| Author |
Message |
longfang |
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 06:32 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 12, 2003
Posts: 189
Status: Offline
|
|
Could those existing team events provide room for an increase in player numbers.
I think there is no harm in trying to get this up and running. To hell with the Eurobowl, it's not "open", it shouldn't even be considered in this. This is about providing an open international team event. If it only attracts 50 players so what! This should be tried and backed by the NAF.
@ Grum. Good post, good thinking. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 06:43 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
generaljason wrote: I'd love nothing more to see a World Cup over on this continent if it could attract 200+ coaches. If it could get into the 200s like the first World Cup 2007 then I'd consider it a success and could justify the move. We are never going to match the 480 coaches that Amsterdam got and I doubt few will no matter where it's held in future. Four words: no hookers, no pot. But 200s would be good enough. I could even live with high Blood Bowl aka NAF Championship coaching count, like 170-80s, but anything less than that and it just seems like charity to me as oppose to awarding the bid that can bring in the most participants. And I agree it's not the only consideration but it's a big one.
A bit off topic... but presumably you'd get a lot more North Americans than a European tournament would - 100 at least? There would be 4-5 Aussie teams, so you'd only need about 10 European teams to come over (from the 75 at the last one) to make 200.
generaljason wrote: Btw I have no problems with Ausbowl or EuroBowl, but they're singles competitions right?
Nope, they are both team competitions. EuroBowl is representative (1 team per country), and AusBowl alternates between Open & Representative. |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 06:45 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
Darkson wrote: Just a quick question - if there's already Rugbowl, Dream Team and Lutece as Team tournaments, why not try to promote one (or more) of them as an international event, rather than starting a new one? Surely it's easier to build when the foundation are already there?
Agreed. Every 4 years one of the major regular team tournaments gets to be the NAF European Team Open or whatever, and gets its regular attendance plus a few more international travellers.
Maybe even make it qualifying criteria for the NETO to have been previously run. |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Pako |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 06:53 AM
|
|
Joined: Jul 15, 2005
Spain
Posts: 471
Location: Spain
Status: Offline
|
|
longfang wrote: Could those existing team events provide room for an increase in player numbers.
Sure but it will not be possible in all the cases IMO.
But I also like the idea. Even if the tournament organizers should search an alternative venue, they will have the experience.
Darkson wrote: Just a quick question - if there's already Rugbowl, Dream Team and Lutece as Team tournaments, why not try to promote one (or more) of them as an international event, rather than starting a new one? Surely it's easier to build when the foundation are already there?
But does it means we should restrict bids to only the existing team tournaments, or whoever would run the European Open could bid for?
I guess is the fair way. Dream Team organizers for example (who are good friends of mine - yes, I have some of them  ) don't want to modify their tourney when we propose it as the spanish major... don't know about to change it even more to became European Open.
Another example is Rugbowl. This is an open air event, I don't know if they could sustain more than 120 players in the country. Or even if they want to change this excellent open air venue to a closeed one in order to accommodate the European Open.
My personal opinion is if there is any running tournament that would host the European Open it will be welcome, but if someone else wants to bid with a new project, should be also allowed to. Isn't it? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Joemanji |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 07:03 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 13, 2003
England
Posts: 298
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
Pako wrote: ... when we propose it as the spanish major... What Spanish major? |
_________________
*This post may have been made without the use of a hat.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Pako |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 07:06 AM
|
|
Joined: Jul 15, 2005
Spain
Posts: 471
Location: Spain
Status: Offline
|
|
Joemanji wrote: Pako wrote: ... when we propose it as the spanish major... What Spanish major?
WHEN there was a chat considering that majors number could be increased, Dream Teams Cup was pointed out as the most important spanish tournament. So then, a good candidate if finally the idea progress.
I know you feel there are enough majors now. Probably I agree with you if I already have one close to my home.
Sorry for the misunderstanding. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
txapo |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 08:09 AM
|
|
Joined: Mar 05, 2010
Undisclosed
Posts: 24
Location: Undisclosed
Status: Offline
|
|
Doubleskulls wrote:
Furthermore having the European Open in July/August may actually help inter continental travellers combine the tournament with their holidays.
Or eastern time could be good too at least only a short holiday needed! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 09:24 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
| Easter I discarded because its too close to NAFC. |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Deathwing |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 10:44 AM
|
|
Former President
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
England
Posts: 1289
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
Pako wrote:
I know you feel there are enough majors now. Probably I agree with you if I already have one close to my home.
Don't want to sidetrack this discussion, but the vast majority of us European coaches are closer to our TWO European majors than many Aus or US coaches are to their ONE. We are very lucky in comparison with both the density of players and the sheer number and variety of tournaments to choose from. |
_________________
 Ex-UK NTO,ex- Senior Tourney Co-Ordinator, ex-VP and ex-President....because Lycos says that new members don't know who I was..
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Wightlord |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 12:17 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 15, 2003
Posts: 33
Status: Offline
|
|
Ironjaw wrote: Wightlord, today's your lucky day.
Dances around the room singing " I feel Pretty"   |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Pipey |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 02:42 PM
|
|
Joined: Jun 02, 2004
England
Posts: 326
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
A few thoughts…
The NAF does hold certain tournaments as ‘special’: the majors and NAFWC definitely fall into this category.
In a slightly different way, Eurobowl fits in here too. It is part of the four-year cycle of grand-scale team events i.e. it steps aside when the NAFWC is held.
Eurobowl also has a long history as the first ever Blood bowl team event of any kind, the first to see nations compete against one another. And it continues to be one of the bigger tournaments in Europe: in France in 2010, 126 coaches attended Eurobowl + EurOpen together.
I believe the NAF should seek to support fantastic celebrations of the hobby like Eurobowl.
However I do acknowledge that in the past it has not fully upheld the spirit of inclusivity that the NAF represents. France took big steps to make it more inclusive (EurOpen), Denmark seem to be carrying on the good work from conversations I have had with Topper. They will also include a large open tournament, and have been in discussion with me about fulfilling the approval criteria in the new Tournament Approval Document regarding ‘selection events’ (i.e. that there needs to be a ‘democratic’ element to team selection within each community)
(As discussed elsewhere, the Eurobowl organisers / captains / players are not forced to comply. However if they don’t, the event cannot be NAF supported or NAF ranked. Document available here [see pre-tournament requirements, point 4]: http://thenaf.net/downloads/NAF_Tournament_Approval_Document_update_Dec_2011.doc)
So how does this relate to the NAF Euro Cup concept? Well in light of this aim to support Eurobowl as a de facto European Team Tournament, I would agree that there this a genuine question to be asked: “do we need this extra tournament?†I agree saturation of the calendar with big events could be a factor.
Reading this debate I note there is somewhat of a split between some existing ‘Eurobowlers’ and other ‘non-Eurobowlers’ (who may even have had a bad experience of the Eurobowl system).
That’s understandable if some feel they’re frozen out of the Eurobowl experience. I would like to change that though. I would like everyone within each national community to be able to have their say on how the team is chosen to represent their nation at Eurobowl.
I wonder whether it is a coincidence that this tournament concept emanates from Spain, where the selection of the national team at Eurobowl has been ‘closed’ i.e. the same team year-on-year. (This is how it appears from the outside; though I fully admit I am not in possession of all of the facts.) It’s perhaps no surprise that such a large and vibrant Blood bowl community has made this move for a more regular piece of the team tournament action.
Maybe also it’s no coincidence that other large BB-playing nations where Eurobowl teams are selected with wider community participation (e.g. France, UK, Germany) have not felt the need for another European team event.
Also I believe the NAF committee should lead in terms in decision making on issues like this, where ‘special’ large-scale tournaments are concerned, indeed thank you Pako for coming to me with the idea to request support. Thanks everyone for the input on here, this is a really important debate. The committee do need to discuss this in much greater detail to decide what direction to take.
Keep the comments coming! |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Grumbledook |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 27, 2012 - 07:48 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
Posts: 922
Status: Offline
|
|
Darkson wrote: Grumbledook wrote: I also don't see an argument against it having a slight bump in K value either.
I am. Why bump this when other worthies aren't (the WC for instance)?
TBH I was surprised the WC wasn't double K value, no reason that couldn't be bumped up as well. That isn't an argument why increasing the K value to try and get some more tournaments that get a greater mix of international coaches together shouldn't be done.
I can totally see space in the tournament calender for a roving 1.5k event personally. What are the downsides? What are the upsides? I've outlined the benefits I see behind the idea and so far the only downside is that it might detract from the Eurobowl, though that won't be known unless it actually takes place.
Seeing how many teams france and spain wanted to send to the WC even getting a more democratic method for picking Eurobowl teams still leaves a LOT of coaches who aren't likely to attend for a long time. 6 players on 15 teams is 90 coaches, it would take 12 Eurobowls for at least all of those players to play assuming you take a totally new team every time. And that isn't even counting the coaches that didn't apply to the WC for logistical reasons who may also consider the Eurobowl.
An open event of smaller teams may also attract more coaches from the smaller European nations who have trouble getting a Eurobowl team together. It will be easier for them to build a smaller team up and experience a large mixed nationality event which can fuel their local community more, as it has done in the more traditional larger BB nations.
Darkson wrote: Just a quick question - if there's already Rugbowl, Dream Team and Lutece as Team tournaments, why not try to promote one (or more) of them as an international event, rather than starting a new one? Surely it's easier to build when the foundation are already there?
This has been suggested quite a few times already and it's what I'd expect as the source of a lot of bids if that was the way this went forward.
Regarding only a few people posting in this thread so far, perhaps it would help if the national NTOs posted a link to it in their respective localised forums to get a wider view? I think more people haven't posted cause they don't know this thread is here rather than lack of interest in the idea. |
_________________
'Boomshanker an Interception'
Jon
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Doubleskulls |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 28, 2012 - 04:16 AM
|
|
Ex-Rulz Committee
Joined: Mar 05, 2003
Undisclosed
Posts: 2627
Location: Kent, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
| I think the whole reason for different K values has been forgotten. It isn't to reward some tournaments for being more important than others, its to artificially "average" out the K value that people on different continents were playing for so that Europeans didn't dominate the rankings quite as much. The landscape has change a lot since then (8~9 years ago) so its worth revisiting, but if the rationale is the same then there is an argument for reducing the European majors even further as the rankings are dominated by Europeans (about 10% of the top 50 are non-European, where it should be more like 20%). |
_________________
Ian 'Double Skulls' Williams
SLOBB
NAF Racial Results
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Volstagg |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 28, 2012 - 09:44 AM
|
|
Joined: Jul 23, 2005
Switzerland
Posts: 50
Location: Switzerland
Status: Offline
|
|
What about equal K value for ALL tournaments? Wouldn't that be easier than increasing the number of Majors or turning some tournaments into Major Tournaments?
Isn't the extra K value the last thing you think about, when you are considering to attend a Tourney? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Deathwing |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 28, 2012 - 12:57 PM
|
|
Former President
Joined: Feb 10, 2003
England
Posts: 1289
Location: England
Status: Offline
|
|
Grumbledook wrote:
Regarding only a few people posting in this thread so far, perhaps it would help if the national NTOs posted a link to it in their respective localised forums to get a wider view? I think more people haven't posted cause they don't know this thread is here rather than lack of interest in the idea.
Pippy's already on it Jon. I'm sure he won't mind me sharing this from the RTOs section (posted 4 days ago):
Pippy wrote: Hi everyone
Pako has proposed a new team tournament in Europe, similar to the North American Team Championship (which is being discussed on the North American boards).
Pako's thread:
http://www.thenaf.net/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=5485&sid=0842f2f0517d69bf20313b587c22d536
The aim is for this to be a 'European' event so it would be good to have a wide debate about what people want, involving a wide range of countires.
RTOs - could you bring the above thread to the attention of your communities via national forums etc.?
Thanks
Brendan |
_________________
Ex-UK NTO,ex- Senior Tourney Co-Ordinator, ex-VP and ex-President....because Lycos says that new members don't know who I was..
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
