To pick up on one of the things Sion said
Solution:-
- Reduce the season in length (3 Tour events - that way there shouldn't be the need for a tie-break!)
A 3-tour season was mooted a while ago, after GB got a bit knackered at worlds (or was it euros? Don't recall.)
One great idea that was suggested at the time was to have a tour 0 for everyone outside the top 8, and then three ordinary tours after that. I think that's a great idea, and fits in with current thinking rather well.
-For the top teams, there's only 3 tournaments to squeeze into the shortened calendar, so they won't get too knackered.
-For everyone else, there's a chance to get your correct seeding early in the season, and still play four high intensity events. [ I might be wrong, but I seem to remember Discuits not getting promoted until B-tour 2, even though they went on to finish as high as 9th the other week. Equally, Abstract lost a boatload of players (damn those thieving Fusion barstewards), and probably shouldn't have been in tour A at Tour 1. Rather than waiting 3 tours for everything to finally settle down, why not have a nice seeding tournament before the real stuff starts? People who end up in the B-tour (and let's face it, the tour split isn't going anywhere as more and more teams enter) will have far less to complain about if they've had a fair shot at joining the big boys. ]
I recognise that this isn't strictly relevant to the discussions on (a) compressed seasons or (b) the tour split / equipment shortages; but while we're discussing improvements, I reckon this is a bit of a corker.
Can't remember who suggested it first, but I think it's worth thinking about again.
Benji __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [email protected] http://zion.ranulf.net/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp
