Question about tiebreaks

(If you don't feel like reading this, just follow the link and tell me who would win the Reserve Section based on Solkoff tiebreaks.)

http://www.kansaschess.org/htdocs/2013KansasOpenCrosstables.pdf

Hey chess.com. I have a quick question about tiebreaks.

Recently I played in a tournament where I tied for first with another player. We split the championship money, but according to the TD, he beat me on tiebreaks, and so he took home a plaque plus 25 extra dollars.

The day after the tournament, my friend, who has experience directing tournaments, called me, and said that I had actually won and that the TD had made a mistake. He said that uschess.org listed me as winning the tournament. So I emailed the organizer of the tournament just so that he could be aware of the situation so that it wouldn't happen again.

I received a reply that stated that the crosstables didn't list the players in order of tiebreaks, but rather in order of new rating. I trust that this is correct, but since I trust my friend, I calculated the tiebreaks manually, and according to my calculations, I should win with Solkoff. The reason for this is that my opponents scored 2, 3, 3, 3, and 4.5, and his opponents scored 1, 3, 3, 3, and 4.5, meaning that I should have one more point of Solk. 

I don't really care about the plaque or the 25 dollars, but since I've already sent an email, I think this is a good opportunity for me to let them know if there actually was a mistake. 

So could someone who has experience with calculating tiebreaks please tell me who should have won the tournament? The order of tiebreaks is Solkoff, Cumulative, Modified Median, and Medium.

Thanks so much everyone. 

You calculations are correct.  If Solkoff is indeed the first tiebreaker, then you came in first as you described... because 15.5, the combined score of your opponents, is more than 14.5, the combined score of his.

In fact, Cumulative, Modified Median and Median, the next three tie-breakers, all result in identical scores.  So in this case the order shouldn't matter at all.

I'd be interested in hearing the TDs response. 

Congrats on a nice tourney.   Good luck in your attempt to break the next barrier... 1800.  That was a tough hurdle for me.  I was a 1600 and 1700 player for awhile.

In September 2010 I won a tourney and a nice, large trophy, on tiebreaks.

The tiebreakers used in the tourney, in order, were Modified Median, Solkoff, and Cumulative.  In this case the order also wouldn’t have mattered, since I was fortunate to come out ahead on all three of those individual tie-breakers.

Thanks for helping me to confirm what I already believed =D

I hope that I can keep playing tournaments like this and keep getting stronger.

(Also, thanks for confirming my other suspicion: that by "medium" they meant "median." I don't know how something like that managed to make it onto the flier.)