From britdisc-owner@csv.warwick.ac.uk Thu May 23 21:43:32 2002
Received: from sorrel.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@sorrel [137.205.192.54])
by pansy.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g4NKhVI07160
for <suaaz@mail.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 23 May 2002 21:43:31 +0100 (BST)
Received: from agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@agave [137.205.192.52])
by sorrel.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g4NKdHjV000059;
Thu, 23 May 2002 21:39:18 +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 g4NKWlQR028319
for <britdisc-outgoing@agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 23 May 2002 21:32:47 +0100 (BST)
Received: (from daemon@localhost)
by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0/Submit) id g4NKWl6N028318
for britdisc-outgoing; Thu, 23 May 2002 21:32:47 +0100 (BST)
Received: from snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (root@snowdrop [137.205.192.31])
by agave.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.12.0/8.12.0) with ESMTP id g4NKWkQR028313
for <britdisc-real@majordomo.csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 23 May 2002 21:32:46 +0100 (BST)
Received: from anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net (anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net [194.217.242.91])
by snowdrop.csv.warwick.ac.uk (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g4NKWkt17156
for <britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk>; Thu, 23 May 2002 21:32:46 +0100 (BST)
Received: from phidelta.demon.co.uk ([158.152.248.177])
by anchor-post-33.mail.demon.net with smtp (Exim 3.35 #1)
id 17AzG8-000O4s-0X
for britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk; Thu, 23 May 2002 21:32:30 +0100
Message-ID: <$mCdxzAYNT78EwFK@phidelta.demon.co.uk>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 19:22:16 +0100
To: britdisc@csv.warwick.ac.uk
From: Wayne Retter <druid#6@phidelta.demon.co.uk>
Reply-To: Wayne Retter <wayne@fluiddruids.com>
Subject: Re: Outdoor Nationals - 30 Aug + 01 Sep 2002
References: <Ddy9pGA6N+68EwY3@phidelta.demon.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <Ddy9pGA6N+68EwY3@phidelta.demon.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 4.02 S <pjZRgFWDsQK5ViyP$l4rxVrb6a>
Sender: owner-britdisc@warwick.ac.uk
Precedence: bulk
Just so you ALL know - I'm currently trying to assess how many teams
would like to play at Nationals, mostly so that I can budget
appropriately, the format is a secondary concern to me right now.
Quick comment on the format though, that will hopefully answer Andy's
questions.
UKU U8 Rules for 2002 say:
1 B UK Ultimate National Finals
1 The format for 2002 Nationals is based on a simple knockout
system. This gives an equal chance for any qualifying teams to win the
tournament.
2 In order to calculate which teams qualify for National Finals
every result from each of the four events is counted. Teams will not be
allowed to discard their worst result.
3 At least the top 16 teams from the tour ranking list will
qualify for National Finals.
4 Nationals format will be based on (at least) a sixteen team
basic knockout format (i.e. no pools), seeded according to the tour
finishing positions. The tournament will try and be expanded to 32 teams
should a venue big enough and demand allow it but this cannot be
guaranteed.
This format was first employed in 2001, after much discussion in all
sorts of places (Britdisc included) about how Nationals could/should be
run.
Regards
Wayne
>hi wayne,
>you say "32 team full knockout" - do you mean Wimbledon style, in that
>there's no pools, just a requirement to win every game? If so, is the
>tournament split into two divisions? 1-16 and 17-32? If that's the case,
>then there's not really enough games per team for the tournament, in my
>opinion. If it's one big division, then surely that would be a complete
>waste of half the tournament - the difference in ability between the top
>team and say the 16th team is big enough. To force the top four or five
>teams to play the bottom four or five is a joke, and a waste of what could
>be an awesome climax to the season.
>
>Just my thoughts.... I'd be interested to know what you think.
>
>Andy
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wayne Retter
Layout Dreams
layoutdreams@phidelta.demon.co.uk