Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
No one thinks there’s a literal smoke-filled room with villains twirling mustaches. It’s much simpler: when the host club prioritizes this over Triple Crown (for valid historical reasons), then seeds itself high at its own event (don’t kid yourself that it’s not a Metro event), and the founder’s kid is front and center on social, the “optics” do the heavy lifting.
And yes, the best teams end up in gold, especially when a chunk of the actual other national contenders are in Kansas City. So it’s dominating a field that thinned itself out. Metro regionals not sweeping lower divisions isn’t the gotcha you think it is. Even a homer tournament can’t manufacture talent across that many teams. |
Anonymous
Over the last decade at least Cap Hill hasn't been a tournament that draws national contenders. This was true even when Triple Crown wasn't that big of a tournament and it took a while for Triple Crown to get to the size it is now. Cap Hill has historically been a good "super-regional" tournament that drew a large number of CHRVA teams as well as a reasonable number of teams from adjoining regions. That's what made it successful. Its disappointing they've moved away from what made it great while simultaneously lowering the competition level. For seeding the easiest way to figure out if Metro teams are being favored is to compare their rankings right now to the pool seeding they receive this weekend. None of the Central, East, or South U13-U17 teams are ranked above 1500. Some are in the 3000-4500 range which would place have them seeded 4th in pools at most tournaments and near the bottom overall seeds. If those teams are seeded 2nd or higher in their pools, then there's likely some kind of bias in the process. For example, in U14 Metro South PW & FX are ranked 4536 and 4540, there are only a couple CHRVA teams lower than them in the 14 club division. In U15 Metro South PW is #4257, which appears to be lower than all but a few teams in the 15 club division. In U16 Metro North is currently #3853, which should have them at or near the last seed in the Patriot division. |
Anonymous
|
We can debate the team acceptance criteria and pool seeding but these are not unique to tournaments the size and popularity of CHC.
As a person who will be attending in support of a "local" team I'll do my best to welcome the out-of-towners. The clubs coming from other states/countries have nothing to do with how the tourney organizes itself, most want to enjoy the Nation's Capitol and I can chip in by being a good representative of the DMV. |
Anonymous
You're 100% correct that CHC is not a particularly competitive tournament. And the reason Metro is invited to play in Triple Crown is because they are a highly ranked club, based pretty much exclusively on the performance of the Travel teams. That's why I don't understand why every year there are rumblings about conspiracies to rig the tournament in favor of Metro. The Metro Travel teams should always be in contention to win most of the open divisions. The Metro Travel teams should be seeded highly because they are amongst the best teams inthe tournament - that's how seeding works. As far as teams from local clubs not getting into the tournament in favor of teams that have to travel (and which generate hotel revenue), that is an unfortunate side effect of the economics of running a big tournament. On the bright side, it is somewhat nice though to have a different group of clubs to play against than you see regionally. For teams that aren't going to multiple qualifiers, it's a chance for the CHRVA teams that do get in to play some different competition. And I think the shift of CHC from being a large mostly regional tournament is one of the reasons CHRVA started having their "Power League" tournaments - to allow larger numbers of mostly regional teams to play in a multiday format https://www.chrva.org/page/show/6330580-girls-power-league. |
Anonymous
|
Potentially in the future, the Cap City Classic can be moved to a different date by the Metro organizers so that Metro teams can play in the Triple Crown NIT. It waits to be seen.
Happy Friday, everyone.!!!! |
Anonymous
Potentially in the future the Triple Crown NIT can be moved to a different date so that Metro can participate. Both alternatives have about the same probability of happening. It waits to be seen. |
Anonymous
The real winner is the guy who owns the courts. He rents them courts and I am not sure how the set up goes now but it used to be Metro parents setting them up at night with coolers of beer. The guy has two sets of courts, or he used to have two, maybe more now, each court goes on a pallet and then on a truck to the next event. |
Anonymous
The issues with seeding aren't about where Metro is seeded its how the other teams are seeded relative to Metro. In a typical 48 team tournament the pools are set up so that the first pool should be the #1, #24, #25 & #48 teams in the tournament. The second pool is #2, #23, #26 and #47, etc. This is universally the approach in every tournament except power pool tournaments (like NIT). After day 1 the top finisher in pool 1 plays the 2nd finisher in pool 2 (which should be #1 vs #23) while the #1 finisher in pool 2 plays the #2 finisher in pool #1. Same for pools 3 & 4, etc. Importantly, teams in pools 3 & 4 can't compete against pool 1 & 2 until day 3 in gold bracket. So if you want to make sure you get to gold bracket and get a good seed, you don't want to play any of the high ranked teams on day 1 or day 2. Being ranked #1 in the tournament takes care of that on day 1. But what about day 2? Sometimes good teams have a "off" match and end up coming out 2nd in a pool that they should have won. If you had bias in seeding you would try to make sure than none of the top teams could play you on day 2, regardless of how their day 1 went. And you would try to seed the tournament so that the best teams compete against each other and knock each other out, so you don't have to face them later. Here are the relative ranks based on current AES ranks of the teams in the AES ranks of the teams in the 15 Open division in pools 1-4: Pool 1: Metro Travel: #1 (AES #3), American 15 Red: #31 (AES #1134) Pool 2: 540 VB 15 Elite: #20 (542), VA Elite 15: #12 (283) Pool 3: Pittsburgh 15 Elite: #25 (747), Loudoun Elite 15 Tony: #9 (235) Pool 4: MDJRS 15 Elite Black: #2 (57), VEVA Fury: #16 (449) Notice how Pool #4 has the #2 overall team while Pool has 2 no teams in the top 10? In fact, the #2 seed in the overall tournament (540 VB) isn't even ranked in the top 500 nationally (and lost head to head matches against Blue Ridge, Yorktowne, and VEVA Fury -- all of whom are seeded below them in the tournament). And they already played Metro at Charm City and lost in a blowout. Meanwhile, pool 4 has the second overall seed ensuring no matter what happens Metro travel is guaranteed not to play them on day 2. Also, if the first four pools only have 2 of the top 8 teams (when it should be 4/8), that means the remaining pools must have more top teams competing against each other (6/8 in this case meaning that those teams), effectively "stacking" the competition on the other side of the bracket from Metro. Similar seeding changes where made in 16 Open (just showing AES ranks this time) Pool 1: Metro Travel (9), Chicago Elite 16 (1018) Pool 2: Ultimate VBC 16 Gold (840), ECJVC 16 National (775) Pool 3: Blue Ridge 16 Blue (73), CHAVC 16 Black (582) Pool 4: MVSA 16 Sparks (170) , CALI 16 Black (NR-1173 last year) Pool 2 doesn't have a highly ranked team in it. The #2 seed (Ultimate VBTC) has 15+ teams ranked above them in AES in the tournament. The second highest ranked team in the tournament per AES (Blue Ridge) is in pool 3, guaranteed not to play Metro on day 2 or until the semifinals on day 3. There's also the same issue with stacking teams in the lower pools. 17 Open Pool 1: Metro Travel (19), Rival 17 Black (384) Pool 2: Chicago Elite 17 (326), Huskies 17U Premier (NR-772 last year) Pool 3: 757 17 Black (789), VA Juniors 17 (64) Pool 4: TVC 17 Black (48) , 575 17WSE Taylor (NR) Again, the #2 (TVC) and #3 (VA Juniors) teams overall are in pool 3 & 4, while pool 2 is the weakest of the 4, and the same issue with team stacking. There are other inconsistencies in the other divisions. Its true seeding is an inexact science. AES ranks aren't perfect (although they do have a strong correlation to future performance against teams that are significantly higher or lower than your ranking). Tournament directors can and should move teams up or down based on additional info not available in AES. But systemic inconsistencies like the 3 above are statistically unlikely, supporting a basis for the claims that Metro gets beneficial seeding at Capitol Hill. It doesn't happen in every division every year but it does happen frequently enough it appears there is some bias, either intentionally or unintentionally. |
Anonymous
| What I found interesting is in 12 C, there is another metro 12-2 Travel team. What is that team? That is not a team on their website. |
Anonymous
This is Metro 11 Travel. https://www.metrovbc.com/travel-coaches-11 |
Anonymous
What you’re describing happened last year. Metro 16 Travel was ranked No. 1 overall (pool 1), and EC Power KOP 16 was ranked No. 2 (pool 2). On Saturday, both teams went 3–0. On Sunday, Metro went 3–0, while EC Power went 2–1 (lost a match in three sets). On Monday, Metro lost to EC Power 1–2 in the first round of the Gold Bracket. EC Power finished first, and Metro Travel finished ninth. It makes sense that Metro would make the second pool weaker to prevent this from happening again. |
Anonymous
At Charm City last year--two weeks before Capitol Hill--in 16 Open, Metro played EC Power and won in a relatively lopsided match. At the same tournament, EC Power also lost to 757 -- who was ranked #4 at Capitol Hill and put into pool 4. Most tournaments would see the head-to-head results and adjust accordingly, with 757 ranking above EC power if the overall rankings were close (they were). Instead, putting EC Power into pool 2 put a team Metro had already beat into their seeding line. In other words, last year's 16 seeding matches the same pattern. Nothing is guaranteed though, so I'm sure it was a surprise when EC Power beat Metro in a reverse sweep. |
Anonymous
Neither event is moving for one club. |
Anonymous
You have too much time on your hands, I fear. |
Anonymous
I don't know how to read this message. Are you trying to be dismissive or to ridicule the PP who did the research? You have better things to do with your time or your time is too important? Nobody asked you to waste your time digging up data - maybe you wouldn't even know what to do in the first place. Just because you don't have the time to look up pools or you don't want to do the work, it doesn't mean that others feel the same way about this issue. Instead of trying to ridicule the PP's work, you could have said "Thank you for doing this research, this is eye-opening." I have to admit that I kept dismissing the idea that the tournaments are rigged to favor Metro. This PP completely changed my perspective and now I understand that - even if you are #1 in the region - you can screw up from time to time. I also understand how the tournaments can be rigged to favor the best team in the region. And I believe that PP provided enough evidence to demonstrate that this is not by chance, but on purpose. Thank you, PP - this was eye-opening. |