Tuesday, October 18, 2016

In which we say a few more things about Rather Large Bronx

Kaz and I arrived early on Friday for Rather Large Bronx, in aid of improving the registration process. That the RLB folk had actually read my how-to-improve-the-registration-process document in the toolkit, which was written years ago expressly because the Bronx was handling the thing abysmally, was apparent. We never once had a line stretching out the door, and we started on time. Will wonders never cease?

Kaz and Kahn handled Policy, Catholic Charlie and I handled LD, and the Paginator was joined by Byron from New Orleans. Having a new person in tab is always dicey. Will the person get the jokes? Will the person enjoy the music? Will the person eat all the shrimp before I get my hands on them? Byron performed admirably on all counts. He found our approach unusual; apparently where he comes from, tab rooms are like funeral homes during prime visiting hours, whereas our tab rooms, when we’re not actually pairing and need to pay attention, are like funeral homes after hours, when the undertakers undo the top buttons of their shirts and start dancing the hoochy-koo, cadavers notwithstanding. I mean, we’re not exactly revolution in the streets, but we are relaxed. I especially liked someone who could add a few names to my music list other than Genesis and Killer Mike, the previous contributions of CC and the P over the years (and, of course, futile on their parts).

Tabroom, aside from the problem with MJP vs Regions, was especially well tuned this weekend. At the beginning, there was an issue with down-3s getting lousy prefs, but that’s a field in the program that can be adjusted, so adjust it we did. I do not believe that people out of the tournament should be disregarded; I simply believe that people in the running come first. The thing is, everyone paid the same amount to be there, and they should get equal treatment in a fair way. Throwing judges they don’t want at them when they’re already out of contention just adds insult to injury, and it’s not a great way to treat your paying guests. We want everyone to say, at the end of the day, that they got great judging. Not an unworthy goal, I would say. (By the way, there’s already a way of prioritizing who gets prefs first, so it does all work out.)

Of course, having a boatload of judges and a big field doesn’t hurt. The bigger the tournament, the greater the likelihood of good prefs. Which is another argument against anything but even tiers. Some tournaments, big as the Ritz, artificially inflate their 1s so that it looks like everyone is getting 1s, but since those tournaments’ 1s are everyone else’s 1s and 2s, no one is fooled. Nor is everyone terribly happy about it. I strongly believe that there is a right way and a wrong way to do tiers. You can read all about it in the toolkit.

After the fact, I noticed some complaining about LD speed on Facebook. O RLY? In 2016? What will we carped about next? Avoiding the resolution at all costs? Theory? Haven’t any of these people been in a debate round any time since, oh, 2006? Jeesh. Tell the students you’ll penalize them if they go fast and refuse to read anything and put that in your paradigm. Then you will either get slow rounds or no rounds. Probably the latter. But in either case, you’ll have nothing to complain about.


I didn’t see any complaints about the tournament per se. I only exploded once, when virtually no one had showed up for a break round following a half hour of prep time. I should stay in the tab room. Obviously half an hour isn’t enough. Nothing is enough. Palmer, of course, wants automated forfeits five minutes after the announced start time. He has my vote for this. I’m with him.

///

No comments: