sen

Keep a diary of what you're hitting, what's frustrating you, and your goals.
Post Reply
Muffinman
the gimp
Posts: 10305
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 15:34
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: sen

Post by Muffinman » 01 Aug 2018 11:05

I also like the idea of Worlds every second year to make it more feasible and valuable for more players to make the effort to attend.

In terms of balancing it out with US Open/Euros ONLY every second year, I disagree there. While that would work for someone like me who barely ever attends events, there ARE players out there that go to as many events every year as possible, and that would be a super bummer for players looking to fill their year up with footbag, especially, like you mentioned, there aren't too many other major events happening on a regular basis these days, especially in NA.

Mathieu Gauthier mentioned that he would be interested in starting a Canada Open (I think this happened once, one year a while back? Is that right? Anyone?) I think that's a neat idea. But also... there are like 15 players in all of Canada... and we're all a million miles apart... Would be neat to have a jersey too. I'm sad I missed out on that. Was it Kolo who made those?

Definitely interested in more discussion about a biannual Worlds though...

User avatar
acxel22
Post Master General
Posts: 3012
Joined: 16 Sep 2004 18:52
Location: Montreal, Qc

Re: sen

Post by acxel22 » 02 Aug 2018 06:24

worlds happening once a year is too little for me, so bi annual would be a disaster in my reality. There needs to be at least 1 opportunity for players to all gather around as THE main thing of the year, the more the better obviously.
a little crowded worlds is better then none IMO
Mathieu Gauthier

boyle
Post Master General
Posts: 2705
Joined: 19 Sep 2007 23:42
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

Re: sen

Post by boyle » 02 Aug 2018 18:06

I've been pretty supportive of the every second year idea, but I'm not certain it would work. What I do know is that there needs to be a strong proposal for each worlds (preferably more than one, so there can actually be some competition for the best place to get it, then maybe the one that didn't get it can build their bed for the following year.)

I do think having that big gathering is the ideal, but it really needs to gather most of the top players I think, which it hasn't always done each year in recent years.

User avatar
Tjuggles
Flower Child
Posts: 1594
Joined: 27 Mar 2005 20:03
Location: Wellington, NZ
Contact:

Re: sen

Post by Tjuggles » 04 Aug 2018 15:23

I think something like providing financial support for the top 3 players of the previous year, or the top 5 or 10 even. Any little bit will help, especially when the average age of our sport is like early 20s, no?
TJ Boutorwick

"You can do anything" -Greg Nelson

User avatar
C-Fan
Rekordy Polski
Posts: 11287
Joined: 23 Jan 2003 23:51
Location: Denver
Contact:

Slippery slope

Post by C-Fan » 06 Aug 2018 14:09

The question of funding competitors to go to Worlds has come up a few times in the past, and it always makes me nervous. The main pitfall that needs to be avoided is the appearance that any players are being favored by the people running the tournament. If I'm running a tournament and pay for player A to come but not player B, and then they have very close results in Circle or Routine, then it can look like the tournament organizer picked winners and losers ahead of time. We already have controversy when routines are close, and it would only be 100x worse if some of those players were sponsored by the IFPA and others were not.

Potentially you could work around this by having the winners of IFPA regional tournaments like USO or Euros compete for a pre-announced prize pot, or had the winners of these tournaments get their Worlds registration waived. But all that would have to be well announced and understood in advance, to avoid slippery slopes and the appearance of favoritism.

User avatar
sen
Post Master General
Posts: 2648
Joined: 08 Mar 2003 19:29
Location: Coaldale, AB, CA
Contact:

Re: sen

Post by sen » 06 Aug 2018 15:24

I don't have much to say on funding. I'm poor, and not even a paying member of the IFPA...

But I will say that I agree, if any players are funded, or sponsored, it should be based on IFPA event results. But then, isn't it just prize money at that point? I guess that Ken's thoughts on waiving registration fees would work, but is that enough incentive to get players there? What are the fees, $150? Having that waived isn't going to help get me to Bulgaria with $2600 in flights to deal with. But maybe it would help some players?

I don't know what the finances of the IFPA are like, but what if there was some sort of points system where you gained points for placing in IFPA events. At the end of the year the top 3 ranking players are given a travel fund to be used in the following year?

boyle
Post Master General
Posts: 2705
Joined: 19 Sep 2007 23:42
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

Re: sen

Post by boyle » 10 Aug 2018 22:05

I think something like that has to be set up from outside the IFPA or the event organisers, then you limit that issue - but there's still the issue of people claiming that you're "playing favourites" etc. This is actually something I've been considering setting up in recent years but I'm just not sure it would work.

I was surprised by how much flights cost to Bulgaria, I think that put a lot of people off. I think even within Europe it wasn't particularly cheap.

Post Reply