R(OF)umor

Yesterday the kids over at ProPaintball reported the rumor that the PSP is reconsidering its ROF regulations. Never say never when it comes to anything paintball but if a change is coming all the happy little campers out there expecting it to go up are likely to be disappointed. (I have inquired ... and should I hear anything I'll let y'all know.) In the meantime speculating is fun.

There are (seemingly) a lot of reasons to discount this rumor and only one reason I can think of--without working too hard--that would lend an upward move any credence. League and divisional uniformity. One ROF for all. And there was a group last year prior to the implementation of the current standards that wanted a single ROF standard. However, any change to a single standard would have to be a downward move, say to a universal 10.5 bps, in order to not undercut all the "reasons" given for making the move to tiered ROF last year. Those reasons included reduced paint usage, the trickle down effect to local fields, a less intimidating competition environment for younger (or newer) players and the notion that a lower ROF would push developing players to improve their basic gun skills and rely less on pure firepower. Left out of the talk most of the time was (and is) the momentum towards national and international standardization.

Without judging the validity of the reasons any significant change or move up in ROF would basically affirm that the league has decided they were mistaken before and that there have been no identifiable paint savings or satisfactory anecdotal evidence of lower ROF at local fields, etc. And I don't see that happening, do you? Of course all the reasons have only sounded reasonable and all the proposed benefits are either damn difficult or impossible to quantify--with perhaps the exception of some paint savings--but even there I doubt a case can be made that it's all about ROF when the league also changed match times and race totals. Which leaves us with the whole national and international standards business. The PSP is clearly interested in national standards --See the UCP--and having a leadership role in developing them and there has been more dialogue and movement toward international development of the game in the last year or so than ever before.

So I could see the PSP making a change. But not one that moves the ROF up.

UPDATE: Lane says there was no talk of making any change until the rumor hit the internet and the PSP has no intention of changing the current ROF regs.

Burning Question

"PSP suggested ROF of 12, 10 and 8 for different skill levels, now agreed to use ROF 10 universally for all from 2010, MS will start already in 2009 with ROF 10."

The above is from what I described yesterday as a purported press release from the Millennium Series. There are a couple of things wrong with it beyond the awkward English--like the pointless inclusion of the 8 bps ROF which didn't see the light of day though it was initially intended. Even so, it suggests the PSP will follow suit in 2010 with a universal ROF at 10.5.

Today the MS website goes into detail regarding their move to a 10.5 bps standard (without mentioning the PSP alignment in 2010.) What I would like to know is has the PSP already agreed to this and are they simply practicing incrementalism in order to make the change more palatable? Wassup, PSP?

Limbo & the Minefield

This post was intended to be 'New Look Pro'--stop me if you've heard this excuse before. Problem is when I started writing the issues broke down essentially in two ways; the on the field game play and tourney environment with all its attendant political and economic complications so this post will address the tourney environment and the follow-up will be--finally and at last--New Look Pro--and discuss on the field game play.
While the rumormill churns I find all the talk of kick-starting a new national league less than credible. I could see a replacement for the XPSL--maybe--but all the chatter is just talk, talk, talk and enormous phone bills. For the foreseeable future competitive paintball will be dominated by the PSP.
This raises some, let me phrase this diplomatically, interesting questions. The situation has all the intrigue of a Faulknerian snoozer. Owners of the PSP are also leading members of PBIndustry and owners of pro teams. This ain't breaking news but it remains an inherently unhealthy complication because of the conflicting interests involved in making league related decisions. Every calculation is what's good for business; what's good for the league; what's good for my team and (hopefully) what's good for competitive paintball.
Now consider that the norm has always forced the teams and league(s) into competition with each other over sponsors. (Nobody ever seemed to take this seriously until the money started to dry up.) At the same time the league calls all the shots on what it takes to compete. (Remember the built in conflicts above?) And all of a sudden everyone is concerned about the survival of the pro teams? I will gladly grant there was concern before and efforts were made last off season but how much were those decisions influenced by factors other than the good of the teams and the league and competitive paintball? More importantly, what's coming this time around–and why?
This off season will present some unique challenges. There are seven "homeless" pro teams that competed only in the NPPL (not including Avalanche & Aftermath which are in the precarious position of having bailed on the NXL.) There are 10 NXL teams. Prior to the Pacific bankruptcy there was widespread speculation that not all of those pro teams would survive into the '09 season. In a continuation of the team losses from '07 a significant percentage of the current pro teams are in free fall.
In this environment every team is waiting to hear what will happen next season. The answers will go a long way towards determining the immediate future of pro paintball--and incidentally let the teams and players know just what the league really thinks of them. Will the decisions made simply maintain a version of the status quo--and will that be enough?

Is your head spinning yet? If not toss in the (apparent) decision of the MS to deny players and teams the use of guns made by non-sponsors of their league and to charge those sponsors twice, for use rights and vendors space. With this sort of impeccable timing it's a miracle they are still in business.
Here's a thought: What happens if 2 of the 3 largest gun manufacturers simply refuse to go along? (Of course they also happen to be the guys who just spent the week in Vegas negotiating a new world standard and who knows what else?) What are the chances all the little guys are just waiting for a signal to line up in opposition? Or, if you don't like that how 'bout this? What if the leading sponsors pooled their fees and invested in a new European league? There are peeps pursuing the possibility as well as alternative resources available. (Of course, that would put a crimp in the old new world standard, wouldn't it?)

Next time–New Look Pro (yeah, yeah, I know)

Next World Order

Say hello to the new boss same as the old boss.
For a lot of tourney players nothing much is going to change. Sure, a rule here, a rule there that add up to some minor changes but nothing major. I think this New World Order talk is perhaps overblown--even if some arrangement is agreed upon between the PSP and MS. Yes, they will be the leading tournament series but they don't and won't have a monopoly on tournament paintball. Most tourney players don't play in either of them and if either league makes enough decisions that alienate their customer base whatever they agree on won't much matter. What the next world order does offer is the possibility of formalizing and stabilizing the game/sport of competitive paintball. And that could be a very good thing.

Here's some of what I think you can expect. 5-man in a couple of variants; xball & something (very) similar to the way the PSP has been running their regular 5-man. At the lower divisions of xball play I don't expect (and continue to hope) there are no major changes. There could very well be more divisions of both xball and 5-man. The place where the greatest changes are most likely is at the top because that is where the widest divergence between the PSP and MS currently exist. I hope, for purely selfish reasons, that the end result is either allowed some flexibility or looks much more like the PSP version than the MS. The tension is between keeping the pro level game the format's undisputed flagship competition and the pressing need to reduce the cost of competing at the pro level. There have got to better ways to address those needs (and there are) than watering down the game--again.
On issues like locked divisions and restrictive non-sponsor possibilities I won't hazard a guess 'cus that's all it would be. I will say it strikes me as borderline insane to do stuff like that at the same time you're trying to forge a world game identity for your version of competitive paintball.

One of the critical discussions to be had as the next world order begins ought to be about what has been lost as much as on what has been gained. What, if anything, can be done to regain or restore some elements of the game play that may be seen as lacking or lost. Who knows, maybe it won't be much of anything but if one format is going to dominate and become the world standard that version of the game has an obligation to represent as much of the energy, excitement, thrill and skill as can be stuffed into it.

And Now For a Bit of Rampant Speculation: Given the seemingly odd timing of the NPPL filing I think one of two things probably happened. Either the NPPL & PSP worked out their bargain or Freidman decided it wasn't worth the effort--nor the likely continued cost--and simply wanted out. Both make sense. The former implies that Friedman remains interested in "selling" paintball. The latter suggests he's washed his hands of the whole mess and is satisfied to get out. For the life of me I can't see why he'd want to stay and keep trying to "sell" paintball on terms other than his own. And if he didn't think he could do it using the NPPL why would he think he can do it using the PSP?
More intriguing is what will become of the NPPL brand? I smell another cynical VFTD game.

Hiking in the Wilderness

No, this isn't New Look Pro. (Yes, it's still coming.) This is an update on Off the Reservation. It was suggested to me that the MS did in fact bring something to the table--a new TV deal. After I stopped laughing I thought about it for a moment. If having mediocre paintball on American TV led to the MS gig then okay, maybe the TV deal in Euroland will prove to be a big hit for the U.S. and finally get competitive paintball over the hump and into the mainstream. (And if that didn't make a whole lot of sense to you, join the club but that is the logic involved--such as it is.)
Another way of looking at this (rumored) endeavor to internationalize or standardize competitive paintball is that at long last the powers that be are attempting to take sensible incremental measures to build competitive paintball into something that might be recognized as sport and actually attract serious outside interest (at some unpredictable time in the future.) Hey, anything is possible.
Here's another idea. Name the two large independent U.S. paintball manufacturers [makers of paintball gear] who chose not to pay the MS's extortionate sponsorship fees and skipped the series last year. (I'm not using "extortionate" to imply any criminal conduct--in case you weren't sure.) If you guessed that the answers coincidentally happen to also be owners of the PSP treat yourself to a piece of pumpkin pie. Will the negotiation result in some rapprochement that will see the missing companies at MS events next season? Inquiring minds want to know.
How 'bout all of the above? Call it Big League multi-tasking at its finest.

Btw, you guys are really boring. 76 comments on relegation (which isn't even going to happen) and nobody wants to talk about competitive paintball's future?

UPDATE: blogging etiquette says one doesn't delete content but rather corrrects it. So, where it says paintball manufacturers the intent was manufacturers of paintball stuff, not paintballs specifically. And if that has left you dazed and confused here's what I was getting at.

The Big Picture issue is that the MS will have a say in what xball looks like in the future over here for no other reason than the PSP has decided now is the time to standardize the game and given what xball (xtra lite) looks like over there that is a sorry thing indeed. Particularly if we end up paying for what may amount to another reduction.

Off the Reservation

I've been told before there's no point in fighting it (or even arguing about it)--and that's not really what I'm doing--because it (whatever it is) is gonna happen whether I like it or not but passive acceptance ain't in my nature. And while it probably doesn't matter what any of us knows or when we knew it--or what we think of it--so what? What's the point of bothering with the blog if I'm gonna censor myself?
About now you might be wondering what the hell is he going on about now?
Same thing(s) I've been dancing around all week. Fortunately there's now been more info posted on a public forum about at least part of it so I feel free to add my two cents.
As some of you will be aware the PSP is having their annual shindig in Vegas soon in order to decide this season's installment of The Future of Paintball. This season's installment may turn out to be a much bigger deal than the norm (for a couple of reasons)--and we'll see and hear about it when we see and hear about it--and in the meantime I'm gonna address an item that will be on the Vegas agenda.
One chunk of the agenda will be given over to hashing out some arrangement with the MS on "standardizing" the competitive game. In one respect this is a swell idea. On the other hand it's been played at before with all the World Federation jabber of a couple of years ago when all it was then was another skirmish in the power struggle to be jettisoned when it--the struggle--had played out. This time it's supposed to be different. But why? Because the next road down the path of mainstreaming the game is another version of professionalizing--which is this notion of setting an international standard. And the purpose of mainstreaming paintball as sport--yes, give yourself a cookie, it's the "selling" of paintball one more time in another guise.
Of course nobody is opposed to "selling" paintball if the price is right and there's not much point in getting all worked up over decisions that aren't made yet.
But still, what does standardizing look like in practice? And what does the MS actually bring to the table? They play Xball XtraLite in most divisions. They've got locked divisions down thru D1 and rumors of wholesale defection and/or team losses coming they've done such a good job of late. They've a got a partial rulebook from, when, back in the 90's? (Maybe it ain't quite that bad but it's a joke nonetheless.) They charge license fees on top of entries to get in a locked division. They apparently want to drop ROF to 10 bps (and at that ROF if my grandma couldn't make her corner I'd kick her ass.) And their players routinely drop a couple divisions to come and play World Cup. Just what do they bring to the table? Or is this a negotiation of what the PSP can expect to impose or some broad compromise for the sake of a deal that benefits who?
And one more thing on the sudden push to standardize a world game. Could anyone possibly pick a worse time to start pushing this idea? Let's see, we's all going to hell in a handcart and we're all gonna have to find ways to economize and hang on until things improve--hey, I know, let's make decisions in this environment that may set the course for the future of the game. What better time than when everyone needs to cut back as much as possible. It's freaking genius is what it is. And doesn't surprise me in the least.

Next time: The New Look Pro