From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Mon Oct 6 17:40:55 1997
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA28525
for britdisc-outgoing; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 17:15:22 +0100 (BST)
Received: from dirc.bris.ac.uk (dirc.bris.ac.uk [137.222.10.51])
by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id RAA28481
for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 17:15:12 +0100 (BST)
Received: from mail.bris.ac.uk by dirc.bris.ac.uk with SMTP-PRIV (PP)
with ESMTP; Mon, 6 Oct 1997 17:14:11 +0100
Received: from [137.222.156.112] (behv1.lang.bris.ac.uk [137.222.156.112])
by mail.bris.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.7.3) with SMTP id RAA20493
for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>;
Mon, 6 Oct 1997 17:12:00 +0100 (BST)
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 1997 17:12:36 +0100
From: Raf.Freire@Bristol.ac.uk
Subject: Re: Ultim-8
To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Message-ID: <MailDrop1.1b11.971006171236@behv1.lang.bris.ac.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Britdiskers,
I'm glad Mark Jefferson has, after much hesitation, decided to inform us about
how he feels about the Ultim-8. Such criticism are essential in evaluating if
the ultim-8 is good or bad for british ultimate. I have kept my response as
brief as possible, which is also with the best intentions so apologies if it
offends (especially the stuff about money).
Mark believes that the strength of british ultimate lies currently at university
level. The answer to this is a most definate no. Sure this is where most players
are, and is how the majority of us find out what ultimate is. But ultimate is a
team game. To develop a good team takes training, practice and continuity of
players (i.e. for players to stay with the same team). It is extremelly
difficult for a student team to have continuity of players, and this is why no
student team has won nationals in the last 13 years (I don't know before that
because I wasn't playing). It is no coincidence that the main aim of the ultim-8
is to develop this continuity of players. The strength of british ultimate
should not be measured by the number of good players, but by the number of good
teams.
Mark also objects that the tour does not take into account time constraints of
students. I can't understand how students can claim to be short of time. I found
it much easier to attend tournaments when I was a student, and I don't think I
ever missed more than 1 tournament a year due to exams. Before you think that I
was a university dosser, I've am now a post-doctoral researcher. Furthermore,
the rule that you can ditch 1 tour result for your nationals seeding seems to be
to accomodate students. Anyone care to enlighten me as to how students don't
have the time to attend 4 out of 5 tour events?.
OK, so the level of commitment required from your wallet is considerable. I
agree that money is horrendously short for students, but I don't see a way
around this. If you want to be a good team you are going to have to play often
and regularly against equally matched opposition. There are student indoor and
outdoor nationals, more suited to the student timetable in which students can
play against similar opposition. There have also been proposals for more
competition between students (both nationally and internationally). These are
competitions set up for students which are made as accessible for you as
possible and should be easier to get funding from the AU. Nonetheless, the tour
is not more money absorbing than playing in any other system over the summer. Is
there any way you could sacrifice your 20 pints and 1/8 of hash a week and make
a few more tournaments?.
In short the ultim-8 requires commitment. The strict rules about transfer of
players and qualification of national aren't there to make life difficult for
students. They are there to promote continuity in teams which results in vast
improvement in the standard of all teams.
Rafi (shotgun)