Difference between revisions of ""stanford housewrite""
m (minor) |
m |
||
| (One intermediate revision by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
Four of the seven teams experienced ''more'' dead tossups at Stanford Housewrite than at Nationals, suggesting that tossups were less well-calibrated. A lack of buzzpoint data at both tournaments and the non-use of powers at Nationals precludes exploring issues such as how deep tossups went on average before being answered. | Four of the seven teams experienced ''more'' dead tossups at Stanford Housewrite than at Nationals, suggesting that tossups were less well-calibrated. A lack of buzzpoint data at both tournaments and the non-use of powers at Nationals precludes exploring issues such as how deep tossups went on average before being answered. | ||
| + | {{-}} | ||
| − | |||
==Mirrors== | ==Mirrors== | ||
{| class="wikitable sortable" | {| class="wikitable sortable" | ||
| Line 118: | Line 118: | ||
|[[Chicago]] | |[[Chicago]] | ||
|3/5/2016 | |3/5/2016 | ||
| − | | | + | |[[Athena Kern]] |
|[[WUSTL]] | |[[WUSTL]] | ||
|"Kurtis et al"<br/>([[Kurtis Droge]], [[Billy Busse]], [[Morgan Venkus]], [[Chinmay Kansara]]) | |"Kurtis et al"<br/>([[Kurtis Droge]], [[Billy Busse]], [[Morgan Venkus]], [[Chinmay Kansara]]) | ||
Latest revision as of 05:57, 2 July 2021
| "stanford housewrite" | |
|---|---|
| Competition season | 2015–2016 |
| School(s) | Stanford |
| Head editor(s) | Stephen Liu |
| Difficulty | Nats-minus |
| First mirror | February 2, 2016 |
| Announcement | link |
| Packets | link |
"stanford housewrite" was a nats-minus housewrite by Stanford for the 2016 season. The official name of the set is in lowercase with quotation marks.
The set introduced the concept of "Nationals-minus" difficulty, which it described as "noticeably harder than tournaments such as ACF Regionals and Penn Bowl, but not as hard as ACF Nationals or last year’s George Oppen."[1]
Evaluation of difficulty
Because many teams played both "stanford housewrite" and 2016 ACF Nationals two months later with the exact same lineups, the concept of "nats-minus" difficulty can be evaluated by directly comparing metrics:
| "stanford housewrite" | 2016 ACF Nationals | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Team | PPB | DTG* | PPB | DTG* |
| Berkeley A | 19.55 | 1.81 | 17.02 | 1.30 |
| Chicago A | 21.32 | 0.86 | 20.29 | 0.50 |
| Chicago B | 17.46 | 1.69 | 14.23 | 2.24 |
| Maryland | 20.40 | 1.20 | 18.48 | 1.11 |
| Michigan | 21.77 | 1.00 | 20.22 | 1.05 |
| Minnesota | 19.05 | 1.70 | 16.05 | 2.10 |
| Oxford | 18.14 | 2.00 | 15.03 | 1.70 |
* DTG = dead tossups per game involving this team, incorporating both their skill and that of their total opponents
Every team had a higher PPB at Stanford Housewrite than ACF Nationals, and those who had common lineups had a higher PPB still at ACF Regionals, suggesting that the "between Regionals and Nationals" difficulty was achieved in the bonus questions.
Four of the seven teams experienced more dead tossups at Stanford Housewrite than at Nationals, suggesting that tossups were less well-calibrated. A lack of buzzpoint data at both tournaments and the non-use of powers at Nationals precludes exploring issues such as how deep tossups went on average before being answered.
Mirrors
The Oklahoma mirror was only 7 rounds and was forced to change formats after its fifth round when two of the eight total players spread across its five teams had to leave. The remaining players were consolidated into "Oklahoma" and "Other Dudes" for the last two rounds".
Many of the sites also mirrored Christmas Present and Cottage Bowl.
References
- ↑ Announcement: "stanford housewrite" by Galadedrid Damodred » Sun Oct 04, 2015 3:15 pm