Just had a discussion with a friend about tournament venues.
I made a blog entry sometime ago where I explained that I thought that 'Nationals' should be held somewhere central, in order to be easily accessible to the majority of teams.
The counter argument is that for Nationals the very best facilities should be used, regardless of their proximity.
This year saw Club Open Indoors Nationals and Uni Mixed Indoor Nationals both held in Glasgow, because it's got a really good hall apparently*. The UKUA Nationals (Outdoors) will be held in Southampton, home of EUC 2007, which apparently are also a great facility.
Both of these venues are not central in their location in the slightest, but offer a high standard of facility. There are perfectly good facilities in the Midlands however. Wolverhampton and Coventry have both got good indoor facilities. Birmingham is one of my favourite outdoor venues.
Therefore, should we go for high quality venues at the expense of proximity, or should proximity be the main driver for 'Nationals'?
*I've not been there, just feedback I've heard.
This post was written whilst mostly listening to Marina and the Diamonds.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Pretty good indoor venue in Stoke-on-trent too....
Pretty good indoor venue in Stoke-on-trent too....
I think the question is whether the added 'quality' of the venues outweighs the increased travel (time for the majority)?
The only fault I would have with the Alan Higgs centre (location for CMIN this year) was the cold temperatures in the hall (though still warmer than sidelining outdoors), otherwise I thought it was an excellent venue.
Is there that much of a step up in quality for the hall being used this weekend?
Post a Comment