> However, I do think that the formula should have a strong weight on > wins (2 points for D1 win, 1 point for D2 win) or something like > that. This ensures that winning games still *means* something. > After all, the object of a quizbowl game is not to answer 75% of > tossups and get 20 on every bonus. The object of a game is to have > more points than your opponent when time runs out or 28 tossups are > read. Joshua -- NAQT agrees, in principle, that quiz bowl is about winning games and not scoring points, a belief that motivates our tie-breaker policy (for example): http://www.naqt.com/tie-breaker-policy.html Based on feedback from previous SCT/ICTs (notably 2000), we have correction terms in our statistics for wins and losses. It is very difficult (more difficult than it was up until 2000) for a team to be invited ahead of one that finished with more wins (or in a higher playoff bracket) at the same Sectional. At the same time, finishing higher than teams with higher statistics, gives a boost to your own statistics in comparision with teams across the country. So even if you barely squeak by in a large number of wins and get blown out in a smaller number of losses, you will still do well with respect to NAQT's statistical measures. -- R. Robert Hentzel President and Chief Technical Officer, National Academic Quiz Tournaments, LLC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST