- Details
- Hits: 40
'Chai Dragons' of Manchester swap places with 'SWOLE' of NUS. So 'Chai Dragons' improving by 11% are now first and 'SWOLE' improving by 6% are second.
All others are in the same place as last round 'TaskForce 141' of GCU improving by 10% and 'Prasinos Aegis' of Manchester improving by 13%, the highest improvement this round, failed to move up.
'SWOLE' are 111 points behind 'Chai Dragons', so 'SWOLE' would need to score 111 points or just over 5% more than 'Chai Dragons' to overtake them. If 'Chai Dragons' improved 10% next round 'SWOLE' would need to score 15% to overtake them. Not an impossible gap to overcome so its still competitive. 'Task Force 141' are 145 points behind 'Chai Dragons' and would need to score 145 points or nearly 7% more than 'Chai Dragons' to overtake them. If 'Chai Dragons' improved 10% the 'Taskforce 141' would need to improve by 17% to overtake the. Not impossible but getting more challenging. Similarly 'Prasinos Aegis' are 166 points behind 'Chai Dragons'. So 'Prasinos Aegis' would need to improve by 166 points or 7.8% to overtake 'Chai Dragons'. So if 'Chai Dragons' improved by 10% 'Prasinos Aegis' would need to improved by 17.8% to overtake them. Not impossible but getting more challenging.
The next round is that last round of the early stage. How will the teams react. 'Chai Dragons' need a good solid average performance to stay ahead. They can’t afford a mistake. So they will be careful maybe even cautious. This might restrict their score. If Chai Dragons' caution guarding against a mistake only produced an improvement of say 5% in the next round then it would be open for the following teams to overtake them. This thinking perhaps leaves the following teams to be more adventurous pursuing a higher score. All the decisions and their consequences should be well understood by now. This allows teams to make judgements assessing risk as they pursue a higher score. If they take risks and do well they will be praised for the wisdom of their judgement. If they take risks and get a low score they will be described as foolhardy!
Its time to scrutinise the see-saw decisions as we teeter-totter into the last early stage round.
- Details
- Hits: 90
Of the top four last round, 'Chai Dragons' of Manchester retain their second place with a points improvement of 20%.
'SWOLE' of NUS rise to first place from fourth with a points improvement of 30%. 'TaskForce 141' of GCU fall from first to third with a points improvement of 13% and 'Prasinos Aegis' of Manchester slip one place to fourth also with a points improvement of 13%.
'Chai Dragons' are only 11 points, about half a percent, behind SWOLE, TaskForce 141 are 108 point off the leader, just over 5% and Prasinos Aegis are 180 point off the lead, just under 9%.
With just two rounds left to go, given the scale of improvements in one round the scores are very close and well able to be overtaken. The juggling of positions indicates how close this is.
This is a stage when those trying to catch up start taking more risky decisions, if they succeed they congratulate themselves, but risk means it can easily go the other way.
Careful judgement is needed so as not to get stung.
- Details
- Hits: 246
Given that the top four last time were tightly bunched then changes in ranking are not surprising.
'TaskForce 141' of GCU rise from fourth to first and 'Chai Dragons' of Manchester rise from third to second. 'Prasinos Aegis' of Manchester slip from first to third and 'SWOLE' of NUS slip from second to fourth. But this isn't much more than a gentle shuffle. Taskforce 141 in first place have 1743 points and Prasinos Aegis in third have 1675 points. This is only 68 points and can easily be overtaken in a single round. SWOLE in fourth have 1592 points 151 points behind the leader, not a huge amount so the top four are still close to each other.
If any team is going to breakaway from the pack, now may be the time for a serious review of strategy to determine how to improve your ranking. Check your decision making. Does every team member contribute to the discussion. Teamwork ensures that the issues around each decision are explored and understood and that the team reaches the optimum decision.
Although the top four are close, external forces may drive the changes. The market could well tighten. Teams that have won jobs with low bids, or even losing bids, will see the effects ripple through their accounts. Their scores will not rise as before, and some might even fall. This may be happening already, and may explain why some teams have slipped.
These first three rounds has seen the performance of the top teams being broadly similar. Will this sustain or are we watching a calm before the storm.