Re: Crown Tourney

["Thorpe, John" <JThorpe@greenville.ClemsonSC.ATTGIS.COM>]

Greetings from Ellwood!

Scripsit Sir Dafydd:

%Ellwood and Leifr mention an "imbalance" in distribution
%of crown tourney contestants (four from one southern Barony,
%only three from north of Caer Mear).

Not quite.  I thought we were speaking of unbelted contestants.
I don't have the entire list handy, so I can't verify all of
our suppositions.  Also, there were two from another southern
barony who are _brothers_.  What are the odds??!?  8^) 8^)

%Before anything further is said, I would like to point out
%that this sort of statistic is interesting, but often not
%meaningful.  Or, to bastardize Twain, you can find any meaning
%you like in it.

You are correct.  Leifr was musing on the statistic, I tried
to make sure he had the statistic right.  8^)  You know and I
know that statistics can be presented to represent almost any
theory that one could want.  Personally, I don't pay too much
attention to the demographics of who enters Crown--just who
wins....  There seems to be a definite pattern to who has been
winning....

%The Knights of the Kingdom often discuss (in our TopSecret Meetings)
%the percentage of Knights in Crown lists as some sort of barometer
%of how well we (as an order) are doing in knighting up-and-coming
%fighters, and other meanings are often ascribed to these statistics.

What about all those aging squires?  BTW, are there _really_
"Rufus rules" at Chivalry meetings?  Oops, I forgot that the
meetings are TopSecret...  <Ellwood dives for cover>  8^) 8^)
Of course, it is hard to have a TSM when I'm standing right next
to you--but then again, the Knights didn't notice I was there 8^)

%There have been one-knight Crowns before (the first one Barry won,
%for example).  There have been seven-knight Crowns, also.  Crowns
%that will lead to Winter reigns seem to be slightly lighter,
%knight-wise, than those leading to summer reigns.  By and large,
%however, these statistics are _meaningless_.  It is as useful to
%ascribe such meaning as to tell no-shit stories (the other major
%activity in TopSecret Chivalry Meetings).

No.  That particular statistic _does_ have meaning.  Whomever gets
the summer reign is the Pennsic Crown.  As I have been told, the
Crowns who go to Pennsic have more fun than the Winter Crowns.
Naturally, more people are going to want to be a Pennsic King....

%Similarly, I think, for the statistics like four contestants from
%one Barony.  The numbers are too small, and the deviation too large,
%to ascribe any meaning there.

%Only three fighters from north of Caer Mear _might_ have some
%meaning, if we only knew what.  However, that meaning could be
%random, or philosophical, or political, or just the fact that this
%was a one-day event moderately far from the center of the North,
%and so all the "I'll go if it's close" entrants stayed home.

This is correct also.  There is too small a sample space.  Now, if
we had our hands on the distribution from the last few Crown
Tourneys, where, and when they were held, we might have the
beginnings of some _real_ statistics.  Now, for some more
statistical fun.  Check out which households have won the last
few Pennsic reigns....

Ellwood
(who brews trouble better than he brews beer)
BBC