Too Many Invitationals? Never...

[UConn Mock Trial]

My Fellow Mockers,

As the founder of the team at the University of Connecticut I have a laundry list of objectives I hope to complete is some capacity before my time here is done.

Up at the top of this list is prestige (and yes we are only entering our 2nd year in existence) and while I recognize there are many ways to build prestige of our program, I would like to ask for your help with one of those methods that I have always wanted to be involved with and that is the creation of an Invitational.

Now, I am accutely aware of the growing problem of over-saturation during Invitational season and I mean no harm by contributing to this dilema (though it would not be until the 2009-2010 year). However, I am writing this to gain invaluable information from those of you out there that have been to the best AND the worst invitationals.

I want to know what has never been offered at an invitational that you would like to see AND what has been offered that you thought was a great idea?

I am aware that a unique pairing system (Beach Party), no fees (ASU), great competition (GAMTIT), and good timing are all huge factors...but what can I do beyond these things, even if they are small, that can give an edge to my Invitational?

I ask these questions with the hope that those of you who have sought that extra something in an invitational but never found it are able to with my help. 

[Rane]

Well, although I am new to the organization of a mock trial invitational, I do know that an incredibly invaluable asset to a tournament is for coaches to be able to see their teams compete so they can do what they're supposed to do, and coach their own teams. Seeing your team in competition is a better representation for what they need help with than any scrimmage or practice ever will be. If you can do a good enough job recruiting judges there's less of a chance you'll have to ask coaches to judge.

If you can find the money to pay for the tournament elsewhere, you can offer what ASU can, and have a tournament without registration fees. Your best bet for this amount of help would be law firms, restaurants, and hotels who can benefit from you directing business their way during the tournament.  Princeton Review has sponsored quite a few tournaments in the past, but now they seem to only be helping with the regular and post season(Regionals, Opening Round Championships, and Nationals), at least this is what I've been told.

Also, you're lucky enough to be in close proximity to a large amount of teams, who will probably be more willing to travel to a tournament that offers a low travel cost. This will definitely work in your favor. I know for my program we would attend more tournaments if there were more in close proximity. We don't have an issue in time management or anything that keeps us from competing as often as other programs, rather it simply costs far too much for us to travel more than once in the fall, and more than one invitational in the winter.

And, another note, if you're worried about there being too many tournaments in the area, you can always try to contact a school nearby and offer to help them host the tournament or even just switch off each year, that way you can share the same pool of teams.

Best of luck Sam, I'm sure the more experienced tournament organizers/hosts will post or pm you soon to offer you more sound advice.

-Corey

[maxus]

Things never seen.
1. Sit down dinner award ceremony that wasn't at a national
2. Final round 1 vs. 2 pairing on video via DVD.
3. A full jury in the main "courtroom" for all trials there.
4. Mock Trial: The Video Game(No Phoenix Wright doesn't count)

Random good ideas
1. Pre Assigned rooms for the first round.
2. Food for Mockers that is at least as good as for the Judges
3. A shortened 0-6 round during the time to tab before the awards
4. Matthew Elisha Williams(I'm always a random good idea)
5. Traveling trophies
6. BBQ for a meal after the trials are over.
7. Having it broadcast on local Access
8. Did I mention Matthew Elisha Williams?

[UConn Mock Trial]

C'mon Everybody!

A lot of people are looking at this post but not writing anything. I know that there are more than two people here that have wished that an Invitational had included something or had done something different...so what was it?

After all, this can end up benefiting a lot of teams.

Please voice any thoughts you have...

[Haskins]

Things I really like about other tournaments:
1. Pairing for round 1: Pick your opposition in the first round--you can only choose those teams ranked below you based on BBR from the prior year (like at Yale)
2. Discount rates on hotels
3. Awesome trophies

Things I don't like:
1. Having no food choices during lunch and being rushed to eat and get to the captains' meeting/trial
2. Starting trial at 8am
3. Poorly set-up courtrooms (having a tournament at a courthouse is best-- desks for attorneys are horrible)
4. Character names for each team (let me be called by a number or letter please)

While it wouldn't really be a true invitational, I think it would be cool to have a competition where you are assigned to a random team and have to create a case theory using the current AMTA case with the members from other schools in a short period of time (like 30 minutes). It'd essentially be a tournament with all bye-buster teams, so there wouldn't be competition among the schools. Rather, there would be a lot of individual attorney and witness awards.

[DesertClassic]

NYU's Downtown Invitational Challenge ("The DIC") is a good example of how to do a lot of things right.

[UConn Mock Trial]

Ok...

Perhaps you could elaborate beyond the name so that I might one day run an Invitational that many people would be overwhelmingly attracted to?

[801d2d]

If you want to hold a good invitational tournament, the recipe isn't very hard. 

1. Find a good location to hold your tournament.  You don't need a courthouse, but large rooms where the students and judges can be adequately spaced out is essential. 
2. Recruit qualified judges...lots of them.  Schools will put up with crappy venues more than they will put up with crappy judges or a lack of judges.  Nothing causes more frustration than finding out the tournament is delayed because you do not have enough judges.  Quite possibly the single biggest factor for retaining teams from year to year. 
3. You need qualified personnel to run your tournament.  Most importantly you need someone to run a tab room efficiently.  The best tournaments seek out the help of board members.  When I hear Dr. Halva-Neubauer is running tab, I know I don't have to worry about delays or massive errors causing an entire bracket to be re-tabbed.  Tournaments need to run on time. 

Other important factors to consider, but not in my top 3...

1. Date - Don't expect to draw top flight teams if you schedule your tournament the same weekend as GAMTI, etc.
2. Easy access to cheap food.  Self-explanatory.


I think schools get caught up in gimmicks too often.  You don't need a banquet awards ceremony or a dance party to make your tournament good.  You need to run on time and have lots of good judges.  If you do that your first year, I guarantee more schools will want to come to your tournament the next year.  Look at Wake Forest if you need inspiration.  The DDIT is one of the most competitive tournaments because the teams that attended gave it great reviews for its venue, adherence to the schedule, and judging pool.

[UConn Mock Trial]

Alright,

I am getting back some helpful feedback. While there are some differing opinions it is pretty much agrred upon what is good and what is bad about invitationals that have been held.

I would to see if anyone had ideas that have not been manifested in any invitational to date. I have tried to come up with some ideas but come up with ideas that aren't very feasible.

Does anyone have an idea for something that hasn't yet been done...or maybe something that is really interesting that was only done once?

[maxus]

I have never seen a 4 round challenge system, mainly because of the significant issues around tabbing such an ambitious idea.

Essentially every round is a free for all the teams would initially be allowed to select in an order determined by their highest team's BBR and then after the first round teams would select based on reverse order for the second round. Then their combined first day record for the third round. And finally in reverse of that order for the fourth round. With no school being able to pick the same program's teams twice in a row.

The other thing I would love to see but haven't is a no SSR. A tourney with no Same School Restriction would also be interesting and wouldn't really effect the running times.

[Golden Skull]

The other thing I would love to see but haven't is a no SSR. A tourney with no Same School Restriction would also be interesting and wouldn't really effect the running times.

I think that's a bad idea.  I can see the argument for no SSR at regionals and nationals--but for invitationals, where nothing is on the line?  Why should anyone pay money to travel out of their area, stay at a hotel, eat on the road, etc., just so that they can play their own school?  You can reserve a classroom and do that over a weekend on your own time.

[bobbyattack]

I think that's a bad idea.  I can see the argument for no SSR at regionals and nationals--but for invitationals, where nothing is on the line?  Why should anyone pay money to travel out of their area, stay at a hotel, eat on the road, etc., just so that they can play their own school?  You can reserve a classroom and do that over a weekend on your own time.

I agree, SSR is required for regular season.

However, I would take it a step farther.  Have each team be able to list one program they do not want to hit.  So if you have already hit the same program in the last two tourneys, you can avoid making it 3 in a row.  Or maybe you just want to assure you don't hit the best team and improve your odds of winning.  Or not the worst team, to assure yourself high quality matches.  Just a little kink that would have some value.

Do first round pairings based on the results of last year.  That would only work if you have a fairly consistent field.  And you would have to figure out how to handle new teams (probably could just random draw them).  But it would make for a good first round.

Also, I still want conference tournaments.

[MT4e]

I agree with Golden Skull, why would teams travel to a tourney just to hit their own team? The point of invites is not only to perfect your case-in-chief but also to see what OTHER programs are doing successfully or poorly. During the invitational season you want to face a very diverse field of teams so you can get very different views of the same case. By hitting your own program, you do not accomplish this.

Also, the reason there is a SSR during regional or national tourneys is because they don't want teams to sacrifice one of their own teams in order to enhance the record of another team in their program.

For example, if 436 and 437 are both 6-0 going into the final round at Golds and are facing each other. And there are 6 other 5-1 teams. One of the teams would be forced to throw the round in order for one of our teams to win the Division. Why risk a split?

For the record, when I say forced, I mean under gunpoint, if necessary.

Hence the SSR at nats and regionals.

The previous post is my opinion and does not reflect the opinion of the Cornell University Mock Trial Program.

[Rane]

I agree, SSR is required for regular season.

However, I would take it a step farther.  Have each team be able to list one program they do not want to hit.  So if you have already hit the same program in the last two tourneys, you can avoid making it 3 in a row.  Or maybe you just want to assure you don't hit the best team and improve your odds of winning.  Or not the worst team, to assure yourself high quality matches.  Just a little kink that would have some value.

How do you propose to offer a fair competition to all teams involved if say, half or more do not want to hit a certain team due to any reason such as disparate talent levels or already hitting that team at another tournament.  The good teams will hit a weak team maybe once, sometimes twice a tournament.  If teams were allowed to choose who they hit, then that almost seems to defeat the purpose of having a power matching system at all. Not only that, it seems to defeat the idea of competition if you can avoid whichever team you want at a tournament you go to.

[UConn Mock Trial]

Just to steer us back a little bit.

I think that a debate about SSR is a great way to remove some of the summer boredom we are experiencing but hopefully we can refocus on my area of concern.

What hasn't been tried yet that would convince your team to give a new invitational a chance?