Thursday, January 05, 2017

In which we go beyond the fringe, and back again

Some tournaments are easier than others, especially tournaments that have been around for a while and that are fairly predictable. The Gem of Harlem is this sort of tournament. The same people show up every year, pretty much, and the same stuff happens. (Although this does ignore that last year we were knocked off the calendar by a blizzard, and somehow managed to recover almost completely a month or so later.) The thing is, Columbia is what it is, everyone knows what it is, and it unfolds the way you expect it to. Last night I cleared the TBAs, and this morning I cleared most of the waitlists. The people expecting to come are the ones who always expect to come, and they will come, and there you are.

That is mostly the way the activity plays out, at least at some level. Say what you will about bid tournaments, and God knows that I am not behind the door what it comes to criticizing some of them, not to mention their raison d’etre, at least they are predictable. The same tournaments occur every year on the same weekends with the same people running them and the same schools attending, and this sort of regularity makes it possible for people to plan their calendars absent any sanctioning body, as with, say, the school football team. We do worry, though, when there is any seismic activity. Usually the tremors are at the periphery of one’s vision. The regular tournaments remain regular but there is often confusion at the edges. The present spectral state of the MHL reflects that. The Paginator wants to get something going again, and I expect (and hope) that he will. Realistically this ought to represent about half of what any school around here is doing every month, although the lure of the $ircuit seems to blind a lot of people to the true purpose of debate education. I met with Jonathan A over the break, and we talked about the fact that he now teaches debate to 7th graders. It’s not about the competition for them, it’s about the education. On the one hand, strong competitors in varsity debate—kids who travel and take home trophies and whatnot—are a great lure for the younger kids, but the action is in spreading the benefits of the activity to those younger kids, not acquisition of yet another trophy. Jonathan doesn’t need another trophy. Most coaches don’t need another trophy. But the trophies send a message to the community that results in kids wanting to debate and schools continuing to pay for it. I’ve said this a million times, quoting Sodikow who no doubt was not the first to utter it, but competition in debate is merely a means to an end. If we could do this without competition, it would be great. It would be cheaper, and we’d avoid all the hassles of weekends and traveling and team management and the like, and just concentrate on the gestalt of debate education. (Of course, some of that other stuff is educational too, but you get my drift.)

Anyhow, I thoroughly enjoy working through the complicated tournaments, although as I say, most of the time it’s just a case of doing it again. Penn is the antidote to that this year. New weekend, new activities, lots of new problems like no rooms and lots of people waiting for slots because the new weekend suddenly makes the tournament more attractive. Of course, there were also lots of people who hated the idea of the new weekend, but I’m going to chance a guess that when all is said and done, it’s going to work out fine. I certainly hope so. Still, it’s fun working through it, because it’s different and a bit of a challenge. I mean, you try adjusting a waitlist when you don’t know how many slots you have. We can’t really have rounds at Starbucks, more’s the pity.

Oh well. Life goes on. This weekend I’ve got nuthin’. Then we dig in. Excelsior!


///

No comments: