Re: Ladder Play (part 2)

[continued from previous
message]

(Incidentally, I'm always frustrated by teams complaining about
repeat matchups in the ladder play playoffs. In
tournaments with more traditional playoffs that involve only
the top teams, rematches are the norm--nobody
complains when a tournament comes down to a two out of
three final between teams that already played twice
before in a round robin and then split field secondary
round robin. In the NAQT ICT format there are no
rematches until the final four rounds, which are playoffs
against exactly those teams adjacent to you in the
standings and with whom you are in direct competition for
final positioning. A rematch or two here, in this sort
of playoff situation, shouldn't be so worrisome to
people. If you have a second match with the same team--or
even, with one team, a third match--it is because those
are exactly the teams with whom you are contesting
for final positioning; they should be the teams with
which you are most closely matched as to performance in
the tournament.)

AEI also
writes:
"Moreover, I am not at all clear as to how four rounds of
ladder play is an effective technique to decide who are
the "top two teams," in light of the fact that the
power matchings prior to that are also determined by
the tournament directors."

This, along with
your later question "Can NAQT guarantee that a team
that goes undefeated in its first eleven rounds will
obtain a spot amongst the top six?" is the clearest
indication that you weren't quite understanding how the
format works. (I'm not attacking you for not
understanding; it is a more complicated format than the norm,
and can easily be misunderstood. The explanation here
is to inform.) The power matchings of rounds 7-11
are not determined by the "tournament directors," as
if they could be subjective or capricious decisions,
but by a computer program based on teams records to
that point, with points tiebreakers as needed. (With,
however, rematches excluded.) Five rounds of such power
matching is a very efficient means of ordering teams
fairly heading into the ladder rounds. The format is
extremely effective in determining the top two teams -- you
can't get there by a fluke, but only through terrific
consistency over a rather grueling schedule in which most of
your matches--all of them after round 6--have been
only against other top teams. Of _course_ a team that
goes undefeated over their first 11 rounds will be in
the top six! In fact, there can be only one such
team, and that team would by definition be #1 going
into ladder play. Any teams that are undefeated after
their first six matches immediately begin to play one
another in power matched rounds, and very quickly there
can be only one such team left.

Eric
H.

P.S. Despite the fact that I jumped in with this post,
Rob Hentzel is the ICT tournament director, and
further questions or comments about the format or any
other aspect of the ICT other than the invitations
process (which I did coordinate) should be directed to
him.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:42 AM EST EST