Tuesday, January 30, 2018

BCQC InFest 2018 Reports | The Maazical Mystery Tour

Slot: Sunday, 21-1-2018, Morning
Quiz: The Maazical Mystery Tour
Flavour: Music
QM: Aditya Gadre and Debanjan Bose
Format: Written elims to decide 6 main teams and draft picks. Elims scores 3 carry over to finals. Seamless Infinite Re-pounce in finals.

Aditya Gadre and Debanjan Bose set an excellent, accessible and nicely distributed quiz to open Day 2 of InFest 2018. While the start of the quiz was delayed to accommodate quizzers recovering from the previous day's festivities, only 10 teams made it to the start of the quiz. A mysterious errand that came up for Shubhankar Gokhale after the elims meant that all remaining 19 quizzers were able to make it to the finals, with only one 4-member team. In recognition of the fact that (nearly) all teams that wrote the elims made it to the final, all six directly qualifying teams had their elims score (multiplied by 3) carry over to the finals.

There was quite a nice mix of musical styles, periods and personalities throughout the quiz, without venturing into the gratuitously esoteric. Questions were workable and based on interesting fundae, and the use of audio-visual clues was judicious. There were 4 written rounds of three questions each, which was the only departure from the otherwise seamless IR(p).

QM Aditya Gadre kept the proceedings at a brisk clip, despite this being perhaps one of the longest quizzes at InFest, and definitely the most AV-heavy (with the possible exception of the InFestYouUs set on Female Non-Acting Oscar Winners taken by Vibhendu Tiwari). The quiz was completed within an acceptable tolerance of its scheduled end-time.

Vibhendu and Aniket topped the elims by a large margin, and their team (augmented by the Upcoming Quizzer of the Year 2016 Omkar Dhakephalkar) carried the resultant lead through the finals. The other teams were quite evenly matched, which was made starkly evident by the three-way tie for second place.
Results:
Winners - Vibhendu Tiwari, Aniket Khasgiwale & Omkar Dhakephalkar (draft) - 180 pts
Jt. 2nd - Ranajeet Soman, Navin Sharma & Rohan Jain (draft) - 155 pts
Jt. 2nd - Annanya Deb, Anand S & Venkat S (draft) - 155 pts
Jt. 2nd - Pranav Pawar, Kunal Sawardekar & Omkar Yarguddi (draft) - 155 pts
5th place - Nadeem Ansari. Shaswat Salgaocar + Nikhil Motlag (draft) - 125 pts
6th place - Ananya Menon, Advay Aundhekar, Nikhil Nair and Aditya Lewis (points to be updated)

Report by: Kunal Sawardekar
 

Monday, January 29, 2018

BCQC InFest 2018 Reports | The Supplies Quiz

The Supplies Quiz 

Set by UNESCO Best QM Suraj Menon and Pranav 'Floyd' Joshi 
Format: Written elims followed by a team final in a University Challenge format

Results: 
1st: Aditya Gadre, Aniket Khasgiwale and Shubhankar Gokhale
Jt 2nd: Kunal Sawardekar, Omkar Dhakephalkar and Ranajeet Soman
Jt 2nd: Anannya Deb, Anand Sivashankar and Pranav Pawar

Other finalists:
Vibhendu Tewari, Maitreyi Gupta and Safal Mohammad
Shrirang Raddi, Arnold D'Souza and Sandeep Shankar
Abhinav Dasgupta, Nadeem Ansari, Saahil Singh and Shashwat Salgaoncar


For starters, let me clarify that the quiz was not about drugs or inventory management - but a surprise to all who took part.

The quiz started with a 25 question elim. At the time of writing the elims - no one knew what the format of the quiz was - but we started getting an idea when every single elims question had the name of a university in it. It also nicely ended with a quesion on University Challenge which also was the theme of the quiz format going forward. Great touch!

We made 6 teams with draft picks - and much painful wire and cable and bench movements later - we had the set up with buzzers (kindly made and provided by Shubhankar) ready for the quiz. The format was identical to University Challenge - with a starter for 10 followed by bonus questions if the team gets the answer right on the buzzer. The additional quirk added was that other teams could atempt the bonus questions by writing down the answer - this got a lot of the teams very close to each other without hitting the buzzer too often. The QMs also read out the questions as opposed to putting them on the slide which further made the experience more authentic. This also added the constraint of making the questions small enough to be read and understood for a buzzer round while keeping the workoutability intact. UNESCO Best QM and Floyd delivered a great set of questions and ran proceedings at a good clip. Hope to see more innovative, experimental formats at InFest next year as well.

Report by Aditya Gadre

BCQC InFest 2018 Reports | The Revolutionary Quiz

The Revolutionary Quiz 

Set by Omkar Dhakephalkar and Pranav Pawar
Format: Written

Results: 
1st: Ranajeet Soman and Kunal Sawardekar - 24 points
2nd: Aditya Gadre and Aniket Khasgiwale - 17 points
3rd: Anannya Deb and Anand Sivashankar - 10.5 points

Dhake and PP - aka Molotov and Ribbentrop for the purposes of this quiz - put up an entertaining set with a Revolutionary theme. There were several rounds for the written quiz - which were both quirky and interesting. I particularly liked the concept of "Torture" on the double questions which could lead to more information worth a point or a penalty of 1 point for human rights abuses!

The questions themselves were fun and interesting - a tough ask for a quiz with this kind of a serious topic. I also liked how the QMs mixed things up with scoring and topics (including very liberal interpretations of Revolution). Perhaps in hindsight the quiz was a bit too tough and low scoring - but I feel the post lunch nature of the quiz had a lot to do with that.

Hoping to see more fun sets on not traditionally fun topics from these two.


Report by Aditya Gadre

Sunday, January 28, 2018

BCQC InFest 2018 Reports | Single Personality Disorder

Slot: Saturday, 20-1-2018, Evening.
Quiz: Single Personality Disorder
Flavour: General
QM: Kunal Sawardekar
Format: Lone wolf. Written elims, followed by 12 member finals with the lowest 6 dropping out after 30 questions.

Kunal had promised a quirky set for the solo quiz on Saturday afternoon and the quiz lived up to its billing. The elims had a cut-off of 9.5 with most of the usual suspects qualifying apart from a couple of minor upsets as Prithwish Datta and Aniket Khasgiwale didn't make the finals.

The finals started with a couple of tough questions and it took a while for some of the contestants to get on the scoreboard. Considering that this was a general quiz, the distribution of topics could have been better. The quiz was heavy on topics of the QM's interest - history, geography, military and also had a more western focus. However, as expected there were very good fundae throughout the quiz which made it quite interesting for the participants as well as the audience.

I liked the format of the finals, with 12 finalists it provides a better chances for people to qualify. And eliminating the top 6 two-thirds of the way into the quiz was also good idea. However in this case it was a close call as #7 (Anannya Deb) was only 15 points behind #1 so it was unfortunate that he had to drop out. There was also an innovative pounce format with the first few incorrect pounces having a minus 5 which went up to minus 10 later.

30 questions into the finals, the bottom six were eliminated, leaving Omkar Dhakephalkar, Pranav Pawar, Abhinav Dasgupta, Apratim Mukhopadhyay, Aditya Gadre and Suraj Menon to fight it out over the last 16 questions. Aditya was leading by 5 points over Omkar, Pranav and Apratim at this point but Omkar gave some great answers in the final leg to win the quiz by a narrow 5 points over Aditya and Apratim with Pranav finishing a commendable 4th.

This was a great performance by Omkar, beating stalwarts from both Mumbai and Pune. Also kudos to Apratim. We shall hopefully see a lot more of him at BCQC in the future.

Final scores:
Top 6:
Omkar Dhakephalkar: 125
Apratim Mukhopadhyay: 120
Aditya Gadre: 120
Pranav Pawar: 110
Abhhinav Dasgupta: 95
Suraj Menon: 90

Places 7 - 12:
Anannya Deb: 60 (lost to Suraj on elims score)
Samrat Sengupta: 55
Vibhendu Tewari: 50
Navin Sharma: 25
Divij Ghose: 25
Anand Sivashankar: 5

Report by: Aniket Khasgiwale

Wednesday, January 24, 2018

BCQC InFest 2018 Reports | InFestYouUs 2018

InFestYouUs, the flagship event of the annual InFest, is a Mastermind-style quiz in which participants choose a specialized topic on which they are asked ten questions. They play against everyone else, who collectively form the 'Mob'. The participant gets +1 per correct answer, and -0.5 for every answer they pass/get incorrect and the Mob answers correctly. 
With an attendance of over 30 attendees, we had a strong mob to challenge and answer in case the participant could not. The venue was a classroom in the Academic Complex at the College of Engineering, Pune, next to the COEP Boat Club.
The winner of InFestYouUs 2018 with a score of 10 on 10 was 11 year-old Mihir Raddi. His topic was 'Aircrafts of the Battle of Britain'. Set by Meghashyam Shirodkar, this young quizzer had come fully prepared. The questions were also framed just for him and this resulted in the youngest winner of InfestYousUs also being the first one to score a full 10. Saahil Sharma who was in town from Bangalore scored a 9 in 'Olympic Controversies' set by Aniket Khasgiwale. PavanKumar and Navin Sharma were tied next at 8.5. The former took 'Rick and Morty' set by Ranajeet Soman while the latter took on 'Nicknames of Male Tennis Players' by Samrat Sengupta.
Saahil and Mihir were given T-Shirts and  PavanKumar and Navin won notebooks. Merchandize was sponsored by Thinq2Win.
Pranav 'Floyd' Joshi once again won the Boatie for the best InFestYouUs Set for his 'Jamie Oliver's Food Tube' set. That said, the most memorable set was the joint effort of Govind Grewal and Snehashis Panda. The older generation was introduced to a plethora of new artistes thanks to their 'Cringe Pop in India' set. A special mention is also must of Suryavardhan and Manpreet Shoora from AFMCs who were super-subs for their compatriots.


A sincere thank you to all the quiz-setters for setting such brilliant sets for InFestYouUs. Heartfelt thanks to all the setters who could actually come and take their set. Extra-special thanks to Divij Ghose, Vrushabh Gudade and COEP for providing such prompt facilities on time so early in the morning.


Proxy QMs included Aditya 'Fidel' Gadre, Kunal Sawardekar and Omkar Dhakephalkar.

Report by: Omkar Dhakephalkar

Full Score Sheet:






Thursday, November 09, 2017

Report on Quiz at IISER



Date: 04-11-2017
Quiz: H.A.N.D.
Venue: Indian Institute of Scientific Education and Research, Pune
Organized by/Fest: Karavaan 2017
QM(s): Bhavesh, Aditya, Vishal, Anisha, Samarendra, Yogesh, Amit, Amla

Results:
1. Pranav Pawar and Omkar Dhakephalkar, 255 Points (Open) (Team A)
2. Ranajeet Soman, 205 Points (Solo, Open) (Team  F)
3. Ajai Ragde and Gokul Panigrahi, 50 Points (Open) (Team E)

Other Finalists

4. Advay and Ananya, 20 Points (AFMC) (Team D)
5. Rohit and Harshini, 15 Points (IISER) (Team B)
6. Arnabh Senupta and Anirudh Anilkumar, -170 Points (AFMC) (Team C)

On a bright Saturday morning, the quiz started at 10:30 (standard delay of half an hour).

The elims composed of 48 questions divided into 4 sections, each set by a different person. They were themed around mythology, music, pop culture and one more. The questions were easy and consisted of many Peters. However, the usual IISERized title hints were a treat. Some of them were difficult though well-framed. Unfortunately, every question was offered a hint, after a vote on whether a hint is needed and gone through again. This caused it be a very long prelims. And in terms of number of questions it was longer than the finals.

The finals were held about two hours after the elims, providing a much-needed break. However, the point system was very skewed. The first IR had a +30/-10 on Pounce (teams could pounce on their own question), +10 on direct and +5 on passing. The questions were well-framed, however there were only six of these.

-At the end of this round, Scores (A->F) were 65, 20, 50, 10, 70, 65 -

The next round was a Hangman round. The rules of this round changed and kept changing as more and more points against parity and unfairness were brought forth by the finalists. It seemed the QMs were themselves unsure of rules. The existing rules made it mandatory to guess a letter for a team (the order randomized using chits) for a +5, a correct guess and -5 for not. Teams could not not guess a letter. After every letter, teams could guess the word which had a question (brilliant qs though). And this went on. Later however, doubts were raised regarding the added information other teams would gain and yet get same points based on the number of people who attempt. Negatives were also differentials.
After more protests and again discussing among themselves, QMs agreed to make it written with differential marking. But they did retain the hangman part with the one of the QMs now revealing letters. This was much better and more fun was had.

-At the end of this round, Scores (A->F) were 235, 45, 150, -5, 95, 170 -

The next round was even surreal: a wheel of fortune. There were fourteen slots on the wheel. 12 contained questions (though only six would be asked, one for each team, unpassable, for +30). One team member would be blindfolded and would stop it while the other would spin it. The two left-over slots contained a ‘+20’ and ‘-20’ which would give a flat +20/-20 and no question if it was landed. This was unfair for a team who got it because they would lose out on a chance on getting +30 via a question and a team who would get -20 based on pure luck. Moreover, the sequence would be decided at random, further increasing the chances of a latter team landing on -20; as the wheel would be spun another time if the arrow landed on a slot whose question was already asked. This was a scary round. Despite protests from the finalists this round went ahead after much debate among the QMs.

-At the end of this round, Scores (A->F) were 265, 45, 180, 15, 125, 170 –

The next round was like the first round with even more skewed scoring, though making it easier to catch-up, at the same time degrading the usefulness of points scored in earlier rounds. The scoring system was +50/-20 on pounce (temas could pounce on their own q), +30 on direct correctly and +20 on pass correctly. HOWEVER, if a team did not attempt an answer, or answered wrongly, even on its own direct, it got a negative. If it passed, and an incorrect attempt was made, or no attempt was a made, a -5 was incurred. Also there was a strange system of part points. A team could attempt for only a part of the answer and get half points if correct, however if wrong, a team would get half negatives. If an attempt was made for both parts, and one part was wrong, then negatives would be granted and no points for answering a part correctly. Only six questions were asked.
Such strange distribution of marks and random negatives left a bad aftertaste despite some excellent questions.

-At the end of this round, Scores (A->F) were 345, 15, 230, 20, 130, 230 –

The last round was a bidding round. There were six questions. Teams had to blind bid a minimum of 20 points and a maximum of the amount of points they had. If a team did not have 20 points, then the QM would pay the rest. Whoever bid the most before a question was would get the question. If there was a same bid, tied teams would go on bidding until one wins. Only that team would then get the question (no pouncing or passing or question going down to the next team which bid). If it answered correctly, it would get points based on the amount it bid, else negatives equal to the same amount. Then there was a second chance to answer, in which it would not incur the penalty if it answered correctly, but at a risk of double negatives.

Teams raised objections regarding how one team could potentially run-away with all the questions with minimal loss by out-bidding them due to their margin and how teams below 20 had no chance of getting a question. Teams also suggested revealing the questions or the subject of the questions so that an intelligent bid could be made. Also, how a single wrong answer could mean doom for all the hard-work so far.

At the first question, after a fierce fight for it, with upto three tied bids between Teams A and C, C got the question and after answering wrongly at both the chances to get a whopping -400. Then Team A bid for three questions in a row successfully (getting -90 in that process). Teams E and F got the last two and answered wrongly.  

Thus no question was answered either fully or correctly and no one ended up gaining any points in this round, though some of the fundae were really good.

The quiz ended at about 6 with prompt handover of prizes.

A special mention is a must for :
-Ranajeet Soman who played H.A.N.D. solo and came second.
-The efforts of the IISER Quiz Club for finding such interesting fundae and questions.
  
Suggestions:

*Whereas the idea to get something different, or a fresh idea for a round is commendable and one daresays, a necessity in a monotonous quiz scene filled with IRs and written rounds; care should be taken that it does not become too gimmicky and allows luck to play a much greater role required in an event designed around knowing stuff. In case this does happen, and the quizzers all feel that the quiz would be better served if the round would be modified to be more fair, it would be a good idea to accept the suggestions and be flexible in that regard.

*If questions are going unanswered, a way must be devised so as to ensure that maximum are being answered and that they don’t go unutilized.

*Because the screen was big and quite close to the finalists, they had to strain their necks to see at the questions. Perhaps, next year, they could be seated in the audience chairs: the front row.

*It would be a good idea to have a single QM who takes all decisions instead of multiple heads thinking and discussing during every doubt as it consumes a lot of time.

Report by: Omkar Dhakephalkar with inputs from Anirudh Anilkumar, Arnabh Sengupta, Pranav Pawar, Ajai Ragde and Gokul Panigrahi

Friday, October 13, 2017

Reports on Quizzes at Mindspark 2017



Date: 22-09-2017
Quiz: Torquest 2017
Venue: College of Engineering, Pune
Organized by/Fest: Mindspark 2017
QM(s): Vrushabh Gudade

Results:
1. Siddharth Ramesh and Arnabh Sengupta (AFMC)
2. Anirudh Anilkumar and Hritvik Jha (AFMC)
3. Sai Pavan and Rituraj (AFMC)

The prelims round started at about 11.30. About 40 teams participated in the prelims. Though the prelims were low scoring, the questions were stimulating and fascinating. The cut off was 3 with the highest score being 13.5. A total of 6 teams qualified to the finals.

The final round started by 1. It consisted of two infinite rebounds, each with 12 questions and a written round with 8 questions. Here too, the teams found it difficult to score. The questions asked were from diverse fields-from simple tech to medicine, to India.

In the end the team of Arnabh Sengupta and Siddharth Ramesh from AFMC came 1st with 100 points. The team of Anirudh Anilkumar and Hritvik Jha came runners up beating the team of Sai Pavan and Rituraj in a tiebreaker.

The quizmaster Vrushabh Gudade did an impressive job in setting up the lovely questions and conducting the quiz. 



Report by: Siddharth Ramesh



-------------------------------------------
The post will be updated with reports of Indikya (the India Quiz)

Thursday, September 21, 2017

Reports on the Quizzes at Credenz 2017: the PICT Fest



Date: 16-09-2017
Quiz: Credenz BizTech Quiz
Venue: Pune Institute of Computer Technology, Pune
Organized by/Fest: Credenz 2017
QM(s): Ritwik Manatkar

Results:
1. Arnabh Sengupta and Anirudh Anilkumar (AFMC)
2. Veushabh Gudade and Karan Agarwal (COEP)
3. Sameer and Yash (PICT)

The Quiz started off with just a delay of around 20 minutes with a full house auditorium of about 30-35 teams. It is notable that there was no hassle in the registrations and other pre-quiz rituals and a fair share of the crowd was from the host college.

The elims was a nice set of 20 questions with a few two-part questions and star marked ones that touched all the corners of all the Biz-Tech dome. All the answers were familiar to the layman, thus creating multiple guesses and helping the non-quizzing junta to think upon the context. Very appreciable. Advertisements, simple questions, one-liners, company trivia, etc all were covered and the cut-off was around 7.

Top six teams made it to the finals: 3 from PICT, 2 from AFMC and 1 from COEP. 5 rounds of various formats made the finals playful and engaging. The two IRs were regarding various companies, their histories, business terminologies etc. Good framing made answers workable. There was a short and quick written round of 10 questions on "Honest Company Taglines" in which all teams scored decent points.
Another round was a pounce-only round. Questions were divided in two parts. If you answer in the 1st part then the stakes are +10/-10 and if attempted in the next slide with more hints, then they were +5/-5. This round was a bit easy though the teams struggled whether to answer Ponds/ Vaseline or Royal Enfield/Harley Davidson at a point.
The Derail round (wonderfully explained by Arnabh in 5th para of General Quiz report below) saw tougher questions. The interesting rules many teams gained points while others lost.

Overall the quiz was prepared with a lot of efforts that could be seen in terms of framing and content. A few extremely unpopular terms popped up as answers, that ideally shouldn't be in a Biz-Tech quiz but they didn’t seem too vague or irrelevant; and also spoke of the research that must have gone in the making of the quiz.
Peters were tweaked so that still looked new and fresh. 

Suggestions: Instead of just companies/terms the quizmaster should have weaved a story into the questions and asked the fundae. That would result in interesting guesses from teams. The QM should have been more stiff in engaging the crowd and instructing the teams.

It was all in all a very awesome time spent at the quiz with scores coming neck to neck of all the top teams. Kudos to the QM for putting up a great debut series of quizzes.


Report by: Vrushabh Gudade
 

------------------------------------------


Date: 16-09-2017
Quiz: Credenz MELA Quiz
Venue: Pune Institute of Computer Technology, Pune
Organized by/Fest: Credenz 2017
QM(s): Ritwik and Rajan

Results:
1. Arnabh Sengupta and Anirudh Anilkumar (AFMC)
2. Ankit and Anurag Chaudhary (PICT)

The quiz had robust participation from engineering, medical, pharmacy colleges, leading to a full house. The preliminary round consisted of a written round with 20 questions. They were very workoutable, with hints being provided by the QM.

Finals followed the same interesting format as the first quiz, with a Derail Round that really brought the claws out. There was a pleasant balance with respect to questions, and they were evocative of a nice, general flavour. Anime, music, celebrities, literature and TV series; the questions covered it all. The contributions of William Shakespeare to the English language made itself felt during two quizzes, sinister connotations associated with nursery rhymes raised their heads and things started getting Schwifty in there. The rounds were aptly named and the safety slides were all prepared by a meme lord.
The quizmaster was not overly pedantic (Take note, Divij.) and seemed to be happy when teams figured out answers. 

Gr8 m8, 5/8 would quiz again. 

Report by: Anirudh Anilkumar

------------------------------------------


Date: 17-09-2017

Quiz: Credenz General Quiz

Venue: Pune Institute of Computer Technology, Pune
Organized by/Fest: Credenz 2017
QM(s): Ritwik Manatkar

Results:
1. Anirudh Anilkumar and Arnabh Sengupta (AFMC)
2. Bareedu Sai Pavan Kimar and Ruturaj (AFMC)
3. Advay Aundhekar and Ananya Menon (AFMC)

The prelims were on the easier side and had many derivable Qs with the top score being 17 and the cut-off being 8. Most regulars saw their prelims score hover around the 15 mark.
Teams from AFMC dominated the quiz from the start with 4 out of 8 teams in the Finals from the college.

The Finals questions were well spread among the topics and everyone from Rick and Morty, Van Dyck , Skrillex to Shashank Manohar made a cameo. A slurry of incorrect pounces kept some teams on the back foot in the start.
The LVC was made on the Angry Birds characters and led to some teams widening their lead. A second LVC was included that was pounce only for its elements. This round was really well crafted with everyone from Edith Piaf and Zlatan making an appearance. The connect spelled out the name of the fest itself!
The General Quiz at PICT always surprises us with innovative rounds. While last year we saw the introduction of a ‘Memento’ based round, this year the QM, Ritwik Manatkar introduced a wonderful ‘Derail’ round. No tongue in cheek reference to the current rail scenario, obviously. The teams could challenge another team to a Q and if the challenged team failed, they would have 10 points docked from their tally! It led to some wonderful “camaraderie” among the quizzers, all regular in the circuit. It took some explaining for the first timers and shook up the score board a lot.
By the start of the final round 2 AFMC teams were decidedly in the lead while the others trailed by 30 odd points.

The final round saw some great Qs as has been the style of the QM, keeping his best Qs for the last. There was a lot of arguments about half points at one point which came to a stop when the arguing team realized there’s no cash prize for 3rd place. All in all, the quiz was well made, had questions on various topics and the effort put in by the QM was evident from the innovative rounds he had included in the quiz.
PS: Reportedly 200 teams registered for this quiz. That’s some footfall!

Report by: Arnabh Sengupta