Re: ICT Div I Qualification Thought?

Chris White <*cwhite2_at_benjaminthedonkey.yahoo.invalid*> · Sat, 28 Feb 2004 19:10:03 -0000

Nick-

Our team was in virtually the same position last year as yours is this
year: we were virtually all first and second years (though not
necessarially freshmen and sophomores); we won the Mid-atlantic Div
II, and we were concerned about our chances in DI the next year.  In
addition, since we're an undergrad-only school, it would seen that
we'd have *more* reason  to complain about grad students than Penn,
which can theoretically (and has in the past) benefitted from grad
students on their team.  

As it turns out, we did just fine this year in Div I.  How?  Why?

We played in lots of open competitions, instead of just sticking
exclusively to juniorbirds.  We went to Terrapin, BOB, Buzzerfest, and
we even braved the gauntlet of ACF Regionals, where we managed a
respectable 5-7 record.  We went face to face with grad students, and
even beat them on occasion.  Yes, there are lots of juniorbirds in the
area, but it's not like there are no open competitions, and it's not
like you're prevented from entering them just because you're eligible
to play in easy tournaments.

And, the Mid-Atlantic is one of the least grad-heavy regions in the
nation.  At ACF Fall (which I will again praise as one of the best
tournaments our team has ever attended- accessible and high quality),
three of the top four teams were undergrad-only.  You should really
try ACF Fall next year.

This is not to say that there isn't a gulf that's wider than it needs
be.  It sems that there's been a canon arms race in the past few years
(mainly spurred on by the hardcore Midwest), such that it bacomes
harder and harder for novices to enjoy themselves at real tournaments.
 In response to this, there's a proliferation of DII and juniorbirds.
While this keeps younger players interested, it also stratifies the
situation and in a sense makes it harder for them to break into open
tournaments, since they can just play in JB's and not truly challenge
themselves.

So, what would I do?  I would try to have more tournaments follow the
(you guessed it) ACF Fall model.  Keep them accessible, encourage
packet submission, and recognize DII and undergrad but force them to
compete together so they know what "real" competition is like. 
Hardcore stuff can be left for masters and ACF Nationals; and
undergrads get recognition while grads continue to play (which is good
for the circuit's health for reasons that have been mentioned before.)

-Chris

--- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, "nicolas_walters" <Sywolf_at_a...> wrote:
> I guess this message is mainly directed at R. and the other NAQT 
> brass, although I would love to get everyone's feedback on it. What's 
> prompting it is a reflection on thinking about my own team's (Penn) 
> chances of qualifying for Div I ICT next year. Right now, I would say 
> they're pretty slim, although not totally out of the question. For 
> the record though, we won Mid-Atlantic Div II Sectionals this year. 
> And yes, the point I'm getting at has been brought up several times 
> before. The jump for even really good freshman and sophs. to "open" 
> competition is quite severe. An easy solution would be to eliminate 
> grad students from the mix, and make ICT for example an undergrad 
> only tournament. Since I know that's not going to happen, I'm not 
> going to even bother proposing. Here's what I am proposing though. 
> Have the Div I field be composed of 16 "open" teams with grad 
> students included of course, and 16 undergrad only teams. Then, the 
> winner that comes out of each bracket will face each other in the 
> final. Granted, the winner of that game might almost always be the 
> open team. But this is a way to insure undergrad participation at a 
> much broader level. Having an undergrad champion in the current 
> format does some to help the problem, but not nearly enough in my 
> opinion. This new format would insure that the best undergrad team in 
> the country is declared champion, and that some good (but not 
> stellar) undergrad teams qualify for ICT, and play some against some 
> reasonable competition. It does marginalize or reduce grad student 
> participation a bit, but then the question must be asked: whom is 
> college bowl targeting? If, as implied by the name, it is college 
> students...then this solution seems like a perfect balance. In Penn's 
> own case, virtually all of our team is freshman and sophs. right now. 
> So next year, it will be juniors, sophs. and freshman. A lot of those 
> juniors are already ineligible for most events in our area, b/c 
> everything is like a junior bird. I know Harvard and Princeton are in 
> similar boats, as are most of the liberal arts colleges of course. 
> This would just be one way to at least give juniors and seniors a 
> better chance of playing more tournaments, and insuring a continuous, 
> four year quiz bowl experience for undergrads. That said, I'm really 
> eager to hear everyone's thoughts.
> 
> --Nick Walters, Penn College Bowl