Tue 16 Sep 2014 5:28AM

2015 NATS

MP Mike Polo [TIM] Public Seen by 138

Hi Guys,

Abit of chat amongst the polo community re: Nats 2015.

We have had semi yarns around this with old email thread etc.

What's people's thoughts.

Mike - Timaru


NickDW [CBR] Tue 16 Sep 2014 7:51AM

Is Sydney still willing to host with rego at $100 per head?
Do we have enough cities willing to host qualifiers to make Brisbane's qualifier method work?

I would like to see an Aus/NZ Nats but if we can't find a host it's a moot point.


Mike Polo [TIM] Tue 16 Sep 2014 11:47PM

I'm personally in favour to see us split it for the greater good of the worlds bid/event if it happens and run separate AUS and NZ.

Ollie had good points about this in other threads which thinking about have changed my mind set on and agree.

Having more teams from both countries playing the the main gig at the worlds is where I would like to see us !



[deactivated account] Wed 17 Sep 2014 1:10PM

As Michael said, there are huge organisational benefits to having split, smaller tournies proposed by Ollie. The combined number of teams we can put into WHBPC15 would be the same whether it's a large joint AHBPC or not. The difference would be that we'd have a confirmed and set number from Australia and NZ. i.e. 4 Aus and 2 NZ (purely an example)


Alan [AKL] Wed 17 Sep 2014 9:19PM

If we are running worlds, we can enter as many Australasian teams as we like into worlds. For example, 5 Aus, 3 NZ, and 2 Timaru. Auckland is opposed to separating the Australasian champs into smaller National champs.


Andy Balcar CHC Wed 17 Sep 2014 9:31PM

As Nick said we need to find a host first and I think work it from there - regions that are thinking about hosting need to decide what they can and can't offer.
I am personally strongly opposed to a split event.
1. We are 1 region - if we allocate spots to NZ/Ausy its not going to be a true representation of the region - look at the results from the last two years.
2. I think it is good for us as community to come together. Especially before we host the worlds - can't beat the face to face communication and synergy that comes with that.
3. With the state of NZ Polo we need to play with Australia to keep upping our game.

I would much rather a smaller Australasian tournament if that is what was needed.


NickDW [CBR] Wed 17 Sep 2014 11:49PM

If we as a region get to decide the Ruleset for worlds then a joint Nats would be a great chance to build the experience of our refs and ensure (as much as possible) consistency of interpretation between Aus and NZ.
Speaking of refs - if we have a smaller Nats tournament we can work within our clubs to bring non-playing refs up. If we have qualifiers from some clubs for the smaller Nats then that's another chance to give refs practice.
And now that I've said this, I've got to step up and ref more.


Mike Polo [TIM] Fri 19 Sep 2014 4:10AM

Totally depends on the scale of Australasians and who's going to host ? It takes a lot of work to host a combine tournie. I'm just being very mindful of the amount of work that's going to have to go into "The Worlds gig"

Do we each as reps take it too the members with a generic information document and go from there with a vote ?.

Just probing this tpoic as I want the rest of the world to say "wow Australasians got it sorted" then they'll be back for more polo !


Ollie BNE Fri 26 Sep 2014 12:07AM

Brisbane have put our hands up to host an Australian qualifier. Two courts, maximum 24 teams. Potentially smaller city qualifiers for the big three clubs (Sydney, Melbourne and Bris). We would run a round robin over two days. No double elim. Like the French and German qualifiers.

This would make it cheaper for Perth as it's only about $4-500 for flights. As opposed to them spending $1000+ to fly to NZ. And then they would have to spend the same again for worlds.

There are many other benefits for the split but the biggest benefits are ATTENDANCE and MAN POWER.

We will have more local players traveling to worlds and playing the wild card if we split the quals.

There will be more free organisers if we split so we can focus more on worlds. Which should be our top priority.

NZ will have the chance to play top level polo at worlds, keeping the joined qualifier for that reason alone is setting ourselves up to host a poor worlds. And none of us want that.


Poll Created Fri 26 Sep 2014 12:16AM

Split Worlds qualification for our region. Closed Sat 18 Oct 2014 5:33AM

by Ollie BNE Tue 25 Apr 2017 5:22AM

No outcome as group was divided. More discussion needed as there now appears to be at least four options for going forward.

I propose that FOR 2015 ONLY we split our regions qualifiers into Aus and NZ.

As stated previously there are many disadvantages to a major AHBPC: it limits our regions organisational and travel funds, creates more work for reps and organisers who could otherwise focus on worlds, and create a distraction from worlds in our region.

I believe if we are to hose THE BEST WORLDS YET we need to have as much time, man power, attendance, input and funds as we can muster. Hosting worlds will be a regional effort. It will have a massive gain for our region as many players who cannot afford to travel to worlds and play will be able to play in the main tourney or the wild card. Negating the need for a massive open Nats to grow our region.


Results Option % of points Voters
Agree 25.0% 2 MP OB
Abstain 25.0% 2 JBH A[
Disagree 37.5% 3 DU DCM P
Block 12.5% 1 ST
Undecided 0% 19 N JHN ABC A S FF JB R K P[ D GG JM RV MC KJW TG BG JT(

8 of 27 people have voted (29%)


Ollie BNE
Fri 26 Sep 2014 12:17AM

It will allow us more time to ficus on worlds and local players wanting to learn and play against way higher level teams can play the wild card. Or the main tourney if they qualify.


John Bennett HBA
Fri 26 Sep 2014 3:38PM

We can make it work either way, happy to let those most affected decide (potential hosts, bigger clubs etc)


Mike Polo [TIM]
Thu 2 Oct 2014 2:50AM

Takes pressure off a Host club, and our focus is worlds as a group.


[deactivated account]
Thu 2 Oct 2014 4:44AM

We can do a one day tournament in BNE, 2 courts, up to 24 teams with 6 games each. two days if it has more teams so no need to split the qualifier unless NZ teams don't want to fly over.


Thu 2 Oct 2014 10:44AM

Let's start this thread again with a clear proposal and consult with our clubs.


David Corrin MEL
Mon 6 Oct 2014 2:59AM

Melbourne movers and shakers believe that we should hold a one day qualifier pre wildcard with everyone in the mix.


[deactivated account] Fri 26 Sep 2014 12:42AM

I'm not sure if I agree with splitting it, but I do definitely agree that for 2015 only we make it a capped tournament - something we can do on two courts on one (or two) day(s).

It would free up workload and focus on WHBPC and it means more players would attend WHBPC (for wildcard) even if not in the main tournie and can help with setup and reffing etc.


Daniel Strout SYD Fri 26 Sep 2014 12:47AM

I'm with Brook in the sense that splitting the tourney doesn't really solve our problem, since we can't even fine one host in either part of the region, let alone two. I know with a smaller tourney more could (should?) come forward but only time will tell.


[deactivated account] Fri 26 Sep 2014 12:56AM

@danielstrout Ollie has indicated that BNE would put their hand up to host a 2 court tournie with capped teams. This could be a good solution but the only thing to decide is if it can include NZ - i.e. work out how many teams it could allow for and then how many teams each club can nominate to go - then see if it could allow the number of NZ teams that would be keen.


Mike Polo [TIM] Fri 26 Sep 2014 1:09AM

Timaru would put up its hand up to hold a NZ qualifier, However I know that Auckland and Christchurch have said they would prefer a joint tournament. But I think for 2015 might work better due to worlds bid.


NickDW [CBR] Fri 26 Sep 2014 1:47AM

I agree with the capped joint Nats. I don't know if Canberra will be able to send teams to both so I'd be pushing them to save for Worlds rather than attend Nats if they can only do one.

24 is a decent number of teams and I'm sure we can do a decent split between Aus and NZ teams.


Ollie BNE Fri 26 Sep 2014 2:37AM

The hard thing is allocating slots. Brisbane had five teams in the top 13. There were also five nz teams in the top 13.

We are happy to host a qualifier in Brisbane, but it will be hard to alocate slots with 24 teams.

If Timaru and BNE hosted qualifiers it would be less complicated, and cheaper to run as both clubs have tourney courts already.

If we were to do a combined Nats we should limit entry to teams wantig to qualify to the worlds main tourney. All other teams can register for the wild card.


Ollie BNE Fri 26 Sep 2014 2:39AM

I would limit BNE, SYD and MLB to 4 slots each. But that would be half the slots of the tourney to three cities. Fuck. See it's really hard.


Alan [AKL] Fri 26 Sep 2014 2:57AM

Ollie, what do you think of my suggestion for the regional allocation? 5 Aus, 3 NZ (+ 2 Timaru teams as hosts) Gives us 10 spots total. Four more than any other year, but also recognizes that Australia's scene is bigger than New Zealand's. Other local teams may end up qualifying via wildcard.


[deactivated account] Fri 26 Sep 2014 3:09AM

@alanengland allocations for WHBPC should be a separate discussion. Allocating spots for Timaru is very tricky thing and completely reliant on how many spots in total are available, i.e. 48 or 64 - which hasn't been decided yet.


Alan [AKL] Fri 26 Sep 2014 3:10AM

Oh sorry, was just following on from Ollie. Will keep my mouth shut. But for the record, we'd support a 64 slot competition since we have so many courts and volunteers.


NickDW [CBR] Fri 26 Sep 2014 3:54AM

@alanengland Ollie is talking slots for a joint but capped Nats so if you've got an opinion on that breakdown it'd be good to hear as you've been supportive of a joint Nats rather than split.


Punk (PER) Fri 26 Sep 2014 4:19AM

PCP is for a combined nats with limited spots per city/club even if it meant every club had limited spots, say use a active member to number of spots ratio to allocate. as for a total number of teams well that's up for debate and clearly what's viable. our bigger question is though timing of nats, a month before worlds, a week? if it was close enough most PCP members would just fly east play nats and then head straight to NZ to help set up etc.


NickDW [CBR] Fri 26 Sep 2014 4:27AM

So I had a look on podium for the results of the last two years. Sydney, Brisbane and Melbourne accounted for half the top 24 on average over those years - so giving them half the teams for 2015 would be reasonable. Perth had two each year. Timaru an average of 2.5 if I'm reading it right. Auckland 1, Christchurch 1.5, Wellington 1.5.

On average over the two years there were 14.5 Aus teams, 7 NZ teams, and 2.5 teams I'm not sure about.

So I'd suggest:
BNE - 4
SYD - 4
MLB - 4
PER - 2
TIU - 2
CHC - 1
AKL - 1
WLG - 1

The remaining 5 spots we leave open to smaller AUS clubs (Hobart, Newcastle, Canberra, Adelaide) and all NZ clubs - potentially on a first in best dressed basis - with the understanding that Nats is to qualify for the main tourney at Worlds.


Andy Balcar CHC Fri 26 Sep 2014 5:36AM

  1. First a point of order - I don't think personal arguments for or against a proposal should be included in the proposal. I thought that was what this bit was for - otherwise it appears slightly biased - well it does to me anyway.
  2. As stated earlier my points above were personal and probably don't represent all of ChCh - I need to see what the other players think - they may well like the idea of a NZ based tournament just down the road.

Ollie BNE Fri 26 Sep 2014 6:09AM

NZ only sent six teams out of 40. More NZ teams will get to play if there is a local qualifier: and then everyone will still get to go to the worlds wild card.


Ollie BNE Fri 26 Sep 2014 6:10AM

This is only for one year remember.


John Bennett HBA Fri 26 Sep 2014 3:36PM

If I have read correctly, two clubs (BNE and Timaru) have put their hands up to host smaller qualifications(24 team, 2 courts). No club has indicated a strong desire to hold a big (48 team, 3 court) combined qualifier? So from an organisational perspective it seems split quals wins. If we were to hold a big qualifier, perhaps right before worlds is the best option - Australian teams only travel once, the results are super relevant and there is a heap of people in Timaru to set up worlds...

In summary: split qualifiers weeks or months before worlds, or a big qualifier just before worlds.


[deactivated account] Wed 1 Oct 2014 12:24PM

Now that WHBPC is confirmed, we can sort out whether we have a AHBPC or just a "qualifier". Before we decide whether we split it or not, the simplest step would be to do some rough figures to see how many teams we can host on two courts over a day of 9 hours of play. It's not an elimination but just games to determine a rank.
16 teams = 9 rounds
20 teams = 7 rounds
24 teams = 6 rounds

If we advertise that only the 8 highest ranked teams go to main tournie in Timaru, would more than 24 teams come from around AU/NZ? Could we therefore still host it in BNE and have both countries attend?


NickDW [CBR] Wed 1 Oct 2014 1:32PM

I think a BNE Nats with a cap on teams at 24 is the way to go. I don't think we need to decide on whether it's a split qualifier, but we do need to decide on dates. If we're planning Worlds for Nov or Jan do we want to hold Nats in March or hold it off til July-August? Or do we want to do as Perth suggested and hold Nats close to Worlds to save them the cost of flying over and back twice in a year?


NickDW [CBR] Thu 2 Oct 2014 1:50AM

Are we discussing this here or on Facebook?


Alan [AKL] Thu 2 Oct 2014 1:59AM

Looks like it is getting discussed pretty heavily on Facebook. Would be nice if we could agree on a few things here before announcing on Facebook? I knew a few ideas have been put forward.. But it sounds like the split nats, BNE, TIU with wildcard qualifier for everyone else in Australasia for example is what is being promoted on Facebook.


Alan [AKL] Thu 2 Oct 2014 2:00AM

When would the NZ Qualifier be Michael? Part of worlds, or many months previous?


Ollie BNE Thu 2 Oct 2014 2:33AM

In my mind the smaller the qualifiers the better. If we split 16 teams for Aus and 16 for NZ would give a better ranking. We will probably need accurate rankings as there will be the potential for more slots in the main tourney.


Mike Polo [TIM] Thu 2 Oct 2014 2:47AM

Hi Guys,

Mine and Sam's approach for the NZ qualifier has been to get what our club prefers. Which is looking at a split event only for 2015 due to the worlds bid. As a club TBP value the interaction with OZ etc.

Alan I would think with the amount of organizing with the worlds we would do the NZ qualifier months early. It would be a really simple even to run with one court in Timaru over a weekend. Its pretty much plug in and play event, Minimal setup for host and helpers.

I proposed to all the reps from NZ to ask their players when next year ? - it gives ppl a really good chance to get teams together and costs sorted.


Mike Polo [TIM] Thu 2 Oct 2014 3:12AM

I think NZ will be fine with what your proposing Ollie, 16 teams for the NZ qualifier.

If the NZ reps can come back to TIMARU on their numbers we can go from there !


[deactivated account] Thu 2 Oct 2014 4:43AM

The discussion is here, not facebook. Facebook was only asking for an update.

Please refer to my point that with 24 teams it doesn't need to be a split qualifier - it just depends on whether NZ would rather fly to BNE or Timaru.

If we're only promoting the strongest teams to come for the 8 spots (example) and it's only for rankings then I strongly doubt we'd hit 24.

I don't think we discuss dates for this until WHBPC dates are set. It's a distraction.


Punk (PER) Thu 2 Oct 2014 6:59AM

on the back of that then if we can do 24 teams in 1 day on two courts why not do 2 days with more teams? nobody wants to travel for 1 day of polo.


Ollie BNE Thu 2 Oct 2014 7:43AM

Yeah I dont see the point in doing one day when it costs the same ether way for us to hire the court, we have to book for a whole weekend. I don't know where one day has come from.

We stipulated a small tourney to make for less organisation, less body's on the ground means less catering, logistics and what not. Our proposed site is small.

If NZ are prepared to fly over then cool, but I think six slots in that case is fair as they sent six this year. That will leave 18 for the rest of Aus and the major centre clubs won't have to limit strong teams.


Ollie BNE Thu 2 Oct 2014 7:46AM

6- NZ
4 each - Syd Melb BNE
2- Perth
4- rest of Aus


Sam TIM Thu 2 Oct 2014 10:27AM

This is a topic that I'm sure will be of wide interest to all players. I suggest we start a new tread. Publicise the link from the start and reps ONLY comment with what the general feeling/vote of there members is.

This is one to be very transparent on.


Ned Collins PER Thu 2 Oct 2014 11:14AM

I'm somewhat in favour of a smaller qualifier to position the strongest teams in a fair position for worlds. as for splitting the qualifiers, I'm curious as to how to words spots are distributed amongst the two regions.


NickDW [CBR] Thu 2 Oct 2014 2:16PM

We've got this thread and it's gone into the comments on Ben's facebook post. I'm not sure we need to start another but I agree that we need to be clear if we are stating our personal views or the views of our clubs. That said, I'll deal if we want to start fresh.

Based on Sam's comment in the worlds thread we could be having the next worlds as late as February 2016. It gives players over a year to save for flights. I also take on some of the concern in the facebook thread that there isn't a major tournament for some time. I think there is value in the limited size Nats proposed and it we provide enough time between it and Worlds then teams may be able to save to fly to both. Plus it gives us time to fundraise to support teams flying to both.


Ollie BNE Thu 2 Oct 2014 11:14PM

I had an idea of small chash prizes for the podium teams, to help pay for flights. It's going to be really cheap for us to run our qualifier, so there will be enough money to do so.

If we split the qualifiers this would mean more support for both Aus and NZ in financial assistance.


Ollie BNE Thu 2 Oct 2014 11:16PM

We would have over $900 left over, that could be distributed $150 each to first, $100 each to second and $50 each to third.


David Corrin MEL Fri 3 Oct 2014 2:09AM

My suggestion is this for Australasian qualifier:

Let's run a 24 team single day swiss the day before the wild card in Timaru. Top 6 (according to our regions allocation) go through to the main event and the rest can fight it out in the wildcard where we guarantee 18 spots in said wildcard event for those teams who didn't make it in the Australasian qualifying day.

I personally think 64 teams is a stupid idea given that they couldn't fill 64 spots even in MP. Even with 48 it leaves 6 spots for Aus, 1 for Timaru and let's say 6 from wildcard. That means we need to attract 35 international teams to make 48. I think you will be pushing it to do this. Pulling more teams from the wildcard to fill the numbers is a total mistake IMO. All it does is shorten the games and reduce the quality of the play.



Alan [AKL] Fri 3 Oct 2014 2:16AM

Auckland is discussing this next week at pick-up, I will be able to present our feedback to the council after that.


Punk (PER) Fri 3 Oct 2014 2:37AM

PCP will be discussing tonight an tomorrow and we will back with results Sunday.


Ollie BNE Fri 3 Oct 2014 6:34AM

If we are brainstorming ideas we were talking today about other options, what about split qualifiers that are open then a top sixteen Australasians. We could seperate the tourneys by 4 months, that would give everyone good tourney practice ore worlds!


David Corrin MEL Sat 4 Oct 2014 4:26AM

After some discussion with some of my constituency I would like to further refine my suggestion of a pre wildcard, single day, australasian qualifier.

I think that this one day event might not need to be capped at 24. I think 32 would be far more inclusive and would work with some new ideas in the mix. The main problem with running more teams is how it effects the accuracy of the seeding owing to fewer games played per team. However after a discussion with our local physicist he believes that with a slightly better algorithm utilising historical data about goal differences and the better data yielded from the unlimited goal format we could do much better than previous attempts using the current podium algorithm.

If we then took top 6-8 to the main event it would give everyone who doesn't go straight through to the main event, the opportunity to play wildcard also and in total, a two day event with 10-12, 15 minute games.

If we have 5 courts setup the 32 team first day with 6 rounds would take only 4 hours of simultaneous play. Easy.

Then we can make wildcard capped at 48 teams. 24 from our region and 24 internationals. 4-6 go through. Wildcard would be morning an afternoon bracket of 15 minute games with unlimited goals using the same algorithm as australasians.

Perhaps a rest day after wildcard before main event?

Unlimited goals for main event also... Just saying...


Ollie BNE Sat 4 Oct 2014 10:36PM

Definitely unlimited goals for all AHBPA tourneys.


Punk (PER) Mon 6 Oct 2014 5:03AM

PCP is strongly against a split Nats. It implies that aus/nz is looking to become two different regions and may cause grief in future events, say if Asia was to host a worlds, (as unlikely as that seems at present).

Also too note you don't see Canada and USA suddenly becoming two regions every second year when the worlds are in their locale.


John Bennett HBA Mon 6 Oct 2014 6:09PM

What's the feeling in regards to format in Perth Punk? Are they in to Dave's suggestion of pre-wildcard qualifier? Or a big AHBPC well before worlds?

I don't mind Dave's idea - although does this mean we have no national competition between March 2014 and Feb 2016? Long gap


Punk (PER) Tue 7 Oct 2014 12:05AM

Generally the feeling is for a bigger AHBPC before worlds as we normally do. Some guys over here are not fussy on playing at a worlds and nationals is enough.

But Dave's option is good as it means its only one trip for all the PCP members plus seems to be accommodating for more teams.

However after the weekend and maybe a few new contacts there has been talk of Perth maybe putting their hand up for Nats. Would that even be an option?


David Corrin MEL Tue 7 Oct 2014 12:51AM

I think anyone who plays polo and isn't thinking of coming to world's in Timaru needs their head read ; )

I personally would like to see all funds, resources and person power diverted away from a national competition so we can do what is necessary to attract the as much of the international polo community to our hemisphere.

For the $50,000 additional dollars it would cost our community to attend a nationals in Perth I'd rather see us donate that money to worlds and put on an actual legitimate professional standard event in Timaru. We could really put our stamp on this. There is real talk about changing to unlimited goals and even some mutterings internationally and locally about having a final day single elim with only 12 teams with 30 minute games and lead by 5 to win.

This is not the time for our region to be myopic. We need to show the world that spending serious dollars coming to a town 2 hours from an international airport is going to be worth it.

I can see that for the players not eager to compete at this level it might seem all for nothing. I can only encourage you to consider how much you enjoy nationals and the thirst we all have for another event like this. Worlds in Timaru can be ten times better if we really work on it. Legit refs, Digital scoreboards and timers, the best courts, perfect live stream, event photographers, media coverage, sick prizes, sweet trophy, full game statistics, a masseuse! I'd settle for shade and a track pump but I know it won't bring the euros or the americans...


[deactivated account] Wed 8 Oct 2014 8:09AM

From those in SYD I've managed to speak to this about were against a qual tournie in TUI before the wildcard. There are a few main reasons for this:
1. Distraction from helping TUI build the courts and event setup.
2. Possible injury concerns sustained in the qual would rule you out of wildcard or WHBPC
3. if you played in the qual, didn't make it then play the wildcard and through to the main tournie, you'd be greatly disadvantaged in energy etc from playing 3 high level tournies back-to-back.
4. if 16 months away then there's plenty of room for a small tournie in BNE for quals


Ollie BNE Wed 8 Oct 2014 10:51PM

I agree with the sentiments of Dave's comment.

After speaking to bne players most are against a qualifier before the wildcard for similar reasons stated by Sydney.

All domestic focus should be on worlds, with the qualifier functioning only as practice, warm up and ranking for top teams.


John Bennett HBA Sun 12 Oct 2014 12:36PM

Update from our AGM tonight. Hobart is largely against a big, joint AHBPC (for 2015 only) - due mainly to its logistical difficulty and to try and reduce travel for all players. We are also against a qualifier immediately before worlds, for much the same reasons as Brooke and Ollie.


[deactivated account] Fri 17 Oct 2014 11:32AM

@ollie1 , the original proposal had a month window. Can we reduce this as it's still two weeks away and I think by the sounds of it there is a push for a new proposal. - which is what Sam is putting up a block for.


carissa Thu 4 Dec 2014 6:56AM

So where are nationals going to be? I personally was going to use the wildcard as my attempt at worlds as I will be tapped financially. I know most of Chch players have families which makes it more difficult for them to travel to Australia but maybe most of our club could just do wildcard? Not sure how we get into the wildcard though...


[deactivated account] Thu 4 Dec 2014 7:21AM

@carissa I think there was another discussion which was more recent. The most current option was to have a weekend qualification tournament which has a capped entry (for example, at 24 teams) over one weekend in BNE. Teams seeking direct qualification would go to this but as only the top 6 or so teams would make it then it is assumed that most teams would go through the Wildcard system instead which has a much higher allocation of spots for WHBPC and would be cheaper/easier to attend. the wildcard would effectively be the AHBPC.

As mentioned, it's not locked in yet but I think that was where the discussion got up to.


carissa Thu 4 Dec 2014 7:33AM

@brooktaitstyles Thanks! Was looking through but assumed I had missed something. Will pass that on (with caveat that hasn't been confirmed) to some of the players less likely to be able to travel


Alan [AKL] Fri 5 Dec 2014 1:01AM

Is the Brisbane tournament (not locked in) Australian qualification, or Australasian qualification? Has a date/month been suggested?


Ollie BNE Thu 5 Feb 2015 8:45AM

Ok time for a new proposal. This time lets make it simple...


Poll Created Thu 5 Feb 2015 8:52AM

For 2015 ONLY we split the NZ/Aus qualification. Closed Sun 15 Feb 2015 8:04AM

by Ollie BNE Tue 25 Apr 2017 5:22AM

For 2015 only we will split our regional qualifiers.

Voting can now commence for the host city for each qualifier.

Rules regarding qualification and attendance to be discussed as there is some differing of opinion.

This split is to reduce the travel costs of the entire polo community and reduce the organisational burden to allow the community to focus on THE WORLD CHAMPS which are in our region for the first time.

By reducing the travel costs for players more will be able to travel to the main event in Timaru and be able to play the main even or wild card. The wild card will take the place of our regular big AHBPC as a place for players to play against a higher level and learn.

Timaru has put its hand up to host the NZ qual as it has a polo specific court with little to no tourney set up costs.

East coast Aus clubs Melb and BNE have put their hands up to run tourneys that will cost very little as they have the facilities already to run an Aus qual.

This saving of set up costs can act as a fundraiser for worlds, with entry fee's and other associated funds raised (cafe's, tee's etc) going to WHBPCVII.


Results Option % of points Voters
Agree 80.0% 12 DU DCM ABC OB A[ P D JB R K C P[
Abstain 20.0% 3 ST N A
Disagree 0.0% 0  
Block 0.0% 0  
Undecided 0% 13 JHN MP S FF D GG JM RV MC KJW TG BG JT(

15 of 28 people have voted (53%)


Ollie BNE
Thu 5 Feb 2015 8:53AM

It is cheaper and simpler for our region and allows more focus on WORLDS.


[deactivated account]
Thu 5 Feb 2015 10:47AM

I think this is wise just for getting a ranking to use for direct qualification. I'd like to see everyone push the Wildcard tournie as the "AHBPC" replacement for the larger tournie where everyone can play hard or chill out and party.


Sun 8 Feb 2015 9:42AM

Add the amendment of entry into both Aus and NZ for each country but not able to qualify.


Alan [AKL]
Sun 8 Feb 2015 8:03PM

Auckland voted in favour of this proposal last night at pick-up.


David Corrin MEL
Sun 8 Feb 2015 9:37PM

General consensus around the traps is in favour of split quals. Not sure how we feel about a limited numbers tourney that allows for nz entries and vise versa. Especially if we are not allowing internationals or others already qualified or attempted


Punk (PER)
Mon 9 Feb 2015 12:56AM

Perth has generally come round to the idea of splitting it. but like Dave has said has some concerns about a reduced numbers tourny but somehow still having room for other non qualifying teams to come as well.


Robert [HBT]
Wed 11 Feb 2015 9:33AM

Hobart agrees with the increased focus on worlds this time round.


jamie barber
Fri 13 Feb 2015 4:25AM

Brisbane host, AHBP assist in organisation
No cap teams
$rego excess goes to timaru/ MPS appearance fee


Fri 13 Feb 2015 11:12AM

Opinion in Timaru was split and so abstaining seems the best way to capture this.


NickDW [CBR]
Fri 13 Feb 2015 11:50AM

Canberra is unaffected by this decision - we have no teams or players likely to qualify for Worlds directly. We want a decision but do not feel like we should decide it.


AdamM [NTL]
Sat 14 Feb 2015 8:31AM

As for Canberra, we are generally supportive of the BNE Australian comp, but feel the decision about nationals really needs to be made by those who are directly affected in terms of competitiveness and travel costs.


Sun 15 Feb 2015 1:11AM

General consensus in Melbourne in favour of split Nats


Kent [SYD]
Sun 15 Feb 2015 1:52AM

No objections from anyone in Sydney. There are some reservations about NZ teams attending qualifier tournament and impacting results, with the suggestion NZ teams come to one of the other tournaments


Andy Balcar CHC
Sun 15 Feb 2015 2:00AM

But still think NZ / Ausy teams should be allowed to play in each others tournaments despite some potential logistical difficulties.


David Corrin MEL Thu 5 Feb 2015 10:51AM

I will discuss with the Melbourne peeps.


Punk (PER) Fri 6 Feb 2015 12:00AM

ill discuss with Perth peeps, but one thing that appears to be overlooked thus far is it is australiASIA... are we telling Singapore, Malaysia, and neighbors to go do their own thing, or do they get an invite to either event?


Kent [SYD] Fri 6 Feb 2015 12:23AM

Another point to discuss is how will AHBPC 2016 be impacted. Now that worlds is in Feb and with the last two Nats in autumn, does this mean two big tourneys in 2016? Even if we push 2016 back to Spring(the start of our 'season') then try to get back on to autumn for 2017, its still two big tournaments 6 or so months apart.


Ollie BNE Fri 6 Feb 2015 2:13AM

I think with Malaysia, Hong kong, Thai and China they can organise their own qualifier and be given their own spots, that way we simplify the travel and make sure more teams attend the world champs. Taiwan and Japan always organise their own qualification system. The Australaisan title was essentially added for NZ I thought.

And if this year we are minimising travel it stands to reason to let each country run its own qualifiers. Next year, maybe later in 2016 we can organise a massive Asian qualifier with all of those countries...

Let's just reduce the travel cost across the board for our region and then be generous with the worlds slots. We aren't exactly going to be limited, there will be AT MOST 12 teams each from NAH and EU. That leaves at least 30-40 slots to fill from Asia. And there is the wild card.


[deactivated account] Fri 6 Feb 2015 3:59AM

Technically "Australasia" doesn't include any of those countries. Its NZ, AU and a bunch of small islands and possibly PNG


Sam TIM Fri 6 Feb 2015 4:35AM

Have spoken with timaru. Briefly their toughts are they the agree with Ollies proposal with one ammendment. That aus teams can play in the nz qual as a non-qualifying team and vis-versa. That way teams who feel they need more polo time against strong teams in the build up to the worlds get that chance if they are willing to pay for the travel. This may be more relevant for the (few) nz teams than for aus.
It also opens up Andy's good point about the benefits of face to face time together in the build up to the world. Something I for one would value.


Ollie BNE Fri 6 Feb 2015 5:27AM

Sounds like a good amendment. If people want to and can afford the flight, peace be with them to travel. I like it.

And yep Brook, exactly! So for now we can sort out the Australia and New Zealand scenes and the rest of Asia can sort themselves.

(we should get a pretty good showing from Japan, Taiwan, China and Hong Kong which will be shweeeet!)


Punk (PER) Fri 6 Feb 2015 6:33AM

I like the idea of teams playing in tournys just for exposure! but places should be reserved for teams using it as a qualifier seeing as total number of teams will be on the smaller side.


Robert [HBT] Fri 6 Feb 2015 9:45AM

Just asked the rest of the boys but I don't suspect there will be any disagreement.


Andy Balcar CHC Sun 8 Feb 2015 5:16AM

After a quick chat with the Christchurch crew - everyone seems pretty happy with this too. But it would suck for the NZ teams that want to head over if there was no room for them - it would defeat the whole point of the amendment.


Sam TIM Mon 9 Feb 2015 5:52AM

For the 4 or so NZ teams who would be able to be a bit competitive in a worlds event, the value in an NZ qual would be limited value.
NZ has some good growing scenes but there is a real split between the teams that attended AHBPC14 and those who have since started playing.

So if those few nz teams couldn't come to a top teams tourney before the worlds they would be sorely disappointed.

Tricky situation.


[deactivated account] Tue 10 Feb 2015 10:31AM

I understand Sam's concerns. Personally, my initial preference as posted here was for a large open AHBPC (48+ teams). As this isn't on the cards due to lack of planning or cities putting their hand up, we've decided that to focus on WHBPC we'd have a smaller one just for direct WHBPC qualification.

Just to clarify, the proposal to have it split is for the purpose of making 'required' travel cheaper and most importantly making it easy to plan and run. With less teams it could be on a single court (even a normal pickup court) with no cost or prep. Having teams from NZ or elsewhere would essentially defeat the purpose for this. If we open it for NZ then it might as well be a qualifier for both regions and have a city properly plan it. If no city wants to host then I'm assuming it should be a split qualifier.

If these teams want competitive games for practice then an alternative can be to schedule another weekend closer to WHBPC for this in an east coast OZ city or use a tournie like Spring or Xmas in MELBs.


jamie barber Fri 13 Feb 2015 4:23AM

I propose that we seek an expression of interest for teams to attend a world's qualifying Brisbane tournament (mid this year). Team cap, qualifying process, format etc to be discussed. Organising efforts to be borne by whole polo community, surplus funds to go into AHBPA fund to assist with worlds.
We find what date works best and look into facilities that are available at the time we want. The courts we used for "No sleep" know about polo and we didn't get any negative feedback from them regarding court damage or misbehaviour. This would mean that a 2 court tournament would be the largest option.
As to team caps: historically we have used the format of 2 courts, 2 days, Swiss first and double elim the next day, this has favoured 16, 24, 36/48 team caps. This has meant that everyone gets at least 2 games the next day.
As far as I can tell, opinion is moving away from swiss/double elim. This in addition to the caveat that it will be a serious qualifying tournament would mean that the number of teams that register isn't really that important, as long as we can have a consensus as to the most effective and fair format. Any implications as to world’s places etc must be agreed upon by the council in accordance to how many regional qualifying spots are available.
The courts cost $200 a day, they are utilised by the school close by, so a booking would have to be made well in advance and include at least one half day either side of the tournament for construction and packup ($200).
Brisbane already has the boards and pallets for the construction of 2 courts. There was a number of pallets destroyed in construction and take down, but they can be easily supplied.
Court construction will be impossible without:
• Minimum $800 in court hire (half a day construction Friday was not enough at NSTB)
• 2 flatbed trucks for moving materials day of construction and takedown $300-500
• A dedicated volunteer squad of 20 people on both the building day and take down day. Home town teams have always suffered due to the physical and mental demand of tournament organising. Brisbane do not want to bear the entire burden of organising the tournament and would like assurance in terms of concrete guarantees about a volunteer workforce with representatives from each city attending.
• A 200-300$ for square drive decking screws and other incidentals
Total cost $1500-1600

Proposed timeline (TLDR)
Vote on an option
Assess number of teams keen for Brisbane qualifying tournament mid year (now til end of February)
Based on feedback we decide on time and location, book most appropriate court (1st week march)
Open registration 2nd week of march- 1st week April
Housing/ transport/ resources/ jobs allocated april- end of april


jamie barber Fri 13 Feb 2015 4:26AM


[deactivated account] Fri 13 Feb 2015 8:09AM

@jamiebarber thanks for the work in proposing a solution. I think that is definitely the next step after the first proposal is voted on.

I've mentioned this before, but as it's purely a qualifier, we only need a rank. There is no need for an elimination day and therefore could be on a single court on one day to save work and costs. The other day could be pickup/bench/hangtime or an elimination for practice but not counted. For less cost, we could even have it on Sydneys pick up court with our club boards we already have and free court use and lights.

For this, it all depends on number of teams. If we only get 12-16 as expected then swiss could be fine to use. All hypothetical.


jamie barber Fri 13 Feb 2015 8:35AM

I guess it depends on the number of teams who are keen to play and the format that we choose.
Each format has it's drawbacks. In a perfect world, each team would play every other one twice, giving us an accurate ranking. This is impossible time-wise and arguably physically impossible.
Luck of the draw for the morning or afternoon bracket could easily mean the difference between between qualifying and not qualifying (remember double elim gives you 1,2,3,4 then tied 5th tied 7th)

Now that there are a few cities with boards and pallets, there is no increased financial burden of keeping it an open tournament . There is no substitute for tournament experience in increasing both skill and keenness amongst newer players.
We just have to utilise a system that prioritises accurate seeding rather than giving everyone tonnes of games


NickDW [CBR] Fri 13 Feb 2015 11:54AM

Canberra is generally supportive of the idea of focussing on Worlds as the regions chance to socialise and party and give newer players experience in both polo and the polo community.

However, given the passion we've seen in the Australasian community on the issue of Nats and the lack of interest in Canberra, we did not feel that our one vote should have an impact. Given the current lack of opposition to the proposal on Loomio this may seem an odd stance but hopefully more reps will participate (participation being one of the ways a decision is valid according to the rules we agreed).


AdamM [NTL] Sat 14 Feb 2015 8:30AM

Newcastle is in basically the same position as Canberra. I think we might have enough players that have indicated they will travel to Timaru for one team in the wild card, but we won't exactly be competitive against teams from larger clubs in Australia or NZ so the guys will be there to make up numbers, help out and have fun.


Pat [AKL] Sun 15 Feb 2015 12:45AM

Hi everyone. Auckland favours this proposal.


NickDW [CBR] Sun 15 Feb 2015 1:18AM

OK, based on the number of reps listed in this thread https://www.loomio.org/d/bR0Nh5GJ/club-rep-elections we now have 50% of the reps voting (ignore the 27 at the bottom of the chart, that includes people who aren't reps).

In line with the rules agreed on this thread https://www.loomio.org/d/anymd9zC/using-loomio-for-ahbpa-decisions we now have enough reps voting for this to be declared decided.


Ollie BNE Wed 18 Feb 2015 12:43AM

My suggestion rather than NZ teams coming over to the qualifier for hard games, why not come to one of the many other east coast tourneys that are planned.

So far from what I know:

Sydney have one in April, its called the Slayer fest so hard polo is a GIVEN!

Melbourne, Bris and Syd are planning at least another tourney each. Bris are talking about two tourneys...

There are plans for the five player squad tourney.

There are many options for other tourneys to attend (where organisers are DESPERATE for strong NZ teams to come over) so why not use them rather than us instigate another man hours draining internet debate.


[deactivated account] Thu 19 Feb 2015 11:01AM

With a heavy mind I agree Ollie. Not an easy choice, but I think it means we can put on a wicked WHBPC and satellite tournies instead. next to discuss is each qualifier as well as AHBPC for the year after as Kent pointed out.


Sam TIM Fri 20 Feb 2015 5:02AM

Yeah, I tend to agree too. Keep it clean. Separate quals. For the kiwi teams that want to play in aus there will be other tourneys.

Good debate and good result.


Andy Balcar CHC Fri 20 Feb 2015 8:55AM

Yep i agree


Punk (PER) Mon 23 Feb 2015 2:31AM

Jamie's idea of first seeking an expression of interest from teams keen on Nats seemed a good one. Are we as reps now to take this too our clubs and report back? Or is it a shut case?