National Series 2011

Can we get rid of 3,2,1 polo at the open?

It's already gone (some people are slow at catching on).

Sweet.

I just wanted to feel involved.

Yeah, I'll have to make a note to put that in the player's/refs briefing.

I'm not too keen on that sub rule too, I just assusmed that as long as 2 from your usual 3 were playing then it counts as your team, so because alex and i used a sub in edinburgh, if alex can't make bristol and neil and i need a sub we won't get points, dispite the fact that both teams are equally as erectusey as each other, or could we disregard certain results at the end of the season if that leaves us with more points?

The teams are not set, and never have been. There was no NS registration. We don't know who is a "regular" member of any team. This is the problem. So there needs to be some type of consistency through out the season, and we decided on two players.

What this does mean is teams can now reshuffle if they want (and this has happened in some cases). Ste and Alex could play as a team for the rest of the NS season and collect all the points for that team. As far as the NS points allocation system is concerned, it doesn't matter.

I hope the logistics of the decision make sense. We weren't trying to be difficult.

Makes sense and I know it ain't to be difficult, I just assumed a 2 of the 'normal' 3 would class as a team, could i put registering for the NS as a team down as an idea for next year?

Why can't we have some form of registration? everyone can name who their team is and then any 2 can play in it. Seems bullshit to say that teams are now just two people with a floating third

Next year, we could perhaps consider some kind of system where an entire team registers at the start of the season and then any 2 of the 3 original players can collect points. But this kind of ruins the drop in aspect of the NS, forcing teams to commit from the beginning.

Or perhaps an individual points based system where players collect points depending on the position they finish, irrespective of the team, and then the final result will be a ranking of uk players.

But I personally feel that the current ruling works well, although it is unfortunate that some teams may lose out for a tournament or two.

could you not have whatever the line up for the 1st tourney you enter that season is your "registered" line up for the rest of it?

Why can't we have some form of registration? everyone can name who their team is and then any 2 can play in it. Seems bullshit to say that teams are now just two people with a floating third

That's not what we're saying, I just used it as a way of helping people visualize the system of points allocation.

And it seems bullshit to be calling stuff that people are working on in their spare time for everyone's enjoyment bullshit.

#justsayin

We'll talk about it at some point.

Good point. I appreciate the large amount of hard work that has gone into the NS, both hosting tourneys and sorting out the system behind them, especially the unfathomable points system. It just seems this aspect of it is counter-intuitive.

If someone would like to follow this up, they'd need to:

1) chase up ~40 team registrations
2) collect the London Open ones
3) check that nobody is in 2 teams
4) if anyone is, contact them and see which team they'd like to be registered to
5) check team lineups for all future tournaments

Or, if anyone wants to get involved in the National Series in another capacity, we could really use someone to work on sponsorship...

I was pretty sure the original rule was 2 of the original 3 players. but not the same two players every time, so A,B,C then A,B,D then A,C,E is fine, as they always have 2 of A,B,C

I might be wrong though, I'd have to dredge out the rule, which I can't be bothered to right now.

And it seems bullshit to be calling stuff that people are working on in their spare time for everyone's enjoyment bullshit.

#justsayin

Someone doing something in their own time doesn't make them immune to criticism. For example if someone has any issue with my distribution, I'd rather they mentioned it...

I was pretty sure the original rule was 2 of the original 3 players. but not the same two players every time, so A,B,C then A,B,D then A,C,E is fine, as they always have 2 of A,B,C

I might be wrong though, I'd have to dredge out the rule, which I can't be bothered to right now.

After seeing there was a decent amount of interest in this, Mark, Josh, Lebowski and I had a meeting and we started to try and put it together.

The first ever National Series tournament will kick-off in Brighton on 7th May. The National Series for 2011 will take place over 6 months with a tournament in a different UK city each month. Every team will score points for their placings in each tournament and after the final event, the team with the most points wins. The 2011 UK National Series will be open to any team but teams must play at least 3 events to qualify for National Series points. The combined total of their 4 top scores will be used to calculate final standings. If a team places below a team that did not play at least 3 events, points will be reallocated. Teams can use a sub at any tournament but 2 players must remain constant to collect points.

Anyway, I'm with James. I'm happy for "registered" teams to exist, but someone else can do the work. And the issue of subs from other registered teams comes up (but can be ignored by just allowing it).

I'd say the site is the most important thing to do at the moment... sponsors need something to look at, etc?

It's going well for the first year all things considered though.

I was pretty sure the original rule was 2 of the original 3 players. but not the same two players every time, so A,B,C then A,B,D then A,C,E is fine, as they always have 2 of A,B,C

I might be wrong though, I'd have to dredge out the rule, which I can't be bothered to right now.

this is what I assumed but am happy to be wrong.

Don't want to seem critical in a non-constructive way, I appreciate all the hard work that goes into all this and it's good no matter how it's done, I'm more thinking of ideas for the next series

Someone doing something in their own time doesn't make them immune to criticism. For example if someone has any issue with my distribution, I'd rather they mentioned it...

I don't think I got upset about anyone criticizing anything at any point. I'm pretty easy going when it comes to working together and finding the best way to do things. But when people start throwing around words like "bullshit" the environment will get toxic pretty quickly. That's all I wanted to get across. We're all mates and there's no reason to get upset about anything. Especially when we had already said we're happy to look into and discuss it.

Prav's stepped up for the website, so that should be nicely in hand.

John H - I have a problem with your distribution. I think you need to have some sort of responsible sales policy to stop certain people buying too much of your product.

I don't think I got upset about anyone criticizing anything at any point. I'm pretty easy going when it comes to working together and finding the best way to do things. But when people start throwing around words like "bullshit" the environment will get toxic pretty quickly. That's all I wanted to get across. We're all mates and there's no reason to get upset about anything. Especially when we had already said we're happy to looking into and discuss it.

You're full of bullshit Mark.
I guess it is just something to think about for next years NS. I don't know why I even care so much as it won't affect me, just the rest of my team

just the rest of my team

Hurricane Josh's team.

fuck!

Not even Josh's team. Based on the official NS two-player rule, Ste and Adam make up Asbo.

I hope you like sleeping on the street, Woody.

I don't think I got upset about anyone criticizing anything at any point. I'm pretty easy going when it comes to working together and finding the best way to do things. But when people start throwing around words like "bullshit" the environment will get toxic pretty quickly. That's all I wanted to get across. We're all mates and there's no reason to get upset about anything. Especially when we had already said we're happy to look into and discuss it.

Yeah, true, bullshit isn't the most constructive of words.

Anyway, I'm with James. I'm happy for "registered" teams to exist, but someone else can do the work. And the issue of subs from other registered teams comes up (but can be ignored by just allowing it).

Guess I was wrong then. Rulez iz rulez, teams will just have to deal with it.