Tournament of Books discussion

Who wants to be a judge in an Alt.TOB here on Goodreads so we can amuse ourselves and make friends and enemies while we wait for the March tournament?

If 7 people volunteer to be judges, we can do a half-tourney round of 8.

We could also use 3 people or so to conduct secret negotiations behind closed doors and to select the novels for our tournament, seed them, and match them up for the first round.

Here's your chance to not wait helplessly by while some musician eliminates your favorite novel!

If no one volunteers I will erase this thread and feel shame-faced, but I will recover in time for March.

Hmm.... I am interested in this idea, for however you would like to use me - judge, secret negotiator, plotter, whatever. I might be better at strategizing the thing - not sure if I could eloquently express myself well enough as a judge, or defender against feedback post-judgement. It would be a cool undertaking though.

Also - HAHAHA!!! 'some musician...' That bit made me snort-laugh. :)

Sounds like fun. Count me in! Like Jennifer, I'm not sure I can express myself well enough to be a judge but I'm willing to try whatever. And if this works out, maybe we can try it earlier next year - maybe with some favorites from the long list that didn't make the short.

I'm game...

But before we start, I do want to make clear that I'm in no way critical of TOB. I thought about it last year, as I sat by avidly reading all the judgements and postings, anxiously awaiting results about books I wasn't really interested in, and I came to the conclusion that TOB is unique and interesting and entertaining no matter what books end up on the list. Also realized that The Morning News group invests a tremendous amount of time and effort and resources and no doubt $$ to provide us all this thought-provoking entertainment for no cost. They can do whatever they want, I'll be there.

So, that being said, this sounds like a fun way to bridge the gap between the end of baseball season and the beginning of TOB. Count me in. Willing to participate in whatever position seems appropriate

I'm with Jennifer and Drew: hesitant to commit myself to judging unless you're willing to except things like "Wow!" and "Be Still My Heart!" as reviews. But I have an idea...

I recently finished Sweet Caress by William Boyd (my review: 4 stars. Very Good. The protagonist, Amory Clay, was a bit distant. Enjoyed Any Human Heart more.)

Amory Clay described a game played with several family members where they would try to find four adjectives that succinctly describe the people in their lives--friends, family, passers-by. Here's an example:

"Bland, rich, bored, arrogant," Greville said out of the side of his mouth.
"Handsome, assured, clever, foreign." (Amory replied, describing the same man.)

So, just a thought: if we can't come up with enough judges with chops like poingu's**, maybe we can design a review-by-adjective scoring system, or some such thing.


** I say that sincerely, poingu. You always impress me with your ability to describe a book, as well as describe your attachment (or lack thereof) to it.)

Well we just have to stay completely playful about this. Judges would need to commit to reading each of two books to the end and then choosing one and saying why but beyond that they can fulfill that obligation however they want.

If we get enough people involved to go ahead with this, I think it would be fun to choose our books even before the longlist is announced, to avoid all possible dissonance with the actual event in March.

So we have 4...we could do it with 7 I suppose but I like the idea of the list of books being chosen by non-judges.

Lljones wrote: "I'm game... But before we start, I do want to make clear that I'm in no way critical of TOB... They can do whatever they want, I'll be there.."

Ditto this exactly. It had not crossed my mind that running a shadow tournament here would appear critical of the ToB. So I truly hope it has not been interpreted that way by some.

In my mind - and as Poingu and Lljones have noted - I see it as a playful, fun, bookish way to bridge some time. And, as Tom Petty says, 'The waiting is the hardest part.' :)

Jennifer wrote: "And, as Tom Petty says, 'The waiting is the hardest part."

I agree! I don't see this as competition, just a way to have a similar type of bookish fun.

I'll try to take part at some level. I don't see it as any conflict or competition. A lot of groups and libraries do Mock Newbery Awards, etc. It's just for fun.

How would you guys feel about doing a little persuasive recruiting with your friends who are members here, to join our bookish fun?

I can think of a few members of this group who are 1) promiscuous readers, 2) highly opinionated, 3) like to share their feelings about books in this group or in reviews. They may be feeling shy though.

It would also be good to recruit someone who would have a good idea of how to link or otherwise make available our "brackets" for view online. I guess a link to a Google Doc would do but that feels so pedestrian.

Karen Michele wrote: "I'll try to take part at some level. I don't see it as any conflict or competition. A lot of groups and libraries do Mock Newbery Awards, etc. It's just for fun."

Great!

I'm definitely up for judging and/or organizing!

Wonderful! That's 6 of us!

This sounds like fun, but how would you select the winner? Would it be done the same way? If so, each judge would commit to reading 4 books. I'm slightly hesitant to devote that much time and energy close to the TOB since I like to try and read as many of the contenders as possible. Maybe a short version? See how it goes this year?

AmberBug wrote: "This sounds like fun, but how would you select the winner? Would it be done the same way? If so, each judge would commit to reading 4 books. I'm slightly hesitant to devote that much time and energ..."

Good point. Let's make sure no one volunteering to be a judge has to read more than 2 new books, at most--some of us might have already read one or both novels, given that this is a group rabidly devoted to new fiction.

Also I was actually thinking about having the final round decided by 1 person, the same as the rest. There is no reason not to make this as easy as possible on us. We don't have to follow the TOB rules or be democratic--we can just allow the judge in the final round to be an autocrat.

Of course we will have comments sections too so anyone who has read both books will be able to share their opinions.

Also does anyone know a musician to invite?

Count on me for following along and occasionally chiming in. In other words, all the fun with none of the work. :-) Am I safe in assuming Sweetland will be one of the 8?

I would be a judge.

Oh, also. This is clearly like Fan Fiction. It's not critical of the tourney. It means we want more, so we are making our own.

Jan wrote: "Count on me for following along and occasionally chiming in. In other words, all the fun with none of the work. :-) Am I safe in assuming Sweetland will be one of the 8?"

Hmm, the ways of the Secret Society of Book Pickers for AltTOB are very mysterious. Those of us who take on that role will need to be sworn to take the ritual to their graves.

Here is our status:

1. Michele
2. (Amberbug is deciding)
3. nomadreader
4. Karen Michele
5. Drew
6. Lljones
7. Jennifer
8. Poingu

I'm thinking we can easily use 10 people to make a good half-tournament with 8 books--7 judges and 3 organizers.

If we get 6-7 more, we can run a full tournament of 16 books--13 judges and 3 organizers. Judges each would still have the same commitment of reading a maximum of 2 books each. Organizers pick the original books and keep it fun as we go along with their bookish banter.

Michele wrote: "This is clearly like Fan Fiction. It's not critical of the tourney. It means we want more, so we are making our own."

Amen!

Poingu wrote: "Also does anyone know a musician to invite?"

Haha, good one, Poingu! I am having fun already! :-)

Jan wrote: "Poingu wrote: "Also does anyone know a musician to invite?"

Haha, good one, Poingu! I am having fun already! :-)"

Actually come to think of it would be very fun to invite someone who makes a point to never read anything written after 1890, or who reads only for work, or who is a spouse of one of us and who doesn't understand why their partner is reading all the time.

I would be happy to judge a couple of books! I love TOB's but find myself uber opinionated about the entries (either I love or abhor them!)

Poingu wrote: "Jan wrote: "Count on me for following along and occasionally chiming in. In other words, all the fun with none of the work. :-) Am I safe in assuming Sweetland will be one of the 8?"

Hmm, the ways..."

Count me in. I'm not the best reviewer but I'm willing to do the work and have fun with it, if you'll have me.

AmberBug wrote: "Count me in. I'm not the best reviewer but I'm willing to do the work and have fun with it, if you'll have me. "

I'm starting to feel all Fellowship of the Ring-ish

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmQyA...

1. Michele
2. AmberBug
3. nomadreader
4. Karen Michele
5. Drew
6. Lljones
7. Jennifer
8. Poingu
9. Amy...

So glad see so much activity in this thread today! Woot!!

Re: persuasive recruiting: I don't really know anyone well enough to feel comfortable with this. And, honestly, the only person I would have gone to would have been you, Poingu. Heh!! OH! Wait -- I lied. Sorry!! I just double-checked the members' list... there are 2 people I am happy to ask, who are really awesome!! I will shoot them a message.

I am open to any way you see this working. I guess there's a lot of planning to do, which will be fun!!

On the final book/winner decision: I do kind of like the idea of a winner being chosen by more than one person. Though if we go that way, odd # of voters to avoid a tie.

I like the multi vote on the winner too.

Jennifer wrote: "On the final book/winner decision: I do kind of like the idea of a winner being chosen by more than one person. Though if we go that way, odd # of voters to avoid a tie. ."

Yes, me too. How about: If we get more than the required number of volunteers then we will create from them a pool of final round judges. There's no reason except tradition to limit the final round to the same people who were judging earlier rounds. I've always thought that was a bit of a glitch in TOB actually because people are coming in with predetermined positions about some of the novels, having judged them already in an earlier round.

Also, we could say that any of the early-round judges with the bandwidth to read two more books could participate in the final round too. But we don't have to require them to do that, if people want to participate but can't commit to 4 books.

also these people I'm thinking of as "organizers" could chime in at the end, too. It feels a little incestuous to have people picking the books and then judging them in the first round but by the final round it wouldn't matter, there would be a lot of other opinions and filters in between the first choices and the final round.

All sounds very reasonable, Poingu!! :)

Poingu wrote: "Jennifer wrote: "On the final book/winner decision: I do kind of like the idea of a winner being chosen by more than one person. Though if we go that way, odd # of voters to avoid a tie. ."

Yes, m..."

I like those ideas very much. Nice job Gandalf!

Poingu wrote: "Jennifer wrote: "On the final book/winner decision: I do kind of like the idea of a winner being chosen by more than one person. Though if we go that way, odd # of voters to avoid a tie. ."

Yes, m..."

I really like this idea--it offers the best of both options.

This sounds like a fantastically fun plan.

After some "persuasive recruiting" I would be happy to be a judge.

Great, Jane! Wonderful.

We have a very comfortable group of 10 participants now for running a tournament of 8 books.

I'd like to take a few more days to see if we get 6 more volunteers, in which case we can go for 16.

1. Michele
2. AmberBug
3. nomadreader
4. Karen Michele
5. Drew
6. Lljones
7. Jennifer
8. Poingu
9. Amy
10. Jane from B.C...

This sounds like a load of fun. I'll play too, thanks!

YAY!!! my 'persuasive recruiting' worked!! :)
Thank you so much, jane and jen!! you guys are awesome!

Like several others, I'm probably not be the best reviewer, but I may be interested in participating. How long would you have to read the two books? Sometimes my real job interferes with my ability to be a prolific reader, but I have read over 50 books this year already.

Can't wait to get started!

I am so excited!

This is great! Just a few more and we have handily enough for a round of 16. While we wait for those happy few to join us maybe we can start talking ideas about logistics.

1. Michele
2. AmberBug
3. nomadreader
4. Karen Michele
5. Drew
6. Lljones
7. Jennifer
8. Poingu
9. Amy
10. Jane from B.C...
11. Jen
12. Ryan

Ryan wrote: "Like several others, I'm probably not be the best reviewer, but I may be interested in participating. How long would you have to read the two books? Sometimes my real job interferes with my ability..."

It's good for people here to share their constraints because we can work around them somewhat. People judging the first bracket will have more time, as much as we want to build in, since both books will be known ahead of time and put in their slots. So if you have serious time constraints you can be a first-round judge.

Interesting. One suggestion: I've always thought it would be fun to have a true alternate tourney where the groups 16 favorites that WERENT in the tourney get judged in the same way as the TOB.

How long will it be to read between rounds? I think the TOB does everything ahead of time with no spoilers. This way it's not a week to read 2 books.

Poingu wrote: "...It would also be good to recruit someone who would have a good idea of how to link or otherwise make available our "brackets" for view online. I guess a link to a Google Doc would do but that feels so pedestrian. "

Challonge (http://challonge.com/tournament/brack...) might work for the bracket piece.

Topher wrote: "Interesting. One suggestion: I've always thought it would be fun to have a true alternate tourney where the groups 16 favorites that WERENT in the tourney get judged in the same way as the TOB."

Topher, are you volunteering? I hope so. I was going to ask you but you just JUST wrote in another thread about being too busy to read. Maybe this would give you incentive.

Also I was just going to post about "how should we choose these books?" I do like the idea of picking and seeding our alt. tournament before the TOB longlist comes out, where we really aren't about creating a parallel process but instead making something different and fun. Unlike your idea we wouldn't deliberately eliminate TOB contenders--there might be overlap, or there might not.

There is at least one novel much beloved here in this group for example that I'm not sure will even make the TOB longlist and would be hard to leave off our own tournament. It would be nice to have our tournament not constraint by the longlist for that reason.

Poingu wrote: "Ryan wrote: "Like several others, I'm probably not be the best reviewer, but I may be interested in participating. How long would you have to read the two books? Sometimes my real job interferes wi..."

Cool. Count me in then as a first round judge.

No, never too busy to read. I meant I'm usually reading books from the past, and cant read all the latest stuff (I'm amazed at how many new books you all read!). I'd definitely judge a round if you'd have me.

I'm still a little confused about when we're going to do this but I work on an academic schedule so I have fairly long periods when I'm off work: 3 weeks at Christmas, 10 days at the end of March, reduced work schedule in summer. And, of course, I clear my calendar of all non-work activities after the TOB shortlist comes out!

AmberBug wrote: "How long will it be to read between rounds? I think the TOB does everything ahead of time with no spoilers. This way it's not a week to read 2 books."

We don't need to be constrained by the Real TOB constraints. They're putting on an entertainment and we just need to keep it moving fast enough to keep it interesting. We have different constraints: needing to have fun together and to not make this a chore for anyone.

My first idea and admittedly I'm just now thinking it up:

1) We pick and seed and publish the brackets soon, as in, before the end of November--really just as soon as we can. That way those of us who want to read them before we get started will have as much time as possible to do so.

2) The deadline for each of the first round of 8 judgments can be on the same day, probably a Monday in early January. For each of the match-ups we'll set up a discussion thread here on this group, where the judge will post their decision, and participate in discussion.

3) on the day when all the round of 16 decisions are posted, all the second round judges will know their 2 books. I'm thinking they can have a week to read and post their own decisions, so the deadline would be on the following Monday. A week feels like a good compromise between ridiculously fast and too slow to hold interest. By posting all 8 decisions from the first round at once we can give Round 2 judges more time than the grueling pace of Real TOB, and we will still have plenty to talk about while we wait for them since we'll have 8 decisions at once.

4) repeat for semi-finals.

5) final will have all previous judges invited to participate plus any extra judges we have.

6) we can use the Listopia list for ideas about seeding and selection of books, here:

https://www.goodreads.com/list/show/9...