I can't let this thread die without spoon-feeding this prik phillips and so here goes:- Whenever I try to explain things, I won't deal in bullsh1t or trivial speculation etc.
I try to approach things as scientifically as I can , it maybe sounds a tad pretentious but in this way, I leave myself less open to the bullsh1tters and people who just 'like' to argue (Brocktwit and co) and it also disarms any real critics who try to challenge it.
Anyways, we can look at woodsball only by acknowledging the following, when we define woodsball, we really mean 'as it is played' i.e. by the players.
And so, when we compare woodsball to tourney, what we are really comparing is not the definitive but the practical i.e. the teams and players who actually participate.
To address this comparison any other way is nonsensical.
Ok so far, and what's good for woodsball in terms of practical definitions we can also apply to tourney in that when we look at tourney play, we really mean, we are really looking at its exponents, the players and teams.
And so to address the problem of comparing respective levels of skill in each discipline, we are really looking at its respective player base and the demands placed upon people who play in each environment.
And so, if we look at the average tourney baller, we don’t even have to take a look at the pros here because a middle order amateur team will suffice for the purposes of this comparison.
These teams will train, they will drill, have an ethos of improvement that runs parallel to other serious sporting philosophies.
The main goal for a tourney baller is an improvement of play, to try and secure better results and to this end, a tourney baller will endeavor to find out the best training regimes etc and apply themselves to the task in hand.
Tourney guys will look upon training as an intrinsic and wholly necessary component to how they play paintball.
This is an important point here because training is all about reductionism and application, a basic training tenet which is recognized in every other serious sport.
Now, lets take a look toward woodsball, their whole ethos is different, it’s not based on results, its based around enjoyment (and good luck to them) and being competitive is secondary to these guys, sure they like to win but if they were that serious about winning then wouldn’t we be seeing reams of woodsballers going through drills, warm up routines, reductionist philosophies of training etc etc etc.
And they do not !!!!
The distinction is now being clearly drawn here because each discipline (tourney and woods) is defined by its player base and as we have seen the player bases are vastly different in mindset and commitment, and especially how they prepare.
And so, if we acknowledge this distinction between players (and their respective approaches) then it’s a simple matter of concluding tourney ball must be on a higher technical plane because tourney ball is an emergent property (as it is played) of guys training many hours with core disciplines of drills and practice, as against the woodsballers almost non existent training regimes.
This ain’t rocket science here, all it takes is a little thought and people like tyger (miaow) and phillips will still remain unconvinced because they are either too stupid or too bigoted, in tyger’s case he probably qualifies for both as does phillips but hey, it takes all sorts and I am glad woodsball (or ‘woosbal’ as Phillips more appropriately calls it) plays host to these two guys and tourney ball isn’t inflicted with their presence.