Tiger, I'm glad you like seeding races because we have them at every festival and will continue to have them. The majority of festivals determine advancements based on placement so those seeding races are necessary there and that will continue. They have to put one A team, one B, one C, one D and one E per heat. That's not really a problem, the placement method is good especially on tidal waters where you can't use time. But the majority of people are not really excited about those seeding races.
I enjoy the Alcan system because only one race is lopsided and all the rest seem to be closer
rb, I agree with you in terms of future races using only time qualifiers should have those qualifying races with teams of equal/similar capabilities to provide close races. It makes for a more exiciting morning/first day.
I think most people would vote for some closer qualifying races if possible. That’s why
Alcan changed their format so after the 1st qualifier the top teams go to their own division and so do the bottom teams. Those teams get closer races in the 2nd qualifier.
There are a few (very few) festivals that use TIME to determine advancements. If you’re using TIME then you don’t need to put one A team, one B, one C, one D and one E per heat in the qualifiers like you do when you’re using the placement system. So why not make the qualifier races more competitive at those festivals? I actually consider that a harder race.
As it is now you don't race any of your competitors until the semis. They spread out all similar teams across all the seeding races. In regular 2-day festivals the first day none of the A teams race each other, none of the B teams race each other, none of the C teams race each other, etc.
I agree that the current seeding races do highlight who are the top teams as you say which is cool and impressive to your family and friends watching. Those seeding races will continue to happen at almost every festival and regatta because almost every festival uses placement. I’d rather have close races in the qualifiers every once in a while just for fun if that’s possible. I’d actually choose to go to a festival that had close qualifiers over a festival that didn’t.
You can do the grid where the winning teams in the first qualifier moves up one division for the next qualifier, or the top two teams move up one division for the next qualifier if you want. That way different teams race. The bottom of A drops to B, the top of B goes up to A, the bottom of B drops to C, the top of C goes up to B. In the suggested Harrison grid example in this thread, if Riptide wins the 1st qualifier then they'd race the A teams in the next qualifier. Or make it the top two teams. Whatever. Be creative with the grid. You're using TIME for advancements so it doesn't matter who you race. Make it fun.
If your team has progressed and is fast enough then you'll end up racing the top teams in the qualifiers and in the semis and finals. It will be because you earned it, not because you're against them in a seeding race.
The fact is that almost all festivals are going to continue to use the placement system and will need to rank and seed teams in the qualifiers the way it's done now. That isn’t going away and I’m not suggesting that it should. What I’m suggesting is that for festivals that use TIME for advancements why not have some closer, harder, more-exciting qualifiers. Be creative. Have some fun. Make some good races.
Harrison is already doing it for the 2nd qualifier. Why not do it for the 1st qualifier as well. In a festival that uses TIME for advancements there's no need to have the 1st qualifier set up like it is for a festival that uses the placement system.
rb
