How to implement Active Travels at College Nationals
Reggie Fanelli
night before nationals begins and you tell them...
'folks, we're gonna call every travel we see out there'
then, the next day, when nationals starts...the observers start
calling travels.
the observer leader walks around and critiques and talks and
discusses....instructs and gathers data.
at the end of the day, all the observers meet under the tent and talk
about it.....
the next day everyone gets better.
by the elimination brackets....the lead observer would be putting the
folks that he saw doing the best job in the best games.....the rest
would be religated to consolation brackets.
then...i'd be in the finals with whoever i pick.
that's how it can go.
Colin
Yeah, that's stupid. Without a greater adjustment period for the
players before the tournament. Springing a strict standard on players
at Nationals only increases the chance of ruining their Nationals
experience with no extra benefit.
Call every movement of the pivot of more than 2" (this gives an
objective standard for the anti-ref folks) and call every failure to
ground tap when the thrower uses it to throw with momentum or uses it
to surprise the marker.
Or better yet, be responsible about it and don't turn 2010 Nationals
into a last-minute experiment.
Reggie Fanelli
> players before the tournament.
---there doesn't seem to be a problem with the teams that come to the
UOA 8s....and some of the players don't even know that there will be
observers calling travels until they arrive at the fields.
and these teams, except a few, aren't even Nationals teams.
Certainly teams that advance to Nationals will be able to adjust to
active travel calls without any problems.....surely.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Springing a strict standard on players
> at Nationals only increases the chance of ruining their Nationals
> experience with no extra benefit.
---some individuals show up at the UOA 8s and get 'active travel
calls' sprung apon them.
no one has yet to complain or to express any sort of displeasure with
their experience here.
so...i don't know where you get your evidence...because ours is
showing that travels being called by the observers makes the games
better.....
our evidence points to people wanting more of their games called the
UOA way....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Call every movement of the pivot of more than 2" (this gives an
> objective standard for the anti-ref folks) and call every failure to
> ground tap when the thrower uses it to throw with momentum or uses it
> to surprise the marker.
----i'm not going to assign a 2 inch distance of travel.
i'd say...when you see a travel, call it.
i bet that would work fine....and i only know that...because the
evidence points that way.
probably won't call any ground tap violations....unless the thrower
initiates the throwing motion prior to establishing a pivot
foot.....because that's how we're gonna play.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Or better yet, be responsible about it and don't turn 2010 Nationals
> into a last-minute experiment.-
---oh.....on the contrary....we should fully encourage the teams to
vote on and accept active stall and travel and up/down calls....and
more.
-TO-
at Nationals only increases the chance of ruining their Nationals
experience"
first off....having to the follow rules would not be sprung on any one
at nationals. Traveling is against the rules with or with out
observers..at any tournament.
second off..if having travels called on a player is gunna ruin their
nationals experience, then they are gunna be super duper dissapointed.
because i would almost guarantee a game W/O observers has more travel
calls than a game with observers.
not to mention..at nationals there is more to lose, creating more of a
reason for players to use these calls to their advantage. all the more
reason a NON BIASED party should be calling violations.
Jarrett
Colin
> "Springing a strict standard on players
> at Nationals only increases the chance of ruining their Nationals
> experience"
>
> first off....having to the follow rules would not be sprung on any one
> at nationals. Traveling is against the rules with or with out
> observers..at any tournament.
First off, following the rules includes choosing when to call
infractions that you see and choosing not to call things if you feel
like not calling things. As a defender, having active travels takes
away my right to not call things. Do you really call every infraction
that you see? I don't. Because I have a complete understanding of
the rules and how they work.
> second off..if having travels called on a player is gunna ruin their
> nationals experience, then they are gunna be super duper dissapointed.
> because i would almost guarantee a game W/O observers has more travel
> calls than a game with observers.
So....how does this have to do with whether or not active travels are
used for all those games at Nationals that are going to have
observers? Where does unobserved ultimate come into this discussion?
> not to mention..at nationals there is more to lose, creating more of a
> reason for players to use these calls to their advantage. all the more
> reason a NON BIASED party should be calling violations.
Jarrett, those aren't new arguments. But they aren't arguments unique
to active travel calls. They are arguments that apply generally to
efforts to address player misconduct (i.e. making bad travel calls).
I am under the impression that the primary reason most players would
support active travels is to prevent opponents from cheating. There
are many ways of doing that. Active travels is one.
Let's say that I am a player that knows all the rules perfectly and
follows them very carefully. I have fully fulfilled my
responsibilities under the rules. Now I'm at Nationals and I have to
play a game against a team with a few players who travel every time
they get the disc (you've seen these people before). Now play stops
every time these guys travel. All I want to do is not call those
travels and play the game. But there's a guy in orange calling every
single one and there's nothing I can do about it. What have I done to
deserve this?
-Colin
Colin
> and these teams, except a few, aren't even Nationals teams.
. . .
> no one has yet to complain or to express any sort of displeasure with
> their experience here.
So you're having lots of teams that don't go to Nationals. Are these
teams familiar with observed Ultimate? Have they played ultimate
under observers before? Often?
Are they truly thinking that everything the UOA is doing is the best
option? Or are they simply happy to have observers rather than
playing unobserved games?
Do your surveys collect information on this?
-TO-
infractions that you see and choosing not to call things if you feel
like not calling things."
that you see? I don't. Because I have a complete understanding of
the rules and how they work. "
well if ur talkin about followin the rules...u should call every
travel. show me where in the rules it says a little travel isnt a
travel. choosing which violations to call is following the rules? if a
player is traveling and your not calling it..does that mean he isnt
traveling?
avoid the confusion and let an observer call the travel..
"Let's say that I am a player that knows all the rules perfectly and
follows them very carefully. I have fully fulfilled my
responsibilities under the rules. Now I'm at Nationals and I have to
play a game against a team with a few players who travel every time
they get the disc (you've seen these people before). Now play stops
every time these guys travel. All I want to do is not call those
travels and play the game. But there's a guy in orange calling every
single one and there's nothing I can do about it. What have I done
to
deserve this? "
you dont follow the rules carefully if you dont call travel on someone
who is travelling.
and what does said player gain by not calling travel? why would you
allow someone to travel? unless they are traveling backwards...
Jarrett
Colin
"u" have got to be kidding me. See comment above about having a
complete understanding of the rules and how they work. End of
discussion.
-Colin
Heinousboy
> play a game against a team with a few players who travel every time
> they get the disc (you've seen these people before). Now play stops
> every time these guys travel. All I want to do is not call those
> travels and play the game. But there's a guy in orange calling every
> single one and there's nothing I can do about it. What have I done to
> deserve this?
>
> -Colin
I'm at nationals and I'm trying to win every game. If there's some
guy on the other team that travels every time he throws I should call
every travel because that's going to help me win. Every time he gets
the disc his whole team's flow stops and he has to throw 2-foot dump
passes to get rid of the disc. I'd especially want an observer making
the call because the traveler would know it's a legit call and I don't
have to keep looking at his pivot foot all the time. Plus I won't get
in a stare down/fist fight/shit-talking feud for calling him on his
poor play. If he can't throw without traveling his team he's on needs
to stop throwing to him.
Colin
What about when you're down 3 to 8 with ten minutes left until the
hard cap? Is stopping play every time he gets the disc going to help
you win?
But this may be a difference. I go to Nationals at least in part to
play Ultimate. I would be very dissatisfied with my Nationals
experience if all of the other teams forfeited each game and I won the
championship without playing. That would be way worse than playing it
out and finishing 9th again.
As a result, my focus is on improving the playability of the game.
Not enforcing a strict rules interpretation that is based on a half-
understanding of the rules and how the game works.
But you've never actually been interested in analyzing any issues, so
you've cast your vote, I've refuted it and I'll leave it at that.
ulticritic
>
> Yeah, that's stupid. Without a greater adjustment period for the
> players before the tournament.
but isnt THAT exactly what the upa did last year.........with FAR LESS
experimentation OR suffecient experience for both players AND
observers????? AND IT ALMOST PASSED, DIDNT IT? so i say run the same
vote as last year only ALSO TABLE, observer stall(w/observer restart
WITH WISTLE) and IRS on ALL calls.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Springing a strict standard on players
> at Nationals only increases the chance of ruining their Nationals
> experience with no extra benefit.
but if they vote for it how is it ruining anything(for them)?. stop
trying to protect the kids when they dont want your protectioin. Its
clear to see that you are being overtly cautious and want to preserve
the "player control" aspect that sotg provides. YOU AINT KIDDIN NO
ONE!!!!!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Call every movement of the pivot of more than 2"
that sounds good......i mean, what ever the present standard that the
player refs are currently using would be fine imo. do those player
refs ever have pre game meetings to discuss what both does and does
not constitute a travel? didnt think so.......so why should observers
have to. JUst calls it likes you sees it, right? and remember GOOD
JUDGEMENT IS one of the three major components of being a good ref.
proper field mechanics and knowledge of the rules being the other two.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
(this gives an
> objective standard for the anti-ref folks) and call every failure to
> ground tap when the thrower uses it to throw with momentum or uses it
> to surprise the marker.
thats a whole different issue(violation) though that shouldnt be
conflated with the concept of what a "travel" actually is though.
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> Or better yet, be responsible about it and don't turn 2010 Nationals
> into a last-minute experiment.
why, its just another tourny really!!!!!! i mean, they'll be plenty
of others AND if the upa dosent want to turn nationals into a last
minute experiment then why would they table the options for the
players at that point in time (like they did last year)? shouldnt
they be tableing AND VOTING ON rule tweeks prior to the new college
season even starting? THIS IS THEIR BLUNDER ISNT IT?
Personally though, i just enjoy seeing you spirit zealots squirm. I
mean, its obvious that the whole "player control" aspect that is at
the core of sotg is drastically eroding. Me thinks the upa may have
shot itself in the foot by establishing a precedence in which teams
voted for new rule(enforcement) changes the night before the nationals
event. And its probably pretty obvious to most "progressive types"
that the upa is now in the position where they must face the
likleyhood that calls that ARENT PLAYER CONTROLED will get voted on to
be used in this years nationals.
SO THE QUESTION IS.......will they even facilitate the kids with the
option to even vote this year.......or will they just use their
dictorial role to thwart said progression in an attempt to preserve
their sacred sotg (and player control). either way, this will be
interesting to watch unfold..........as the wedge drives further and
deeper through the sport of ultimate and its participants.
ulticritic
> so...i don't know where you get your evidence..
i think he gets it at the corner of pussy street and wuss
avenue........which, i think, is the same location of upa
headquarters.
ulticritic
> second off..if having travels called on a player is gunna ruin their
> nationals experience, then they are gunna be super duper dissapointed.
> because i would almost guarantee a game W/O observers has more travel
> calls than a game with observers.
WORD FUCKIN UP. I mean, donesnt the thought of a subjective and
partially motivated opponent makeing a sketchy call durring crunch
time of an important game leave a MUCH WORSE taste in ones mouth than
an impartial and objective observer making that same call????
-----------------------------------------------------------------
> not to mention..at nationals there is more to lose, creating more of a
> reason for players to use these calls to their advantage.
WORD FUCKIN UP AGAIN........how does the obvious elude spirit zealots
so???? i guess its just that thing they call "desperation". I mean,
how can spirit zealots NOT BE desperate when their precious "player
control" is slipping away right before their eyes?
--------------------------------------------------------
all the more
> reason a NON BIASED party should be calling violations.
me thinks that colin thinks one should have to receive some kind of 8
year degree in observeing ultimate prior to being allowed such emmense
responsibility and "control". he's just making it out to be alot more
dificult and complicated than it is.......BUT, we must take ito
consideration colins agenda here. HIS IS TO PRESERVE SOTG.
Its like that twilite zone episode where the star trek gang stubles
into the twilight zone.......it was called "_________ ________(the
name of a woman) MUST DIE". Only in this case its SOTG that MUST DIE.
ulticritic
Do you really call every infraction
> that you see? I don't. Because I have a complete understanding of
> the rules and how they work.
please refresh my memory...........is this how its done in all other
sports????? THEN FUCK YES. players play and officials
officiate!!!!! thats how sports competition, at any "official" level
work. GET WITH THE PROGRAM YOU CLOWN!!!!!
>
> > second off..if having travels called on a player is gunna ruin their
> > nationals experience, then they are gunna be super duper dissapointed.
super duper???? seriously colin??? is this really how you talk?
---------------------------------------------------------------
> > because i would almost guarantee a game W/O observers has more travel
> > calls than a game with observers.
thats ballsy of you to guarntee somthing that is so speculative. but
why speculate when that data is completely retreavable........so hop
to it and report back with real evidence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Jarrett, those aren't new arguments. But they aren't arguments unique
> to active travel calls. They are arguments that apply generally to
> efforts to address player misconduct (i.e. making bad travel calls).
> I am under the impression that the primary reason most players would
> support active travels is to prevent opponents from cheating. There
> are many ways of doing that. Active travels is one.
AND THE MOST LOGICAL AND SANE........just look at all the other sports
that use that same approach. souldnt that dynamic(other sports) count
for somthing?
----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Let's say that I am a player that knows all the rules perfectly and
> follows them very carefully. I have fully fulfilled my
> responsibilities under the rules. Now I'm at Nationals and I have to
> play a game against a team with a few players who travel every time
> they get the disc (you've seen these people before). Now play stops
> every time these guys travel. All I want to do is not call those
> travels and play the game.
then why not incorporate a harsher penalty so to provide suffecient
enough incesntive for them NOT TO travel(like maybe a turnover). isnt
that the most logical solution.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But there's a guy in orange calling every
> single one and there's nothing I can do about it. What have I done to
> deserve this?
you decided to participate in a thing called a sport.......thats what
ya did!!!!! Kinda like when you take up driving you often have to
deal with trafic slowing down while some cop is writing up a violator
of the traffic rules. It just comes with the territiory. Think of
the stoppages that would occur if drivers settled their own disputes
in the way players in ultimate do though.......youde have MANY MORE
traffic delays. some might be as entertaining as the two black chicks
i saw duking it out yesterday at the intersection of kerr and
whrightsville. Some do-gooders had to spoil it and break it up
though. fuck if i;m gettin out in the middle of traffic (in the rain)
and gettin in the middle of two balck chicks scrappin.
ulticritic
>
> As a result, my focus is on improving the playability of the game.
> Not enforcing a strict rules interpretation that is based on a half-
> understanding of the rules and how the game works.
i dont get how you think that a persons "understanding" of how the
rule is suposed to be "interpreted" deteriorates so much just based on
the distinction of the "role" of that person trasnitioning from a
partial "player ref" to an impartial "ref". I JUST DONT GET IT? i
mean, definitely get the idea of being able to decline the penalty by
simply not calling it but what about the other "edge" of that
sword???? you know, the one that allows someone to call somthing just
to slow the O's mo? sure you could give em a tmf but if they have
some to spare then THERE IS NO PENALTY.....thus no incentive......thus
an easliy manipulated calling opportunity........which is why many of
us want to see that "opportunity" go bye bye.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> But you've never actually been interested in analyzing any issues
but isnt the issue progressing, evolution, refinement AND IMPROVEMENT
of the rule enforcement process THE issue????
-------------------------------------------------------------
, so
> you've cast your vote, I've refuted it and I'll leave it at that
suit yourself then........be amoungst the minority. Just KNOW that
thats who you are.......the minority.
Reggie Fanelli
> option? Or are they simply happy to have observers rather than
> playing unobserved games?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---they are writing things like....'this is how all ultimate should be
played' and...'this is how all competitive ultimate should be played'
so....we figuring that what they are experiencing...is the best way
for ultimate to be played.
Reggie Fanelli
> play Ultimate.
---colin, i'm sure there will be a pick up game somewhere for you!!!
Reggie Fanelli
> that you see? I don't. Because I have a complete understanding of
> the rules and how they work.
--which infractions that you see don't you call?
and...are you saying that ability to work the rules is more important
than playing by the rules?
i mean...if that's the case, then THAT is the fundamental difference
between our philosophies......and why your's will be shattered and
crushed.
Reggie Fanelli
> option?
----did i answer this?
the answer is yes.
Nathan
>
>
>
> > Now I'm at Nationals and I have to
>
> > > play a game against a team with a few players who travel every time
> > > they get the disc (you've seen these people before). Now play stops
> > > every time these guys travel. All I want to do is not call those
> > > travels and play the game. But there's a guy in orange calling every
> > > single one and there's nothing I can do about it. What have I done to
> > > deserve this?
>
> > > -Colin
>
> > I'm at nationals and I'm trying to win every game. If there's some
> > guy on the other team that travels every time he throws I should call
> > every travel because that's going to help me win. Every time he gets
> > the disc his whole team's flow stops and he has to throw 2-foot dump
> > passes to get rid of the disc. I'd especially want an observer making
> > the call because the traveler would know it's a legit call and I don't
> > have to keep looking at his pivot foot all the time. Plus I won't get
> > in a stare down/fist fight/shit-talking feud for calling him on his
> > poor play. If he can't throw without traveling his team he's on needs
> > to stop throwing to him.
>
> What about when you're down 3 to 8 with ten minutes left until the
> hard cap? Is stopping play every time he gets the disc going to help
> you win?
I don't think there has ever been a hard-capped game at nationals, has
there? I don't think they even use a hard cap - just a soft cap. And
even that is VERY rare to be used - the rounds are very long, since
they only play 3 games (max) per day.
jim
By your logic, wouldn't springing observers on players at nationals
be the same thing?
Players don't play all season, sectionals or regionals with
observers..yet they are used at nationals.
Does this throw everything about the sport off...for the
players...during nationals?
I don't think so...just ensures players are playing by the rules.
ulticritic
>
> and...are you saying that ability to work the rules is more important
> than playing by the rules?
BINGO!!! and its refraining from taking advantage of that "ability"
is how spirit zealots define and quantify what the "spirit" in sotg
IS!!!!!! Its like they want to make it a piety contest (not to be
confused with pie eating contest.....ha) mixed in with a sporting
match.
-------------------------------------------------------------
> i mean...if that's the case, then THAT is the fundamental difference
> between our philosophies.
BINGO AGAIN!!!! and this is the fundamental difference in people that
are spirit zealots from those of us that ar more "progressive
players"......or as i just no made up, members of the PPP (progressive
players party)
ARE YOU DOWN WIT DA "PPP"??????
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
.....and why your's will be shattered and
> crushed.
pfft, most defineite!
ulticritic
>
> I don't think there has ever been a hard-capped game at nationals, has
> there? I don't think they even use a hard cap - just a soft cap. And
> even that is VERY rare to be used - the rounds are very long, since
> they only play 3 games (max) per day
how about fuck all that cap shit and go to stopped time games? surely
the uoa has this on their list to experiment with???? it is, after
all, just a stop watch away(and maybe a stop watch watcher). fyi, we
did it in nua caomp and it was tha shaaaaaat. last second throws and
whatnot. created a little more urgancy at the end of games too. AND,
if ya got a visible clock for showcased games the fans will chant down
the final seconds. just sayin.
ulticritic
>
> - Show quoted text -
bam!
Tim-Haymaker
If instituting active travels will result in a drastically
different playing experience, then that should be a concern
to the athletes who will play at nationals.
You seem to be saying you think it will, and yet the
evidence from the tournaments that have had active travels
is that it doesn't have a huge impact on the number of calls
and the athletes prefer it.
It also dramatically lessons the opportunities for a biased
athlete to make a bad call (intentionally or not) at the end
of a close game changing the outcome of said game.
Do you still believe that giving observers the power to call
active travels will result in a drastically different
playing experience? What evidence to you have for this?
I give very little credence to the fact that you saw a lot
of travels at some tournament or another. If players know
that travels will be called, they'll respond. If they don't
know how to play without traveling, their team will bench
them. Those 5 or 15 players should vote against active
travels. They'll lose out to the majority that knows how to
play within the rules.
-Tim
--
Posted from http://www.rsdnospam.com
Colin
Not even close. You guys and your attempts at logic.
Colin
> Colin,
>
> If instituting active travels will result in a drastically
> different playing experience, then that should be a concern
> to the athletes who will play at nationals.
Yes, yes it should be a concern for the players at Nationals! The
players should consider this in their voting. Remember when I said
that before? Remember how that was one of my primary points? And the
UPA should ensure that the players have significant opportunities to
experience these experiments and make an informed decision. And make
sure that the observers get a chance to refine the system to ensure
that it gives the best playing experience possible. There is
absolutely no reason this has to happen for 2010. And experimentation
and voting could be done really well for 2011 without much effort. So
that's what should happen.
> You seem to be saying you think it will, and yet the
> evidence from the tournaments that have had active travels
> is that it doesn't have a huge impact on the number of calls
> and the athletes prefer it.
I give little credence to the UOA surveys when it comes to specific
stuff not really addressed in the surveys. They are little more than
spirit scores and contain very little demographic data, as far as I
can tell. And I give little credence to the blanket positive
statements by Mike G about his own greatness and the greatness of his
tournaments.
> Do you still believe that giving observers the power to call
> active travels will result in a drastically different
> playing experience? What evidence to you have for this?
The two tournaments I've observed with nationals-caliber teams and
active travels. The dozen tournaments I've observed with Nationals-
caliber teams. What are you basing your opinion on? What somebody
said?
> I give very little credence to the fact that you saw a lot
> of travels at some tournament or another.
Because I'm biased and simply say that everything at every tournament
I observe goes perfectly smoothly all the time and is the best option
and couldn't use even slight improvements? Is that why you give
little credence to what I say? No, that doesn't sound quite right.
Because I give blanket negative statements about all the experiments?
No, that doesn't sound right either. Where are you coming from on
this one?
Is there any reason to believe you about anything? Are you a source
or are you just a parrot?
-Colin
Colin
ha. good one. Just working on a name change before playing 2011-2015.
Colin
Looks like in 2009, Wisconsin vs Texas got capped. Also Minnesota vs.
San Diego and Minnesota vs UCSB. And about a half dozen women's
games.
I don't recall the capping method off the top of my head.
The point remains, it is not always desireable to slow down the game.
So "la-la-la-la-la that won't happen" is a better argument than "that
should happen and I always want it to happen if my opponent is
traveling."
Colin
> On Mar 11, 10:06 pm, Colin <colinmcint...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > second off..if having travels called on a player is gunna ruin their
> > > nationals experience, then they are gunna be super duper dissapointed.
>
> super duper???? seriously colin??? is this really how you talk?
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > > because i would almost guarantee a game W/O observers has more travel
> > > calls than a game with observers.
>
> thats ballsy of you to guarntee somthing that is so speculative. but
> why speculate when that data is completely retreavable........so hop
> to it and report back with real evidence.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You're going to have to take this up with Jarrett, because that's who
you're quoting.
Tim-Haymaker
evidence I've seen that convinced me best shows that active
travel calls don't dramatically increase the number of
calls. I'm basing that primarily on the survey question
Weddle reported where players, captains,etc rated the
question about whether active travels improved the game
positively. I'm also going on the comments of observers and
players who have given reasonable testimony about the
changes immediately after the various UOA tournaments.
I've never played with active observers. I'm no source, nor
am I pretending to be. I'm just somebody who should be
working but is drawn to this conversation b/c I'm interested
in the evolution of our sport. I'm asking questions and
trying to figure out what the actual disagreements are as a
mental exercise and hopefully to make it easier for others
to wade through the spew
I think I've succeeded to some extent. The crux of this
disagreement does seem to be that you're convinced that
active travels will create a drastically worse playing
experience for the athletes at nationals this year and you
don't believe Gerics et al when they say their tournaments
show that that won't be the case. You seem to not belive
them becuase you think they are self-agrandizing zealots who
are trying to advance their own agenda and are thus willing
to risk ruining the experience of the athletes at
nationals.
Gerics et al believe that they have discovered a better way
of doing things and believe they've shown that it works.
They don't believe you when they say that active travels
will result in too many calls because they think you're so
committed to the player officiating aspect of ultimate that
you're willing to ignore a solution that works because it
offends your sense of what makes ultimate special.
Both sides belive the other is so biased that the question
at hand "whether to implement active travels at nationals"
is less imporant than that bias. You will argue forever
unless you can convince each other that you're not as biased
as accused because when you refuse to believe the "evidence"
the other side provides, you stop being able to have a
rational discussion.
Rather than Colin and Gerics continuing to talk past each
other, I'd be much more interested to hear from athletes who
played UOA or other tournaments with active travel calls.
Did it positively or negatively impact your games?
Shut these guys up with some actual reports of actual
experiences.
-Tim
P.S. Thanks to RSD I probably have to work this weekend.
Great.
jim
That's all u got? Too simple a concept for you?
And I am only one person.....who's this 'you guys'?
Mitch
> I give little credence to the UOA surveys when it comes to specific
> stuff not really addressed in the surveys. They are little more than
> spirit scores and contain very little demographic data, as far as I
> can tell.
You can look at the team list for each tournament to get an idea of
who's answering the questions as far as demographics go. They vary
from small teams that may not make regionals to nationals
semifinalists. Pitt, UVA, Florida, NC State, Cornell to name a few of
the higher caliber teams from last year. While no survey is perfect,
when a question like ~"observer active stalls make the game better"
and the average answer is over 4 on a scale of 1 to 5, that says
something significant. Is it the only reason to make a decision?
**No.** But why should someone dismiss several hundred responses from
a few dozen teams up and down the east coast, all of widely varying
talent levels for your single impression? This is what I don't get.
This isn't just mike's single self description of perfection, these
are real teams playing real games giving real feedback, and lots of
it. Your experience makes your input relevant, but it doesn't
invalidate other sources of input. I think the surveys are what can
allow people to look at what the players and observers at the UOA
tournies are saying instead of trying to discern something from
"everything I do is perfect."
> And I give little credence to the blanket positive
> statements by Mike G about his own greatness and the greatness of his
> tournaments.
Is anyone (besides Mike) making the argument "let's go with active
travel because Mike says he's perfect and he wants it?" No.
> > Do you still believe that giving observers the power to call
> > active travels will result in a drastically different
> > playing experience? What evidence to you have for this?
>
> The two tournaments I've observed with nationals-caliber teams and
> active travels.
But the real question isn't "is it drastically different", it's "is it
a worse experience?" I worked Queen City with you last year, would
you say teams thought it was a worse experience than had there not
been active travels? The only remotely negative feedback I received
regarding the experimentations was a coach saying he'd prefer 2 trail
observers instead of just 1. ACC's was mostly positive, as were the
UOAs. Different than normal? Yes. But worse? Not according to
those going. Or are people unhappy and they just aren't saying
anything to anyone?
Reggie Fanelli
> stuff not really addressed in the surveys. They are little more than
> spirit scores and contain very little demographic data, as far as I
> can tell. And I give little credence to the blanket positive
> statements by Mike G about his own greatness and the greatness of his
> tournaments.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
---then you're crazy.
corey
> > then...i'd be in the finals with whoever i pick.
I thought, like the Super Bowl, they pick the refs that have done the
best job. Didn't you completely blow it last season and make a bad
call that cost a team a spot to (regionals? natties?)? Clearly you
are not always the best observer out there.
Are you so conceited that you are 100% sure you'll automatically be
the best observer there?
Because I'm sure you said the same thing about all your ulty teams,
and they didn't win every tourney ever.
I really like a lot of your ideas for frisbee, but you are such an
arrogant douche bag it's hard to get on board with you.
Corey
Reggie Fanelli
> best job. Didn't you completely blow it last season and make a bad
> call that cost a team a spot to (regionals? natties?)? Clearly you
> are not always the best observer out there.
---well i learn pretty good from my mistakes.
did i cost them a spot at nationals?
i don't know.....i've offered to take the blame and they turned me
down.
i am still...always...going to be the best observer.
if you don't know...just ask around.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Are you so conceited that you are 100% sure you'll automatically be
> the best observer there?
---i don't know if i have to be so conceited to be 100%
sure....automatically.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Because I'm sure you said the same thing about all your ulty teams,
> and they didn't win every tourney ever.
---i did a pretty good job of winning.
i'd call myself a winner.
and i think i help other people be winners too.
didn't win every tournament ever....nope.
my percentage is pretty outstanding tho.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> I really like a lot of your ideas for frisbee, but you are such an
> arrogant douche bag it's hard to get on board with you.
---well...then i suggest not getting hung up on what you think is an
arrogant douche bag.......
try to just focus on the ideas....then...just jump on board.
why wouldn't you?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Corey
---who?
Bobus
> the best observer there?
Actually, Corey, he lost his self-proclaimed title and pretty much
disqualified himself from observing at Natties (especially if they
adopt active travel calls), in this thread:
Oh well...
Reggie Fanelli
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
hey corkey and bulbous....try to stay focused on the improvement of
the sport, like i am.
try not to focus so much on me and how great i am.
and....i am the greatest observer in the world....so....dq me however
you want...and the sport will suffer thru those times.
Reggie Fanelli
> disqualified himself from observing at Natties (especially if they
> adopt active travel calls), in this thread:
--i am pretty sure i've made mention of stuff like "calling games in
accordance with the rules of the event" as one of the UOA codes.....
so if you're refering to the ground tap...if it meant a trip to
officiate nationals...i'd call it......and i'd be counting the times.