From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk  Mon Jun 16 19:52:51 1997
Received: by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk
	id TAA13473; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:23:06 +0100 (BST)
Received: from lupin.csv.warwick.ac.uk by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk with ESMTP
	id TAA13466; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:23:03 +0100 (BST)
Received: from localhost by lupin.csv.warwick.ac.uk with SMTP
	id TAA15675; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:23:01 +0100 (BST)
Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:22:58 +0100 (BST)
From: Mr M J Jefferson <haucf@csv.warwick.ac.uk>
X-Sender: haucf@lupin
To: Britdisc <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>
Subject: Tennis scoring.
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.95.970616190713.14491C-100000@lupin>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk


	The Bears took up Sammy's "anonymous" suggestion to attempt
Ultimate with tennis scoring today, with mixed results.  In its favour,
the alternative system brought in an extra dimension on the tactical
front, and gives the winner of the toss a far greater advantage than under
the present system.  In reality though, the emphasis on tactics proved a
bit of a red herring.  On a day like today, where there was a strong
down-pitch wind, games were almost a fore-gone conclusion between equally
matched teams, whether "serving" or "returning."  Under the existing
scoring format in a tightly matched game, a hard won point up-wind would
be enough to turn the game around.  We found that, due to the wind, it
would have been almost impossible to "break serve" as that would have
meant four or five points won up-wind in a short space of time.  I think
everyone agreed that with a cross wind, or better still without any wind
at all, things may have been different, and probably would have been more
exciting.
	Looking forward to hearing other opinions.....
	Mark.