Reply to Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?

Forum Index » Volleyball

Reply to "Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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. 
[/quote]

The issues with seeding aren't about where Metro is seeded [b]its how the other teams are seeded relative to Metro[/b]. 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.[/quote]
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.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics