Regarding the power matching algorithm. I recall quite distinctly that the first power matching round had Chicago and Illinois facing each other, and I believe many of the other very top teams facing each other. Pardon my ignorance on this, but I had thought that one should set the power matching rounds such that you want the best teams playing by the latter rounds of the power matching, and not the first. This is because you'll get those matchups with ladder play later. As Rob mentioned, Illinois went 2-1 against Chicago, but because the one loss was at Round 14 -- the last 1-2 ladder play match -- Illinois was relegated to being #2. It was also conceivable that they could have been knocked out of the finals had they lost to Michigan... which would have been their ONLY loss to Michigan the entire tournament. Furthermore, by being at a -1 disadvantage despite being +1 in head-to-head, Illinois had to go 4-1 against Chicago to win, while Chicago could go 2-2 or 2-3 against Illinois and win the championship. I concur with Rob that this is certainly not ideal if NAQT wanted to award the best team out there. WHEN you play a team and beat them shouldn't place a team at such an advantage or disadvantage. I would prefer going back to a 2/3 with NO disadvantage for the ICT finals (in all divisions).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:42 AM EST EST