Re: Regional Constraints

[Pat <pjgehrke@ecst.csuchico.edu>]

> If pick 20 passes, I would think regional constraints would have to go.
> Steve 

Why? Under the current system debaters strike critics and if they 
accidentally strike someone from their own region, then it's their 
mistake and they simply have lost out on a strike, so people are careful 
not to choose from their own region.

If someone "picks" someone from their own region, then that "pick" 
doesn't count as one of the minimum twenty, since it is not a true 
"pick." Hence, at nationals its becomes 
"Pick-At-Least-20-Outside-Your-Region." 

That seems extraordinarily complex to me, but given that the computer 
already has to delineate regional affiliations under the status quo 
policy, and that "pick-at-least-20" would have to be smart enough not to 
allow you to pick your own coaches (or previous coaches who are coded off 
of you), it doesn't seem much more complicated than any other possible 
pick-at-least-20 system. 

I'm completely unfamiliar with tournament direction and the tab procedure 
at nationals, so I'd really like feedback on the feasibility of this 
idea, but it seems at least theoretically sound. Ideas? Problems?

Pat Gehrke
Chico

---

References:

• Re: Regional Constraints (fwd)
• From: Steven Hunt <hunt@lclark.edu>

---

• Prev by Date: Re: flowing evidence etc.
• Next by Date: Re: Mutual pref/Pick at least 20 -Reply
• Prev by thread: Re: Regional Constraints (fwd)
• Next by thread: Re: Regional Constraints (fwd)
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

Archive created by Jonathan Stanton (jonathan@cs.jhu.edu)
Return to main CEDA-L Archive Page