I'd support the switch to 8 teams sitting out, though not necessarily the switch to basing it on tour results rather than nationals. I don't really care about fluctuations - seems to me that the top 8 either at nationals or over the whole tour are good enough to deserve an A-tour spot next year.
But (in my opinion) there are three important ideas behind Tour 0 (in no particular order): 1: That the top players (in general) wanted to drop from 4 to 3 tours a couple of years ago, but a lot of the lower ranked teams would still prefer the extra event. 2: That any new/improved teams should have a fair shot at being A-tour if they deserve to be (i.e. if 4 or 5 good new teams appear, they can all get into A-tour straight away rather than fighting for 2 or 3 spots. (Specifically in response to what Alastair Findlay just said, it's important that new or vastly improved teams [Discuits a couple of years ago, anyone?] are allowed in as well; plus, most of the lower teams want to play the extra tourney anyway) 3: That in order to correctly seed any new/improved teams, it's important to have a wide open format, and this is both a) difficult with 60 teams, and b) generally unnecessary for the top few teams. The original suggestion was that the top 8 would sit out Tour 0; this was changed at the conference - I can't say why because I wasn't there. But in my opinion, there would be no real downside to the top 8 sitting it out in relation to any of the 3 objectives above, and reducing the number of teams competing will greatly benefit the schedule. I wouldn't have more than 8 sit it out, because it's important that there are a large number of A-tour spots up for grabs. Incidentally, part of the original rationale for Tour 0 was based on only 2 teams being promoted/relegated, and by making it 3 teams we reduced the need for Tour 0 somewhat, since there is a greater chance to move up and down anyway. Looking at this year's results, only 1 team stayed up after promotion each time (sometimes winner of B-tour stayed up, sometimes 2nd) and the 3rd placed team in B-tour finished last at the next A-tour every time. I don't think that the 3rd qualifying spot is necessary, though I suppose people might like it for other reasons - it gives more teams A-tour experience (even though they seem to lose a lot), and it gives a meaningful play-off for third place. Do people think it's worthwhile? B McLoughlin, Matthew J wrote: > After having reviewed the results of the tour this year I was wondering if > the UKU were going to implement the same rules for Tour0 next year as they > did this year. > > In 2007 all teams outside the top4 (based on Nationals 2006) were made to > qualify via the Tour0 route. This was because of "fluctuations" between > finishing positions between 5-8 deemed it viable to include the fifth place > team. This season has seen the top 5 positions held only by 5 teams with > Leeds taking 5th in every tour and unlucky not to take higher. Also > fluctuations between the 6-9 spots has also been reduced (with Discuits > filling one of those spots every time). > > The question I want to raise is that next year shouldn't tour 0 be compulsory > for teams outside the top 8 based on final tour rankings? > > Matt > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Behalf Of Admin > Sent: 21 August 2007 14:56 > To: 'britdisc' > Subject: [BD] Open Tour 2007 Final Ranking Positions > > > Sorry about the delay - the results are up now (including OT3): > > http://www.ukultimate.com/previous_open_division_results/2007_tour > > The 11th year of the UKUA Tour seemed to go pretty well: > - Clapham retained the Ben Rainbow Trophy (aka "the Rock") - but didn't have > things all their own way > - The first ever Tour 0 - a "qualifying round" - generally considered a > success and likely to be retained in 2008 > - A total of 49 open teams played in Tours 1,2 and 3 > - 37 of the teams played in all three rounds > - 14 clubs fielded two teams > - Only 12 teams remained in the A Tour for all three rounds > - 7 teams (ranked 13th-19th) bounced up and down between the two divisions - > sometimes breaking into the top 12 > - ABH was the highest ranked team that didn't play in the A Tour > - Definitely the worst weather we've ever had across the whole Tour! > Although in 1997, Tour 4 (of 5) at Southampton was abandoned due to > lightning on Sunday afternoon before the final positioning games could be > played. > > Women's results to follow shortly... > > Si > > > Simon Hill, UKUA Administrator > Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Skype: ukua.admin > Postal address: UK Ultimate Association, LONDON WC1N 3XX > > > __________________________________________________ > BritDisc mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc > Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed > > __________________________________________________ > BritDisc mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc > Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed > > > __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [email protected] http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed
