Rochester United Captures Turtle Cup V

By Taylor Veracka

Editor’s Note: The author is the Quidditch Post’s Mid-Atlantic Editor and plays for the Hopkins Hallows. For results of each match see here. 

Turtle Cup V, one of the premier tournaments in the Mid-Atlantic region, took place on Saturday, Sept. 26 under cool and cloudy skies at the University of Maryland (UMD) in College Park, Maryland. Sixteen teams from inside and outside the region competed against one another in at least four games apiece, including three pool play games and one bracket play game. Though many expected Rochester United (RU) to dominate in the way that it did, the hosts surprisingly failed to live up to the hype surrounding them. Ultimately, it was not the finals many predicted, as RU knocked off last season’s Mid-Atlantic runner-up the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) 150-110* to take home the title.

While it was impressive for RU to take home the title within its first month of competitive existence, the real takeaway of the tournament might be the competitive openness of the Mid-Atlantic. Supposedly powerful teams like UMD and District of Columbia Quidditch Club (DCQC) – who played last year as Capital Madness – had trouble with basic aspects of the game, allowing teams like George Mason Club Quidditch (GMU) and University of Richmond Quidditch to make a statement, regardless of the final score. 

The upset of the day was UNC avenging its Mid-Atlantic Regional Championship (MARC) final and USQ World Cup 8 quarterfinal losses to UMD. UNC looked great throughout the game against UMD and continued its stellar performance by stopping one of the favorites 120*-100 with seeker Alex Crawford’s snitch catch a little over a minute and a half after it was released. RU’s advancement to the finals was less dramatic, as it beat DCQC in its semifinal game 160*-60 in a 29-minute affair.

Pool Play Breakdowns

Pool A:

Team:	Record:	Point Differential:
Maryland Quidditch (UMD)	3-0	+380
University of Richmond Quidditch	2-1	+120
Tri-State Lightning Quidditch Club (TSLQC)	1-2	-230
Stony Brook Quidditch (SBU)	0-3	-270

The first pool consisted of a very interesting combination of familiar regional teams and new competitors: the host team, UMD, TSLQC, SBU, and Richmond. To no one’s surprise, UMD took the pool, though there was some sloppy play from it that resulted in many incomplete passes and missed shots as well as some careless beating. However, the weak caliber of its opposing defenses afforded it more than enough opportunities to score, which UMD took advantage of. While Richmond was the strongest competitor against Maryland, it couldn’t match the level of on-field cohesion that an experienced team like UMD has. Richmond handled TSLQC and SBU easily, however, benefitting from a larger roster. Brand new community team TSLQC played its first official tournament with many of the advantages that one would expect from a team with so many seasoned players. The team’s cohesion, competence, and talent was evident on defense. Offensively, it appeared that TSLQC needs a little work, though chaser Matt Mongioi did very well for his team. Stony Brook played with a lot of heart and used a good system of substitution to try to keep its players fresh. However, its small size – in regards to both depth and physicality – meant that it was no match for the other teams in its pool.

Photo Credit: Kat Ignatova Photography

Pool B:

Team:	Record:	Point Differential:
District of Columbia Quidditch Club (DCQC)	3-0	+230
Philadelphia Honey Badgers (PHB)	2-1	+20
University of Rochester Thestrals (URT)	1-2	-50
Lock Haven University Quidditch (LHU)	0-3	-200

Pool B was an easy sweep for DCQC, who won handily against PHB, URT, and LHU. However, DCQC did not perform as forcefully as it was expected to. DCQC played unimaginatively and predictably, which allowed for PHB to show off some skills that many would not have foreseen it to have. Both teams were comparable in size, but DCQC had the upper hand due to its more experienced players. PHB’s game against URT was an exciting one, as the two teams appeared to be evenly matched in skill level and size. Though PHB eventually gained the upper hand once the snitch was on the pitch, the result of this game could easily have swung in the favor of the Thestrals. URT was able to gain its one win off the back of LHU, who did play better games than seen in previous years. LHU’s players were consistent and worked well as a team, but were missing the skill shown by PHB and URT.

Photo Credit: Kat Ignatova Photography

Pool C:

Team:	Record:	Point Differential:
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC)	3-0	+320
George Mason Quidditch Club (GMU)	2-1	+50
Stockton University Ospreys	1-2	-130
Wizengamot Quidditch at VCU (VCU)	0-3	-240

Pool C was an exciting one in which UNC – the day’s runner up –  took on GMU, Stockton, and VCU. UNC played in prime form, executing great passes, working well as a team, and taking some beautiful shots to clinch its third-place ranking entering bracket play. Justin Cole and Kyle Bullins were huge assets on defense in helping fill gaps left by losing key players between seasons. GMU also had a very good day, though its game against UNC was not as competitive as the two teams’ rematch later on in the day. Since many of its players have now experienced World Cup-level play, the team appeared much better equipped to handle high-pressure situations. 

Stockton played as well as anyone expected. Its roster was a bit smaller than the opposing teams in its bracket which made it even harder for its generally more inexperienced players to keep up with the likes of GMU and UNC, but overall the Stockton team came away with some strong plays and one win under its belt. VCU struggled throughout pool play, largely due to the young team. After having a multitude of its stronger players graduate, VCU is left with lots of holes that need to be filled; Turtle Cup made it clear that this still has yet to happen. Though its roster is by no means small, many of the players were competing in their first official tournament, which made it difficult for VCU to come together as a unit. This is a problem that will potentially be rectified as the season progresses, as there was definitely potential in some of those fresh faces.

Photo Credit: Kat Ignatova Photography

Pool D:

Team:	Record:	Point Differential:
Rochester United (RU)	3-0	+570
Virginia Quidditch Club (UVA)	2-1	-10
RIT Dark Marks (RIT)	1-2	-160
Hopkins Hallows (JHU)	0-3	-400

It’s not hard to imagine the outcome of any pool in which the formidable RU is playing. UVA, RIT, and JHU were all outclassed by their competitor from the Northeast. RU played with a skill level far beyond anything else seen at the tournament: its performance was fluid, the offense and defense worked well together, and it was clear that these players knew what they were doing. The team with the second best record in the pool, UVA, was second by a considerable margin. However, UVA did appear to have a cohesive team that knew how to throw its weight around a pitch. These players’ physical play resulted in two wins but also too many injuries; by the end of the pool play, its roster was so depleted that the decision was made to pull out of the rest of the tournament, giving Rochester United its bye when the bracket began. 

RIT had a good day, performing well given the caliber of some of its competitors. Once RIT gained bludger possession, the Dark Marks were able to stave off RU more efficiently than UVA or JHU did. JHU had a discouraging day. RU and RIT outplayed it handily, though it managed to hover in snitch range for a while in its game against UVA. JHU was admittedly missing a large portion of its roster but also lacked some basic skills and union on the pitch that many other teams showed that day. Some well-timed plays showed potential, but that was not enough to garner it a win at the tournament.

Photo Credit: Kat Ignatova Photography

Bracket Breakdown

No. 1-seeded RU got a bye for the first round after the aforementioned injuries rendered UVA unable to participate. The first two games of bracket play consisted of No. 2-seeded Maryland against JHU and the Honey Badgers against RIT. UMD beat Hopkins easily 170*-10 and moved on to play the Honey Badgers, who had won handily against RIT 120*-40. The resulting game was much more exciting than the previous two. The Honey Badgers played closer to UMD than expected, as the game was tied 40-40 at the 10 minute mark. The game further exposed some new vulnerabilities in the Maryland framework, such as weak passing and shooting on offense and undisciplined beating. While Maryland ultimately won 140-90*, the Honey Badgers caught the snitch.

Photo Credit: Kat Ignatova Photography

UNC easily beat Stony Brook 140*-30 to reach the next round, in which it met GMU, fresh off its victory against TSLQC. Or rather, pretty exhausted from its game against TSLQC, which ended up being the longest in the tournament at just under a full 30 minutes. As a result, GMU won this matchup 160*-70. The game between GMU and UNC was an exciting one, especially for GMU, which managed to keep itself in snitch range until just after the snitch entered the pitch. Considering the supposed difference in skill between the two teams, and the fact that GMU’s last game tired its players significantly, GMU should be proud of the game that it played. The final score was 180*-60.

On the opposite side of the bracket, RU continued its domination of the tournament by playing the winner of the URT and Stockton match: URT. Though it was not surprising that URT won, Stockton put up a good fight. The final score was 160*-50, and the most notable part of the match was when the Thestrals managed to pull the snitch just a mere 12 seconds after it was released onto the pitch. After this win, URT unsurprisingly lost to Rochester United 160*-40, albeit with another quick snitch pull, 26 seconds after being released.

The quickest grab of the day goes to Richmond in its game against Lock Haven. 11 seconds after the snitch was released, Richmond grabbed it, ending the rather uneventful game 160*-30. Richmond then went on to nearly upset DCQC, who had won a 230*-10 blowout against VCU. Richmond played a close game against DCQC and showed a lot of athletic potential on the field. DCQC eventually bested Richmond 100*-50, but really had a sub-par performance, especially considering its reputation. Richmond was able to stay in snitch range for a while and put some pressure on the DCQC offense.

Photo Credit: Kat Ignatova Photography

Many of these teams will compete in a variety of tournaments through October before they attend MARC in November.