Re: ACF bonus conversion rough statistics

• From: tgallows <no_reply_at_yahoogroups.com>
• Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 01:34:41 -0000
• Message-ID: <aa523h+9g9a_at_...>

     Actually, I think bonus conversion for the X bracket is higher
than this.  The stat sheet has FAU scoring -26 instead of 260 against
Furman, dropping our bonus conversion from around 14ppb in the RR to
something under 11.

--Raj Dhuwalia, FAU

--- In quizbowl_at_y..., cooterchekov <no_reply_at_y...> wrote:
> The following table lists the sum of bonus conversions for the first 
> n places in each bracket, where n goes from 1 to 9:
> 
> 	Xenophon	Yokomitsu
Zeromski
> 1	18.18
	 15.90
	 16.62
> 2	33.73
	 31.53
	 32.70
> 3	44.04
	 44.71
	 46.90
> 4	53.74
	 55.94
	 63.09
> 5	63.26
	 65.17
	 77.80
> 6	74.76
	 75.06
	 89.42
> 7	81.46
	 84.44
	 96.49
> 8	87.46
	 94.00
	102.99
> 9	91.93
	100.25		106.05
> 
> Assuming that bonus conversion (by itself) is enough to indicate the 
> ability of a team, we can see that: through the first 2 places of 
> each bracket, brackets were equal; through the first 4 places, the Z 
> bracket was harder. Why? Harvard's bonus conversion was almost 17ppb. 
> A strong supporting performance by Chicago A increased the strength 
> of the Z bracket even further.
> 
> How would we have fixed this? Knowing what we know now (that Virginia 
> wasn't bringing Steve Perry), we might have moved Chicago A or 
> Harvard or both to other brackets.
> 
> However, as they say, that's why we play the games.
> 
> I would have liked to have run the 28-team format, but unfortunately 
> it simply wasn't within the means we had available (short packets, 
> short teams).
> 
> ERS