<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?><?xml-stylesheet href="http://www.blogger.com/styles/atom.css" type="text/css"?><feed xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom' xmlns:openSearch='http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearchrss/1.0/' xmlns:georss='http://www.georss.org/georss' xmlns:gd='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005' xmlns:thr='http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0'><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7557694181012473799</id><updated>2011-11-27T18:46:35.704-06:00</updated><title type='text'>The Unconventional Overview</title><subtitle type='html'></subtitle><link rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#feed' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://unconventionaloverview.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7557694181012473799/posts/default?max-results=100'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://unconventionaloverview.blogspot.com/'/><link rel='hub' href='http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/'/><author><name>C.J. Clevenger</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/06891761187105354922</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author><generator version='7.00' uri='http://www.blogger.com'>Blogger</generator><openSearch:totalResults>1</openSearch:totalResults><openSearch:startIndex>1</openSearch:startIndex><openSearch:itemsPerPage>100</openSearch:itemsPerPage><entry><id>tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7557694181012473799.post-4170901402592235397</id><published>2011-10-12T23:19:00.000-05:00</published><updated>2011-10-12T23:19:14.175-05:00</updated><title type='text'>Is There a Side Bias for the Space Topic Yet?</title><content type='html'>In response to a post on Debate Central's website.&amp;nbsp; Brian Rubie was live tweeting a debate at Greenhill in the outrounds in which one of the arguments presented in the debate totaled to results sheet at Greenhill and claimed that there was a side bias on the topic.&amp;nbsp; This lead me to invesitgate with the results that were available to me if there was a side bias on the topic.&amp;nbsp; I did find some intersting results.&amp;nbsp; Numbers being what they are, it is always up for interpretation, but there are some things about debate which makes us want to spin the numbers anyway that we can.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; I will break down the results by tournaments that I have statistics for and in total, along with some fun spin about what might play a role for the numbers that we have seen in debates.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Wake Forrest Early Bird:&lt;br /&gt;The outrounds at Wake were split 14 AFF wins and 14 NEG wins (with the side results for finals unknown).&lt;br /&gt;Round 1 - 25 AFF v 29 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 2 - 25 AFF v 29 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 3 - 30 AFF v 24 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 4 - 28 AFF v 26 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 5 - 26 AFF v 28 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 6 - 26 AFF v 28 NEG&lt;br /&gt;TOTAL - 160 AFF v 178 NEG&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Grapevine:&lt;br /&gt;Outrounds: 5 AFF v 5 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 1 - 9 AFF v 26 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 2 - 23 AFF v 12 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 3 - 15 AFF v 20 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 4 - 15 AFF v 20 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 5 - 23 AFF v 12 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Total - 90 AFF v 95 NEG&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Greenhill Round Robin:&lt;br /&gt;Total - 69 AFF v 43 NEG&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Greenhill:&lt;br /&gt;Outrounds 18 AFF v 12 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 1 - 31 AFF v 20 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 2 - 24 AFF v 27 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 3 - 28 AFF v 23 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 4 - 26 AFF v 25 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 5 - 25 AFF v 26 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 6 - 25 AFF v 26 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Total - 177 AFF v 159 NEG&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Samford:&amp;nbsp; &lt;br /&gt;Outrounds: Unknown&lt;br /&gt;Round 1 - 4 AFF v 7 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 2 - 5 AFF v 6 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 3 - 6 AFF v 5 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 4 - 4 AFF v 7 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 5 - 3 AFF v 8 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 6 - 5 AFF v 6 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Total - 27 AFF v 39 NEG&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Valley:&lt;br /&gt;Outrounds: Sides Unknown&lt;br /&gt;Round 1 - 19 AFF v 22 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 2 - 21 AFF v 20 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 3 - 23 AFF v 18 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 4 -&amp;nbsp;24 AFF v 17 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 5 - 27 AFF v 14 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 6 - 12 AFF v 29 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Total - 126 AFF v 120 NEG&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Georgetown:&lt;br /&gt;Outrounds: Sides Unknown&lt;br /&gt;Round 1 - 19 AFF v 16 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 2 - 9 AFF v 26 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 3 - 20 AFF v 15 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 4 - 18 AFF v 17 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 5 - 23 AFF v 12 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Round 6 - 16 AFF v 19 NEG&lt;br /&gt;Total - 105 AFF v 105 NEG&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Overall Totals: &amp;nbsp;754 AFF v 748 NEG&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Looking at the total numbers, the affirmative has a very slight margin of victory over the negative.&amp;nbsp; This margin is negligible to indicate that there is no real bias for the affirmative over the negative to date.&amp;nbsp; But, these can be deciving.&amp;nbsp; These numbers include the first and second round which are preset rounds.&amp;nbsp; Looking at totals that only include power matching of some sort would be a more indicative indicator becuase it would place like teams (in theory based on record) against one another.&amp;nbsp; Looking at the side bias in this manner removes the quality of team question and places debates in a more focused light.&amp;nbsp; If you being with round 3 for these tournaments and through outrounds (for those results that are available) you might end up with a different total.&amp;nbsp; I have left Samford off of this calculation because there were only 22 teams at the tournament and also the Greenhill Round Robin.&amp;nbsp; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Looking at the results this way expands the affirmative lead.&amp;nbsp; 469 AFF v 430 NEG.&amp;nbsp; The reality is that the side bias favors the affirmative even more so when you place like teams against one another.&amp;nbsp; The question then becomes why is there a side bias for the affirmative.&lt;div class="blogger-post-footer"&gt;&lt;img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/7557694181012473799-4170901402592235397?l=unconventionaloverview.blogspot.com' alt='' /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</content><link rel='edit' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7557694181012473799/posts/default/4170901402592235397'/><link rel='self' type='application/atom+xml' href='http://www.blogger.com/feeds/7557694181012473799/posts/default/4170901402592235397'/><link rel='alternate' type='text/html' href='http://unconventionaloverview.blogspot.com/2011/10/is-there-side-bias-for-space-topic-yet.html' title='Is There a Side Bias for the Space Topic Yet?'/><author><name>C.J. Clevenger</name><uri>http://www.blogger.com/profile/06891761187105354922</uri><email>noreply@blogger.com</email><gd:image rel='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#thumbnail' width='16' height='16' src='http://img2.blogblog.com/img/b16-rounded.gif'/></author></entry></feed>
