UK Championships?

Foosball chat / key issues and discussion
User avatar
joshjaeger
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:54 pm
Real Name: Joshua Jaeger
Location: Bath
Contact:

UK Championships?

Post by joshjaeger » Thu Sep 20, 2012 11:02 am

I'm not sure I understand this.
The point of this tournament is to qualify our best players (and be the UK champion, not that this title has any prestige or value anymore) for Nantes
Why doesn't it hold value or prestige? I think for most players in the UK scene this is fairly important. Very few people travel to foreign tournaments. I think that part of getting more players involved in the UK scene is the attraction of kowing where you stand in your country's ranking and that that is taken seriously. It is after all competition.

Perhaps I misunderstood the syntax of the statement. I still think this is as important point.
Babyfoot for a better society

User avatar
Happyham
Posts: 1531
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 3:51 pm
Real Name: Joey 'Slackjaw Chavilton' Hamilton
Location: Nebraska - USA

Re: UKC 2012

Post by Happyham » Thu Sep 20, 2012 2:22 pm

matty96 wrote:
From a Junior perspective the UKC is a great chance for Callum and myself to play the top players in the country in all categories,unfortunately something we don't get the chance to do often enough.If we were only allowed to play a Junior event at the UKC,then we might as well just play that game in my garage and phone the result in.
Agreed.
matty96 wrote:
It was my understanding that Rob was picking the men's team early this year from submitted applications of available players.So surely the best team would be selected anyway before the UKC,meaning everybody from all categories should be able to fight it out for the UK title without worrying about qualification.
Matt,

The UKC is the tournament used to qualify players for the individual events at the ITSF world championships. Mens singles, doubles, Womens singles, doubles etc. The UKC is the only method we use to qualify players for these events.

Rob selects players for the team event (ITSF World Cup).
I hated every minute of training, but I said "Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion."

Please subscribe/comment/support my blog at http://happyham1986.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Happyham
Posts: 1531
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 3:51 pm
Real Name: Joey 'Slackjaw Chavilton' Hamilton
Location: Nebraska - USA

Re: UKC 2012

Post by Happyham » Fri Sep 21, 2012 8:46 pm

joshjaeger wrote:
Why doesn't it hold value or prestige?
Josh, this tournament has changed quite a lot since its inception.

The first UKC was not an open tournament. We used a player of the year (POY) ranking system, with the top 16 players in each category (open singles/doubles, womens singles/doubles) qualifying for this tournament.

It was also held on the 3 main tables (Tornado, Bonzini, Garlando) that represent the UK foosball scene. It was later extended to 4 table types, I believe?

Since then, the UKC has become an open tournament, with players not in the top 16 POY being charged an entry fee to enter. I don't have a huge problem with this, but I do think that it takes away a little of the glamour of this tournament. I also understand that its neccessary in order to fund the tournament, so it has its purpose.
However, only being able to qualify via a points race throughout the year gave players an incentive to compete, and also gave a sense of reward if they made the top 16 that year. As it stands, you don't have to play any tournaments, but can still pay an entry and turn up for the UKC. Not as prestigious in my opinion.

The last two years this tournament has been held on just one table type. The UK scene certainly isn't recognized for playing on just one table type, so this handicaps the tournament in favour of those who are most comfortable on Garlando. If you win this tournament, I would hardly call yourself the champion of UK foosball. The champion of Garlando UK foosball, perhaps. There are a number of players (myself included) that are just as strong on Tornado as someone might be on Garlando. Potentially, their talent won't get recognized as well at this tournament, which in my opinion devalues the results, and the title of UK Champion.

Ironically, I think our best 4 players over the last 5 years all prefer Tornado, which is usually reflected at the ITSF world championships by selecting the Tornado table as home table.


joshjaeger wrote:
I think for most players in the UK scene this is fairly important. Very few people travel to foreign tournaments. I think that part of getting more players involved in the UK scene is the attraction of knowing where you stand in your country's ranking and that that is taken seriously.
I actually dont think the UKC is fairly important to many people. At least, not the people I speak to. The UKC used to mean something. By restricting seniors/juniors/women to choosing just one event to play in, its only function now is to qualify players for Nantes. The title of UK champion means nothing anymore, otherwise it would be open to anyone who wanted to play in it (Via points race or not).

I agree that knowing where you stand in the rankings is attractive to new players, but this tournament doesn't do that. It generates a list of results based on one-off performances on one table type. The ranking list generates a list made up of your performance over numerous tournaments, over a significant period of time. This is as close to an accurate reflection of where you stand in your country as we can get.

With no tournaments being held anymore, there's not really a POY points race. Without the points race, theres no added prestige to the UKC tournament. With only one table type, I see no reason to give the winner the title of 'UK Champion'.

Its just another tournament, except Rob Davey can't win it :wink:
I hated every minute of training, but I said "Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion."

Please subscribe/comment/support my blog at http://happyham1986.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Elvis
Posts: 282
Joined: Mon Jan 16, 2006 6:55 pm
Real Name: Martin Landers
Location: Darlington
Contact:

Re: UKC 2012

Post by Elvis » Fri Sep 21, 2012 10:32 pm

This makes sad reading - In Darlington we'd be happy to host an annual ranking tournament in a fixed month every year - Is there are process to go through for this?

M
Martin Landers
Secretary - Darlington Table Football Club

User avatar
Jonathan may
BFA Committee Observer
Posts: 3817
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:21 pm
Real Name: Jonathan May
Location: London
Contact:

Re: UKC 2012

Post by Jonathan may » Fri Sep 21, 2012 11:05 pm

Yes.

The process is the same as any other tournament.

Its kind of obvious why the tournament means nothing to Joe these days.

User avatar
Gipsy Beast
BFA Vice Chairman
Posts: 1312
Joined: Wed Apr 07, 2004 9:01 am
Real Name: J-P Thompson
Location: Hackney Central, London
Contact:

Re: UKC 2012

Post by Gipsy Beast » Sat Sep 22, 2012 2:36 pm

Happyham wrote:With no tournaments being held anymore, there's not really a POY points race. Without the points race, theres no added prestige to the UKC tournament. With only one table type, I see no reason to give the winner the title of 'UK Champion'.
In a world where the BFA had unlimited resources, i'm sure things would be different... A UKC is still better than no UKC, in my opinion. As much the UKC has the purpose of giving players a chance of representing G-B in the ITSF World Cup 2013, it's also an opportunity for the community to get together and share their passion for foos and support team G-B. It's fun, its a great meetup... Most of us are there to play our best and get the highest ranking possible, only for the elite few is it really going for the title...

I'm really looking forward to it... The Rileys venue is good, really enjoyed last time! Coventry is one big motorway from what I saw but I could not care less as i'm going there to play foos!!! No offence Boz, but i'm not sharing a room with you this time... Trying to sleep next to what sounded like a half dying polar bear and having to drag the mattress in the bathroom at 3AM to rest a bit... LOL - Its loads of fun! I recommend everybody should try it once :eating:

willhawkes
BFA General Secretary
Posts: 1133
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 2:31 am
Real Name: Will Hawkes

Re: UKC 2012

Post by willhawkes » Sat Sep 22, 2012 4:24 pm

Sorry to wade in here. The question is "does the UK Championship matter any more"? Apparently, it doesn't because it's not multi-table; something about the format not being the same as it was in the past; and a beef about how the UK team is selected. I'd add to that the sub-context is that the UK's best two players (it's not a matter of debate) haven't come for the last few years, and probably won't this time either, it's trivial what the reasons are for that (whether because of the aforementioned "meaningless" or in Joe's case, because he's in Nebraska).

Should every sport have an annual national championships? Of course. Does it make sense that - in some way or another - the outcomes from that championships influence who represents the UK in the world championships? Again, of course. If Joe and Rob don't come will it prevent them from being in the UK team? Nope. Would it be better if it was multi-table? Of course. Anyone got an idea how that's going to happen when there isn't a ready stock of tables on hand? No.

If Rob or Joe come along and win, that's even better because they're awesome players, but if someone else does (in my dreams it's me), we will celebrate them as UK Champion because that's what they'll be for the next 12 months (even if they aren't ranked Pro-Master in the US).

Guys, there hasn't been a national UK tournament for about 8 months, it's great that one is happening, full stop, let's celebrate, and try and get a good turn-out.

PS. Oh yes, and the final wasn't actually played last year so yes fair play that did demean it a bit. That won't happen this year will it?

User avatar
Happyham
Posts: 1531
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 3:51 pm
Real Name: Joey 'Slackjaw Chavilton' Hamilton
Location: Nebraska - USA

Re: UKC 2012

Post by Happyham » Sat Sep 22, 2012 11:42 pm

Gipsy Beast wrote:
In a world where the BFA had unlimited resources, i'm sure things would be different... A UKC is still better than no UKC, in my opinion. As much the UKC has the purpose of giving players a chance of representing G-B in the ITSF World Cup 2013, it's also an opportunity for the community to get together and share their passion for foos and support team G-B. It's fun, its a great meetup.
Just to be clear, I totally agree with you JP. :D A UKC is definitely better than no UKC, and it serves the purpose of selecting our players for the ITSF world championships. With whats been a really low number of tournaments this year, any excuse to have a tournament is awesome. Half the reason any of us do this is to meet up with friends!

My post was a direct reply to Josh's question about why I thought the title of UK champion had lost value and prestige.
I hated every minute of training, but I said "Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion."

Please subscribe/comment/support my blog at http://happyham1986.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Happyham
Posts: 1531
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 3:51 pm
Real Name: Joey 'Slackjaw Chavilton' Hamilton
Location: Nebraska - USA

Re: UKC 2012

Post by Happyham » Sun Sep 23, 2012 12:02 am

willhawkes wrote:Sorry to wade in here. The question is "does the UK Championship matter any more"?

Hey Will,

I didn't mean for it to sound like I think the UKC doesnt matter. It matters a lot. I think I mis-worded a previous post of mine. To anyone who loves to play foosball, its the main way to qualify for the ITSF world championships. So it matters.
willhawkes wrote:
but if someone else does (in my dreams it's me), we will celebrate them as UK Champion because that's what they'll be for the next 12 months (even if they aren't ranked Pro-Master in the US).
This is the only part I have an issue with personally. Like I've said, I support the idea of a tournament that qualifies players for the ITSF world championships. I just don't think that the title of UK Champion holds much value anymore. The winner of this tournament has not beaten the best players in the UK and has won on just one table type. I understand that its not feasible to have numerous tables etc. I'm just saying I think its needs to be re-looked at as to what this tournament's function is. Its a qualifier. Call it the UK qualifiers, or the UK trials, or whatever you want. If it continues to be advertised as a tournament to decide the UK champion, then I'll continue to believe that the title holds little value compared to years past.
I hated every minute of training, but I said "Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion."

Please subscribe/comment/support my blog at http://happyham1986.blogspot.com/

willhawkes
BFA General Secretary
Posts: 1133
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2010 2:31 am
Real Name: Will Hawkes

Re: UKC 2012

Post by willhawkes » Sun Sep 23, 2012 7:27 am

Joe, we're getting there... but...
The winner of this tournament has not beaten the best players in the UK and has won on just one table type.
e.g. "the winner of this tournament a) hasn't beaten Joe or Rob, b) isn't Joe or Rob" so can't be UK champion. So what you're saying is, you're both not coming, so it's meaningless. Fair enough. So how would we have a meaningful UKC then? I understand why you can't come, you're in Nebraska - so BFA Committee, Rob Atha if you're reading, can we get Rob to come along to so we havea a meaningful UK champion? Or even in that situation, is Rob not still not UK champion because it's only been played on Garlando? Or in the (unlikely but not impossible) event a Jon May or Tom Burdett (or me - oops the dreams again) beats Rob, they're still not UK champion?

Following this line of argument a bit further, the way to decide the UK champion would then be to get Rob and Joe to play a straight first-to-five, best-of-five multi-table decider, on the first-choice tables of both players. But if both players chose Fireball (nominally the "home table" of both?), it wouldn't be multi-table so it is still meaningless?

So it's like Matty Warr said for the Juniors, "we might as well just play that game in my garage and phone the result in".

I mean, I don't mind, whatever, hopefully I'll be there and will have a good time anyway. Moderator, recognising we're probably way off topic...

Rob Atha
Posts: 743
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2003 2:47 am
Real Name: Rob Atha
Location: Manchester
Contact:

Re: UKC 2012

Post by Rob Atha » Sun Sep 23, 2012 9:42 am

willhawkes wrote:Joe, we're getting there... but...
The winner of this tournament has not beaten the best players in the UK and has won on just one table type.
e.g. "the winner of this tournament a) hasn't beaten Joe or Rob, b) isn't Joe or Rob" so can't be UK champion. So what you're saying is, you're both not coming, so it's meaningless. Fair enough. So how would we have a meaningful UKC then? I understand why you can't come, you're in Nebraska - so BFA Committee, Rob Atha if you're reading, can we get Rob to come along to so we havea a meaningful UK champion? Or even in that situation, is Rob not still not UK champion because it's only been played on Garlando? Or in the (unlikely but not impossible) event a Jon May or Tom Burdett (or me - oops the dreams again) beats Rob, they're still not UK champion?

Following this line of argument a bit further, the way to decide the UK champion would then be to get Rob and Joe to play a straight first-to-five, best-of-five multi-table decider, on the first-choice tables of both players. But if both players chose Fireball (nominally the "home table" of both?), it wouldn't be multi-table so it is still meaningless?

So it's like Matty Warr said for the Juniors, "we might as well just play that game in my garage and phone the result in".

I mean, I don't mind, whatever, hopefully I'll be there and will have a good time anyway. Moderator, recognising we're probably way off topic...
I am reading Will.

A lot of what joe said is true. The only benefit of this tournament is the top 2 qualify for the individual events in Nantes france, I don't see any other benefit to it. Thats my opinion anyway. I have issues that it is only on 1 table type so there could be a odd name thrown into the hat who qualifies in the top 2.

I have a problem that there wasn't enough notice for the tournament, I planned on playing in germany for the 40,000 Euro P4P german championships which is held on the same weekend. 700 players will be there.

I already qualified for the Singles in Nantes so I will tell you now I won't play singles as there is no benefit. I have problems with the doubles as Joe can't go and I don't know wether I should skip the largest tournament of the year just to play doubles against 12 teams in coventry on the sunday.

I don't think you can call the winner of this tournament the best player in britain. The reason is because its on Garlando only. There are very good multi table players who are stronger on Fireball. There isn't prize money so it won't attract the number of players that a normal tournament would.

So atm I don't know if ill go or not. If I did its only because I want to play Doubles in nantes as it is one of my favourite events.

User avatar
Bundy Volume 1
BFA Regional Rep - London
Posts: 3258
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:13 pm
Real Name: Joe Bundy
Location: Liverpool

Re: UK Championships?

Post by Bundy Volume 1 » Sun Sep 23, 2012 5:38 pm

Upon request - I've split the topic so people can continue to discuss the issue.

However, I don't think there is much to discuss.

Of course the BFA committee would like to put on a big end of year multi-table event for the UKC. But right now we can't do that, for a number of reasons. We'd also like to have a proper POY standings run again, but until we have an increased number of tournaments each year, that isn't going to happen either.

So in the current climate this type of tournament, as is happening this year, is how the UKC will be and the winners will go down as UK Champions in the records. How much that matters in a personal opinion, and can't really be argued to a definitive answer.

User avatar
joshjaeger
Posts: 159
Joined: Sun Mar 09, 2008 9:54 pm
Real Name: Joshua Jaeger
Location: Bath
Contact:

The importance of "The UK Championships"

Post by joshjaeger » Sun Sep 23, 2012 6:18 pm

I can see how this became off topic but as I said in my original question to Joe I really think this is an important issue.

We are no longer in the good old days when the UKC was a PoY qualified tournament. I can understand that there is a lament for the days of many tournaments on varied tables.

However, the oft repeated statement in the posts on this matter, that the only use of the UKC is to qualify for the ITSF worlds is misguided. Because A. It isn't and B it shouldn't be. And seams to being stated by players who don't have to qualify anyway. I can see both Rob and Joes points but they are precisely that. They are very specific to their personal positions, two players who are head and shoulders above 99% of the players in the UK and a good portion of the world. I think that it should be understood that the UK scene and the UKC no matter what condition they are in, are for the 99% of players (and future players) who aren't Rob and Joe. I think Will, that it can be fun and educational to watch great players play but I for one don't care if the "Top Players" turn up i want to compete. and if the top players have better tournaments to go to then that is cool. All their reasons are very good. It does not matter if Rob turns up. We have a tournament to decide who is the best player in the UK who thinks it is important to compete in the UKC. The players who win can say they are the best players that year apart from the ones who are so good they have better things to do (Any one of us in Robs position would go to the P4P and play for the money and prestige, and most importantly I suspect the quality of players).

In many other sports the national teams are made up of players who are Invited, usually, on the performance over the year to "Try Out" for a cap. They can amongst other things be made to compete against each other. The team captains in conjunction with the BFA could put their heads together and make an informed decision. This can be done away from a major tournament in a way that doesn't denigrate that tournaments importance. Those tournaments are very important for the rest of us. The sooner we stop harking back and expressing our dissatisfaction but instead address the situation for what it is and try to make it better the sooner the UKC will mean something to everyone.
Babyfoot for a better society

Steviola
Posts: 2656
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2005 6:02 pm
Real Name: Stephen Lyall
Location: London

Re: UK Championships?

Post by Steviola » Sun Sep 23, 2012 6:52 pm

This is the first tournament that we have had in 7 months and there are not many organisers out there at present, so to be honest I would just make the most of the opportunity to play, compete and have fun.

If anyone would be keen to know more about organising an event (it really is quite easy) please send me a PM for a chat.

User avatar
Happyham
Posts: 1531
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 3:51 pm
Real Name: Joey 'Slackjaw Chavilton' Hamilton
Location: Nebraska - USA

Re: UKC 2012

Post by Happyham » Sun Sep 23, 2012 8:33 pm

willhawkes wrote:
e.g. "the winner of this tournament a) hasn't beaten Joe or Rob, b) isn't Joe or Rob" so can't be UK champion. So what you're saying is, you're both not coming, so it's meaningless.
That's actually not what I'm saying. I'm sorry if you think that I'm the kind of person who thinks the UK foos scene should revolve around Rob and myself. I'm really not.

I'm saying that this tournaments primary function, like it or not, is to qualify players for France. There will be players that either cannot make France, or are restricted from entering the 'mens' singles and doubles categories (due to playing in another category). Assuming there has been a number of tournaments already in the year, if you are one of the better players in the country, this tournament isn't that appealing if you aren't going to France.
willhawkes wrote:
Fair enough. So how would we have a meaningful UKC then?
If you are asking me how would we have a meaningful UK Champion, then my first suggestion would be to award it to the winner of a tournament that is not what is currently known as 'The UKC'. Obviously right now there are not many tournaments so this is not easy, but I'm sure things will pick up again. There are too many people in the UK who love foosball to let it die completely.

I think initially the UKC winner was named UK champion because that's how it was listed in the ITSF qualified list. This is why we associate the UKC with the National Champion I think. I see no reason why we can't just rename the UKC the 'UK qualifiers' and then attach the title of UK champion to a different tournament. If its not multi table, then call it the UK (insert table name here) championships. We had a UK Tornado championship for a while, and I'm sure a UK Garlando championship also.

If you wish to continue to attach the name of UK Champion to the UKC tournament, then I suggest running a points race throughout the year (again, I'm sure tournaments will happen again soon), and then make the UKC exclusive to the top 16.
Allow players to compete in whichever events they qualify for. Example: Rob Davey makes the top 16 in the points race, he should be allowed to play in the mens events and the senior events. Make it one of the better paid tournaments for the year (don't know how much its paying out this time).
The winner then would have consistently shown throughout the year that they are one of the top players, and then beat only other top players on the day. They deserve the title of UK Champion. Whether that's Rob Atha or Will Hawkes doesn't make a blind bit of difference to me.

I can fully relate to your enthusiasm and passion for the game and the UK scene, as it wasn't long ago I was at a similar stage to you. A national champion means something to you, and it does to me to! This tournament however is not the right one to use to crown him/her.
willhawkes wrote:
Fair enough. So how would we have a meaningful UKC then?
If you're asking me how can we make the UKC tournament more meaningful, then I don't think you need to. It determines who qualifies for France. That's meaningful enough.
willhawkes wrote:
Or even in that situation, is Rob not still not UK champion because it's only been played on Garlando? Or in the (unlikely but not impossible) event a Jon May or Tom Burdett (or me - oops the dreams again) beats Rob, they're still not UK champion?
It's my belief that the title of UK Champion / National Champion should go to the best player on the table(s) played on in that country.

In Austria, they only play on Garlando so its easy to attach the title of national champion to their biggest tournament.

In the UK however, we play on numerous tables. It wouldn't matter so much that it was on Garlando only, if the other tables player bases were clearly inferior to the Garlando player base. Its not that simple though. There are some great tornado/fireball specialists, as well as Bonzini specialists. A Garlando only tournament would greatly harm the Tornado/Fireball/Bonzini specialist's chances of winning.

So in answer to your question, no. I don't think Rob should be called UK champion if he won a Garlando only tournament.
willhawkes wrote:
Following this line of argument a bit further, the way to decide the UK champion would then be to get Rob and Joe to play a straight first-to-five, best-of-five multi-table decider, on the first-choice tables of both players. But if both players chose Fireball (nominally the "home table" of both?), it wouldn't be multi-table so it is still meaningless?
You're clearly being silly here, but just to play along, I think it would be fine because we each would be given the choice of our home table. If the UKC had the 3 main tables available and everyone chose Garlando, then thats clearly what our best players prefer to play on. So you can make a valid claim to the winner being labelled UK champion. Its obviously not this way currently.


I get the impression you think I'm laying into the current state of the game and rubbishing everything to do with the UKC as well. I'm not. Its a thankless task running tournaments, and I greatly appreciate the work that these volunteers do for us. I think that the UKC is a fun, exciting way to decide who qualifies for France and I'm in favour of it for qualifying one of the two spots available. I am in favour of some kind of points race to determine the other spot, but I wont go into that here.

Does it mean I think the title of UK Champion holds as much value as it could, given the way its selected currently? No I don't. I would crown it differently. That's all I'm trying to say.

At the end of the day it comes down to what your perception of a UK Champion is. We clearly have different perceptions.
I hated every minute of training, but I said "Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion."

Please subscribe/comment/support my blog at http://happyham1986.blogspot.com/

Rob Davey
Posts: 1108
Joined: Sun Apr 16, 2006 4:36 pm
Real Name: Rob Davey
Location: Bristol

Re: UK Championships?

Post by Rob Davey » Sun Sep 23, 2012 8:46 pm

Joe

Of course you don't care about the UK Championship - I don't think you have ever won it!!!!!

I won it in 1979 with (uhhh, arggg, eeeeeet, eheheheheheheheheheh) Chris Bulley.
Then again in 1980 with Kev Ferris.

Then again in 2009 with John Shovelton.

And then again in 2010 with Mike Amsden. The UK Championship means a lot to me.

Last year was a complete joke playing on dirty unmaintained garlandos with the worst balls possible. Even you may have done better than you normally do :shock:

I'm hoping for better this year??????

Rob

User avatar
Jonathan may
BFA Committee Observer
Posts: 3817
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 5:21 pm
Real Name: Jonathan May
Location: London
Contact:

Re: UK Championships?

Post by Jonathan may » Sun Sep 23, 2012 8:58 pm

This is extraordinary.

No one knows who would win on what table between any of the top UK players on the day. So 99% of this is irrelevant. Both Rob and Joe have lost to others in the UK in UK events. And players improve.

So firstly, stop obsessing about Rob and Joe. The issue here is not about them.

However, I agree that the title of UK Champion is fairly meaningless at THIS event, as this is not what the event is for, and silly things happen. For example, Rob doesn't play Singles because he's already qualified.

The multitable thing is just a function of our resources. If we decided to run a UK Champs, irrespective of Nantes, and all we had was Garlandos, or Fireballs, or Smoby tables, whoever won would be UK Champ, because we called it the UKC. That's fine because the best player on the day won. Don't tell me you can't learn another table. I've had to learn T and F now for years. And now F is my best table. If it matters to be UK Champ, you will learn that table, the same way I learned Fireball to be useful in the GB team.

User avatar
Happyham
Posts: 1531
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 3:51 pm
Real Name: Joey 'Slackjaw Chavilton' Hamilton
Location: Nebraska - USA

Re: The importance of "The UK Championships"

Post by Happyham » Sun Sep 23, 2012 9:07 pm

joshjaeger wrote:
However, the oft repeated statement in the posts on this matter, that the only use of the UKC is to qualify for the ITSF worlds is misguided. Because A. It isn't and B it shouldn't be.
Right now it is also being used as a much needed UK tournament. I get that. Every other year there has been enough tournaments to satisfy most players cravings, and the UKC in the past hasn't been the most noob friendly tournament.

Ask most pro master players a couple of years ago what this tournament was for and they would tell you the same thing as what the rookies would say. Its function is to qualify players for France.
This year however, things have changed in the fact that this will also serve as a much needed tournament. I think thats great.

I'm sorry that I think the prestige has gone out of the title 'UK Champion'. That doesn't mean I am slating UK foosball, and the UKC tournament.

What do you think the uses of the UKC tournament are, Josh?
joshjaeger wrote:
And seems to being stated by players who don't have to qualify anyway.
Who's that? How do you think I plan on qualifying? Or Rob for doubles? That is assuming you are referring to myself and Rob?
I hated every minute of training, but I said "Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion."

Please subscribe/comment/support my blog at http://happyham1986.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Happyham
Posts: 1531
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 3:51 pm
Real Name: Joey 'Slackjaw Chavilton' Hamilton
Location: Nebraska - USA

Re: UK Championships?

Post by Happyham » Sun Sep 23, 2012 9:13 pm

Jonathan May wrote:
This is extraordinary.

I agree that the title of UK Champion is fairly meaningless at THIS event, as this is not what the event is for
Wow, you're right that is extraordinary. We normally disagree on everything! :wink:
I hated every minute of training, but I said "Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion."

Please subscribe/comment/support my blog at http://happyham1986.blogspot.com/

User avatar
Happyham
Posts: 1531
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 3:51 pm
Real Name: Joey 'Slackjaw Chavilton' Hamilton
Location: Nebraska - USA

Re: UK Championships?

Post by Happyham » Sun Sep 23, 2012 9:17 pm

Rob Davey wrote:Joe

Of course you don't care about the UK Championship - I don't think you have ever won it!!!!!

Rob
I totally won it!

Well, I think I did? I won singles one year I'm sure? Me and Rob won doubles one year, maybe?

And if you think you can count the 2009 with Shovo as a victory then you are having a laugh... We all remember that Tom and Juj had that year in the bag :wink:
I hated every minute of training, but I said "Don't quit. Suffer now and live the rest of your life as a champion."

Please subscribe/comment/support my blog at http://happyham1986.blogspot.com/

Post Reply