- Trinity College Cambridge (370, 185)
- Durham University (460, 230)
- Magdalen College Oxford (445, 222.5)
- Gonville & Caius College Cambridge (505, 252.5)
- Bristol University (350, 175)
- Liverpool University (325, 162.5)
- St Peter’s College Oxford (440, 220)
- Oxford Brookes University (310, 155)
As
you can see, no repechage survivors this year, which means we have a much
clearer idea of teams aggregate performance. Lets look over the teams in order
of highest aggregate score:
- Caius: Highest score of the first round (305) as they trounced St Anne’s College Oxford, before defeating Manchester in the second round. Strong on both the buzzer and the bonuses in both matches. One to watch.
- Durham: Trounced Brasenose College Oxford by massive margin in first round, then took down York narrowly in, in my opinion, the best match of the second round. Strong on the buzzer, but their bonus work could do with improving if they face any more tight matches.
- Magdalen: Overcame Pembroke College Cambridge in a controversial first round match, before beating Open in the second. Steady on the bonuses and on the buzzer both times, but may have been aided both times by, in the first round, Pembroke apparently being deterred in the final minutes and in the second, Open’s inclination to sit on the buzzer.
- St Peter’s: Comfortable winners over Sussex in the first round and Selwyn College Cambridge in the second. Both wins largely due to captain Gabriel Trueblood’s excellent buzzer performance; should he have an off-day, the rest of the side may struggle. Variable on the bonuses.
- Trinity: Low scoring winners over St Andrews in Round 1, but fared better in Round 2 in defeating the fancied Leicester team. About half on the bonuses both times; buzzer work varied between matches, and will need further examination.
- Bristol: Comfortable winners over the Courtauld Institute in the first round, narrow winners over L.S.H.T.M. in the second. Both matches low scoring; buzzer work fine, but bonus work may need to be improved.
- Liverpool: Narrow winners over Sheffield in first round, comfortable winners over Glasgow in second. Got through both matches through sheer buzzer work; bonus rate will need to improve.
- Oxford Brookes: Narrowly defeated Jesus College Oxford in first round, more comfortably defeated U.C.L. in second. Again, both matches low scoring. Buzzer work adequate, bonus work has sufficed so far, but may need to be improved.
So,
four stand out teams, one question mark, and three who will need to up the ante
to progress.
Based
purely on what we’ve seen of them so far, I would tip Caius, Durham, Magdalen
and St Peter’s to be the four semi-finalists, with Trinity the wildcards. But
I’m not ruling Bristol, Liverpool or our friends Oxford Brookes out totally
yet; remember our old friends Bangor two years ago, who performed much better
in the QFs than in the first two rounds?
The draw leaves something to be desired; as Weaver’s Week pointed out, the first four matches of the series featured far more strong teams than the second. Of course, they also speculated it could’ve been a set-up draw so that Trinity, Magdalen and Manchester would meet in the QFs, which, of course, didn’t materialise.
If the logic of the past three years is anything to go by, it’ll be Bristol vs Liverpool next week, with St Peter’s vs Oxford Brookes the week after. This, as WW points out, would be pretty deeply unbalanced, with St Peter’s probable to walk over the other three teams in the half, and the other four all being very close in the top half.
We shall have to wait and see how the draw pans out; overall, whatever the case, the QFs should, as usual, have plenty of twists in them. I don’t think the drama of the series is over quite yet.
I'll, hopefully, be back on Friday with some more thoughts on possible reform.
For what it's worth, here's my ranking of the teams:
ReplyDelete1. Gonville and Caius - 245
2. Magdalen - 211
3. St Peter's - 201
4. Durham - 199
5. Trinity - 170
6. Bristol - 168
7. Liverpool - 144
8. Oxford Brookes - 140
These stats got every match but one right in the QFs and beyond last time around, though the teams are bunched quite a lot closer than they were last time. Still, I'd agree with your assessment. There's quite a clear division between the top four and bottom four, so barring a weird draw or some good luck I'd call those four as the semi-finalists. All due respect to all the quarter finalists, of course - "bottom four" is a very relative phrase in this situation. :D
It's been a good series so far, although not quite as good as last year in terms of quality and excitement. Some rather boring low-scoring games, including in Round 2. My tips for the QFs:
ReplyDeleteFirst two to qualify with 2 wins: Magdalen and Caius.
First two to go out with 2 losses: Bristol and Liverpool.
The other semi-finalists will probably be St. Peter's (purely on the basis of Trueblood's ability) and a toss-up between Trinity and Durham. All four players of Trinity buzzed very well against Leicester and because of that I would back them ahead of Durham. The latter seem very reliant on Morgan-Thomas and Boyd-Shah, and they did struggle to put away a one-man York team. Then again, they've broken 200 twice so I certainly wouldn't write them off.
The best thing one can say about this series is that it's very open and there is no obvious winner. Magdalen seem strong...but not as formidable as the 2010-11 team, with Haddad-Fonda and Cudmore bulldozing all before them. They've won both matches comfortably, but neither victory was hugely dominant. Caius pulled off a champion's performance in Round 1 with all four buzzing well, but against Manchester they looked a little vulnerable, and were heavily reliant on Taylor. If these two meet in the final, it would be fascinating indeed. Here's to an interesting denouement.
You guessed correctly about our match next week, we are up against St Peter’s. I can see where you and others are coming from about the relative strength of the two quarter final ‘pools’, I think there are two reasons as to why it has worked out in this way in this series. To an extent the quarter final pools are set with the second round draw as in order to fit all the filming in over the three weekends studio time (and Jeremy time most likely) available, two quarter final matches are filmed on the same weekend after the last second round matches. It makes logistic (and financial) sense that the four participants in these two matches and consequently one quarter final pool are the four winning teams of the final four second round matches. Otherwise teams would have to stay (at the producer’s expense) for further nights in hotels etc etc.
ReplyDeleteThe second reason is where we (Brookes) come in as I think we messed up the draw to an extent with our win over UCL. After the first round, it was fair to pair us with a strong first round team and perhaps it was thought that UCL would beat us given we scored fewer points in our first round win than UCL’s opponents and UCL still had won by nearly 100. So when we won in the last match of the second round, the only four teams still in Manchester were ourselves, Peter’s, Bristol and Liverpool and two quarter final matches had to be recorded to fit in with the schedule – a bit of a fait accompli. If UCL had won against us, then I don’t think many would query the two pools of Caius, Magdalen, Durham and Trinity on one hand and UCL, St Peter’s, Bristol and Liverpool on the other as of the five stand-out first round teams still in, one pool had three (Caius, Magdalen and Durham) and the other had two (UCL and St Peter’s).