2011 USA Ultimate Club Women's Championships

[matthewbourland]

http://www.usaultimate.org/assets/1/Page/200x200/2011_Club_Logo_300x300.png
Club Championships Page (http://www.usaultimate.org/competition/club_division/club_championships/default.aspx)
Score Reporter Page (http://scores.usaultimate.org/scores/#womens/tournament/9509)

This will serve as the official discussion thread for this event. Speculate about who will qualify, talk about the players to watch, hash out seeding, recap the results, and share links to photos/videos from the event.

[ambler]

I do not envy DeAnna Ball's task of seeding the women's division this year. So many "Team A beat Team B who beat Team C who beat Team A" situations, making head-to-head comparisons tough across the board. Capitals' results are especially tricky as their big wins over Traffic, Scandal, and Ozone all were with their roster for Canadian Nationals, but in the USAU Series they are missing some of those key players and were upset by Brute Squad in the finals of NE Regionals.

The SRT's seeding chart (http://scores.usaultimate.org/scores/#womens/seeding/9509) does a nice job of summarizing all the relevant games from this season, any one want to take a crack at preliminary seedings?

CN1 Nemesis
CN2 RevoLOUtion

MA1 Scandal
MA2 Phoenix

NE1 Brute Squad
NE2 Capitals
NE3 Bent

NW1 Fury
NW2 Traffic
NW3 Riot
NW4 Further

SO1 Showdown
SO2 Ozone
SO3 DeSoto

SW1 Molly Brown
SW2 Safari

[ambler]

Here's my first attempt, I'm sure others will find many flaws in my logic:

1. Fury
2. Traffic
3. Riot
4. Scandal (MB has head-to-head edge, but Scandal has better RRI and more recent wins against Phoenix, who MB lost to twice at Fusion)
5. Phoenix
6. Molly Brown
7. Nemesis (Despite Showdown's H2H win over Nemesis, I gave Nemesis the nod over Showdown based on strength of schedule and better results against common opponents Phoenix, Underground)
8. Showdown
9. Ozone
10. Brute Squad (BS and Caps are so low because I believe BS’s upset was about taking out a Caps team that is diminished from the team that posted great early season results; not that BS dramatically improved in the three weeks since Fusion when it lost to higher ranked teams; this is a tough one!)
11. Capitals
12. Safari
13. RevoLOUtion (Head to head loss to Further at ECC, but that was with an incomplete roster and Revo has been to Nationals before)
14. Further (Note that Further's results from LD were playing with pick-up players added to their roster)
15. Bent (Over DeSoto based on strength of schedule and previous Nationals appearances)
16. DeSoto

[jennyfey]

Nice job, Gwen. I basically agree with everything you've done here. A couple thoughts:

1. Fury
2. Traffic
3. Riot
4. Molly Brown (MB over Scandal honors the head-to-head, and prevents the Scandal/Phoenix regional match up)
5. Scandal
6. Phoenix
7. Nemesis
8. Showdown
9. Brute Squad (It sounds like Caps have lost some big players, but I think BS is also peaking at the right time)
10. Capitals (Moving BS up allows Capitals to get a stronger spot, and they have the head to head against Ozone)
11. Ozone
12. Safari
13. RevoLOUtion
14. Further
15. Bent
16. DeSoto

[rahil.suleman]

While I agree that Capitals is a little weaker, I do think that they will be stronger at the Club Championships. I believe that the Capitals used Regionals as a tournament to gain experience for a lot of the new players, and whether or not it was the right decision, it will only help them in Florida.

[angela.lin]

Hey. yeah, def glad I'm not in Deanna's shoes.

my thoughts on 4-6:

I think it's gotta go
4. Scandal
5. Phoenix
6. Molly Brown

shouldn't use preventing regional matchups as a reason for seeding.
agree w/ Gwen on the reasoning why Scandal should be on top of this group.
Phoenix's record over MB includes a recent finals beatdown at Fusion, an earlier mostly decisive looking win vs them in the same tourn, and a DGP loss to them at LDUC (yeah i think scores matter).

7-11 hard...

I could see going either way betw Nemesis or Showdown getting ranked higher. I lean towards putting SD as 7, but I haven't really seen Nemesis play, and they've got some recent quality wins vs Phoenix and Scandal. BS and Caps ... confusing. There's a lot at stake at Regionals - not the time to test new players esp in a region where the diff betw winning it and getting 2nd can result in a serious difference in Nats ranking.

still formulating opinions,
angela.

[ambler]

Thinking more on this, I like where Jenny was going with trying to move Brute Squad and Capitals up a bit. In fact, I might actually be in favor of moving the Brute Squad/Capitals block up to the 7/8 spots.

Brute Squad is going into Nationals with an abysmal record against other qualifiers not from the NE (2-14 record), so it feels weird to have their team above teams like Nemesis and Ozone that they've lost to. However, adding Johanna Neumann and Marie-France Hivert certainly seemed to help them at Regionals and they've now had time to adjust their personnel roles after all those injuries sustained earlier in the season. Winning the NE is a big deal, especially considering that the region supplied a finalist and semifinalist last year. There is a long history of Brute performing well at the end of the season after posting lack-luster pre-Series results. Meanwhile, Capitals is sitting at 6-2 against non-NE qualifiers, with its only losses at the hands of Fury and Riot. Not having Walker and Danielle Fortin play in the Series is a big loss for the Caps, but even if they end up with a bit of a down year, their performances up to this point probably should be rewarded more than i initially did.

7. Brute Squad
8. Capitals
9. Nemesis
10. Showdown
11. Ozone

I never know how much weight to put on historical finish for seedings at Nationals, but the SO1 and SO2 teams finished 11 and 12 last year, so maybe having Showdown and Ozone at the 10 and 11 spot isn't terrible. Nemesis would make for a dangerous 9th seed as the 3rd team in a pool, but I couldn't justify splitting Nemesis and Showdown by the two NE teams.

More food for thought: Skyd Magazine just came out with their Top 10 Power Rankings (http://skydmagazine.com/2011/10/skyd-power-rankings-club-womens-101111/) that aren't limited by Regional finish order.

[michelle.ng]

Here's my take on things (not necessarily reflective of my team's position). Disclaimer: The only non-MB games I have seen all season are: Nemesis v. Phoenix (Labor Day), Showdown v. Ozone (Labor Day), Showdown v. Phoenix (Labor Day), and Fury v. Riot (ECC via Ultivillage).

Seeds 1-3:
No argument here-- I think this is pretty much set in stone.

Seeds 4-6:
These are the results I looked at for this grouping of teams:
- Molly Brown- 1-2 v. Phoenix, 1-0 v. Scandal, 1-0 v. Nemesis, all other losses are to Seeds 1-3
- Scandal- 0-1 v. Molly Brown, 1-1 v. Phoenix, 1-1 v. Nemesis, also has an early season loss to Caps (Canadian Nationals roster)
- Phoenix- 2-1 v. Molly Brown, 1-1 v. Scandal, 0-2 v. Nemesis, also has a loss to Ozone

Thoughts on this sequence:
- I would go Molly Brown-Scandal-Phoenix. People are pointing to our 1-2 record against Phoenix as a reason to go Scandal-Phoenix-Molly Brown. I disagree with that because of Phoenix's 0-2 record v. Nemesis, and the fact that we have a H2H win v. Scandal and are 1-0 v. Nemesis.
- Secondarily, Molly Brown's only other losses are to teams in the top tier (Seeds 1-3). In addition to the two losses to Nemesis, Phoenix has a loss to Ozone (Tier 3), and Scandal has an early loss to Capitals (Canadian Nationals roster) and a loss to Nemesis (Tier 3).
- Interesting sidenote about Fusion: if we had beaten Nemesis by 1 more in pool play, we would have faced Nemesis in finals instead of Phoenix.

Seeds 7-11:
- I agree with the way that Jenny has seeded this sequence, though I could be persuaded otherwise.
- For me, Nemesis is at the top of this pack because they are 1-1 v. Scandal and 2-0 v. Phoenix (3 wins against Tier 2 teams). They only drop out of Tier 2 for me because of their losses to zG and Showdown, and their 15-1 loss to Fury.
- I think I am mostly in the camp that seedings are earned through results (I think they are a reflection of past results, not predictive of the future). I agree with the statements about Brute peaking at the right time, taking advantage of big pickups, etc. but I think putting them at 7 is too much in the camp of being predictive of their future results. They do not have any wins against higher-tier teams, and the Capitals minus Walker, Fortin, and Werry is too much of a question mark for me to "reward" Brute THAT much for beating them at Regionals.
- Team composition IS an allowable consideration for seeding and that is pretty tough. I see the argument for Brute at 7, especially if you are in the predictive camp.

Seeds 12-16:
- I am on board with Gwen's reasoning for bumping RevoLOUtion up, and agree with how she's seeded these teams. I could be persuaded to bump RevoLOUtion up to 12 based on last year's 15-9 win over Safari at Nationals and roster composition, but 12 and 13 are interchangeable, so I'd default to Safari at 12.

Other random thoughts about this sequence:
- Further's Labor Day results were with Erika Baken and Sabrina "Kodiak" Fong playing, and both were huge factors in their game against us. However, Clare "Gordy" Gordon and Jenica Villamor were not in attendance, and both are on their fall roster. Regardless, props to Further for qualifying ahead of zG, Underground, and Schwa. No small task.
- Have the TN women ever qualified for Club Nationals before? Tobey Beaver, Sara Gibson, Jenn Baumann, and others have all done a lot to build the South Region and I am really happy to see them get a trip to Sarasota.

Michelle
Molly Brown #10
Showdown 2009 and 2010

[c.alex.davis]

The Capitals/Brute Squad/Traffic/Riot dynamic is a tough one to reconcile.

Prior to Regionals, Capitals would have been a top-4 seed, and well above Brute Squad, with 2 head-to-head victories in their favour. Of course, Capitals must be seeded beneath Brute Squad because of the Regionals win; likewise, Traffic must be seeded ahead of Riot because of their Regionals win.

But Capitals still have 3 head-to-head victories over Traffic (and very solid games against Fury and Riot), so it's hard to justify seeding them outside the top 8. If the Capitals rediscover their momentum in Sarasota, it could royally mess up pool play by having them under-seeded. It's hard to know whether to assume Brute Squad has had an epiphany, or whether Capitals slipped up. The fact that Capitals went 11-1 against Bent versus Brute Squad's 15-10 against Bent inclines me to think Capitals still has plenty of potential to do damage.

I'm thinking of putting Capitals and Brute Squad in the same pool (e.g. as 8 & 9) to sort themselves out on Thursday. It's a tempting compromise.

[a.tiarsmith]

What a disaster! This seems like a perfect time for me to renew my annual whining about the requirement that teams who finish higher at regionals must be seeded higher at nationals...but I will resist.

Given that Capitals did not win their region, it seems like we all agree that 1-3 should be NW1, NW2, NW3. So:
1. Fury
2. Traffic
3. Riot

It seems that the consensus is Molly Brown, Scandal, and Phoenix are Tier 2, while Nemesis is Tier 2.5. I can definitely see arguments for seeding Tier 2 in different ways but I'm just gonna go with Michelle's seeding:

Molly Brown
Scandal
Phoenix
Nemesis

The question is now what to do with Brute/Capitals. I think our options are either to put them both ahead of this four team group OR put them both after this four team group. The reason is because each of these four teams is in the same position vis-a-vis Brute/Capitals: based only on regular season results, there is simply no reason to put any of these teams below Brute (they are a combined 9-0 against Brute), and no reason to put any of them ahead of Capitals. Notice that this relationship to Brute/Caps does not hold for the lowest seeded team in Tier 1 (Riot), or the likely highest seeded team in Tier 3 (Showdown). Based on regular season results, Riot clearly has an argument to be ahead of both of these teams. On the other end, Showdown is the first team that Brute Squad has any argument for being seeded higher than--the two teams only attended one tournament together, (Colorado Cup) and Brute Squad finished higher than Showdown.

So that gives us either:
4. Molly Brown
5. Scandal
6. Phoenix
7. Nemesis
8. Brute Squad
9. Capitals

or

4. Brute Squad
5. Capitals
6. Molly Brown
7. Scandal
8. Phoenix
9. Nemesis

I'm not really sure how you decide between these two options. I'm gonna just go with option 1 so I can finish my post. If anyone has any ideas about how to decide between these two options I'd be interested to hear them.

The arguments everyone has provided for the bottom group makes good sense to me...so here's what I"m going with (at least until I think of something better):

1. Fury
2. Traffic
3. Riot
4. Molly Brown
5. Scandal
6. Phoenix
7. Nemesis (when you seed this way it's tempting to move Nemesis ahead of Phoenix since they are 2-0 against them--but Phoenix finished higher than Nemesis at both of those tourneys)
8. Brute Squad
9. Capitals
10. Showdown
11. Ozone
12. Safari
13. RevoLOUtion
14. Further
15. Bent
16. DeSoto

[a.tiarsmith]

The more I look at Tier 2, the more I think Angela is right it should be Scandal, Phoenix, Molly Brown.

[kathratcliff]

Hi all,
My seedings are really similar to what Jenny and Michelle have suggested.

1-3 Fury, Traffic, Riot
Clearly.

4-6 Molly Brown, Scandal, Phoenix
Obviously I am going to be biased in favor of moving us up (Molly Brown), but I think to reiterate, our only losses outside of the top 3 seeds are two losses to Phoenix at the same tournament. Both Phoenix and Scandal have losses to teams outside of seeds 1-6. MB's head to head win over Scandal, plus wins over common opponents who they both have losses to (Nemesis, Ozone), I think gives us the bump to be #4. I wouldn't argue putting Phoenix above us *IF* they had won their region. Unfortunately, the rules dictate they be below Scandal, and I think nobody would argue MB above Scandal if it weren't for the Phoenix thing.

7-11 Nemesis, Brute Squad, Capitals, Showdown, Ozone
I think Nemesis might even have the argument to be pushed up above Phoenix here since they are 2-0 vs them, but I think taking into account the rest of their season knocks them down to this spot. BS, Caps required to be in that order, and BS is getting a bump up because of their impressive regionals win. Showdown/Ozone I believe have to be below these two teams mainly because of Caps strength outside of regionals and both Showdown and Ozone don't have super strong results this year (notably, SD loss to Underground, loss to Phx, Ozone loss to Phx, Scandal, MB, 2x SD, and the only win for either team over a higher seeded team is SD over Nemesis at Labor Day).

12-16 Safari, Further, RevoLOUtion, Bent, DeSoto
I'm giving Safari the bump here because of experience and a stronger season. Putting Further above RevoLOUtion from H2H win and coming out of the NW being no easy thing. Bent, DeSoto according to the Score Reporter.

So that gives us:
1 Fury
2 Traffic
3 Riot
4 Molly Brown
5 Scandal
6 Phoenix
7 Nemesis
8 Brute Squad
9 Capitals
10 Showdown
11 Ozone
12 Safari
13 Further
14 RevoLOUtion
15 Bent
16 DeSoto

Kath Ratcliff
MB #13

[hacklindrun923]

Oh man…what a mess:)
Molly Brown’s argument for 4th is #1 they have beaten Nemesis and #2 they have lost to no one else but the top three except Phoenix.
Well, they did not play other teams outside of the top three as much as Phoenix because of geography and therefore did not have the same equal opportunity to lose. At Labor Day, MB beat Ozone on DGP in pool play and Phoenix on DGP in consolation. At Fusion, Ozone was not there and MB lost to Phoenix in pool play and in the Championship game pretty decisively. Now….if Ozone could have been there?? Who knows. Same thing with Scandal. They played Scandal at Fusion and won, so did Phoenix. But, only Phoenix got to play them at Regionals….so…..

Anyway…I was thinking there was going to be a huge issue with Phoenix – Scandal – Molly Brown – Nemesis. Here is my logic:
Unfortunately, Nemesis is on a bit of a different tier and it has nothing to do with their records against Phoenix and Molly Brown (which we will just call a wash at this point). It has to do with two facts:
1. They have lost to teams not at Nationals (zG)
2. They have finished off tournament weekends not at their best (15-1 loss to Fury at ECC, loss to zG at Labor Day, 15-7 loss to MB at Fusion to keep them out of the Championship Game)
Therefore, I am going to jump a big ship here and say that Nemesis is at the bottom of these four. I think that is a scary seeding, and I feel sorry for the one seed in their pool. But, them’s the breaks.
Now, Scandal – Phoenix – MB.
Scandal is definitely above Phoenix.
So, what about MB against Scandal-Phoenix?
MB lost twice to Phoenix at Fusion and the second time was in the Championship game. Phoenix won a tournament over them. MB beat Scandal in their only meet up this year…..but, Scandal finished significantly ahead of them at Nationals last year (Scandal made quarters, MB lost to ->PHX<-in pre-quarters). So, I would go with Scandal – Phoenix – MB with giving us a little bit of a nod because of last year’s finish as a tie breaker.
Regionals rematch in pool play does not bother me. Sucks a whole lot worse when it is in quarters and this way that probably won’t be happening.
Sounds like Riot, Showdown, Ozone, Phoenix are thinking this is right. MB and Scandal obviously thinks differently:) Don’t envy Deanna at all….. If Molly Brown is going to be seeded above Phoenix though, then Nemesis needs to be seeded above Phoenix using that same logic.

Either way...looking forward to it! I think this is one of the strongest, deepest women's club championship tournaments in a long time and I am just thrilled to be a part of it.

Lindsey Hack
Phoenix #23

[hacklindrun923]

Interestingly enough...here are the rankings on Score reporter (RRI/whatever):
1. Riot
2. Fury
3. Caps
4. Traffic
5. Scandal
6. Phoenix
7. Molly Brown
8. Ozone
9. Showdown
10. Brute Squad
11. Nemesis

I wonder why Nemesis mathematically is so low? Loss to Zeit? DGP victory over pop? Close victory over Revolution??

[kawilson830]

So I don't have a ton to say about this. I don't envy Deanna. I agree with the break down of the tiers. I think it's nearly impossible to know where to put Brute and Caps. I just wanted to respond to Kath's post to say Ozone actually did beat Phoenix the last time we matched up, we lost to Scandal by 2 (very early in the season pre-manu) and we lost dgp to MB. So...I think we have proven to match up decently well against the Tier 2 teams. I think bc of actual record, we need to be near the bottom of Tier 3. But I don't know that I would necessarily automatically put us below Brute and Caps, since Caps roster is so different now and Brute has only won one game against a new Caps roster that no one has seen yet.

[thompsor]

I don't think the womens seeding is particularly difficult this year. There are two main things to figure out - Scandal/Molly Brown/Phoenix and where to place BS/Capitals. From what I can see on Score Reporter, as well as from attending (and watching a surprising number of womens games at) Labor Day and Boston Invite, I think that Scandal is the strongest of the three teams in question. I would be tempted to seed Scandal, MB, Phoenix. And, unfortunately for Capitals and anyone who has to play them, they get bumped down because of Brute's less than stellar season. I think it makes sense to bump them down rather than raise Brute up.

[c.alex.davis]

Earlier in this thread, I suggested placing Brute and Capitals in the same pool. Seeding them 8th and 9th is an obvious possibility. However, I thought I'd also point out that this can be similarly achieved by seeding them 7th and 10th.* So, if the Capitals suddenly rediscover that they're the Capitals and subsequently go on a tear, they're likely in a power pool with Traffic, Scandal, etc. (as opposed to Riot, Fury, etc.). And if not, well, Brute Squad probably deserves the spot.

While it may ruffle some feathers to put Brute 7th and Capitals 10th (relative to the rest of the field), it's a worthwhile thought, because at the end of the day, the balance of pools and power pools matter far more than the seeding numbers themselves.

I also thought up a breakdown of the Scandal/MB/PHX/Nemesis dynamic if anyone is in the mood for it.




*You could also go with 6th/11th, for example, even though the field begins to look awfully distorted from a ladder perspective.

[angela.lin]

Sounds like Riot, Showdown, Ozone, Phoenix are thinking this is right.


woah woah, are my posts on this board supposed to be reflective of what my team thinks? uh oh.

btw for anyone who hasn't read it yet, Fury's* thoughts:
http://www.rsdnospam.com/index.php?t=msg&th=36282&start=0&

*or Matty's. =)

I feel like every year during this process several people say, "hm eek messy," and then a couple people come in and say, "meh seems straightforward to me" based on some logic that is clear to them. Fascinating. Is this indicative of some people's need to over complicate things or other people's need to over simplify things? or just a product of the system...

a.

[ambler]

I feel like every year during this process several people say, "hm eek messy," and then a couple people come in and say, "meh seems straightforward to me" based on some logic that is clear to them. Fascinating. Is this indicative of some people's need to over complicate things or other people's need to over simplify things? or just a product of the system...


The system itself seems to complicate matters, in my opinion. The Series Guidelines (http://www.usaultimate.org/competition/club_division/club_series/series_guidelines.aspx#seeding) state that the following information should be used for seedings: "input solicited from all the captains of participating teams, results prior to the Series (e.g. head to head, common opponents, tournament finish), results of last year’s Series, and other applicable information (e.g. team composition, conditions). The coordinator has the authority to adjust rankings according to the best information available." That's a lot of different parameters without any indication of whether they should be treated equally or with some unspecified weighting.

I'm sure that these guidelines are left vague on purpose. First of all, since USAU doesn't have an official club regular season, they probably can't mandate pre-Series results are the most important thing for seeding. Also, coordinators probably want the flexibility to use all available data, especially at the Sectionals and Regionals levels where teams may not have a lot of results to go off of and new teams appear each year. I would think that at Nationals it would be appropriate to have the seeding guidelines more codified since there tends to be a lot of information available about the different teams. A hierarchy of which factors to consider in what order would make the seedings less subjective.

For instance, maybe the previous' years results only should come into consideration when current season's results are lacking or inconsistent. Maybe the "other applicable information" like team composition or weather should be used only as a last resort to differentiate between teams that have similar claims to a certain seed. I am sure that each person has her own internal hierarchy for what she considers most important when coming up with seeding, but different people's systems vary which is why there's never consensus. This comes up every year and it really would be nice to see it resolved. Even now that the college division has an official regular season, the 2012 college guidelines (http://www.usaultimate.org/competition/college_division/college_season/guidelines.aspx#seeding) still have the same language for seedings.

Then again, maybe arguments over seeding are good for the sport. This thread has had the most activity posting about women's ultimate in awhile...

[hacklindrun923]

should have been more clear - "players/coaches from Riot, Showdown, Ozone, Phoenix are thinking......." It was simply for those individuals reading this forum that may not know who is who. that was all.

[angela.lin]

should have been more clear - "players/coaches from Riot, Showdown, Ozone, Phoenix are thinking......." It was simply for those individuals reading this forum that may not know who is who. that was all.

Haha. Just messin w/ ya, Hack.

a.

[david.belsheim]

The 4-7 seeding question will be an interesting development over the next week. I think the final seeding will be something like this:

4. Molly Brown
5. Scandal
6. Nemesis
7. Phoenix

4. Molly Brown has a head to head win over Scandal and wins over Nemesis, Brute Squad and one over Phoenix. Molly Brown's only losses are to Fury, Riot, Traffic and they've got a 1-2 record v. Phoenix. I don't think the argument that Scandal and Phoenix should be ahead of Molly Brown carries much weight. Yes, Phoenix has won two out of three matches against Molly Brown, but Molly Brown beat Scandal and Nemesis while Phoenix failed to beat them. Phoenix also lost to Ozone, an additional loss that sets the two teams further apart. In the end, Molly Brown should be compared against the highest placing team from the Mid Atlantic, Scandal. Molly Brown has the better record against common opponent Nemesis and head to head victory over Scandal to put them at 4th.

I think the bigger question is where to seed the next three teams. Really, we should be comparing Nemesis to Scandal first since Phoenix must be behind Scandal. The teams are 1-1 vs each other with Nemesis winning last, by one point. Here, I think Scandal has the edge as they have more favorable win margins against common opponents whereas Nemesis has a couple of losses to Zeitgeist and Showdown. So Scandal ahead of Nemesis.

5. Scandal

Next you compare Nemesis against Phoenix. I think you have to give Nemesis the edge despite stronger season results from Phoenix because Nemesis has 2 big head to head wins over Phoenix, which I think is more useful for seeding two teams against each other than using common opponents.

6. Nemesis
7. Phoenix

[matthewbourland]

The majority of the team bios/logos/rosters have been posted for the Women's Division.

EDIT: All of them are now posted.

[matthewbourland]

Women's Division seeding and schedule set. (http://www.usaultimate.org/news/2011-club-championships-seeding-and-schedules-set/#W)

[joeseidler]

Congratulations to Fury for continuing their dynasty. They have now tied DoG for the most consecutive championships.

[matthewbourland]

Women's stats from the event. (http://www.usaultimate.org/news/2011-club-championship-stat-totals/#W)