"It's true that, as the page says, SFU C (Division II) had a 7-3 record and SFU A (Division I) had a 6-5 record, but the Division I and II fields were separated after the combined round-robin. After the Division I rounds, SFU A and Whitman A were the top Division I all-undergrad teams, both with 5-5 records, so they played a final game to decide the Undergraduate championship. SFU A won that game." Ack! OK, the fault was mine in not yet looking past the records and standings as listed on the spreadsheet of results that was sent. The host hadn't explained the format employed, but did say that SFU A was the undergraduate champion. Looking at the won-loss records, I mistakenly thought this was an error arising from an assumption that a Division II team wasn't eligible for the UG title (which they are, in a combined field). I didn't look closely enough to see that this tournament was partly combined and partly separated, and that it played an undergraduate title game. So now I'm glad Peter pointed this out before we announced invitations. Which we are just about ready to do, pending word on which division a couple of our hosts are choosing, and a search for some missing playoff statistics in the Midsouth, which could make a difference for a team or two there. Eric Hillemann NAQT invitations coordinator P.S. There are a few errors on the website results page right now, though not involving champions -- corrections to some teams' won-lost records, mostly. These have been reported, but due to one person's moving and another's being on the road, may or may not be corrected immediately. Ditto for the correction of the 2001 title.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:45 AM EST EST