Grid Explanation
Saad Bin Amjad
Tournament Advisor
ESSDC Squared: BSDC 2012
Tournament Advisor
ESSDC Squared: BSDC 2012
The
WSDC Grid is based on the idea that it “simplifies the process of the random
draw” and “ensures balance across various important aspects of the draw”. In
simple terms, “the Grid allows the draw to be random while also ensuring a
basic equality in various dimensions of the draw." Now for the BSDC 2012
Grid I tried to implement and maintain those key features of the WSDC Grid.
Randomness:
For BSDC, we have 16 teams that were split into 4 groups based on the Pre-Tourney Rankings. Group A now will have the top 4 teams but not necessarily MAD is A1, since it would be an over the hat draw to see who, becomes A1 from the four teams.
Randomness:
For BSDC, we have 16 teams that were split into 4 groups based on the Pre-Tourney Rankings. Group A now will have the top 4 teams but not necessarily MAD is A1, since it would be an over the hat draw to see who, becomes A1 from the four teams.
Balance
across opponent quality:
We have modified the basic WSDC structure, so that each team will have slightly more debates against other teams of their own standard; we think that this is important to improve, value of BSDC as a learning experience. Therefore, each team will debate with all of their group members once, so that they would be
facing the teams similar to their strengths.
Across Pools:
Furthermore, debates would also be across pools, where each team would then debate with 2 teams from adjacent group (e.g. A with 2 Bs, C with 2Ds) and 1 team from the last two groups. So far we have 7 rounds of debate, with one debate left.
Joint balance across Proposition and Opposition and across prepared and impromptu: In the last round (not necessarily 8th), we randomly pitted them in such a way that every team have debates in 4 Prop and 4 Opp positions and 4 Impromptu and 4 Prepped motions. But it results one team to debate with 2 strong and 2 weak OR 3 strong or 1 weak, but it was thus made into a prep round (ie Round 5) to even this out.
We have modified the basic WSDC structure, so that each team will have slightly more debates against other teams of their own standard; we think that this is important to improve, value of BSDC as a learning experience. Therefore, each team will debate with all of their group members once, so that they would be
facing the teams similar to their strengths.
Across Pools:
Furthermore, debates would also be across pools, where each team would then debate with 2 teams from adjacent group (e.g. A with 2 Bs, C with 2Ds) and 1 team from the last two groups. So far we have 7 rounds of debate, with one debate left.
Joint balance across Proposition and Opposition and across prepared and impromptu: In the last round (not necessarily 8th), we randomly pitted them in such a way that every team have debates in 4 Prop and 4 Opp positions and 4 Impromptu and 4 Prepped motions. But it results one team to debate with 2 strong and 2 weak OR 3 strong or 1 weak, but it was thus made into a prep round (ie Round 5) to even this out.
To make a grid with 16 teams is difficult. We are open to feedback about this grid and after this tournament is done, if changes are required, we all sit and discuss and have a new grid next year.
Thanks
a ton to Simon Quinn, who was kind
enough to guide through the process of the rankings, came up with the
methodology and finally guided the process of making the grid for the
tournament.
Grid
Grid
 |
| P.S C1 would also be yellow colored when C2 is green |
Match-ups
Groupings1.
The rankings are based on the local school tournaments of the past year, i.e
2011.
2. Only those tournaments that maintained an electronic tab were taken into consideration.
3. The results of the preliminary rounds were taken, not the performances of the break rounds.
4. When multiple teams from the same school participated in one championship, the result of the best team was taken. (i.e the team which have highest number of wins in that tournament amongst the other teams of the same school. For example, MAD 3 had 4 wins and MAD 1 with 1 and MAD 2 with 3 wins in one single tournament, the result of MAD 3 was taken for this rankings..)
5. The teams were sorted first by win (largest to smallest) and then by rounds (largest to smallest) so as to take participation into account.
2. Only those tournaments that maintained an electronic tab were taken into consideration.
3. The results of the preliminary rounds were taken, not the performances of the break rounds.
4. When multiple teams from the same school participated in one championship, the result of the best team was taken. (i.e the team which have highest number of wins in that tournament amongst the other teams of the same school. For example, MAD 3 had 4 wins and MAD 1 with 1 and MAD 2 with 3 wins in one single tournament, the result of MAD 3 was taken for this rankings..)
5. The teams were sorted first by win (largest to smallest) and then by rounds (largest to smallest) so as to take participation into account.
Rank
|
School
|
Team Code
|
1
|
Manarat Dhaka International School
|
MAD
|
2
|
Maple Leaf
|
MLIS
|
3
|
European Standard School
|
ESS
|
4
|
Academia
|
ADC
|
5
|
Dhnamondhi Tutorial
|
DT
|
6
|
Siddique's International School
|
SIS
|
-
|
Mastermind
|
MM
|
8
|
Vertical Horizon
|
VH
|
-
|
Sunnydale
|
SD
|
-
|
Aga Khan
|
AKS
|
11
|
Turkish Hope
|
TURK
|
-
|
Scholastica
|
SCHL
|
13
|
St. Joseph
|
JDC
|
14
|
South Breeze
|
SB
|
-
|
Universal Tutorial
|
UT
|
-
|
Oxford International School
|
OIS
|
-
|
Notredame
|
NDC
|
18
|
Viqarunessa Noon School and College
|
VNSC
|
19
|
Summerfield
|
SF
|
20
|
Green Herald
|
GH
|
-
|
Bangladesh Interantional Tutorial
|
BIT
|
-
|
RAJUK
|
RAJUK
|
23
|
International School Dhaka
|
ISD
|
-
|
Play Pen
|
PP
|
25
|
Ideal
|
IDC
|
-
|
Sun Beams
|
SBEAMS
|
27
|
Bangladesh International School
|
BIS
|
The registered teams are
first sorted according to the Pre-Tournament Rankings:
1. MAD
2. MLIS
3. ESS
4. ADC
5. DT
6. SIS
7. SD
8. AKS
9. SRU
10. JDC
11. UT
12. VNS
13. SF
14. RAJUK
15. BIS
16. Swing Team (With no breaking status)
Then they are sorted into
4 groups:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
After
they are sorted into groups, there would be an “over-the-hat draw” so to decide
each team position in the group. For example, Team BD may be A4 or A3 or A2 or
A1.
Group A
|
Group B
|
Group C
|
Group D
|
A1
|
B1
|
C1
|
D1
|
A2
|
B2
|
C2
|
D2
|
A3
|
B3
|
C3
|
D3
|
A4
|
B4
|
C4
|
D4
|