--- In quizbowl_at_yahoogroups.com, jpahk <no_reply_at_y...> wrote: > jerry is right. berkeley A defeated michigan A in a slightly > unorthodox, but highly appropriate, "play-in" game, which was sort of > like resolving a protest under the "trial by ordeal" system, for the > right to get smacked down by chicago in the finals. due to some > weirdness of format, which is unfortunate for michigan but (in my > opinion) better than some of the drawbacks of other formats, michigan > A slipped behind maryland A, who won all of their playoff matches > against substantially weaker competition, to fall to 4th place. i > think everybody who was at the tournament recognized that michigan > and berkeley played at a higher level than any other teams; neither > lost a match to anybody other than each other and chicago. > I concur with Jerry and Joon that Berkeley got the honor of witnessing the ascension of Subash among the greatest players of all time. Of the 12 powers in the final, Subash had 8 of them. The game was over with over two minutes left on the clock. A very impressive performance that made me glad to stick around. I will be the first to admit (because Adam and Mike have not yet posted) that Maryland's third place finish is a bit of a fraud, since we got crushed by Michigan B and probably would have had a worse fate had we faced Michigan A. However, we finished in third place according to the mathematical formulas used by NAQT, thanks to a seven-game winning streak to finish the tournament, and we are not going to apologize or return our trophy. We earned our placement by how we did at the tournament, and that will not change despite what people think. We took advantage of the math. Sometimes the karma shifts. Sometimes a candidate wins an election without a plurality of the popular vote. Sometimes a team is overlooked in favor of a team that finished three games ahead at the same sectional. So it goes. Dan
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:47 AM EST EST