From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Mon Jun  8 21:27:02 1998
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) id VAA23619
	for britdisc-outgoing; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:18:41 +0100 (BST)
Received: from mail2.lancs.ac.uk (mail2.lancs.ac.uk [148.88.8.13])
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA23613
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:18:38 +0100 (BST)
Received: from mail2.lancs.ac.uk (actually host localhost) 
          by mail2.lancs.ac.uk with Local SMTP (PP);
          Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:18:34 +0100
Received: from unixc.lancs.ac.uk (unixc.lancs.ac.uk [148.88.16.116]) 
          by mail2.lancs.ac.uk	with SpooMTA 1.23;
          Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:18:34 +0000
Received: (from ultimate@localhost) by unixc.lancs.ac.uk (8.8.4/8.6.12) 
          id VAA00606; Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:18:31 +0100 (BST)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 21:18:31 +0100 (BST)
From: Lancaster Ultimate <ultimate@lancaster.ac.uk>
To: britdisc <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: cam98 report
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.980608162807.26701B-100000@unixc.lancs.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, 7 Jun 1998, David J.C. MacKay wrote:

> A great time was had by all, with excellent spirit, lots of
> close games, bar and food all day, and four fields which could 
> have passed for snooker tables. 

Can't argue with the above however (and no offence is intended here) :


"Teams playing in events for which Infera is being used as originally 
intended should be informed that every point in every game counts towards 
their inferred ranking"   D MacKay

This is absolutely essential in order for teams to appreciate that they 
have to give their best possible performance during all games, if they 
want a fair ranking on their performance.

It seems 'infera' has many advantages when used in certain situations 
over other formats  BUT  in some cases it simply is not logical or fair :

Having a pool format means that in the majority of cases some pools will 
be easier than others giving inaccurate 'infera' scores as games will be 
much closer in some pools.  
This will be acceptable as long as each team plays every other team - as 
in a league.

In general it seems that 'infera' takes the excitement out of a 
tournament, as surprise results add to the thrill of a team knocking out 
a 'better' one. Infera does not allow for this. Clearly with the infera 
system, a new type of tournament is created, one which essentialy runs to 
form. I think that it would be good to hear other peoples views on the 
ways of ranking teams in tournaments.

Please don't let me give you the impression that Cam 98 was not enjoyed 
by the Fish or that the organisation of this event was in any way 
lacking.  It was one of the best tournaments we have attended and 
certainly our best result.  It was just a big disappointment that we were 
given fifth when we felt we had achieved third.  Given the small 
difference in 'infera' rankings we felt we could have bettered this if 
the system was made clear to us.

Mainly because the only teams to have beaten us were the top two.  To be 
placed below a team who we had beaten (strange blue) who in turn had 
beaten a team also placed above us seemed unfair.

Perhaps if we let the organisors of the World Cup know of this system 
England may even reach the final. jk

A final point to make is the entry of the junior team "Southern Lights" 
from Brighton.  It really is great to see youngsters making an effort to 
trek across the country under their own steam to enter a tournament.  
What's even better was their enthusiasm and skills.  Good show guys.




---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reservoir Fish  -  Ultimate at Lancaster

ultimate@lancaster.ac.uk
http://www.lancs.ac.uk/socs/ultimate
---------------------------------------------------------------------------