A Word about...

• From: twoclubs
• Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2001 12:42:45 -0800
• Message-ID: <000T9O4A5.000MTV9OV.12170551-quizbowl_at_...>

<<Basically, they demonstrated that a lot
depends on what calculations you decide to make; it is up
to other people to decide whether or not
the
calculations make sense.>>

Thank you for the
rhetorical statement - the main purpose of my statistical
analysis was that there ARE certain methods which IMO are
better indicators than the formula NAQT used this year.
Frankly, I couldn't care less about what other people
think: the individuality of an opinion - assuming it
contains a logical basis and presents a certain
clarification or argument - is far greater in importance than
the repulsive groupthink that pervades our society.
Intellectual arguments are NOT verified by consensus popular
opinion, nor are individual opinions verified by
statistics - if I say that Maryland is a better team than
UPenn, Samer can say UPenn is better than Maryland.
While I use head-to-head matchups and Samer (and NAQT)
uses total points scored, each is correct in their
opinion. However, I believe my logic has a more correct
fundamental basis, and thus I continue to post and present
arguments in our defense - not for this year's results, but
for future teams who may be slotted in the same
position.

<<MO, I agree with NAQT's decision not to make an a
posteriori correction. I also agree that something *should*
be done next year to prevent a situation like this
for next year.>>

Agreed. Changes after
the fact only lead to a decrease in
credibility.


One more point for those who care: take a look at the
team statistics from the George Washington tournament
this past weekend, and note the similarities between
GW and the NAQT MA sectionals. Despite the obvious
differences b/w timed/untimed, NAQT/ACF, and masters/solely
school-based teams, there again exists a non-linear
correlation b/w points scored and order of finish. Of course,
we again had to play well in close games, (which I
still think is of paramount importance in being a
top-notch team: see other posts for details) but if NAQT
had sanctioned the tournament, we would have again
been penalized for not scoring at the top for the
teams at the tournament despite finishing
third.

BTW, kudos for GW for two fine tournaments run over
the weekend...

-Shaun