a modest proposal...for playoff formats

[Zip Zap Rap Pants]

ok, i know everybody has an opinion about certain playoff formats, but here's two new ideas i thought about:

1. this is sort of derived from uva's 25 team format, but i just think it would be fair if you took the top 16, and then any teams with the same record as the 16th ranked team would also get in. b/c i mean total points have too much weight i think. if you're up by 100 with 5 tu's left, you're not really worried about leading by 300, you kinda relax a bit. also, to do everything so precisely by total points like that is to deny that brackets are hardly ever put together perfectly, teams get harder schedules or easier schedules all the time. letting around 22 teams in allows some leeway for that. well we probably couldnt use this for our house written tournament since we'd have to write an extra round, but oh well, maybe for an naqt tournament....

2. in a national tournament (or any two day tournament), since its about who's the best of the best, how about doing a 16 team (or some form of 4 rounds) single elimination playoff with ONE CATCH, each round is a series of 3 matches, best 2 out of 3 wins. that way you dont get fluke wins like in normal single elimination, and you dont get the huge advantage for the lone winning bracket team at the end of double elimination (where its close to impossible for their opponent to come up and win 2 in a row, big props to c-ville doing just that against spotswood by the way). heh, maybe somebody could convince to convince hentzel to do that one year. or, maybe they could establish a patrick press national tournament with that playoff format lol

[jewtemplar]

The first format is roughly feasible, only with the stipulation that undefeated or highly ranked teams don't play the first round. Otherwise the structure goes to hell.

The second format is, I think, excessive. It would take forever, and would result in tremendous numbers of overkill matches that do little to lend legitimacy to the results.

[STPickrell]

The first format is roughly feasible, only with the stipulation that undefeated or highly ranked teams don't play the first round. Otherwise the structure goes to hell.

The second format is, I think, excessive. It would take forever, and would result in tremendous numbers of overkill matches that do little to lend legitimacy to the results.

How about longer matches using roughly the same format? Regular season or preliminary matches would be the normal length.

So for NAQT, it'd be three halves.

For Spotswood's tournament, it'd be 10 tossups, 10 category (directed) questions and 20 tossups with bonuses instead of 10.

For VHSL format, it could be 20 tossups, 15 directed questions then 20 tossups.

[Zip Zap Rap Pants]

The first format is roughly feasible, only with the stipulation that undefeated or highly ranked teams don't play the first round. Otherwise the structure goes to hell.

yea i forgot to mention, most of the teams would receive a 1st round bye. and the long-round format is actually a pretty good idea, Mr. Pickrell. Just to ensure no flukes, you know.

[dtaylor4]

How about longer matches using roughly the same format? Regular season or preliminary matches would be the normal length.

So for NAQT, it'd be three halves.

For Spotswood's tournament, it'd be 10 tossups, 10 category (directed) questions and 20 tossups with bonuses instead of 10.

For VHSL format, it could be 20 tossups, 15 directed questions then 20 tossups.

In Illinois, that would be perfect. The afternoon matches would have an extra half, but for IHSA state series, that might not work, since that would mean 45 tu/bonuses matches, and for regionals which already are late enough, people would be seriously ticked.

[emactruman]

It might work. I like the extra teams concept better than the best of 3 series purely due to time constraints.