"There's a serious difference between a tournament being elitist and its attendees being elitist. Say what you will about the major formats -- and much has been said -- but the thing which separates NAQT from ACF (for many of my teammates -- as said before, I'll play damn near anything) is that ACF seems to be disinterested in the enjoyment of all teams, choosing instead to focus merely on the top few. The result? NAQT has 36 contenders for best team in the nation, while ACF has 16. Such is their prerogative. Having not attended a CBI National (sigh), I have no idea how they handle things, so I will not comment further. Yet I do know how things were apparently handled by the players themselves." Again you're speaking out of your ass, Andy. I had 26 teams registered for ACF Nationals at one point, but 10 dropped out either due to lack of money, transportation, or other issues. Other teams could only afford to go to one national tournament, and since there's usually a bigger NAQT contingent at most schools, they win. What is your reasoning behind the statement that ACF is only interested in the best teams? Or are you just rehashing some tired stereotype? I made a concerted effort to recruit new teams for Nationals this year, and ACF has traditionally offered discounts and other incentives to inexperienced teams. In addition, the ACF question archive is available free for teams that want to get better; the other formats makes you pay a crapload for old questions. Also, why the hell are you babbling about CBI if you have so little experience with it? Every time someone dares to say something inflammatory on this list, you start flailing about like a decapitated chicken. Maybe it would be more constructive to allocate the time you spend posting to studying for quizbowl. Dave
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:44 AM EST EST