I had a conversation today with a friend of mine who used to be a pro player. He's still in the paintball business though his playing days are part of the past now. As usual it was a fairly wide ranging though pretty much exclusively paintball related chat--and it got me to thinking. (Which is almost always of sign of impending trouble.) Part of what we talked about were last week's posts about classification and we routinely go back and forth on the subject as he tends to be more solidly in favor of the system than I. I tried at one point to explain that compared to the early days of the UPC I was positively giddy about classifications these days but that I thought it was worthwhile now and again to look at the the other side if for no other reason than as a reminder there are unintended consequences sometimes that effect real people. Or that's the point I would'a tried to make if he hadn't suggested that what I was saying was akin to reminding him that once upon a time I called his wife fat and ugly but since she'd gone on a diet she was just ugly now.
Before the conversation deteriorated though an interesting notion was mentioned and passed over without much comment--until now, as I have a chance to think about it. (See what I mean about trouble?) See, he's convinced that divisional teams tend to (or would tend to without the UPC) avoid moving up if at all possible and that teams moving up are less interested in the (hopefully) superior competition and are instead put off by the prospect of having a tough time reaching the top. So in his view if the UPC wasn't pushing top teams up it would keep some lower division teams from continuing to compete at the national level. Which is, to my mind, almost the exact opposite of the frame of mind of a real serious competitor. However, I found the argument interesting and I'm curious what the rest of y'all think.
Have we come so far down the road to wimpdom that even so called competitive teams demand a handicapped system? Do teams not view the division leaders are targets? Or as the current benchmark of excellence within a given division? Do teams really try to avoid moving up because of the teams in the division above them? If divisional teams really are concerned about having to move into divisions they aren't ready to compete in the answer isn't to make that division easier, is it?
If all or some that is really true would be so bad if some group of average teams continued to play in a particular division indefinitely? Maybe they're better than the next division down but simply not good enough to move up. Is that a problem? Why?
I'm completely serious in asking. Rhetorical questions and all. It all seems almost alien to me. I have never walked away from an event thinking "boy, those guys were just too good, we'll never be able to compete."
What do you think?
Monday, May 7, 2012
Sunday, May 6, 2012
Baca's Mailbag: WCPPL #2 part 2
Have you noticed that the layouts for PSP-style Race 2 events have trended toward encouraging wire side confrontations? Each point often becomes two battles down each wire for control and dominance and success on one wire or the other often leads to the game closeout. I mention it here for two reasons; as a reminder not to get so caught up in your wire war you forget about the few good crossfield opportunities there are, and as an example of how elements of the game (layout) influence how we play often without us noticing.
I'm going to begin today with the orange T. It is a useful primary or secondary (bump from Home.) It is, in fact almost a second Home. OTB it offers some versatility for your laners (and more cover and visibility than the Home CK) and it also functions as a transitional hub. A prop you can use to make secondary moves to any other part of the field. It's little to no use for snake contain and of limited use in controlling D wire rotations but when coupled with another prop and working in tandem it's not a bad choice given all the options the player in the orange T has as the point develops.
It's worth a note here that I left the D side lane blocking Can out of the breakdown altogether. That isn't because it isn't playable or a decent alternate temporary bump when making an inside out move; ie: orange T to D1 or D2, for example. The concern is that except the xbox the blocking Can is the most exposed prop to S1 and for many teams taking the snake OTB will be a consistent option and if they make it more often than not they will take the blocking Can out of play.
Moving on to the green props--as mentioned yesterday their strength is they can be played effectively both ways. (Although this is less true of the D side CK it's a safe prop OTB with good options for the next rotation up field as well as a couple of good lanes to play early in the point.) Most common combination is likely to be the snake side lane blocking MT paired with the D side T. Communication between the two shouldn't be an issue and between them they can take turns as necessary working their contain lanes to either side of the field--and both props are positioned to give ready access to the two wires (or center) as the points transition from mid-game to close or it's necessary to replace eliminated teammates.
The blue MT is almost a must play prop. It can contain movement wireside between the doritos and deny your opponent the ability to wrap. And if your opponent is in their blue MT you have to match them otherwise it creates a distinct advantage for them/disadvantage to you. Additionally the blue MT has excellent nearly all field vision and can put paint on a lot of different props. The blue MT can also be played on the inside--even if there's an S1--if it's played low and provides a good position from which to bump into the doritos.
Tactically what you're going to want to keep in mind is that if you can keep your opponent out of the snake feed TCK you isolate any snake player and pin their support in positions you can effectively attack from the cross. Which means that D2 should be a high priority prop you want to get into asap--and at the same time use the large exposed gaps between the green T and blue MT and D1 and between D1 and D2 to pin your opponent in D1. If they can't get out of D1 you blunt the whole D wire attack and pin their support/insert players in the back.
As always the first ten seconds OTB will often be critical to your success or failure. There are good lanes to be had. Find them, figure out to use them and you could make quick work of your opponent. Have fun.
It's worth a note here that I left the D side lane blocking Can out of the breakdown altogether. That isn't because it isn't playable or a decent alternate temporary bump when making an inside out move; ie: orange T to D1 or D2, for example. The concern is that except the xbox the blocking Can is the most exposed prop to S1 and for many teams taking the snake OTB will be a consistent option and if they make it more often than not they will take the blocking Can out of play.
Moving on to the green props--as mentioned yesterday their strength is they can be played effectively both ways. (Although this is less true of the D side CK it's a safe prop OTB with good options for the next rotation up field as well as a couple of good lanes to play early in the point.) Most common combination is likely to be the snake side lane blocking MT paired with the D side T. Communication between the two shouldn't be an issue and between them they can take turns as necessary working their contain lanes to either side of the field--and both props are positioned to give ready access to the two wires (or center) as the points transition from mid-game to close or it's necessary to replace eliminated teammates.
The blue MT is almost a must play prop. It can contain movement wireside between the doritos and deny your opponent the ability to wrap. And if your opponent is in their blue MT you have to match them otherwise it creates a distinct advantage for them/disadvantage to you. Additionally the blue MT has excellent nearly all field vision and can put paint on a lot of different props. The blue MT can also be played on the inside--even if there's an S1--if it's played low and provides a good position from which to bump into the doritos.
Tactically what you're going to want to keep in mind is that if you can keep your opponent out of the snake feed TCK you isolate any snake player and pin their support in positions you can effectively attack from the cross. Which means that D2 should be a high priority prop you want to get into asap--and at the same time use the large exposed gaps between the green T and blue MT and D1 and between D1 and D2 to pin your opponent in D1. If they can't get out of D1 you blunt the whole D wire attack and pin their support/insert players in the back.
As always the first ten seconds OTB will often be critical to your success or failure. There are good lanes to be had. Find them, figure out to use them and you could make quick work of your opponent. Have fun.
Saturday, May 5, 2012
Baca's Mailbag: WCPPL #2
The kids at Elusive PB requested a breakdown of the WCPPL layout for event #2 and despite that fact I'ma do it. (Hint: next time more flattery and less tawdry sexual innuendo. It was really kinda creepy.) Btw, this doesn't mean VFTD is back in the business of doing layout evaluations but it does mean you can ask and if something about the layout grabs my attention or the request comes wrapped in a C-note--well, you never know.
Let's begin by castigating Adrenaline Games (some more) for the silly 'technical' snake and the convolutions required in an attempt to make it playable. As with PSP Galveston (& Phoenix) the snake side plays down with mid and low props--even though there is n MT and Can on the snake side, sorta. (More on the Can coming.) The other MT is the d wire corner--which neutralizes to some degree the elevation value. The snake itself is only really playable at S1 (the mini-race) during the early to mid-game phase when teams are contesting for control and numbers (unless you keep the other team out of the snake; then S2 [yellow circles] can be played but remains high risk.) Otherwise the rest of the snake is easily contained and more easily run down so unless it's the end game phase where the last bodies are being swept off the field the majority of the snake is both relatively useless and very high risk without compensatory reward. None of that means it can't be played; only that it isn't a dominating feature and you have to pick your time.
The other dominant characteristic of this layout is that it's almost a throwback to divisional Xball layouts from the days when the NXL was using the tiny "tree" blocking props in that it has some VERY open lanes. (Expect to see more designs with this er, feature as ongoing efforts are made to make a playable snake with the current prop set.) For the ADD crowd playing this field Adderall is your best friend. Sit on those lanes and let no one pass. (This also applies OTB but you'll have to find the lanes as they aren't all available from Home.)
The center of the field (the X & xbox) can be attacked OTB with the "safe" run hedging toward the snake side or with a hesitation in the green MT and then up the middle. From the center it can be played to effect from both sides but is unlikely to earn any quick kills unless your opponent is unaware of the player's presence. It is ideal for containing snake side rotation but the center of the field is seldom a go to or high value prop if you expect to play out an extended point. The principle value of a center attack is the quick kill or the close backside lane in combination with heavy pressure on the other wire
The snake Can. Superficially you might think to use it to contain rotations on the D wire but the edge can be contested immediately by a player in the D corner MT which severely limits its cross-field utility. And it also puts a player focused on the D wire deep in snake side territory which is less than ideal. So while the snake Can is likely to be under backside pressure very early in most points it is also of very limited utility on the snake side as well. It is edge dominated by the TCK feed to the snake and worse, a long stride toward the wire from the TCK, and the Can is blocked from contesting the move into the snake. Nor can it effectively contest activity in the snake. It is most useful if a player can wrap the wireside. Under most circumstances it's just a transitional stop in bumping to the snake or TCK feed.
The props marked in red designate the snake playing options--although Home could have as easily been orange or green. (More on that in a minute.) As noted previously S1 is the play and even then there are no uncontested easy eliminations to be had. That being the case this field is likely to be dominated by D wire heavy attacks leaving two options for snake play; try to work the snake or play it for contain and counter. Contain uses one or more of the green props in conjunction with a red prop. The idea is simply take the snake player out of the game by denying them opportunities. In red this can be done from Home or the TCK. The virtue of using Home is that it maintains the flexible use of that player to transition anywhere on the field. Using the TCK sets up the counter and is the ideal (on this field) launching point for transitioning into an end game closeout. (If you match most any green prop with the TCK you can see via the red lanes the contain control available.) Further options use your own S1 to try and pull your opponents guns to play cross-field, or get a quick kill, or the unexpected bump to the Pin to get a good downward angle on a snake player moving past S1 or launch a highway attack to clear out the snake. (The red Pin is also going to be a safer move than it may at first appear in a lot of game situations on this layout.) And of course S1 kills the opponent's S2 all day every day. (S2 is only, when properly contained, playable at best from the team side of the mini-race which doesn't offer much in the way of improved shots or angles over S1.)
While I expect this snake to be played as the weakside more often than not there will be some teams that are so snake play dominant they will try and force this play anyway. With the limited number of transitional props and no snake corner the play here is an extra laner OTB and patience. Avoid gunfighting edges but keep paint in those enormous gaps.
The rest of the field tomorrow
Friday, May 4, 2012
Game Changers?
The long national nightmare is over--no, not that one--VFTD is done commenting on, for now, boring stuff like APPA & the UPC. So breathe a sigh of relief. And I won't say anything more about divisional teams either--until the next time I do.
Instead I want to comment on a piece posted by the kids at Social Paintball. The idea is that video, with cameras like the Replay, has the potential to revolutionize the game and that while talk of stats is currently all the rage the real value in stats is how those not playing the game interact with the game and its players. Regarding statistics as a useful tool we still have a long way to go. The conceptions are new as is the process. It will take time to discover not only what is possible but also what if anything is valuable in the context of improving the game. So on that score I think the jury is out. On the value of stats as a means of interacting with the game and providing handles for talking about the game I think stats are great and even essential. But as a coach I am also concerned about the potential for statistics to be a distraction. What I don't want--and will continue to take measures to counter--is any sign my players are playing for their stats. So far the stats are a curiosity and an opportunity to grab temporary bragging rights over confirmed kills between matches with nobody taking any of it too seriously. Playing for stats (as an individual) on the other hand is destructive of team goals and unity and cannot be allowed. There's no telling how much of a problem it might prove to be but the potential exists for stat chasing to be a team killer.
In the Social article a useful comparison is made between stat driven baseball and film study in football. It's not that football doesn't have stats or useful ones but that the nature of the game is more dynamic and critical elements of performance can't easily be quantified into a pattern of numerical relationships--and that the same is true of competitive paintball. I think this is correct. If so, then digging a little deeper might be informative. What football teams don't do is use television broadcast feeds for film study--and for the most part webcast video is equally incomplete. The TV broadcast and the webcast are both narrative reprisals of the game or match; they are telling the story of the game. That isn't the sort of visual recapitulation that is useful. What is useful is a full field view all the time. It is essential to evaluating any or all of the players to know all the spatial relationships all the time the game is playing out.
Okay but what about cameras like the Replay? Again, because of the limited data, they provide only a limited utility as a training tool. As a unique visual record of a point or a match they're great. At the available frame rate they capture a lot of info that might not, at first glance, appear to be present but is. Will they or any other video capture revolutionize the game? I doubt it. A proper visual record could be a useful training tool but it wouldn't be a game changer. The same kind of teaching already goes on--at least some places--and where it doesn't it isn't for lack of video. Stats and video are after all simply tools and the one aspect we haven't discussed is how those tools are put to use. Without coaches and team leaders who have a comprehensive understanding of the game as it's currently played the tools are almost worthless. A real game changer would be a wider, deeper pool of those capable of taking the game to the next level.
Instead I want to comment on a piece posted by the kids at Social Paintball. The idea is that video, with cameras like the Replay, has the potential to revolutionize the game and that while talk of stats is currently all the rage the real value in stats is how those not playing the game interact with the game and its players. Regarding statistics as a useful tool we still have a long way to go. The conceptions are new as is the process. It will take time to discover not only what is possible but also what if anything is valuable in the context of improving the game. So on that score I think the jury is out. On the value of stats as a means of interacting with the game and providing handles for talking about the game I think stats are great and even essential. But as a coach I am also concerned about the potential for statistics to be a distraction. What I don't want--and will continue to take measures to counter--is any sign my players are playing for their stats. So far the stats are a curiosity and an opportunity to grab temporary bragging rights over confirmed kills between matches with nobody taking any of it too seriously. Playing for stats (as an individual) on the other hand is destructive of team goals and unity and cannot be allowed. There's no telling how much of a problem it might prove to be but the potential exists for stat chasing to be a team killer.
In the Social article a useful comparison is made between stat driven baseball and film study in football. It's not that football doesn't have stats or useful ones but that the nature of the game is more dynamic and critical elements of performance can't easily be quantified into a pattern of numerical relationships--and that the same is true of competitive paintball. I think this is correct. If so, then digging a little deeper might be informative. What football teams don't do is use television broadcast feeds for film study--and for the most part webcast video is equally incomplete. The TV broadcast and the webcast are both narrative reprisals of the game or match; they are telling the story of the game. That isn't the sort of visual recapitulation that is useful. What is useful is a full field view all the time. It is essential to evaluating any or all of the players to know all the spatial relationships all the time the game is playing out.
Okay but what about cameras like the Replay? Again, because of the limited data, they provide only a limited utility as a training tool. As a unique visual record of a point or a match they're great. At the available frame rate they capture a lot of info that might not, at first glance, appear to be present but is. Will they or any other video capture revolutionize the game? I doubt it. A proper visual record could be a useful training tool but it wouldn't be a game changer. The same kind of teaching already goes on--at least some places--and where it doesn't it isn't for lack of video. Stats and video are after all simply tools and the one aspect we haven't discussed is how those tools are put to use. Without coaches and team leaders who have a comprehensive understanding of the game as it's currently played the tools are almost worthless. A real game changer would be a wider, deeper pool of those capable of taking the game to the next level.
Thursday, May 3, 2012
A Standard of Excellence
Back in the Dark Ages of tournament paintball teams largely self-selected what division they would play--at least when they made the jump to the national stage. Some made the wrong call and quietly dropped back, others dropped out. Still others developed and improved. The majority stayed where they were. Not quite good enough to contend for titles but not bad enough either to embarrass themselves. Of course back then there were basically only three choices; Pro, Am & Novice--and novice was a mid- to late- Nineties invention. The standard back was winning. Teams determined their ability to compete at the next level on their ability to win where they were. And when they moved up their target was the best teams in their new division.
I didn't take that trip down memory lane to suggest that the old way was a better way, only that it reflects a different mindset. Underlying the UPC is a conception of each division as sort of self-contained bell curve of results that's a bit fuzzy at the edges. The bulk of teams should be bunched up in the middle with fewer teams distinguishing themselves and a like number unable to keep up. The justification for this is that any representative spectrum of teams should, after some period of competition, display an approximate bell curve in their collective results. But that isn't what the divisions should represent and the average divisional team should not aspire to middle-of-the-pack status--particularly in the upper amateur divisions. By the time a team reaches D1 status it ought to be a proven winner in competition with other proven winners, not a bell curve sampling of teams.
Ultimately the league is responsible. It is their rules & competition. My concern is that the rules are unable, and in fact inimical to, maintaining a consistent (hopefully excellent) standard of play in which the divisional distinctions are actually meaningful. And I am convinced that the standard has deteriorated over time. (Also don't think for a minute that because I'm focused on divisional play that this doesn't apply to the pro division too because it certainly does.)
For the sake of keeping my example simple let's agree that D2 has 20 teams and that 20% of them will qualify for D1 status. So 4 teams of the 20 move along. That means the best remaining team from the last season was the fifth best. If at least 4 of the incoming teams for the new season aren't better than the best remaining team the overall quality of play in the division necessarily drops. And even then last year's best team was four places better than the best team leftover so the incoming teams only have to be better than last year's fifth place team to be winners. If you repeat that pattern for five years what is the likelihood that the winner of year 5 was as good as the winner of year 1? And how will you be able to tell?
I didn't take that trip down memory lane to suggest that the old way was a better way, only that it reflects a different mindset. Underlying the UPC is a conception of each division as sort of self-contained bell curve of results that's a bit fuzzy at the edges. The bulk of teams should be bunched up in the middle with fewer teams distinguishing themselves and a like number unable to keep up. The justification for this is that any representative spectrum of teams should, after some period of competition, display an approximate bell curve in their collective results. But that isn't what the divisions should represent and the average divisional team should not aspire to middle-of-the-pack status--particularly in the upper amateur divisions. By the time a team reaches D1 status it ought to be a proven winner in competition with other proven winners, not a bell curve sampling of teams.
Ultimately the league is responsible. It is their rules & competition. My concern is that the rules are unable, and in fact inimical to, maintaining a consistent (hopefully excellent) standard of play in which the divisional distinctions are actually meaningful. And I am convinced that the standard has deteriorated over time. (Also don't think for a minute that because I'm focused on divisional play that this doesn't apply to the pro division too because it certainly does.)
For the sake of keeping my example simple let's agree that D2 has 20 teams and that 20% of them will qualify for D1 status. So 4 teams of the 20 move along. That means the best remaining team from the last season was the fifth best. If at least 4 of the incoming teams for the new season aren't better than the best remaining team the overall quality of play in the division necessarily drops. And even then last year's best team was four places better than the best team leftover so the incoming teams only have to be better than last year's fifth place team to be winners. If you repeat that pattern for five years what is the likelihood that the winner of year 5 was as good as the winner of year 1? And how will you be able to tell?
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Who is a D2 player?
D'oh! Anybody with a D2 ranking. Next question.
Not so fast. According to the UPC it's anybody who has accumulated more than 984 points but fewer than 1974 points. (Yes, I know, in season moves require different totals. Not important.)
[If you're wondering why I don't mention any of the other ID/ranking systems it's because they aren't worth mentioning as all they do is justify levying another tax on your ignorant player ass.]
A weakness of the system is that it's assigning value to individual players for what a team accomplishes--which is problematic--but at least in recent years changes made have tried to account for an inability to grade a specific player and offered more latitude to the process. Less than perfect perhaps but few things are. Perfect, that is.
What the formula can't do it is assumed teams will do at some point--make precise judgments about a specific player's skill set and either keep him (her) or cut them. Which is not an unreasonable position to take, at least when we're talking about competitive paintball at the higher end of the sport.
The issue I want to address today is not what happens to players and teams along the divisional ladder but what happens to the divisions and the competition within those divisions.
By UPC formula the (approx.) bottom 30% of teams don't score enough points to reach (or maintain) the division they're in. If that's true do they really belong? Meanwhile, the upper (approx.) 35% of teams score enough to move up to the next division and--again by rule and formula--they have to unless they break up their team. So what does it mean? [Edit added: According to Raehl the number is around 20-ish % currently. And in taking more time to crunch the numbers he's basically correct. It hasn't always been. I don't think the difference impacts the argument much but as usual you can decide for yourself.]
Here's the problem. There is no standard. A D2 player is whatever the numbers say he is but the comparison and competition is limited to the group "competing in D2 now." The "best" is a reflection of that specific group of competitors and nobody else. And if a division routinely bumps up the top 25-35% of competing teams the teams remaining in the division are necessarily not as good as the teams promoted. So the next influx of new teams entering a higher division are necessarily competing against an existing group that isn't as good as it was the prior season. The degree of difficulty in challenging for the top spots diminishes and the overall demands of the competition are reduced within that division--and the effect is more pronounced the higher or more elite the division because the competition is supposed to be that much more demanding. At D4 and D3 the pool of competing teams is less refined and there can be (and should be) greater variances in performance from top to bottom. As teams rise the gap should narrow but under the current system it doesn't because all divisions, teams and players are treated the same--by formula--except the pros ('cus they got nowhere else to go.)
From the beginning the system was designed to keep teams churning up the ladder with the middle of the pack being the division marker. At the lower levels it's probably discriminating enough to be acceptable. At the upper levels all it has done is drive teams out of national competition and dumb down the competition in the upper divisions.
The easy fix is be more discriminating in who moves up--a much lower percentage--and more flexible in allowing (or even compelling) teams to move back down. It is not enough to simply populate the various divisions. The failure to nurture and protect divisional distinctions and attempt to maintain a divisional standard of excellence (as opposed to mediocrity) lessens the competition and does all the competing teams a disservice.
Not so fast. According to the UPC it's anybody who has accumulated more than 984 points but fewer than 1974 points. (Yes, I know, in season moves require different totals. Not important.)
[If you're wondering why I don't mention any of the other ID/ranking systems it's because they aren't worth mentioning as all they do is justify levying another tax on your ignorant player ass.]
A weakness of the system is that it's assigning value to individual players for what a team accomplishes--which is problematic--but at least in recent years changes made have tried to account for an inability to grade a specific player and offered more latitude to the process. Less than perfect perhaps but few things are. Perfect, that is.
What the formula can't do it is assumed teams will do at some point--make precise judgments about a specific player's skill set and either keep him (her) or cut them. Which is not an unreasonable position to take, at least when we're talking about competitive paintball at the higher end of the sport.
The issue I want to address today is not what happens to players and teams along the divisional ladder but what happens to the divisions and the competition within those divisions.
By UPC formula the (approx.) bottom 30% of teams don't score enough points to reach (or maintain) the division they're in. If that's true do they really belong? Meanwhile, the upper (approx.) 35% of teams score enough to move up to the next division and--again by rule and formula--they have to unless they break up their team. So what does it mean? [Edit added: According to Raehl the number is around 20-ish % currently. And in taking more time to crunch the numbers he's basically correct. It hasn't always been. I don't think the difference impacts the argument much but as usual you can decide for yourself.]
Here's the problem. There is no standard. A D2 player is whatever the numbers say he is but the comparison and competition is limited to the group "competing in D2 now." The "best" is a reflection of that specific group of competitors and nobody else. And if a division routinely bumps up the top 25-35% of competing teams the teams remaining in the division are necessarily not as good as the teams promoted. So the next influx of new teams entering a higher division are necessarily competing against an existing group that isn't as good as it was the prior season. The degree of difficulty in challenging for the top spots diminishes and the overall demands of the competition are reduced within that division--and the effect is more pronounced the higher or more elite the division because the competition is supposed to be that much more demanding. At D4 and D3 the pool of competing teams is less refined and there can be (and should be) greater variances in performance from top to bottom. As teams rise the gap should narrow but under the current system it doesn't because all divisions, teams and players are treated the same--by formula--except the pros ('cus they got nowhere else to go.)
From the beginning the system was designed to keep teams churning up the ladder with the middle of the pack being the division marker. At the lower levels it's probably discriminating enough to be acceptable. At the upper levels all it has done is drive teams out of national competition and dumb down the competition in the upper divisions.
The easy fix is be more discriminating in who moves up--a much lower percentage--and more flexible in allowing (or even compelling) teams to move back down. It is not enough to simply populate the various divisions. The failure to nurture and protect divisional distinctions and attempt to maintain a divisional standard of excellence (as opposed to mediocrity) lessens the competition and does all the competing teams a disservice.
Tuesday, May 1, 2012
APPA & The Lost Generation
There is a lost generation of paintball players all around us going about their daily lives. They come in all shapes, sizes, ages and skill levels. The one thing they have in common is they used to play paintball and they don't anymore--but many, if not most will play again--all we have to do is reach out and invite them back. (Okay, that's probably a bit of hyperbole but even if just 25% came back think how many players that would be. APPA claims to have records on 80K plus. How many are still active? What if 25% of those former players came back?)
As much fun as it is to tweak raehl now and again the intent of the last two posts hasn't been to bemoan the evils of APPA or the UPC. Both are works in progress and both are useful tools. And we could go round endlessly debating which cause had what effect on the decline in the number of tourney players in recent years. But VFTD has been there and done that (on more than one occasion) and while it engenders lots of debate it doesn't do much else and what I'm really interested in is discussing ways to get former players back into the fold.
Before jumping in with both feet though there is something else to be said about APPA and local promoters. Even if we assume the lion's share of the problem of team and player attrition is more about Big Picture economics (or outta control ROF) (or raising the skill & commitment bar to entry too high) (or whatever other option you prefer) the fact remains APPA & the UPC is in the business of grading players with an unavoidably very blunt instrument; team results--and then determining what those results mean relative to all other players. If competitive paintball was in fact unequivocally a sport this probably wouldn't be an issue or at least as big a one as it is--but it's not. Especially at the local level where hopeful up-and-comers vie with a large contingent of mostly hobbyists (whether they would describe themselves as such or not.) And herein lies a problem. Local leagues are subject to the same ranking attrition that the national level teams and players are. At the national level where the game aspires to be sport it might be possible to make a case that it is an unavoidable consequence of the competitive process but at the local level it is a foolish and counterproductive waste. It is also a difficult problem to remedy because of APPA's utility to the local promoter as time saver and standard. How do you use the system without being part of the system? (At least insomuch as it dictates what happens to players/teams.)
Everybody wants to see paintball flourish--and the majority of VFTD readers also want to see competitive paintball regain lost ground too and continue to grow. There may be a few things we as individuals can do; like inviting old friends who used to play to give it a try again and encourage our local fields to find creative ways to reach out to the pool of potential players most likely to respond, former players. Like it or not this effort really falls on the local field owners (who are so inclined) and local promoters. It wasn't very many years ago Florida had multiple series to choose from and well over a 100 teams competing in primarily D3 and below. That's a lot of former tourney ballers. In the past VFTD has suggested ideas like Friday Night street ball, start a paintball club, work with local businesses to promote youth paintball, promote and maintain a local available player list, offer discounts to old timers who bring in an old team jersey, etc. There have got to be ways to reach out to local ex-players and invite them to give the game a try again. Got any other ideas? Heard of an effort that seemed to work? Let's hear 'em.
As much fun as it is to tweak raehl now and again the intent of the last two posts hasn't been to bemoan the evils of APPA or the UPC. Both are works in progress and both are useful tools. And we could go round endlessly debating which cause had what effect on the decline in the number of tourney players in recent years. But VFTD has been there and done that (on more than one occasion) and while it engenders lots of debate it doesn't do much else and what I'm really interested in is discussing ways to get former players back into the fold.
Before jumping in with both feet though there is something else to be said about APPA and local promoters. Even if we assume the lion's share of the problem of team and player attrition is more about Big Picture economics (or outta control ROF) (or raising the skill & commitment bar to entry too high) (or whatever other option you prefer) the fact remains APPA & the UPC is in the business of grading players with an unavoidably very blunt instrument; team results--and then determining what those results mean relative to all other players. If competitive paintball was in fact unequivocally a sport this probably wouldn't be an issue or at least as big a one as it is--but it's not. Especially at the local level where hopeful up-and-comers vie with a large contingent of mostly hobbyists (whether they would describe themselves as such or not.) And herein lies a problem. Local leagues are subject to the same ranking attrition that the national level teams and players are. At the national level where the game aspires to be sport it might be possible to make a case that it is an unavoidable consequence of the competitive process but at the local level it is a foolish and counterproductive waste. It is also a difficult problem to remedy because of APPA's utility to the local promoter as time saver and standard. How do you use the system without being part of the system? (At least insomuch as it dictates what happens to players/teams.)
Everybody wants to see paintball flourish--and the majority of VFTD readers also want to see competitive paintball regain lost ground too and continue to grow. There may be a few things we as individuals can do; like inviting old friends who used to play to give it a try again and encourage our local fields to find creative ways to reach out to the pool of potential players most likely to respond, former players. Like it or not this effort really falls on the local field owners (who are so inclined) and local promoters. It wasn't very many years ago Florida had multiple series to choose from and well over a 100 teams competing in primarily D3 and below. That's a lot of former tourney ballers. In the past VFTD has suggested ideas like Friday Night street ball, start a paintball club, work with local businesses to promote youth paintball, promote and maintain a local available player list, offer discounts to old timers who bring in an old team jersey, etc. There have got to be ways to reach out to local ex-players and invite them to give the game a try again. Got any other ideas? Heard of an effort that seemed to work? Let's hear 'em.
Monday, April 30, 2012
The Classification Curse
Regulars may recall that in posts past VFTD has had issues with player classification as defined and cataloged by the only real (functional & utilitarian) data base service of this sort in the paintball universe; APPA. Which isn't to say that APPA is bad. It isn't. Numerous changes made in recent years have improved it greatly. And in the grand scheme of things competitive in paintball it serves a useful purpose. (If you're a glutton for punishment follow this link.) But an important problem remains and it is to (once again) highlight that problem I'm writing this post. (That, and I was reminded of it yesterday when I spent a free--from TBD commitments--Sunday hanging out with some old paintball buddies and some new tourney players. For some additional background look here.)
In the Spring of 2010 a number of my former teammates decided to play a local event for fun--and to see if the game reignited old passions. Pretty much across the board it did--reignite old passions--and within weeks they had bought new gear, planned a practice schedule and decided to play as many of the rest of the season's events as possible.
Next week they'll be competing in the third event of their second CFPS season. Two former teams have been reconstructed and a brand new team of mostly young players has been formed as a result of ex-players rediscovering the tourney game they loved a decade or more ago.
The problem is APPA. (Sorta.) Some of the first posts on VFTD le blog in 2008 dealt with my concern that the classification rules in force then had the unintended consequence of pushing D1 ranked players out of tourney paintball. (If you're curious--and you know what curiosity did to the cat--start looking in the July 2008 archives.) And here we are again except the situation is happening on the local level. As it turns out my former teammates, the old guys, have had some success and it appears that by the end of the season they will be bumped up in classification by APPA and out of local competition. Theoretically the CFPS could offer D3X Race 2-4 but have had difficulty fielding a division in the past and if next year is like this one the old guys will be out of tourney paintball again. Okay, but they could play PSP. Or maybe a different regional series, right? Well, yes, at least by classification rule they could but they are all older with families and jobs and real responsibilities and never intended or wanted to travel around the country to events or rise through the ranks. They are regular guys who enjoy playing competitive paintball for fun--not to rejoin the grind--and once again the unintended consequence of well-intentioned and useful rules is gonna push players out of the game. And this time it will be exactly the kind of players the game needs at the grassroots level to provide leadership, resources and knowledge to help grow the next generation of tournament players.
In the Spring of 2010 a number of my former teammates decided to play a local event for fun--and to see if the game reignited old passions. Pretty much across the board it did--reignite old passions--and within weeks they had bought new gear, planned a practice schedule and decided to play as many of the rest of the season's events as possible.
Next week they'll be competing in the third event of their second CFPS season. Two former teams have been reconstructed and a brand new team of mostly young players has been formed as a result of ex-players rediscovering the tourney game they loved a decade or more ago.
The problem is APPA. (Sorta.) Some of the first posts on VFTD le blog in 2008 dealt with my concern that the classification rules in force then had the unintended consequence of pushing D1 ranked players out of tourney paintball. (If you're curious--and you know what curiosity did to the cat--start looking in the July 2008 archives.) And here we are again except the situation is happening on the local level. As it turns out my former teammates, the old guys, have had some success and it appears that by the end of the season they will be bumped up in classification by APPA and out of local competition. Theoretically the CFPS could offer D3X Race 2-4 but have had difficulty fielding a division in the past and if next year is like this one the old guys will be out of tourney paintball again. Okay, but they could play PSP. Or maybe a different regional series, right? Well, yes, at least by classification rule they could but they are all older with families and jobs and real responsibilities and never intended or wanted to travel around the country to events or rise through the ranks. They are regular guys who enjoy playing competitive paintball for fun--not to rejoin the grind--and once again the unintended consequence of well-intentioned and useful rules is gonna push players out of the game. And this time it will be exactly the kind of players the game needs at the grassroots level to provide leadership, resources and knowledge to help grow the next generation of tournament players.
Sunday, April 29, 2012
PSP Phoenix D2, part 2
VFTD: Thanks once again are due Mike McGowan of Prime for putting in the time and effort to rep the division.
In general, teams were using the snake corner much more than in Galveston. Teams broke the dorito-side tower far less than before with teams opting to step off the box in space behind the center can to shoot him off the break. Far more teams loved that center aztec to lock down the dorito-side. Hardly anyone utilized the center A from what I saw. Teams also used the cross-shot from the insert baby-cake. Most teams, doubled the back center and filled out from there. If teams were up bodies and controlled the snake, the game was in their favor. The dorito-side just didn't have the explosiveness it had in Texas. I also did hear tales of odd officiating calls echoing through the ranks. Par for the course. But some of them implied disturbing accounts of referee favoritism. Like wiping off friendly-fire hits or making bold decisions in typical simultaneous exchange situations. I know I heard stories about the two separate fields, thus different crews. So maybe I was relayed a biased message. Hope such rumors are unfounded. These refs stuck it out the entire day, the entire weekend in these elements. Props to them.
The quarterfinals were nearly identical to Galveston with three blowouts and a one point game. PR1ME, ac402.com, and Collision were crushed 5-1, while Boom edged out TNN 5-4. AC402 did see improvement this event. They had 5-0'd Elevation in the prelims. Elevation returned in kind in their rematch. Revo, Fury, Elevation, and Boom the advancing parties. The semi-finals games appear to have been the most interesting/competitive of the event score-wise. I heard the Boom vs. Revo match was tight. Boom putting the pressure on Revo unlike anyone the whole weekend. But Revo came out the victor 4-3. Scottsdale Elevation thrived on home field turf throughout the event but were beaten 5-4 by Fury. Finally trading places with Boom this go around for 3rd place after beating them 5-2.
There must have been either a mechanical or editing issue with the webcast for the D2 Finals game as the video starts midmatch with Revo already winning 3-2. By what I could gather, Fury kept pushing for their center cross play and Revo denied them by chopping one of them out off break. Namely the center aztec player. While the commentators attributed Revo's win to their "technical" play. They also seemed to disparage their approach as inferior to more aggression on the field. If it were say, Tampa Bay Damage, they probably would have been lauded for their grinding down of opponents. You don't watch college football and talk about how their strategy wouldn't translate into the Pros. Or how the Kentucky basketball team is good but none of them shoot like Kobe.
As former Pros themselves the commentaters contrast the divisional level to what they know and aim to demonstrate to the viewer where their game falls short of the professional. Which to their credit, is the most filmed and viewed. But there are serial moments of unwarranted criticism. For example, I do agree that without aggression you can't win paintball. But being aggressive is a decision. When Revo is up 4-2 with a minute left, saying, in reference to their entire performance "Unless you're, like, Alex Fraige, [counterpunch paintball] is definitely not the way to go." That just sounded absurd to me. It encapsulated the unnecessary level of harsh treatment these teams receive. I'm not saying, "Go easy. We're sensitive and gonna cry on the airplane." Far from it. But Revo had just won every single match of the tournament. The webcasters' experience has entitled them to render judgement. But perhaps also talk about the consistency the Revo program and their organizer, Carlos Beltran, have brought about as well. Give credit where credit is due. Maybe they need a divisional correspondent for these games with some inside info. Someone that's aware of the dynamic to chime in every now and again for these specific games. Greg Pauley or Shane Pestana or Steve Nicola. Anyone with current experience at D2, but also in the Pro ranks.
These divisional teams are learning from the Legions and the Damages of the world. More technical play has become systemic. Signs of further advancement are becoming apparent. Houston Heat has seemed to coalesce, with the bonding agent of cash-money, the technical and the creative with their roster make-up. There's several ways to skin a paintball team, but these divisional teams are learning. Their approaches may be on the Darwinian path to defeating future Pro teams. Just look at what 187 is already doing. Granted, they swept the D2 division in the three tournaments they played in 2010, so they may just be on another level. I'm not saying they shouldn't seek advice, or they don't deserve a sound thrashing now and again to know they need great improvement to get to the professional level. Like what Lasoya often says, "Sometimes you can learn something from these divisional teams. Their approach might be different."
Divisional teams more so than any other could be at the bar, with their kids, at the frat house, Xbox console, or just home in the AC (reading Tolstoy or Marcus Aurelius no doubt). We could be putting our money in a mutual fund like the savvy investors we are or paying off student loans. But we're not. We're in 102.9 degree heat. Dropping $400 on a luxurious Caravan. Spinning four points in a row. Playing out games with dislocated shoulders. Watching our teammates play freshly on crutches jeopardizing our workman's comp. Old salty Pros taking licks just to keep bringing the next generation to bear. Playing on even when our teammates, our best friends, have achieved their dreams by making Pro rosters. You know why?
Because. We. Love. This. Job.
In general, teams were using the snake corner much more than in Galveston. Teams broke the dorito-side tower far less than before with teams opting to step off the box in space behind the center can to shoot him off the break. Far more teams loved that center aztec to lock down the dorito-side. Hardly anyone utilized the center A from what I saw. Teams also used the cross-shot from the insert baby-cake. Most teams, doubled the back center and filled out from there. If teams were up bodies and controlled the snake, the game was in their favor. The dorito-side just didn't have the explosiveness it had in Texas. I also did hear tales of odd officiating calls echoing through the ranks. Par for the course. But some of them implied disturbing accounts of referee favoritism. Like wiping off friendly-fire hits or making bold decisions in typical simultaneous exchange situations. I know I heard stories about the two separate fields, thus different crews. So maybe I was relayed a biased message. Hope such rumors are unfounded. These refs stuck it out the entire day, the entire weekend in these elements. Props to them.
The quarterfinals were nearly identical to Galveston with three blowouts and a one point game. PR1ME, ac402.com, and Collision were crushed 5-1, while Boom edged out TNN 5-4. AC402 did see improvement this event. They had 5-0'd Elevation in the prelims. Elevation returned in kind in their rematch. Revo, Fury, Elevation, and Boom the advancing parties. The semi-finals games appear to have been the most interesting/competitive of the event score-wise. I heard the Boom vs. Revo match was tight. Boom putting the pressure on Revo unlike anyone the whole weekend. But Revo came out the victor 4-3. Scottsdale Elevation thrived on home field turf throughout the event but were beaten 5-4 by Fury. Finally trading places with Boom this go around for 3rd place after beating them 5-2.
There must have been either a mechanical or editing issue with the webcast for the D2 Finals game as the video starts midmatch with Revo already winning 3-2. By what I could gather, Fury kept pushing for their center cross play and Revo denied them by chopping one of them out off break. Namely the center aztec player. While the commentators attributed Revo's win to their "technical" play. They also seemed to disparage their approach as inferior to more aggression on the field. If it were say, Tampa Bay Damage, they probably would have been lauded for their grinding down of opponents. You don't watch college football and talk about how their strategy wouldn't translate into the Pros. Or how the Kentucky basketball team is good but none of them shoot like Kobe.
As former Pros themselves the commentaters contrast the divisional level to what they know and aim to demonstrate to the viewer where their game falls short of the professional. Which to their credit, is the most filmed and viewed. But there are serial moments of unwarranted criticism. For example, I do agree that without aggression you can't win paintball. But being aggressive is a decision. When Revo is up 4-2 with a minute left, saying, in reference to their entire performance "Unless you're, like, Alex Fraige, [counterpunch paintball] is definitely not the way to go." That just sounded absurd to me. It encapsulated the unnecessary level of harsh treatment these teams receive. I'm not saying, "Go easy. We're sensitive and gonna cry on the airplane." Far from it. But Revo had just won every single match of the tournament. The webcasters' experience has entitled them to render judgement. But perhaps also talk about the consistency the Revo program and their organizer, Carlos Beltran, have brought about as well. Give credit where credit is due. Maybe they need a divisional correspondent for these games with some inside info. Someone that's aware of the dynamic to chime in every now and again for these specific games. Greg Pauley or Shane Pestana or Steve Nicola. Anyone with current experience at D2, but also in the Pro ranks.
These divisional teams are learning from the Legions and the Damages of the world. More technical play has become systemic. Signs of further advancement are becoming apparent. Houston Heat has seemed to coalesce, with the bonding agent of cash-money, the technical and the creative with their roster make-up. There's several ways to skin a paintball team, but these divisional teams are learning. Their approaches may be on the Darwinian path to defeating future Pro teams. Just look at what 187 is already doing. Granted, they swept the D2 division in the three tournaments they played in 2010, so they may just be on another level. I'm not saying they shouldn't seek advice, or they don't deserve a sound thrashing now and again to know they need great improvement to get to the professional level. Like what Lasoya often says, "Sometimes you can learn something from these divisional teams. Their approach might be different."
Divisional teams more so than any other could be at the bar, with their kids, at the frat house, Xbox console, or just home in the AC (reading Tolstoy or Marcus Aurelius no doubt). We could be putting our money in a mutual fund like the savvy investors we are or paying off student loans. But we're not. We're in 102.9 degree heat. Dropping $400 on a luxurious Caravan. Spinning four points in a row. Playing out games with dislocated shoulders. Watching our teammates play freshly on crutches jeopardizing our workman's comp. Old salty Pros taking licks just to keep bringing the next generation to bear. Playing on even when our teammates, our best friends, have achieved their dreams by making Pro rosters. You know why?
Because. We. Love. This. Job.
Saturday, April 28, 2012
PSP Phoenix D2, part 1
VFTD: Thanks once again are due Mike McGowan of Prime for putting in the time and effort to rep the division.
"You will hydrate." It felt like a scene from Jarhead. "You will adjust to this desert, and you'll hydrate some more." Everyone got an associate's degree in hydration. Saying it's hot in Phoenix is like saying there's gravity on Earth. But everyone was looking out for each other. At least humidity was left out of the equation. But, like the rest of the US, there has been unseasonably if not record-setting, warm weather across the seaboards. Arizona has not been immune. On the same April 19-22 dates in 2011 and 2010 the highest temps were 90 and 88 degrees respectively. This past weekend. 102.9 degrees. When your body temp reaches that high, you go to the hospital. I heard of at least two cases of heat stroke, one a spectator and one a TX Storm player. If on the calendar next season Phoenix should be the first event of the year for a variety of reasons, weather and cost certainly among them. But perhaps we should see it a month earlier to guarantee less hellish temperatures.
It's rare to see a major city embrace paintball the way the Glendale area has. A real-life sporting complex. Actual paved parking lots. Discounts to local stores issued. Not to mention use of soccer fields. The surface play similar to astroturf. The ground hardened from the beating sun, had a "slick" feel without being slippery on the feet, but tough and survivable. There's that level of refinement at places that have hosted legs in the series several times before. If they're willing to welcome the abuse paintball players bring to their grounds year in and year out, that's a special place to play. [VFTD: They're willing for a substantial 5 figure payday. If you want to see Lane turn red ask him about the fire code inspections prior to the event.]
This event saw 16 Division 2 teams. There were 18 in Texas. Teams from Galveston that decided not to join: Blackout, Breakout, Overhead, Siege, Da Bears (basically Moon City Lazercats D1 at Phx) plus Texas teams, Team Zone and OBK. Several teams made Phoenix their first event: Team No Name (TNN) [New Jersey], Carolina Collision, Denver Fury, Royalty [CA], and PaintballTickets.com [San Jose, CA]. Have to expect that the east coast teams that attended are in essence declaring the rest of the season. Collision is essentially longtime CFOA team Dark Carnival reprised. They had Rob Staudinger playing alongside them as D1 Mayhem was unable to come. They would make the cut through a wildcard for an 8th place finish. TNN brought a couple D1 former Hurricanes along on the squad. Only 5 of the 9 players were from the squad that won D3X New Jersey last season. The remaining teams may just be journeymen that wanted to drop in to the only West coast PSP. Shane Pestana's WCPPL team, Royalty; 4th Place D3X at Cup last year. They're also responsible for the Ironmen's most recent acquisition, Tokahe Hamil ("A-Rod" Rodriguez could be considered but he only played with Royalty at Cup.) Paintballtickets.com placed 5th at NPPL HB, which explains their D4 APPA rankings as players. In spite of NPPL's conversion to a "Xball/Race" format, they did not find the same success in a 5-Man format in Phx.
Fury will probably decide to stick around. They didn't play HB, so they may be committed to PSPs. The webcast commentators knew of their owner, Scottie Flint. The man seems to be known throughout the paintball ranks, and the Fury name has popped up several different times throughout the years. [VFTD: Scottie & Fury date back to the mid- late 90s at least.] One of their players was on the Vicious pro squad. Most of their players, six out of eight to be exact, played D1 at Cup in 2011, but you wouldn't know it by their classification. For most it counted as their drop score. They utilized the two center bunkers to cross it up plus some seriously impressive gun-fighting skills. Apparently, they had been flying out to visit Dynasty and had a long-term scrimmage fest with Texas Storm prior to the event.
While the desert was a distinct contrast from the muddy, soggy coast of Galveston Island. The Arizona oven didn't change much of what rose to the top. There were a few exceptions. Coalition surprised yet again. This time in an unfortunate way for them. They didn't make the cut this go around. A first place, while excellent for confidence, is useless for self-assessment, not to mention motivation. Especially on the same layout. I only saw a few of their Friday games. While they may have tried to change their game plans up, it didn't really look like it. Plus, it's difficult to revamp your entire style. I saw them dying going for that center aztec to cross it up. In what was perhaps the toughest bracket, with no gimmes like in the others, Coalition fell short of their goals. PB Vipers were rocking the brand new Vapor from the brand new company Machine. I watched PBV almost come back down 0-4 to Fury but didn't quite make it, losing 5-4. Penalties plagued them. Last Call took up the caboose yet again. Three of their players were out due to injury. They certainly have heart.
"You will hydrate." It felt like a scene from Jarhead. "You will adjust to this desert, and you'll hydrate some more." Everyone got an associate's degree in hydration. Saying it's hot in Phoenix is like saying there's gravity on Earth. But everyone was looking out for each other. At least humidity was left out of the equation. But, like the rest of the US, there has been unseasonably if not record-setting, warm weather across the seaboards. Arizona has not been immune. On the same April 19-22 dates in 2011 and 2010 the highest temps were 90 and 88 degrees respectively. This past weekend. 102.9 degrees. When your body temp reaches that high, you go to the hospital. I heard of at least two cases of heat stroke, one a spectator and one a TX Storm player. If on the calendar next season Phoenix should be the first event of the year for a variety of reasons, weather and cost certainly among them. But perhaps we should see it a month earlier to guarantee less hellish temperatures.
It's rare to see a major city embrace paintball the way the Glendale area has. A real-life sporting complex. Actual paved parking lots. Discounts to local stores issued. Not to mention use of soccer fields. The surface play similar to astroturf. The ground hardened from the beating sun, had a "slick" feel without being slippery on the feet, but tough and survivable. There's that level of refinement at places that have hosted legs in the series several times before. If they're willing to welcome the abuse paintball players bring to their grounds year in and year out, that's a special place to play. [VFTD: They're willing for a substantial 5 figure payday. If you want to see Lane turn red ask him about the fire code inspections prior to the event.]
This event saw 16 Division 2 teams. There were 18 in Texas. Teams from Galveston that decided not to join: Blackout, Breakout, Overhead, Siege, Da Bears (basically Moon City Lazercats D1 at Phx) plus Texas teams, Team Zone and OBK. Several teams made Phoenix their first event: Team No Name (TNN) [New Jersey], Carolina Collision, Denver Fury, Royalty [CA], and PaintballTickets.com [San Jose, CA]. Have to expect that the east coast teams that attended are in essence declaring the rest of the season. Collision is essentially longtime CFOA team Dark Carnival reprised. They had Rob Staudinger playing alongside them as D1 Mayhem was unable to come. They would make the cut through a wildcard for an 8th place finish. TNN brought a couple D1 former Hurricanes along on the squad. Only 5 of the 9 players were from the squad that won D3X New Jersey last season. The remaining teams may just be journeymen that wanted to drop in to the only West coast PSP. Shane Pestana's WCPPL team, Royalty; 4th Place D3X at Cup last year. They're also responsible for the Ironmen's most recent acquisition, Tokahe Hamil ("A-Rod" Rodriguez could be considered but he only played with Royalty at Cup.) Paintballtickets.com placed 5th at NPPL HB, which explains their D4 APPA rankings as players. In spite of NPPL's conversion to a "Xball/Race" format, they did not find the same success in a 5-Man format in Phx.
Fury will probably decide to stick around. They didn't play HB, so they may be committed to PSPs. The webcast commentators knew of their owner, Scottie Flint. The man seems to be known throughout the paintball ranks, and the Fury name has popped up several different times throughout the years. [VFTD: Scottie & Fury date back to the mid- late 90s at least.] One of their players was on the Vicious pro squad. Most of their players, six out of eight to be exact, played D1 at Cup in 2011, but you wouldn't know it by their classification. For most it counted as their drop score. They utilized the two center bunkers to cross it up plus some seriously impressive gun-fighting skills. Apparently, they had been flying out to visit Dynasty and had a long-term scrimmage fest with Texas Storm prior to the event.
While the desert was a distinct contrast from the muddy, soggy coast of Galveston Island. The Arizona oven didn't change much of what rose to the top. There were a few exceptions. Coalition surprised yet again. This time in an unfortunate way for them. They didn't make the cut this go around. A first place, while excellent for confidence, is useless for self-assessment, not to mention motivation. Especially on the same layout. I only saw a few of their Friday games. While they may have tried to change their game plans up, it didn't really look like it. Plus, it's difficult to revamp your entire style. I saw them dying going for that center aztec to cross it up. In what was perhaps the toughest bracket, with no gimmes like in the others, Coalition fell short of their goals. PB Vipers were rocking the brand new Vapor from the brand new company Machine. I watched PBV almost come back down 0-4 to Fury but didn't quite make it, losing 5-4. Penalties plagued them. Last Call took up the caboose yet again. Three of their players were out due to injury. They certainly have heart.
Friday, April 27, 2012
One Crazy Game
Okay, I lied. About that last post being the last MS related post for a while. The thing is I had intended to incorporate this post into the last one--but changed my mind. (Even the title of the other post was chosen because of the content in this one. Oops.) So it wasn't exactly a lie, more an unintended consequence of thinking the assorted ideas through. You should be used to it. Happens all the time in paintball. (No, not the thinking things through part, the lying part.)
If you've been reading the St. Tropez posts you may recall a comment or two that was mildly disparaging of the Euro style of play. I want to expand on that theme. (Making friends and influencing peeps.) (It isn't all of the teams but it is an easily recognizable pattern common to many of the teams.)
While none of the major leagues have a functioning game philosophy they all have some general ideas about the direction the game has gone in recent years and what future developments they may want to institute. For example, the PSP has a not-quite-guiding principle that as much as possible all the divisions should play the same game and it is a concept taken into consideration when changes are discussed. (Except when it isn't.) The NPPL's guiding precept is solvency--despite the for the player rhetoric--hence the wholesale changes looking for a formula that will at least break even. (Hey, desperation isn't necessarily a bad thing--unless it involves giving Pev an open mike.) The MS is a bit different in that there are more voices at the table that expect to be heard, more bickering and more agendas being pursued. For purposes of this post though only one agenda is relevant. It is the one that envisions the ideal game of paintball being a fast & furious explosion of action resolved quickly and repeated as rapidly as possible. A notion that the Euro players seem to have bought into as well. (Here is where I confess I too am largely persuaded that speed is the ultimate killer. But that's not exactly what the Eurokids put into practice. Too often it looked like aggression for aggression's sake regardless of the situation or the player's awareness, or lack thereof.)
In support of that idea the MS stayed with the prior field dimensions when the PSP changed. They have also followed a tacit plan to design layouts that promote that style of play--or at least discourage anything remotely defensively-oriented. On the other hand they lowered the cap on the ROF. And introduced the 'technical' snake. Both of which are mitigating factors given the way the league seems to want the game to be played.
And what do changes of these sorts accomplish? If left in place long enough they change the way teams will practice. They reorder the priority assigned to the various skills employed to play, etc. In myriad subtle ways they change how the game is approached, conceived and played with most everyone involved seldom, if ever, giving it a second thought.
Then there is the cornerstone of the league's officiating policy; don't ask, don't tell. No, that's not it. It's no unobvious hits, no need to make a subjective call. Which should, in a rational universe, have a chilling effect on play and yet doesn't seem to. Let me explain. What situations are most likely to result in refs calling 1-4-1's? (No, not players cheating. Well yes, but that isn't a situation, that's a choice. Not the same thing.) The situation is players on the move, shooting their guns, intent on being proactive. Getting shot in that situation is practically the MS definition of a 1-4-1. Given a moment to consider then one might reasonably presume that greater risk attaches to such action compared to the likely reward. Doesn't it follow then that taking that risk should only occur when the player has a reasonable expectation they are in control of the situation? And yet point after point the Eurokids run around with no more apparent rationale than excited molecules with the refs running about throwing flags and pulling bodies. Is the outcome of points like that truly determinative of superior play or skills--or is it a crapshoot based on what the refs saw or didn't see? Or acted on or chose not to act on?
So what makes teams play that way? Are they committed to attempting a style of play they don't know how to execute? Is the reffing less rigorous and consistent than claimed making the risk versus reward balance more closely in the players' minds? Both? Something else?
Does the Millennium ever think about what sort of game they want to be promoting when they make decisions about how they will run their events?
If you've been reading the St. Tropez posts you may recall a comment or two that was mildly disparaging of the Euro style of play. I want to expand on that theme. (Making friends and influencing peeps.) (It isn't all of the teams but it is an easily recognizable pattern common to many of the teams.)
While none of the major leagues have a functioning game philosophy they all have some general ideas about the direction the game has gone in recent years and what future developments they may want to institute. For example, the PSP has a not-quite-guiding principle that as much as possible all the divisions should play the same game and it is a concept taken into consideration when changes are discussed. (Except when it isn't.) The NPPL's guiding precept is solvency--despite the for the player rhetoric--hence the wholesale changes looking for a formula that will at least break even. (Hey, desperation isn't necessarily a bad thing--unless it involves giving Pev an open mike.) The MS is a bit different in that there are more voices at the table that expect to be heard, more bickering and more agendas being pursued. For purposes of this post though only one agenda is relevant. It is the one that envisions the ideal game of paintball being a fast & furious explosion of action resolved quickly and repeated as rapidly as possible. A notion that the Euro players seem to have bought into as well. (Here is where I confess I too am largely persuaded that speed is the ultimate killer. But that's not exactly what the Eurokids put into practice. Too often it looked like aggression for aggression's sake regardless of the situation or the player's awareness, or lack thereof.)
In support of that idea the MS stayed with the prior field dimensions when the PSP changed. They have also followed a tacit plan to design layouts that promote that style of play--or at least discourage anything remotely defensively-oriented. On the other hand they lowered the cap on the ROF. And introduced the 'technical' snake. Both of which are mitigating factors given the way the league seems to want the game to be played.
And what do changes of these sorts accomplish? If left in place long enough they change the way teams will practice. They reorder the priority assigned to the various skills employed to play, etc. In myriad subtle ways they change how the game is approached, conceived and played with most everyone involved seldom, if ever, giving it a second thought.
Then there is the cornerstone of the league's officiating policy; don't ask, don't tell. No, that's not it. It's no unobvious hits, no need to make a subjective call. Which should, in a rational universe, have a chilling effect on play and yet doesn't seem to. Let me explain. What situations are most likely to result in refs calling 1-4-1's? (No, not players cheating. Well yes, but that isn't a situation, that's a choice. Not the same thing.) The situation is players on the move, shooting their guns, intent on being proactive. Getting shot in that situation is practically the MS definition of a 1-4-1. Given a moment to consider then one might reasonably presume that greater risk attaches to such action compared to the likely reward. Doesn't it follow then that taking that risk should only occur when the player has a reasonable expectation they are in control of the situation? And yet point after point the Eurokids run around with no more apparent rationale than excited molecules with the refs running about throwing flags and pulling bodies. Is the outcome of points like that truly determinative of superior play or skills--or is it a crapshoot based on what the refs saw or didn't see? Or acted on or chose not to act on?
So what makes teams play that way? Are they committed to attempting a style of play they don't know how to execute? Is the reffing less rigorous and consistent than claimed making the risk versus reward balance more closely in the players' minds? Both? Something else?
Does the Millennium ever think about what sort of game they want to be promoting when they make decisions about how they will run their events?
Millennium Style
This is the last one (Millennium post) I swear--until the next event at the end of May and chances are I won't ramble endlessly about whatever happens at Bitburg. For one I've covered all the generic stuff and there's no need to repeat any of that. Odds are I'll post a simple event report and any signs of progress--should any such signs manifest. And that's it. Not so bad really.
Worse luck for you I want to tie today's post into the game philosophy notions recently put forward here. A demonstration of how a shared & active game philosophy can/could make a real world difference--and the potential problems that can arise when there is no real game philosophy underpinning. Let's begin with the logistics of running an MS event; 4 teams playing at the same time to be precise. It's a more efficient use of time and space, provides some cost savings to the MS and allows more teams teams to play on fewer fields. Was the move made to improve the game or improve the MS's bottom line? I have no inherent objection to the MS (or any other league) making smart business decisions--but I do have a problem when there are conflicts of interest because, like it or not, the major leagues control the direction and the destiny of the game we play. At least for now. Did the MS decide Race 2-5 was the ideal variant or were they more concerned about the logistics, scheduling & cost (to everyone) when that decision was made? Same goes for a 3 match prelim. Is that the competitive ideal or even a decent compromise given other considerations? What drove those decisions? Was it the good of the game or what was good for the league? [And, no, what's good for the league is NOT necessarily good for the game. The game existed before the league and will exist after it.]
Virtually every serious concern anyone involved has had about the state of the game and its future direction has revolved around the lack of direction and purpose that a game philosophy would provide. And that goes for the other major leagues as well.
As competitive paintball continues to evolve whose priorities will drive future change? And will competitive paintball in the future be a better game, one we even recognize or something completely different?
Worse luck for you I want to tie today's post into the game philosophy notions recently put forward here. A demonstration of how a shared & active game philosophy can/could make a real world difference--and the potential problems that can arise when there is no real game philosophy underpinning. Let's begin with the logistics of running an MS event; 4 teams playing at the same time to be precise. It's a more efficient use of time and space, provides some cost savings to the MS and allows more teams teams to play on fewer fields. Was the move made to improve the game or improve the MS's bottom line? I have no inherent objection to the MS (or any other league) making smart business decisions--but I do have a problem when there are conflicts of interest because, like it or not, the major leagues control the direction and the destiny of the game we play. At least for now. Did the MS decide Race 2-5 was the ideal variant or were they more concerned about the logistics, scheduling & cost (to everyone) when that decision was made? Same goes for a 3 match prelim. Is that the competitive ideal or even a decent compromise given other considerations? What drove those decisions? Was it the good of the game or what was good for the league? [And, no, what's good for the league is NOT necessarily good for the game. The game existed before the league and will exist after it.]
Virtually every serious concern anyone involved has had about the state of the game and its future direction has revolved around the lack of direction and purpose that a game philosophy would provide. And that goes for the other major leagues as well.
As competitive paintball continues to evolve whose priorities will drive future change? And will competitive paintball in the future be a better game, one we even recognize or something completely different?
Thursday, April 26, 2012
MS St. Tropez: The TBD Experience, part 2
The team was treated to dinner Saturday night at an Italian restaurant (thanks, Rab) facing the harbor in Frejus. It was quite good but maintained the standard European practice of not having (or using) ice to chill their drinks. It is frankly barbaric. (When I was last in Paris I found a tiny hole in the wall daily sundries store near our hotel that sold ice cubes by the dozen in shrink wrapped plastic for about twice what an 8 lb. bag costs at the local 7-11. As I recall it also sold live pigeons for sacrificial divinations. Or maybe not.) Oh, by the way, have I mentioned that Europe is expensive? Dinner was on GI Sportz. The two cabs that took us back to the Oasis Village ran up a 100 Euro charge (total) in less than 8 miles.
Sunday night we abandoned the venue and stayed at the Mercure Thalassas Hotel in Frejus. It is a modern establishment with the typical amenities and more room than is often the case with European hotels. The only downside was beds designed for adult males born in the 12th century (when the average height was give or take 5 and a half feet tall.) Consequently my feet hung over the edges. It was an improvement over the bungalows. The kids probably didn't notice as they spent most of the night bar hopping drinking and eating rich desserts with Moose and Q among others. (You know who you are.) It also turned out that the evening meal begins at 7 pm and most restaurants don't open until then. I'm not a regular on the blue plate circuit but sometimes you want to eat before 7. Or you want breakfast for dinner. Or steak and waffles at 3 am. I'm just saying. Turned out however that dinner Sunday night was worth the wait--the proprietress took pity on us--or else was afraid we'd storm her doors--and let us in around 6:30 pm. The tiny 6 table restaurant specialized in beef and offered the exotic option of individually cooking your meal at your table on superheated rocks. I know how it sounds but it was amazing--probably the best meal I've ever had in Euroland.
It’s late in the day Thursday before we learn our prelim schedule. (We knew our bracket from the big hat drawing but not our match schedule. No, the hat wasn't all that big. The drawing was the event.) Two matches on Friday. One Saturday. The sequence was ideal. A first match against the lowest ranked team from the season past then Dynasty. A chance to fine tune a bit followed by a match against a team we know well. Friday's results will tell us what we need to know about Saturday and what we need to do. Friday the weather is lovely crisp and cool until the sun comes up, then warm but not hot. A mild breeze replaces the previous day's stiff gusts. The air is dry, the sky a depth less blue with wisps of while skirting the horizon. A perfect day for paintball.
We don't have our usual pit crew and there's the new routine to adjust to of the simultaneous matches and there are a few hiccups along the way. We call for a time out too late. And a hot gun that can't be replaced in time means starting a point with 4 players. But it's mostly small things; the routine isn't yet routine and means our attentions are divided. We struggle through the first match but still manage to win. Lots of penalties on us. (Three or four I think.) No problem, we earned them. Next up came Dynasty. Better now than later. No surprises. Well other than our ineffective laning OTB. We're putting the paint where Dynasty was running but not getting kills. Fewer penalties and a lot fewer kills equals an unequivocal loss. We take it in stride. We're learning. All will be resolved on Saturday. Sunday comes a day early. The math is simple. Win and stay in. We do--and with the fewest penalties so far in the event. But it's only one match and Race 2-5 at that. Compared to what we're used to it's almost as if we hadn't played at all.
Throughout the prelims we haven't played well--at least not to our standard--and discuss some further adjustments. We had hoped the similarities to Galveston would translate but it doesn't really--the St. Tropez field feels and plays differently enough that we have to reconsider what we're doing. The players are unselfish, willing to do whatever is needed to be successful. This time it backfires as I make the wrong change. At first I resist but allow myself to get talked into an adjustment I'm not comfortable with. (Not the first mistake I've ever made and it won't be the last. Unfortunately.)
On Sunday we are unable to do enough to win our way into the semis. It's a learning experience and should serve as a reminder that every match and every victory has to be earned regardless of the league or opponent.
The reffing.
Conceptually we’re fine with the Millennium style but the M style doesn’t, in and of itself, assure consistency or uniformity anymore than any other rules enforcement effort. And in practice it took us time to make the adjustment--still, not a problem. Our issues weren't playing by the Millennium's rules, it was the failure of the Millennium crew to impose those rules uniformly across the board on everybody else. I have intentionally left out the names of the teams we played--other than Dynasty (who flat beat us) because I don't want them unfairly tarred by any of my comments regarding the officiating. As far as I'm concerned the other teams lined up and played paintball and have zero responsibility for what the refs did or didn't do.
Now at this point you have the option of choosing what you wish to believe. You could be charitable and assume my disappointment has colored my opinion or you could attribute my views to sour grapes and poor sportsmanship. Or you can Solomon-like split the difference and assume some errors were made. Or you may not care at all. All of which are fine by me. It is the risk I take when I blog stuff like this. However, there's a little more to it than that. Five of my players had Replay cameras on their guns. The video is amazingly good, crisp clear and unambiguous. The video doesn't (usually) indicate when we were eliminated but it does show every instance of when we shot an opponent. And what did or did not happen as a consequence. It will not be released to the public. (I can hear the pics or shens crowd squawking already. Forgetaboutit.) It is not (and never was) the team's (or my) intention to try and embarrass the league or its officials. But if a rep of the league would like to see some video we can probably make it available.
If I haven't sufficiently antagonized the Eurokids yet just wait. My next post will be about the disconnect between the way Euro players play and the Millennium's efforts to manipulate the game play.
Sunday night we abandoned the venue and stayed at the Mercure Thalassas Hotel in Frejus. It is a modern establishment with the typical amenities and more room than is often the case with European hotels. The only downside was beds designed for adult males born in the 12th century (when the average height was give or take 5 and a half feet tall.) Consequently my feet hung over the edges. It was an improvement over the bungalows. The kids probably didn't notice as they spent most of the night bar hopping drinking and eating rich desserts with Moose and Q among others. (You know who you are.) It also turned out that the evening meal begins at 7 pm and most restaurants don't open until then. I'm not a regular on the blue plate circuit but sometimes you want to eat before 7. Or you want breakfast for dinner. Or steak and waffles at 3 am. I'm just saying. Turned out however that dinner Sunday night was worth the wait--the proprietress took pity on us--or else was afraid we'd storm her doors--and let us in around 6:30 pm. The tiny 6 table restaurant specialized in beef and offered the exotic option of individually cooking your meal at your table on superheated rocks. I know how it sounds but it was amazing--probably the best meal I've ever had in Euroland.
It’s late in the day Thursday before we learn our prelim schedule. (We knew our bracket from the big hat drawing but not our match schedule. No, the hat wasn't all that big. The drawing was the event.) Two matches on Friday. One Saturday. The sequence was ideal. A first match against the lowest ranked team from the season past then Dynasty. A chance to fine tune a bit followed by a match against a team we know well. Friday's results will tell us what we need to know about Saturday and what we need to do. Friday the weather is lovely crisp and cool until the sun comes up, then warm but not hot. A mild breeze replaces the previous day's stiff gusts. The air is dry, the sky a depth less blue with wisps of while skirting the horizon. A perfect day for paintball.
We don't have our usual pit crew and there's the new routine to adjust to of the simultaneous matches and there are a few hiccups along the way. We call for a time out too late. And a hot gun that can't be replaced in time means starting a point with 4 players. But it's mostly small things; the routine isn't yet routine and means our attentions are divided. We struggle through the first match but still manage to win. Lots of penalties on us. (Three or four I think.) No problem, we earned them. Next up came Dynasty. Better now than later. No surprises. Well other than our ineffective laning OTB. We're putting the paint where Dynasty was running but not getting kills. Fewer penalties and a lot fewer kills equals an unequivocal loss. We take it in stride. We're learning. All will be resolved on Saturday. Sunday comes a day early. The math is simple. Win and stay in. We do--and with the fewest penalties so far in the event. But it's only one match and Race 2-5 at that. Compared to what we're used to it's almost as if we hadn't played at all.
Throughout the prelims we haven't played well--at least not to our standard--and discuss some further adjustments. We had hoped the similarities to Galveston would translate but it doesn't really--the St. Tropez field feels and plays differently enough that we have to reconsider what we're doing. The players are unselfish, willing to do whatever is needed to be successful. This time it backfires as I make the wrong change. At first I resist but allow myself to get talked into an adjustment I'm not comfortable with. (Not the first mistake I've ever made and it won't be the last. Unfortunately.)
On Sunday we are unable to do enough to win our way into the semis. It's a learning experience and should serve as a reminder that every match and every victory has to be earned regardless of the league or opponent.
The reffing.
Conceptually we’re fine with the Millennium style but the M style doesn’t, in and of itself, assure consistency or uniformity anymore than any other rules enforcement effort. And in practice it took us time to make the adjustment--still, not a problem. Our issues weren't playing by the Millennium's rules, it was the failure of the Millennium crew to impose those rules uniformly across the board on everybody else. I have intentionally left out the names of the teams we played--other than Dynasty (who flat beat us) because I don't want them unfairly tarred by any of my comments regarding the officiating. As far as I'm concerned the other teams lined up and played paintball and have zero responsibility for what the refs did or didn't do.
Now at this point you have the option of choosing what you wish to believe. You could be charitable and assume my disappointment has colored my opinion or you could attribute my views to sour grapes and poor sportsmanship. Or you can Solomon-like split the difference and assume some errors were made. Or you may not care at all. All of which are fine by me. It is the risk I take when I blog stuff like this. However, there's a little more to it than that. Five of my players had Replay cameras on their guns. The video is amazingly good, crisp clear and unambiguous. The video doesn't (usually) indicate when we were eliminated but it does show every instance of when we shot an opponent. And what did or did not happen as a consequence. It will not be released to the public. (I can hear the pics or shens crowd squawking already. Forgetaboutit.) It is not (and never was) the team's (or my) intention to try and embarrass the league or its officials. But if a rep of the league would like to see some video we can probably make it available.
If I haven't sufficiently antagonized the Eurokids yet just wait. My next post will be about the disconnect between the way Euro players play and the Millennium's efforts to manipulate the game play.
Wednesday, April 25, 2012
MS St. Tropez: The TBD Experience, part 1
Our tournament ended when the ultimate [?] overruled a lesser official’s call (not a hit, player clean, point good) and decided the residual paint between harness sleeves rubbed into the Velcro on Chad’s pack was indeed a hit and called for a 1-4-1. From the time we cleared the field--with 3 alive--until Chad pressed the buzzer a phantom 1-4-1 called on J-Rab–it was mixed colors and looked like he’d bumped up against one of the bunkers--saw Jason pulled and we were left with one live body. And when the ultimate made his call we lost that point and the swing point awarded to our opponents ended the match in their favor. The stain of paint on Chad’s pack was pink. Both teams were shooting the same paint. It was orange.
Our European adventure began, for the majority, with a 2 pm flight out of Tampa to Dulles, outside Washington DC. With everyone together we boarded a flight for Frankfurt Germany around 7 pm. We arrived seven and a half hours later and quickly passed customs then hiked to a different concourse to await the 8:30 am flight to Nice, France. [Say what you will about the Germans but the stereotype of regimented order and sticklers for detail oozes from the architecture in Frankfort’s airport to say nothing of the airport personnel. It may be the only English many of them know is, “Not possible. Against the rules.” It was something we heard with some frequency anyway.] At 10:30 am a prearranged shuttle service picked us up and within the hour we had arrived at the venue approx. 17 hours after we left home.
If it weren’t for the different languages being spoken it’s hard at first to grasp that you’re somewhere foreign. The trappings of modern airports around the world are broadly the same. The people look much alike--although there is a breed of European male that is unmistakable on sight, like a neutered puppy. Landing in Nice early in the morning makes it clear we’re in another place and much of the adventure comes in discovering just what sort of place it might really be. Unfortunately the team finalized our commitment to the MS relatively late and with HB scheduled for the following weekend there was no time for much beyond paintball. As a consequence most of our experience of France was en passant. In passing–and in some of the ordinary routines of daily living--as experienced on site at the ironically named Oasis Village resort. (While neither an oasis or a village it would be an excellent location for filming a low budget zombie movie.) The seemingly random hours of operation for most of the services--a self-serve laundry even--or a restaurant that offered only two meal choices or pizza. Even the front office's and curio shop's daily hours were a mystery.
On site English is more prevalent than I expected. While a dozen or more languages drift around the vendors and stake out temporary ground around teams staging to play many, if not most, seem to speak some English. This isn’t true off site. (And why should it be? After all the French are the Americans of Europe. We, and they, expect other people to accommodate us.) Not even close, particularly in France--where a person may or may not know some English--but you’ll likely never know. Even those involved in the tourist industry aren’t routinely bi-lingual. Or admit to it anyway.
The team has reservations and confirmed in advance that our credit card--AMEX--would be good. But this is France and that was then and this is now. They can't accept the card. As it turned out they couldn't accept any of the cards our paint sponsor's rep produced either. Eventually an African distributor for our paint sponsor produced a credit card that was deemed acceptable and we checked in. By this time we were due at the venue to share some practice time on the CPL field with Amsterdam Heat.
After moving our luggage to our appointed bungalows we walk to the venue. The wind is gusting and the nets haven't been raised yet. We meet the guys from Heat and begin to get ready. The word is that the netting will be raised soon. We all assume that despite the delay the practice schedule will be maintained. (After all the MS requires teams to sign up in advance, choose an allotted time slot and pay for the field time. Heat had the first hour block.) Turns out we are mistaken. It is our first taste of what is to come. Before we know it Marseilles Icon is on the CPL field. A fellow named Thierry (I think)--though it sounds kinda like Cherry to the Anglo ear--is in charge. (At least we couldn't find anybody else willing to take any responsibility.) He has a clipboard with the printed schedule on it. It is utterly irrelevant. He assigns field time as he chooses and gives preference to French teams--and the league's reigning powerhouse, Art Chaos. Every argument, up to and including pointing out to him the printed list on his clipboard, makes no difference. For each point we make he has a different excuse or simply a shrug. He scratches out the printed list and writes in his personal choices in blue ballpoint ink. While Icon practices we are finally informed Thierry has found a place for us--on a different field four hours from now. Without Thierry’s help we arrange amongst ourselves for us, Art Chaos, Icon and Heat to share the CPL field. (Many thanks to Art Chaos and Icon.) It’s not what we, or the other teams, had planned--or what was paid for--but it was better than waiting until 6 pm for the chance to play on the wrong field. Welcome to the Millennium ugly Americans.
Our European adventure began, for the majority, with a 2 pm flight out of Tampa to Dulles, outside Washington DC. With everyone together we boarded a flight for Frankfurt Germany around 7 pm. We arrived seven and a half hours later and quickly passed customs then hiked to a different concourse to await the 8:30 am flight to Nice, France. [Say what you will about the Germans but the stereotype of regimented order and sticklers for detail oozes from the architecture in Frankfort’s airport to say nothing of the airport personnel. It may be the only English many of them know is, “Not possible. Against the rules.” It was something we heard with some frequency anyway.] At 10:30 am a prearranged shuttle service picked us up and within the hour we had arrived at the venue approx. 17 hours after we left home.
If it weren’t for the different languages being spoken it’s hard at first to grasp that you’re somewhere foreign. The trappings of modern airports around the world are broadly the same. The people look much alike--although there is a breed of European male that is unmistakable on sight, like a neutered puppy. Landing in Nice early in the morning makes it clear we’re in another place and much of the adventure comes in discovering just what sort of place it might really be. Unfortunately the team finalized our commitment to the MS relatively late and with HB scheduled for the following weekend there was no time for much beyond paintball. As a consequence most of our experience of France was en passant. In passing–and in some of the ordinary routines of daily living--as experienced on site at the ironically named Oasis Village resort. (While neither an oasis or a village it would be an excellent location for filming a low budget zombie movie.) The seemingly random hours of operation for most of the services--a self-serve laundry even--or a restaurant that offered only two meal choices or pizza. Even the front office's and curio shop's daily hours were a mystery.
On site English is more prevalent than I expected. While a dozen or more languages drift around the vendors and stake out temporary ground around teams staging to play many, if not most, seem to speak some English. This isn’t true off site. (And why should it be? After all the French are the Americans of Europe. We, and they, expect other people to accommodate us.) Not even close, particularly in France--where a person may or may not know some English--but you’ll likely never know. Even those involved in the tourist industry aren’t routinely bi-lingual. Or admit to it anyway.
The team has reservations and confirmed in advance that our credit card--AMEX--would be good. But this is France and that was then and this is now. They can't accept the card. As it turned out they couldn't accept any of the cards our paint sponsor's rep produced either. Eventually an African distributor for our paint sponsor produced a credit card that was deemed acceptable and we checked in. By this time we were due at the venue to share some practice time on the CPL field with Amsterdam Heat.
After moving our luggage to our appointed bungalows we walk to the venue. The wind is gusting and the nets haven't been raised yet. We meet the guys from Heat and begin to get ready. The word is that the netting will be raised soon. We all assume that despite the delay the practice schedule will be maintained. (After all the MS requires teams to sign up in advance, choose an allotted time slot and pay for the field time. Heat had the first hour block.) Turns out we are mistaken. It is our first taste of what is to come. Before we know it Marseilles Icon is on the CPL field. A fellow named Thierry (I think)--though it sounds kinda like Cherry to the Anglo ear--is in charge. (At least we couldn't find anybody else willing to take any responsibility.) He has a clipboard with the printed schedule on it. It is utterly irrelevant. He assigns field time as he chooses and gives preference to French teams--and the league's reigning powerhouse, Art Chaos. Every argument, up to and including pointing out to him the printed list on his clipboard, makes no difference. For each point we make he has a different excuse or simply a shrug. He scratches out the printed list and writes in his personal choices in blue ballpoint ink. While Icon practices we are finally informed Thierry has found a place for us--on a different field four hours from now. Without Thierry’s help we arrange amongst ourselves for us, Art Chaos, Icon and Heat to share the CPL field. (Many thanks to Art Chaos and Icon.) It’s not what we, or the other teams, had planned--or what was paid for--but it was better than waiting until 6 pm for the chance to play on the wrong field. Welcome to the Millennium ugly Americans.
Monday, April 23, 2012
Lite Housekeeping
To date VFTD has allowed all comments without screening or registration, etc. and as a consequence as the site has become more popular--within the paintball community--the level of spam has also increased. It isn't a significant problem so I have no intention of changing the comments policy but since the site does get comments from far and wide--and from a fair number of English as a second language commenters--I wanted to take a moment and suggest that if your comment failed to appear in the intended comments section to drop me a quick note so I can look for it and restore it, if appropriate. I seldom look at what the spam filter catches but I don't want to lose any legit comments. Thanks.
Additionally, personal attacks aimed at fellow commenters is unacceptable. You are welcome to challenge me or your fellow commenters ideas and opinions but if I decide it's crosses the line it will simply be removed and your IP may be blocked.
Additionally, personal attacks aimed at fellow commenters is unacceptable. You are welcome to challenge me or your fellow commenters ideas and opinions but if I decide it's crosses the line it will simply be removed and your IP may be blocked.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
