A few suggestions for better seedings in the B tour: 1. Seed Tour 1 based on last years Tour (3/4 events) rather than last years nationals (1 event). 2. Having a tour 0 for the bottom (4 teams?) of the A tour and the top (4teams? plus a few 'wildcards' at the DoC's discretion) of the B tour the previous year as a play in to the A/B tour 1. 3. Spend more time on the problem. 4. Ask the teams where they think they should be seeded. Require a justification give their relative strength to the previous years team and their strength relative to other teams.
JP On 7/10/06, Andy Kayley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Appologies if this is a silly question but .... how would you seed Tour 0?? Surely it just pushes the same problem to another event. Seeding based on the last season seems a fair way of going about it to me, with the first event of the season being formatted to iron out any changes between seasons. Note that I am probably agreeing with you here, crossovers might have been a good idea - but I don't know what the format of B1 was. Having an additional event for the B tour only will create controversial issues for "GEO" clubs where 1st team players could legally be fielded to push up the finishing position of the 2nd team. To get round this you have to start introducing picky little rules which gets silly and complex. Andy -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Darroch Reid Sent: 10 July 2006 15:23 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [BD] Tour 1 B Following on from Nick Sampson's comments about seeding... I think that there should have been crossover games, as the seedings weren't brilliant. I'd also like to mention an idea I heard this weekend: Have a Tour 0 to give accurate seeding for Tour B Teams. Seeding seems notoriously difficult, especially if that information is 8 months out of date (from an event that not all the teams may have attended). This would produce more accurate seeding information for B Tour 1 and would also provide an additional tour event for B Tour teams, which personally I would appreciate. >From my memories (vague and open to error), one reason to reduce the number of Tours, was because the A Tour teams felt they had too many events. I don't remember the B Tour teams feeling the same. How does that sound? Possum p.s. Below is the original point that Nick made. --- nick sampson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > However, I was suprised that the first tour event of the year had a > schedule that seemed to be based on having seadings correctly done > - i believe they > were done on last yrs nationals - and to make top 8 you had to win > your group with no crossovers for teams that had come 2nd in their > pool - especially the 2 unfortunate teams that ended up with fire 2 in > their group! ----- Fight back spam! Download the Blue Frog. http://www.bluesecurity.com/register/s?user=ZGFycm9jaF9yZWlkMTUzNg%3D%3D ___________________________________________________________ All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ranulf.net/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ranulf.net/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp
__________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ranulf.net/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp
