Madeline Zhu Takes CSU Long Beach
LONG BEACH, Calif. — The Jack Howe Invitational at CSU Long Beach concluded on Sunday night with a final round that featured Claremont High School’s Madeline Zhu and Harvard-Westlake School’s Ben Sprung-Keyser.
On a 2-1 decision, Madeline defeated Ben to take the tournament. Congratulations to both debaters!
Madeline is coached by David Chamberlain and Fritz Pielstick; Ben is coached by Mike Bietz, Peter D. van Elswyk, and Tara Norris.
Paras Kumar and Fritz Pielstick contributed to this report.
LINCOLN-DOUGLAS DEBATE
OCTAS
Claremont MZ def. Palo Verde LS (Lauren Smith)
Sanger CB def. Claremont JH (Johnny Huynh)
Rancho Bernardo PK def. La Costa Canyon DK (Damon Karson)
Brentwood CW def. CPS MD (Michelle Deloison-Baum)
Loyola AB def. Brentwood AB (Alex Bowman)
Harvard-Westlake BSK def Loyola RL (Rich Lizardo)
Rancho Bernardo AK def. San Dieguito MS (Michael Slemon)
La Costa Canyon DM def. Centennial CS (Courtney Shipp)
QUARTERS
Claremont MZ def. Loyola AB (Andrew Blay)
Harvard-Westlake BSK def. Brentwood CW (Cory Wynn)
Rancho Bernardo PK over Rancho Bernardo AK (Ankit Kumar)
Sanger CB def. La Costa Canyon DM (David Moore)
SEMIS
Claremont MZ def. Rancho Bernardo PK (Paras Kumar)
Harvard-Westlake BS def. Sanger CB (Charles Bell)
FINALS
Claremont MZ def. Harvard-Westlake BS (Ben Sprung-Keyser)
CHAMPION
Claremont MZ (Maddie Zhu)
Popularity: 5% [?]
test
26 Responses to “Madeline Zhu Takes CSU Long Beach”
Leave a Reply
Most Popular Posts
- Walt Whitman Closes Out Big Bronx XXXIX
- Eric Thurm Wins Yale
- St. Mark's: Larry Liu Wins the Heart of Texas
- Charles Chy Takes Home the Kaiser
- Jake Sonnenberg Wins Meadows
- Graham Tierney Wins the Iowa Caucus
- Field Report: Big Bronx XXXIX
- Ben Lewis Wins the 2009 Bronx Round Robin
- Madeline Zhu Takes CSU Long Beach
- Jon Cruz Announces the 2009 Bronx Round Robin
Posted from: 66.253.124.2
October 4th, 2009 10:22
Update: Day 1 has ended and Day 2 is about to begin. More novices have disclosed results than do varsity debaters. It’s a wonderful judging pool :)
Posted from: 67.205.59.174
October 4th, 2009 14:54
[...] Finals: Plano Senior’s Charles Rutter defeated Northland Christian’s Maegan Odenweller. Long Beach — Awaiting Results Samford — Finals: Donoho’s Vinay Giri defeated Indian [...]
Posted from: 96.229.128.173
October 5th, 2009 00:50
Some outs results:
Octos:
Brentwood CW def. CPS MD (Michelle Deloison-Baum) (Colton, *Pielstick, Weiss)
Loyola AB def. Brentwood AB (Alex Bowman) (Colton, PIelstick, Weiss)
Harvard Westlake BSK def Loyola RL (Rich Lizardo) 3-0
Quarters:
Claremont MZ def. Loyola AB (Andrew Blay) 3-0
Harvard Westlake BSK def. Brentwood CW (Cory Wynn) 2-1
Rancho Bernardo PK over Rancho Bernardo AK
Sanger ?? def. ?
Sems:
Claremont MZ def. Rancho Bernardo PK (Morehead, Newkirk, ?)
Harvard Westlake BSK def. Sanger ??
Finals:
Claremont MZ vs. Harvard Westlake BSK
———————————————–
While I am not one to overly criticize tournaments, I feel that this tournament had some flaws that should be pointed out. To start, rounds were extremely behind schedule all day on Saturday. Round 5, which was originally scheduled for 8 PM did not get posted until 8:20, and most Flight A’s did not even begin till 9 PM.
Secondly, and more importantly, I feel that the judging provided by the tournament and the overall attitude towards judging at this tournament was appalling.
First, the fact that the tournament had to double flight its octofinal and quarterfinal rounds (and possibly even semis, I did not stay for them) is pathetic. This shows the complete lack of preparation on behalf of the tournament and lack of a willing staff to fulfill judging requirements.
Second, I was informed by numerous judges that by the time out rounds had begun the Tab Staff had given up on trying to allocate good judges to rounds or even getting proper judges their ballots. Especially during the Quarters round, which was scheduled to start at 4:20 PM. However, this round didn’t begin until nearly 4:45 or 5 PM. Moreover, this conflicted with the tournaments awards ceremony, causing most judges to fail to pick up ballots. This created havoc with ballots, which the Tab Staff solved by LITERALLY putting ballots in the hands of the first people that walked up to the ballot table. As a debater who spends a large amount of money on tournaments, I am offended by the fact that my entry fees are not being used to offer adequate judging or show me the respect of even giving me someone who cares to show up to debate rounds. In fact, during my quarterfinal round, I looked at 2 of my judges, both of whom were texting throughout speeches and did not bother to show the decency of even feigning their interest and attention. To me, this is extremely offensive due to the fact that myself, and many other debaters, put an exorbitant amount of time and money into the activity and I feel we are at least worthy of the decency and the respect of paying attention to us for 45 minutes. This poorly reflects the Tab staff at CSULB and their forensics team. Knowing that the tournament is hoping to bring back their bids in L/D, I strongly recommend that they re-evaluate how they run their tournament and the legitimacy of their judging pool, it seems to me that a tournament so poorly run will never be deserving of a bid.
And finally, this is a comment that extends beyond the scope of just this weekend. Something I noticed this weekend and have seen at many other tournaments is the preservation of coaches from the judging pool. By this I mean that certain teams that have high quality coaching bring their coaches to tournaments and rather than enter them for judges, bring along parents so that the coaches can focus solely on working with kids. While I understand that this is the prerogative of the teams themselves, I also feel it is unfair to other debaters and teams who show up expecting to be able to debate and teams who enter their good coaches as quality judges for the judging pool. I feel that the community should try to move in the direction of increasing the quality of the judging pool for the sake of the activity and to show debaters the decency of rewarding their hard work by giving them the chance to display the skills they spend hours to hone and improve upon. While I realize my comments are only those of one person, I still fell they should be heard.
Posted from: 96.229.128.173
October 5th, 2009 00:54
*Alec Bowman in octos
Posted from: 71.84.43.236
October 5th, 2009 00:56
Probably the least efficient tournament I have ever attended…
Every single round, including the FIRST round of each day as well as all of the outrounds, started significantly late. The ballots’ suggestions for how speaker points should be awarded are ridiculous and skew the outround pool, e.g. 16-19 speaker points = average, 20-23 excellent… An inexperienced judge won’t know that giving a 20 is not doing anyone a favor, and this is not to be some criticism of lay debate AT ALL (!!) but just how the pairings become so skewed because inexperienced judges are told that 20 speaker points is excellent while some kids are getting 28s and 29s from an experienced judge while their speaking was probably very similar.
I’m not at all trying to sit on some ivory tower and criticize non-circuit competition because I don’t think that’s true; kids should adapt. But tournaments should not use this practice which just inevitably screws everything up and diminishes the quality of a tournament which has a lot of potential and just further causes kids to hate “parent judges.” Simple solution: don’t encourage parents to give 17 speaker points and think its good.
Posted from: 72.130.142.156
October 5th, 2009 01:02
long beeeeeach
that said, grats to blay/maddie/cory/paras on the breaks
and congrats to adam and sam from TP for breaking in novice (semifinals and octofinals, respectively). sam, for having your first round ever saturday morning..not bad. not bad at all.
Posted from: 75.85.110.214
October 5th, 2009 01:10
Much agreed with both comments above ^. The tournament quality was poor this year, and the lack of decency towards debaters and their work is disrespectful. CSULB needs to reevaluate their tournament before competitors will rightfully spend their money on it in the future.
Posted from: 75.85.110.214
October 5th, 2009 01:12
We deserve a partial refund! This was absolutely ridiculous. If the money didn’t go to judging or allocation to setting up rounds, then where did it go? It was fairly dang expensive -.-
Posted from: 71.84.43.236
October 5th, 2009 01:34
@8
As impractical as that sounds, I agree! Was the tournament just a fund raiser for the csulb debate team with minimal return to the participants and contributors?? I don’t know exactly what I paid for… volunteer parent judges, facilities with no bathrooms accessible to students unless one walked a 5K, or ONE printing of the posting for the entire pool which pushed the tournament back god knows how long…
Posted from: 76.176.139.23
October 5th, 2009 01:42
Regardless of how the tournament was run (which will likely be the crux of this victory briefs discussion) I want to sincerely congradulate Maddie. You earned it. You worked hard and it DEFINITELY showed.
Also, big ups to Cory, Damon, and David Moore. Cory for being generally legit, and the D’s for properly representing LCC’s name.
I wanted to thank everyone for fighting through the frustration of the administration of the tournament and still provide some very entertaining debate rounds.
As a quick aside, Blay, furthering your discussion of the judging pool I feel that the primary reason the judging gets so messy is due to the rudeness of the long beach staff. They treated my brother, who volunteered to be there, like trash the ENTIRE tournament. Every judge I talked to genuinely seemed like they had NO desire in being there. I hope the CSULB staff learn from their mistakes; treating judges fairly truly does improve debate rounds. A judge that is happy to attend is a judge who, regardless of their debate experience, wants to provide their undivided attention. Just my two cents.
Posted from: 24.161.175.30
October 5th, 2009 02:04
I have full results from quarters onwards and pictures that I’ll give to Mr. Cruz tomorrow. Also, there a few people to congratulate.
First, congrats to my teammate Ankit. I’m sorry we had to hit in quarters:( You are the smartest kid I have ever talked to, but also the laziest. If only you worked hard…it would be scary man
Second, HUGE CONGRATS TO MADDY FOR WINNING LONG BEACH! What a great way to start the year for a great person. Thanks for a really fun semis round.
Third, congrats to cory for keeping iwth it and Ben for just being good all weekend and getting to finals.
Lastly, congrats to everyone who broke at Long Beach.
Also, I feel bad for the Parli team that had to wait 9 hours for the final round becuase one kid was double entered in LD and Parli.
Posted from: 75.25.160.95
October 5th, 2009 02:23
Grats to Ankit and Paras!!
Posted from: 75.25.160.95
October 5th, 2009 02:25
Oh, and congrats to Adam for making it all the way to semis in novice. That is an impressive accomplishment! You’re gonna destroy this year!
Posted from: 75.32.229.182
October 5th, 2009 02:30
Ridiculous postings area especially at round 5.
Posted from: 71.104.147.161
October 5th, 2009 02:44
Finals
Claremont MZ (Maddie Zhu) def. Harvard Westlake BS (Ben Sprung-Keyser) on a 2-1
Congrats to both debaters!
Posted from: 67.81.3.29
October 5th, 2009 06:59
CONGRATS MADDIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
you deserve this! yeah irene’s army!
Posted from: 76.201.61.251
October 5th, 2009 11:31
props to blay on the comment I feel most of us wanted to make
props to maddie on the W
Posted from: 96.229.128.173
October 5th, 2009 12:20
good job maddie, at least you won this thing after quarters
Posted from: 24.120.60.99
October 5th, 2009 14:56
@ #3, #5, et. al.
While I was not at Long Beach this year, the descriptions of the judging pool, scheduling difficulties, and all of the other criticisms reminds me very much of the years that I did attend as a coach (2000-2005).
I’m curious as to whether a couple of past traditions have been retained:
1. Are many LD debate rounds still being held outside on the quad (come rain or come shine)? Or perhaps has that honor been passed along to PF?
2. Are large numbers of LBSU students taking communications classes still being forced to judge as part of their course grade (which used to be the cause of many surly, and often hungover, lay judges showing up late on Saturday morning)?
For what it’s worth, I’m old enough to have been friends with the late, great Jack Howe (the tournament’s namesake and the inventor of collegiate CEDA debate). It saddens me that his memory is being carried forward in a tournament that is causing so much frustration and bad feeling. Having known Jack for many years, and having attended “The 49er” tournament under his direction, I assure you that if these criticisms are accurate, this is not the kind of event that he would have run.
Posted from: 71.104.147.161
October 5th, 2009 15:02
Full Results:
Claremont MZ def. Palo Verde LS (Lauren Smith)
Sanger CB def. Claremont JH (Johnny Huynh)
Rancho Bernardo PK def. La Costa Canyon DK (Damon Karson)
Brentwood CW def. CPS MD (Michelle Deloison-Baum)
Loyola AB def. Brentwood AB (Alex Bowman)
Harvard Westlake BSK def Loyola RL (Rich Lizardo)
Rancho Bernardo AK def. San Dieguito MS (Michael Slemon)
La Costa Canyon DM def. Centennial CS (Courtney Shipp)
Quarters:
Claremont MZ def. Loyola AB (Andrew Blay)
Harvard Westlake BSK def. Brentwood CW (Cory Wynn)
Rancho Bernardo PK over Rancho Bernardo AK (Ankit Kumar)
Sanger CB def. La Costa Canyon DM (David Moore)
Sems:
Posted from: 71.104.147.161
October 5th, 2009 15:04
Sems:
Claremont MZ def. Rancho Bernardo PK (Paras Kumar)
Harvard Westlake BS def. Sanger CB (Charles Bell)
Finals:
Claremont MZ def. Harvard Westlake BS (Ben Sprung Keyser)
Champion: Claremont MZ (Maddie Zhu)
Posted from: 71.187.60.43
October 5th, 2009 18:22
maddie you’re absolutely amazing in case you didn’t already know :)
Posted from: 67.159.182.18
October 5th, 2009 19:07
I just want to say congratulations to everyone who was in break rounds with me: you guys were all really great, thanks for some really fun rounds. Despite the general illegitimacy of the way that they ran LB this year (and I do agree with the previous posters on that), you guys helped make it a great experience.
and thanks Ankit in particular for the pizza. even though it did let that dog in during semis :)
Posted from: 98.14.255.196
October 5th, 2009 22:36
HUGE congrats to Maddie and to Ben!!!
Congratulations as well to Paras for semis, and many thanks to him for his help in covering this tournament. Many thanks to Fritz for his help as well!
Lots of talent in this pool — congrats to all.
Posted from: 71.104.105.174
October 6th, 2009 03:07
I was one of those ‘parent judges’ spoken about above. I am not just off the turnip truck; I did IE and Readers Theater in college & I’ve been a trial attorney for 25 years. However, I am a novice as far as h.s. debate is concerned. I gave my competitors my full and undivided attention and judged as fairly as possible. I would NEVER text during a judging session. I agree that judges were ill-treated at this meet, at least on the I.E. side. The Congress staff was much nicer. On the I.E. side we were treated like cattle. Despite our coach registering me in advance, my name somehow disappeared and I had to grapple for judging papers. I wanted to do Impromptu and they couldn’t find one for me. So I practically arm-wrestled for a H.I. round. Instructions on the I.E. side were virtually nonexistent. I commented to someone that a bum sleeping under a tree would be allowed to judge if he wandered to the I.E. room….
Posted from: 166.205.131.102
November 17th, 2009 15:38
I think I debated Adam in novice. I won novice on my first LD tournament ever ( I think brentwood sa in finals)
I’m thinking of going allopen from now … Any agreements or disagreements ? Thanks !
Palos verdes peninsula DT