From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Tue Mar 13 12:28:57 2001 Received: (from daemon@localhost) by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) id f2DCQ0t29367 for britdisc-outgoing; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 12:26:00 GMT 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 f2DCPvM29343 for <britdisc-real@pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 12:25:57 GMT Received: from anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.91]) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.10.1/8.9.3) with ESMTP id f2DCPnL01186 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 12:25:49 GMT Received: from ultimatum.demon.co.uk ([158.152.203.174]) by anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 2.12 #1) id 14cns2-000ENC-0X for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Tue, 13 Mar 2001 12:25:46 +0000 Subject: Re: Stop the threat to our beautiful game Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2001 12:26:21 +0000 x-sender: ultimatum@pop3.demon.co.uk x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0v3, January 22, 1998 From: Paul Hurt <paul@ultimatum.demon.co.uk> To: "BritDisc" <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Message-Id: <E14cns2-000ENC-0X@anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net> Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk >Yeah, your funny - but addressing the half that was not in jest. My point was that many players that were around for "the roots" of Ultimate didn't want the sport to get any bigger, because they liked the fact that they personally knew each and every person that played the game. We're way beyond that now. Ultimate is way more fun now than it was 18 years ago. Also, if the roots of Ultimate mean queueing for cold showers and having to play on a hillside, then as Dave said, bring on the sponsors and the TV cameras. :-) Many of the founders of our sport didn't have any particular vision - they just liked to smoke a lot of dope, drive around the country and throw frisbees with their mates. > >I am not saying anything against "improved organisation and increased >public awareness". However, the easiest way to grow the sport is not >through mass media, but from within the sport. Absolutely agreed. I just thought your list of "statements" seemed to suggest that being more organised, and having an eye on the sport's public image, were bad things. >Increasing the number of >growth centres by supporting the fledgling teams, Yes >producing a record of >players so that players without a team can find one (lots are lost after >leaving university), I think we lose them because it gets harder to find a team to play for once you leave University. Mad keen players will sort themselves out when they graduate. But many others find that new aspects of their life take priority, to the exclusion of Ultimate (certainly happened to me). Hopefully we'd automatically keep track of players who wanted to carry on playing via the BUA membership system. As you say, what we could do with is more support for fledgling teams, and a wider range of types of tournament. I still think city leagues have a lot going for them in terms of developing the sport. Which reminds me, I'd better get on with London League 2001...! >keeping the cost down, continuing to make the sport >attractive for those who play. Frequently these two do not go hand in hand. >If we do this then ultimate growth >should be exponential, as its growth will depend largely on its existing >population. This assumes no drop-out rate. Outside of student Ultimate, there aren't any mechanisms bringing significant numbers of new players into the sport. And the biggest drop-out rate is probably also from students after graduation. I imagine there's a lot of "churn" in the player base around the 18-22 age range, but above say 25 it gets a bit stagnant. Improved growth depends on either: i) keeping students in the sport after they leave University ii) promoting the sport outside of the student world We could always do both. But who's going to do the work? > >Incidently, I mentioned some of these growth issues last year and we >still haven't got a register for players, the cost of ultimate is about >to go up, and I haven't seen Stirling or Strathclyde at any tournaments >this year. So where is the "improved organisation". Good question. I'm sure Ben's working on it, though key to the whole issue is who's going to volunteer to be part of that organisation? Paul