Should the UK Champs decide the 6 UK teams for the WHBPC?

Yorgo is no longer a zombie, we fired him.

arn't their some German players too?

;1303746']Yorgo is no longer a zombie, we fired him.

good decision

I've started an alternative solutions thread to deciding the 6 allocations for the whbpc over here

Agata is coming over from Paris to play for the UK Champs at the, er, UK Champs. Obviously if we win a place for the Worlds then she'll play with us as she has represented London for ages.

We're not planning on winning though so as you were.

we're not planning on winning though so as you were.

what ?!?

Agata he spends nearly as much time as you on the floor

;1303621']
what difference does it make if a team that got together in the last month or the next couple months would like to have a shot at playing in the worlds?

In my opinion, a lot. Only because, first, you want to use Kev's questionnaire as a method of allocating spots. And second:

;1303621']Berlin are offering wildcard spots

Wanting to add extra teams (by first-come-first-serve) on top of teams who have already expressed interest through the form is the same as saying the allocation-by-form method is imperfect, and therefore we need to gerrymander it. If that's the case, why would we use it (that is, use it knowing that there are still wildcard spots for unlucky teams)?

(in my opinion)

Agata he spends nearly as much time as you on the floor

we're doomed

...
Wanting to add extra teams (by first-come-first-serve) on top of teams who have already expressed interest through the form is the same as saying the allocation-by-form method is imperfect,...

I'm not saying that using the 'expressed interest' forms is perfect, not at all. I feel it is the method that seems the best to me in the given situation*. That is why I've proposed it.

Adding a couple open spots for London's quali for 3 spots will not hurt anything. There would be more games to play, more people involved, etc.etc.
And, the forms were individual players forms, not teams. so Berlin allocated slots by players, not set teams.

*The situation being that the UK champs were closed before we knew any details about the worlds and that the circle format is flawed in finding the absolute best teams. And on top of that MCR players/organizers have expressed that they don't want the UK champs to be the qualifications.

if you play in a qualifier for a tournament you should not be able to play in any other qualifiers for the same tournament.

other than that, even if the UK champs is not a qualifier, people shouldn't have been making up teams with players from all over europe just to play in a tournament. UK champs should mean something. if one of these teams win, it won't achieve what the tournament has been set up to achieve, to find the best team in the UK. I'd be gutted if a UK team loses out to one of these teams.

Imo

I think that the only good solution is to hold another tournament a month before of the Worlds.
that is going to be very difficult or impossible.
the next best option, that not ideal, is the choose from the UK Champs
this has its problems but I think there more pros than cons.
any other solution, will carry more cons than pros.

we need to choose a way that is the fairest possible, having in account that we want the 6 BEST teams from UK

fucked, we need another tourney in June

if you play in a qualifier for a tournament you should not be able to play in any other qualifiers for the same tournament.

other than that, even if the UK champs is not a qualifier, people shouldn't have been making up teams with players from all over europe just to play in a tournament. UK champs should mean something. if one of these teams win, it won't achieve what the tournament has been set up to achieve, to find the best team in the UK. I'd be gutted if a UK team loses out to one of these teams.

This

I think that the only good solution is to hold another tournament a month before of the Worlds.
that is going to be very difficult or impossible.
the next best option, that not ideal, is the choose from the UK Champs
this has its problems but I think there more pros than cons.
any other solution, will carry more cons than pros.

we need to choose a way that is the fairest possible, having in account that we want the 6 BEST teams from UK

+1

It's not ideal, but the UK Champs is better than any other option suggested so far.

we're doomed

It's ok, we've got still got Matt. My money's on him getting MVP for the tourney and carrying us to victory.

Possibly.

@ Mike, have I missed something, how is the circle format any more flawed than any other format for deciding the best teams in a tournament.

;1304294']I'm not saying that using the 'expressed interest' forms is perfect, not at all. I feel it is the method that seems the best to me in the given situation*. That is why I've proposed it.

It seems to add luck and complication to an already complicated issue.

I'm fine with deciding who goes to Berlin by some other method than the UK champs (if there is a better option). However, right now my position is:

a) It's not up to MCR (sorry guys) whether the results of that tournament are used to decide who goes to Berlin. It's up to the UK polo community to ask itself whether the results from the UK champs are a good enough indicator for deciding which teams the UK wants to send to Berlin.

b) Dividing up the country based on the questionnaire is possibly acceptable (I'm undecided), but not if we start adding extra teams based on a first-come-first-serve process (on this, I'm decided). By doing this, we are dismissing the very logic which gives the questionnaire any sort of legitimacy as a method of deciding, as well as adding more complication by allowing a few (2, I think you proposed) teams in based on chance.

@ Mike, have I missed something, how is the circle format any more flawed than any other format for deciding the best teams in a tournament.

Not every team would play every team. Some have an easier ride. e.g. ELKs have a tough draw.

A less flawed format would be something like the league or the Euro's qualifiers (if either were national of course)

The wheel was based on seeding of the teams.

Short of having every team play every team in the UK, which just isn't possible time wise, the wheel format is exactly the same as seeding a single or double elimination before a tournament.

yes, I agree that it is the same as double elim, just trying to say why it is a slightly less unfair way than everyone playing everyone. (... which is probably an impossibilty before April 30th however!)

Any pooled format is aimed towards allowing every team to play more games and not to find the "cream of the crop" as in a round robin or double elimination (where winning teams have to keep winning against progressively harder teams).

Pooled formats are more fun for tournaments, but the points above are valid, it's not ideal (but works to an extent) for top team selection.

Seeding is always flawed (new teams, no archive of games won/lost across the selection, etc), but it is possibly an acceptable trade-off.

swiss round is the best and fairest format, but the wheel or seeded groups are second best. the only issue is that the seeding (if done) in this case must have been done purely arbitrarily because there is no means of seeding at least half of the teams in the tournament

doesnt mean it was arbitrary, just means it wasn't that systematic