| Subject: Re: stupid acronyms |
Author:
Ian
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 08:53:50 10/15/03 Wed
In reply to:
Robin
's message, "Re: stupid acronyms" on 18:16:00 10/14/03 Tue
>IMTM: Individually Marked Team Match, ie what we had
>up to now. A team match is just 4 individual
>competitions. -> your A QS can go out 1st round while
>your A Waltz makes the final.
IMTM has been used to indicate the use of the same fomat as the new Team match, team prizes and divisional structure, so top teams are in top division, but simply with individual rather than team marking. (Uses Team marking in qualifying round.)
>TMTM: Team Marked Team Match, ie the new system. Marks
>for the 4 dancers in a team are treated like one
>dancer doing a 4-dance (see skating system for
>details). -> the entire team advances to the 2nd
>round/QF/SF/F, the final contains the 6 best teams in
>all 4 dances. (uses individual marking in the final/ Reserve Final.)
Old format: streamed A/B/C/D matches, which no-one argues for.
>Seperately the issue of "all-in" vs. "streamed" vs.
>"divisions" exists:
>
>"all-in": like Sheffield 2003: all teams A-D (or E/F)
>compete in the same event
>
>"streamed": like IVDA 2003, a seperate team match for
>all A-teams, all B-teams etc. regardless of level of
>ability
>
>"divisions": The teams are grouped by ability,
>irrespective of A/B/C/D. So while Oxford or Cambridge
>A, B C or even D might be in division 1, Hull* A might
>be in division 2, teams compete against teams of
>similar ability.
>
>
>All combinations of the above are possible. Last years
>IVDA was IMTM-streamed. The new proposal is
>TMTM-divisions, Sheffield was IMTM-all-in, Oxford was
>IMTM-division.
>
>Any questions?!? (Even i'm confused now)
>
>Robin
>
>* Hull was chosen as a convenient example, i am not
>saying they won't be extremely good and win ivda this
>year...
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 