Improving the format of the New England Championships Individuals

[bbower]

New Englands is run using an IFA team format (As fence only As, Bs fence Bs, Cs fence Cs). The current invidual format has 9 fencers (5A,3B,1C) promoted to a final pool of 9. I hate this format because

1) There is no clearly defined gold medal bout
2) Not enough fencers are promoted (we now have 12-14 teams)

I would like to discuss possible format alternatives so that I may propose a change to the coaches. This format must take no more than 2 hours to run, with 4 strips available per weapon.

My thoughts

A) 12 promoted (6A,4B,2C). 2 Pools of 6 to a final DE of 8
B) 16 promoted (8A,5B,3C). Straight DE of 16

Any comments on either format? Any better suggestions? Does anyone like the current format of a pool of 9?

[whtouche]

I like your option B best, and am with you in hating the format using a final pool, for the same reasons.
The problem with option B is, how do you seed the table of 16?
Maybe A is a good compromise between the two, but I prefer DEs over pools. If I come up with anything more concrete I'll post again.

[oiuyt]

Whereas I would strongly prefer option A over option B. Trying to sort out appropriate seeding between the 6th-best A strip vs. the 2nd-best B strip is error-prone at best.

Let people sort it out with a round of pools, then go to DE's and you still have clear medal-round bouts.

-B

[bbower]

I know how not to seed the 16. The IFAs seeds the As in order, then the Bs, then the Cs. (promoting 9A, 5B, 2C) This is certainly wrong, as the #1 B is never a weaker fencer than the #9A.

I'm with Brad in preferring the pools. I'm concerned about the amount of time they'll take though. Even with double stripping the two pools of 6, that's 7.5 5-touch bouts per strip for the "round of 16" vs 1 15-touch bout per strip for that same round if you use a DE from 16.

Another possible solution is to use 2 pools of 6 and promote 2 per pool to a final DE of 4. This cuts out one round of DEs. I'm concerned though that this is too drastic of a cut.

[oiuyt]

The comparison should be 7.5 5-touch bouts vs. TWO 15-touch bouts (you have 4 strips for the event, you run 8 bouts in the L16 DE tableau). Not as big a difference as you had.

NIWFA promotes to a DE of 16 and tries to have a reasonable seeding. Certainly better than the IFA seeding. From inspection (and playing with historical data from the past 3ish years) there are minor tweaks that might improve the ordering, but showing that a change absolutely would be an improvement would require more data than was available to me (last February when I was playing with it).

-B

[annacattiva]

I like option A pools to DEs too. I have no further contribution.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

I like option B but I can't figure out a way to resolve the seeding problem either.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

NIWFA promotes to a DE of 16 and tries to have a reasonable seeding. Certainly better than the IFA seeding. From inspection (and playing with historical data from the past 3ish years) there are minor tweaks that might improve the ordering, but showing that a change absolutely would be an improvement would require more data than was available to me (last February when I was playing with it).

-B

As someone who has benefited from the NIWFA seeding (y'know, the year I wasn't screwed over) ............ It makes some damn weird things happen.

But at least that format is apparent.

Really, "being apparent" is what I look for in a format more of the time than I really think I should have to.

[Relampago]

IF there is to be a change (I'm not sure that one is entirely necessary), then option A seems more sensible. It take the current format (a finals pool) and adds the gold medal bout you think is necessary. B promotes too many fencers, and is impossible to seed ideally.

To qualify, I fence in these championships and have made the finals in recent years.