Jump to content
vmanAA738

Bid Levels for next year?

Recommended Posts

So i looked at the bid levels next year just to see what they were- anyone know why were 5 new finals bid tournaments were added?

i counted University of Washington, Central Valley (WA), Cypress Bay (FL), Isidore Newman (LA), Loyola, and Westminster as new with Fullerton being dropped

 

also why was GDS moved down to a semis bid and pinecrest moved up to a quarters bid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shit happens. Schools get money for their debate program, they lose money for their debate program, etc. There's probably a different story for all those tournaments. Overall, it's really just up to the TOC committee  on what tournaments get what bids. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Georgetown got dropped down because they broke 3-3's and the pool we eh. Pine Crest got moved up because lots of good teams went and it should have been a quarters bid. It's mostly based on attendance. 

Edited by TheZodiacKiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The TOC committee is very un-transparent - so it's hard to determine why they do anything. Presumptively, though, they look at attendance of a tournament in terms of quantity (how many teams), quality (how many teams showed up that also got bids elsewhere), and diversity (how many regions and circuits were represented), and also look at tournaments in a regional context (does a region have an increasing debate presence? did a different tournament in a region recently end, leaving a region with a strong debate circuit with proportionately fewer bids?). From my knowledge of all of the aforementioned tournaments, these measures explain the changes in bid levels and allocations, but, again, it's really hard to tell - and there are, admittedly, factors that are un-objective, maybe even "corrupt" that may go into these decisions, too (but i'll save the TOC committee conspiracy theories - some almost definitely true, others more speculative - for later). 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The TOC committee is very un-transparent - so it's hard to determine why they do anything. Presumptively, though, they look at attendance of a tournament in terms of quantity (how many teams), quality (how many teams showed up that also got bids elsewhere), and diversity (how many regions and circuits were represented), and also look at tournaments in a regional context (does a region have an increasing debate presence? did a different tournament in a region recently end, leaving a region with a strong debate circuit with proportionately fewer bids?). From my knowledge of all of the aforementioned tournaments, these measures explain the changes in bid levels and allocations, but, again, it's really hard to tell - and there are, admittedly, factors that are un-objective, maybe even "corrupt" that may go into these decisions, too (but i'll save the TOC committee conspiracy theories - some almost definitely true, others more speculative - for later). 

 

Opaque*

  • Upvote 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mirroring above posts -- bid levels are based (to my knowledge) on a couple of factors. First, sheer number of teams that attend, second is the number of states that are represented. Third, is the elim that the tournament breaks to, ToC requires there be at least one elim before the bid is awarded, meaning you can't break right to a bid. Third is they *attempt* to do it based on regional location to try to allow schools the best opportunity to pick up bids from around the nation, but then you also have states like Texas that have six bid tournaments, so it doesn't always come out that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mirroring above posts -- bid levels are based (to my knowledge) on a couple of factors. First, sheer number of teams that attend, second is the number of states that are represented. Third, is the elim that the tournament breaks to, ToC requires there be at least one elim before the bid is awarded, meaning you can't break right to a bid. Third is they *attempt* to do it based on regional location to try to allow schools the best opportunity to pick up bids from around the nation, but then you also have states like Texas that have six bid tournaments, so it doesn't always come out that way.

 

MBA though...

 

Also - why the hell is Westminster a finals tournament? That tournament is gonna be poppin with talent

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tournament at the University of Washington, which will be a finals bid next season, had 6 VCX entries this season. Isidore Newman, also a finals bid next season (and used to have a bid many years ago), also had 6 VCX entries this past season. The most plausible explanation is that the TOC wants to grow debate in these regions, since these tournaments were clearly not sufficiently challenging last year.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mirroring above posts -- bid levels are based (to my knowledge) on a couple of factors. First, sheer number of teams that attend, second is the number of states that are represented. Third, is the elim that the tournament breaks to, ToC requires there be at least one elim before the bid is awarded, meaning you can't break right to a bid. Third is they *attempt* to do it based on regional location to try to allow schools the best opportunity to pick up bids from around the nation, but then you also have states like Texas that have six bid tournaments, so it doesn't always come out that way.

Texas is also the the 2nd most populous state, and within driving distance for teams from OK, CO, KS, AR, and LA, so I think it's only fair that there are many bids available in Texas. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The tournament at the University of Washington, which will be a finals bid next season, had 6 VCX entries this season. Isidore Newman, also a finals bid next season (and used to have a bid many years ago), also had 6 VCX entries this past season. The most plausible explanation is that the TOC wants to grow debate in these regions, since these tournaments were clearly not sufficiently challenging last year.

 

the UW tournament was also held the same weekend as Cal and Harvard, which, to the best of my knowledge, will not be the case next year. The region around the UW last year had a few toc-qualifying teams, and several more elim-quality teams. A more plausible explanation imho is that the toc committee realizes that the lack of a bid tournament in western washington region is problematic, given the already-developing region; the toc committee seems to "match" regional development more than it attempts to "create" it. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...