I think that third qualifying spot is essential. We in Boogie Knights have been narrowly missing that promotional spot all year (finishing 4th in Tour 3), but having three teams relegated and angry has helped us no end. There is quite a jump between the playing attitude and intensity in the A and B tours, but I think this year that gap has closed a lot. That has to have been because there are more teams getting the A Tour experience, being relegated and then desperately trying to get back. They have seen how to win at that level and the passion and intensity it requires and apply that in the B Tour. The third spot just further intensifies the competition as the semi finals are not necessarily the most important games any more.
Few teams can step up their game quickly enough to compete in the A Tour, especially if it's their first time there, so it's reasonable to expect the winners of the B Tour to lose in the A Tour. But I think in the coming years this six team churning pot is going to close the gap between the Tours. Who knows, by then we may have a C Tour and a mirrored situation there too (I'm not a fan of regionalisation yet)! As for Tour 0, I enjoy the extra tournament and I thought it was really good this season. It has value in allowing teams to realign themselves, as many players move around once uni courses end, etc, changing the strength of squads. Maybe, at the top end, there is going to be less change with each year, and hopefully this will spread down until a Tour 0 is unnecessary (or used to set seedings in the B-C divide). But for now, the top teams can think about it as giving something to the up and coming teams. We really enjoy playing teams from the A Tour. It doesn't matter how much we lose by, we still get to see the areas of our own game that needs improving. Boogie Knights have even managed to worry a couple of teams in games and that helps even more! Maybe it won't make any difference if the top 8 don't attend, but then it slightly reduces the number of teams we want to play. As a side note, the calendar suggests that the Open and Womens Tours are happening before Mixed. Is that correct and was I asleep when this was discussed/decided (quite possible)? ----- Original Message ---- From: IndoorsDOC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "McLoughlin, Matthew J" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: britdisc <[email protected]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 31 August, 2007 1:45:46 PM Subject: Re: [BD] Tour 0: 2008 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 ___________________________________________________________ Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [email protected] http://www.fysh.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/staying-informed
