Tourney: London Open 2012 - August 25th and 26th

Oh damn, JLS forgot to do it...

Ditto Beavers... Balls.. they look really good...

We weren't even asked. Most handsome team and all.

You see! Look at that smile!

I look fucking tired.

How do I yoink that shit? I want to facebook it for all my fans.

We weren't even asked. Most handsome team and all.

They took a captain's portrait... :p

Workin' on those sweet tan lines.

I would probably post a longer post about it one day.
Thanks London community or such good hosting, party and the amount of work so few have done. Great atmosphere and lot of fun around courts, party and pub.

When I'm thinking about it, inthe improvement list:
-More tents for rain or shade
-new nets, I saw a lot of really lose bungie and some goal cancelled because of that, also find a way to avoid bounces from bottom bar. ( double nets, wood piece, ski pole etc).
-trying new rule I you have time to explain it or to play it. unlimited goals
Looked useless and even worse when the dark final happens, the 15 or 30 minutes you would probably have save by playing first to five looked priceless at the end of both tourneys Hb an Lo.

Yeah, we wanted new goals, but had zero budget (we made a loss this year).

The format was changed for HB by popular request (which we didn't really have time for) and we over ran.

We were on schedule to finish at 8pm for the LO on both days until the rain on Saturday and when we lost 10 minutes on each court on Sunday in the late afternoon (communication breakdown).

Agreed we should have gone over the rules better, but again, it was secondary to starting on time each day unfortunately.

First to five would have saved us a small amount of time (only 6 games went past 5 in the DE bracket, so perhaps only 10 minutes court time), but unlimited goals is more accurate and doesn't take away (precious) court time from newer teams... this is a pretty important principle for the Open.

But yeah, 82 teams (280 games) in two days was pretty tough.

First to five would have saved us a small amount of time (only 6 games went past 5 in the DE bracket, so perhaps only 10 minutes court time), but unlimited goals is more accurate and doesn't take away (precious) court time from newer teams... this is pretty important principle for the Open.

I've been pretty undecided re: first-to-five, but this is the best argument I've heard for it in regard to the Open.

And again, nice one, Jono!

it's a shame that unlimited goals wasn't showcased to it's full effect as i'm still convinced it's a far superior format. i also think the double d area shouldn't be written off because it didn't work immediately. with a little bit of tweaking i think it can be made to work smoothly.

^ I think the only way to enforce the goal-zone ruleset is to give power (and a whistle) to the goal refs. The ref can't be expected to watch the ball and the two ends at the same time. Giving goal refs more responsibility will result in much better calling of fouls at either end of the courts as well. >>>rulesthread

Great tourney, thanks Jono and London, and NADOES!.

I thought the no double goalies rule was actually a really good introdution and helped to keep the games flowing more, the hatched areas on Cort B & C(?) were a good size but the other (Court A?) was a bit too big...

i disagree i thought A was the good the others were too small. but as boagatron said, this should be discussed in the rules thread

It seemed to work alright, generally everyone started shouting at the second keeper, then the ref shouted a few times if they hadn't moved, then a turn over happened if they still didn't move and there was no advantage.

Having talked to Clement, I'm starting to come around to the idea that unlimited goals is maybe not so suited to polo, at least as it is now.

For round robin, I think it's absolutely the right thing, all teams play every team, and so it's a good way to distinguish between teams. I really hope we use it for the league this year.

But for Swiss, as you only play a small selection of teams, a big win can skew the GD.
So for example a team could win 15-0, and another team might not have that chance.
So I think if you use GD, it should be first-to-something (doesn't have to be 5).

Now if you use Median-Buchholz, that changes things, as GD isn't a factor (and in fact if you have a big win, you are helping the teams you have played against more than yourself). So with Median-Buchholz I think unlimited could work.

Regarding giving teams court time, that's absolutely right for the Open, but for something like the Worlds, that shouldn't really be a factor.

For elimination, I don't think it really makes a big difference, the same could be achieved by increasing the number of goals. But I do think unlimited goals can lead to teams sitting on their lead, especially in elim where GD isn't relevant. Once you are ahead you might as well defend and play out time.

With Podium as it currently stands you lose loads of potential information about the games by ignoring the game length if a game goes to 5 (and by restricting yourself from discovering which teams are capable of scoring more than 5).

Either game length, or unlimited goals should be used to further differentiate teams, Podium uses neither and is therefore marginally less accurate/useful than it could be.

Unlimited goals isn't the problem here: I hate it when I see a team beaten by 5 goals to 3 (or 4) with plenty of time left on the clock, we assume too early that we know who the winner of the game is because of a relic from throw-ins.

But yeah, probably a discussion for a different thread.

I think the unlimited goals system best, it's crucial for new teams, or even during games where the seeding has screwed up, for skills to be transferred and for everyone to feel like they've participated. It also gives better indication when you'll be on court for tourneys with multiple courts.

Re: Goal crease, I really liked it, i found that just having it there deterred 'bad' play. I agree goal refs should be given more power and a whistle, for this rule and others. It's frustrating being a goal ref, especially a new one, if you can't communicate to the head ref. During the Open there was a situation where play continued for about a minute, after a goal was assumed not to be a goal (came off inside of post after crossing the line and back into play after rolling along the goal line), and neither myself or those around me could get the attention of the main ref to stop play and award the goal, the teams were obviously busy paying attention to the resulting break. It was all sorted out in the end with lots of shouting, but it can't have been great for the teams on court who were a bit confused by it.

ANYWAY I came here to echo the sentiments of others: This years Open was awesome, the highlight for me on the weekend was our game against Warin, but the best thing about the open is having so many players in London for a week. Some excellent throwin sessions and really nice folks. I only wish I could've helped out more in the run-up, my best goes to all the organisers!

Either game length, or unlimited goals should be used to further differentiate teams, Podium uses neither and is therefore marginally less accurate/useful than it could be.

Unlimited goals isn't the problem here: I hate it when I see a team beaten by 5 goals to 3 (or 4) with plenty of time left on the clock, we assume too early that we know who the winner of the game is because of a relic from throw-ins.

I completely agree, but the same can be achieved with an appropriate goal limit for the time. For the top teams, I'd say 5 goals is fine, it was rarely met (obviously that's not the case for teams of different ability).

Game length is interesting, but again with Swiss, i feel that could bias it to a team that got a really easy first round game.

Again, I think MB would solve a lot of the issues, and I'm hoping it's something Podium will offer soon. It's one area where Challonge does it better, but there are so many other things Podium does better.

Is there a lost and found thing?

This set http://www.flickr.com/photos/36707747@N07/sets/72157631278830868/
has had more than twice as many views as this set http://www.flickr.com/photos/36707747@N07/sets/72157631244021358/

Is there some vain person keeps looking at their own photo?

Cocorico's fan base will be swooning over the first set.

Lost property coming soon, I'll go through it all... I have loads of London players stuff at mine too: Bill, Josh, etc?

Lost property:
Khyam sleeping bag (black) - Jess?
Bosch drill and charger - Urban guys?
Brine RH glove - James?
Length of garden hose - Bill?
Raceface pads and Belk holder - Josh?
Red pannier - Josh
Super Sport pump?
BBB arm warmers?
Santini fingerless gloves?
Specialised full finger gloves?
1 x Kona full fingered glove?
1 x Sugoi fingerless glove?
Slic water bottle?
Foot pump?
Abus key?
18mm spanner?
Crumpler watter bottle?
Trek water bottle?
Bike to work water bottle?
3 x LCC water bottles?
Look Pro Team water bottle?
Black Giro helmet?
Green cool bag?
Franklin gloves and Bauer helmet - Josh?
Deflector pads?
Crewroom jacket?
Mallets:

Yup Brine glove is mine (I assume: white/black with blue lining, no ties on the wrist, hockey tape on the thumb).

Bosch drill and charger is a dude from Souths, the name eludes me.

Jono, mallet third from left is mine (short perro, inner tube grip, RV drilled head and nut/bolt?). Thanks for picking it up. Sure I'll be down some time soon.