Shoaibaktar, I'll respond to your post tomorrow - it makes some insightful points that I need to think about, good post anyway !!
2500 Shades of Play ...
- Thread starter P8ntballer.Com
- Start date
Shoaibaktar you make some very valid points although from my perspective the quality of play has improved greatly in the last ten years. We may not have the world dominating 'pro' of old but what we have now is lots and lots of very accomplished players, the higher echelons of the CPPS are a merry go round of teams all of a similar standard battling for spaces in the Elite division.
I think the gulf between the top 3 in Elite and the rest of the division is larger than before but the gap between 4th and the majority of Div 1 comes down to a good days play. This pattern continues as you move down the divisions (with a few guys who were playing elite a few years ago now playing in the lower divs due to the quality increase) this increase has been due to the proliferation of good training venues such as Urban Paintball and Skirmish having bodies in each week scrimming against each other. The paintball landscape is definitely a brighter shade of green now.
I think the gulf between the top 3 in Elite and the rest of the division is larger than before but the gap between 4th and the majority of Div 1 comes down to a good days play. This pattern continues as you move down the divisions (with a few guys who were playing elite a few years ago now playing in the lower divs due to the quality increase) this increase has been due to the proliferation of good training venues such as Urban Paintball and Skirmish having bodies in each week scrimming against each other. The paintball landscape is definitely a brighter shade of green now.
I started out playing tournament ball in the US in the late 90's, early 00's. The Pan Am series run by Russ Maynard and Dan Bonebrake (Previously called the Great Western Series). It was 200 round limit per player as they walked on the field, and then you could redistribute your paint as needed. It was fast, and incredibly entertaining to play.
Before I took a 10 year hiatus, the last major event I played was NPPL Tampa 2004. The event where Infamous was created. DM4's with crazy cheating boards were just hitting the scene. Same with Timmy's from Bob Long. 7 vs 7 with basically full auto markers, was INSANE. Not really that fun either. Walking onto the field with a case on my back each game. Although having a full ride sponsorship from Empire and Diablo was awesome and not having a paint bill, plus getting entrance into WDP's Angel Heaven (with strippers and fruit) was amazing.
Coming back into the sport last year for events, I went to 2 Mills. Puget and Basildon. In Puget we used 16 cases, and Basildon 10 (the field layout was insanely fast in basildon). What I enjoyed the most though, was the atmosphere. Having a cheap pint in Basildon, while grilling after games, feet in the grass, watching a Div2 team play just to the side of us. Incredible. Watching the Impact guys fire off fireworks, getting told off by the hotel managers, and then getting it all on tape was pretty damn fun.
This year, I wondered about the M500 format, conversations with Max from Joy last year in Puget made it clear that a LOT of players were pushing for the M500 format. After playing 1 CPPS event, the Mills in Spain, and heading back to round 2 of CPPS this weekend, I have to say I like it, a lot. Only the very first point I played did I run out of paint. After that things fell into place.
We used 10 cases in Spain and we played 14 points, an average of 285 balls per person, per point. Split the paint bill 6 ways, it wasn't bad at all.
I know my fellow 'murican's have issues, and they are all butt hurt over rule changes, but M500 is a fun way of playing. Matty Marshall was in Spain, and asked players who played both NXL and the Millennium events, and almost universally they all liked it. The only 2 memorable ones were Ryan and Ollie from Dynasty who like the laning aspect of the game and were sad to see it go, but said if there was 1 more pod allowed, they'd be happy with that compromise.
All in all, I think our path is a good one, we desperately need a lower cost point of entry for teams who are casual, or new, to enter the tournament scene. Tournament organisers who put on quality events and can capture that 'atmosphere' will be successful, and help garner enthusiasm with these newer teams, hopefully encouraging them to sign up for more.
Before I took a 10 year hiatus, the last major event I played was NPPL Tampa 2004. The event where Infamous was created. DM4's with crazy cheating boards were just hitting the scene. Same with Timmy's from Bob Long. 7 vs 7 with basically full auto markers, was INSANE. Not really that fun either. Walking onto the field with a case on my back each game. Although having a full ride sponsorship from Empire and Diablo was awesome and not having a paint bill, plus getting entrance into WDP's Angel Heaven (with strippers and fruit) was amazing.
Coming back into the sport last year for events, I went to 2 Mills. Puget and Basildon. In Puget we used 16 cases, and Basildon 10 (the field layout was insanely fast in basildon). What I enjoyed the most though, was the atmosphere. Having a cheap pint in Basildon, while grilling after games, feet in the grass, watching a Div2 team play just to the side of us. Incredible. Watching the Impact guys fire off fireworks, getting told off by the hotel managers, and then getting it all on tape was pretty damn fun.
This year, I wondered about the M500 format, conversations with Max from Joy last year in Puget made it clear that a LOT of players were pushing for the M500 format. After playing 1 CPPS event, the Mills in Spain, and heading back to round 2 of CPPS this weekend, I have to say I like it, a lot. Only the very first point I played did I run out of paint. After that things fell into place.
We used 10 cases in Spain and we played 14 points, an average of 285 balls per person, per point. Split the paint bill 6 ways, it wasn't bad at all.
I know my fellow 'murican's have issues, and they are all butt hurt over rule changes, but M500 is a fun way of playing. Matty Marshall was in Spain, and asked players who played both NXL and the Millennium events, and almost universally they all liked it. The only 2 memorable ones were Ryan and Ollie from Dynasty who like the laning aspect of the game and were sad to see it go, but said if there was 1 more pod allowed, they'd be happy with that compromise.
All in all, I think our path is a good one, we desperately need a lower cost point of entry for teams who are casual, or new, to enter the tournament scene. Tournament organisers who put on quality events and can capture that 'atmosphere' will be successful, and help garner enthusiasm with these newer teams, hopefully encouraging them to sign up for more.
Wow, another couple of great posts in this thread from Sid and Spike.
It seems there are differing views as to the position we now find our domestic game inhabits.
It seems to be a thread that has provoked interest which I suppose is what our forum is meant to do.
Great stuff guys !!
It seems there are differing views as to the position we now find our domestic game inhabits.
It seems to be a thread that has provoked interest which I suppose is what our forum is meant to do.
Great stuff guys !!
Sid ,your point that playing standards at the lower level is rising ,is true .I've watched the fields Div1 and the one opposite and they are very competitive. Jaguars ,DV8 ,Entity and Tigers2 all scrapping for the top spot ,all would be worthy members of the top division .It is the very top that is falling back.As this is where players have to come up with even more funding and time to train abroad ,pay for pros ,coach .This ceiling is where industry funding has fallen back and if you want to play with the big boys it has to be replaced. The eye watering figures Robbo has indicated were paid by Richmond and his backers,have to both come back and then show a profit. The amazing job Ainsley has done ,has galvanised grass roots paintball in this country .Also new training centres opening .This however justifies the retail strategy as boosting the profitable end while saving money on the costly team support end.I should point out I would be more than happy to be wrong since I think the people in this "sport" is what makes it .
I agree completely Shoaibaktar. The grass roots in the UK seems solid and only getting better over time. The resurgence of competitive woodsball is helping those who have strayed from the field back onto it and is encouraging more and more players to get out and play.
Gone are the days of the 'free ride', top players have to dig deep both financially and socialy to find the time and monies required to play at the top level. My question in regards to the top spot is what do the 'Pro' teams offer in today's marketplace in terms of generating monies and players for their sponsors? previously these teams played a large role in the using and advertising of new products, do they still have the same 'sway' in supporting the UK marketplace? If not how can this be reignited, especially with the boom in social media, so that the support is brought back to the fore for those elite and deserving players and teams. And the controversial question but do we need the old pro team model anymore, or have we got to a point where out ideas, much like the format, require root changes?
Gone are the days of the 'free ride', top players have to dig deep both financially and socialy to find the time and monies required to play at the top level. My question in regards to the top spot is what do the 'Pro' teams offer in today's marketplace in terms of generating monies and players for their sponsors? previously these teams played a large role in the using and advertising of new products, do they still have the same 'sway' in supporting the UK marketplace? If not how can this be reignited, especially with the boom in social media, so that the support is brought back to the fore for those elite and deserving players and teams. And the controversial question but do we need the old pro team model anymore, or have we got to a point where out ideas, much like the format, require root changes?
Last edited:
I wrote an extended response to the above post and then deleted it after reading your latest posts - the reason I deleted it was because I agreed with what your latest post said and it changed the way I interpreted your initial post in this thread.
You speculate that while the industry guys will benefit, the top players, and by default, the playing standard will fall, and I agree with this in principle but you then go on to make the point, the industry doesn't really care about playing standards, which I also agree with.
However, why would you expect them to care, nothing much has changed in that regard and I don't see it as really significant one way or another.
If we do in fact face an erosion of playing standards in the UK, primarily as a consequence of the haemorrhaging of our top players, then, if teams wish to seriously compete at the top, it would have to be self-financed which is a monumental task at best.
The landscape has drastically changed since I had Nexus back in 2002-06 - it was possible to secure relatively huge sums in sponsorship and that's just not available now but does this really mean we can never compete at the top, or more to the point, try to improve as players?
It's not the same thing Sho ....
I follow your reasoning as to why you believe we can't compete at the top [in Europe] but I'm not happy having to concede it's beyond us ....
I'd like to think we have people in our sport who can work their particular brand of magic and come up with a cogent strategy for a team to compete at the top - after all, it's not rocket science Sho, but I readily concede that funding is a very real problem in this regard.
... But have you ever asked yourself, why the sponsorship packages of old aren't available now?
The reason is simple, there was more money in the game back when I owned Nexus, and that money was industry money.
If I can borrow one of Gino Postorivo's pet phrases, if 'we grow the pot', regardless of playing standards or methodology, then a healthy industry surely means healthy opportunities for team support.
And so, rather than decry the fact that our industry will benefit from these changes, we should be hoping they will benefit because they hold the keys to team sponsorship as you're well aware.
I realise that in the meantime, UK teams will find it desperately difficult to attempt a serious assault on the top teams but it's not impossible mate - it takes dedication, commitment, someone who knows what the fuhk they are doing and an iron will to improve as players.
After all Sho, we have a great theatre for playing standards to improve, that being Ainsley's CPPS, I couldn't think of a better place to hone techniques, try different approaches and so on ... we've never had the competitive backdrop the CPPS now makes available for UK players leastwise in terms of the sheer number of competitive teams at his events.
The bottom line is this - we need to attract more players into tournaments, if you agree with this then the next consideration is, how we achieve that.
The Millennium and NXL have come up with a plan and implemented it this year - let's hope it works because if it does, then we all benefit, industry and player alike.
Sugar daddies like Doc & Bart are kind of thin on the ground now. And I've been banging on about limited paint for ages, so I'm glad the MS listened.
Perhaps the industry is pumping more money collectively into the scenario/recreational side of paintball? That's where most of the players are remember. We as tournament players can be blinkered to that at times and forget there are more events going on which don't involve sup'air fields.
There's no doubt that the average level of skill for tournament players has improved over the last 15 years. Does that mean though that the top tier teams have become less skilled or remained plateaued, while the bottom tier teams have got better? I don't know, I haven't been to see a tournament for a few years now. I don't think there's any doubt that the Yanks are still dominant worldwide, even the Russians don't appear to be the force they once were.
There's no doubt that the average level of skill for tournament players has improved over the last 15 years. Does that mean though that the top tier teams have become less skilled or remained plateaued, while the bottom tier teams have got better? I don't know, I haven't been to see a tournament for a few years now. I don't think there's any doubt that the Yanks are still dominant worldwide, even the Russians don't appear to be the force they once were.
The old business model of sponsoring pro teams has undoubtedly been replaced with a shift in the promotional dollar toward the woodland faction of our sport.
Ostensibly, this shift makes more commercial sense but its timing had a lot to do with the decimation of printed magazines and recessive economic pressures than any 'Road to Damascus' rationale.
The reason for this is because most other mature spots actively invest in team/player sponsorship programs - it's sometimes difficult to ignore such strategies adopted by other more professional sporting concerns especially when those business models are so prevalent and implicitly successful.
Maybe the 'Emperor's new clothes' has finally, and somewhat inevitably, made a visitation to our sport and the situation is now irreversible whereupon pro teams will never enjoy those heady days that had copious amounts of sponsorship dollars stuffed into their kit-bags.
If so, what does it really mean for our sport especially here in the UK?
It inevitably redirects concern toward standards of play as has been suggested but the mechanisms that influence those standards aren't straightforward, it invites speculation of course but the passage of time will provide the ultimate answer.
Personally, I'd hate to entertain any notion that suggests we cannot improve as players/teams with the right chemistry of coach, player base and commitment in place.
To lop the head off of any and all aspiration to compete at the top will prove injurious to two of our sport's most vital of qualities, our need to compete, and to improve.
Ostensibly, this shift makes more commercial sense but its timing had a lot to do with the decimation of printed magazines and recessive economic pressures than any 'Road to Damascus' rationale.
The reason for this is because most other mature spots actively invest in team/player sponsorship programs - it's sometimes difficult to ignore such strategies adopted by other more professional sporting concerns especially when those business models are so prevalent and implicitly successful.
Maybe the 'Emperor's new clothes' has finally, and somewhat inevitably, made a visitation to our sport and the situation is now irreversible whereupon pro teams will never enjoy those heady days that had copious amounts of sponsorship dollars stuffed into their kit-bags.
If so, what does it really mean for our sport especially here in the UK?
It inevitably redirects concern toward standards of play as has been suggested but the mechanisms that influence those standards aren't straightforward, it invites speculation of course but the passage of time will provide the ultimate answer.
Personally, I'd hate to entertain any notion that suggests we cannot improve as players/teams with the right chemistry of coach, player base and commitment in place.
To lop the head off of any and all aspiration to compete at the top will prove injurious to two of our sport's most vital of qualities, our need to compete, and to improve.