War is Good? PSP vs. NPPL

[Chicago]

Com'on Baca. You can't require that I have some data showing a correlation between number of tournament players and players any more than I can require that you have some data showing number of players does not change unless improvements are made.

It especially doesn't make sense since there being a ratio between the number of tournament players and the number of total players isn't my important point, especially since I don't think there's a fixed ratio, most likely the number of tournament players increases faster than the number of players in general because of basic network growth - the more tournament players there are, the easier it is for people to play tournaments.

What I am saying is that there is a very direct correlation between the number of tournament players at the local level and the number of tournament players at the national level.

We know that tournament participation at the local level is also up dramatically. We know there have been few changes in local level tournaments. If you were right, and most of the growth at the national level was due to changes, then we wouldn't expect to see much growth at the local level. That's obviously not the case; since growth at the local level is occuring without changes, it's a pretty good bet that growth at the national level would also have occured without changes.

Your saying the changes caused the growth, I'm saying the growth made the changes possible. If there had been no growth, two leagues would not havebeen sustainable, one wouldhave died, and we would have lost the benefit of having two leagues making changes to compete against each other.

 

[Baca Loco]

Originally posted by Chicago
1--Com'on Baca. You can't require that I have some data showing a correlation between number of tournament players and players any more than I can require that you have some data showing number of players does not change unless improvements are made.

2--It especially doesn't make sense since there being a ratio between the number of tournament players and the number of total players isn't my important point, especially since I don't think there's a fixed ratio, most likely the number of tournament players increases faster than the number of players in general because of basic network growth - the more tournament players there are, the easier it is for people to play tournaments.

3--What I am saying is that there is a very direct correlation between the number of tournament players at the local level and the number of tournament players at the national level.

4--We know that tournament participation at the local level is also up dramatically. We know there have been few changes in local level tournaments. If you were right, and most of the growth at the national level was due to changes, then we wouldn't expect to see much growth at the local level. That's obviously not the case; since growth at the local level is occuring without changes, it's a pretty good bet that growth at the national level would also have occured without changes.

5--Your saying the changes caused the growth, I'm saying the growth made the changes possible. If there had been no growth, two leagues would not havebeen sustainable, one wouldhave died, and we would have lost the benefit of having two leagues making changes to compete against each other.

1--actually Chitown, good buddy, I'm suggesting your be all, end all correlative is too simplistic for my taste and I've been trying to push you away from it. Unsuccessfully. Even so, I agreed last time with your basic tenet. I'm just not convinced it's the overriding factor you think it is.
2--well, to be fair, you didn't actually say that before and while I may be many things I am not The Amazing Kreskin.
3--can't disagree with that but again, you didn't really say that before if that's what you meant, you short-handed it.
4--Okay, first, I'm not intentionally advocating a particular point of view, I've simply been putting things up in opposition to your, "It's the numbers, stupid" position. Be that as it may I don't think you can really say the local tourney scene(s) have remained the same. Of course, defining local tourney scene might have some merit. If you mean the odd one-off promoted by a local field owner for Rookies in his area then the changes aren't all that substantial excepting it's likely on an airball field now with more or less flat grass and odds are the prizes are better, the paint is cheaper, 4500 lb air fills and some effort will be made to assure the bulk of the players really are Rookies. If by local we include series either held in single locations or state based the same differences apply and you can throw in the trickle down effect from the national events; demands for better officiating and regulation of player categories and so on.
5--chicken and the egg--maybe so. Either way, apparently only you and I find it an interesting topic.
It will also be interesting to see how the Euroland experiment shakes out as conventional pball wisdom says Euro pball is more static and certainly hasn't shown the wild growth we have stateside. Yet, the MS is instituting, or promising to institute, wholesale changes in organization and offering apparently out of concern about future competition over a more finite player base. Will those changes gain more players or build a loyal base that can withstand the incursion of a second league? Will the changes see more teams begin to play? If you build it will they come? Should a second league vie for the Europlayer's cash we should have a front row seat and maybe a few more answers.

 

[Liz]

Originally posted by Baca Loco
It will also be interesting to see how the Euroland experiment shakes out as conventional pball wisdom says Euro pball is more static and certainly hasn't shown the wild growth we have stateside. Yet, the MS is instituting, or promising to institute, wholesale changes in organization and offering apparently out of concern about future competition over a more finite player base. Will those changes gain more players or build a loyal base that can withstand the incursion of a second league? Will the changes see more teams begin to play? If you build it will they come? Should a second league vie for the Europlayer's cash we should have a front row seat and maybe a few more answers.

I get the impression that many teams have got to the stage of believing it when they see it when it comes to the MS "big" changes. I also get the feeling that most will just sit back & see what's on offer before they decide which international series to play in coming years.
Ballers are fickle creatures and are always looking for the greener grass on the other side of the fence, loyalty rarely comes in to it. They will most probably try both & see which they think gives the best value for money, or works out cheaper for them (same thing to many players). The only "loyalty" I can see influencing them to play one seriers over another will be loyalty to or by their sponsors, those who are lucky and/or talented enough to have them.

 

[Intheno]

I think you are both a little off.

The amount of new teams in Div 2 and 3 in the NPPL indicates that new teams are entering the NPPL due to the promotion of the league. I think the DVD's, the TV shows and Chicago's favorite PR machine are driving teams to want to enter an NPPL event when itcomes to town. This is born out by the entries, as that is where the growth is (the growth from 165 teams to 220+ teams trying to get into each event.
I am not relying on speculation and conjecture here, just where the teams are entering from.

All the rest of what you are both saying seems valid, but remember paintball growth is down this year. The first quarter for the entry level specialists was not good and Brass Eagle actually experienced a decline for the first time since they broke the Wallmart deal. However the top level competition is up. Chicago's example of the amount of teams entering X-ball in Chicago is not a good example though. The teams entered this event because Chicago is chocka full of paintball players who only see one major per year. Of course they enter it, its thier World Cup, and Rennick does a great job of driving teams there. If the event was on the west coast it wouldn't have half the teams entered, making that example of growth an unrepresentative snap-shot in my opinion.

 

[Intheno]

Liz, you will see a decentseries this yearbecause you have the US companies looking for a foothold and they will no doubt flex thier promotional muscles to acheive this. Once they realise that Europe is not the pot of gold they thought it was things will change again though, so be ready for a purple patch., followed by a return to the old ways. Thats my prediction. There simply is not enough money in Euro-ball to sustain a top level series that will run and run while continually improving. Its a lot of work, and if you work really hard for something that does not earn you money you soon decide to call it a day.
The yanks buy more guns, and more often. The Brits in particular tend to use thier equipment for longer and be a little more 'thrifty' than the standard US customer.

I hope the MS works out, or the Euro-ballers are going to go back to the dark ages, but I don't see wherethe money is coming from....

 

[Chicago]

Why is attendence at Chicago a bad example? (Did I even make that example?)

Attendence at Chicago this year is going to be greater than attendence at Chicago last year. Saying there wouldn't be that many teams if it were out west is ... well, pointless, since Chicago is always much better attended than LA.

But HB this year was bigger than HB last year and sold out faster - so you'd have to assume growth is holding there as well.

 

[Intheno]

My point is that its not growth as in general growth in paintball. Its popularity. The upper leagues are becoming more appealing to the teams in the regional leagues. The glitz and glamour is drawing them in.
The 'expansion' of paintball in general has little if nothing to do with it.
As for HB, of course it was bigger, its the mecca, it could go 300+ teams next year, woudl that mean that all the other events would go to that too, no, its a regional thing, combined with the inevitable draw of HB, which every team and thier mother wants to play.
Of course I could be missing your point, but I couldn't be bothered to read through all the posts...

 

[Chicago]

But it's not just happening at the national level. I just don't know how you can say that local level tournaments have not experienced just as much, if not more, growth than thenational level has.

Where are these national level players coming from? They're not just waking up one day and saying "Hey, let's go play NPPL."

 

[Nick Brockdorff]

In Denmark.....

....we have experienced a growth of 200% the past year.

I'm talking tournament players at the local level here.... most of whom were not playing paintball at all - even rental - 1 year ago.

I get pretty much the same picture whoever I talk to in Europe (well not 200% - but GROWTH)... with the UK being a notable exception (although I may have been misinformed).

One thing we have been very successfull with the past year in Denmark, has been converting a huge number of hardball players to paintball.... and not least Reball has been extremely effective there.

Also, because of Reball (which is BIG in Scandinavia).... players are now able to practice 2-3-4 times a week, and do it on the same budget they spent playing "real paintball" once or twice per month yesteryear.

The fundamental differences between Europe and the big markets in the US (such as California and Florida), has always been two things: Price of paint and weather.

Now, all of a sudden, European kids are able to walk into indoor arenas any day of the year, and play paintball (well - Reball)... at a cost that is extremely low.

I believe that little yellow rubber ball is going to create an immense growth in paintball all by itself, because suddenly paintball doesn't look as expensive to kids looking for a sport they can do several times a week.

I do not know how many fields offer paintball in markets outside Scandinavia..... but I think the rest of Europe is yet to experience the same close population of Reball fields as we have over here.... everyone is opening a Reball field these days, because it's the only way to keep their punters.

Once that growth starts to manifest elsewhere in Europe, things will start moving as fast there, as in Scandinavia.

Mark my words.... 2-3 years from now, Europe will be populated with a lot of kids teams, that play as hard and fast as their US counterparts... because at last they get to play as much.

Nick

 

[Magued]

Nick.

Trust me, English ballers are slow!

I tried to get some buzz going about Reballs in England but I dont know what it is they wont get it. Even when you try to get them to talk about it the only thing you get back is "what does the home office say?" lol.

The only guys that think its a good idea in England (or who I heard talk about it) is Nexus, Tigers, shockwave and the Kelly guys. Im starting to belive that England doesnt have any players, just posers..
Nick, England have 1 shop that sells reballs!!! Thats 6 less than Norway!

I guess they will find out later

Magued