EmptyMessage board »Message Board home »Sign-in or register to get started
Online now: 7 members: Advil Knight, Apps, Crumpy, DJP18, Rookies 40, SMFB, marcster13; 12 anonymousDiscussion: Rating the National tourneys
| Posted | Discussion |
| Oct. 25 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | How would we rate the events that we attended this year? This has been asked of me and i\'m not certain of how to go about it. I know which ones that we\'ll definitely attend in \'07 (SPA, LVSSA & SSWC) as our recent experience with them has been mostly favorable. This presumes that their \'07 tournament dates do not conflict with one another. I also know which ones that we won\'t attend in \'07 (USSSA). We also participated in SSWS and the Western NSA and are only lukewarm on them. SSWS gave us too many surprises to count and not good ones. Western NSA never seems to draw many teams or is cancelled altogether. Rather than jaundice anyone\'s thinking, I will withhold my rating until later. Please consider them on the following basis: 1) field conditions/maintenance 2) number of quality teams to play (more is better) in your division 3) level of pre-event communication (such as who else is in it, timing of the draw, etc.) 4) bat/ball combination (was the ball flying too much? not enough?) 5) scheduling (did you have to stay there all day? were any of your games impacted by the sun?) 6) rules (too few HRS? too many HRs?) 7) format (did you play seeding games in your division? too many seeding games? too few?) If you felt that, in a given category, they did a good job then reward them with a star. If not, do not award a star. Add up the stars (the maximum would be 7 stars)... no partial stars. I recognize that some will not like this methodology, some will. If you\'re one that doesn\'t you need not respond. I will totally understand. The purpose here isn\'t to castigate any of the Assns or TDs but rather to provide them with constructive input upon which to base possible future changes. Bob Woodroof, GSF |
| Oct. 31 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Now that Gene 22 has solved the illegal bat issue (to the extent of our power) can we move on to another matter? Some real sage started a post last week that was requested by an Assn VP. His intent was to offer his psuedo rating categories and he hoped that others would jump on this subject. Perhaps his use the English language made it less than inviting. He's a little rough on the edges... We have seen bits and pieces of this discussed in various blogs but nothing within the same format. Please offer your thoughts on what you liked or disliked on the events you attended. Do it free form or in whatever manner you choose. The Assns really could use some constructive input. The SAB will meet before long and this would prove helpful for them. Please, nothing here on illegal bats... thanks. Bob 'Woodstein', :-) |
| Oct. 31 BruceinGa Men's 70 3233 posts | SPA 1) the fields were hard because of the drought. This was probably the best they could have done because of the lack of water. Everything else about the fields at Heritage Yards were excellent. I would call McKinney average 2) Quality of competition was Excellent. 3) I don't recall if we knew who would be there ahead of time. 4) Bat were excellent (U2). The balls were a bit soft but maybe that was because of the heat. 5) Scheduling seemed to be ok. Motels not convienent 6) Hr rules were good 7) Did we play 3 rr games? I don't remember. ****** (that's 6) It would be really tough to get all 7. Maybe if motels were closer. As usual, Ridge made it feel like a true championship. ISF 1) field were average, we got rain so there wasn't a lot they could do. 2) Competition was above average. 3) The best I remember the teams were posted on their website as well as updates on the games. 4) Bat were ASA, need I say more. Talk was that there were plenty of "BRAND NEW" Freaks. Balls were ok. 5) Scheduling seemed ok Motels not convienent 6) Hr rules were ok. 7) I think that some of seeding games were rained out. *** (3) Not many teammates want to return. NSA 1) Fields were very good 2) Not much in the number of teams 3) Not much communication 4) Bats allowed were good and if I remember right the balls weren't flying. 5) Can't say much about scheduling as were were disqualified after one game. Motels were convienent 6) Hr rules were ok if I remember. 7) I can't remember if we played rr games or who we played. **** (4) Excellent complex. I beleive we will be returning. ISA 1) Infield was ok but I believe the outfield was a little rough because it is a new complex. 2) Not many teams as the USSSA held their nationals that same weekend. 3) Don't remember 4) Good bat and balls. 5) Scheduling was good, motels were convienent. 6) Hr rules ok. It didn't matter as Bruce Meade hit the only one that I saw. Fences were 310 or 320, can't remember, with the wind blowing in. 7) I disagree with the rr format. We were Major + and had to play Maj and AAA teams. We have an impact players list because were are told that it would be dangerous for these player to compete against AA and AAA teams. If this is true, why do we play AAA teams in seeding games? **** (4) I appreciate the work of the staff and td. I think we will be back. LVSSA 1) The infields were ok, outfields were rough. 2) Very good competition, 50 and 55's. 3) Thanks to Stoneman communication was good. 4) Bats and balls were very good. 5) Scheduling seemed good. 55's had a day's delay because of rain. hotels were convienent. 6) Hr rules ok. 7) Format was good the best that I can remember. **** (4) I think we are planning on being there in 07. We also played in the SSUSA Springnationals in Fl., and SPA Winternationals in Tampa. We will be returning to both of these as well as SSUSA Winternationals in Ft. Meyers. |
| Dec. 13 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | When this post was initiated (Oct 25) it was done with the hope that many people would offer their candid and meaningful feedback. What we were seeking wasn't a popularity contest but rather honest, forthright input and feelings. I applaud Bruce's post as he provided a lot of useful information. We have lost some leverage for 2007 in terms of timing and location of national events. As an example, if you were/are adverse to playing in extreme heat you could have voiced it. Most of the assns are already well into securing sites and dates and are extremely unlikely to make changes now (for 2007). But you can still offer an opinion as to format, rules, approved equipment, etc. You could also take the opportunity to critique the ones that your team attended. Perhaps the way the initial post was stated turned some of you off to this matter. If so, I take responsibility for this. Ignore the guidelines from that post and just provide your straightforward feelings. The Summit Advisory Board will meet in Las Vegas in late January. This is your chance to give them food for thought. This message board forum is being observed by the assns... and not just SSWC. We will only have ourselves to blame if the changes that we'd like to see aren't implemented (due to our own indifference or sloth). Freedom of speech is a valuable commodity. Bob Woodroof |
| Dec. 13 STONEMAN Men's 50 535 posts | THE WOOD: N.A.S.C.S. @ Palm Springs. 1) FIELDS--O.K. We played @ 2 diff.' parks. Lead to believe that the games were all going to be @ FIELD of DREAMS. 2) QUALITY of TEAMS-- 50, 55, & 60's had several of the top teams in the Major Plus division. 3) Level of COMMUNICATIONS-- Vicky, as always, did not tell the truth. Miss lead teams about Balls & Fields. 4) Balls -- Crappy. Not the 525s that Vicky, stated in my E-MAIL. BATS-- lots of New FREAKS, that looked New. Also, on E-BAY, about 30 painted bats were sold; 2 wks or so, before this Event. FOR THOSE THAT WENT TO PALM SPRINGS: We need to write to Greg M, & ask Greg, to get rid Of Vicky. We were hitting CITY of PALM SPRINGS, city balls. These balls were not 44 cor, 525 comp, as promise...... 5) SCHEDULING-- O.K. for Sat.' & Sunday. 6) RULES-- H.R., I do not believe that 2 many teams reached their limits. 7) FORMAT-- 3 games in R.R.-- O.K.; Will go back..... But, I will raise HELL, w/ Greg & Vicky. This Tournament is close to home. That is the only reason, why, I keep going. HISTORY---- Players, r lied to all the time. TEAMS, expect Fairy Tells, from this group..... GOOD LUCK........ ThE STONEMAN..... |
| Dec. 13 Robo2 238 posts | It is hard to rate some of the tournaments by field conditions due to changes in location. However, as far as how the tournaments are run: 1) SPA that's real softball; pleanty of time allowed; good HR rule; no limits on runs per inning; Good umpires and two per game in dbl elim. Good ball and bat. Good team turnout. Meaningful if selected All American. 2) SSUSA always good turn out; good bats; good locations. Would like to see a year in Wash DC or Orlando. Just for a change. See some other parts of the country and maybe some new teams that don't travel to the West. 3) ISF / NSA about the same - not bad in all cases. 4) and LAST ASA. Do they still run a senior sofball tournment? The worst by far. They do not listen to the players and hence the rules and equipment stink. NO turnout and won't be until the organization listens to the players. My opinion. I'm sure some may disagree. |
| Dec. 13 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Stone: no one fractures the English laguage better than you. I love you, man. Robo2: Let them disagree! I appreciate that both of you took the time and mental energy to express your views. I'm hopeful that more folks do as you have done. BW |
| Dec. 13 sjuhoops 145 posts | hey bob I like the SPA No.1 Great complex, good balls, this year the ultra2, good umpires Quality teams. home run rules fine. Could have better communication on the web site. list taams in divisions, times, fields. Downside HEAT(JULY) WOW ****** SSUSA No.2 Great communication Everything is posted on web site early. So-so balls in summere heat not so good but in fall definitely B+. Great competition, great bats, umpiring good. Fields usually good. Four day tourneys too long. I understand we will be going to three. thats good. ****** LVSSA No.3 Best balls, unlimited runs in maj +. unlimite home runs fine. Good scheduling. Fiedls so-so. Umpiring like ssusa same people. Usually quality teams ***** Our kidz4ever team will be at these three worlds. Outside chance of palm springs but balls there are the worst, scheduling is the worst. and if you dont play in the qualifier they charge you 700dollars to enter. happy holidays bob hank c. |
| Dec. 18 the wood Men's 65 1123 posts | Hank, thanks for taking the time to provide your feelings. I know that over the 10 years that I've known you, your teams have played in almost all of the very best events. Therefore, your feedback is as meaningful as anyone's. I noticed that, on another thread, there was a guy taking a shot at you about a bat... and simultaneously telling you how much he respected you. This is a difficult thing to do in person... it's even less effective in print. What struck me the most about that was how you 'held your tongue' because we both know that there were A LOT OF THINGS that you could have stated. I commend you for this because, quite frankly, I wouldn't have shown nearly as much class as you. I wonder if he was as aggressive in defending the previous bats that he marketed... if so, I never saw/heard it. Again, thanks for your input on the National tourneys. Bob Woodroof |
