-
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
This argument is flawed, swiss-style again tries to get the best teams to play the most games, it's completely bias towards finding the best of the best, which means if you lose, you're more or less out of the running.
The wheel system allows everyone to play a set amount of games, regardless of the outcome of those initial games, the aim being to allow everyone some tourney time. This is an direct alternative to swiss-style as it is more-or-less impossible to provide early stage comparison of the teams (without a massive back-log of team seed value/points).
The UK champs will be a fairly "unfair" tourney as your initial games may be too easy/hard, because we're single elim after the "unfair" seeding, you may find that you place badly due to bike malfunction, etc.
However, I'm all for it, it's the best we've got, live and learn, bring it, polo.
-
We could also do the preliminary selection with all of us nominating the teams that we think should be able to play here online. I think we all have a good idea of which teams stand the best chance, regardless of which city we live in.
This also gives people a chance to say they want to play, big themselves up, and be put through by their peers. This means whether you actually play in the tourney or not you still have a say of who should represent the UK at the Worlds.
I suggested this a while back as an alternative* if* we couldn't do tournament that included everyone. Everyone vote for the 6 teams that they want to represent (be it based on previous tourney/ league performance or not) and teams with highest no. of votes go. I was quickly told no as it would turn into a popularity contest rather than us sending our best 6 teams!
-
Also for the record, my main reasons for not wanting the UK Champs as sole decider for the Worlds are:
1: the format has been shoehorned to fit the time we have and the number of teams registered. I took over the organisation of the Champs AFTER it had been announced by Andy, i feel if the remit for the Champs was as a decider for the Worlds i would have placed more emphasis on a fairer seeding/tournament system, and also limited the number of teams... as it is i inherited something that had never been planned that way, the emphasis was just on actually getting the ball rolling in holding a National UK Champs.....
2: I know personally i'm not going to be completely focussed on Netto games because of everything else i'm going to have to do leading up to and on the day of the tourney, this obviously doesn't matter SO much if a place at the Worlds is not at stake....
So, if those 2 issues could be remedied i would have no problem in the UK Champs deciding the Worlds, i still think the results will be an important tool in making the final team selections for the Worlds...
My 2¢
-
This argument is flawed, swiss-style again tries to get the best teams to play the most games, it's completely bias towards finding the best of the best, which means if you lose, you're more or less out of the running.
that couldn't be more wrong. in a swiss round every team plays the same number of games regardless of how they perform, and the matchings evolve so that with each round equal teams are matched up so that there are only close matches and no blow-outs.
-
I worded it wrong maybe, what I'm trying to say is that in swiss, the best will play the next best and so on, all the way down to the bottom, it is used to find the very best team and is time consuming with no random/auto/seeded elements.
If you can plan a swiss style tourney for the number of teams in the time we have, it'd be brilliant...
-
i don't think any more time is needed for swiss as opposed to any other group or round-based format. well, apart from doing matchups after each round, but a spreadsheet could maybe be written that reduces that calculation to seconds. for 36 teams 18 matches x 5 rounds would be 90 matches, 15 hours. i don't know if this is any more or less than the 36 team wheel they have proposed for the UKC but i think it would result in a better ranking at the end of it
i'm not suggesting the hosts in mcr should change their format; they've done the work, they should do what they want.
-
90 x (10min games + 2min change over) = 1080mins = 18 hours of polo... less than I thought actually.
Worth bearing in mind for future tourneys?
-
90 x (10min games + 2min change over) = 1080mins = 18 hours of polo
& that's for 36 teams and 1 court. just think how much polo you could play in 18 with 2 courts and 24 teams... (ok, i won't make you think about it, it's 7.5 games per team)
gabes out of curiosity does the wheel 4 game format work out to 72 games or is it different for some reason?
-
Only a couple of days left to vote!
-
what's the outcome of this vote?
this is flawed to the extreme and proper bogus. i'm not angry, i just can't understand this poll. its polotics polling bollocks at its finest.
:D -
i think the outcome of the vote is overwhelmingly:the top 6 teams from the UK Champs in MCR SHOULD represent the UK at the WHBPC Berlin, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they WILL
-
• #166
bored at work, Matt?
-
• #168
i think the outcome of the vote is overwhelmingly:the top 6 teams from the UK Champs in MCR SHOULD represent the UK at the WHBPC Berlin, but it doesn't necessarily mean that they WILL
ha, nothing is for certain, but I read that as having a sinister edge to it. I think it's the all-caps "will".
-
ha!
i got pissed off and vented it here.
fuck you polo dicks.
phew. there i go again.
JonoMarshall
Hops
Dangeruss
hurricanejosh
Buffalo_Bill
mattmadegood
rik
deleted
Cohen-
Post a reply
About
Should the UK Champs decide the 6 UK teams for the WHBPC?
Posted by
@turnpedal
*[I][I][I]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.
+1
[/I][/I]
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.[/I]
+1
*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.
*
I'm not sure I agree with this, but surely if this is what we go with then we'd have to decide after the seeing how the tournament is reffed, organised, generally put together. As we are not the organisers and the organisers themselves are saying this tourney shouldn't be the qualifiers, we have no idea whether it's suitable for this use or not.
What about (if possible) doing a combination of these suggestions. We put together a round robin tournament for a small number of teams that are sent to the tourney after being picked by their city as the best from the city.
So if we do a tournament to find the top 6 teams perhaps we allow 10 teams or something.
We could also do the preliminary selection with all of us nominating the teams that we think should be able to play here online. I think we all have a good idea of which teams stand the best chance, regardless of which city we live in.
This also gives people a chance to say they want to play, big themselves up, and be put through by their peers. This means whether you actually play in the tourney or not you still have a say of who should represent the UK at the Worlds.