As I have mentioned to Harish several times:

Making the allocation based only on whether people broke or not is 
highly inaccurate and leads to a far weaker field.

A 17 point team is worth a lot more than a 4 point team.

Just my opinion.

Tuna

On 4/18/13 1:49 PM, Michael Baer wrote:
> Dear US BP Debating Community,
>
> Below is the registration policy that will be in place for Chennai 
> Worlds 2014.  Please let me know if you have questions or concerns.
> *
> *
> *Chennai Worlds 2014 - Registration Policy*
>
>
> *_Overview_*
>
> The consensus from the World Universities Debating Council at Berlin 
> was that the registration process for the World Universities Debating 
> Championship (WUDC) needs to change. Council voted on an advisory note 
> that provided the outlines of a new registration policy. That advisory 
> was to serve as a starting point for registration at future WUDC, 
> beginning with Chennai. This document outlines how we will implement 
> Council’s advice.
>
> There are several broad points to note at the outset:
>
>  1. In reforming the registration process, Council was focused on
>     balancing the competing concerns of ensuring diverse institutions
>     from around the world have access to participate in WUDC and
>     maintaining the quality of the competition. This policy is our
>     best effort to reflect that balance.
>
>  2. Unlike previous years, registration will NOT be done according to
>     which institutions sign up first. Council resoundingly rejected
>     this “fastest fingers” approach. Instead, registration will be
>     open for 24 hours, with no preference given on the basis of which
>     institutions sign up first within that window.
>
>  3. Our registration policy adopts the mechanism from Council’s
>     advisory note, which uses the success of institutions at previous
>     WUDCs to determine the order in which institutions are allocated
>     teams. The allocation process is outlined in detail below.
>
>  4. There are two points where we have chosen to add to or modify the
>     advice offered by Council. In the interest of transparency, we
>     have identified those points. We think these modifications better
>     accomplish the goals Council supported at Berlin.
>
>  5. This is the most significant change to the process of Worlds
>     registration in our memory. As such, we understand that it may be
>     controversial and that some institutions will fare better in
>     registration and some worse than in the past.  We also recognize
>     this is not a perfect policy.  We believe, however, that it is an
>     improvement over the “fastest fingers” registration policy of the
>     past, and we encourage anyone who sees way to improve it to
>     propose those ideas in advance of this year’s Council.
>
>  6. Please contact Michael Baer ([log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>) or Harish Natarajan
>     ([log in to unmask]
>     <mailto:[log in to unmask]>) with questions.
>
>
> *_
> _*
> *_Key Details_*
>
> Initial Team Cap: 384 (potentially rising to 400)
>
> Fees: Rs. 25,000 per debater or adjudicator (approx. 350 Euros, US$460)
>
>          Rs. 57,000 per observer (approx. 800 Euros, US$1,045)
>
> Payment can be made via PayPal, which will be integrated into FastRego 
> or via Wire Transfer.
>
> Each institution will shoulder the surcharges and corresponding wiring 
> fees of their bank transactions. Institutions may lose their allocated 
> slots should they fail to meet payment deadlines. Any payment made 
> prior to the forfeiture of slots is non-refundable.
>
>
> *_Dates_*
>
> We are opening registration later than we intended. This is because it 
> took us longer than expected to finalize our registration system. 
> Given the magnitude of the change to the registration process, we 
> wanted to ensure we had time to discuss and refine various proposals.
>
> Registration will open on *Monday May 20, 2013, at 10am GMT*. 
> Registration will remain open for *24 hours.*
>
> Three weeks prior to registration, on* Monday, April 29, 2013*, we 
> will post a document with a) all of the institutions who have attended 
> any of the prior 3 WUDC competitions and b) the number of teams those 
> institutions have broken, in any language category, during those 3 years.
>
> When we post that document, please review it and let us know if there 
> are any mistakes. The sooner you let us know, the easier it will be to 
> correct this information. The deadline for informing us of a mistake 
> will be* Friday, May 17, 2013*.
>
> Initial registration results will be announced as soon as we can, and 
> *no later than June 1, 2013*.
>
> All institutions will be required to create a FastRego account by 
> *Monday, June 11, 2013 at 10am*. Failure to do so will result in 
> institutions forfeiting their places.
>
> All institutions will be required to pay a deposit of Rs.10,000 per 
> debater or adjudicator (approx 140 Euros, US$183) and Rs. 25,000 per 
> observer (approx 350 Euros, US$460) by *Monday, July 8, at 10am*. 
> Institutions can pay the full balance on that date. Any institution 
> that has not paid their deposit will forfeit any unpaid places.
>
> Any institution allocated a place after July 8 will have until Monday, 
> August 5 to pay their deposits.
>
> Full payment will be required by *Monday, September 9, at 10 am*. Any 
> institution that has not paid in full will forfeit any of their unpaid 
> places and may lose their deposits.
>
> Any institution allocated a place after September 9 will have until 
> Monday, September 30 to pay the full payment.
>
>
> *_Team Allocation_*
>
> When registration opens on May 20, institutions will be allowed to 
> request /up to 3 teams/.
>
> We will initially be allocating 354 team slots. Pending confirmation, 
> we aim to allocate another 30 slots through a ‘Scholarship Scheme’ at 
> a later date. Details will be released soon.
>
> We may also increase the team cap to 400 at a later date. We first 
> want to fully assess our financial position, judging resources and 
> have some room to adapt to any unforeseen circumstances.
>
> Institutions that have not sent a team to /any/ of the previous 3 
> WUDCs will only be able to register a maximum of 1 team /this year/.
>
> After registration closes, all institutions that have requested teams 
> will be ordered on a “Registration Priority List.” Institutions on 
> that list will be prioritized as follows:
>
>   * Institutions will be grouped according to the average number of
>     teams from that institution that have made the break in any
>     language category over the past 3 WUDCs. E.g. an institution that
>     broke 2 teams in 2011, 0 teams in 2012, and 1 team in 2013 will
>     have an average of 1.00.  This is equally true if those teams
>     competed in the open break, ESL break, EFL break, or a combination
>     thereof. An institution with an average of 1.00 will be ranked
>     higher than institutions with an average of .667.
>
>   * Institutions with the same average will be ordered within that
>     group by random. If institutions A, B, and C all have broken an
>     average of 1.00 teams over the past 3 WUDCs, a random number
>     generator will determine their order in the Registration Priority
>     List. Regardless of how they are ranked within the “1.00 group,”
>     all of them will be ranked higher than every institution with an
>     average of .667 teams, and all of them will be ranked lower than
>     every institution with an average of 1.33.
>
>   * The Registration Priority List will be the source of the mechanism
>     by which teams are allocated.
>
> NB: For institutions that have hosted WUDC during one of the previous 
> 3 years, their average will be for the 2 years they did not host. We 
> believe this a fair way to use the same time window that applies to 
> everyone else but not punish an institution for choosing to host Worlds.
>
> Teams will then be allocated in the following manner:
>
> *Allocation Step 1* – Each registered institution will be allocated a 
> team, starting with the highest ranked institution on the Registration 
> Priority List and proceeding until there are no institutions remaining 
> that have not been allocated a team.
>
> /Note, as mentioned above, institutions that have not attended any of 
> the past 3 WUDCs will only be allocated 1 team./
>
> *Allocation Step 2* – A second team will be allocated to every 
> institution that has an unresolved team request AND has an average of 
> better than 0.00 (i.e. has had at least one team break in the past 3 
> years), starting with the highest ranked institutions and proceeding 
> down the list. This will proceed until all institutions that have 
> unresolved team requests and have an average of better than 0.00 are 
> allocated a second team.
>
> *Allocation Step 3 *– A third team will be allocated to every 
> institution that has an unresolved team request AND has an average of 
> 1.50 or greater. This will proceed until all institutions that have 
> unresolved team requests and have an average of 1.50 or greater are 
> allocated a third team.
>
> *Allocation Step 4* – A second team will be allocated to every 
> institution that has an unresolved team request AND has an average of 
> 0.00 (i.e. has not had a team break, in any language category, in the 
> past 3 years) until all institutions requesting a second team have 
> been allocated one.
>
> *Allocation Step 5* – A third team will be allocated to every 
> institution that has an unresolved team request AND has an average of 
> below 1.50 until all requests for a third team are resolved.
>
> *Waiting List* – Any institution with outstanding team requests will 
> be placed on a waiting list. Teams will be allocated from the waiting 
> list in accordance with the procedures outlined above. We expect teams 
> to make it off the waiting as institutions decide not to attend Worlds 
> and/or fail to meet payment deadlines. Institutions that have not 
> attended any of the past 3 WUDCs may /request/ extra teams, though 
> they will be placed at the bottom of the waiting list.
>
>
> *_Modifications to Council’s Advisory Note_*
>
> At Council, delegates voted on an advisory note to guide future WUDCs 
> in selecting a registration policy. That note was passed with the 
> understanding that it would not be binding and that improvements could 
> be made. We have made two modifications to the advisory note that we 
> believe improve our registration policy.
>
>  1. We have limited institutions that have not sent a team to any of
>     the previous 3 WUDCs to 1 team. This is for two reasons.  First,
>     all institutions with an average of 0.00 – i.e. institutions that
>     have not broken a team at any of the past 3 Worlds – will have an
>     equal chance of being ranked at the top of their group. Given this
>     fact, it seems unfair to give a brand new institution the
>     possibility of sending a second team before an institution that
>     has regularly attended Worlds. We believe that institutions that
>     have shown a commitment to WUDC should be prioritized. Second,
>     many institutions attending Worlds for the first time (or
>     institutions with a long-lapsed record of Worlds attendance) often
>     are not able to send as many teams as they initially suspect when
>     they register.
>
>  2. Our policy likely means that a limited number of institutions will
>     be allocated a third team before many institutions will be
>     allocated a second team. This decision reflects our commitment to
>     balancing the competing principles of access and quality of
>     competition. If we strictly followed Council’s advisory note,
>     which requires every institution to receive a second team
>     (assuming it requested one) before any institution receives a
>     third, plausibly no institution would be able to send 3 teams to
>     Worlds. But for institutions that have broken an average of 1.5
>     teams or greater, at least half of their delegation from the past
>     3 years has broken at Worlds. We think these institutions are
>     highly likely to bring third teams that would significantly add to
>     the quality of the competition.
>
>
>
> *_Judges_*
>
> We will enforce an *n-1 judging requirement*. Any institution that 
> sends 2 teams must also send 1 judge, and any institution that sends 3 
> teams must also send 2 judges.
>
> Given, however, that this new registration procedure will likely 
> result in changes to the number of institutions sending more than one 
> team, institutions will be allowed to express a desire to send 
> additional judges, should they wish to do so.
>
> Since we will not know how many extra judges we can cater for until 
> after registration has been completed, institutions will be able to 
> note how many judges they wish to send on the registration form.
>
>
> *_Independent Judges_*
>
> Individuals that are not affiliated with an institution and want to 
> attend Chennai Worlds can apply to do so at a later date. Further 
> details will be provided by *Monday, June 3.
> *
>
> Please let us know if you have questions. We look forward to seeing 
> you in Chennai!
>
> Regards,
> Michael Baer ([log in to unmask] 
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>)
> Harish Natarajan ([log in to unmask] 
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>)
> Chief Adjudicators, Chennai Worlds 2014