From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Sun Mar 24 11:32:07 2002
Received: from snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@snowdrop [137.205.192.31])
by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2OBW6R11484
for <suaaz@mail.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:32:06 GMT
Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@agave [137.205.192.52])
by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2OBCLv16526;
Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:12:21 GMT
Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (daemon@localhost [127.0.0.1])
by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g2OB1l0K026533
for <britdisc-outgoing@agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:01:47 GMT
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0/Submit) id g2OB1liu026532
for britdisc-outgoing; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:01:47 GMT
Received: from daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@daffodil [137.205.192.30])
by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g2OB1k0K026527
for <britdisc-real@majordomo.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:01:46 GMT
Received: from mta1-3.us4.outblaze.com (205-158-62-44.outblaze.com [205.158.62.44])
by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g2OB1jn23062
for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:01:45 GMT
Received: from ws1-2.us4.outblaze.com (205-158-62-54.outblaze.com [205.158.62.54])
by mta1-3.us4.outblaze.com (8.11.6/8.11.6-srs) with SMTP id g2OB1WN10680
for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:01:32 GMT
Received: (qmail 8083 invoked by uid 1001); 24 Mar 2002 11:01:32 -0000
Message-ID: <20020324110132.8082.qmail@mail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.41 (Entity 5.404)
Received: from [129.11.147.183] by ws1-2.us4.outblaze.com with http for
rich8@mail.com; Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:01:32 +0000
From: "Richard Hims" <rich8@mail.com>
To: rachelparkinson@another.com
Cc: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 11:01:32 +0000
Subject: Student Summers
X-Originating-Ip: 129.11.147.183
X-Originating-Server: ws1-2.us4.outblaze.com
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Few thoughts from another Student Playing Tour:
A bunch of students of Tour standard won't be playing Tour this year because of the confusion surrounding rostering. Those Jedi who fit in to this category will be trying to pick up or playing mixed tour instead.
Yes, we need more 'fun' tournaments for students to go to over the summer. There are so few of them, Jedi are already talking about who's going to Glastonbury and whether we're going as Jedi or a 'fun' team.
Rachel's right about recruitment/attendance this year, Dave touched on a point about Students getting slack for messing up Tour seedings, and I quote Wigs (interviewed for studentultimate.com:
SU: What did you like about student Ultimate?
CHRISTIAN: I can't comment too much, but it always struck me as a fairly independent community within Ultimate who do invaluable work in recruiting the players we need to help the sport keep expanding.
Student Ultimate is a separate community, and it is the lifeblood of the sport. I personally think that Tours shouldn't be aimed at Students, and we shouldn't expect student teams to go to them [doesn't stop me wanting Jedi to go, but that's another issue].
Getting to my point:
Can Tours be made more attractive to student teams? Admirable gesture from Matt & Batchelor to make T1 entry 120 squid, but that's still gonna be expensive [my memory stretches as far back as Waynes re: entry fees, and I'm more cash-strapped now than I was as a 17 year old...]
Do we want Tours to be more attractive to student teams? Or are we happy for the better student players to 'defect' to better teams for the purpose of playing Tour?
Rich,
Jedi, LeedsLeedsLeeds, Chunky Monkey
----- Original Message -----
From: rachelparkinson@another.com
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2002 21:15:41 +0000 (GMT)
To: roger thomson <roger.thomson@oyster.com>, britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Subject: RE: No. of teams from each region.
> Don't know about elsewhere in the country but in leics the weather has been manky,and the new breed of student beginners seem to prefer spending their weekends going home for roast dinners with their families than rolling around in the mud enjoying ultimate- outdoors is too hard apparently!- how do we convince these people that outdoors is the real sport and indoors is simply a warm-up for the proper season!? Up til this point sadly we ca'nt put non-attendance down to exams, tho that may be a viable explanation for the lack of entries in the tour- esp after all the stick student teams get for only entering some of the dates and messing up the seedings- would people rather have the same teams at every tour or see the places filled?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From : Roger Thomson <Roger.Thomson@oyster.com>
> To : britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
> Date : 21 March 2002 17:29:20
> Subject : RE: No. of teams from each region.
> >Its interesting that there's so many teams wanting to play in indoor
> >>nationals that we need to have FIVE qualifying competitions, I wonder if
> >>the same will happen outdoors :-)
> >
> >There are only 34 teams registered for Tour 1 according to the latest mail
> >Matt sent round. Does anyone know why? Are we losing or alienating some
> >potential outdoor players for some reason we could affect?
> >
> >Is it simply because the teams needed for outdoors are so much bigger that
> >there are just as many or more players participating outdoors? Or because
> >the students are doing exams and then the student teams dissolve for summer
> >and most of them wait for indoors to come around again? Or because some
> >warped souls really like playing indoors much more than outdoors and don't
> >make the effort in the summer. Or because the Tour is seen as too stretching
> >and too much commitment?
> >
> >Can anyone make a stab at the impact of each of these factors vis-ý-vis the
> >number of players who took part in the Indoor Cup and it's qualifiers this
> >season? (Which was how many - does UKU know?) Some kind of analysis would
> >seem a very worthy task for our new admin person ;-) Easy to look at the
> >database and see how many players were rostered for an indoor team but are
> >not rostered for an outdoor one, then either guess why not (student indoor
> >team) or email 'em to find out why.
> >
> >I've no idea how proactive UKU is (or old BUF was) about looking at the
> >player base in terms of marketing strategy and understanding the players in
> >order to grow the sport - what would help would be if more of the strategy
> >documents and minutes of meetings were put on the website. As paid-up
> >members of UKU these are definitely things we could reasonably expect to be
> >published I would have thought, and that in turn might well stimulate more
> >people to participate and contribute. ...Ben?
> >
> >Now come and get some outdoors action - the Frogs are waiting! ;-)
> >Silver Bear
> >cu#1
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Tom Styles [mailto:tstyles@protocol-systems.co.uk]
> >Sent: 21 March 2002 15:06
> >To: Bess S
> >Cc: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
> >Subject: No. of teams from each region.
> >
> >
> >>Admittedly I may feel differently if I lived in the
> >>Midlands...
> >
> >Not entirely,
> >We chose to qualify in the Midlands (Nottingham) as it was more
> >convenient, fully expecting to find a quite tough regional competition.
> >On hearing the news that BAF were going to Weston, and Space Monkeys and
> >MHB were going to Sheffield we thought we might even qualify.
> >Unfortunately we underestimated our ability to lob the disc at the
> >floor. And while I try not to take anything away from the other
> >Nottingham qualifiers. I think they will agree that it might have been
> >tougher to qualify from some of the other regions.
> >
> >Form changes from year to year and it's totally unfair to say that one
> >region is crap at ultimate so we'll only have 2 teams from there. Also
> >deciding how many qualify from each region based on the quality of the
> >teams playing there, is wide open to abuse.
> >
> >Teams change from tournament to tournament too e.g. BAF seeded 4 at
> >Warwick based on performance at previous tournaments where a full squad
> >wasn't able to attend. Bears 1 seeded 5 in Birmingham, when it was
> >mainly beginners. If Jon's algorithm feels like tracking the composition
> >of every team in every competition, and working out from that each
> >players impact on the team and therefore who has the strongest team,
> >then we don't even need nationals next year we can just read the result
> >off the sheet. ;-)
> >
> >If there was to be a different number of teams qualify from each region
> >the only fair way to do it would be based on the size of the qualifying
> >competition. e.g. Region with 32 team qualifying competition gets more
> >spots than region with 16 team qualifying competition.
> >
> >Lastly I think if I was organising the tournament and with 2 days to go
> >I had a cheque in my hand from a seventh placed team and only a promise
> >from a sixth placed team despite giving everyone involved at least a
> >weeks notice I would have taken Sublime's cheque. Tournaments are damn
> >hard to organise, we should be grateful we have so many tournaments to
> >go to. And help UKU and our TD's to make good decisions not have a pop
> >when things don't go quite the way they should. Ideally teams who can't
> >make it to nationals should not attend qualifiers. That way most of
> >these problems would go away.
> >
> >Congrats to Sharks.
> >See you all Schmoutdoors.
> >
> >Tom
> >
> >Block Stack and Two Smoking Hammers
> >tom@block-stack.co.uk
> >www.block-stack.co.uk
> >
> >Its interesting that there's so many teams wanting to play in indoor
> >nationals that we need to have FIVE qualifying competitions, I wonder if
> >the same will happen outdoors :-)
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Bess S [mailto:bess0@hotmail.com]
> >Sent: 21 March 2002 13:36
> >To: prw102@york.ac.uk
> >Cc: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
> >Subject: Re: Shafted
> >
> >
> >How do you propose assessing recent performance - it is unfair to use
> >tournaments south of the border as frequently the better Scottish
> >players
> >are unable to attend. The only way it can be done is to use tournaments
> >which all the teams in question will be at but this is never going to
> >happen. Recent performance assessment can only ever apply to non student
> >
> >teams as the influx of new talent occurs every year and in some cases
> >each
> >semester. It seems to me that the present situation seems to be the
> >most
> >logical especially as there is free entry to any of the regional
> >qualifiers.
> >Admittedly I may feel differently if I lived in the Midlands...
> >
> >Bess
> >Postivie Mojo (kind of)
--
_______________________________________________
Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com
http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup
Win the Ultimate Hawaiian Experience from Travelocity.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;4018363;6991039;n?http://svc.travelocity.com/promos/winhawaii/