Road to Minneapolis: NAQT ICT bid prediction thread

Old college threads.
User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8413
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by Matt Weiner »

rylltraka wrote:Considering our USC Div II team was myself, a trash specialist, and three novices, I doubt any compensation for playing on Div I vs Div I would be enough to catapult us to an ICT slot we don't deserve.

It would be an abomination were Stanford's Div II team be excluded, however.
I found more errors in my calculations (that I won't bother to correct since actual bids should be out imminently) and again I'm just guessing at what NAQT's formula is, so don't worry about it just yet.
Matt Weiner
Founder of hsquizbowl.org

User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8413
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by Matt Weiner »

OK, I lied, I will do this one last time, incorporating all the data, and fixing a stupid math mistake I made before. I'm actually somewhat curious to see how well my predictions match up with the real bids when they come out, so here goes.

D1 field

(32 teams = 4 host bids, 9 autobids, and the top 19 teams in S-value among those not receiving autobids)

Host Harvard
Host Iowa
Host Michigan
Host Oklahoma State
1 4.760 Brown A
2 4.670 Chicago A
3 4.599 Berkeley
4 4.408 Illinois
5 4.359 Stanford A
6 4.347 VCU
7 4.288 Chicago B
8 4.179 Caltech
9 4.037 Rutgers A
10 4.033 Carleton A
11 3.905 Texas
12 3.895 Princeton A
13 3.831 UCLA A
14 3.806 Vanderbilt A
15 3.561 South Florida
16 3.544 Virginia A
17 3.544 Wisconsin
18 3.393 Yale
19 3.257 Florida A
20 3.244 Chicago C (ineligible)
21 3.104 USC
22 2.994 Maryland A
23 2.946 Florida State
24 2.864 Toronto
25 2.793 Columbia
26 2.793 Harding
27 2.792 Texas A&M
28 2.727 Amherst
36 2.307 Princeton B

D1 top 5 waitlist:

29 2.552 Johns Hopkins A
30 2.504 Ohio State A
31 2.485 Grinnell
32 2.468 Minnesota
33 2.415 North Carolina

D1 other teams:

34 2.363 Southern Virginia
35 2.323 Virginia B
37 2.290 Carleton B
38 2.288 Macalaster
39 2.245 Cornell
40 2.194 UCLA B
41 2.149 Oklahoma
42 2.148 UTK A
43 2.103 Minnesota
44 2.071 McGill
45 1.950 Rochester
46 1.926 Case Western
47 1.861 MoRolla
48 1.846 Georgia A
49 1.786 BU
50 1.768 Ottawa
51 1.766 Stanford B
52 1.718 Rutgers B
53 1.654 WUSTL
54 1.595 UL-LA
55 1.456 Tulsa
56 1.403 George Washington
57 1.328 Iowa State
58 1.275 Queen's
59 1.219 Simon Fraser B
60 1.055 Simon Fraser A
61 1.047 UTK B
62 1.046 Cincinnati A

D2 field

(24 teams = 3 host bids, 6 autobids, and the top 15 teams in S-value among those not receiving autobids)

Notes on what happens if there are autobids awarded to the teams involved in the tie at Oklahoma State are contained below.

Host Irvine
Host Brock
Host UTC
1 4.835 Maryland B
2 4.672 MIT
3 4.541 Toronto A
4 4.503 Drake A
5 4.310 Chicago D
6 4.215 Harvard
7 4.206 Alabama A
8 4.133 Illinois A
9 4.067 Saint Olaf A
10 4.050 Yale B
11 3.980 Dartmouth A
12 3.909 Johns Hopkins B
13 3.805 Florida B
14 3.791 Virginia Tech A
15 3.684 Minnesota
16 3.656 McGill A
17 3.639 Georgia B
18 3.649 WUSTL A
19 3.627 Brown B (drops to waitlist if Oklahoma State field gets 3 autobids)
20 3.618 Vanderbilt B (drops to waitlist if Oklahoma State field gets 2 autobids)
21 3.586 Chicago E (drops to waitlist if Oklahoma State field gets any autobids)

D2 top 5 waitlist:

22 3.475 Dartmouth B
23 3.345 Toronto B
24 3.362 Truman State A
25 3.308 Carleton A
26 3.256 Princeton C

D2 other teams:

27 3.234 Northwestern A
28 3.224 Case Western
29 3.204 Macalaster
30 3.183 USC
31 3.165 William and Mary
32 3.102 Illinois B
33 3.114 Brandeis
34 3.049 Carnegie Mellon
35 3.047 Wilfrid Laurier A
36 3.009 Wisconsin A
37 3.030 Florida C
38 2.882 Villanova A
39 2.878 Ohio State B
40 2.813 Rochester A
41 2.784 Cornell
42 2.743 Virginia C
43 2.758 Michigan State
44 2.711 McMaster A
45 2.700 Miss State
46 2.703 WUSTL C
47 2.695 Oklahoma C
48 2.561 Toronto C
49 2.582 WUSTL B
50 2.553 Stanford
51 2.527 Georgia C
52 2.486 Drake B
53 2.512 Berry
54 2.460 Villanova B
55 2.437 Wisconsin B
56 2.395 Cincinnati B
57 2.388 Alabama B
58 2.366 Virginia Tech B
59 2.395 Bowling Green
60 2.372 Northwestern B
61 2.408 Oklahoma B
62 2.289 Iowa State
63 2.340 Missouri-Rolla
64 2.303 NYU
65 2.287 Kansas State A
66 2.246 UCLA B
67 2.260 Tulsa C
68 2.207 Yale C
69 2.191 Tulsa B
70 2.149 BC
71 2.121 Grinnell
72 2.068 Harding A
73 2.076 Hendrix
74 1.989 Emory
75 1.920 Saint Olaf B
76 1.920 Wilfrid Laurier B
77 1.910 Carleton B
78 1.952 Harding B
79 1.898 McMaster C
80 1.946 Texas-Dallas A
81 1.859 USC
82 1.836 McMaster B
83 1.765 SW Oklahoma St
84 1.761 McGill B
85 1.745 Berkeley
86 1.742 Truman State B
87 1.696 Olin
88 1.689 Kansas State B
89 1.634 British Columbia
90 1.535 Texas
91 1.465 Penn
92 1.454 Chicago F
93 1.306 Texas-Dallas B
94 1.222 Alabama C
95 1.173 Rochester B
96 1.077 Shorter
97 1.063 Texas A&M

CC field

Will not be predicted since only Valencia posted stats and no one seems to know if the other sectionals even occurred. Hopefully the wait for official bids is not due to communication problems regarding this.
Matt Weiner
Founder of hsquizbowl.org

User avatar
ValenciaQBowl
Auron
Posts: 2392
Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 2:25 pm
Location: Orlando, Florida

Post by ValenciaQBowl »

I have no idea whether waiting for CC stats is causing the delay (and is it a delay? I don't remember how long it usually takes, but it always seems like a while to me), but here's what I do know:

Alabama's CC SCT was won by Snead State, with Faulkner State second and Bevill State third.

Georgia's was won by Gulf Coast with Chipola second and South Georgia third.

Kansas's was won by Cloud County.

No one (with whom I've communicated) has any idea whether Mississippi's went down or not.

So Valencia Red, Snead, Gulf Coast and Cloud are in, as well as the Miss. winner (if any). Since this is a prediction thread, I'd guess that the three wildcards will be Faulkner, Chipola and Valencia Black, with Bevill getting in if there's no auto bid from Miss.

User avatar
Deckard Cain
Rikku
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 3:42 pm
Location: Ozark, Missouri

Post by Deckard Cain »

Invitations are now up on the NAQT website.

User avatar
nobthehobbit
Rikku
Posts: 293
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2006 1:18 am

Post by nobthehobbit »

Deckard Cain wrote:Invitations are now up on the NAQT website.
I have to say I'm pleased to see McGill get a wildcard bid in D2, as well as Toronto's getting bids in both divisions. I admit some surprise that UBC got a bid in D1 after our low turnout, but I suppose hosting is hosting.

Congrats to all the invitees and good luck at ICT!

Ray
Lulu
Posts: 68
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2004 10:29 pm
Location: Chicago, IL
Contact:

Post by Ray »

DAVE WE MADE IT

User avatar
Jeremy Gibbs Lemma
Rikku
Posts: 370
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:49 pm
Location: Kirksville, Missouri
Contact:

Post by Jeremy Gibbs Lemma »

I´m hoping for two teams to not be able to make it :P.
Kent Buxton
Truman State University '09
TSU- Science Education Grad Program '11

User avatar
jonpin
Forums Staff: Moderator
Posts: 2046
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:45 pm
Location: BCA NJ / WUSTL MO / Hackensack NJ

Post by jonpin »

Initial reactions to the list:

D-1 list only has 31 teams, pending a British team, so Minnesota is probably in (though I wonder if they will be fielding teams). British Columbia is on there, as is UCI (who someone said was going D-2). My guesses which I never got around to posting, had the other 29 teams there plus Maryland, Amherst, and Columbia, with Minnesota-North tops on the waitlist. Johns Hopkins is low on the waitlist because they were in a lower playoff group than North Carolina and I think the rule is that order-of-finish doesn't matter but playoff groups DO matter. If there were playoffs for all teams in the Northeast (something was said about it, but stats were never posted), that could explain why Amherst and Columbia dropped off.

D-2, Stanford does get a bid, as does Oklahoma (curious for the purposes of future eligibility... I assume it was the Oklahoma "B" team, not the "C" team winning the bid on PPTH). In addition to Stanford's bid, which I think is fair but didn't think would happen, I thought Georgia and Chicago E would make it as opposed to Dartmouth B.

User avatar
Jeremy Gibbs Lemma
Rikku
Posts: 370
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:49 pm
Location: Kirksville, Missouri
Contact:

Post by Jeremy Gibbs Lemma »

Since Oklahoma gets a team, does that mean they can combine the best of both teams to create a better team ? ... I´m not sure how that works.

If we somehow got in, for example, would I be able to bring my strongest team or is the sectional team locked as the ICT team ?
Kent Buxton
Truman State University '09
TSU- Science Education Grad Program '11

Susan
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 1827
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 12:43 am

Post by Susan »

You can field any eligible set of players you want; you're not locked in to your SCT team.

User avatar
Matt Weiner
Sin
Posts: 8413
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 8:34 pm
Location: Richmond, VA

Post by Matt Weiner »

Kentb426 wrote:Since Oklahoma gets a team, does that mean they can combine the best of both teams to create a better team ? ... I´m not sure how that works.

If we somehow got in, for example, would I be able to bring my strongest team or is the sectional team locked as the ICT team ?
Definitely not locked. Any otherwise division-eligible player at your school can play on any team you bring.
jonpin wrote:In addition to Stanford's bid, which I think is fair but didn't think would happen
I really don't know what to say about it; their bonus conversion of 11.45 would easily be the worst in the D2 field, but they played on D1 questions so that changes things. I came up with a few ways to adjust for D1 opponents in calculating PPTH and similar opponent-dependent statistics when creating my bid predictions, but any correction for things that are solely team-versus-question will be largely arbitrary. In the future I think that each field should qualify for at most one division--if only 4 D2 teams register then they need to either demand to play a multiple-round-robin among themselves (a demand which TDs should be obligated to fulfill) or they should be able give up the possibility of either qualifying or losing their eligibility for that year, and play with the D1 teams in a tournament that can only qualify D1 teams. Actually trying to determine qualification based on D2 teams playing D1 questions against D1 opponents seems like a futile task.
Matt Weiner
Founder of hsquizbowl.org

geekjohnson
Wakka
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 7:10 am
Location: Flomaton, AL
Contact:

Post by geekjohnson »

I'm glad NAQT cleared all the garbage up with the disputed SCT @ OK. State. I do find it depressing that Georgia B did not receive a bid, even if they are #1 on the waitlist. Especially with Vanderbilt B being invited ahead of them. Nothing against Vandy, but Georgia had them beat in every category except BPC and P/N, although they did have more negs. But with 2 head-to-head wins against Vandy, plus a higher finishing place, a higher PPTH, and a higher PPG. I guess that BPC and P/N counts exceptionally more than placement in the tournament and h2h victories.

It would also be good to know the CC bids. This is slightly strange to me, as I played for Faulker the last two years and the bids were always put up at the same time. Apparently the Miss. situation has hindered the process.

Overall it seems like a nice well-rounded field in D2, with no snubs, aside from Georgia.

Manyo2
Lulu
Posts: 71
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 6:11 pm
Location: Louisville, KY

Post by Manyo2 »

Not to dispute that Georgia deserved to get in more than we did, because they did, but they didn't beat us twice I don't believe. We only played them once.

geekjohnson
Wakka
Posts: 180
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 7:10 am
Location: Flomaton, AL
Contact:

Post by geekjohnson »

My bad. I thought you guys played them in the tie-breaker, but now that you mention it I guess Florida played you guys in it. Sorry about that, but congrats on the bid anyways.

User avatar
Zip Zap Rap Pants
Yuna
Posts: 780
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 12:55 am
Location: Richmond/Williamsburg, VA
Contact:

Post by Zip Zap Rap Pants »

Matt Morrison wrote:
I VERY roughly estimate us to be about 31st on the list not including CC's,
Haha, if Matt's estimations are correct, then oh yeah I'm good baby, it's all about instinct, who needs math anyway?

Here's how I always treated math classes:
Homer Simpson wrote: Boring!!!
Matt Morrison, William & Mary '10, Tour Guide &c., MA in History '12?

"All the cool people eat mangoes while they smoke blunts and do cannonballs off a trampoline into my hot tub..."
-Matt Weiner

“In beer there is strength,
In wine is wisdom,
In water is germs.”
-Unknown

new email: mpmorr at email dot wm dot edu

Eärendil
Kimahri
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 12:27 am
Location: Stanford, CA

Post by Eärendil »

I'm a little surprised of all the doubt surrounding Stanford's D2 qualification. Maybe that's just from being new to ICT, but here are my calculations:

Looking only at the PPB of all the teams playing on D1 questions from the Southeast, South, West, Iowa, Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, Canadian, Midwest, and Northwest sectionals (61 by my count), the average PPB is only 12.62. Our sectional also had, by Matt Weiner's rankings, two out of the top five and four out of the top 13 teams. Furthermore, rebracketing was done after 9 rounds and I've noticed NAQT questions tend to get harder as the rounds progress, so any benefit from playing on easier rounds was lost by playing better, more experienced teams. I don't know what NAQT used to calculate s-values, or how much they emphasized PPB, or even how the D2 set compared to the D1 set (I haven't seen it yet), but surely they must've taken it all into account.

Given all that, I just didn't think NAQT would not give us a bid. Maybe that's just the naiveté talking.

jazzerpoet
Wakka
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2004 10:30 pm
Location: Portland, Oregon
Contact:

Post by jazzerpoet »

D-2, Stanford does get a bid, as does Oklahoma (curious for the purposes of future eligibility... I assume it was the Oklahoma "B" team, not the "C" team winning the bid on PPTH). In addition to Stanford's bid, which I think is fair but didn't think would happen, I thought Georgia and Chicago E would make it as opposed to Dartmouth B.
I would like to think that it was the "C" team who qualified, since the "C" team had upperclassmen, while the "B" team was all-freshmen. Also, in the three-way championship series, the "C" team beat the "B" team, while the "C" team lost to Rolla (and Rolla lost to the "B" team).

vandyhawk
Tidus
Posts: 584
Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2003 3:42 am
Location: Seattle

Post by vandyhawk »

geekjohnson wrote:I do find it depressing that Georgia B did not receive a bid, even if they are #1 on the waitlist. Especially with Vanderbilt B being invited ahead of them. Nothing against Vandy, but Georgia had them beat in every category except BPC and P/N, although they did have more negs. But with 2 head-to-head wins against Vandy, plus a higher finishing place, a higher PPTH, and a higher PPG. I guess that BPC and P/N counts exceptionally more than placement in the tournament and h2h victories.
I guess a one point edge in bonus conversion outweighs a one point edge in ppth. I don't think points per game is taken into account given the variable number of questions, so you just look at ppth. Like Jack said, they played once, and head to head doesn't count either, nor do tie-breaker matches. All that being said, I'm sure our DII team must've been one of the last invitees, and Georgia will undoubtedly get a chance to compete if they desire.

User avatar
ChopinManiac
Lulu
Posts: 69
Joined: Sun Dec 28, 2003 2:16 pm
Contact:

Post by ChopinManiac »

Hey, not to be difficult or anything, but do you know how many wait-list teams are usually given opportunities to compete?

And also, I'm a little bit surprised that Vanderbilt was given a bid ahead of us, but we played them in the first match, and shot ourselves in the foot multiple times throughout the day, including a loss to our own b team, not to mention that Vandy vastly improved throughout the day in almost every statistic. So, if you go by bad losses, I'm not all that surprised that we were put on the wait-list. That being said, I think we are very much looking forward to competing if given the chance.
Last edited by ChopinManiac on Wed Feb 21, 2007 10:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
cvdwightw
Auron
Posts: 3446
Joined: Tue May 13, 2003 12:46 am
Location: Southern CA
Contact:

Post by cvdwightw »

Eärendil wrote:I don't know what NAQT used to calculate s-values, or how much they emphasized PPB, or even how the D2 set compared to the D1 set (I haven't seen it yet), but surely they must've taken it all into account.
Given that NAQT does somewhat adjust their S-value for strength of schedule, I wouldn't be surprised if you got a huge boost from playing five games against Division I qualifiers. Also, since NAQT demanded scoresheets from the host, they may have looked at a sample of the bonuses you got to see how your performance on those might have corresponded to how you would have performed on the Division II set. All in all, though, you guys deserved a bid. You gave us a pretty good game, and I'm sure your stats would have been up there had a fourth Division II team been found.

Susan
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 1827
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2003 12:43 am

Post by Susan »

ChopinManiac wrote:Hey, not to be difficult or anything, but do you know how many wait-list teams are usually given opportunities to compete?
2001 (St. Louis): 1 of 24 teams declined.
2002 (Chapel Hill): 3 of 32 teams declined.
2003 (Los Angeles): 8 of 24 (four-year school) teams declined.
2004 (St. Louis): 3 of 24 teams declined
2005 (Tulane): 3 of 24 teams declined.
2006 (College Park): 2 of 24 teams declined.

(2001 had a 24-team field overall for DII, 2002 had a 32-team field, and subsequent ICTs have had a 32-team field with eight slots reserved for community colleges.)

Generally, few teams get off the waitlist in DII. While Minnesota will certainly pose some travel problems for some teams, it's hard to say whether they'll have as great an effect on bid acceptance as they did in 2003.

your mom
Lulu
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 9:06 pm

Post by your mom »

HUZZAH! We rock.

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6368
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Post by grapesmoker »

I'll just go ahead and say right now that Brown B will not be accepting their bid. It's too hard to get to Minneapolis and we don't have enough people interested to justify sending a DII team.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

Nyktophoros
Lulu
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:55 pm

Post by Nyktophoros »

jazzerpoet wrote:
D-2, Stanford does get a bid, as does Oklahoma (curious for the purposes of future eligibility... I assume it was the Oklahoma "B" team, not the "C" team winning the bid on PPTH). In addition to Stanford's bid, which I think is fair but didn't think would happen, I thought Georgia and Chicago E would make it as opposed to Dartmouth B.
I would like to think that it was the "C" team who qualified, since the "C" team had upperclassmen, while the "B" team was all-freshmen. Also, in the three-way championship series, the "C" team beat the "B" team, while the "C" team lost to Rolla (and Rolla lost to the "B" team).
According to Chad Kubichek it was the B team which qualified.

User avatar
Jeremy Gibbs Lemma
Rikku
Posts: 370
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:49 pm
Location: Kirksville, Missouri
Contact:

Post by Jeremy Gibbs Lemma »

As of right now, my only remaining hope of getting to nationals lies in Yale or McGill. The field is almost set and only one team has declined so far... I figured we would have no problem given that so many teams in the past few years had declined but that may prove to be wrong.... I guess we'll find out soon.
Kent Buxton
Truman State University '09
TSU- Science Education Grad Program '11

User avatar
bsmith
Tidus
Posts: 586
Joined: Thu Dec 09, 2004 10:33 am
Location: Ottawa, ON

Post by bsmith »

Kentb426 wrote:As of right now, my only remaining hope of getting to nationals lies in Yale or McGill.
While McGill has requested the registration deadline extension for the past two ICTs, I don't think they'll end up going this year. Their main organizers graduated last year, and there is zero leadership amongst their D2 players.

User avatar
Jeremy Gibbs Lemma
Rikku
Posts: 370
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:49 pm
Location: Kirksville, Missouri
Contact:

Post by Jeremy Gibbs Lemma »

yeah that could be a problem .... well hopefully they can get everything together there

and I just heard that Yale is accepting so that just hasn´t been updated yet

so if we don´t make it, it will be time to go study like crazy this summer.
Kent Buxton
Truman State University '09
TSU- Science Education Grad Program '11

User avatar
Mr. Kwalter
Tidus
Posts: 617
Joined: Tue Nov 18, 2003 1:48 am
Location: Houston, TX

Post by Mr. Kwalter »

Kentb426 wrote:yeah that could be a problem .... well hopefully they can get everything together there

and I just heard that Yale is accepting so that just hasn´t been updated yet

so if we don´t make it, it will be time to go study like crazy this summer.
And/or you could attend ACF Nationals, which is a mere 8 hour drive from Kirksville. You can do it, we drove to Tulsa twice in two weekends and four times total this year, and that's a 9 hour trip from Austin. Also, it'd be cheaper than ICT. You should come, you seem like you've got good ideas about quizbowl and I think you'd enjoy the tournament, even though it is, in fact, a hard event.

User avatar
Jeremy Gibbs Lemma
Rikku
Posts: 370
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:49 pm
Location: Kirksville, Missouri
Contact:

Post by Jeremy Gibbs Lemma »

I think the plan right now is to go to ACF fall next year. While I would love to come to ACF Nationals this year (I know it isn´t very far), I don´t think I can afford another quiz bowl trip this year due to classes and trying to keep my gpa up. But next year, we will be at ACF fall for sure.

Also, be on the lookout for our first college tournament in a few years. I am not really sure when Truman last hosted a Brainal Leakage but the plan is to have one in the Fall, along with our college-style high school tournament.
Kent Buxton
Truman State University '09
TSU- Science Education Grad Program '11

User avatar
Jeremy Gibbs Lemma
Rikku
Posts: 370
Joined: Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:49 pm
Location: Kirksville, Missouri
Contact:

Post by Jeremy Gibbs Lemma »

Congrats to all the teams that made it. We'll just try to get everyone to sectionals next year and try to rock out.
Kent Buxton
Truman State University '09
TSU- Science Education Grad Program '11

User avatar
jonpin
Forums Staff: Moderator
Posts: 2046
Joined: Wed Feb 04, 2004 6:45 pm
Location: BCA NJ / WUSTL MO / Hackensack NJ

Post by jonpin »

Kentb426 wrote:Also, be on the lookout for our first college tournament in a few years. I am not really sure when Truman last hosted a Brainal Leakage but the plan is to have one in the Fall, along with our college-style high school tournament.
I've never been up there, but I think it was January '04. It conflicted with WUHSAC so we couldn't make it, but I think that year it still got held, either than or later.

EBD
Lulu
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2006 1:52 pm

Post by EBD »

Also, be on the lookout for our first college tournament in a few years. I am not really sure when Truman last hosted a Brainal Leakage but the plan is to have one in the Fall, along with our college-style high school tournament.
BLI- Jan 2003
BL2- Jan 2004
BL3- Cancelled
BL4- Also Cancelled

User avatar
Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN)
Chairman of Anti-Music Mafia Committee
Posts: 5640
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 11:46 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Post by Sen. Estes Kefauver (D-TN) »

Bill (I assume you're Bill), you are ruthless. You eat babies.
Charlie Dees, North Kansas City HS '08
"I won't say more because I know some of you parse everything I say." - Jeremy Gibbs

"At one TJ tournament the neg prize was the Hampshire College ultimate frisbee team (nude) calender featuring one Evan Silberman. In retrospect that could have been a disaster." - Harry White

User avatar
dxdtdemon
Rikku
Posts: 388
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 4:46 pm
Location: Beavercreek, OH

Post by dxdtdemon »

I know that the S in S-value stands for secret, but I was wondering approximately how much the strength of schedule is factored in since I'm trying to comprehend how my team (Ohio State A) never cracked 300 points in any round, went 4-8, and still had the 30th highest S-value.

Locked