Poll

Who ya got??

Citadel A
2 (1.4%)
Citadel B
0 (0%)
Duke A
20 (14.4%)
Duke B
17 (12.2%)
Furman C
15 (10.8%)
Furman D
2 (1.4%)
Georgia C
3 (2.2%)
Georgia D
0 (0%)
UT-Knoxville A
14 (10.1%)
UT- Knoxville B
5 (3.6%)
North Carolina C
2 (1.4%)
North Carolina D
0 (0%)
South Carolina A
7 (5%)
South Carolina B
1 (0.7%)
Washington & Lee A
17 (12.2%)
Washington & Lee B
11 (7.9%)
Appalachian State
1 (0.7%)
Bob Jones
7 (5%)
Central Florida C
1 (0.7%)
Davidson
4 (2.9%)
Elon
5 (3.6%)
Lee
1 (0.7%)
Shaw
1 (0.7%)
Wake Forest C
3 (2.2%)

Total Members Voted: 22

Voting closed: February 07, 2009, 04:56:09 pm

« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll  (Read 1982 times)

DrillbitTaylor

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 100
  • Karma: 7
  • "Mind Before Pain" - Drillbit Taylor
Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« on: January 29, 2009, 04:56:09 pm »
Pick em.
Logged
"I've protected three Vice-Presidents, Bobby Brown, Sylvester Stallone

Will181198

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 165
  • Karma: 2
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2009, 02:53:30 pm »
T-minus 24 hours till the beginning of regional season 2009.....   :gavel:
Logged

GooglyMoogly

  • Captain
  • Posts: 321
  • Karma: 9
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #2 on: February 07, 2009, 11:52:52 pm »
Results?
Logged

Chris

  • Attorney
  • Posts: 223
  • Karma: 2
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #3 on: February 08, 2009, 12:42:08 am »
In no particular order, here are the qualifiers:

Washington and Lee A
Washington and Lee B
Duke A
Duke B
Tennessee A
Elon
UCF
Georgia
Logged

Will181198

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 165
  • Karma: 2
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #4 on: February 08, 2009, 09:00:57 am »
Teams Qualifying for the ORC Tournament
1563 Washington & Lee (7-1)
1304 University of Tennessee (7-1)
1564 Washington & Lee (6-1-1)
1600 University of Central Florida (6-2)
1504 Elon University (5-2-1)
1264 Duke University (5-2-1)
1263 Duke University (5-3, CS 19.5)
1335 University of Georgia (5-3, CS 16)
Logged

MTAttorney

  • Tryout
  • Posts: 8
  • Karma: 0
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #5 on: February 08, 2009, 10:27:43 pm »
Just checking out the tab summary for Chapel Hill and I see that Shaw had a 7 point deduction on each ballot for a violation of Rule 7.7 in Round 1. According to my copy of the rules, 7.7 deals with the roles of the attorneys (i.e. only the attorney doing the exam can object, the same attorney can't open and close). Rule 7.7 seems to me, at least, very difficult to violate for someone at all familiar with how mock trial works. Does anyone what exactly occurred in that round?
Logged

Devil4Life

  • Tryout
  • Posts: 24
  • Karma: 0
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #6 on: February 09, 2009, 12:23:30 am »
i hear they had one attorney run two directs...not sure why
Logged

misterdan

  • Witness
  • Posts: 55
  • Karma: -3
  • One Fish Two Fish Red Fish Blue Fish
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #7 on: February 09, 2009, 01:07:38 am »
did they really think no one would notice? or let them get away with it?
Logged
"It was long after that I recognized sarcasm as the protest of people

Rane

  • Legend
  • Posts: 1,073
  • Karma: 2
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #8 on: February 09, 2009, 01:12:08 am »
Maybe they lost a member or two last minute? I find it highly unlikely anyone would try something like this out of a simple ignorance of the rule...
Logged
"I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I'm not."-Kurt Cobain

mocksluzer

  • Myth
  • Posts: 2,251
  • Karma: 6
  • House of the Holy
  • School: Saint Louis University
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #9 on: February 09, 2009, 11:02:06 am »
Oh my good lord, did anyone else catch some of the naaaasty point differentials on the tab summary? An example of some of the final points differentials: -125, -88, -61, +140 (!!!), -98, +81, +71. Of course there were some (around 5) that balanced it out ending under +/- 10. I wonder if this signifies that there was a very large disparity between the "upper" and "lower" teams. Crazy numbers.
Logged
We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act but a habit.

Grindline

  • Alternate
  • Posts: 35
  • Karma: -4
  • Grind = Shine
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #10 on: February 09, 2009, 11:13:08 am »
Quote from: MTAttorney on February 08, 2009, 10:27:43 pm
Just checking out the tab summary for Chapel Hill and I see that Shaw had a 7 point deduction on each ballot for a violation of Rule 7.7 in Round 1. According to my copy of the rules, 7.7 deals with the roles of the attorneys (i.e. only the attorney doing the exam can object, the same attorney can't open and close). Rule 7.7 seems to me, at least, very difficult to violate for someone at all familiar with how mock trial works. Does anyone what exactly occurred in that round?

so, technically, one person could do all the attorney roles, if they were sure they would win by at least 7 points?
Logged
" The harder I work, the luckier I get."

Quotequeen

  • Mock Demi-God
  • **
  • Posts: 5,562
  • Karma: 9
  • 4 8 15 16 23 42
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #11 on: February 09, 2009, 11:34:41 am »
Quote from: Grindline on February 09, 2009, 11:13:08 am
so, technically, one person could do all the attorney roles, if they were sure they would win by at least 7 points?

The precise penalty is in the discretion of the AMTA reps, so that would be a pretty big risk.  It may be that they were just given zeros for that role.
Logged
"Success is simply a matter of luck.  Ask any failure."  -Earl Wilson

arandomguy

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 166
  • Karma: 5
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #12 on: February 09, 2009, 01:17:57 pm »
Regarding the point differentials, I think we are going to see some high PD's (and consequently low PD's) at the regionals and the ORCS due to the 4th round pairing which is High Low, instead of High-High. Look at the teams with High PD's, and look at their 4th round opponents and their overall record.
Logged

Will181198

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 165
  • Karma: 2
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #13 on: February 09, 2009, 01:29:00 pm »
Quote from: arandomguy on February 09, 2009, 01:17:57 pm
Regarding the point differentials, I think we are going to see some high PD's (and consequently low PD's) at the regionals and the ORCS due to the 4th round pairing which is High Low, instead of High-High. Look at the teams with High PD's, and look at their 4th round opponents and their overall record.

I have to agree, I don't think the High PD's or Low PD's at all indicate the level of competition at a given regional.  While some teams did obviously struggle, and others excelled, the PD's are going to be in flux during the Regional season with this new pairing format.

Not to mention that PD's are often a product of judging as well (not saying that Chapel Hill had bad judges by any means) but a lot of times the PD might not be indicative of a particular teams talent, hence by AMTA lessened its important in the tie-breaking procedures a couple years ago.

What really is shocking is some of the splits that happened in that 4th round.  (+21, -1 for example)  It's amazing how you can have two educated people differ so much when they watch the same performances.
Logged

bluedevilsadvocate

  • Expert Witness
  • Posts: 111
  • Karma: 3
Re: Chapel Hill, NC Regional Poll
« Reply #14 on: February 09, 2009, 01:39:13 pm »
Quote from: Quotequeen on February 09, 2009, 11:34:41 am
The precise penalty is in the discretion of the AMTA reps, so that would be a pretty big risk.  It may be that they were just given zeros for that role.

Yes. I heard in this case that the atty was awarded 7 points on each ballot for the extra direct. Hence those points were taken away.

I guess you could do all three directs if you were confident that your first direct was so outstanding that you don't need any more points  ;-)
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »