2019 OAC State

Any posts that are outdated will be moved here. Please do not post any new topics in this forum.

2019 OAC State

Postby gbdriver80 » Sun Apr 07, 2019 4:10 pm

The bracket for OAC State on May 11th is ready and results that day will be able to be found here: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1mVKrO ... O93Fdr10VU
Joe Czupryn
OAC Committee Executive Director
Sidney Coach 2012-2015
Northmont Assistant Coach 2008-2011
Northmont '08
gbdriver80
Varsity
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Dayton, OH

Re: 2019 OAC State

Postby gbdriver80 » Sat May 11, 2019 8:00 am

Live results from today will be posted at the above link!
Joe Czupryn
OAC Committee Executive Director
Sidney Coach 2012-2015
Northmont Assistant Coach 2008-2011
Northmont '08
gbdriver80
Varsity
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Dayton, OH

Re: 2019 OAC State

Postby gbdriver80 » Sat May 11, 2019 4:55 pm

Congratulations to Beavercreek on winning the 2019 OAC State Championship!

The full order of finish was as follows:

1st: Beavercreek
2nd: Miami Valley
3rd: Northmont
4th: Solon
5th: Walnut Hills
6th: Copley
7th: Little Miami
8th: Saint Ignatius
9th: Aurora
T-10th: Hoban, Lakewood, Wyoming
13th: Fisher Catholic
14th: Pettisville
15th: Sidney
16th: Olentangy
Joe Czupryn
OAC Committee Executive Director
Sidney Coach 2012-2015
Northmont Assistant Coach 2008-2011
Northmont '08
gbdriver80
Varsity
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Dayton, OH

Re: 2019 OAC State

Postby gbdriver80 » Sat May 11, 2019 5:03 pm

Questions have been posted!
Joe Czupryn
OAC Committee Executive Director
Sidney Coach 2012-2015
Northmont Assistant Coach 2008-2011
Northmont '08
gbdriver80
Varsity
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 8:16 pm
Location: Dayton, OH

Re: 2019 OAC State

Postby BobKilner » Sat May 11, 2019 8:41 pm

A couple years ago, Joe predicted that quizbowl power was shifting from NE Ohio down to the West Central area, and I can fully see that now (although the historical NE powers like Copley and Solon are still powers). Congrats to Beavercreek on the three-peat and all the other teams who competed today, regardless of finish. I'm really looking forward to seeing you guys at HSNCT.
Bob Kilner
Secondary Admin, ohioqbforum.com
Former Coach, Garfield Heights HS (2001-2008)
Coach, North High School (2015-19)
Kent State '06 / Boise State '10
BobKilner
Site Admin
 
Posts: 376
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 5:43 pm
Location: Garfield Heights OH

Re: 2019 OAC State

Postby trbenedict » Mon May 13, 2019 2:52 pm

Congratulations to Beavercreek on their third consecutive OAC championship and on unifying the NAQT and OAC titles! Congrats as well to Northmont and Walnut Hills, two wild-card teams who proved their mettle by finishing in the top five (as if their strength was ever in question).

Big thanks to the OAC writers, who once again produced a strong test for the state's best teams. I regret that I wasn't able to hear the set in person due to MSNCT, but in reading over the packets today I found them tough but ultimately fair...a few categories in the team rounds seemed to skew harder, but the set was mostly internally consistent in that regard, and it's so difficult to perfectly balance team round questions anyway. I'll also add that many of the questions I found "very hard" were in the sciences and fine arts, both of which are decidedly not my areas of expertise.

Best of luck to the full Ohio contingent at HSNCT and NSC!
Tyler Benedict
Coach, Miami Valley School Quiz Bowl
OAC Committee Middle School Representative
OQBA NASAT and Matt's Buzzers Liaison
Miami Valley School '09
trbenedict
Varsity
 
Posts: 206
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 3:03 pm

Re: 2019 OAC State

Postby tomoore » Mon May 13, 2019 10:23 pm

All in all, this was a pretty good set. Great job by everybody. Lots of praise to the following tossups: crime (sociology tossup), "Crossing Brooklyn Ferry"; Heathcliff; and the Indus Valley.

Writing the following to touch on Tyler's comments. I may be a little tough on my science criticisms, but I'll note and concede that they were still fine questions at the end of the day.

trbenedict wrote:I'll also add that many of the questions I found "very hard" were in the sciences and fine arts, both of which are decidedly not my areas of expertise.

Fine Arts
Round 1: team questions were fine, although I did think to myself that Le Havre was tough to toss-up.

Round 2, 3, 4, 5, 6: all fine.

Round 7: Okay, this fine arts category and the American Literature category, at least to me, were the only two cases through the whole states set where one team question is considerably harder than both the other team question and the toss-up. If I had to rate the answerlines on a scale of 1-10 difficulty wise, Helga Testorf is a 6, Joanna Hiffernan is a generous 7, and Meurent is a 9.5. Unless something has changed in writing trends the last five years, I can recall hearing Testorf and Hiffernan as clues for Wyeth and Whistler/bonus part answerlines probably 10-15 times a year when I played but maybe once, at most, with Meurent and Manet. Maybe I'm completely wrong and off-base on this one, but Meurent probably would've been more appropriate as the toss-up answerline rather than the Team B question, which would've been fine so as to be balanced team questions.

(The criticism I have of the American Literature in Round 7 was that I'm led to believe Sam Shepard, while definitely significant in contemporary American Literature, is harder an answerline than Lillian Hellman as well as Neil Simon.)



Sciences
Round 1: I thought these were largely great, although the "marijuana" final round was wonky. The lead-in is not helpful, and the clue progression of [symptoms of cannabinoid hypremesis syndrome] then [treatment of CHS] seemed to me, at least, to be "somewhat helpful" to then "not helpful at all". Basically this was a pretty cliff-y question, with the obvious buzzer race on "medicinal use" in the second-to-last sentence. It could've been done better.

Round 2: all fine; round 3: all fine.

Round 4: STD category questions were incredibly easy, only to be followed up by a very hard physical sciences round. Mercury was a pretty fine tossup, but holy hell was phosphorus/palladium tough or what?

Round 5: fine

Round 6: I thought both of these were fine. Fugacity is decently asked about in regular difficulty. Compressibility factor would probably be "too hard" to ask a high schooler about from a general quizbowl-canon perspective, although if you understand the depth behind fugacity, the ideal gas law and general thermodynamics then you shouldn't have had any trouble with it. That one seemed to be a pretty reasonable "real knowledge" question, just a little tough of an answer line.

Round 7: fine.

I didn't think the transcription category was too tough for a good science player.
Moore, T.

Unaffiliated; Reader, Southeast Region
tomoore
Rookie
 
Posts: 35
Joined: Sun May 13, 2018 11:50 pm


Return to Old/Outdated Posts

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron