- Jan 8, 2011
- 2,190
- 4,250
I'm not disagreeing with the way that UCA chose to give their bids, I actually like the fact that they stuck to "Highest scoring Winners first" then so on and so on. My suggestion was for the future. I believe that EVERY Bid event should have all bid eligible divisions judged by the SAME panel ( I agree that different panels score different divisions differently ) but with the Varsity scoring system ( which I think is hands down the best so far ) in my scenario I believe the highest scoring teams should be awarded the bid. Again, I'm not criticizing decisions on bid placements at this event or any other events this season but for FUTURE USASF bid events, NEXT season.Except the panels judging everyone were different. I know that all the large senior scores were a good bit higher than than the large limited scores. Each panel was right within their division, but when you cross division they aren't a fair comparison.
For example: If ECE Large Limited didn't have a bid and Vancouver in large senior didn't have a bid, and they gave the bid to highest score than I believe Vancouver would have gotten it. Vancouver is a talented team (I was hella impressed with their ability!) but ECE is a good bit more polished and solid.
There is no one size fits all solution for a subjective sport. Giving out the bids to the first place winners in the divisions is the least worst solution. The problem though is one team could have entered International Open without any competition, taken home a national title and a paid bid for showing up (if say someone in large senior or unlimitd already had a bid).