• That's fair, but it doesn't address my point, which is that the qualifier is about determining who does and who doesn't get to go.

    John H has already asked for 'teams who don't think they have a realistic chance of qualifying' (paraphrasing) to not enter, on the grounds it makes it fairer for everyone else.

    How is it different to say 'teams who are almost certainly going to qualify shouldn't enter to make it fairer for the people in the cut-off zone'?

    I understand everyone wants to play, because it'll be a great tournament, and valuable practice, but it's different to other tournaments, in that the winner is largely irrelevant, but the 10th/11th place distinction is hugely important.

    I don't agree with John's statement, as it goes. I think it's very difficult to judge whether you have a chance of qualifying or not. E.g. Passed It have not played a single tournament with our full line-up outside of London, so we have no idea where we are relative to other UK & I teams.

    I haven't seen either of the Irish teams play for 6 months, and I haven't seen any of the 'new' UK teams play. How can I or anyone else realistically estimate what the standard is likely to be at the qualis? I would much rather see as many teams as possible at the qualis going for it, rather than the same old faces.

About