2013-14 Tournament of Champions Standings

[hoya1]

Hey y'all! This is Jim from the college tournament. I've been lurking for a bit but I figured I'd say hello. I've also had a bunch of people asking when the Tournament of Champions will be, so I appreciate the insight here!

[NYCScribbler]

Bump to make it easier for whoever's been loyally editing this to find it. Also because I'm slightly neurotic and curious as to whether I've kept my place.

[MarkBarrett]

When I want to find the thread I search of the champs with the odder last names and that works well enough for me. You can expect to draw one of the super champs.

[MinnesotaMyron]

Aw, Neal Pollack is out. That's too bad.

[Bamaman]

With two tournament champs already in and likely two more, I wonder if they have more than eleven five time champs if some will get bumped to the next TOC or if they'll just be out of luck?

[ahirbhairav]

I just bumped Sara Garnett off the list with my 4-day total of $53900 with the iPad game. And everyone here thinks I'm young and can't understand everything. Take that!

I also noticed Stefan saying something about chronological ToC invitations, and that one actually was done with the 2001 and 2003 ToC because Kevin Keach was the last 5xer they had space for, so Alan and Mark were the alternates that year. In 2003 they played in it, and we all know what happened next.

[GoodStrategy]

With someone asking about the ToC tapings, and no possible spoilers this week, I thought I'd give the list a bump.

[zdude69closedrofl]

So is this set to air after the Battle of the Decades? I feel like the ToC should be held at least within 2 months time. And what are the chances of those competitors "on the bubble" making it? For example, Mark Japinga. Someone used to make those little bar graphs that show each competitor's chances of making it in the tournament. Anyone have those?

[MarkBarrett]

So is this set to air after the Battle of the Decades? I feel like the ToC should be held at least within 2 months time. And what are the chances of those competitors "on the bubble" making it? For example, Mark Japinga. Someone used to make those little bar graphs that show each competitor's chances of making it in the tournament. Anyone have those?

No, the ToC will not air in May. It will not air in June. It will not air in July. It will not air in Season 30. The range for the next ToC airing is very likely from the end of September through November sweeps. Mark Japinga has 14 players ahead of him for qualification. That leaves him in the 15th and final spot.

If any champ wins five games during the rest of April, May, June, or July then Japinga is likely out. A couple of qualified champs have mentioned summer trips. If some kind of scheduling conflict arose and the powers of the show were sympathetic then those players could be invited back for the following TOC to open up another spot.

To figure out Japinga's chances otherwise then calculate the remaining games of regular play this season and pace of 5-time and above champs so far this season. Odds will dictate he's more likely than not going to miss the cut.

The real test is the sacred 5-time rule. Rani Peffer at 5x and $68,701 would very likely have her total passed by anyone who wins five games. Two more big champs and she would fall to No. 16. Woud the powers keep her out? Paperwork the players sign does not guarantee a ToC spot for winning five games. Perhaps the most recent big winner would automatically be bumped to the following ToC? I expect we'll get answers by the end of the season.

[ahirbhairav]

So is this set to air after the Battle of the Decades? I feel like the ToC should be held at least within 2 months time. And what are the chances of those competitors "on the bubble" making it? For example, Mark Japinga. Someone used to make those little bar graphs that show each competitor's chances of making it in the tournament. Anyone have those?

No, the ToC will not air in May. It will not air in June. It will not air in July. It will not air in Season 30. The range for the next ToC airing is very likely from the end of September through November sweeps. Mark Japinga has 14 players ahead of him for qualification. That leaves him in the 15th and final spot.

If any champ wins five games during the rest of April, May, June, or July then Japinga is likely out. A couple of qualified champs have mentioned summer trips. If some kind of scheduling conflict arose and the powers of the show were sympathetic then those players could be invited back for the following TOC to open up another spot.

To figure out Japinga's chances otherwise then calculate the remaining games of regular play this season and pace of 5-time and above champs so far this season. Odds will dictate he's more likely than not going to miss the cut.

The real test is the sacred 5-time rule. Rani Peffer at 5x and $68,701 would very likely have her total passed by anyone who wins five games. Two more big champs and she would fall to No. 16. Woud the powers keep her out? Paperwork the players sign does not guarantee a ToC spot for winning five games. Perhaps the most recent big winner would automatically be bumped to the following ToC? I expect we'll get answers by the end of the season.

J! has indirectly announced that the next ToC will be next season. When the put the press release for Arthur up on their Tumblr, they announced,"Chu will take place in the Tournament of Champions, which will take place next season."

[GoodStrategy]

The real test is the sacred 5-time rule. Rani Peffer at 5x and $68,701 would very likely have her total passed by anyone who wins five games. Two more big champs and she would fall to No. 16. Woud the powers keep her out? Paperwork the players sign does not guarantee a ToC spot for winning five games. Perhaps the most recent big winner would automatically be bumped to the following ToC? I expect we'll get answers by the end of the season.

As I've said it looks unclear if the protocol for having more than a full ToC pool of 5+ (and tournament) winners changed with sky's-the-limit. While some have hypothesized that some 5-game winners might not make it, others (like me) think that language is there (and was there even before players could play an unlimited number of games until they lost) for CYA purposes in case we should have another Barbara Lowe or Jeff Kirby type player. If my assumption is correct, once we have 12 5+timers (and the three tournament winners in the queue) then as with what happened in 2001 any 5+timers after that would be held over until the next ToC (with the first in line being the alternate*, and if any of the regularly-scheduled contestants can't make it for whatever reason they'd probably let them "swap places" with the first holdover).

*With a different feeling compared to most ToC alternates, since unlike the usual cases if you don't get in this time you'll be back for the next one.

[Mathew5000]

I say, leave it to February 2015 and invent a new format for 24 entrants. That way the two 4-timers should make it in and probably ComingUpMilhouse too.

I'm bored of the 15-player tournament format. There's a few ways you could have a 24 player tournament in three weeks.

[dhkendall]

And everyone here thinks I'm young and can't understand everything. Take that!

Oh, it's not your trivia knowledge we call into question ...

[Vermonter]

I say, leave it to February 2015 and invent a new format for 24 entrants. That way the two 4-timers should make it in and probably ComingUpMilhouse too.

I'm bored of the 15-player tournament format. There's a few ways you could have a 24 player tournament in three weeks.

The 15-player format works well; and I don't see a point to expanding too much at the expense of "regular" players. Maybe an 18-player tournament with a one-day final, but that's about all.

[lieph82]

I say, leave it to February 2015 and invent a new format for 24 entrants. That way the two 4-timers should make it in and probably ComingUpMilhouse too.

I'm bored of the 15-player tournament format. There's a few ways you could have a 24 player tournament in three weeks.

The 15-player format works well; and I don't see a point to expanding too much at the expense of "regular" players. Maybe an 18-player tournament with a one-day final, but that's about all.

You don't think there's a little too much left to chance with regard to wagers in the quarterfinal round and day 1 of the final?

[Golf]

You don't think there's a little too much left to chance with regard to wagers in the quarterfinal round and day 1 of the final?

You win the game you advance, you don't win the game and roll the dice. That's why you play to win instead of making some halfway wager that may or may not win the game if correct, or may or may not advance if incorrect.

[lieph82]

You don't think there's a little too much left to chance with regard to wagers in the quarterfinal round and day 1 of the final?

You win the game you advance, you don't win the game and roll the dice. That's why you play to win instead of making some halfway wager that may or may not win the game if correct, or may or may not advance if incorrect.

Sure, that's one philosophy. However, I do think there are many possible ambiguous situations.

Let's say you're playing a quarterfinal game and you end DJ with $24,000 to your opponent's $22,000. Is your best bet $20,001?

Let's say you both have $20,000. Is your best bet $20,000?

The fact is, there are wildcard spots available, and those can and, in my opinion, should, factor into your decision making. And when you factor wildcard spots into the decision making, yes, there will always be at least some element of "rolling the dice" involved. You can use historical numbers all you want, but the wildcard cutoff might be $1 or it might be $20,000. The existence of wildcard spots creates additional unknowns, and if I were a strong player in the TOC, those additional unknowns would bother me. The only way to be sure of a semifinal spot is to win, but doesn't it make sense to take the nearly 100% shot of at least a wildcard spot by betting $0 or close to $0 in the above scenarios? I would argue that you have a better shot at a semifinal berth by betting $0 than by "betting to win." But there's no way to know most of the other competitors' scores in the moment.

Of course, all of this can be avoided by coming out of DJ in your quarterfinal match with a lock, so maybe we should all just do that .


The first day of a two-day final bothers me even more. If I'm in a dead heat with my two competitors going into FJ, our respective positions going into the second day will be decided in part by our FJ responses and in part by wagers that are almost entirely arbitrary. Larissa, Dan, and Aaron were pretty much even going into FJ on day 1 of their TOC final; Larissa and Dan both bet big, Aaron bet relatively small, for reasons unknown. Ken, Brad, and Jerome were very close going into FJ on day 1 of their UTOC final; if one of them had decided to bet big, he would have opened up a big lead going into day 2. I bet your philosophy (Golf) would just be to automatically bet it all if you're close going into FJ on day 1 of a final, and that's fair. But you have very little way of knowing whether your opponent will bet large or bet small or bet somewhere in between- that's largely guesswork, and that's what bothers me about the format.

[Golf]

Sure, that's one philosophy. However, I do think there are many possible ambiguous situations.

Let's say you're playing a quarterfinal game and you end DJ with $24,000 to your opponent's $22,000. Is your best bet $20,001?

Let's say you both have $20,000. Is your best bet $20,000?

The fact is, there are wildcard spots available, and those can and, in my opinion, should, factor into your decision making. And when you factor wildcard spots into the decision making, yes, there will always be at least some element of "rolling the dice" involved. You can use historical numbers all you want, but the wildcard cutoff might be $1 or it might be $20,000. The existence of wildcard spots creates additional unknowns, and if I were a strong player in the TOC, those additional unknowns would bother me. The only way to be sure of a semifinal spot is to win, but doesn't it make sense to take the nearly 100% shot of at least a wildcard spot by betting $0 or close to $0 in the above scenarios? I would argue that you have a better shot at a semifinal berth by betting $0 than by "betting to win." But there's no way to know most of the other competitors' scores in the moment.

Of course, all of this can be avoided by coming out of DJ in your quarterfinal match with a lock, so maybe we should all just do that .


The first day of a two-day final bothers me even more. If I'm in a dead heat with my two competitors going into FJ, our respective positions going into the second day will be decided in part by our FJ responses and in part by wagers that are almost entirely arbitrary. Larissa, Dan, and Aaron were pretty much even going into FJ on day 1 of their TOC final; Larissa and Dan both bet big, Aaron bet relatively small, for reasons unknown. Ken, Brad, and Jerome were very close going into FJ on day 1 of their UTOC final; if one of them had decided to bet big, he would have opened up a big lead going into day 2. I bet your philosophy (Golf) would just be to automatically bet it all if you're close going into FJ on day 1 of a final, and that's fair. But you have very little way of knowing whether your opponent will bet large or bet small or bet somewhere in between- that's largely guesswork, and that's what bothers me about the format.

If you've got 20k, I see no issue in wagering nothing. That's a near 100% chance of advancing. I would think that in almost every situation the proper wager is either 0 or bet to win.

As far as day 1 of 2 FJ wagers, once again I think in almost every situation the proper wager is either 0 or everything depending solely on the category.

Over and over again there are discussions about wagering whether on DD's or these funky tournament situations, and it seems each and every time the answer is either the absolute minimum or maximum.

[Bamaman]

Still wish they hadn't gotten away from the TOC being an annual November event.

[nealpollack]

I favor any format that would allow me a chance to play again. Unfortunately, that format will only occur in a Fantasyland Miracle Reality.