Author Topic: CUBAIT '06  (Read 7502 times)

daniel.shapiro

  • Witness
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« on: January 18, 2006, 09:25:56 am »
The Columbia University Mock Trial program is pleased to announce that it will be hosting its 3rd annual Big Apple Invitational on Saturday, January 21 and Sunday, January 22 at Columbia Law School located at 435 West 116th Street.

Teams Attending

360 - Carleton
392 - Northwestern
393 - Northwestern
514 - Columbia
515 - Columbia
516 - Columbia
517 - Columbia
564 - NYU
565 - NYU
576 - Macalaster
584 - Furman
585 - Furman
696 - Chicago
756 - GW
828 - Penn State
852 - Bellarmine
928 - Yale
929 - Yale
936 - Princeton
964 - UCLA
972 - Virginia
973 - Virginia
992 - Miami-OH
993 - Miami-OH

Power pairing will be conducted based on Combined Strength of Schedule (with ties in CS broken by Point Differential). Impermissibles will also look to Combined Strength of Schedule after Record and only then to Point Differential.

NDmock

  • Legend
  • Posts: 1,743
  • Karma: 5
Re: CUBAIT '06
« Reply #1 on: January 18, 2006, 10:36:10 am »
Quote from: daniel.shapiro
Power pairing will be conducted based on Combined Strength of Schedule (with ties in CS broken by Point Differential). Impermissibles will also look to Combined Strength of Schedule after Record and only then to Point Differential.


And somewhere Jaggers is smiling.

Jaggers27

  • Royalty
  • Posts: 3,515
  • Karma: 7
  • Hoisting the Light
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #2 on: January 18, 2006, 10:40:35 am »
:D
"Who do these people think they are coming on my perjuries and asking

JayZ

  • The Devil
  • Oracle
  • *
  • Posts: 4,538
  • Karma: 11
  • Raging Against the Machine
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2006, 11:36:55 am »
Some people want to be astronauts when they grow up.

Some people want to be cowboys.

Some people want to be ballerinas.

Anderson has always wanted to be the NTD for a major collegiate mock trial organization.  :p
"Call on God, but row away from the rocks." - Hunter S. Thompson

"Kudo

MiaWUCU

  • Epic
  • Posts: 697
  • Karma: 25
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2006, 01:01:54 pm »
Just a note that we will provide feedback of the results of pairing by the "Columbia Rule" so that the AMTA community will have sufficient data to consider adopting our rule change.  Feedback will include how the pairings would have differed under the current rules.

candacejuliana

  • Mock God
  • ***
  • Posts: 10,283
  • Karma: 11
  • put two and two together, noticed it was four
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #5 on: January 18, 2006, 01:46:25 pm »
Will there be the Spirit of New York award again?   :gavel:
"you can call us Auto Hut...it's like pizzas, only with car parts."

MockMaster

  • Epic
  • Posts: 689
  • Karma: 12
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2006, 01:49:24 pm »
Quote from: JayZ


Anderson has always wanted to be the NTD for a major collegiate mock trial organization.  :p


Everybody gotta have a dream.

daniel.shapiro

  • Witness
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #7 on: January 18, 2006, 01:51:13 pm »
Sorry to disappoint its many fans, but the spirit of New York Award will not be given out this year.

andrewbaker

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 154
  • Karma: 2
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #8 on: January 18, 2006, 05:04:16 pm »
NYU will be there.  May we keep a television at counsel table to watch the football on Sunday?  :D
hearsay exception: 803(25) - wikipedia

Arpan

  • Epic
  • Posts: 775
  • Karma: 1
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #9 on: January 18, 2006, 05:20:31 pm »
Quote from: andrewbaker
NYU will be there.  May we keep a television at counsel table to watch the football on Sunday?  :D


If you did that, the spirit of ny award might have to make a comeback, no?

andrewbaker

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 154
  • Karma: 2
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #10 on: January 18, 2006, 05:27:53 pm »
Quote from: Arpan
Quote from: andrewbaker
NYU will be there.  May we keep a television at counsel table to watch the football on Sunday?  :D


If you did that, the spirit of ny award might have to make a comeback, no?


Agreed.
hearsay exception: 803(25) - wikipedia

MiaWUCU

  • Epic
  • Posts: 697
  • Karma: 25
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #11 on: January 18, 2006, 05:59:17 pm »
NYU is welcome to concentrate on football in any round against Columbia.

ShaphPrime

  • Myth
  • Posts: 2,039
  • Karma: 3
  • Billy Mays here for perjuries.com!
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #12 on: January 18, 2006, 07:42:35 pm »
Why concentrate on football?  The Bears already lost...  :confused:
Monkey killing monkey killing monkey over pieces of the ground.

MiaWUCU

  • Epic
  • Posts: 697
  • Karma: 25
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #13 on: January 19, 2006, 12:22:19 am »
Columbia Rule Update:

In preparation for CUBAIT, Dan and I repaired round 3 of the Rhodes invite.  The Columbia Rule resulted in changes to 8/12 pairings.  We are especially excited to test out the rule change at an invitational as competitive as CUBAIT.

I should also note that we paired the round on our laps on the NYC subway.  That's skillz.

Quotequeen

  • Mock Demi-God
  • **
  • Posts: 5,562
  • Karma: 9
  • 4 8 15 16 23 42
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2006, 12:33:23 pm »
How are you planning on evaluating which pairing system is better?
"Success is simply a matter of luck.  Ask any failure."  -Earl Wilson

crialkilru

  • Epic
  • Posts: 776
  • Karma: 2
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #15 on: January 19, 2006, 12:36:35 pm »
I can't speak for Dan and Mia, but I don't think it's a question of "better" as much as it is a question of whether the system works more effectively.  If our goal is to power-protect teams, then ranking teams based on the strength of their opponent seems more logical than ranking them on point differential.
"Find Michael Harmon guilty, your honor.  Find him guilty . . . of Mic

UMCane*GWB

  • Myth
  • Posts: 2,500
  • Karma: -4
  • NFL U
  • School: The University of Miami, formerly of Wake Forest U
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #16 on: January 19, 2006, 12:42:16 pm »
Quote from: crialkilru
I can't speak for Dan and Mia, but I don't think it's a question of "better" as much as it is a question of whether the system works more effectively.  If our goal is to power-protect teams, then ranking teams based on the strength of their opponent seems more logical than ranking them on point differential.


I think that is debatable....Who is to say beating a 4-0 by 1 point is more meaningful than beating a 2-2 by 30 points? The most logical way would be to account for both...
It's all about the U.

crialkilru

  • Epic
  • Posts: 776
  • Karma: 2
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #17 on: January 19, 2006, 12:50:11 pm »
This system does, as I understand it.  I think that the second round is paired normally, and then in later rounds they will still use point differential after CS. It's just a question of which of the two inputs to prioritize, and I think prioritizing the strength of schedule is a more important one.  But it's an experiment, so we'll see if it works.
"Find Michael Harmon guilty, your honor.  Find him guilty . . . of Mic

UMCane*GWB

  • Myth
  • Posts: 2,500
  • Karma: -4
  • NFL U
  • School: The University of Miami, formerly of Wake Forest U
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #18 on: January 19, 2006, 12:51:35 pm »
ahh in that case I think I would agree with you... If your system accounts for both, I would prioritize SOS above Points as well...
It's all about the U.

crialkilru

  • Epic
  • Posts: 776
  • Karma: 2
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #19 on: January 19, 2006, 12:53:47 pm »
From our website, so I don't misquote the system.

"Power pairing will be conducted based on Combined Strength of Schedule instead of Point Differential. Impermissibles will also look to Combined Strength of Schedule after Record and only then at Point Differential."
"Find Michael Harmon guilty, your honor.  Find him guilty . . . of Mic

Quotequeen

  • Mock Demi-God
  • **
  • Posts: 5,562
  • Karma: 9
  • 4 8 15 16 23 42
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #20 on: January 19, 2006, 12:58:46 pm »
I understand that argument... what I don't understand is what you're going to get out of looking at the results of the tournament.  Dan/Mia said something about posting how the new pairing rule affected things, but I don't think saying "it changed 8 of 12 pairings" or whatever is very useful information, so I was wondering what criteria you use to determine if it's worth switching or not.  The argument that using CS makes more sense is an abstract one... it doesn't require looking at the actual results of anything.
"Success is simply a matter of luck.  Ask any failure."  -Earl Wilson

JusticeSeeker

  • Attorney
  • Posts: 222
  • Karma: 1
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #21 on: January 19, 2006, 01:09:08 pm »
Quote from: MiaWUCU
Columbia Rule Update:

In preparation for CUBAIT, Dan and I repaired round 3 of the Rhodes invite.  The Columbia Rule resulted in changes to 8/12 pairings.  We are especially excited to test out the rule change at an invitational as competitive as CUBAIT.


Do you mind sharing what the new pairings were?

312

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 112
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #22 on: January 19, 2006, 01:39:59 pm »
Quote from: crialkilru
I can't speak for Dan and Mia, but I don't think it's a question of "better" as much as it is a question of whether the system works more effectively.  If our goal is to power-protect teams, then ranking teams based on the strength of their opponent seems more logical than ranking them on point differential.


How will you assess if the system works more effectively?  In other words, what result would make you say, "This worked better than the normal system" or "This didn't work as well as the normal system."  It seems that any sort of evaluation requires making determinations about how the pairings SHOULD have come out -- which is either circular or amorphous, depending on how that determination is reached.
(I think this is similar to the argument Quotequeen is making, but she can correct me if I am mistaken.)

I don't know which is better, CS-first-PD-second or vice-versa.  But I think it's pretty obvious that whatever format is used in pairing should be used in tiebreaking.  Otherwise, we end up punishing a performance at the end of a tournament that was encouraged throughout.

daniel.shapiro

  • Witness
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #23 on: January 19, 2006, 02:19:45 pm »
I also agree that whatever system is used to tiebreak should be used to pair.  That is why we are using CS.  Unfortunately, it would be too time consuming to break CS ties with SOO as they would be at the end of the tournament so we are forced to rely on PD as the secondary tiebreaker in pairings and impermissibles.

I agree that the evaluation of which system is better is purely abstract.  What we are planning on reporting is how easy it was in the tab room to adapt to the new system and if it required much extra work (which I don't believe it will).  The number of rounds changed doesn't prove the system is better, it's just an interesting fact that some people might like to know.  The theoretical debate is the important one.

daniel.shapiro

  • Witness
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #24 on: January 19, 2006, 02:21:44 pm »
Quote from: JusticeSeeker
Quote from: MiaWUCU
Columbia Rule Update:

In preparation for CUBAIT, Dan and I repaired round 3 of the Rhodes invite.  The Columbia Rule resulted in changes to 8/12 pairings.  We are especially excited to test out the rule change at an invitational as competitive as CUBAIT.


Do you mind sharing what the new pairings were?


I will, but I don't have them with me at work so it will have to wait for a bit.

Quotequeen

  • Mock Demi-God
  • **
  • Posts: 5,562
  • Karma: 9
  • 4 8 15 16 23 42
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #25 on: January 19, 2006, 02:22:04 pm »
That makes more sense.  Thanks.
"Success is simply a matter of luck.  Ask any failure."  -Earl Wilson

312

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 112
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #26 on: January 19, 2006, 02:22:08 pm »
Quote from: daniel.shapiro
I agree that the evaluation of which system is better is purely abstract.  What we are planning on reporting is how easy it was in the tab room to adapt to the new system and if it required much extra work (which I don't believe it will).  The number of rounds changed doesn't prove the system is better, it's just an interesting fact that some people might like to know.  The theoretical debate is the important one.


Thanks for the clarification.  That makes a lot of sense.

crialkilru

  • Epic
  • Posts: 776
  • Karma: 2
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #27 on: January 19, 2006, 03:02:40 pm »
Sorry for the confusion.  I'm going to stop trying to understand pairings and go back into my "competitor bubble" for the next four months.  :)
"Find Michael Harmon guilty, your honor.  Find him guilty . . . of Mic

MizzouMock

  • Legend
  • Posts: 1,025
  • Karma: 5
  • School: Grizzled Veteran
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #28 on: January 19, 2006, 03:17:30 pm »
So if I'm thinking about this correctly...then this only really affects pairings for Rounds 3 and 4, right?
I post in my personal capacity, not on behalf of AMTA.

DrCornelius

  • Legend
  • Posts: 1,975
  • Karma: 7
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #29 on: January 19, 2006, 03:33:49 pm »
Seems like it.  CS is a pretty useless statistic after the first round.
"Luck errs on the side of those who are prepared."

daniel.shapiro

  • Witness
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #30 on: January 19, 2006, 03:47:22 pm »
That is correct.

MiaWUCU

  • Epic
  • Posts: 697
  • Karma: 25
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #31 on: January 19, 2006, 06:32:15 pm »
At the end of round 1, CS is (obviously) the inverse of record, so it is no help.

Kris, we have the charts ready to go.  I for one am happy about having to add only numbers less than 12.

daniel.shapiro

  • Witness
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: 0
Update
« Reply #32 on: January 20, 2006, 10:41:15 am »
UPDATE: Princeton dropped from the tournament last night.  As such, we will most likely be fielding a bye-buster team.  Schools that are nearby are invited to bring extra students to participate if they wish.

If there is a local area team that wishes to participate send me an email at dshapiro@stblaw.com

Quotequeen

  • Mock Demi-God
  • **
  • Posts: 5,562
  • Karma: 9
  • 4 8 15 16 23 42
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #33 on: January 20, 2006, 02:05:19 pm »
Ooooh, can I be on it?  :D
"Success is simply a matter of luck.  Ask any failure."  -Earl Wilson

daniel.shapiro

  • Witness
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #34 on: January 21, 2006, 11:28:19 pm »
Round 3 Flip for side (in random order)

393 v 360
992 v 696
584 v 828
514 v 993
929 v 576
515 v 565
516 v 756
564 v 999
392 v 852
517 v 972
964 v 973
585 v 928

bigscooper

  • Witness
  • Posts: 54
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #35 on: January 22, 2006, 08:56:23 pm »
1. UCLA 964 7.5
2. columbia 514 7-1
3. Furman 584
4. uva 972 6-2


have fun with your power polls!

crialkilru

  • Epic
  • Posts: 776
  • Karma: 2
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #36 on: January 22, 2006, 08:59:11 pm »
1.  University of California, Los Angeles 964, 7-0-1
2.  Columbia University 514, 7-1
3.  Furman University 584, 6-1-1
4.  University of Virginia 972, 6-2
5.  George Washington University 756, 6-2
6.  Bellarmine University 852, 5-3
7.  New York University 564, 5-3
8.  Columbia University 515, 4-3-1
9.  University of Virginia 973, 4-4
10.  Northwestern University 392, 4-4

There were six other teams in the 4-4 tiebreaker including Columbia 516.
"Find Michael Harmon guilty, your honor.  Find him guilty . . . of Mic

Jaggers27

  • Royalty
  • Posts: 3,515
  • Karma: 7
  • Hoisting the Light
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #37 on: January 22, 2006, 09:07:42 pm »
Congratulations to UCLA and to all teams involved.  This looks like it sure was one heckuva tournament.  If - as the records seem to imply - a 6-0 UCLA hit a 6-0 Furman in the fourth round for a win-tie, then I really, really wish I could have been a fly on the wall for that trial.  If we can have televised broadcasts of bowling, why not mock?
"Who do these people think they are coming on my perjuries and asking

JayZ

  • The Devil
  • Oracle
  • *
  • Posts: 4,538
  • Karma: 11
  • Raging Against the Machine
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #38 on: January 22, 2006, 09:08:49 pm »
Goddamn, goddamn, I said, goddamn!

UCLA - Threepeat?
"Call on God, but row away from the rocks." - Hunter S. Thompson

"Kudo

crialkilru

  • Epic
  • Posts: 776
  • Karma: 2
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #39 on: January 22, 2006, 09:09:43 pm »
UCLA actually hit Furman 584 in the second round for the W-T.
"Find Michael Harmon guilty, your honor.  Find him guilty . . . of Mic

Jaggers27

  • Royalty
  • Posts: 3,515
  • Karma: 7
  • Hoisting the Light
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #40 on: January 22, 2006, 09:13:43 pm »
A bit anticlimactic, but a compelling trial nonetheless.  As for Z, have you learned nothing from this year's college football season?  Stop right now before you go comparing them to the greatest MT teams of all time, or they'll surely be doomed! :p
"Who do these people think they are coming on my perjuries and asking

JayZ

  • The Devil
  • Oracle
  • *
  • Posts: 4,538
  • Karma: 11
  • Raging Against the Machine
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #41 on: January 22, 2006, 09:19:51 pm »
So... '06 UCLA v '03 Iowa? ;)
"Call on God, but row away from the rocks." - Hunter S. Thompson

"Kudo

Jaggers27

  • Royalty
  • Posts: 3,515
  • Karma: 7
  • Hoisting the Light
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #42 on: January 22, 2006, 09:23:59 pm »
Quote from: JayZ
So... '06 UCLA v '03 Iowa? ;)


Oh no you did not just go there.
"Who do these people think they are coming on my perjuries and asking

DrCornelius

  • Legend
  • Posts: 1,975
  • Karma: 7
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #43 on: January 22, 2006, 09:30:11 pm »
Quote from: Jaggers27
Quote from: JayZ
So... '06 UCLA v '03 Iowa? ;)


Oh no you did not just go there.


Well, if I'm following in the footsteps of ESPN's hype machine, I have to pick '06 UCLA by 9 million on each ballot.
"Luck errs on the side of those who are prepared."

FundamentalPrecepts

  • Oracle
  • *
  • Posts: 4,988
  • Karma: 5
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #44 on: January 22, 2006, 09:40:43 pm »
The cool thing about mock is that such a matchup is much more feasible than in, say football. I'd say give them a new case and an hour or two to prepare.
www.findjoshua.com

"The joy is in the journey."
 -Frosty Westering

The Gelf

  • Legend
  • Posts: 1,459
  • Karma: 47
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #45 on: January 22, 2006, 09:57:48 pm »
I judged four excellent rounds this weekend.  The tournament was fun and well-run.  Big thanks to Furman 584, Yale 928, Northwestern 392, Columbia 516, Chicago 696, Miami 992, Penn State, and Miami 993 for some great trial.  I had a blast!
Mock Trial with J. Reinhold!  Mock Trial!  Mock Trial with J. Reinhold!

daniel.shapiro

  • Witness
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #46 on: January 22, 2006, 10:29:03 pm »
OUTSTANDING TRIAL TEAM AWARDS

1-Team 964, University of California, Los Angeles, 7.5
2-Team 514, Columbia University, 7
3-Team 584, Furman University, 6.5
4-Team 972, University of Virginia, 6
5-Team 756, George Washington University, 5 (CS=21.5)
6-Team 852, Bellarmine University, 5 (CS=14.5)
7-Team 564, New York University, 5 (CS=11)
8-Team 515, Columbia University, 4.5
9-Team 973, University of Virginia, 4 (CS=20.5)
10-Team 392, Northwestern University, 4 (CS=20)

HONORABLE MENTION TRIAL TEAMS

Team 516, Columbia University, 4
Team 576, Macalester College, 4
Team 696, University of Chicago, 4
Team 828, Pennsylvania State University, 4
Team 928, Yale University, 4

OUTSTANDING ATTORNEY AWARDS

20-Team 584, Furman University, Lawrence Hilton, D (also 18 on P)
20-Team 964, University of California, Los Angeles, Amanda Bonn, D (also 17 on P)
20-Team 514, Columbia University, Buchanan Vines, P

19-Team 564, New York University, Vik Kumar, P
19-Team 852, Bellarmine University, Chris Schaefer, D (also 19 on P)

18-Team 515, Columbia University, Lia Losonczy, D
18-Team 972, University of Virginia, Daniel Young, P

17-Team 993, Miami University, Ryan Blough, D
17-Team 393, Northwestern University, Jeanette Kang, P

16-Team 999, Byebuster (St. John’s University), Tahanie Abouski, D
16-Team 392, Northwestern University, David Bouchard, P
16-Team 565, New York University, Matt Shahabian, P

OUTSTANDING WITNESS AWARDS

20-Team 514, Columbia University, Julianna Ilvento, P

19-Team 993, Miami University, Ryan Blough, P

18-Team 392, Northwestern University, Lul Tesfai, D
18-Team 828, Pennsylvania State University, Mike Thomas, P

17-Team 972, University of Virginia, Sean Hamidi, P
17-Team 973, University of Virginia, Steve Kanjo, P
17-Team 852, Bellarmine University, Ashley Larrow, P

16-Team 992, Miami University, Matt DiMuzio, P
16-Team 584, Furman University, Margaret Harouny, P
16-Team 564, New York University, Ben Margulis, P
16-Team 565, New York University, Jessica Selecky, P

daniel.shapiro

  • Witness
  • Posts: 98
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #47 on: January 22, 2006, 10:42:27 pm »
Tab Summary available at http://www.columbia.edu/cu/mocktrial/

MizzouMock

  • Legend
  • Posts: 1,025
  • Karma: 5
  • School: Grizzled Veteran
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #48 on: January 22, 2006, 10:53:56 pm »
Hot dang.

First weekend: Columbia flies 3,000 miles to Los Angeles, wins on UCLA's home court.

Next weekend: UCLA flies 3,000 miles to New York, wins on Columbia's home court.

Power polls across the country asplode.
I post in my personal capacity, not on behalf of AMTA.

Jaggers27

  • Royalty
  • Posts: 3,515
  • Karma: 7
  • Hoisting the Light
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #49 on: January 22, 2006, 11:20:50 pm »
Quote from: daniel.shapiro
Tab Summary available at http://www.columbia.edu/cu/mocktrial/


You guys are the best.  I'm still waiting for the Northwestern tab summary, and I went to the tournament!  I'm interested to hear from the CUBAIT tabroom brain trust how the CS pairing affected the tournament.  Whether it's experimenting with new pairing procedures, trying new tab formats, or posting tab summaries just hours after the conclusion of the tournament, I applaud the CUBAIT for constantly pushing the evelope while remaining the shining example of a well-run tournament. :gavel:
"Who do these people think they are coming on my perjuries and asking

Plymouth Djinn

  • Myth
  • Posts: 2,457
  • Karma: 16
  • Friendly but fierce
  • School: 613 in the 5-1-3
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #50 on: January 22, 2006, 11:29:05 pm »
Quote from: JayZ
So... '06 UCLA v '03 Iowa? ;)


I would only be down for that if we could do State v. Ellis
My rants and ramblings are my own and should not be attached to others.

g4ut4m1

  • Alternate
  • Posts: 33
  • Karma: 0
Re:CUBAIT '06
« Reply #51 on: January 23, 2006, 04:37:14 am »
Just landed about 2 hours ago but I just wanted to say thanks to Dan, Mia, Laura and Phil for putting on one helluva tournament. (and anyone else who was responsible who I forgot to mention.)  Very well planned out, amazingly executed, and probably one of the best venues in America to have a tournament of that caliber.  Thanks also to UVA 972 and 973, Furman and Northwestern for 4 well fought rounds.  Good Luck to everyone as the regional season kicks off next weekend.

MiaWUCU

  • Epic
  • Posts: 697
  • Karma: 25
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #52 on: January 23, 2006, 09:37:28 am »
Quote from: Jaggers27
I'm interested to hear from the CUBAIT tabroom brain trust how the CS pairing affected the tournament.


CUBAIT tabroom braintrust, representing.

We haven't had a chance yet to re-pair round 3 to see how many rounds were affected, but I can speak to how things went in the tabroom.  First of all, I am supremely grateful that my "staff" consisted entirely of AMTA board members, Columbia coaches, and Ryan; your wealth of experience and willingness to jump right in to our experiment made my first go at running a tabroom painless, and for that I thank everyone involved.  Thank you especially to Dan Herron for running the other set of cards and to both Dan and Glen for constant support and assistance throughout.

I hope all the participants can attest to pairing by CS not taking any longer than usual; all 4 captain's meetings started on time.  The only alteration to procedure that it required was adding a line on each card at the bottom that said CS:_____, and creating a running "Win Sheet".  The win sheet had four columns: "Wins after round 1," "Wins after round 2," "Wins after round 3," "Wins after round 4."  As each set of ballots came in, we updated the win sheet to reflect how each team was doing.  This is exactly what we normally do at the end of the tournament to break ties, but done throughout.  This was very easy.  A pleasant surprise was that we were able to do the final tiebreakers in record time because all this information was already compiled when we needed it.

The learning curve on actually pairing by CS was very quick.  Once or twice one of us would accidentally look first to PD; it was always quickly remedied.  We found that occasionally CS would be tied (esp. after round 2, when many teams' CS was 3, 4, or 5.  If CS was tied, we then looked to PD.  I found this preferable to the traditional pairing, whereby if PD is tied, we look to a coin flip to determine which card is ranked higher.

For round 3 there were no impermissible matches, which prompted me to comment to Dan that perhaps our system has another unexpected fabulous side effect.  Dan rightly informed me of the mathematical impossibility of that statement, which was validated by the round 4 pairings, which were as many impermissibles as usual with a 24 team field and many programs having more than one team.  In my opinion, resolving impermissibles was exactly as easy/hard as it always is.  Of course, comparing CS 10 to CS 11 is easier than comparing PD -26 to PD -43 for someone like me who hates large negative numbers :)

Our goal in pairing by CS was to make pairing order consistent with tiebreaking order.  It's impossible to say whether our pairings were "better" than the current system, but they were certainly consistent and easy to do.

Perhaps an intrepid mocker would like to pair round 3 traditionally off the already-released tab summary (see above) and let us know how many changes there would have been.

MockMaster

  • Epic
  • Posts: 689
  • Karma: 12
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #53 on: January 23, 2006, 11:14:48 am »
This is a VERY quick and dirty assessment, but I think that all of the Round 3 pairings except for the 0-4 v. 0-4 matchup would have been different using traditional methods.

Here's what I came up with using traditional methods:

964 v. 993
514 v. 973
565 v. 756
392 v. 515
852 v. 516
584 v. 564
999 v. 828
972 v. 992
926 v. 517
393 v. 696
360 v. 576
585 v. 928

I assumed that the bye buster composition remained the same and that the lower numbered teams won the coin flip and received the higher rank when record and point differential were tied. After laying out the brackets, I saw only one impermissible that had to be resolved (a same-school 515 v. 516).

There's probably an error or two in there since I did this quickly, but, suffice it to say that pairing with CS instead of PD makes a significant difference.

RadicallyLiberal

  • Oracle
  • *
  • Posts: 4,710
  • Karma: 3
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #54 on: January 23, 2006, 11:28:13 am »
576 didn't hit Carleton 360 in Round 3, we hit 929 Yale.
You mean the law on the bar exam isn't...law?

MockMaster

  • Epic
  • Posts: 689
  • Karma: 12
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #55 on: January 23, 2006, 11:54:40 am »
Quote from: RadicallyLiberal
576 didn't hit Carleton 360 in Round 3, we hit 929 Yale.


Right. But if CUBAIT had used traditional methods, you would have hit 360.

RadicallyLiberal

  • Oracle
  • *
  • Posts: 4,710
  • Karma: 3
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #56 on: January 23, 2006, 12:07:09 pm »
Quote from: MockMaster
Quote from: RadicallyLiberal
576 didn't hit Carleton 360 in Round 3, we hit 929 Yale.


Right. But if CUBAIT had used traditional methods, you would have hit 360.


Ooooooh, ok, I get it.

I'm glad we didn't.  They're in our region, what a waste that would have been on a plane ticket. :)
You mean the law on the bar exam isn't...law?

PJG2001

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 160
  • Karma: 11
  • School: Kings College, est. 1754
Re:CUBAIT '06
« Reply #57 on: January 24, 2006, 02:00:18 am »
Quote from: The Gelf
I judged four excellent rounds this weekend.  The tournament was fun and well-run.  Big thanks to Furman 584, Yale 928, Northwestern 392, Columbia 516, Chicago 696, Miami 992, Penn State, and Miami 993 for some great trial.  I had a blast!


Thank you Gelf, for essentially being the MVP of the CUBAIT judges pool. As the guy who had to assign the judges, you made my job a whole lot easier by knowing that I had an excellent judge willing to preside all four rounds. Thanks as well for the kind words about 516, both here and at the tournament.

Quote from: g4ut4m1
Just landed about 2 hours ago but I just wanted to say thanks to Dan, Mia, Laura and Phil for putting on one helluva tournament. (and anyone else who was responsible who I forgot to mention.)  Very well planned out, amazingly executed, and probably one of the best venues in America to have a tournament of that caliber.  Thanks also to UVA 972 and 973, Furman and Northwestern for 4 well fought rounds.  Good Luck to everyone as the regional season kicks off next weekend.


Thanks for the kind words, Gautam. Thank you for stepping in and judging a round when we fell one judge short on Sunday morning. I told my team after that round that they should stick around and pick your brain. I hope they did. It would serve them very well.

Moreover, congratulations to you and to UCLA for what was a(nother) truly impressive performance this past weekend. Although I unfortunately did not get a chance to sit in on one of your rounds, the schedule you hit and the reports I received back in the tab room only confirmed the power of the machine that is UCLA mock trial. May that machine continue to run through March (that is, unless it hits a Columbia team in Iowa).  ;)
FREE JUDGE BLUM'S BALLOT!

Moviebuf6

  • Tryout
  • Posts: 18
  • Karma: 0
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #58 on: January 24, 2006, 08:34:00 am »
I would like to echo Phil's words of thanks and congratulations to Gautam and UCLA.  Their performance both this weekend and last weekend has confirmed that the "UCLA machine" is a force to be reckoned with.  

I would also like to thank the Gelf and all the CUBAIT judges for volunteering their time, energy, and weekends to us.  We could not have had this tournament without your help.

In addition, I must thank Dan Shapiro, Mia Eisnber-Grynberg, and of course, Phil Gary, for organizing and running the tournament.  These three gave up their weekend, their sleep, and their sanity to ensure that CUBAIT ran smoothly (while simultaneously coaching their teams).  You guys are amazing and you made this tournament what is was!

--Lauren

andrewbaker

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 154
  • Karma: 2
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #59 on: January 24, 2006, 10:04:44 am »
Quote from: Moviebuf6


I would also like to thank the Gelf and all the CUBAIT judges for volunteering their time, energy, and weekends to us.  We could not have had this tournament without your help.
--Lauren


I've had to deal with Gelf as a judge, and may I say--he is an egomaniac, and his rulings on evidence are quite questionable.  I say, kick him off the bench.  :D
hearsay exception: 803(25) - wikipedia

DesertClassic

  • Legend
  • Posts: 1,911
  • Karma: -8
  • Retired..finally
  • School: Arizona State
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #60 on: January 24, 2006, 10:32:31 am »
Quote from: JayZ
So... '06 UCLA v '03 Iowa? ;)


No Travis sighting yet?
Associate Head Coach Sun Devil Mock Trial
Adjunct Faculty, ASU Barrett Honors College

The Gelf

  • Legend
  • Posts: 1,459
  • Karma: 47
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #61 on: January 24, 2006, 10:44:05 am »
Quote from: andrewbaker
Quote from: Moviebuf6


I would also like to thank the Gelf and all the CUBAIT judges for volunteering their time, energy, and weekends to us.  We could not have had this tournament without your help.
--Lauren


I've had to deal with Gelf as a judge, and may I say--he is an egomaniac, and his rulings on evidence are quite questionable.  I say, kick him off the bench.  :D


I should have you prosecuted for multiple attempted murders based on all those heart attacks you intentionally inflicted on me two years ago every time you opened your mouth on the witness stand.   Five minutes before the start of the last round in Florida:  "Gelf, I've got some new Carver material."
Mock Trial with J. Reinhold!  Mock Trial!  Mock Trial with J. Reinhold!

andrewbaker

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 154
  • Karma: 2
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #62 on: January 24, 2006, 10:46:11 am »
Quote from: The Gelf
Quote from: andrewbaker
Quote from: Moviebuf6


I would also like to thank the Gelf and all the CUBAIT judges for volunteering their time, energy, and weekends to us.  We could not have had this tournament without your help.
--Lauren


I've had to deal with Gelf as a judge, and may I say--he is an egomaniac, and his rulings on evidence are quite questionable.  I say, kick him off the bench.  :D


I should have you prosecuted for multiple attempted murders based on all those heart attacks you intentionally inflicted on me two years ago every time you opened your mouth on the witness stand.   Five minutes before the start of the last round in Florida:  "Gelf, I've got some new Carver material."


Tracy likes to dress up as a clown, what can I tell you?
hearsay exception: 803(25) - wikipedia

DesertClassic

  • Legend
  • Posts: 1,911
  • Karma: -8
  • Retired..finally
  • School: Arizona State
CUBAIT '06
« Reply #63 on: January 24, 2006, 11:07:13 am »
Thanks to CUBAIT for always giving me something to chase after..!!! :gavel:  :gavel:  :gavel:
Associate Head Coach Sun Devil Mock Trial
Adjunct Faculty, ASU Barrett Honors College