| Subject: Re: agh my brain is fed up |
Author:
Tim
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 10:41:22 05/21/03 Wed
In reply to:
Robin
's message, "Re: agh my brain is fed up" on 23:45:52 05/20/03 Tue
Robin,
The latest version of the proposal does address (imperfectly I admit) the representation problem, by amalgamating teams according to geographical proximity.
On scoring... I wonder if it is possible for results to be unwound somehow to count towards the university's results, even if not the team results? Probably not, given our general scoring methodology.
Note that in normal competitions points are assigned to each couples and then summed to give team placings. That isn't the methodology being proposed by Ali, and I think the new system is better. What we are giving in the new system is a straight comparison between teams, without, at any point, assigning points to them. The idea is that when we say Oxford C beat Bath A, we are saying, in a direct competition between the two, Ox C beat Bath A, not Ox C got more points. In a direct comparison (assuming that the two conditions for eligibility have been met), any incomplete team is beaten by all other teams. They therefore finish last. Trying to unbundle the amalgamated team's results would therefore be mixing two separate scoring methodologies. Since the new system seems more sporting, and fairer, I think we should stick with it.
All of which means it is important that the SC, in creating teams, try and create coherent teams that do actually represent something and therefore have a place in the team match. That requires time in advance.
>>>someone has half a team, ...make sure that only the
>>full team represents the uni, and the half team say
>>YORK/HULL is treat like a separate team as if it was
>>from hogwarts or
>>>something.
>
>>That's almost exactly what the odds team is! What is
>>your objection, given that you've proposed something
>>almost identical?
>
>I don't think it's the same. Maybe in practice it is,
>but you have not answered the concern that it
>represents no-one and thus has no place in the team
>match at all.
>
>The point is that everyone represents a uni, even if
>an amalgamated team of lower dancers might not score,
>it's still hull/york or UEA/Leeds, not just "random
>dancers". "Random dancers" or "odds and sods" have no
>identity ...
>
>>>or a fair way of splitting the scores is devised...
>>
>>Mathmatically impossible, invalid and highly
>>impractical, I'm afraid.
>
>at worst it's undesirable. In Oxford we have an
>intercollegiate comp and we allow partners from
>different teams. The points are split, so the
>disadvantage is that your total number is half of what
>it could be if you had a whole team. Give the SC veto
>power over it, and they can prevent abuse. Or make it
>non-scoring, i don't think that's a problem...
>
>Robin
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 