Selection process for EHBPC 2011 23-26.06.2011

---

***LDN non-qualifers can then enter (but only if that complete team played the LDN qualifier ie. not just cos they couldn't make the date)

Hang on, this implies that ROE teams get 2 chances to get to a tourney that suits them, but London teams only get a 2nd chance if they can make both. What about London teams that can't make the first but can make the second?

Already this is getting over-complicated. One tourney would make it a lot easier, then there can be no accusation of conspiracy etc.

We should be sending the top 10 from the UK. If you want to represent for your scene: get better at bike polo or play in the wildcard, that's what it's there for.

I think a one day tourney is totally feasible, I don't think there will be 15 LDN teams.
For a start: Lebowski, Otters and Brendan are all one man teams, then as John said, some teams will not go if they don't think they can make it. I reckon London will end up fielding 10 teams, outside of london it seems there are 8 teams keen to qualify for euros, that's 18 teams. 18 teams, one day tourney EASY.

London are happy to step up and host, but equally we would like to see it in Cambridge or MCR.

(I think that's London's general opinion, correct me if i'm wrong LDN #rep)

well worded, major points covered. good shit.

I also think that is the LDN opinion.

One advantage of doing it here is that we can get Newt, which has two courts, which means we can have more teams. But anywhere that could get two courts would be fine (or Cambridge, possibly).

I tried to start a list of teams here, but the Jono nixed it. Said there was better info. For which we are still waiting (or was that it post #638?).

Do it in cambridge, Swiss Rounds. Done.

The list of teams doesn't exist Vidal, I thought each scene had to list them, they didn't... also the number of teams wasn't the only factor in play for slot allocation, etc.

If you need a list of prospective teams (so we know if we need two tourneys or one), then start it here I guess?

London's existing list:

1. L'Quiche
   
2. La Schmoove
   
3. B_D (needs clarification)
   
4. Spring Break
   
5. Nice Touch
   
6. Degeneration
   
7. Dogma or Pie
   
8. Cosmic
   
9. Psyclone
   
10. Pesky Skids
    
11. The Joker, The Ace, and The King
    
12. Otters & Co (needs clarification)
    
13. Lebowski & sons (needs clarification)
    

London's existing list:

1. L'Quiche
   
2. La Schmoove
   
3. B_D (needs clarification)
   
4. Spring Break
   
5. Nice Touch
   
6. Degeneration
   
7. Dogma or Pie
   
8. Cosmic
   
9. Psyclone
   
10. Pesky Skids
    
11. The Joker, The Ace, and The King
    
12. Otters & Co (needs clarification)
    
13. Lebowski & sons (needs clarification)
    
    

Manchester's teams:

Asbo
Netto
Polo Erectus

London's existing list:

1. L'Quiche
   
2. La Schmoove
   
3. B_D (needs clarification)
   
4. Spring Break
   
5. Nice Touch
   
6. Degeneration
   
7. Dogma or Pie
   
8. Cosmic
   
9. Psyclone
   
10. Pesky Skids
    
11. The Joker, The Ace, and The King
    
12. Otters & Co (needs clarification)
    
13. Lebowski & sons (needs clarification)
    
    

Manchester's teams:

Asbo
Netto
Polo Erectus

Birmingham
Black Stabbath

London:

1. L'Quiche
   
2. La Schmoove
   
3. B_D (needs clarification)
   
4. Spring Break
   
5. Nice Touch
   
6. Degeneration
   
7. Dogma or Pie
   
8. Cosmic
   
9. Psyclone
   
10. Pesky Skids
    
11. The Joker, The Ace, and The King
    
12. Otters & Co (needs clarification)
    
13. Lebowski & sons (needs clarification)
    
    

** Manchester**:

1. Asbo
   
2. Netto
   
3. Polo Erectus
   
   

** Cambridge:**
1.Fen Boy 3

1. Cream
   
2. Thor
   
   

** Birmingham:**

1. Black Stabbath
   

1. B_ _(needs clarification)
   
2. Otters & Co (needs clarification)
   
3. Lebowski & sons (needs clarification)
   
   

Balice International?

BRalice.

I think I have to agree with the idea of one big tournament. Whilst it will decrease ASBO's chance of playing in the Euros, it will mean that the best in England get to play. I can imagine how pissed off I would be if I was top 8 in London, but couldn't take the place because it was gifted to a less good ROE team puely because of where I lived.
2 tournaments could be fairer for making sure that everyone can get invovled, but I think we'd need to make both open to everyone, and you can chose which you want to enter, or enter both. people could sort of hedge there bets.
My only problem with this format is if we don't do it, how do we seed it. If we already know that the ROE teams are going into the tourney th underdog, it seems a little unfair to seed them against good teams, effectivly getting rid of their chances of qualifiying?

+1 woody, pragmatic.

As for seeding, I would suggest that we get one representative from each region, MCR, Brum, Brizzle, Camb, etc etc, to go through a list of teams and score them out of 10. We then take the average of these as a seeding.

I would NOT use the results of Cambridge, as it was not seeded in the first place.

But what is the purpose of seeding those teams out of 10?

To seed the first round. Otherwise we end up with an unrealistic result.

So say Chan, Rich, Harvey and Jono seed a team, let's say Team Thor

They give the team 8, 9, 6 and 7 out of 10, it get and average of 7.5/10, they then get seeded accordingly.

So you end up with a first round seeded on a cross section of opinion. e.g

1. Cosmic (9.5)
   
2. Sping Brake! (9)
   
3. ASBO (8.2)
   
   

etcetc

Obv we have to select people who we trust to be objective. But saying that, if we have enough people doing the seeding, one person can't sway the seeding by much, as it should average out anyway.

I would suggest doing this using google spreadsheets and google forms. The spreadsheet is private, and the 'judges' put in their scores via a google form, and can't see the results, or what other people have entered. Once ALL 'judges' have completed the form, we can make the entire spreadsheet public. Transparency is key.

it shouldn't be seeded at all, imo. It's a qualifying tourney after all....

So how would you do the first round? Alphabetical?

Random seeding can be biased (randomly).

Of course, if we use swiss, the first round pretty much does the seeding for us.

but wouldn't you still have to seed the first round with swiss?

Well, not accurately, but you have to choose an order for teams in the list somehow.

1. Seeded
   
2. Alphabetical
   
3. 1st come 1st serve (order of registration)
   
4. Random
   

it shouldn't be seeded at all, imo. It's a qualifying tourney after all....

My point exactly.
Can't use alphabetical as this has already been done, use a random number generator. As you said Gabes, this still seeds in a random way, but that is just the luck of the draw

Luck should NOT play a part in this, SKILL should. It is the qualifying tourney for the euros and therefore worlds.

Maybe we should all do team videos and they get voted on by the public.

If it's Swiss, it's not a big deal (for strong or weak teams to be seeded). If people are that afraid of having to play teams that they'd have to play to qualify anyway, do random.

It will probably require one extra round to sort out the mid of the table if there aren't that many teams. Although if there aren't that many teams, just to RR - even better.

+1