Hi All,
The Div II stats for the SCT at University of Maryland through round 4 can be found at http://www.wam.umd.edu/~bhouston/quizbo ... dings.html . I'm going to update these every 2 rounds or so for your edification. I don't know if Casey's going to put up Div I stats but I presume they will be there sooner or later.
Cheers,
Brad
NAQT SCT East stats
The Div II stats are now complete and can be found at the above site. After a 4-way circle of death necessitated by NAQT's policy of not breaking ties on paper, JHU won a 2-game sudden-death playoff to win the D2 title. Thank you to all teams for coming out and participating. Div I results to follow (I can say that UVA won the Div I title but beyond that it has to wait for Casey to post the stats).
Cheers,
Brad
Cheers,
Brad
Final Div I and Div II stats for the SCT East can be found at http://www.wam.umd.edu/~bhouston/quizbo ... dings.html for Div I and http://www.wam.umd.edu/~bhouston/quizbo ... dings.html for Div II.
Cheers,
Brad, who apologizes for the short post
Cheers,
Brad, who apologizes for the short post
-
DanTheClam
- Lulu
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2004 7:07 pm
- Location: Princeton, NJ
As explained at the tournament, NAQT policy prohibits us from settling a tie on paper, including by winning percentage. The argument that was made at the time as to why Princeton B should be declared the winner ("We lost one fewer game than everyone else") is very easily reversed on the part of the other teams ("They had an unfair advantage because they played fewer games than anyone else"). The "Maryland House" forfeit is there not to indicate anything other than to indicate to me that Johns Hopkins actually won the day after (my memory is notoriously bad and I wanted some sort of visual reminder). Moreover, when I went back and calculated playoff records, Princeton B shared a 4-1 record with two of the three other teams in the circle of death, so we would have had to do a playoff anyway going off of that basis.
Yeah, it sucks that the bracket was unbalanced because NYU left early (though certainly I don't blame them since they were worried about the storm). It also sucks that we didn't have enough staff to run a house team in your bracket, which would have negated the whole issue to begin with, but the fact that we did not have said team is not the same as saying "Since NYU left and other teams got a forfeit, we should get a forfeit for the Maryland House team that never existed in the first place." But again, this was not our determination, but one made by NAQT, so if you have an issue you should take it up with them. What else, it's not like we took it out of your hands and gave it to Johns Hopkins; we gave you the opportunity to win it outright in two tiebreaker rounds, so that's your responsibility.
Quite frankly, I would be very, very surprised if anything more ends up at stake than a title and an overpriced piece of plastic in any case.
Cheers,
Brad
Yeah, it sucks that the bracket was unbalanced because NYU left early (though certainly I don't blame them since they were worried about the storm). It also sucks that we didn't have enough staff to run a house team in your bracket, which would have negated the whole issue to begin with, but the fact that we did not have said team is not the same as saying "Since NYU left and other teams got a forfeit, we should get a forfeit for the Maryland House team that never existed in the first place." But again, this was not our determination, but one made by NAQT, so if you have an issue you should take it up with them. What else, it's not like we took it out of your hands and gave it to Johns Hopkins; we gave you the opportunity to win it outright in two tiebreaker rounds, so that's your responsibility.
Quite frankly, I would be very, very surprised if anything more ends up at stake than a title and an overpriced piece of plastic in any case.
Cheers,
Brad
Brad, I was actually on the team that was actually affected by the game situation, and I'll try not to be utterly sarcastic with anger like Dan... haha.
I'd just like you to think about it this way, trying not to think of me as the member of the raging mob, just from a logical perspective.
As you know, the final records were 11-2 (ours) and 11-3 (others). However, our 11-2 record was deemed exactly equivalent to all three 11-3 records. This means that our bye WAS a loss in the context of the tournament results. I understand NAQT qualifies results with total wins, so this is fair, but I would also assume that NAQT assumes that each team plays the same number of games. (I think the best solution may have been to give Princeton B one more game to play against a randomly chosen team when it became apparent that this might happen, but that would have required both of us to notice it earlier and that is probably not a reasonable hope.) I just wanted to point out that our bye WAS a loss, whereas JHU's (and the other teams in the b bracket's game vs NYU) were wins (I find it, therefore, very unlikely that they would argue that by virtue of us playing less games we had an unfair advantage, when each of the teams in the playoff with us was the recipient of a free win).
(Also, you did not give "us" two rounds to win it outright in the playoffs... you gave each of our teams one chance... I don't really think its fair to treat us as one entity when both of our teams had a chance to win independently, but these are just word games. It was feasible that both of our teams could have qualified for nationals [I don't know if we're allowed to send two teams, I'm new to NAQT] had we won and our other team remained in 2nd. By the same token, our C team received an additional free win in the sudden death round to advance to the final... this is inherently unfair to both JHU and Princeton B (A 3 team playoff should have ensued after finding Penn had left). Anyway, just my thoughts, not really relevant.)
And yes, we should have taken advantage of our playoff and won... we have no excuses for that, although we were a little angry at the time, trying to get out of there before the roads got terrible (we ended up having to stay the night), our anger may have gotten the best of us... JHU did a great job and capitalized on their opportunity.
I appreciate your confidence in thinking we will get a bid, as we all worked very hard to get it.
Thanks for a well-run tournament and thanks for your time reading this,
Lawrence
I'd just like you to think about it this way, trying not to think of me as the member of the raging mob, just from a logical perspective.
As you know, the final records were 11-2 (ours) and 11-3 (others). However, our 11-2 record was deemed exactly equivalent to all three 11-3 records. This means that our bye WAS a loss in the context of the tournament results. I understand NAQT qualifies results with total wins, so this is fair, but I would also assume that NAQT assumes that each team plays the same number of games. (I think the best solution may have been to give Princeton B one more game to play against a randomly chosen team when it became apparent that this might happen, but that would have required both of us to notice it earlier and that is probably not a reasonable hope.) I just wanted to point out that our bye WAS a loss, whereas JHU's (and the other teams in the b bracket's game vs NYU) were wins (I find it, therefore, very unlikely that they would argue that by virtue of us playing less games we had an unfair advantage, when each of the teams in the playoff with us was the recipient of a free win).
(Also, you did not give "us" two rounds to win it outright in the playoffs... you gave each of our teams one chance... I don't really think its fair to treat us as one entity when both of our teams had a chance to win independently, but these are just word games. It was feasible that both of our teams could have qualified for nationals [I don't know if we're allowed to send two teams, I'm new to NAQT] had we won and our other team remained in 2nd. By the same token, our C team received an additional free win in the sudden death round to advance to the final... this is inherently unfair to both JHU and Princeton B (A 3 team playoff should have ensued after finding Penn had left). Anyway, just my thoughts, not really relevant.)
And yes, we should have taken advantage of our playoff and won... we have no excuses for that, although we were a little angry at the time, trying to get out of there before the roads got terrible (we ended up having to stay the night), our anger may have gotten the best of us... JHU did a great job and capitalized on their opportunity.
I appreciate your confidence in thinking we will get a bid, as we all worked very hard to get it.
Thanks for a well-run tournament and thanks for your time reading this,
Lawrence
Getting aside from the D2 hoopla (although I would like to hear NAQT's justification/clarification for such a policy), I'd like to thank Maryland for a well-run tournament. Most of the readers were very good and there was only one reader who was a little slow in D1 (but still quite competent). They were also great about providing breakfast and being flexible when we suddenly had transportation issues and had to change the composition of our team when it turned out we weren't going to have two D1 teams.
-jordan
-jordan
Jordan Boyd-Graber
UMD (College Park, MD), Faculty Advisor 2018-present
UC Boulder, Founder / Faculty Advisor 2014-2017
UMD (College Park, MD), Faculty Advisor 2010-2014
Princeton, Player 2004-2009
Caltech (Pasadena, CA), Player / President 2000-2004
Ark Math & Science (Hot Springs, AR), Player 1998-2000
Monticello High School, Player 1997-1998
Human-Computer Question Answering:
http://qanta.org/
UMD (College Park, MD), Faculty Advisor 2018-present
UC Boulder, Founder / Faculty Advisor 2014-2017
UMD (College Park, MD), Faculty Advisor 2010-2014
Princeton, Player 2004-2009
Caltech (Pasadena, CA), Player / President 2000-2004
Ark Math & Science (Hot Springs, AR), Player 1998-2000
Monticello High School, Player 1997-1998
Human-Computer Question Answering:
http://qanta.org/
agreed! Well-run all around in terms of logistics.ezubaric wrote:Getting aside from the D2 hoopla (although I would like to hear NAQT's justification/clarification for such a policy), I'd like to thank Maryland for a well-run tournament. Most of the readers were very good and there was only one reader who was a little slow in D1 (but still quite competent). They were also great about providing breakfast and being flexible when we suddenly had transportation issues and had to change the composition of our team when it turned out we weren't going to have two D1 teams.
-jordan
I like to eat peanut butter