NAQT SCT Midwest Results

Captain Sinico · Post by **Captain Sinico** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 8:05 am

In brief: Chicago A defeated Michigan A in an advantaged three-game final to win the division 1 championship.
Chicago B took the undergraduate championship, clearing the field by several games.
Michigan beat-out Chicago A for the division 2 chamionship.
Full results will follow later.

Unable to compare with all the top players who complain about NAQT,
MaS

suds1000 · Post by **suds1000** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 8:03 pm

The NAQT Midwest SCT was held here at UIUC on Saturday.

Chicago A (Seth Teitler, Selene Koo, Susan Ferrari, and Pericles Abbasi) defeated Michigan A (Adam Kemezis, Will Turner, and Dave Rappaport) in the first of a two-game finals series to win in Division I, and Chicago B (Seth Samelson, Kannan Mahadevan, Bruce Arthur, and Ray Sun) took third and won the all-undergraduate title by going 8-4.

In Division II, Michigan (Deskin Miller, Andy Kravis, Yeugeny Shrago) went undefeated and claimed the title. Depauw (Andrew Ibendahl, Alan Heien, Mary Weston, and Anna Garst) finished second at 9-2, while Chicago (John Laycock, Minda Zhang, Nolan Esser, and Harry Altman) took third at 8-3. UIUC (Scott Green, Donald Taylor, Eddie Ruan, and Sulee Cao) finished fourth.

The four highest scorers in Division I were:

1. Adam Kemezis (Michigan A)
2. Seth Teitler (Chicago A)
3. Andrew Brantley (Washington University)
4. Chris Grubb (Rose-Hulman)

The four highest scorers in Division II were:

1. Andy Kravis (Michigan)
1. Alan Heien (Depauw, tied with Andy Kravis)
3. Kent Buxton (Truman State A)
4. Donald Taylor (UIUC)

Division I stats can be found here:

http://netfiles.uiuc.edu/msorice/www/SC ... dings.html

Division II stats can be found here:

http://netfiles.uiuc.edu/msorice/www/SC ... dings.html

I am indebted to the following people, without whose efforts the tournament would not have been possible:

My co-director, Steven Canning, who helped me with planning and scheduling, and without whom I probably would have gone insane while trying to put a tournament of this size together.

The moderators, who spent their valuable time helping me run this tournament: Mike Sorice, Dom Ricci, Andrew Yaphe, Ed De Guzman, Tom Phillips, Steven Canning, Andrew Ullsperger, Stan Jastrzebski, Les from Cincinnati, Bob from Eureka, and Matt from Bradley.

The scorekeepers, who also spent their valuable time helping me run this tournament: Anne Shivers, Micah Rumsey, Kelly Tourdot, Mark, Mr. and Mrs. Taylor, and all of the teams whose players helped out during their byes.

Our treasurer, Tom Phillips, who took care of all of the financial stuff, invoices, and money collection for the team.

Our president, Scott Green, who got an extra prize for us to give away and obtained extra buzzer systems for us at the last minute.

Our alumna Dawn Owens-Nicholson, who hooked us up with a bunch of free copies.

All the teams, who put up with the fact that we were understaffed like mad and didn't complain about the delays. There were some miscommunication issues with one of the moderators, who left for part of the tournament in order to visit a family member, leaving us a bit short on staff briefly. But overall, everything turned out all right, and I hope you guys had a good time.

Thanks again to everyone, and to NAQT for supplying the questions. I hope we'll be able to discuss the set fairly soon.

--Sudheer Potru
Co-TD, NAQT Midwest SCT 2006

jonpin · Post by **jonpin** » Sun Feb 12, 2006 8:34 pm

Are results for D2 after the upper and lower playoff brackets available?

suds1000 · Post by **suds1000** » Tue Feb 14, 2006 1:40 pm

The D2 playoff stats are being entered, and will hopefully be available sometime in the next couple of days.

suds1000 · Post by **suds1000** » Wed Feb 15, 2006 6:04 pm

The stats have been updated to reflect both the finals game in Division I and the playoffs of Division II.

There was an error made in determining the final standings for Division II. The top four teams are as follows:

1. Michigan (11-0)
2. Depauw (9-2)
3. Chicago (8-3)
4. UIUC (7-4)

I apologize to anyone who may have been affected, and congratulations to Depauw on their second-place finish.

--Sudheer

hip swivels · Post by **hip swivels** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 4:24 am

I just have a small question about the ranking system, and I hope that it is not a very silly one. It appears that teams with the same overall record are ranked according to points per game. Why is it done this way when the matches are timed and not all the teams have the same point-scoring opportunities?

alkrav112 · Post by **alkrav112** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 4:27 am

If I am not mistaken, this is a default of the software, and perhaps the ties would, for this format, be better broken by points per tossup heard. I don't think that will matter in NAQT's "secret formulation" of the Nationals qualifiers, though...

Someone please correct me if I am wrong about the software and argue with me if I am wrong about the better way to rank teams.

Jeremy Gibbs Paradox · Thu Feb 16, 2006 11:03 am

suds1000 wrote:The stats have been updated to reflect both the finals game in Division I and the playoffs of Division II.

There was an error made in determining the final standings for Division II. The top four teams are as follows:

1. Michigan (11-0)
2. Depauw (9-2)
3. Chicago (8-3)
4. UIUC (7-4)

I apologize to anyone who may have been affected, and congratulations to Depauw on their second-place finish.

--Sudheer

Wait, this still makes no sense.

OK the way I am looking at the stats as they came out: 4 teams place 4th with a 7-4 record: UIUC, NW, Truman State A, and WUSTL A. All four teams were in the same rr bracket before playoffs. After playoffs they all have the same record for the day hence the tie. But in the prelims, WUSTL beat all 3 of the other teams. How is this logjam broken?

Sean

suds1000 · Post by **suds1000** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 1:26 pm

You're right, Sean...I guess Wash U A did finish fourth technically by virtue of head-to-head wins. In my haste to post a correction yesterday, I didn't bother to look at the actual game scores.

Of the teams tied with 7-4 records in Division II, here's the technical order of finish:

4. Washington University A
5. UIUC
6. Northwestern
7. Truman State A

However, I don't believe that NAQT uses head-to-head matches as a tiebreaker, so maybe according to their rules, this new ranking doesn't matter, and it probably won't affect who gets an ICT bid.

So, take this order of finish for what it's worth to you, as I doubt NAQT will look at it. Anyway, Sean, thanks for bringing this to my attention.

--Sudheer

jonpin · Post by **jonpin** » Thu Feb 16, 2006 2:33 pm

Actually Truman A was in the lower playoff bracket, so they are 9th place. From what I can tell, it goes
4-6 Ill/Nwest/WashU
7 Cincy A
8 Truman B

9 Truman A
10 WashU B
11 Eureka and so forth...

(which, upon checking, is how NAQT has the teams ranked on their website)

Jeremy Gibbs Paradox · Thu Feb 16, 2006 5:07 pm

jonpin wrote:Actually Truman A was in the lower playoff bracket, so they are 9th place. From what I can tell, it goes
4-6 Ill/Nwest/WashU
7 Cincy A
8 Truman B

9 Truman A
10 WashU B
11 Eureka and so forth...

(which, upon checking, is how NAQT has the teams ranked on their website)

Yeah so basically what Sudheer had with the 4-6 (WUSTL, UIUC, NW) then what you have 7 and on Jon.