Re: Tuna's MJP system for nationals

[EMarlowWSU@aol.com]

I was just wondering how big of a problem "strikeouts" would be if the number
of strikes were 10%.  I am not sure that I think the reasons for arbitrarily
assigning 5% as the figure make much sense to me.  Obviously, I don't have
the tab room and software experience that Tuna does, but I wanted to know if
there were empirical proof that striking 10% would cause strikeouts.

I mean the judging pool and the number of teams at CEDA nats are both pretty
deep.  I find it a stretch to imagine that every team would strike the exact
same judge, much less do it with a number of judges creating a strikeout.
 Shoot, in my experience, I rarely have had two teams on my squad that could
agree on which judges to strike so a community consensus is hard for me to
imagine.  I kind of like the idea of 10% of the pool being subject to strike.
 I think this would refine the judging pool even further for the teams who
put in the effort to complete the preference sheet, and that seems like the
whole goal of MPJ, unless I am just imagining things.

Just curious,
Marlow

---

Follow-Ups:

• Re: Tuna's MJP system for nationals
• From: Gary Larson <Gary.N.Larson@wheaton.edu>

---

• Prev by Date: Re: Eligibility-1 Year Extension Plan
• Next by Date: Re: Tuna-Don't Worry. Be Happy :-)
• Prev by thread: Re: Tuna's MJP system for nationals
• Next by thread: Re: Tuna's MJP system for nationals
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread
  • Author

---

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