Anonymous
Post 02/17/2026 12:15     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Yeah, my overall takeaway after this year's tournament and results is that, sans day 3 matches for open teams, CHC simply isn't a competitive tournament.
Anonymous
Post 02/17/2026 12:10     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


You have too much time on your hands, I fear.


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.

Inherent in all this speculation is that the results of every match can be reliably predicted using unreliable data sources. While I am not of the belief that the AES ranking system has no value (there are many knowledgable people who feel this way), I also don't believe it's accurate enough for anything other than really broad comparisons. A team ranked in the top 100 is probably better than a team ranked 1,000, but I don't think it's reliable enough to say with any confidence that a team ranked 50th is clearly better than a team ranked 75th or even 200th depending on the time of the season. And even if it were reliable, does that mean the outcome of any match is predetermined with the higher ranked team winning every time? Obviously not.

I watched some of Metro's 17 and 18 Open gold bracket matches at Cap Hill yesterday and from what I saw, it didn't seem like the best two teams made the finals in both divisions. From what I observed, Northeast 17.1 and Northeast 18.1 seemed like the best teams other than Metro 17 and 18 Travel and they came in not seeded very high and also not ranked very high in AES.

For 17s, Northeast 17.1 was initially seeded 9th in 17 Open but won all their matches on Saturday and Sunday until meeting Metro in the 17 Open quarterfinals, where they lost in 3 in a very good match. Other highly placed teams in 17 Open included NYC VBA 17 Westside who lost to Metro in 3 in the semifinals, and Jupiter Elite 17E who lost in 2 to Metro in the finals. Here's how they are ranked in AES as of today, their initial CHC seeding, and their finish place:

Metro 17 Travel, 27 in AES, seeded 1 at CHC finished 1st
Northeast 17.1, 863 in AES, seeded 9 at CHC, finished tied for 5th
Jupiter Elite 17E, 459 in AES, seeded 8 at CHC, finished 2nd
NYC VBA 17 Westside, unranked in AES, seeded 5 at CHC, finished tied for 3rd

For 18s, the story is similar. Northeast 18.1 was initially seeded 12th in 18 Open but won all their matches on Saturday and Sunday, including beating Metro 18 Travel in Sunday pool play. This resulted in them meeting Metro in the 18 Open semifinals, where they lost in 3 in a back and forth match. VA Juniors 18s made it to the gold final, which Metro 18 Travel ultimately won in 2, but the first set was close with VAJRs leading for almost the entire set and Metro making a late comback. Here's how these teams are ranked in AES as of today, their initial CHC and their finish place:

Metro 18 Travel, 156 in AES, seeded 1 at CHC finished 1st
Northeast 18.1, 391 in AES, seeded 12 at CHC, finished tied for 3rd
VA Juniors, 159 in AES, seeded 9 at CHC, finished 2nd

Obviously watching a team in a single match does not give a complete picture of how good a team is in the overall national landscape, but from what I saw the Northeast 17s and 18s teams were among the top handful of teams there and their record over the course of CHC seems to validate that. But their rankings in AES don't reflect that and their seeding to start CHC doesn't seem too out of line given the AES rankings. It does seem like maybe VA JRs should have been seeded higher if AES ranking were the sole factor in CHC seeding, but that said VAJRs got lucky and had a much easier path to the finals in the gold bracket, getting a first round bye and then most of the other best teams being on the other side of the bracket.

My point is that none of this is an exact science and that in most cases, the best teams will still rise to the top. Particularly at a tournament like CHC which is not super competitive and where in most of the Open divisions there are a handful of teams that are far better than the rest of the field. The reality is at CHC, the top teams should coast through day 1, day 2 should be a little tougher, and day 3 begins the real tournament in bracket play.
Anonymous
Post 02/17/2026 11:43     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
I noticed certain players being awarded Best Digger, Best Hitter, Best Blocker, etc.

Who actually votes the awards? I assume it is by total stats from all games played but I could be wrong.
Anonymous
Post 02/16/2026 23:26     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.!!!!


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.


Neither event is moving for one club.


The post you replied to was sarcastic.
Anonymous
Post 02/16/2026 23:23     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.!!!!


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.


Neither event is moving for one club.


Exactly pp. The previous poster aka a metro parent is so typical- the sun doesn't revolve around metro. Metro is so overrated.
Anonymous
Post 02/14/2026 18:14     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


You have too much time on your hands, I fear.


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.
Anonymous
Post 02/14/2026 13:45     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.


You have too much time on your hands, I fear.
Anonymous
Post 02/14/2026 13:42     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.!!!!


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.


Neither event is moving for one club.
Anonymous
Post 02/13/2026 22:00     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.

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.


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
Post 02/13/2026 20:06     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote: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.


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.

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
Post 02/13/2026 19:50     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote: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.

This is Metro 11 Travel.
https://www.metrovbc.com/travel-coaches-11
Anonymous
Post 02/13/2026 16:17     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
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
Post 02/13/2026 13:35     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote: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.


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
Post 02/13/2026 08:29     Subject: Re:Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote:The Cap Hill Classic owners clear well over a million after all expenses. It is big business. In addition to the registration fees and the passes, they get a kickback from every hotel room that is booked.


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
Post 02/13/2026 08:25     Subject: Cap Hill - $30 daily and $70 weekend passes?
Anonymous wrote: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.!!!!


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.