, only bonus formats in the form of 5-5-5, 15-10-5, > and 15-10 (just one 15-10) will be permitted. Please alter your bonus > question writing accordingly. > > The packet deadlines remain Feb. 15th and Mar. 1st. We welcome > feedback on what everyone thinks about this change. We doubt you can > convince us to have 30pts bonus tournament, but you're welcome to try; > also, if you think for whatever reason that the problems discussed can > be fixed in better ways than by making bonus values 15pts, we'd like > to hear that too. > > Stephen Aslett > Rice Quiz Bowl > > P.S. Before anyone accuses us of sour grapes, we want to say that this > reform isn't due in any part to our performance at any tournament. > We've simply been thinking about it for a while and finally decided to > do something about it. > > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor > ADVERTISEMENT > HGTV Dream Home Giveaway > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > quizbowl-unsubscribe_at_yahoogroups.com > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service. >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST