Site Descriptionhttp://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/en-usMon, 17 Mar 2008 10:56:05 AM -0700 Mon, 17 Mar 2008 10:56:05 AM -0700 Tom Michael 2008 NCT Field is Set
Also, you will indeed find the occasional two line toss-up. Some of those get to the point in three or four interruptable clues. Others are written specifically to test certain cognitive skills. Again, you won't find one in every game.

Finally, you ask about spelling questions. We realize that some players passionately hate them. However, reviewing the evaluation responses from the RCTs, it's evident that there is also a body of players who like them. For many years now, we've tried to reconcile the two opposing views by having spelling questions, but limiting them to only occurring as one part of a multi-part bonus. You will see such bonuses occasionally at the NCT, but again not in every game, and there should be fewer of them overall then were at the RCT, much like ideally there are fewer in the RCT then there are in the Campus Program set. The continued use of spelling questions is reviewed at the end of every year, and we welcome all feedback.]]>
Also, you will indeed find the occasional two line toss-up. Some of those get to the point in three or four interruptable clues. Others are written specifically to test certain cognitive skills. Again, you won't find one in every game.

Finally, you ask about spelling questions. We realize that some players passionately hate them. However, reviewing the evaluation responses from the RCTs, it's evident that there is also a body of players who like them. For many years now, we've tried to reconcile the two opposing views by having spelling questions, but limiting them to only occurring as one part of a multi-part bonus. You will see such bonuses occasionally at the NCT, but again not in every game, and there should be fewer of them overall then were at the RCT, much like ideally there are fewer in the RCT then there are in the Campus Program set. The continued use of spelling questions is reviewed at the end of every year, and we welcome all feedback.]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/2008-nct-field-is-set?opendocument&comments#03172008105605AMTMIP2M.htm Sun, 16 Mar 2008 04:27:24 AM -0700 Billy Beyer 2008 NCT Field is Set
One other question. Some of the packets featured two line tossups. That seems kind of long, especially to decide a national championship. Is there any way for there to be more one line tossups this year? Also, are there any plans to include more of the much beloved spelling questions?]]>
One other question. Some of the packets featured two line tossups. That seems kind of long, especially to decide a national championship. Is there any way for there to be more one line tossups this year? Also, are there any plans to include more of the much beloved spelling questions?]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/2008-nct-field-is-set?opendocument&comments#03162008042724AMCBOFFP.htm Thu, 28 Feb 2008 12:46:38 PM -0700 Greg 2009 RCT dates
Due to an ice storm on Thursday and Friday, one school called the regional coordinator on Friday morning and cancelled.

While I would have liked to have seen the tournament format change, I didn't bring it up as it would have forced the number of games required to jump by 50% with basically no advanced planning or ability to recruit additional volunteers.]]>
Due to an ice storm on Thursday and Friday, one school called the regional coordinator on Friday morning and cancelled.

While I would have liked to have seen the tournament format change, I didn't bring it up as it would have forced the number of games required to jump by 50% with basically no advanced planning or ability to recruit additional volunteers.]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/2009-rct-dates?opendocument&comments#02282008124638PMCBOSD7.htm Thu, 28 Feb 2008 09:47:39 AM -0700 Tom Michael 2009 RCT dates
As to the substance of your comment, I am checking into this further, but it's my understanding at the time that the RCTs that played full round robins with seven teams all had very last minute cancellations, and nearly all of the cancellations were weather related. I can empathize with teams that no-show due to weather - I spent a few hours myself last Friday at the Philadelphia airport, where weather caused flight cancellations and delays that almost made me a no-show for Region 5's RCT. The problem is, when those team cancellations are very last minute, it's hard to adjust the staffing and other logistical issues that make adjusting from a full round robin to a double round robin possible. With only a day's notice - or less, in the case of one no-show who didn't even supply any notice - it can be quite difficult for the Regional Coordinators to adjust.

Both College Bowl Company and ACUI desire that participants have a great experience at the RCT, and the ACUI College Bowl Program Team adopted the format guidelines in 2001 to address these types of concerns. I assure you that we will all be revisiting the format guidelines, and looking to see what steps we can take, or changes we can make, to adjust better to last minute cancellations, and give participants the most we can for their investment of money, time, and effort. But sometimes, weather wreaks havoc on even the best-laid plans.]]>
As to the substance of your comment, I am checking into this further, but it's my understanding at the time that the RCTs that played full round robins with seven teams all had very last minute cancellations, and nearly all of the cancellations were weather related. I can empathize with teams that no-show due to weather - I spent a few hours myself last Friday at the Philadelphia airport, where weather caused flight cancellations and delays that almost made me a no-show for Region 5's RCT. The problem is, when those team cancellations are very last minute, it's hard to adjust the staffing and other logistical issues that make adjusting from a full round robin to a double round robin possible. With only a day's notice - or less, in the case of one no-show who didn't even supply any notice - it can be quite difficult for the Regional Coordinators to adjust.

Both College Bowl Company and ACUI desire that participants have a great experience at the RCT, and the ACUI College Bowl Program Team adopted the format guidelines in 2001 to address these types of concerns. I assure you that we will all be revisiting the format guidelines, and looking to see what steps we can take, or changes we can make, to adjust better to last minute cancellations, and give participants the most we can for their investment of money, time, and effort. But sometimes, weather wreaks havoc on even the best-laid plans.]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/2009-rct-dates?opendocument&comments#02282008094739AMTMINVD.htm Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:42:41 PM -0700 Ryan 2009 RCT dates http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/2009-rct-dates?opendocument&comments#02272008124241PMCBOSAQ.htm Mon, 5 Nov 2007 09:23:45 PM -0700 Tom Michael Welcome New Schools! Campus Tournament 101
You also might want to include some snippets of program history or testimonials from past players. I know an alumnus of your school from five or six years ago; contact me privately if you want her contact info, and I'll put you in touch with her.]]>
You also might want to include some snippets of program history or testimonials from past players. I know an alumnus of your school from five or six years ago; contact me privately if you want her contact info, and I'll put you in touch with her.]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/welcome-new-schools-campus-tournament-101?opendocument&comments#11052007092345PMTMI8DJ.htm Thu, 1 Nov 2007 12:38:23 PM -0700 Natalie Pariano Welcome New Schools! Campus Tournament 101 http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/welcome-new-schools-campus-tournament-101?opendocument&comments#11012007123823PMCBOR2J.htm Wed, 7 Mar 2007 10:11:54 PM -0700 Tom Michael 2007National Championship Tournament Field is Set!
Tom]]>
Tom]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/2007national-championship-tournament-field-is-set?opendocument&comments#03072007101154PMTMI9AP.htm Wed, 7 Mar 2007 12:23:26 PM -0700 Jon Pinyan 2007National Championship Tournament Field is Set!
As to RCT... why were there only 16 packets available? In our region, the championship round had to be scraped together from leftovers.]]>
As to RCT... why were there only 16 packets available? In our region, the championship round had to be scraped together from leftovers.]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/2007national-championship-tournament-field-is-set?opendocument&comments#03072007122326PMCBORWP.htm Sun, 4 Mar 2007 07:10:55 PM -0700 Jonathan Graham 2007National Championship Tournament Field is Set! http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/2007national-championship-tournament-field-is-set?opendocument&comments#03042007071055PMCBO5RD.htm Mon, 5 Feb 2007 10:22:47 AM -0700 Tom Michael Selecting the Team
Teams may use a different player as Captain in some or all games. They must tell the Judge of the change before the match starts. In the event of conflicting answers, the person designated as Captain at the start of the match speaks for the team.

If, for some odd reason, a team is unable to decide on a Captain, then the Judge or Tournament Director may make the decision for them. And, if the process of switching Captains becomes disruptive, the Tournament Director may designate a player as Captain for the remainder of the tournament. A simple notification to the Judge prior to the match, however, is usually easy and not a problem.]]>
Teams may use a different player as Captain in some or all games. They must tell the Judge of the change before the match starts. In the event of conflicting answers, the person designated as Captain at the start of the match speaks for the team.

If, for some odd reason, a team is unable to decide on a Captain, then the Judge or Tournament Director may make the decision for them. And, if the process of switching Captains becomes disruptive, the Tournament Director may designate a player as Captain for the remainder of the tournament. A simple notification to the Judge prior to the match, however, is usually easy and not a problem.]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/selecting-the-team?opendocument&comments#02052007102247AMTMIPKC.htm Sun, 4 Feb 2007 02:56:07 PM -0700 Nathan Murphy Selecting the Team
Thanks]]>
Thanks]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/selecting-the-team?opendocument&comments#02042007025607PMCBOUW5.htm Sat, 13 Jan 2007 03:11:29 AM -0700 tim domain Happy Holidays! http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/happy-holidays?opendocument&comments#01132007031129AMCBOF5Q.htm Wed, 3 Jan 2007 02:06:33 AM -0700 Tom Michael Bride of Questions from the Inbox: Lists of Answers Revisited
And I could weasel out of this by saying that I only said I "might" accept Nevado for Nevada. But I won't. I was trying to make a point about how RCT's had some flexibility early to help new teams adjust, picked a particularly bad example, and failed to explain it because I worried I tend towards digressions.

In the opening rounds of the RCT, some Regional Coordinators have realized there is a learning curve to some of the rules, and have a tradition of relaxing some of them. The most common is to realize that many teams do not adequately train for the recognition rule, and to say that for any match in which a team is playing for the first time at the RCT, both teams playing will be allowed one informal warning at the first violation of that rule, but for all subsequent violations, and all subsequent matches, the rule will be strictly enforced. Such a procedure is within the purview of a Tournament Director, but not all do it.

In the spirit of that, and *if* that was the philosophy of the Tournament Director, I can see a case for allowing a team to correct a mispronounced answer in their first round played, then taking the time, off the clock at the half or at the end of the game, to teach what correct procedures will be followed for the rest of the tournament. The problems with doing this are that better trained and more experienced teams have to be treated with the same rulings, but since they are less likely to make the mistake, feel that under the rules the other team should be penalized if the mistake happens; and, that such actions by Game Officials violate the principal that procedures across all tournaments at the RCT level should be standardized.

Since about 2002, the ACUI Program team has set standards for RCT formats. College Bowl Company provides training for new Regional Coordinators, and one of the purposes of this blog is to reinforce that training and increase uniformity of practice across all RCT's. But, anytime 15 different human beings are running 15 RCT's, there will be some variation; and using the first RCT round to help new teams make the transition to the College Bowl format is an acceptable variation - provided that such a limited waiver of rules is temporary, precise (i.e. clearly and specifically targeted towards a rule new teams commonly have a problem with), and available to both teams in a match.

Nevado/Nevada isn't a good example of this, and certainly without more explanation is jarring. Thanks, Chris, for pointing this out.]]>
And I could weasel out of this by saying that I only said I "might" accept Nevado for Nevada. But I won't. I was trying to make a point about how RCT's had some flexibility early to help new teams adjust, picked a particularly bad example, and failed to explain it because I worried I tend towards digressions.

In the opening rounds of the RCT, some Regional Coordinators have realized there is a learning curve to some of the rules, and have a tradition of relaxing some of them. The most common is to realize that many teams do not adequately train for the recognition rule, and to say that for any match in which a team is playing for the first time at the RCT, both teams playing will be allowed one informal warning at the first violation of that rule, but for all subsequent violations, and all subsequent matches, the rule will be strictly enforced. Such a procedure is within the purview of a Tournament Director, but not all do it.

In the spirit of that, and *if* that was the philosophy of the Tournament Director, I can see a case for allowing a team to correct a mispronounced answer in their first round played, then taking the time, off the clock at the half or at the end of the game, to teach what correct procedures will be followed for the rest of the tournament. The problems with doing this are that better trained and more experienced teams have to be treated with the same rulings, but since they are less likely to make the mistake, feel that under the rules the other team should be penalized if the mistake happens; and, that such actions by Game Officials violate the principal that procedures across all tournaments at the RCT level should be standardized.

Since about 2002, the ACUI Program team has set standards for RCT formats. College Bowl Company provides training for new Regional Coordinators, and one of the purposes of this blog is to reinforce that training and increase uniformity of practice across all RCT's. But, anytime 15 different human beings are running 15 RCT's, there will be some variation; and using the first RCT round to help new teams make the transition to the College Bowl format is an acceptable variation - provided that such a limited waiver of rules is temporary, precise (i.e. clearly and specifically targeted towards a rule new teams commonly have a problem with), and available to both teams in a match.

Nevado/Nevada isn't a good example of this, and certainly without more explanation is jarring. Thanks, Chris, for pointing this out.]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/bride-of-questions-from-the-inbox-lists-of-answers-revisited?opendocument&comments#01032007020633AMTMIDVB.htm Thu, 28 Dec 2006 08:48:29 AM -0700 Chris Sloan Bride of Questions from the Inbox: Lists of Answers Revisited
"I might accept it at the Campus program or even the RCT round robin levels; I would not accept it in the RCT playoffs or at the NCT."

In my opinion, this is fundamentally wrong. The rules do not change between the RCT and the NCT. Therefore, "Nevado" should be just as right or wrong in one versus the other. I won't get it into my thoughts on whether it is right or wrong; I think you covered it pretty well. However, the ruling cannot change merely based on which tournament you are in.

best,

Chris]]>
"I might accept it at the Campus program or even the RCT round robin levels; I would not accept it in the RCT playoffs or at the NCT."

In my opinion, this is fundamentally wrong. The rules do not change between the RCT and the NCT. Therefore, "Nevado" should be just as right or wrong in one versus the other. I won't get it into my thoughts on whether it is right or wrong; I think you covered it pretty well. However, the ruling cannot change merely based on which tournament you are in.

best,

Chris]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/bride-of-questions-from-the-inbox-lists-of-answers-revisited?opendocument&comments#12282006084829AMCBOMQC.htm Mon, 11 Dec 2006 12:07:42 PM -0700 Tom Michael Questions from the Inbox: Lists of Answers http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/questions-from-the-inbox-lists-of-answers?opendocument&comments#12112006120742PMTMIRLX.htm Mon, 11 Dec 2006 10:05:44 AM -0700 Richard Dunlap Questions from the Inbox: Lists of Answers
Nevado, excuse me, NevaDA

Idaho

California

Utah

Arizona

The key issue, of course, is if the first line is one response or two. I've seen this issue pop up twice that I remember, in both cases as a spectator, with two different rulings.]]>
Nevado, excuse me, NevaDA

Idaho

California

Utah

Arizona

The key issue, of course, is if the first line is one response or two. I've seen this issue pop up twice that I remember, in both cases as a spectator, with two different rulings.]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/questions-from-the-inbox-lists-of-answers?opendocument&comments#12112006100544AMCBOP8M.htm Fri, 8 Dec 2006 10:11:38 PM -0700 Tom Michael The Donation of Constantine
There's so much I want to write, and the year is going by so fast! The best course seems now to me to select a few subjects, like strategy, to go into in-depth, while lightly touching on equally important topics that I'll have to more fully explore months from now, if not next season. I have a rough outline I'm following, but it has been and will continue to be modified by your feedback telling me where you want the focus to be, and constrained by how much work events give me time to write blog posts. As I said from the outset, I'm learning as I go, and this blog will occasionally change its destination from where I thought it would be heading when I wrote a post.

The abstract of the Tab Can story: "saccharin" and "saccharine" are considered two different words by most authorities, not alternate spellings of the same word. One is a noun, the other an adjective. In a match between Virginia and Furman at the 1982 Region 5 RCT in Blacksburg, Virginia, a question gave the word and asked for a spelling. The answer on the question card was challenged after the ingredient list on a can of Tab suggested there was a difference in spelling. Upon review, a correct answer was accepted. Under the rules at the time, it created a circumstance where the only fair solution was replaying the entire match. So it was.

The full story is much longer, and has both funny and instructive moments, though the Tab Can itself ultimately comes to a tragic end. Sorry to leave you hanging again, but it's a story that, I apologize, since I brought it up, must wait a bit to be completely recounted.

That the Tab Can Affair was from 1981-82 was very hard to read, due to a glitch between the format it was written in and the format the blog posts in. I've corrected that for this blog's original post, and will correct that for the other posts the glitch occurs later this weekend.]]>
There's so much I want to write, and the year is going by so fast! The best course seems now to me to select a few subjects, like strategy, to go into in-depth, while lightly touching on equally important topics that I'll have to more fully explore months from now, if not next season. I have a rough outline I'm following, but it has been and will continue to be modified by your feedback telling me where you want the focus to be, and constrained by how much work events give me time to write blog posts. As I said from the outset, I'm learning as I go, and this blog will occasionally change its destination from where I thought it would be heading when I wrote a post.

The abstract of the Tab Can story: "saccharin" and "saccharine" are considered two different words by most authorities, not alternate spellings of the same word. One is a noun, the other an adjective. In a match between Virginia and Furman at the 1982 Region 5 RCT in Blacksburg, Virginia, a question gave the word and asked for a spelling. The answer on the question card was challenged after the ingredient list on a can of Tab suggested there was a difference in spelling. Upon review, a correct answer was accepted. Under the rules at the time, it created a circumstance where the only fair solution was replaying the entire match. So it was.

The full story is much longer, and has both funny and instructive moments, though the Tab Can itself ultimately comes to a tragic end. Sorry to leave you hanging again, but it's a story that, I apologize, since I brought it up, must wait a bit to be completely recounted.

That the Tab Can Affair was from 1981-82 was very hard to read, due to a glitch between the format it was written in and the format the blog posts in. I've corrected that for this blog's original post, and will correct that for the other posts the glitch occurs later this weekend.]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/the-donation-of-constantine?opendocument&comments#12082006101138PMTMI9AD.htm Fri, 8 Dec 2006 07:53:09 PM -0700 Jonathan Graham The Donation of Constantine http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/the-donation-of-constantine?opendocument&comments#12082006075309PMCBO6KS.htm Thu, 7 Dec 2006 01:54:31 PM -0700 Tom Michael Questions from the Inbox: Lists of Answers
1) Absolutely yes, the call is reviewable. While a few judgement calls are not reviewable, such as when time is called on a response, questions of whether points were awarded, or not awarded, in error are always reviewable at the end of the first half, and reviewable at the end of the second half if a resolution of the discrepancy may change who won the match.

2) In your example, "Nevada" is answered twice in the first five. We only take the first five answers, and points are not awarded in a list for duplicating answers. Repeating an answer counts the same as giving an incorrect answer. The list would be evaluated as:

Nevada - correct

Idaho - correct

California - incorrect

Nevada - already given, counts as incorrect

Utah - correct

Arizona - not evaluated, as only the first five answers given are evaluated.

If the Judge or Moderator awards more or less then 15 points in this instance, the call is reviewable.]]>
1) Absolutely yes, the call is reviewable. While a few judgement calls are not reviewable, such as when time is called on a response, questions of whether points were awarded, or not awarded, in error are always reviewable at the end of the first half, and reviewable at the end of the second half if a resolution of the discrepancy may change who won the match.

2) In your example, "Nevada" is answered twice in the first five. We only take the first five answers, and points are not awarded in a list for duplicating answers. Repeating an answer counts the same as giving an incorrect answer. The list would be evaluated as:

Nevada - correct

Idaho - correct

California - incorrect

Nevada - already given, counts as incorrect

Utah - correct

Arizona - not evaluated, as only the first five answers given are evaluated.

If the Judge or Moderator awards more or less then 15 points in this instance, the call is reviewable.]]> http://blog.collegebowl.com/collegebowl/CBBlog.nsf/dx/questions-from-the-inbox-lists-of-answers?opendocument&comments#12072006015431PMTMITPP.htm