> DIVISION II: The tournament was a round-robin, followed by division > into three groups of 4 (or 3 in the case of the middle bracket). The > winner in this division was much less clear-cut. Harvard B and > Brandeis Parasite both had two losses; however, upon reviewing the > score sheets, it was found that Harvard had beaten Brandeis in both > of their meetings, and therefore won the tournament. Unfortunately this tie-breaker is not allowed by NAQT's tie-breaker policy: http://www.naqt.com/tie-breaker-policy.html which explicitly forbids head-to-head based tie-breakers. Both teams finished 11-2 and there should have been a single-game final to determine the championship. Since this was not done, NAQT declares both teams co-champions of the division but will apply the only permitted tie-breaker that is not based on further play (points per tossup heard) to determine the recipient of the automatic bid. In this case, that is Harvard B. Please note that the application of this statistical tie-breaker at the tournament itself would not have been allowed; when packets remain, ties must be decided by further play. In the future, if situations like this arise, tournament officials should contact NAQT personnel on site or by telephone to make sure that a proposed resolution is in accordance with NAQT policy. -- 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