BD, Be aware that Spirit in the US is far and few between. Hard practices, and major tournaments that people go to to win at all cost might increase the athletic level of the sport, but it destroys Spirit.
Please take good care that the UK does not become an infection point in Europe where bad Spirit starts because you want to win at all costs. Learn from what happened in the US and don't make the same mistake. Keep 'em flying, Patrick van der Valk (BULA) http://beachultimate.org P.S. The US men's team at World's in Portugal showed that the Spirit is not lost in the US, so it is possible. Just be aware of the problem. -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jon Palmer Sent: Wednesday, September 01, 2004 4:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [BD] The Future of UK ultimate [was: Tour Structure etc] BD, Many people have asked why the UK and Europe fail to match up to the level of ultimate played in the US. A common answer is that the US has more people, more players and they've been playing the sport longer and have more experience. However I think this is the wrong way to think about it. While the USA population of 290 million vs. 60 million in the UK might seem to be an advantage, I think it is much more telling to look at smaller areas of the USA from which the club teams that represent the USA come from. The question should not be "How does the USA consistently produce teams that are better than teams from the whole of the UK?" but instead: "How is it that a region such as New England (DoG), California (Condors) or Vancouver (Furious) can consistently produce teams that are better than teams from the whole of the UK (or any other European country for that matter)?" Compare the numbers: UK Population: 60 million Ultimate players: 2000 Student population: 5 million University teams: ~50 Massachusetts Population: 6 million Ultimate players: ~2500 Student population: 0.5 million University teams: ~50 (?) Similar numbers must be true of California, Vancouver or most other areas of North America. So Massachusetts (or even New England as a whole) have smaller population than the UK. They obviously have a higher % of population playing ultimate and have stronger junior programs. These two facts can largely be attributed to the fact that the sport is older in the US and is more established where as in the UK it is still (I hope) growing and gaining acceptance and exposure. Yet it is still a fact that in every division, be it University, womens, mixed or open, that Massachusetts alone has 2-5 teams in each division that would be top 4 if not win their respective divisions in the UK. I suspect even that some of the US college teams would do surprisingly well in the open tour. This must be due to two things: 1. Better training and coaching at the junior and university level. 2. A higher level of/more opportunity for competition in all divisions. The first problem is key. The bottom line is that most UK universities start of at the same basic level as US universities. Both have equally athletic beginners entering their first year that they have to train up to be great players in 3-4 years. Yet the average US player graduating university is a significantly better player than the UK graduate. This should be easy to fix, get top players in the UK to help coach and develop players (when was the last time that most GB players taught a beginner to throw a forhand?). The UKUA can develop a coaching qualification and provide literature on how to run a team and how to run practices. (In the mean time everyone coaching a University team should go and read Jim Parinella's book "Ultimate Techniques & Tactics".) It is important to note that it isn't good enough for the top open teams to recruit good university players from their area and hope that those players in turn share their new knowledge and skill with their university teams. It is crucial that the top UK players get directly involved in the actual coaching and training of university teams. How to improve the level of competition is more difficult but I believe the key is to start to view the problem from a different angle. Instead of asking how the UK can beat the USA think of how Europe can beat the USA. It is easy to see the similarities between regionals/Nationals and European clubs and sectionals/regionals/nationals in the UPA. European clubs is the closest thing we get to UPA nationals yet we only run it every four years!! Why not run it every year? Why not run regionals, a 16 team UK nationals and have the top X (2-5?) teams qualify for European clubs in the same year? It should also be looked into to see if it would be practical to run a European Universities competition along similar lines. More controversially why not scrap the tour. Replace it with regionals, nationals and European clubs every year as previously discussed. Expand the Champions league format to involve more teams (this would be similar to the elite divisions at the 'invite' tournaments in the US) a host of other tournaments would hopefully pop up in traditional venues and new ones to replace the tour events. These might range from serious preseason warm-ups to just for fun tournaments. Teams would be able to pick and choose their tourneys based on style of tournament, cost, how close they are etc. etc. The UKUA could oversee some form of calendar to help avoid conflicts. A side effect of this would be to make the UKUA's job simpler and also create a better economic market for TD's. A tournament that consistently provides value for money, flat pitches or hot showers will find it easy to fill the tournament and should be able to make a good profit and no one would mind them doing so. On the flip side TD's that consistently don't provide the above will find it hard to make money the next year. It would also stop the bitching and complaining so often leveled at the TD's and the DoC. If you didn't like a tournament you don't go the next year. The current format of the tour creates more complaints because teams they feel that they have little choice about which tournaments to attend and so inevitably feel disappointed/let down when a given tour event doesn't meet their expectations. Everyone would benefit, the UKUA has a simpler task to oversee fewer tournaments and get less bitching, the good TD's will make more money, the bad ones less, all the players will get better value for money, as well as a greater choice and flexibility, the top players would have a shorter less tiring season and a higher level of competition. Why would you do it any other way? JP -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Barry O'Kane Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 10:13 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [BD] The Future of UK ultimate [was: Tour Structure etc] Jon said: Before any decision are made on how/if to chance the tournament structures isn't it is important to identify what the short term and long term goals of the UKUA are for 'improving' UK ultimate and how the achievement of those goals will be measured. I couldn't agree more. That is the single most important aim for the 'Conference' on the 23rd of October (and discussions before and after). We want to produce a development plan - which identifies the goals of the UKUA and thus steers all the decisions we make. I'd be especially interested to hear what people think about Jon's suggestions for what we should be aiming at, and how this would be reflected in Juniors, Women's, Mixed, Uni Ultimate... Barry __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://zion.ranulf.net/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp __________________________________________________ BritDisc mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://zion.ranulf.net/mailman/listinfo/britdisc Staying informed - http://www.ukultimate.com/informed.asp
