From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Fri Jul 10 11:32:11 1998
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) id LAA22711
	for britdisc-outgoing; Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:21:39 +0100 (BST)
Received: from exchpk02.chelt.ac.uk (exchpk02.chelt.ac.uk [194.66.194.6])
	by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA22700
	for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:21:37 +0100 (BST)
Message-Id: <199807101021.LAA22700@pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk>
Received: by exchpk02.chelt.ac.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3)
	id <3QMM2761>; Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:21:55 +0100
From: "HUGHES, Chris" <CHughes@chelt.ac.uk>
To: "'David Grayson'" <david@mcg.gla.ac.uk>, britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Subject: RE: handicapping
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 11:20:11 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.1960.3)
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk

So you are suggesting we handicap people based on the distance they have
to travel. Short distance, big handicap, big distance no handicap. That
could work.

		-----Original Message-----
		From:	David Grayson [SMTP:david@mcg.gla.ac.uk]
		Sent:	10 July 1998 11:36
		To:	britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
		Subject:	Re: handicapping


		> From my recollection of handicap systems in other
		> sports I have played, the winner is always the one
		> who's handicap is slightly generous because their
		> form (or team) has changed from that which was used to

		> fix a handicap score.
		> 
		> So a handicap that adjusts itself to the current 
		> score in a game might be good fun.
		> 

		The problem with a handicap that adjusts itself during a
game is that 
		there is really no reward for a team playing well,
because regardless 
		of how well you play (within reason) it will be close.
Therefore - 
		who cares?  There really is no incentive to play well,
or more to the 
		point, to play sensibly.  How many teams will we see
performing no 
		look thumber hucks most of the game?

		The other thing is that it will almost always come down
to who scores 
		last or a time scramble - HRT goes ahead, gets
penalised, LRT 
		makes a comeback, HRT loses their penalty, HRT moves
ahead again, LRT 
		catches up etc. - might as well just play one point.

		As for team winning who was mishandicapped, every
tournament has a 
		favourite, it just so happens in this case it would be
the team that got their 
		handicap wrong instead of the best team.  Will people
deliberately 
		talk down their quality beforehand instead of boasting?
- nah can't 
		see it!

		As for novel handicaps - why not drive 12 hours to get
there....

		Dave.
		Mud Culture.