The sixth annual Vancouver Estival Trivia Open (VETO) was held on Saturday, July 17, 2004, at the Harbour Centre Campus of Simon Fraser University in downtown Vancouver, B.C.

All the question packets are available for free download! (saved on the Stanford Packet Archive)

This was a guerrilla-style tournament, meaning that all questions were written by members of the participating teams, and there was no central editing. Question packets were shared with a mirror tournament (VETO Escapes to Toronto Ontario) being held the same day in Toronto. All staff were drawn from the participating teams during their bye rounds.

We had eight teams, with a total of 27 players. This was the same number of teams as last year, but there were three fewer players. Participating in their first VETO were eight players, including one full team of three.

Teams (with [labels] used below) were:

• [B2B] B2B (last year's winners) — Brock, Bruce, Shaun, Meghan
• [SFUJ] SFU Fake Junta — Hanson, Sarah, Victoria, Mischa
• [FrSd] FARSIDE — Peter
• [FOMO] Feast of Maximum Occupancy — Tara, Idris, Herre, Phil
• [OUTC] SFU Once Upon a Time Called MRSS Alumni — Greg, Paulman, Rajon
• [UBC] University of British Columbia — Luka, Mike, Fred, James
• [CAWU] SFU Combined Age Well Under 100 — Geoff, Brittany, Dean, Joanne
• [NTC] National Trivia Champions (Templeton Secondary School, current national Smart Ask champions + St. George's School, current national Reach for the Top champions) — Daniel, Adam, Brandon

Round-Robin Results

This time, for once, we worked out the schedule beforehand, and posted copies of it in the hallway. Special considerations in drawing it up were that Paulman of OUTC had written some of the CAWU packet, and that the FARSIDE team would not be able to staff more than one game room by itself.

Despite the 8 a.m. start, every team had representatives who arrived on time. So we didn't have to shift the schedule around to fit in late-coming teams. We also didn't need to modify the schedule because of problems of availability of equipment. The only special equipment required was a tape player for two rounds, and Meeting and Event Services had supplied one for every room.

Here are the scores for the games in the round-robin.

#	winning team	score	score	losing team	question authors	other byes
1	SFU OUTC	155	50	SFU CAWU	SFU Junta	FOMO
	UBC	295	125	NTC
	B2B	260	160	FARSIDE
2	UBC	295	50	FOMO	B2B	FARSIDE
	SFU CAWU	130	110	SFU Junta
	NTC	220	90	SFU OUTC
3	NTC	170	85	SFU Junta	FARSIDE	UBC
	SFU OUTC	140	80	FOMO
	SFU CAWU	100	85	B2B
4	FOMO	185	120	NTC	B2B	SFU OUTC
	FARSIDE	190	100	SFU Junta
	UBC	265	40	SFU CAWU
5	FOMO	180	120	SFU CAWU	UBC	NTC
	FARSIDE	145*	135	SFU OUTC
	B2B	180	155	SFU Junta
6	NTC	235	50	SFU CAWU	FOMO	SFU Junta
	B2B	215	125	SFU OUTC
	FARSIDE	230	165	UBC
7	FOMO	245	205	FARSIDE	NTC	SFU CAWU
	SFU Junta	205	160	SFU OUTC
	UBC	265	165	B2B
8	FARSIDE	240	95	NTC	SFU CAWU	SFU OUTC
	UBC	240	155	SFU Junta
	FOMO	240	155	B2B
9	FOMO	125	80	SFU Junta	Zhan's team (via SFU CAWU)	SFU CAWU, FARSIDE, B2B, NTC
	UBC	265	20	SFU OUTC
10	B2B	165	105	NTC	Matt Bruce (via SFU Junta)	SFU Junta, UBC, SFU OUTC, FOMO
	FARSIDE	360	65	SFU CAWU

* The only game that went into overtime was the one between FARSIDE and SFU OUTC in round 5. Three additional tossups were played to break the tie.

Team statistics

W: Wins
L: Losses
ANPPG: Average Normalized Points Per Game
PPG: average Points Per Game
+10: number of tossups answered correctly
-5: number of incorrect interrupts
BAvg: average points per bonus
PA: average Points Against
Diff: average score Difference (= PPG - PA)

Rank	Team	W	L	ANPPG	PPG	+10	-5	Bavg	PA	Diff
1	UBC	6	1	1.59	256	72	10	15.6	112	144
2	FARSIDE	5	2	1.26	219	68	9	13.2	152	66
3	FOMO	5	2	0.99	158	49	11	13.7	159	-1
4	B2B	4	3	1.04	175	51	17	15.7	164	11
5	NTC	3	4	1.00	153	50	14	12.8	159	-6
6	SFU OUTC	2	5	0.76	118	45	13	9.8	169	-51
7	SFU CAWU	2	5	0.54	79	33	7	7.9	199	-119
8	SFU Junta	1	6	0.81	127	44	12	11.6	171	-44

Note that if we had used head-to-head instead of ANPPG to break ties, FOMO would have ended up in second place instead of FARSIDE, and FOMO would have faced UBC in the finals.

Finals

winning team	score	score	losing team	question authors
UBC	180	90	FARSIDE	Rico's Roughnecks
UBC	205	55	FARSIDE	University of Ottawa

Congratulations to UBC for winning the sixth Vancouver Estival Trivia Open!

Here are individual tossup results (+10/-5) and team bonus averages for the final two games.
UBC: Luka 8/1 (37.5 PPG), Fred 7/1 (32.5 PPG), James 2/0 (10.0 PPG), Mike 2/2 (5.0 PPG); Bonus average 11.3.
FARSIDE: Peter 10/6 (35.0 PPG); Bonus average 7.5.

UBC went on to play in the Trans-Canada Championship Match against some players in Toronto.

Individual player statistics

The last five columns indicate whether the person had played in any of the five previous VETOs. None of the players in this VETO had been in the Ontario mirrors in Waterloo in '00, in London in '01, or in Toronto in '03.

Rank	Player	Team	+10	-5	Games	PPG	'99	'00	'01	'02	'03
1	Peter	FARSIDE	68	9	7.15	88.8	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
2	Fred	UBC	28	3	7	37.9	-	-	-	-	-
3	Luka	UBC	25	1	7	35.0	-	-	-	Y	Y
4	Greg	SFU OUTC	29	12	7.15	32.2	-	Y	Y	-	Y
5	Adam	NTC	28	11	7	32.1	-	-	-	-	-
6	Herre	FOMO	26	9	7	30.7	-	-	-	Y	Y
7	Bruce	B2B	23	7	7	27.9	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
8	Brock	B2B	19	3	7	25.0	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
9	Hanson	SFU Junta	20	7	7	23.6	-	-	Y	Y	Y
10	Idris	FOMO	15	0	7	21.4	-	-	-	Y	Y
11	Daniel	NTC	15	1	7	20.7	-	-	-	-	-
12	Mike	UBC	14	2	7	18.6	-	-	-	-	Y
13	Sarah	SFU Junta	13	2	7	17.1	-	-	Y	Y	Y
14	Geoff	SFU CAWU	13	3	7	16.4	-	-	-	-	-
15	Brittany	SFU CAWU	9	2	7	11.4	-	-	-	-	-
16	Rajon	SFU OUTC	8	0	7.15	11.2	-	-	-	-	-
17	Mischa	SFU Junta	8	1	7	10.7	-	-	-	Y	Y
18	Paulman	SFU OUTC	8	1	7.15	10.5	-	-	Y	Y	-
19	Dean	SFU CAWU	7	1	7	9.3	-	-	-	-	Y
20	Shaun	B2B	9	6	7	8.6	-	-	Y	Y	Y
	Brandon	NTC	7	2	7	8.6	-	-	-	-	-
22	Tara	FOMO	6	2	7	7.1	Y	Y	Y	Y	Y
23	Joanne	SFU CAWU	4	1	7	5.0	-	-	-	-	Y
24	James	UBC	5	4	7	4.3	-	-	-	Y	Y
25	Victoria	SFU Junta	3	2	7	2.9	-	Y	-	Y	Y
	Phil	FOMO	2	0	7	2.9	-	-	-	-	-
27	Meghan	B2B	0	1	7	-0.7	-	-	-	-	Y

For leading the individual scoring, Peter retains the title of West Coast Dominatrix of Relevant Knowledge (WC-DORK).

Packet statistics

Round		Total points			TUs answered			-5's			Bonus average
#	Games	min	med	max	min	med	max	min	med	max	min	med	max	Packet authors
1	3	205	420	420	11	17	17	1	2	3	10.0	15.0	15.3	SFU Fake Junta
2	3	240	310	345	12	14	14	3	4	6	11.7	13.2	16.8	B2B
3	3	185	220	255	13	14	14	4	4	5	4.6	8.5	10.0	FARSIDE
4	3	290	305	305	13	14	15	1	1	3	10.7	11.8	13.8	B2B
5	3	280	300	335	14	15	15	1	3	4	10.0	11.8	13.3	UBC
6	3	285	340	395	15	16	17	2	3	4	10.3	12.2	13.8	FOMO
7	3	365	430	450	16	17	18	0	1	4	13.1	15.0	16.5	NTC
8	3	335	395	395	14	14	15	5	6	7	16.4	18.0	20.4	SFU CAWU
9	2	205	245	285	15	15.5	16	4	4.5	5	5.3	7.2	9.1	Zhan's team
10	2	270	348	425	12	13.5	15	3	3.5	4	14.2	16.8	19.3	Matt Bruce
F1	1	270			15			4			9.3			Rico's Roughnecks
F2	1	260			14			6			10.7			Ottawa
TCCM	1	470			19			2			15.3			Gabe

Prizes

Honour	honouree	reason	prize	sponsor
Best question on popular culture from before 1981, as voted by players	Matt Bruce	tossup about SCTV	Beverly Hillbillies DVD	Brock of B2B
Best question, as voted by players	Alt of UWO	Canadian indie rock bonus	NoFrigginClue.com Prize Pack	Braintrust Games
Best question on food from non-animal sources	Phil	a question about chili peppers that was so far back in the FOMO packet that it wasn't read, but the author said it was good	a ReBar nutritious organic food bar, made in B.C.	Peter of FARSIDE
Worst music question	Hanson	bonus on "Norwegian composers not named Grieg or Sondre Lerche"	a Barbra Streisand biography	Brock of B2B
Player most protective of his or her teammates	Peter	his teammates did not show up, perhaps because of his T-shirt; he never allowed them to buzz in or consult on bonuses, but from time to time he did talk out loud as he was thinking of some bonus answers	a VHS copy of The Bodyguard	Brock of B2B
Team that takes the longest to answer a bonus question	UBC	taking their time on several bonuses all day, helped by moderators who did not enforce bonus question time limits	a set of Kokanee "do not disturb" hangers	Brock of B2B
Team that looks as if it wants to leave but sticks it out anyway	FOMO	?	some stickers	Brock of B2B
Best science fiction/fantasy literature question	Hanson of Junta	Stargate SG-1 bonus	a towel	Daniel of NTC
Best indie shout-out	UWO alumni	Canadian indie rock bonus	we'll find out	Hanson of Junta
Best Daily Show shout-out	withheld	none worked	unknown	Hanson of Junta
Best "Mike" Question	Brock	Bruce LaBruce tossup	was going to be a copy of Exclaim, which Brock claimed had a Bruce LaBruce article in it, but it didn't, so nothing	Hanson of Junta
Question that everyone thought Brock might write but was written by someone else	Daniel of NTC	Asperger's syndrome tossup	Lord of the Rings poster	Brock of B2B

General observations and lessons learned

• All teams showed up, and all had complete packets. We also had four packets from Toronto, but we needed only three. The other one (by UWO alumni) was available as a backup packet in case of a mishap that didn't occur. This packet was played by people who didn't make the finals while FARSIDE and UBC had their finals matches in another room.
• This year, for the first time, the Vancouver teams that hadn't won VETO in a previous year had to apply to the VETO Invitation Committee for approval. FARSIDE, SFU Junta, and B2B had won previous VETOs, and therefore each had a member on the Invitation Committee, which judged the applications by UBC, FOMO, NTC, SFU CAWU and SFU OUTC. Applicant teams were required to submit one or two packets' worth of questions written by their members. UBC and FOMO were approved on this basis. NTC did not have a packet but was approved because we thought having the national champions participating would add to the tournament's prestige. Approval for the other two SFU teams came after the July 1 application deadline because there was still space available. We let SFU CAWU write questions because they wanted to, but SFU OUTC did not write questions, because the team had only one member until late, and that member did not have reliable access to e-mail.
• The packet swap between Vancouver and Toronto players proceeded smoothly: everyone who needed to receive a packet from the other site got it on time, even though the packet swap addresses were not sent out until Thursday. The Ottawa team playing in Toronto needed to receive a packet from UBC on Thursday night, because the team was leaving town on Friday morning, and fortunately UBC was ready. One person e-mailed his packet to the wrong address on Friday afternoon, but fortunately the recipient caught it in time and forwarded it to the correct address.
• We had working buzzer systems from SFU, UBC, St. George's, and Templeton, but needed only three of them.
• All of the tape players worked, except one that had awful sound quality. This was quickly replaced with a different player that had been supplied in the same room.
• The schedule was just right for eight teams. We started at 8 a.m. If we had started at 9 a.m., we would have run out of time. We finished the finals at 5 p.m., in time for the Trans-Canada Championship. The building closed at 6 p.m.
• Eight teams, the same number as last year, seemed like the perfect size. Any more teams and we wouldn't have been able to do a full round-robin and two-game final and Trans-Canada Championship Match, at the rate we were going. We might have been able to accommodate a ninth team if we'd had some extra staff.
• An inevitable problem of any guerrilla tournament is questions with clues that are repeated from earlier packets in the tournament. This year, some of us made a big show about the importance of removing repeats, and those participants who brought packets were even better than last year at removing repeat questions from them before play.
• The packet statistics show that most question packets were a bit too hard. On three packets, the maximum number of tossups answered correctly was only 14. This means that in every room where these packets were played, at least 30% of the tossups went unanswered. Our guidelines suggest that two good teams should leave fewer than 20% of the tossups unanswered in a game.
• It's still not completely clear whether Average Normalized Points Per Game is a good tie-breaker to use. It took us several minutes to compute for the two 5-2 teams. Average (un-normalized) points per game would have been quicker to calculate, and the results above show that for this tournament, just like last year's, the rankings by PPG and by ANPPG are exactly the same. It's actually questionable whether "normalization" of scores even makes sense when there are so few teams: a round may have low-scoring games on average because the best teams have byes, and likewise a round may have high-scoring games on average because the worst teams have byes. In either case, "normalization" adjusts not only for the difficulty of the packet but also (unintentionally) for the quality of the teams that played on it. Notice that this year, the lowest-scoring round was also the one that the two top teams didn't play on.
• The teams were quite well matched: the team that got the fewest tossups got almost half as many as the team that got the most. This was also the case last year.
• We still consider Harbour Centre to be the most attractive, intelligent, and convenient location for a quiz bowl tournament in Vancouver, and we hope to have the seventh VETO there next year.

"Vancouver, Vancouver, this is it!" — famous last words

Back to CAQL tournament results page.

  Webmaster e-mail: caql -at- caql -dot- org