Defence of fixed-number qualifying

Currently as the situation stands, there is, IMO,
a perverse incentive for teams to go to 'perceived'
weaker regions where they can rack up the stats against
lower-quality teams. 

Has the time come for NAQT to
create pre-determined regions? In my honest opinion, I
think this time has come. Certainly there will be some
travel considerations; however, this should balance out
over the seasons, and certainly NAQT can grant
exceptions to schools on the border of a region a la CBI.


Having fixed numbers of teams qualifying from each
region would reduce this perverse incentive. A team
going to a weak region would have a difficult time
qualifying as there are fewer spots available (and running
up stats against the very weak teams in that region
won't do any good if you can't beat the powers that are
already in those regions) and a team who stays in a
strong region will have an easier time qualifying as
going .500 in the Region of Death will mean a
qualifying spot. 

The number of teams qualifying from
a region to Nationals will be changed based on the
performance of that region's teams at Nationals, providing an
incentive to continue to do well for ALL
teams.

Another idea would be to have the Division I and Division
II tournaments at separate locations, with each
tournament having 30-36 teams. This I think would reduce the
staffing problem and organizational difficulties of
running a giant 60-team tournament, which even Penn with
its 10 years of experience can still have
glitches.

BTW, I do hope ladder play will be taken down this
season. 

Shawn Pickrell

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