| Subject: Re: Trialing the new team match format |
Author:
Ali
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 16:51:44 11/03/03 Mon
In reply to:
Shell
's message, "Re: Trialing the new team match format" on 16:34:59 11/03/03 Mon
>I respect the principles of the SF and the once-off 2
>division team match suggestion was just a way in which
>I thought they could avoid dancing directly against
>Impoxbridge, while letting us all give the new team
>match format a go.
As much as I believe in the principles (note spelling) of the SF, the original concept hardly has room for a joint IVDA A-team winner and a top 4 overall uni. It was intended for the small southern unis to have a comp away from the scary people. Now some scary people come from the small southern unis - and not just one-off couples either. Personally (and this is MY opinion and not necessarily that of the SF etc.) is that a complete rethink of the SF is overdue, because it just doesn't match its own mandate any more. That said, it is still a useful springboard for beginner and beginning couples, regardless of the strength of the uni.
>>Do we really need to try the 2 division thing,
>Over to you Ali .......
Well, yes. A 1-division trial is useful to some extent, because it allows some of the practicalities (not the least of which is the scoring/scrutineering) to be field-tested. However, qualifying is an integral part of the system, and there are several ways of doing it. There is no way of knowing which is the best, except by trialling them. Again, 2 divisions will create a headache for the scrutineers (unless, by some miracle, their software is flexible enuogh to cope with it) - much more so than 1 division, and some practice here would be most helpful.
Additionally, central to the new format is a shift in the emphasis of the event towards teams ahead of individuals. This, fundamentally, requires a change in people's perceptions - which will become its great strength once the transition is made - because interpreting the effects of team marking based on people's perceptions have previsouly been doesn't make so much sense, but interpreting team marking based on what people's perceptions *will be* is a key advantage. The sooner people come to perceive the team match in terms of genuine teams, the better, and the swifter people will come to accept the new ideas.
>Would the IVDA exec like to see how long it would
>take?
Useful, though in theory about 30 mins more than the ABCD match.
Would it give us a chance to trial qualifying
>(I assume Cardiff A wouldn't mind taking on
>ImpOxbridge in division 1)
Having a 2-div SF with ImpOxbridge in D1 and the regular SF in D2 won't help, because it would essentially be two 1-division matches - there must be a qualifing round.
>it's more a case of letting
>us see how it works and getting the competitors,
>coaches, spectators, and comp organisers used to it!!
That, if anything, is the most important point.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 
