2008 TJIAT (10/18/08) at TJHSST

[cvdwightw]

And finally, the "games played" for Elaine and Thomas don't add up correctly; admittedly, math isn't my strong point-- but I'm pretty sure that 1.0 + 1.0 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 1.0 = 5.0 (not 5.1), and 1.0 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 = 3.0 (not 2.9), as listed on their player detail tables. In fact, I'm also pretty sure that each of them played exactly half of all seven prelim games... but I may have to go back and check my own score sheets on that.

I haven't checked and seen the stats, but if this was a timed tournament, then it makes perfect sense. SQBS calculates "games played" by ((tossups heard)/(total tossups heard)) * (games). Therefore it's possible that although your players alternated halves, one of them heard more tossups than the other, hence the illusory "two halves don't make a full game" phenomenon.

[Robbie Ram]

And finally, the "games played" for Elaine and Thomas don't add up correctly; admittedly, math isn't my strong point-- but I'm pretty sure that 1.0 + 1.0 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 1.0 = 5.0 (not 5.1), and 1.0 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 = 3.0 (not 2.9), as listed on their player detail tables. In fact, I'm also pretty sure that each of them played exactly half of all seven prelim games... but I may have to go back and check my own score sheets on that.

I haven't checked and seen the stats, but if this was a timed tournament, then it makes perfect sense. SQBS calculates "games played" by ((tossups heard)/(total tossups heard)) * (games). Therefore it's possible that although your players alternated halves, one of them heard more tossups than the other, hence the illusory "two halves don't make a full game" phenomenon.

OK, that makes sense. But shouldn't the stats for each round reflect that? In other words, if Elaine heard 12 questions in a round and Thomas heard 8 in the same round, shouldn't their individual stats for that round indicate "0.6" and "0.4" games played, respectively?

[cvdwightw]

OK, that makes sense. But shouldn't the stats for each round reflect that? In other words, if Elaine heard 12 questions in a round and Thomas heard 8 in the same round, shouldn't their individual stats for that round indicate "0.6" and "0.4" games played, respectively?

I went back to the "source material" to find the problem.

Only in two half-games did they hear different numbers of tossups.

Against Churchill B, Elaine heard 10 tossups and Thomas heard 9. 10/19 ~= .53 which SQBS rounds to .5 in the report. 9/19 ~= .47 which SQBS rounds to .5 in the report.

Against Walter Johnson, Elaine heard 9 tossups and Thomas heard 8. 9/17 ~= .53 which SQBS rounds to .5 in the report. 8/17 ~= .47 which SQBS rounds to .5 in the report.

But when SQBS takes total games, Elaine heard 0.53+0.53 ~= 1.06 games, which SQBS rounds to 1.1 in the report, while Thomas heard 0.47+0.47 ~= 0.94 games, which SQBS rounds to 0.9 in the report.

Hope that makes sense.

[Allez Cuisine]

Full Stats: attached :-p

I apologize for the ridiculous delay in posting these stats and promise that I will never allow it to happen again while I am tournament director. I need to point out that there *are* scoresheets missing (I dunno what some of our scorekeepers did to them after *not* filling them in completely). Also, as the card system was used for the consolation bracket, the few scoresheets lacking the appropriate header (i.e. without a round number on it) had rounds assigned to them by the Flying Spaghetti Monster. If there are any questions, complaints, comments, or if you just want to talk about your day, please feel free to email me at [email protected]

again, my humble apologies

--g

[Whiter Hydra]

Prelim stats and full stats are now online.