Are there too many tournaments now? (UK)

[Hawk]

I have managed 15 Tourneys this year So I would like to comment.....

I must admit I was a little put back and insulted by Joe's comments to suggest that we don't go for the social aspect or decent rule packs etc....... (By we I mean the group that is obviously seen as "The others")

Its the seeing everyone and having a great laugh that I spend £100+ a time for, otherwise I'd just sit at home on FUMBBL?

The guys I have met in the last year are some of the funniest, friendliest and Sporting people I'd ever wish to meet Al, Glowworm, Hawca, Buggrit, Eski, Army & Irish Dave to name just a few so when I think about going to a tourney, the first thing I think of is who I will spend the weekend with..... BloodBowl is more of an added bonus

If there were fewer tourneys then some would still flop... It would just mean that more people would miss out on going to one all together.

[sann0638]

I'd libraries do more "stay away" tourneys

so what word gets autocorrected to libraries?

[Darkson]

"Like" I think - I had just woken up.

[shaniepoo]

...as less regular but larger events made us mix more.

I think there's more mixing at smaller tournies, it's easy to just stay amongst friends at a larger one.

I have to agree with this.

I dont think there are to many tournaments. The UK is a big place so having 1 event every weekend is not a problem as they could be in 4 points of the UK. The Pornbowl was in the same month as 2 other events intentionally as they were down south. This was so that anyone in the north didnt have to travel to the other side of the country for a weekend of gaming.

A few large tournaments V's lots of small tournaments. I find you are more likely to meet new people at a smaller event as you are forced to talk to people outside your circle of friends. It also means you are not going tn get all the top ranked players turn up and this opens up the chance of mid card players winning. Personally i find that appealing as i know that the bigger events i dont stand a chance. Lots of smaller events means more chances to game and offers a wide variety of players to meet, places to visit and rule sets to play.

Now to go see what dates are available for Pornbowl II, a nice small local North West event.

[lunchmoney]

Resurrecting an old thread, but is this still valid? In the last couple of weeks two tournies have had to cancel due to lack of interest.

[Darkson]

Not so sure if it's lack of interest or just people signing up later and later for events.
Maybe a bit of both?

[lunchmoney]

people signing up later and later for events.

Certainly doesn't help with the anxiety of the TO when you need a minimum number to meet costs.

[howlinggriffon]

Rodders and I were looking at running Bunker Bowl again later this year but there are local tournaments everywhere at this time (RIOTS was sadly cancelled but there is still STABB Cup, Cromwell Rumble and COSH Bowl). We're going to look at early 2015 instead now just to try to spread things out a bit. The last Bunker Bowl ran at a loss due to the cost of the venue so we're going to move to a pub function room if possible. I think lower ticket prices will get more attendees too.

For me personally, I've had sporadic tournament attendance due to work and family - but I want to attend as many tourneys as I can now my kids are a bit older. I can more easily attend those I don't have to stay in hotels for so local tournaments are definitely my targets. I would love to go to tournaments further afield if I had the finances to allow it.

[Joemanji]

I think there is a large element of people not signing up / paying in time. I'm as guilty of this as anyone (had my eye on RIOTS too), so not a dig. If someone is going to invest the time and effort in running a tournament for people, the least the community can do is help out by declaring interest and hopefully paying in good time. A TO does not owe it the community to run an event if he knows there a chance of it costing him money.

But perhaps at the end of the day we owe it to ourselves to be proactive enough to tell a TO if we are seriously interested in his event.

[Waldorf28]

Maybe there need to be guidelines about setting a "state intent to attend by this date, pay by this date" convention for NAF tourneys so organisers can set a date when they know they will have the numbers and income to cover room hire deposits?

[SillySod]

A TO does not owe it the community to run an event if he knows there a chance of it costing him money.

..... I'm not sure I agree with that.


If I sign up for an event then it means taking time off work and making plans for that specific event on that specific weekend. This isn't a completely serious problem for me personally. Worst case scenario I'd grumble a bit and shrug it off but not everyone can rearrange their life at short notice. i.e. cancelling an event is an issue and it affects people in potentially quite a negative way.

Personally I feel that running an event is a statement of responsibility. When you say "I am going to run an event" you are stating that you want to give your time and take on the burden of multiple expectations in return for the satisfaction of having run the event and made lots of people happy. Is that a fair deal? No. But you knew it was a bad deal before you decided to run the event. If you care about the risks and the hardship then why are you running an event? More specifically, if financial risk is a considerable issue for you then why are you running an event that is vulnerable to low turnout?

This is perhaps a harsh way to judge someone that has offered their time and effort to the community but IMO if you are not prepared to meet base expectations then your event is more likely to detract from a community than to add to it.

One thing to consider here is that bloodbowl is very fortunate and has heaps of dedicated members that work hard to create some very special events. Not every event can be the carrot crunch but the bar is set pretty high.

I'm aware that this is just one way of looking at things and my opinion is skewed by being secure enough to just take the hit if things go badly.

(please be aware that I haven't been paying attention to recent events - I don't even know which events got cancelled so this isn't meant to be a dig at anyone!)

[SillySod]

Maybe there need to be guidelines about setting a "state intent to attend by this date, pay by this date" convention for NAF tourneys so organisers can set a date when they know they will have the numbers and income to cover room hire deposits?

If financial risk is an issue then this would be a very sensible way to try to mitigate the problem.

Whether or not it should be a convention is another question (personally I'd say no but I can see the advantages in standardizing the approach). It is definitely a good tool that event organisers could use though.

[shaniepoo]

I dont know where i stand on this whole situation. Ive cancelled the Pornbowl next month (2nd tournament ive had to do this to) due to lack of interest - a 1/4 of the interestef list ended up being unable to make it, only 2 people paid with just over a month to go and radio silence on the topic fir over a month. Pornbowl was only meant to be a small event and there was never gona be any money gained from it (Pornbowl 1 had me lose money) but being out of pocket by £50 isnt a nice feeling after putting lota od time and effort into being a TO only to have 5 people turn up.

Waldorf maybe right about having a 'X players must have paid by X date', but thats upto the TO. What is hard as a TO is having people saying they will POTD and thwn not turnibg up (i had 5 on the 1st Pornbowl do this), or seeing people say 'yeah i will come' then seeing them pay up for every event in the 6 months apart from yours. Or worst yet is a combo of both of these!

It is getting very busy now on the tournie sceen but that just shows how popular the game is i guess.

[SillySod]

What is hard as a TO is having people saying they will POTD and thwn not turnibg up (i had 5 on the 1st Pornbowl do this), or seeing people say 'yeah i will come' then seeing them pay up for every event in the 6 months apart from yours.

That is pretty rough

I guess small events are more susceptible to that kind of thing too.

[Pipey]

Few thoughts on this…

Tourney scheduling in the UK has been an organic process where the only rule is that tourneys are not run on the same date when in close geographical proximity to one another.

For me that free structure has led to lots of interesting new tourneys which have enhanced the scene, therefore more choice for the individual tourney goer. But on the other hand it probably means people travel less, and traditionally smaller and less-established events have sometimes taken a hit, or have even had to cancel. Overall I think it’s been a good thing though.

There again I think some balance between a ‘free market’ model and a more controlled approach is a good thing. The community definitely benefits from ‘flagship’ tourneys which are viewed by the NAF and its members as having a special significance – the clearest example here is the NAF Championship which UK NAF players flock to in numbers. This is also what I’m trying to achieve with UKTC, a team event located centrally within the UK that I hope we can rally around as a community (shameless plug, but relevant here I think!). Perhaps we also would benefit from something like the SWTC for the whole of the UK.

Ways to avoid getting stung by a shock low turnout in a competitive tourney scene? I agree having a guideline deadline date for payments is a good call. The (similar) early bird discount method often works well too. Over the years at my tourneys I’ve tried to be very conservative indeed about what the minimum likely turnout will be, and leave the planning of ‘bonus’ purchases (prizes, additional trophies etc.) right until the very last minute. Things like this can help, but as Sod says being an independent TO is never without risk; it’s an inherent part of the job.