Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Ask The Tab Director

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    A couple follow ups on your response to Adevans,

    1. If there are 9 ORCS next year and still only 48 spots at Nationals, how will AMTA assign bids to ORCS. 48 doesn't divide nicely into 9. How will AMTA decide which ORCS get more bids?

    2. I don't see that motion in the minutes from the summer meeting. Am I just missing something? Or are there motions that get passed and don't make it into the minutes?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by TheGhostofChaseMichael View Post
      3. Does AMTA have a plan for dealing with the increasing geographical power imbalance? If the goal is to have the best teams advance to the next level of competition, the fact that your ability to qualify is heavily determined by what site you compete at seems like an issue.
      I disagree that it's "increasing." There has always been some degree of regional power clusters. Where those clusters are is cyclical depending on which programs get strong and stay strong. In my view there's actually a lot of parity around the country. But remember that regional tournaments are just that--regional. American, Howard, Georgetown, GW, and Maryland are *always* going to be a Metro ride away from one another. There's only so much that can or should be done to distribute good teams that happen to be in the same city or greater metro area. With continued growth we've been able to add regionals which gives us some more options for distributing power, but I don't support making teams travel hundreds or thousands of miles in the hopes of finding a mythical "perfect balance."

      I post in my personal capacity, not on behalf of AMTA.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Adevans View Post

        Second, do you think there is a plan in place for expanding ORCS and or Nationals? If the issue is more hosts, I feel like they should post something to that affect, I am sure more people would volunteer if they thought it would solve some of these issues.
        I know this is Johnathan's thread, but just to follow-up. In the past, AMTA's routinely posted their call for hosts on their website, their Twitter, and their Facebook. Frank wrote a letter attached to the front of this year's case and last year's case about the expanding world of mock and the need for hosts. If you read the last few years of board minutes, you'll see Leckrone & co talk about the incentive structure changes they've been making to improve host recruitment and retention. What other methods of posting this information would you suggest? Not meaning to be snarky, I just am curious to know if there's other things people are expecting. Also keep in mind that AMTA's reaching out individually to a lot of teams/institutions to scope out potential hosts, some of whom just don't want to help for a variety of reasons. But just because you're not hearing about the direct outreach doesn't mean it's not happening (might just be that you're in a region that doesn't need another host, and/or you haven't yet established yourself as a reliable prospective host in a variety of ways - so you wouldn't happen to be a recipient of one of these feeler requests).
        Last edited by pmgf; February 5th, 2018, 04:34 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by pmgf View Post
          Hey Johnathan, I saw nationals next year will start April 5. Does that mean no new nationals case next season?
          I'm not sure how the scheduling is going to play out next year. I haven't heard anything about not having a NCT case, so I assume there will be one. If I had to guess, the regionals and ORCS will just get moved a bit earlier. That all tends to get worked out over the summer.
          I post in my personal capacity, not on behalf of AMTA.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by The_Quibbler View Post
            A couple follow ups on your response to Adevans,

            1. If there are 9 ORCS next year and still only 48 spots at Nationals, how will AMTA assign bids to ORCS. 48 doesn't divide nicely into 9. How will AMTA decide which ORCS get more bids?

            2. I don't see that motion in the minutes from the summer meeting. Am I just missing something? Or are there motions that get passed and don't make it into the minutes?
            1. My proposal would be for each ORCS to have 5 bids and then give 3 open bids out of a nationwide open bid pool, just like we do from regionals to ORCS. I am sure some of my colleagues would rather increase NCT to 54 teams and have one 26 team division and one 28 team division, so that we could maintain 6 bids per ORCS. We'll see what happens!

            2. My bad. It was the 2015 mid-year meeting. After you've been to what feels like a million of these meetings they all sort of blend together.
            I post in my personal capacity, not on behalf of AMTA.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by MizzouMock View Post
              We do account for "power C & D teams" and assign them an assumed TPR for our internal purposes.
              How is "assumed TPR" calculated for C-E teams if not by previous years' regionals? Or did you mean it is based on regionals for assumed TPR, but you would be against using regionals for actual TPR? Do you think this system works to account for some programs' C teams being stronger than other programs' A teams?

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by DefenseMid View Post
                This is a confusion I've had come up for a while. If, in captain's meeting, one team shows the other that they are using a white board as a demonstrative, does that team have to disclose anything about what the board will be used for? I've seen teams take issue with that. Also, on a more fun note, what is the most ridiculous thing you've ever had a tab complaint about?
                I don't want to get into too much rule interpretation here, mostly because I don't want teams going into tournaments saying WOODWARD SAID ON PERJURIES THIS WAS/WASN'T OK. So I'm going to let the rulebook speak for itself on that.

                I can't think of too many good tab "complaint" stories. Certainly there are plenty of *weird* things that happen at, and prior to, tournaments. One of the best stories I heard is a team that asked to call a fourth witness, because their third witness "didn't go well."
                I post in my personal capacity, not on behalf of AMTA.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by kmcf8 View Post

                  How is "assumed TPR" calculated for C-E teams if not by previous years' regionals? Or did you mean it is based on regionals for assumed TPR, but you would be against using regionals for actual TPR? Do you think this system works to account for some programs' C teams being stronger than other programs' A teams?
                  No, we base the numerical value off of the TPR of the school's B team. It's basically an invented number but one that reflects the fact that the team took a bid the previous year, and the assumption is that the C team TPR would be less than that of the B team (and the D team less than that of the C team, when that happens.) Sometimes yes, that assumed/placeholder TPR is greater than that of other schools A teams. So we do try and account for it.

                  Keep in mind TPR is valuable as a consistent metric but it's by no means perfect. It assumes that teams will perform consistent with their past performance, which doesn't always happen. Some teams graduate lots of people and go into a bit of rebuilding mode. Other teams stay off the radar screen and suddenly have a breakout year. That's part of what makes mock trial fun; if we had a perfect predictor of results we wouldn't need to have the tournaments.
                  I post in my personal capacity, not on behalf of AMTA.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by MizzouMock View Post

                    No, we base the numerical value off of the TPR of the school's B team. It's basically an invented number but one that reflects the fact that the team took a bid the previous year, and the assumption is that the C team TPR would be less than that of the B team (and the D team less than that of the C team, when that happens.) Sometimes yes, that assumed/placeholder TPR is greater than that of other schools A teams. So we do try and account for it.
                    How much do you discount the TPR of the C team from the TPR of the B team? What is the formula for this "assumed TPR"?

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by TheGhostofChaseMichael View Post

                      How much do you discount the TPR of the C team from the TPR of the B team? What is the formula for this "assumed TPR"?
                      I'm pretty sure we just do 1/2 of the B team TPR. You could argue that it should be less of a discount. But at the same time, C and D teams are more volatile than A and B teams--it's harder to have consistent freshman teams. So you don't want to overstate it the other way either. Regardless, we're talking about differences of less than 10 points in TPR which in the grand scheme of things is pretty minimal.
                      I post in my personal capacity, not on behalf of AMTA.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by pmgf View Post

                        I know this is Johnathan's thread, but just to follow-up. In the past, AMTA's routinely posted their call for hosts on their website, their Twitter, and their Facebook. Frank wrote a letter attached to the front of this year's case and last year's case about the expanding world of mock and the need for hosts. If you read the last few years of board minutes, you'll see Leckrone & co talk about the incentive structure changes they've been making to improve host recruitment and retention. What other methods of posting this information would you suggest? Not meaning to be snarky, I just am curious to know if there's other things people are expecting. Also keep in mind that AMTA's reaching out individually to a lot of teams/institutions to scope out potential hosts, some of whom just don't want to help for a variety of reasons. But just because you're not hearing about the direct outreach doesn't mean it's not happening (might just be that you're in a region that doesn't need another host, and/or you haven't yet established yourself as a reliable prospective host in a variety of ways - so you wouldn't happen to be a recipient of one of these feeler requests).
                        I may have missed the letter at the front of the case, but I think that most of the posts I see are just that like the hosting application is open. Based on the fact that the dates were so early (to host a regional next year I would have had to apply over the summer last year), I never knew they even had trouble getting hosts.

                        I also think that if AMTA did a little more for hosts people would be more willing to apply. At the moment, I believe the issue isn't the actual money, but acquiring judges. I would like to believe that the scrutiny is a little higher for regional judges than for invitationals. I think if AMTA said that they would worry about getting judges, people would be extremely willing to host. When hosting invitationals, that is by far the most difficult part. Also, if AMTA had a pool of judges or a way of vetting judges it would make competition at regionals better anyway so it just feels like a good idea.

                        The last thing that I think holds people back from hosting is with getting good rooms. Often times at invitationals, trials will be in very small classrooms, with 3 pushed together desks to form a council table, and when we are talking about regionals, everyone wants to have a higher standard. This is an unavoidable issue, but just should be noted. To this end, I wonder if making the regionals smaller would ever be a possibility.

                        In theory, if we did more tournaments like colorado-springs size, I think people would then be more willing to host since they can find a couple decent rooms. I get that this is in many ways changing how the regional format would be, but even to that affect, getting judges is easier too. If regionals were all like 16 teams in which 4-5 bids were given. It would be easier to host, easier to power balance, and there would be fewer teams getting "lucky" draws to break. Just a thought.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Adevans View Post
                          I also think that if AMTA did a little more for hosts people would be more willing to apply. At the moment, I believe the issue isn't the actual money, but acquiring judges. I would like to believe that the scrutiny is a little higher for regional judges than for invitationals. I think if AMTA said that they would worry about getting judges, people would be extremely willing to host. When hosting invitationals, that is by far the most difficult part. Also, if AMTA had a pool of judges or a way of vetting judges it would make competition at regionals better anyway so it just feels like a good idea.
                          I really really doubt AMTA has the capacity right now to assist in and major way with judge recruitment for regionals. I do wonder about the vetting though.

                          MizzouMock what do AMTA reps do at tournaments if teams report egregious behavior from a judge? Do they just report it to the host and hope that the host blacklists that judge for later years? Does AMTA have any way of making sure that a judge who was black listed at one tournament doesn't get recruited by another tournament (especially in areas like the Northeast where there are many tournaments close together that may cross recruit judges).

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Yeah no. Adevans, AMTA is not some big business with a bunch of resources. It's a working board manned by volunteers, most of whom are full time attorneys / educators / both in addition to being full time coaches of competitive teams. And most of them host their own tournaments. Some of them even host 2 tournaments a year (1 invitational, 1 AMTA tournament, because they want to give back). They don't have the time or money or resources or connections to recruit judges for you. If you're a rising sophomore on a team with no adult coaches or institutional support, you're probably not a prime target for AMTA's host recruiting efforts. On the other hand, if you're an attorney coaching in a decent sized city with decent team support from your university and a reasonably large local bar, AMTA probably wants to talk to you, especially if there's no other regionals near you.

                            There's also no way they can really vet volunteer judges. What are you going to do, send online quizzes that lawyers are required to take to make sure that they remember the definition of hearsay and that they're not mean and that they're not racist? Good luck with that.

                            Also it's not true that to host next year, you had to have applied last year. That's the schedule for just the NCT (for good reason). For ORCS/Regionals, it's just the summer before. So, spring 2019 tournament applications are due this summer 2018, and so forth.

                            And if you think that's still early, it makes sense why they have to recruit in the summer. Choosing everyone's dates, figuring out conflicts, working out team assignments, reaching out to other potential hosts once the deadline passes, etc. takes a lot of time. Starting during the summer when there's no competitions to be prepping can free up a bit of time to focus on these kinds of admin things. Plus some venues like courthouses require tons of advance lead time to reserve, and some hosts might want to try for CLE credit and the deadlines for those applications can be early depending on the state, so getting dates approved early is important. Also, since judge recruitment takes an insane amount of time, it's not a bad idea to send a "save the date" judge recruitment months in advance.


                            Also, @ all of you reading, if you DO want AMTA to eventually be in a position where it could just hand over lists of judges to new regionals hosts, sign up as an alum when you graduate and get put on judges lists. That's the best way to increase our pool of good judges and it's a way you can keep giving back to this organization.
                            Last edited by pmgf; February 6th, 2018, 11:14 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Hi, I was wondering how one becomes an AMTA rep. I know there's an application, but I was wondering what the specific requirements are? Do you need a certain amount/kind of mock experience? How soon after graduating can you become one?

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by The_Quibbler View Post

                                MizzouMock what do AMTA reps do at tournaments if teams report egregious behavior from a judge? Do they just report it to the host and hope that the host blacklists that judge for later years? Does AMTA have any way of making sure that a judge who was black listed at one tournament doesn't get recruited by another tournament (especially in areas like the Northeast where there are many tournaments close together that may cross recruit judges).
                                That's right, we rely on hosts to recruit judges so we report issues to them and trust them to follow through with that. There isn't a regional or nationwide "bad judge list," and thankfully I'm not aware of problems that have risen to the level where we would need one. But something to keep in mind I suppose!

                                I post in my personal capacity, not on behalf of AMTA.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X