USACFC Competition Schedule and Participants List

[Wafath]

Originally Posted by TooLoftheDeviL

By chance, does anyone know how we might go about making a motion to actually implement some seeding algorithm for this years championship to avoid secret deliberations and such?

My experience with "motions" in the Assoc. indicates that this is a great way to get nothing done.

Instead, however, re-read my previous post about this conversation not being entirely academic. As far as I am concerned, this forum is the secret deliberation. If I didn't want people to pick apart my idea, I wouldn't have posted it.

And yes, this all may be moot if the BC, by whim or instruction, re-arranges pools the day of. But I suspect they will be busy enough with other problems.

W

ps: Arguments backed up with functional Java code carry more weight.

[Wafath]

Originally Posted by DroppingBy

The list of schools competing... was that sent out recently? If so, to what list? I haven't received anything since our confirmation of receipt (and yes, we're listed on there).

Nothing has been mailed out. I am waiting for a little more information before I start soliciting lineups.

W

[foillion]

Originally Posted by DJ Apostrophe

You know Brad... seeing a comment like this, you could just smile and sit all smug... because the success UMASS has had at this event can be largely attributed to you... You were a big part of getting the event started working with Bruce, and you were a big part of how the team functioned, worked, and succeeded... I'm sure I'm not alone in appreciating what you did for our program.

That said, I understand what you were saying... but I felt like you needed a misty eyed thank you.

-w

AWWWWWW! I got misty just reading the damn post. Good times. Quite frankly the best times. Fencing with Leo at the pool at 11PM in Florida. Bringing my volleyball on the plane. Getting razzed for only going 11-3 the first year. Back to back to back 3x Men's Foil Team National Champions. I miss that team. I miss those friends. I miss that coach. Temple is lucky to have you.

-P

Edit: I almost forgot about you being held down and tickled while you got your toes painted. Classic.

[Wafath]

Originally Posted by noodle

same process, men's 3w. 30 indicates last, indicates no past data. some of the higher outliers can be attributed to format change, i think.

Possibly, but I suspect it also has to do with the maturity of the conference. Teams have cycles. (For example, look at Cornell & Maryland, both in champs & regular season. Prior to the 06-07 season, Cornell beat UMD in both. In the 06-07 season, UMD beat Cornell in both. This suggests to me that their relative results in that champs is not influenced by the format.)

I believe, however, you have made a good case for your seeding method. I feel it doesn't take into account the regular season of teams, which will reflect team's cycles better.

I remain concerned about the sheer number of unranked teams, however.

W

[noodle]

Originally Posted by Wafath

Possibly, but I suspect it also has to do with the maturity of the conference. Teams have cycles. (For example, look at Cornell & Maryland, both in champs & regular season. Prior to the 06-07 season, Cornell beat UMD in both. In the 06-07 season, UMD beat Cornell in both. This suggests to me that their relative results in that champs is not influenced by the format.)

I believe, however, you have made a good case for your seeding method. I feel it doesn't take into account the regular season of teams, which will reflect team's cycles better.

I remain concerned about the sheer number of unranked teams, however.

W

right, that too. there's no avoiding the fact that after 4-ish years, fencers will graduate and fall out. including the good fencers who hold up some teams. beyond that, there are always random factors specific to some teams that will affect results. seeding can't address that.

in my opinion, conferences fall into this category. different conferences have different strengths, different formats, and oftentimes different teams attending than teams that would attend clubs. a 2nd place in conference A might be the equivalent to 5th place in conference B. seeding purely on this would cause problems and imbalances. seeding primarily on past results provide a grounding, albeit not necessarily totally accurate grounding, in results with almost every participant. some teams might be inaccurately represented, but that will almost definitely never be less than 50%.

also, i was also only pointing out the use of past results, which is half of what i was proposing. i still like the idea that i would also try to insert teams based on the composite USFA rating of their teams compared to ratings of the others. in order to insert new teams into the already seeded teams from the past.

[epeemike81]

Originally Posted by DJ Apostrophe

You know Brad... seeing a comment like this, you could just smile and sit all smug... because the success UMASS has had at this event can be largely attributed to you... You were a big part of getting the event started working with Bruce, and you were a big part of how the team functioned, worked, and succeeded... I'm sure I'm not alone in appreciating what you did for our program.

That said, I understand what you were saying... but I felt like you needed a misty eyed thank you.

-w

QFT

-m

[LordShout]

Composite USFA ratings? My best fencers are either not rated in their weapon or rated 2-3 letters below where they would be if they fenced collegiate. If my memory serves last years women's epee champ squad was UUU. To many teams, especially very new teams (IE teams this would actually effect) don't have the USFA ratings.

[noodle]

Originally Posted by LordShout

Composite USFA ratings? My best fencers are either not rated in their weapon or rated 2-3 letters below where they would be if they fenced collegiate. If my memory serves last years women's epee champ squad was UUU. To many teams, especially very new teams (IE teams this would actually effect) don't have the USFA ratings.

and we're only talking about the 100% new teams.
and statistically speaking, based on past results, the majority of new teams finish up in the bottom 25% of the field.

so, if most new teams are mostly low-rated and most new teams also finish in the bottom 25% of the field, i don't see a problem correlating them for practical purposes, even if the correlation isn't 100%, or even actually there at all.

is it perfect? no. but no seeding method will be. otherwise, why even fence if we know so well where people will place?

and again, the composite USFA rating suggestion is the TERTIARY seeding proposition. after past results and spreading out conference members.

find me a better one and prove why it works and i'll replace USFA ratings with it in my proposed seeding method.

[larkmaj]

I think USFA ratings should be considered as Noodle suggests. Not all new schools participate in a conference or even dual meets. I don't know the last time our school competed against another school in a school vs school format, if we do face another school it is in a USFA team tournament style. Our competitive fencers participate in USFA tournaments and not school vs school tournaments. For this reason a number of our fencers do have ratings that are as good a representative of their ability as they can be.

If a school has competitive fencers and they don't participate in any sort of conference where do they compete? In USFA tournaments.

[MyrddinsPrecint]

Originally Posted by KD5MDK

Also, he's secretly planning a 0th place reserved for UMASS in case of squad meltdown on strip.

squad meltdown?

Don't you mean coach meltdown???

[EpeeConvert]

Originally Posted by DJ Apostrophe

You know Brad... seeing a comment like this, you could just smile and sit all smug... because the success UMASS has had at this event can be largely attributed to you... You were a big part of getting the event started working with Bruce, and you were a big part of how the team functioned, worked, and succeeded... I'm sure I'm not alone in appreciating what you did for our program.

That said, I understand what you were saying... but I felt like you needed a misty eyed thank you.

-w

Crap, I never had you as a coach but I miss you.

[LordShout]

I thought I posted this two days ago, must have spaced and closed the window before posting.

noodle:

I agree, on second thought they probably will work just fine and even if they don't make a great predictor its the easiest way and it only applies for their first year anyway.

[KShan5[PrFC]]

Originally Posted by EpeeConvert

Crap, I never had you as a coach but I miss you.

Agreed.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by TooLoftheDeviL

Would it be too cute to start asking for seeding for squads now?

*bump*

-B

[TooLoftheDeviL]

A recent email was asking for rosters so that a seeding comittee would know which squads were incomplete.

[oiuyt]

Originally Posted by TooLoftheDeviL

A recent email was asking for rosters so that a seeding comittee would know which squads were incomplete.

Did it mention what criteria the seeding committee might be using beyond checking for warm bodies?

-B

[TooLoftheDeviL]

Originally Posted by oiuyt

Did it mention what criteria the seeding committee might be using beyond checking for warm bodies?

-B

It did not. USFA rating did not appear to be asked for with the roster, either. Only the fencers' names.

[KD5MDK]

No mention of a special levy to fund cigars and room service for this seeding committee?

[Wafath]

The seeding committee appears to be made up of Bruce, Jon, Jim V. & sometimes L. Schiller.

NEIFC is seeded by championships. Vermont is appended to this list.
MFC is seeded by a combination of the regular season & championships.
The three western schools (ASU, Wyoming & USC) are seeded by IFCSC.

SIFA schools (UT, TAMU) have said "Just make sure we are in different pools."

For the men, MACFA schools are seeded by MACFA championships. Rutgers is inserted into this list based on available regular season results. The RU coach has been consulted in this matter, and it is still being discussed.

The rest of the men's squads are dumped into SAC (regardless of actual affiliation) and seeded by Bruce.

For the women, NEIFC, MFC, IFCSC & SIFA are seeded as above. The rest are dumped into SAC and seeded by Bruce.

This information may change. It is not clear if pools will be set up by software and then verified by committee, or set up by committee.

W