Thursday, December 07, 2006

November 2006 BC Regular Open Quiz - Report

Date: 3 Dec, 2006 (Sunday)
Venue: Dewang Mehta Auditorium, PSPL
Set and Conducted by: Samrat Sengupta

Quiz Final Results
(60 questions)
1st: Shamanth Rao, Kunal Sawardekar, Meghashyam Shirodkar (E): 62
2nd: Rishi Iyengar, Sumant Srivathsan, B.V.Harishkumar (A): 56
3rd: Amit Varma, Ravi Venkatesh, Kunal Thakar (B): 50
4th: Anand Sivashankar, Vibhendu Tiwari, Siddharth Natarajan (F): 41
5th: J. Ramanand, Abhishek Nagaraj, Salil Bijur (C): 35
6th: Shivaji Marella, Ganesh Hegde, D. Dharmendra (D): 25

(3 out of 60 questions went unanswered)

Quiz Elim Results (out of 32 questions)
First 6 Teams cutoff: 14.5
(in order) Shamanth-Kunal S (20.5), Rishi-Sumant (20), Ramanand-Abhishek (19.5), Anand-Vibhendu(17.5), Amit-Ravi (16.5), Shivaji-Ganesh (14.5)
next 3 cutoff: 13.5
(in order) Meghashyam-Siddharth N (14), Harish-Salil (13.5), Dharmendra-Kunal T (13.5), (just missed out: Biju + Chandan, Akhil + Apurva, both 12.5)

BC Theme Attic Quiz: "Tintin and Asterix" by J.Ramanand

Report

* A very good elims set was provided. The finals were quite enjoyable too.
* Some of the questions in the finals were a tad too easy; I personally didn't like the division into sets of 4 and 6 pointers as these distinctions are v. subjective and not easy to pull off. Some of the 6 pointers tended to be "either you know it or you don't" which made them tougher and hence possibly worthy of a larger value, but in some cases, it wasn't appropriate IMO. Anyway, this is just my opinion and the quiz setter should not need to conform to standard thinking!
* Appropriately for a Samrat quiz, the non-"U-rated" questions were in full flow, and it helped a lot of the on-stage commentary :-) - was a lot of fun. The routine Samrat-isms helped too.
* The split of points in connects was a little ad-hoc; suggestion to Samrat is to try and figure out the exact split required while setting the question and explaining it to the teams beforehand.
* A look at the elims and finals scores above will show that while 2-member teams wrote the elims, 3-member teams sat in the finals. The explanation is as follows: we wanted to try and get more participants on stage. However, the usual method of having 8 teams or inviting 3-member teams at the outset was not preferred (the former because of concerns on the time that could be spent in passing questions; the latter because we wanted to avoid polarisation into a few very strong teams). Instead, the top 6 teams after the elims made it to the final, with each the 6 members of the next 3 teams in the elims randomly assigned to one of the first six. This way, we had a 3 member final. (This system, BTW, was proposed by Samrat.)
* Great performances by all teams, esp. the winners, who got some tough ones. We also had quite a decent turnout (27 teams), including some of the school kids (5 school teams) who stayed back.

And...
* If you want a copy of the elims and finals, please send me an email or leave a message in the comments. The ppts are rather large and it will take some time for them to be collated and sent out.
* If you have any comments on the contents/conduct of the quiz, please leave a comment behind. Newcomers especially, please let us know what you thought of the quiz and if there's anything we can do to encourage your presence in these quizzes.
* We'd be interested in knowing opinions about the 12+6 system of finalists. This can work easily for these kind of open quizzes where there's not much at stake and where the aim is to enable more participation and finalists. More formal quizzes with prizes etc. may not be able to implement this, for finalists may not feel inclined to share space with a relative stranger.
* I couldn't note down the elims scores, so if anyone remembers, let me know.
* Thanks are again due to PSPL, especially the security and auditorium staff for the great support provided throughout the day!

Sample Elims questions:
1. This medical condition takes its name from the Greek word for "Waterfall". Which one?
2. Which company had the tagline 'Geography is History'? (Unfortunately they became history)
3. If Jeux de la Francophonie is French then what is the English counterpart?

Update: Samrat's views on proceedings.

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

1. 12+6 is good for informal quizzes like this. However, instead of random assignment of Extras, a draft pick should be held. Each of the six teams gets to pick on Extra in order. I'd suggest the teams get to pick in reverse order of Elims scores -- i.e Team qualifying sixth picks first. However, the opposite order could be tried too.

2. Every time there's a question that results in split points or gets answered "midway" (a particular question passes around but points are finally given to one of the teams in the middle of the passing since their answer was the best, even though it wasn't completely right), the decision on whom to award the next Direct to is a tricky one. I think some sort of formalization needs to be done about this. I haven't given the matter even thought as yet, but I will when I get the time. But it's quite messy currently. (I remember at one point where Team E would rather Team A get all 4 points, rather than the split that was awarded, just so that they [Team E] would get a full crack at the next question. Game theoretically such situations are absolute must-avoids!)


3. I was the one who insisted on changing the IR rule for the situation where all teams fail to answer a particular question. May I, very immodestly, suggest it be called the Arnold Variation, rather than Modified IR. (This is my only chance to be remembered for anything connected to quizzing! :P)

Abhishek said...

> a draft pick should be held

That's a good idea, but it should definitely start with the teams with top elims scores.

> the decision on whom to award the next Direct to is a tricky one. I think some sort of formalization needs to be done about this. I haven't given the matter even thought as yet

I have and IMHO, the next question should go to the team next to the one who had the last attempt. The splitting of points thing(where you rather don't want half points) is a very rare case, with very few teams having as much confidence that they will definiltey get full points on the next one. I don't think there is an issue here. This variation in passing HAS to be made.

>suggest it be called the Arnold Variation, rather than Modified IR.

It is in some quarters, but to be fair this was the system in use in many other regions of the country before probably you even heard about IR, but now that we may all decide to implement the change in passing that i suggested in point 2, the so-not-called Arnold Variation, will soon have to be replace by the 'Abhishek variation'. ;-)

PS: as I said the other day also,, it should be Jeux de la Francophonie not Francophone.

Ramanand said...

12+6: A&A: I'm against the draft pick, I prefer it random. It's tough for teams to make judgements about strangers and we don't want to further embellish cliques. Secondly, most teams are tightly clustered after elims and there isn't much to choose between them. It's safest to keep it random.

Arnold var: like Abhishek said, it seems to have been in use elsewhere, but you clearly (re-)discovered it independently. So at least in local circles, I shall call it that :-)

next attempt: I didn't want to make a fuss that day, but a fledgling convention has already been established at the BC on this: if all teams attempt, then the team with which it started gets the next direct. Remember that IR is about keeping attempts as equal as possible, and this is the only one that will ensure the property. Indeed, I was going to make a post on the current accepted form of IR in these parts and stress on this - it's best if we can standardise such things. Coming soon to a blog near you.

Anonymous said...

* I couldn't note down the elims scores, so if anyone remembers, let me know.

For only the teams whose elims scores were announced by Samrat:

Ganesh + Shivaji -14.5
Amit+ Ravi - 16.5
Sumanth + Rishi -20
Abhishek + Ramanand -19.5
Anand + Vibhendu -17.5
Kunal S + Shamanth -20.5
Biju + Chandan -12.5
Akhil + Apurva -12.5
Meghashyam + Siddharth N -13.5
Salil + Harish -13.5
Dharmendra + Kunal T -14

-Vibhendu

Ramanand said...

Thanks Vibhendu - updated scores.

Rishi said...

Enjoyable quiz but, as you say, the scoring was somewhat arbitrary. Still, one man's sitter is another man's toughie and all that jazz.

Imo, random is good. The quality of the top 12 teams is high enough that even the split up team members can pull their weight. There is sufficient depth in the circuit to ensure this.

Looking forward to that post on splitting points.

Anand said...

Great to see good ol' Arnold in such fine fettle :)

If spreading the array is what we want, what about random picks, a la Wing Cdr. Mulki etc ? Else, individual elims with scorers 1, 10, 18 as Team A, 2, 9, 17 as Team B etc . ?

The IR should have gone out with the spinning jenny, IMHO.
And what is professed to be a team's willingness to forgo a chance to split points is merely a reflection of their perceived degree of ease wrt the q's--may not be risked elsewhere !
Let's also take a look at stats instead of having these wistful conjectures on points and number of right answers:attempted etc.It can also be resolved by the QM steeling himself to have all q's in a single-funda correct format, and dust off everything else ( In our last quiz, I remember awarding full points to Shivaji & Siddharth on getting a connect right despite getting ALL individual elements wrong-QM decision final blah ! )

And talking of Siddharth forced to withdraw, our normalised score reads (41*3)/2 = 61.5(since by Duckworth-Lewis Sid represented a lost "resource") :)

Rishi said...

I do wonder. Who the devil is Arnold? Is he any relation to the respected Gubernator? Or is this one of those eldritch horrors Which non-Pune Quizzers Are Not Meant To Know?

amit varma said...

Anand, Duckworth-Lewis also looks at number of overs left. ;)

Rishi, do not speak so flippantly of Arnold, or eldritch horrors will invade your dreams and imprison you there. Show respect -- even awe and tremulous fear!

Rishi said...

Arnold is a Nameless Horror? I crave forgiveness. I shall sacrifice someone else's firstborn to the Dread Arnold.

See? I'm a reasonable person. I can be convinced by logical, well-structured arguments.

Anonymous said...

Will the real Arnold please stand up?