Tourney: WHBPC 2011: Seattle 08-11.09.2011

Ha. I'm raising the issue.

Less tournaments on better surfaces > more tournaments on slippy surfaces.

...playing surface should be the number one concern. It makes or breaks a tournament.

Bristol was rough, at times bumpy, had holes that had been patched by the Bristol crew, and was silty in the corners thanks to the rain.
At the end of the weekend, I didn't hear one person say anything other than they'd had a brilliant weekend.

Many tournaments are the outcome of opportunity though.

For example, Sheffield put on a tournament as part of a festival, Cambridge did an indoor tournament in winter and Bristol did an incredible job with their new courts.

It's your choice to attend tournaments based on the courts and I would understand that. However, if you start telling everyone in the UK that courts have to be a certain way otherwise they shouldn't put on tournaments, I would say you're missing the point.

Bristol was awesome, it was rough, but that's something you can deal with, I don't think it made people fall off all the time. And the location/atmosphere was awesome, and that has nothing to do with the surface of the court.

I don't recall cambridge being a bad surface, a bit more slippy than tarmac, but not so bad.

I don't think we should make it some standard, for all tourneys, but I certainly think that major tourneys should find a good surface to play on. If you're going to take the title of "UK champs" for example, you should find courts that allow people to play as hard and fast as possible.

Yup. Serious/showcase tournament, court should be a priority but I think it **has **been a priority for many tournament organisers this year to find the best location they could.

However, surfaces haven't necessarily been trialled properly under tournament conditions beforehand (lots of games, dirty/wet tyres).

My point is that court surface needs to become number one priority.

For me, the surface will make a tournament good or bad. Fun will always be had off court, that is not dependent on the surface, that's a given.

Whilst I'd always be an advocate of better quality surfaces, surely a National Series has as part of its core challenge the the variety of courts - surface, size, walling, weather, light et al. The teams that are able to adapt across the range should benefit accordingly and not have their successes devalued by the notion that some 'standard' was not achieved - implied or otherwise.

Agreed that single tournaments such as LQ/LO/Euros etc. should be played on the best surface available, but in that drive let's not devalue or dishearten regional groups who've stepped up and made a great fist of supporting the fledgling National Series. IMHO the biggest success provided by the NS initiative has been in the encouragement and growth of these new tournament organisers - long may that continue.

For me, the surface will make a tournament good or bad.

This is simply not the case for 90% of tournament attendees, you are looking at it through Cosmic eyes.

I'm not interested in representing 90% of tournament attendees, or Cosmic.

These are *my *views.

Agreed that single tournaments such as LQ/LO/Euros etc. should be played on the best surface available, but in that drive let's not devalue or dishearten regional groups.

This is what I'm trying to say, I'm just not very good at being sensitive. MrK, would you be my spokesperson?

^ Subject to agreeing fees, it would be a pleasure... ;-)

In that case we're saying the same thing. I just always think you're a heartless bastard.

He is a heartless bastard.

Is it cos I'm a Tory?

Please don't label my views as 'Cosmic' btw. Matt will play anywhere on any surface that he can, and Todd is a massive hippy. I on the other hand am a 'heartless bastard'. #sob

You're related to Bill, you can't help it.

Matt will play anywhere on any surface that he can, and Todd is a massive hippy.

Hahaha

There was a time when all polo players just played on any surface possible, as long as it was ridable and had walls, polo would happen.

I guess as the game changed and play gets faster and harder the need for gripper surfaces is a must, but obviously somewhere like cambridge has a massive lack of courts, as do most cities, so their is a limited choice. We are very lucky to have an indoor court, i personally think the court is pretty grippy and i can push it has hard and fast as any other court-it is a million miles from a 'crap' surface.
I think it would be little minded to regulate tournaments down to the surface, how would that even work, who would regulate it? would that mean someone/a group would go an inspect courts?

Far enough maybe something like the UK champs needs to be played on a good surface, but not every town has a court like Downs. To say to a city that their surfaces is shit and that the tournament would not be worth having would for me ruin polo and the community feeling it has.

All the tournaments I have been to this year have been great, surfaces issues are just something you deal with and if you don't like it go home or don't come.

Theses are just my views....

This is all Rupert's fault.

Surface's affect everyone equally, ok so maybe locals could get a slight advantage, but can anyone name a tourney won by a local team, where the team probably had an advantage by being local?

I think we already decided this:

Whilst I'd always be an advocate of better quality surfaces, surely a National Series has as part of its core challenge the the variety of courts - surface, size, walling, weather, light et al. The teams that are able to adapt across the range should benefit accordingly and not have their successes devalued by the notion that some 'standard' was not achieved - implied or otherwise.

Agreed that single tournaments such as LQ/LO/Euros etc. should be played on the best surface available, but in that drive let's not devalue or dishearten regional groups who've stepped up and made a great fist of supporting the fledgling National Series. IMHO the biggest success provided by the NS initiative has been in the encouragement and growth of these new tournament organisers - long may that continue.

This is all Rupert's fault.
We should introduce a rule* to standardise his front-end set-up and riding style in order that he doesn't fall off so much.

*for "important" tournaments only. He can fall off all he likes at any other event.

Get 2 more people to agree and we can make an official bike polo rule before he even knows.

seconded.

For me it could be just great and important to have a grippy surface to play our Nationals, EHBPC and WHBPC, that's all.
For other tournament, it's not a problem, as you said people can come or not, it's their choice.

I had a lot of fun in Cambridge this year even if it was a bit sleepery (and it was announced in the tournament brief before registration so very good), and I hope play this tournament next year.
The only thing is even if everybody play in the same conditions, why not hope for the best conditions..

Please don't take away my flat bars!

I regret mentioning any specific tournament, I'm sorry if I've offended anyone. But I stand by what I've said. I think court surface is a huge issue and needs bringing up. But, slippery surfaces are shit, tournaments on slippery surfaces result in lower quality polo, to play and watch, IMO. Why not try to push people to look for best courts possible? (I'm sure you have looked, but this goes to new scenes as much as old ones).

I've never said a tournament wouldn't be worth having.