<<Until tournaments stop resisting using
formats like power-matched records and ladder play, what
do you expect?>>
Both of these are
difficult to pull off, for two reasons:
[1]
Power-matching is fundamentally incompatible with packet
submission. For a tournament where all questions are written
in-house, it can be done. But for your standard
invitational (e.g., MIT, BU, Penn Bowl), or even a tournament
like ACF Regionals, it's not terribly easy to
do.
I know--I certainly thought about ways it could be
done, but I couldn't come up with anything practical.
If anyone has suggestions, please let me
know.
[2] Ladder play is extraordinarily inefficient: as
someone has pointed out, it's basically a bubble sort. I
suspect most people resent it at NAQT precisely because
it creates essentially *meaningless* repeat games
(unless, for example, there were significant amounts of
money involved, I don't see how a 13th v. 14th place
game could be considered
significant).
<<In my opinion, if at all possible play some more
questions.>>
That I can agree with.
--STI