From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Tue Apr 9 10:38:26 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 g399cOd07888 for <suaaz@mail.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 10:38:24 +0100 (BST) 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 g399WZt18777; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 10:32:35 +0100 (BST) 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 g399T5QR006930 for <britdisc-outgoing@agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 10:29:05 +0100 (BST) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0/Submit) id g399T5hb006929 for britdisc-outgoing; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 10:29:05 +0100 (BST) 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 g399T4QR006924 for <britdisc-real@majordomo.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 10:29:04 +0100 (BST) Received: from bakery.tesco.net (bakery.tesco.net [194.73.73.174] (may be forged)) by daffodil.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g399T4708247 for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 10:29:04 +0100 (BST) Received: from dialup.212-140-68-218.tesco.net ([212.140.68.218] helo=Nancy) by bakery.tesco.net with smtp (Exim 2.05 #1) id 16urvs-0007Pi-00 for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Tue, 9 Apr 2002 10:28:56 +0100 Message-ID: <001601c1dfa7$ca2f1420$cd54ac3e@Stebbing> From: "Nancy Stebbing" <nancy.stebbing@tesco.net> To: "britdisc" <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk> References: <80256B96.002DDC25.00@birmingham.gov.uk> Subject: Re: The Tour/Relegation Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 10:19:55 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200 Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk Precedence: bulk As first co-ordinator of the Mixed Tour, Id really hate to see our progress undone, which I think the below suggestion would do. > 1. Run the Tour and the Mixed Tour at the same time, at the same venue if > necessary. Many players simply use the Mixed Tour as a sideline to their > ambitions in the open Tour and playing in Worlds etc. Yet there are several > players who are completely the opposite, their main aim is to play in a > successful Mixed team. Why don't we make people have to choose, at least then > the teams who represent Britain at Worlds are established Mixed teams rather > than ones cobbled together in the season before. This would reduce the number > of teams entering the Tour and negate the need for a second division, it could > also lead to stronger Mixed teams in the future in the same way that the Tour > has made stronger open teams. This sounds just like the argument for having the women's tour on the same weekends as the open tour! Subsitiute 'women' for 'mixed' and it would be the same argument. Actually, I'm in agreement with a few points made above, although some are pretty generalized statements that certainly don't apply to all Mixed players. But, we're talking about forcing a choice again. You'll note that the womens tour only has 4 teams entered right now, exactly because the choice between open and womens was forced. (Ask Bliss about the level of competition or the Red girls about choosing between open and womens, if you need proof.) I think a choice between mixed and open would result in even fewer than 4 teams. Unfortunately, this brings up that old circular argument- there aren't enough womens/ mixed teams playing to support a really competetive tour. There won't be enough womens/mixed players until a competeive tour is established. (Although I think the Mixed tour is getting pretty close to a hard-@ss tournament. Any of the top 4 teams can win it on any given weekend. And the others are catching up quickly.) I know that there are hard decisions to be made, but I hope we won't take apart a new, succesful division just to improve (note: not SAVE) another division. nancy