Re: IFT's bearing on ICT selection

<<True, but GT was a special case last
year. One of our players, a very integral player,
unfortunately lost a family member the morning of the
tournament and obviously couldn't attend. We had to plead
our case to NAQT, and were one of the last teams
invited.>>

You may have plead your case, but no pleading was
actually needed as your invitation came in the normal
course of the process--albeit in "Stage 2" due to your
CCT championship, not through SCT performance.
Looking back on my notes on last year's invitations, the
original D1 field size was going to be 40 (later expanded
to 42). 15 teams qualified automatically as SCT
champs or undergrad champs, and four hosts additionally
opted for a D1 slot. 17 teams were then given
invitations based on SCT performance, to reach 36 teams, or
90% of the targeted 40. Then last year we had
reserved three spots for British teams, bringing invites
to 39. The final of the original 40 invitations then
went to Georgia Tech, as a CCT champ not yet invited.
Texas A&M was also in this category, but Georgia Tech's
CCT title came in a larger field, so they got the
first nod. Then we expanded to 42, for reasons I
forget, which let in Texas A&M and Johns Hopkins, which
was a CCT 2nd-place team. Seven of these 42 original
invitees either declined, or first accepted and then later
declined, so we wound up going well into the waitlist.
Thanks to the late withdrawals, always an unfortunate
thing, some of those offers to waitlisted teams came too
late to allow teams who would have accepted earlier to
make affordable travel arrangements, and couldn't be
accepted when the offers finally came. In the end, I think
offers were made, at least technically, to fully 19
waitlisted teams in order to make up the seven original
invitations that were eventually declined. In the end, we
took two teams originally registering as standby, and
had 41 in the tournament.

In contrast to
Division 1, the Division 2 waitlist last year was
untouched. We wanted 24 teams, but after the original 24
were invited we immediately invited two more that
should have been in the first 24 but weren't, due to a
statistical problem not discovered until after the original
list was announced. We figured that after two teams
declined, we'd stick at 24, and not go to the waitlist
until a 3rd team declined. However, of the 26 teams
given invitations, in the end 25 accepted, so we wound
up going with 26, replacing the only team declining,
Kentucky, with De Pauw, which had started out 2nd on a
waitlist that had no movement, but had then agreed to come
to Boston in any case as a standby team.

And
now I've gone rather far afield from commenting on
the invitation to GT last year on the basis of CCT
rather than SCT performance, but on the eve of the
inevitable anxieties about the initial list of ICT
invitations I found it interesting myself to remember what
happened with the waitlists last year, and how very
different the situation wound up being in that respect in
the different divisions.

Eric H.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:43 AM EST EST