From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Mon May 22 21:27:28 2000
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id e4MKQCH07066
	for britdisc-outgoing; Mon, 22 May 2000 21:26:12 +0100 (BST)
Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@daffodil [137.205.192.30])
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e4MKQAp07055
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 22 May 2000 21:26:10 +0100 (BST)
Received: from york.ac.uk (pump3.york.ac.uk [144.32.128.131])
	by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id e4MKQ5V11175
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 22 May 2000 21:26:05 +0100 (BST)
Received: from york.ac.uk (cst375.york.ac.uk [144.32.9.51])
	by york.ac.uk (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA17828
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 22 May 2000 21:26:00 +0100 (BST)
Message-ID: <392997D7.F83335C1@york.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 22 May 2000 21:25:59 +0100
From: jbc102 <jbc102@york.ac.uk>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.51 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: BritDisc <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>
Subject: Tour 2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk

All,

Rafi wrote 
> Perhaps Towcester racecourse might consider laying some playing field?...

Amen, but wasn't there a regionals event in Towcester during February?
Surely someone noticed the condition of the pitches then. I hardly think
someone went around putting bricks just below the surface between then
and the weekend!!

On 24th February, in response to "how (does) the Tour work", Chris
Hughes wrote 
> It works differently from all other 'open' tournaments, where the top seed in each pool spend the majority of
> Saturday playing pointless games, in which other than possibly one, they know that they will comfortably beat the
> opposition, and vice versa for the bottom seeds.
> 
> In the Tour teams start in 'peer' pools, where teams compete against opposition of similar quality, split into
> groups of eight - two pools of four in each group, 1-8, 9-16, 17-24, etc. This presents some meaningful
> competition on Saturday for all teams. The theory being that by playing against opposition of similar quality,
> this will allow teams to improve through close competition, and also enjoy themselves more by removing the
> pointless games. Sunday allows the teams to either challenge the group above them, or defend against upcoming
> teams. The top four teams of each group then challenge the bottom four teams of the group above them, which allows
> improving teams to climb the rankings.

So what happened? I played two games on Saturday in which the result was
never going to be in any doubt, and only resulted in more of the team
getting injured. by the time it came to playing 'meaningful games, our
team was not only reduced in numbers, but thoroughly pissed off at the
prospect of having to play more matches on those 'pitches'.

Enough moaning from me, I'm sure there are plenty of people who fared
worse over the weekend.

Jaimie Cross
YBK, Swamp Donkeys, GB Juniors