good lord, this has generated a huge amount of discussion. i think that what eric (and others) are objecting to is the fact that some teams have a chance at an automatic bid and some don't; and this is perceived to be unfair. it certainly seems to me to be unfair, if only slightly, since i have every confidence in NAQT's ability to determine the absolute strength of teams using their complicated formula. but it raises the question: well, if the formula is so good (and surely, it is), why are there any automatic bids at all? why not just use the S-value for everybody and take the top [n] teams? surely NAQT does want to provide a strong incentive for actually winning your SCT. but that can be factored into the S-value, along with appropriate corrections for the quality of teams they had to beat in order to win it. as an aside (i guess two asides), i think that it's wonderful that NAQT is so prompt to respond to the concerns of its customers. regardless of what happens this year regarding ICT bids (and i'm sure it'll be perfectly fair and i'm equally sure that somebody will find something to gripe about anyway), kudos to them for their professionalism in handling our questions. second, i really do think that any halfway decent team will get to play if they want to play because of the venue, so much of this discussion will be moot. hopefully the ICT will have a strong field anyway, but i would honestly be surprised if it were as strong as in past years. joon
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:46 AM EST EST