Shooting Ourselves in the Foot ?

[Robbo]

I’ve just had a thought; this month’s Millennium tournament in Lisbon, Portugal has 8 American pro teams entered.
Consider for a second that there are only 8 qualifying places in the semis.
Also consider the Americans dominance at the top end and what have we got ?
We have in my opinion, a domestic circuit, that when the Yank teams come over here in force, the way we structure our tournaments ultimately inflicts damage on our own teams.
What lies at the very heart of this is a blind adherence by some of the Millennium board to try and construct our tournament circuit around the American rules model.
Now, some people just don’t seem to think before they adopt rule changes that have erupted over in the US.
Case in question is that of post game chronographing, the Yanks decide to stop end of game chronographing and we like some blind-ass idiot follow suit without even one brain cell firing, it was stupid and ignorant to do so.
There should always be the opportunity to chronograph any gun at any time whilst the players are on the field, immediately before and immediately after.
Anybody and I mean anybody, that offers up any argument to the contrary, is flying in the face of safety or has something to hide.
And yet like a frikkin donkey, the millennium board adopt this rule ‘just’ because the Yanks have done it, D’uh !!!!
Now this is not what this post is about, this is to do with, limiting the number of semi final places to 8 just because of the Yank model of tournament organisation.
But there is like the previous example, no obvious problem.
The Yanks are the best in the world in terms of tournament success, of that there is no doubt and all credit to them, they rule the roost.
So, what’s my problem ?
Well, it ain’t really a problem, it’s more of an observation, if only eight teams are allowed to go thru to the semis and 8 Yank teams are playing Portugal, it don’t take Sherlock Holmes to work out the potential dominance of the American teams of the semi-final brackets.
So, if we as Euro teams wanna get better, then one of the best ways to do that is to get as many games against the Americans as possible then you can maybe see what I am now getting at.
It seems, our own domestic circuit, in following the American model, has predisposed our own top teams from not getting as much opportunity to play the top Americans sides as we could.
If we expanded the semi final qualifiers to 12, then this would go some way to allowing some of our top teams from gaining valuable experience against the top US teams.
Now, I’m not saying all those 8 US teams are going to qualify but the way that it’s set up at the moment, we do tend to be preventing a significant number of Euro teams from the semi-finals.
Is it any use us keep moaning about US team dominance when we can't even work out how to get the best out of own tournaments ?
Any thoughts or suggestions from anybody ?
Robbo

 

[Tom Tom]

Well its a mixed bag of nuts really, One argument should be, Heck we should be getting better and trying to give the yanks more of a challenge??

Have more in the semis.

Have it so you do the divisions for a tourney and have the top US team and the top Euro team qualify from each group, (don't flame me it was just an idea)

(quick side line on chronying, The americans brought us this sport and have done no end of good to build an image that is stronger today than it has ever been. But lets take the batton from them a develop not just stay one step behind. We should do what we feel is best for the sport as players and as europeans.)

This is a tricky one to resolve. Maybe have a US division so only 2/3 teams can qualify and the eueopeans can get through as well.

 

[Buddha 3]

Whoa! That's some serious food for thought!
It's weird that we as Europeans try to model ourselves to the American way of doing tourneys. Anybody that watched the Toulouse 2001 video should be able to remember Ed Poorman saying something along the lines of the Americans trying to be more like the Europeans in setting up the tourneys, because ours ist the best scene by far. So if we have the quality that they are trying to copy (not in playing, but in organising), why do we need to adopt their rulings? In all honesty, I have no idea. Is it because there are so many of them? Could be, but the masses aren't always right. After all, Adolf Hitler got voted into office by the masses too (Okay, a very extreme example, but it does prove that what the majority of the people support at any given time, isn't always the right thing).
So far the Europeans have been 'stubborn' enough to adopt many things of our own. We have the 7 man system, they have the 10 man. We came up with Sup'Air when they were running around Hyperball fields and so on. Then why are we suddenly inclined to swallow all is thrown at us from the US? I have no idea, unless there is some ulterior motive involved that perhaps only a few promoters are privvy to (or at least those that vote in favor of such rulings). Jeez, I'm going all conspiracy theory-ish!

I have no clue to the why of all of this, but I do agree that it's weird.
As far as having 12 instead of 8 spots in the pro finals, I guess that also depends on how many pro teams are coming over. Some tourneys only get 12 pro teams, so that would make the preliminaries kind of obsolete.....But hey, Dutch Masters Amsterdam has 24 pro teams registered so far, so I'm all for a 12 slot final on that one, but then again it would be stupid to have one set of rules for tourney X and another for tourney Y when they are part of the same series, just because one tourney draws more teams than the next.

Another argument for more slots in the pro finals is the future of paintball.
We all want our sport to expand. We all want to see it televised in the end, and we all want people to say 'cool' instead of giving us funny looks when we tell them that we play paintball.
When paintball starts drawing more spectators, and perhaps even gets a proper fan following, it would be natural for the spectators to be drawn towards the pro games, since the same thing happens in most other sports. If we want to ensure an as large as possible number of spectators on finals day (and I'd say that most spectators, meaning people who only come to watch a certain team play, will show up on finals day, because than it gets real interesting, particularly when we get to the point of spectators having to pay an entrance fee), and thereby ensuring a larger revenue and more turnover for trade stands, fan stands, and those selling food and drink, we better make sure that we get as many teams in the finals as possible. It's simple really, more teams = more spectators once we get to the point of fans dedicated enough to just come and watch their team play...

 

[Matski]

We also invented hyperball actually (thanks WDP), the yanks were still running around mounds of dirt.

The fact that many more yank teams are coming over just shows how good the millenium series is getting and how well its been organised. I mean boby's men? Aftershock? Bad Company? They dont often make the trip, it all shows that millenium organisers have been doing a good job.
I think that the 8place semi bracket is more to do with the fact that not so many pro teams have attended millennium events in the past. Millennium organisers should just consider this another step in expansion and increase the semi final bracket. Not only will this make the semis more competitive but will give some euro teams valuable experience.

Just my '2 cents'

 

[Jake]

I think you have a really excellent point there Pete.

10 or 12 Semi places would help no end in getting Euro teams more experience of playing some of the top US teams ... but also more experience of playing in the more highly charged and important Semi games

I also think it would help some of the lesser known Euro pro teams to get noticed more if they have a higher probablility of getting into the semi's



As one last point I'd like everyone (including Robbo) to bug the hell out of Niall and the rest to see that it happens.


Sorry Niall

 

[Beaker]

the rules allow for the number of Semi qualifiers to be a function of the number of teams entered in that bracket

Less than 20 teams (in bracket) = 8 qualifiers
21-30 = 12 qualifiers
31+ = 16 qualifiers

So in this case it's not so much that there are 8 US teams and 8 spots - but that there are not at least 13 other Euro Pro teams entering so therefore it doesn't nudge into the 12 qualifier bracket. I think Alvaro has posted there is 19 Pro teams - therefore, only another 2 entering would mean there would be those extra spots

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by Jake
I think you have a really excellent point there Pete.
10 or 12 Semi places would help no end in getting Euro teams more experience of playing some of the top US teams ... but also more experience of playing in the more highly charged and important Semi games
I also think it would help some of the lesser known Euro pro teams to get noticed more if they have a higher probablility of getting into the semi's
As one last point I'd like everyone (including Robbo) to bug the hell out of Niall and the rest to see that it happens.
Sorry Niall

Already done !!!!!
it was proposed for Porthugal but Pedro declined deciding that the Nations Cup (not the X-ball thingy) was more important than the rest of the Euro teams need for 12 in the semi's and said he could not find time to have an extra 4 teams......Hmmmmm.... go figure !!!!!!!
We'll see what happens !!!!
Robbo

 

[Robbo]

Originally posted by Beaker
the rules allow for the number of Semi qualifiers to be a function of the number of teams entered in that bracket
Less than 20 teams (in bracket) = 8 qualifiers
21-30 = 12 qualifiers
31+ = 16 qualifiers
So in this case it's not so much that there are 8 US teams and 8 spots - but that there are not at least 13 other Euro Pro teams entering so therefore it doesn't nudge into the 12 qualifier bracket. I think Alvaro has posted there is 19 Pro teams - therefore, only another 2 entering would mean there would be those extra spots

Hey Beak, you are right, the number of teams in the semi's is a direct function of the number of teams entered.
But we write the rules (or unwrite them in Laurent's case), so if we can't adjust them to be more accommodating, then things need to be looked at badly !
Robbo

 

[Jake]

I think that having a direct link between the number of teams entering and the number of semi-finals spots is commendable.

However I think you would find that the majority of Pro teams (especially the Euro teams) would encourage at least 10 semi spots.

It is surely in the interests of all the promoters of the millenium events to promote a more competitive environment, increase the profile of the European pro scene and as a direct result the euro scene as a whole, and most importantly keep the customers happy.


I could be talking b0llox but it makes sense to me

 

[Beaker]

Robbo,

While I agree with your points on having more games with US teams is how we'll improve I am going to disagree on the accomodating thing.

There has to be a line somewhere, and sometime there will be things that work for and against certain interests. Unles a rule is watertight and transparent in meaning then it shouldn't go in the rule book (or be made up half way through a tournament ).

and as for Portugal I am going to stick my neck out and say I think only 5 or possibly 6 of the US teams will qualify. Not least because with the new system there are likely to have to play each other a fair bit so a couple of bad results will put them out. It is also likely some Euro teams may get schedules with only 1 or 2 of the "easier" US teams.

Look at Max - Trauma walked it and failed the Finals cut, Bushwackers didn't even make it.

While I dont doubt the average dominance of US teams, I also think other aspects of the draw will mean Euro teams will get through.

BTW - as I still haven't managed to get through to you I think i will just speak to you in Portugal - much easier!