No announcement yet.

Case Stats

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Case Stats

    Since AMTA won't be posting another case balance memo until after regionals (by which point it won't be particularly useful in actually preparing for regionals), and I for one find it useful to know how biased the case is while competing, I thought it would be good if we started sharing case balance statistics on Perjuries now that it seems to be coming back. Could people post the balance data from their tournaments here (posting on MTC was great until MTC slowed way down, I'm pretty sure they are over a month behind)?

    I've gone ahead and done stats on all of the fall tournaments where at least 25% of the teams were at Nationals last year as a reference (borrowing this standard from MockAnalysisIsMyDrug) so we can see how the case has changed (sorry, I wanted to do all of them, but that's just too much). I know AMTA already posted the overall stats but I think looking at it on a tournament by tournament basis can also be useful to see the range of variation.

    Carolina Classic:
    Teams competing: 21
    National teams: 8

    Total P wins: 45.5 (51.7%)
    Total D wins: 42.5 (48.3%)
    R3/4 P wins: 24.5 (56%)
    R3/4 D wins: 19.5 (44%)

    Teams competing: 24
    National teams: 11

    Total P wins: 43.5 (45.3%)
    Total D wins: 52.5 (54.7%)
    R3/4 P wins: 21 (44%)
    R3/4 D wins: 27 (56%)

    Scarlet & Gray:
    Teams competing: 26
    National teams: 7

    Total P wins: 51.5 (49.5%)
    Total D wins: 52.5 (50.5%)
    R3/4 P wins: 30 (58%)
    R3/4 D wins: 22 (42%)

    Tobacco Road:
    Teams competing: 26
    National teams: 12

    Total P wins: 44 (42.3%)
    Total D wins: 60 (57.7%)
    R3/4 P wins: 21.5 (41%)
    R3/4 D wins: 30.5 (59%)

    Spartan Throwdown:
    Teams competing: 31
    National teams: 10

    Total P wins: 62.5 (48.8%)
    Total D wins: 65.5 (51.2%)
    R3/4 P wins: 32 (50%)
    R3/4 D wins: 32 (50%)

    Mumbo Jumbo:
    Teams competing: 20
    National teams: 9

    Total P wins: 29.5 (36.9%)
    Total D wins: 50.5 (63.1%)
    R3/4 P wins: 16.5 (41%)
    R3/4 D wins: 23.5 (59%)

    Teams competing: 24
    National teams: 23

    Total P wins: 64 (44.8%)
    Total D wins: 79 (55.2%)
    R3/4 P wins: 33.5 (47%)
    R3/4 D wins: 37.5 (53%)

    Teams competing: 24
    National teams: 20

    Total P wins: 49 (51%)
    Total D wins: 47 (49%)
    R3/4 P wins: 24.5 (51%)
    R3/4 D wins: 23.5 (49%)

    Teams competing: 23
    National teams: 6

    Total P wins: 46.5 (48.4%)
    Total D wins: 49.5 (51.6%)
    R3/4 P wins: 24.5 (51%)
    R3/4 D wins: 23.5 (49%)

    Classic City:
    Teams competing: 22
    National teams: 8

    Total P wins: 39 (44.3%)
    Total D wins: 49 (55.7%)
    R3/4 P wins: 18.5 (42%)
    R3/4 D wins: 25.5 (58%)

    Wolverine Classic:
    Teams competing: 16
    National teams: 8

    Total P wins: 27.5 (43%)
    Total D wins: 36.5 (57%)
    R3/4 P wins: 15 (47%)
    R3/4 D wins: 17 (53%)

    Yale Invite (A division):
    Teams competing: 24
    National teams: 23

    Total P wins: 49 (51%)
    Total D wins: 47 (49%)
    R3/4 P wins: 28 (58%)
    R3/4 D wins: 20 (42%)

    Teams competing: 16
    National Teams: 8

    Total P wins: 27 (42.2%)
    Total D wins: 37 (57.8%)
    R3/4 P wins: 12.5 (39%)
    R3/4 D wins: 19.5 (61%)
    Last edited by J.D. Lorean; January 18th, 2018, 01:36 PM.

  • #2
    Looks like defense has a pretty solid edge even at these top tournaments. Thanks for posting this. I am intrigued to see if that changes at the January tournaments before Regionals (UClassic, and Chicago Fire are out at the moment). These tournaments will have the case changes implemented.

    Personally, I don't see the case changes making the prosecution that much stronger, I think most of the changes they made were minor changes to witnesses that wont effect the overall case that much, and I don't even really see it affecting call percentages that much.


    • #3
      If I had to make changes to each witness I think they would be:

      Kerry - stronger for prosecution (say something nobody else says)
      Morgan - a lot stronger for prosecution - need to actually ID Dylan or something else really big.
      Smith - wouldn't change
      Nichols - stronger for defense, have them fuck something up, or make it more confining what they did and didn't do that night (non-affidavit witness is a lot of power)

      Bailey - stronger for defense, give her something about Kerry muttering about how much they hate Dylan in Kerry's sleep or something about seeing Kerry do drugs - something like that haha
      Waters - wouldn't change

      Hendricks - stronger for prosecution, add a question asking them who else might have done this, and have them respond "I dont know" (good cross fodder if they make up a crazy theory).
      Longfellow - stronger for defense, just say something of substance... please
      Reeves - wouldn't change
      Morrison - stronger for defense, she says nothing right now


      • #4
        Here are the stats for Great Chicago Fire:

        Teams Competing: 24
        National Teams: 7

        Total P wins: 42 (43.8%)
        Total D wins: 54 (56.3%)
        R3/4 P wins: 24.5 (51%)
        R3/4 D wins: 23.5 (49%)

        So, about the same as a fall tournament on the overall balance. Comfortingly the R3/R4 results seem to be better, although they are still within the same range as we were seeing in the fall. Obviously, we will have to see how things go with later tournaments to get a bigger body of data.
        Last edited by TheGhostofChaseMichael; January 17th, 2018, 04:03 PM.


        • #5
          Adevans, I tend to agree with your analysis, I just wanted to give some reasoning as to why you're right.

          Kerry needs to be stronger for the prosecution because even though Kerry is a sympathetic witness who can score big points, they bring almost no facts to the table. Needs something about the gloves or the key to really tie things together.
          Morgan needs to be better for the prosecution because a Kerry/Morgan call could be good if there weren't such direct contradictions about who took Everest.
          Smith doesn't need to change because they are a versatile expert who has a clear focus.
          Nichols doesn't need to be changed in my opinion, because although there is a lot of good P evidence, the defense's Nichols cross can support almost every theory.

          Bailey should be stronger for defense because the defense is already so limited in call choices compared to P, with Longfellow being either forced or not.
          Waters doesn't need to change because they are a great blank slate to create crazy characters, with enough facts for both sides.

          Hendricks is fine as-is in my opinion. Tying Hendricks to any more statements would dampen the fun of a non-affidavit defendant.
          Longfellow would be fine if they had a bit more foundation. The conclusions are good enough, but Longfellow is just not credible as an expert. Maybe add something about the wifi, since teams are ignoring the cell tower information on Smith and going wifi-only.
          Reeves is actually INCREDIBLE for the defense now, because AMTA added a line about how the numbers they chose line up perfectly with the toxicology report, giving Reeves a get-out-of-jail-free card from their assumptions. They tried to make Reeves worse, and in my opinion they got better.
          Morrison needs to be stronger for defense because there is too much evidence placing Hendricks at the scene for there to be any reasonable doubt based on the timeline of Hendricks going home. I would love to see a little more anti-Kerry information, perhaps some more about Hendricks appearance on that night. The lack of evidence, combined with the fact that the defense already has such limitations, is enough reason to give Morrison a bit of a buff.

          Additionally, any defense bias in the case tends to be more about the fact that scores tend to increase as the round goes on rather than the specific facts.


          • #6
            In general, I think there also needs to be some more good P physical evidence, preferably supported by an exhibit that can come in on someone other than Nichols. The gun is good, but the gloves are kind of weak, and even the gun has its glaring flaws. I think one of the of the major sources of imbalance in the case appears when you start looking at how the evidence is limited by P call. Yes, there is a lot of P evidence if you just read the case through cover to cover, but P can only call three witnesses and that seriously restricts how much they can bring in. With most three witness calls, you just don't get enough solid physical evidence to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt by the end of the case in chief (yes, the Dylan cross usually helps, but fundamentally you should be able to prove things by the time you rest the P case) and that's even ignoring the fact that the D side is raising doubt at every opportunity. Having more physical evidence that was available on multiple witnesses would improve the P side's chances of getting all the evidence they need to within the three witness limit.


            • #7
              Thanks for running the GCF stats TheGhostofChaseMichael. UCLASSIC was below 25% nationals teams, but I went ahead and ran those stats anyways because there haven't exactly been a lot of tournaments since case changes yet and I'm very curious to see how they impacted balance.

              Teams competing: 38
              National teams: 7

              Total P wins: 73 (48%)
              Total D wins: 79 (52%)
              R3/4 P wins: 38 (50%)
              R3/4 D wins: 38 (50%)

              That 50/50 R3/4 split is something, I suppose.

              And interesting thoughts on witness adjustments. I disagree with you two that Kerry should be stronger, primarily because I'd love to see more diverse calls and most teams are calling Kerry right now. I think what you said about Kerry being sympathetic and high-scoring is exactly why they shouldn't be stronger for P- there needs to be a trade-off.

              Reeves is also fascinating because everyone seems to be divided over whether case changes ruined Reeves or made them much stronger. Mostly I think the changes just made that cross messier (easier to fight in convoluted ways), which is going to be helpful for strong witnesses and difficult for weaker witnesses.

              Agreed on most of the other witnesses though. Morrison in particular is just a kind of ridiculous choice right now who people call only because there aren't better options.


              • #8
                J.D. Lorean

                I think your comment about Kerry changes brings up a bit of a problem AMTA faces at the moment with the competing interests of balancing the case overall and balancing the witness calls. I mean if we look at the difference between Kerry and Morgan for example (since these are two witnesses that are very frequently seen as alternatives to one another), AMTA has conflicting interests. For witness call balance, it makes sense to make Kerry weaker and Morgan stronger so that are people will call Morgan rather than Kerry (and produce more witness call balance). But for overall case balance, making Kerry stronger makes more sense because most teams are calling Kerry and so if Kerry getís better the P side as a whole gets better.

                One might argue that If Morgan were simply enough better, then people would call Morgan and Morgan would also be sufficiently strong to combat the case bias. But, as you pointed out, there are non-fact based reasons for calling Kerry. Most people donít call Kerry because s/he is a fantastic fact witness. They call Kerry because Kerry is important for the emotional tone of the case (and cryers score well). So in order to help P (from a strictly case bias stand point), they need to make Kerry better from a fact perspective so that the witness that everyone is going to call for emotional reasons anyway is actually useful.

                Iím not sure in this particular case, that Kerry actually needs new facts from a ďis this witness actually usefulĒ standpoint (s/he IDís the defendant after all). Itís not like Kerry is as bad as Morrison for example. But, I do think there is an interesting larger issue here in that AMTA could have done a better job of fixing case bias by adding good facts to Kerry that would bolster the case as a whole.


                • #9
                  Here are the Ramblin'í Wreck Stats:

                  Teams Competing: 24
                  National Teams: 12

                  Total P wins: 45.5 (47.4%)
                  Total D wins: 50.5 (52.6%)
                  R3/4 P wins: 21.5 (44.8%)
                  R3/4 D wins: 26.5 (55.2%)
                  Last edited by TheGhostofChaseMichael; January 25th, 2018, 04:38 PM.


                  • #10
                    Here are the stats from BRIC (Cornell), and they don't look great:

                    Teams Competing: 18
                    National Teams: 8

                    Total P wins: 28 (38.9%)
                    Total D wins: 44 (61.1%%)
                    R3/4 P wins: 12.5 (34.7%)
                    R3/4 D wins: 23.5 (65.3%)


                    • #11
                      Downtown stats-

                      Teams Competing: 18
                      National Teams: 15

                      Total P wins: 65 (36%)
                      Total D wins: 115 (64%)
                      R3/4 P wins: 33.5 (37%)
                      R3/4 D wins: 56.5 (63%)


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by DefenseMid View Post
                        Downtown stats-

                        Teams Competing: 18
                        National Teams: 15

                        Total P wins: 65 (36%)
                        Total D wins: 115 (64%)
                        R3/4 P wins: 33.5 (37%)
                        R3/4 D wins: 56.5 (63%)
                        Where are you finding the tab summary for Downtown?


                        • #13
                          See the Invitational Results forum (2017-2018 Invitational Results), I added Downtown (second page).



                          • #14
                            Stats from Hoosier Hoedown (Indiana):

                            Teams competing: 26
                            Nationals teams: 8

                            Total P wins: 44.5 (43%)
                            Total D wins: 59.5 (57%)
                            R3/4 P wins: 20.5 (39%)
                            R3/4 D wins: 31.5 (61%)


                            • #15
                              This is the first time in a while that AMTA has produced a genuinely unbalanced case. Curious to see if they'll acknowledge that in the post-Regionals case balance memo, assuming these trends carry through Regionals. It's also possible they'll even out because of the statistical noise of so many weaker teams.