NDCA Octos

Beacon DF Vs McDonogh RB

Bronx ME Vs MBA MH

Carrolton DG Vs Lexington VE

Damien GE vs Glenbrook North MP

GBS TD vs Westmin DM

Kinkaid KB vs Chattahoochee CR

Westminster TA vs Greenhill KP

Woodward PP vs GBN SS

5 thoughts on “NDCA Octos

  1. Robert

    I may have looked at it wrong, but it seems like Bronx is seeded wrong based on the packet on the NDCA website – http://www.joyoftournaments.com/defn/9/5/9534/201
    They were seeded 5th behind two other 6-1's (Damien and Woodward), but they're speaks were the highest of the tournament
    Also, it looks like Kinkaid should have been fourth while Bronx, third (followed by Damien and Woodward).

  2. Bill Batterman

    The NDCA tournament uses the MBA system for seeding (opponent wins plus high-low adjusted speaker points). For example, Bronx had 288 high-low points but only 28 opponent wins compared to Woodward's 284.5 high-low points and 33 opponent wins. When you add the two together, Woodward comes out slightly ahead of Bronx.

  3. Whit

    @Bill Batterman
    Do you know if this system was used throughout or just for elim seeding? If it was used throughout, do you think it helped to contribute to the particularly nasty round 3 pairings? If so, do you think that is an argument for why the MBA system would solve for the lack of High-High rounds that Scott whines about all the time.

  4. Bill Batterman


    I'm not sure how the preliminary rounds were paired. Here is a list of teams with a 2-0 record after round 2; the first number is their high-low points and the second number is their high-low points plus opponent wins. They are listed in order for high-low + oppW (with ties broken by high-low, then alphabetically):

    Bronx Science: 57.0, 59.0
    Carrollton: 57.0, 59.0
    Chattahoochee: 57.0, 59.0
    Georgetown Day: 57.0, 59.0
    Glenbrook North: 57.0, 59.0
    Kinkaid: 57.0, 59.0
    Lexington: 57.0, 59.0
    McDonogh: 57.0, 59.0
    Montgomery Bell: 57.0, 59.0
    Westminster: 57.0, 59.0

    Dallas Jesuit DG: 56.5, 58.5
    Greenhill: 56.5, 58.5
    St. Paul Central: 56.5, 58.5
    Glenbrook South: 57.0, 58.0
    Beacon: 56.0, 58.0
    Dallas Jesuit MY: 56.0, 58.0
    Damien: 56.0, 58.0
    St. Mark's: 56.0, 58.0
    Woodward: 56.5, 57.5
    Edina: 56.2, 57.2
    Mountain Brook: 56.0, 57.0

    Here are the round three pairings for these teams:

    Beacon vs. Glenbrook North
    Bronx Science vs. Damien
    Carrollton vs. Woodward
    Dallas Jesuit MY vs. McDonogh
    Georgetown Day vs. St. Mark's
    Glenbrook South vs. Kinkaid
    Greenhill vs. Dallas Jesuit DG
    Lexington vs. Chattahoochee
    Montgomery Bell vs. Greenhill PS (PULL-UP)
    Mountain Brook vs. Westminster
    St. Paul Central vs. Edina

    I'm not sure how TRPC breaks the ties; I assume it's purely random. There were 10 teams with 57.0 high-low points and 59.0 high-low points plus opponent wins; one of them—MBA—drew the pull-up (because there was an odd number—21—of 2-0 teams).

    All of the 57.0/59.0 teams debated a team in the lower half of the bracket. The only matchup that did NOT include one 57.0/59.0 team was the debate between Greenhill and Dallas Jesuit DG… with 56.5 and 58.5, they were in the middle of the bracket.

    The "big" matchups in round 3 (Bronx/Damien, Carrollton/Woodward, GBS/Kinkaid) seem to be purely a result of speaker point anomalies in the presets, not a function of the way the round was paired.

    Pairing round three based on the MBA system doesn't seem to matter much because a team that is 2-0 will have either 0, 1, or 2 opponent wins—there isn't much variation. (Obviously there isn't much variation in speaker points, either.)

    Bottom line: still not sure if pairing based on the MBA system will result in more "high-high-esque" matchups or not. Need more data to properly investigate, but it doesn't seem like it had that effect in round 3 at NDCA.

Comments are closed.