There appear to be a few minor errors with the stats, which we'll fix and re-upload tonight.
I have a rather complicated announcement concerning the result of the GDS B - St. Joseph's A playoff game in round 10 (recorded as a 270-265 GDS B win). It seems that, by verification of both teams, St. Joe's lodged a protest on a tossup with the understanding that it would be resolved if it mattered at the end of the game. Since it did matter, both teams then again confirmed with the moderator that he would take care of protest resolution, and went to their final round games. Unfortunately, this never happened, and I didn't even hear about the protest until I happened to strike up a conversation after the finals with a player from GDS B.
After looking into the protest and discussing the matter with the other two parties, it's clear to me that there WAS a protest filed in accordance with the rules, and that the staffer did not represent the situation accurately when asked about it before we broke down the tournament site. As to the actual protest, while I cannot go into specifics regarding the question, I will attempt an explanation:
1) St. Joe's buzzed in on the beginning of a tossup's third clue and gave an answer that was equally specific as the answer line, and identically correct, pertaining to the first and third clues.
2) The reader prompted the player, who did not add anything more (for reasons which will become clear in a second), negged him, and finished for GDS B, who got the tossup, earning 10 points on the question and 10 points on the bonus.
3) St. Joe's protested, at the time over the issue of the second clue being incorrect in regards to both their answer and the question line.
It is indisputable that the second clue was entirely incorrect. It is further indisputable that the St. Joe's player's answer was at least equally as correct and specific as the answer line for the first and third clues, and thus should absolutely have been prompted, and really should have been accepted since giving the question line's answer rather than theirs would have required reading the mind of the packet author. The Maryland protest committee has talked this over, and has decided to award the tossup to the St. Joe's player, for giving an answer that was equally correct and no more general than the answer line. By rule, these facts make the buzz correct, and St. Joe's is awarded 15 points for the removed neg and the question value, GDS B loses the 20 points they earned on the bounceback, and St. Joe's wins 280-250 - I'm sorry a bonus can't be read to you over skype, Coach Powers, but hopefully this will be a satisfactory result.
I can't apologize enough for the fact that his happened, or that it has to be resolved so long after the fact - I hope GDS B does not feel cheated, for they did absolutely nothing wrong and played a great game and tournament. The moderator's conduct, both after the game and later when I spoke to him, are bizarre and inexcusable, and do not reflect the standards we try to uphold at our tournaments. It's entirely my fault that teams were put in a position where this lapse in judgment could have affected them, and I sincerely apologize. If teams have any questions, please feel free to email me.
EDIT: Sorry that stats aren't in playoff brackets and appear quite confusing - we'll get this fixed as well tonight, and list the final order of finish for teams.
University of Chicago, 2016
University of Maryland, 2014