From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Tue Oct 6 18:18:34 1998 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) id SAA06564 for britdisc-outgoing; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:09:41 +0100 (BST) Received: from polaris.kbw.co.uk (dns1.kbw.co.uk [193.132.201.37]) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.8.7/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA06537 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 18:09:37 +0100 (BST) Received: by dns1.kbw.co.uk with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) id <42YVM01P>; Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:57:56 +0100 Message-ID: <5916162CC25BD21186D700A0C997E63D5676@dns1.kbw.co.uk> From: Roger Thomson <Roger@kbw.co.uk> To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk Subject: RE: Tour 99 - how to run it? Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1998 17:57:54 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1460.8) Content-Type: text/plain Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk For what it's worth (and give up now if you're not a statto of any description): 1) Given the number of teams and marked differences in levels of ability, demotion and promotion could lead to good teams (Touch or Headrush for example) being cast into the abyss below them for half a season, or weaker teams (Violently or BAF) being elevated like kings then used as whipping boys for the rest of the season. 2) 8 is probably too small for subdivisions as this would mean running the equivalent of 4 tournies in place of what has been 1 tour event. So...a compromise (but promising..) solution could be: For Tour 1 have a 12-team Division 1, and a larger (16 or however many we could cater for) Division 2 - probably at different venues (as the consensus seems to be moving this way). Separating the top 12 would prevent the exclusion of lower teams from the Tour and give everyone a chance at experience-enhancing competition. For Tour 2 add the top 4 teams from Division 1, and again have whatever size is deemed appropriate for Division 2. This would introduce a highly competitve element into Division 2: Tour 1 games, as teams are playing for promotion. Tour 2: Division 1 would also be highly exciting as, yes you guessed it - the bottom four teams go back down to division 2. Tour 3: as Tour 1 Tour 4: as Tour 2 Tour 5: as Tour 1. This would: 1) solve the current problems of too many teams at one venue for Tour events, and allow for expansion of the lower division; 2) allow significant opportunities for promotion and demotion during the Tour, but in a way which allows a team to get back up/down having suffered no more than one tournament out of their depth, and in a way which never 'swaps' teams in a football league fashion (they have played head to head in the larger 16-team format to get promoted/demoted). VARIANTS: 1) Could be 16 and 20 team Division 1s, depending on how many active teams we think there are. 2) Could argue that Tour 1 should be the larger event to cater for teams placed 8-16 having changed markedly since last season, and allowing them to re-sort into new placings. PROBLEMS: 1) I'm not sure enough of a consensus has grown behind a split Tour. Have we yet considered the effect of separating 1st/2nd teams? Or of couples on teams in different divisions? Or even of running twice as many events? 2) Shipley could probably make a fortune running a book on play-off fixtures. Anyway, I'll go plan something simpler and leave you lot thinking... Roger SHOTgone PS how many made Tooting this week? > -----Original Message----- > From: RCOLE.UK.ORACLE.COM [SMTP:RCOLE@UK.oracle.com] > Sent: 06 October 1998 16:35 > To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk > Subject: Tour 99 > > Christian suggested 4 divisions with teams being promoted or demoted at > the > end of the season, but how about 1/2 way through? This would give teams > the > opportunity to work hard and be rewarded earlier on in the season, and > give > teams different opponents (the same 7 teams each tour for 5 tours? Sounds > like > this years...) halfway through. Although it is fun to beat/lose to the > same > teams every week, and you all improve, as shown by Chevy, and the > Headrush-Touch-Red trio, it gets a touch boring after a while. > > Rob Cole > > > ************************************************************************** > *** > > Robert Cole Tel: 0118 924 4873 > > Associate Consultant Mobile: 0961 170 759 > Enterprise Methods and Tools Internal Extn: 44873 > Oracle UK Fax: 0118 924 5605 > Building 530 Email: rcole@uk.oracle.com > > Thames Valley Park > Reading, RG6 1RA > > ************************************************************************** > ***