Archive Boards > APAT UK & European Team Championships
APAT UK Team Championship - January 2010
karrde:
Teams of 5 just wouldnt be a good representation of team. I suppose a compromise of 8 players per team would be slightly better... but my support is 100% behind teams of 10 players.
Would be good to get some kind of word on who is going to be accepted though. I would make a case for the top 5 teams from last time to get an automatic spot, then the rest to be worked out.
Marty719:
--- Quote from: karrde on November 02, 2009, 12:16:43 PM ---
Teams of 5 just wouldnt be a good representation of team. I suppose a compromise of 8 players per team would be slightly better... but my support is 100% behind teams of 10 players.
Would be good to get some kind of word on who is going to be accepted though. I would make a case for the top 5 teams from last time to get an automatic spot, then the rest to be worked out.
--- End quote ---
Im assuming u were a top 5 team?! :)
Chipaccrual:
--- Quote from: Marty719 on November 02, 2009, 12:25:35 PM ---
--- Quote from: karrde on November 02, 2009, 12:16:43 PM ---
Teams of 5 just wouldnt be a good representation of team. I suppose a compromise of 8 players per team would be slightly better... but my support is 100% behind teams of 10 players.
Would be good to get some kind of word on who is going to be accepted though. I would make a case for the top 5 teams from last time to get an automatic spot, then the rest to be worked out.
--- End quote ---
Im assuming u were a top 5 team?! :)
--- End quote ---
Top 3 team, so I don"t think the cut-off was a purely selfish one. ;)
karrde:
Lol, no it was a fair cutoff. Obviously when there is so much interest there has to be some reward for doing well. To be honest though I suspect that doesnt need to be said.
My main point would be to argue against 5 man teams. That wouldnt decide a "best team" accurately. 20 teams of 8 would be a decent compromise I suppose.
Paulie_D:
--- Quote from: Baldus New on November 02, 2009, 09:10:40 AM ---
If the venue can only accomodate 160 players why not consider reducing the players per team to up the number of teams and create a larger team / forum competition?
If this is the APAT Team Championship, surely it is worth considering having as many teams as possible represented?
--- End quote ---
I can see the logic in remaining in teams of 10, it"s just that I think that by doing so (given the venue size), it"s limiting the involvement of the numerous forums (fora?) that wish to take part. The number of players in the team is not necessarily representative of the number of forum members. Some forums have only a couple of dozen members, mine has nearly 1500. Are the 10 players in either team going to be a truly "representative" sample...I think not.
In fact it"s only 14 teams getting an opportunity as B&SWM and APAT get an automatic entry. I"m not begrudging either team automatic entry but now the number of possible slots gets even smaller. Then we get into the matter of who gets to say that one forum is more "worthy" of being selected than any other? Well, APAT of course, it"s their tournament after all...but what criteria are involved?
So, (IMHO) I think the APAT ethos would dictate getting as many forums as possible involved as can be achieved within the bounds of reasonableness...whether it"s 32 teams of 5 players or 20/8, 16/10 or whatever.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version