Worlds 2008 Applications- Are we asking the right questions?

Nation,

With the exception of juniors, all of our teams that will represent us at the World Championships in 2008 have posted Team Canada Applications.

I really like the concept of adding players throughout the country to help bolster our respective lineups. It gives people throughout the country more of an affinity to Canada's efforts during the tournament. I also think that the decision makers on these teams are very serious about looking at applications. This is refreshing.

I don't pretend that these teams will compose a lineup much different than the ones that represented their cities at the 2007 nationals. However, given the progressive push by the USA, Australia, and Japan, Canadian teams needs to ensure they add players that can offset increased competition.

What are my thoughts on the current application process? I think we have to understand the logistical and financial problems that prevent true tryouts and evaluation. However, I think there are also some current flaws in the flawed process we know use. Let's look at some of the questions asked by the teams in their applications.

Photos Courtesy: http://www.wugc2004.org
Photographer: Juha Kankaanpää

• Strengths as a player
• Outside of personal bias and overestimation, this is pretty good
• Experience
• A necessary evil. It might speak more to past glory than current value. It's like when teams play a 32 year old free agent millions for what a player did in his late twenties
  
• Current Team
• Generally, good teams have good players. But, even better players may play on less successful team. You're not picking teams to join your team.
  
• References
• We have built in BS detectors to filter sport references. People usually pick people who will give them a superficial reference in the positive area.
  
• Age
• This is an important one for masters and juniors. Can you make a decision based on age? I see a lot of young players fresh off world juniors who lack the fitness of people in their late twenties and early thirties. You want to give future stalwarts a shot, but many ultimate players don't learn how to train/prevent injury until later on.
  
• Height
• "You can't teach height" (P-Mo)
  
• Weight
• If you're going to go there, why not just ask for a body fat ratio?
• No fatties!!! Does your weight (within limits) affect your ability to play ultimate
  
• Commitment Level/Availability
• Very good question. The further away you live, the less chance you have. Most teams list their expectations, and they are ambitious.
• Is being available more important than talent?
  
• Role
• Are players in the right/optimal role currently
• Can you really peg people in ultimate? The game is pretty organic.
  
• Photo
• This was a random request, by the girls surprisingly.
  
• If I think I know you, you have a better shot
• If you're good looking, you have a better shot
• I'm sure this could be requested after team selection
• Top Major Tournament Finishes
• This speaks to the team. Can't stress this enough.
  
• Major Tournament Experiences
• What's the value of a past worlds/nationals/upas?
• If you played in many major tourneys, and choked personally in all of them, does that still go down as an asset?
  
• Past "Big Game Experience"
• Playing well 4 years in Helsinki is more valued than being able to play big in 2008?
• How valuable is experience? If you don't know how it relates to your team's chances and player value, than why ask it?
• Do we pick experienced players because it's safer?
  
• Athletic Ability
• No discussion/request for 40 times or anything of the like.
  
• Like all the other questions, good intentions but...

What to do?

Really no easy way to fix this process. However, with the increase in game film and stats, it will be easier to scout and evaluate potential talent.

Here's an example. Go Big Recruiting is a website dedicated to posting game film of college hopefuls. It has replaced the process of sending many tapes/dvds to schools. Recruiters can instead log in and everyone can view your ability.

Like hockey, Team Canada recruitment will get better after we fail at the international level. From desperation and want comes the need for innovation.

Practice Rumblings.. what really frustrates me..

Nation,

I try to keep this site geared towards the game in Canada, rather than about myself. However, I'm going to let off a rant off . Here goes:

People don't use practice to its full advantage.

Ottawa has an excellent men's league set up this winter. We're getting lots of great scrimmage in, and we're running great drills. But constantly (including players outside of Ottawa I've played with and watched), I see players who don't approach practice in a way that can translate into game success.

Unknown Ottawa Girl
Source: Ultypics.com
Photographer: Alan Pieroway

• When you're running a drill, you run it like a game situation. Thus, you don't cheat in the drill in a way that wouldn't work in a real game.
• Technique is F-ing important.
  
• You should not measure a play being good/bad based on the outcome of the play solely. It's really the decision involved AND the execution. If you keep throwing the same bad break throw to someone's shoetops, but it gets caught, it doesn't mean you're onto a great strategy. Conversely, if you make the right play but fail in the execution, that doesn't mean you should limit yourself.
  
• There is a difference between running a play/drill right and wrong.
• I amazed at the amount of times people run drills like robots. Look/Adjust to your throwers/receivers..
• Those warm-up throws are going to affect your game throws..
  

Good practice can make perfect. $hitty practice makes less than perfect.

Performance Enhancing Drugs in Ultimate?

Nation,

Dick Pound doesn't look so crazy now... does he?

Did anyone hear about the Mitchell report, which is rocking the baseball world? Of course you did. It listed many former and current major league baseball players who have used performance enhancing drugs. To me, a sport academic and a crazed sports fan, it just left me wondering who they failed to list/mention. (The report was limited because the Senator Mitchell was unable to subpoena or force any stakeholders to talk/participate). Unless you made a slip up at the border, you had a trainer who squealed, or if you failed a test, you were able to avoid infamy.

Roger Clemens Roadtrip!!!
Photo Source: Eyes of the Border

Why did so many people cheat? It's quite simple. J.C. Bradbury does an excellent job of describing Nash Game theory in his book "The Baseball Economist". Here's the gist:

"a solution concept of a game involving two or more players, in which no player has anything to gain by changing only his or her own strategy unilaterally. If each player has chosen a strategy and no player can benefit by changing his or her strategy while the other players keep theirs unchanged, then the current set of strategy choices and the corresponding payoffs constitute a Nash equilibrium.

Stated simply, A and B are in Nash equilibrium if A is making the best decision A can, taking into account B's decision, and B is making the best decision B can, taking into account A's decision. Likewise, many players are in Nash equilibrium if each one is making the best decision that they can, taking into account the decisions of the others. However, Nash equilibrium does not necessarily mean the best cumulative payoff for all the players involved; in many cases all the players might improve their payoffs if they could somehow agree on strategies different from the Nash equilibrium (eg. competing businessmen forming a cartel in order to increase their profits)."

So......

• Players cheat because they want to get ahead (make more money, do better on field, last longer)
• Players cheat because they know others may/do cheat
• Players can't say no to performance enhancing drugs because they are potentially putting themselves in weaker position.

Sadly...

• Nobody gains any advantage because everyone is doing it
  
• Users don't get any more of the $ pie
• Users are left with the long term side effects of the drugs
  
• Those that abstain get punished (Maybe they don't make the big leagues)
• Everyone outside the cheating players wins (Owners, Fans who like great feats, etc.)

The very fact that owners, teams and fans got benefit from PE drugs lead to the blind eye treatment. MLB commish Bud Selig loved the record setting attendance and the positive buzz that followed the home run chases, the record breaking careers and the money that came into the league as a result. When congress dragged pro sports to the table, it was a rare time that the MLB and its player's union could agree that this would be bad for business.

Okay... so what about Ultimate.

I don't think Ultimate has an steroid or human growth hormone problem. However, I think that if ultimate dreamers (That's right, you're dreamers... keep giving Petro Canada your personal info and signing up to the facebook groups) ever got their Olympic dreams fulfilled, they would be very saddened to find that Ultimate has more of a performance enhancing problem than we think.

It's bad enough if they tested for Performance Delimiting drugs! If our sport started testing (by Olympic standards) we would be surprised how illegal our supplements, pre game pick me ups and other activities are.

Be careful what you ingest. Be careful what you wish for, and don't be naive.

Poll question is.. does ultimate have a performance enhancing drug problem? Comments are appreciated.

This is too much respect...

If you're Andrew Lugsdin, do you like seeing this or do you get a little freaked out..?

Indoor

Nation,

I've been around the Ottawa scene for over five years now. When I first started, the number of quality indoor locations with legitimate space and field turf was limited. Sure, the cost of playing during the long Ottawa winters was steep, but people in ultimate and competing sports were more than willing to pay.

After a two year stint in London (where we had no indoor facilities and thus, we had no ultimate except for some rare games/tourneys in the snow), I've come back to Ottawa and found a different marketplace. Not only has the market of indoor turf stadiums grown to the point of over saturation, but there has been a serious wane in the demand/interest by competitive ultimate players. I myself am only playing one night of men's comp, and avoiding the coed leagues that everyone once clamored to be a part of.

The Sweet Stuff....

Why the drop in interest for men's and women's comp players? Here are some of the possible reasons

-Despite the great field turf, you can get your a$$ hurt
-The times can be pretty terrible.
-The dome game is different, and instead of being viewed as a place to experiment, is now a place to learn bad habits.
-Summer injuries and training programs make playing indoor less attractive
-Despite having two fine coordinators for cooed indoor comp play, people are often not signing up because they don't think the level will be good/high enough.
-Serious disconnect between coed and women's/mens ultimate (Perhaps Ottawa specific)
-There are far too many players who don't want to play better ultimate, and don't want to listen to high level players... leading to frustration on both sides.
-Combining three types of players (open, women's, coed) can be an ineffective scenario if the right leaders are not in place.

I don't even think it's a money issue (Hearing well paid civil servants complain about indoor fees is always quite a laugh for me). However, it will be interesting to see how this plays out in future years, and if the different divisions of competitive continue to go their different ways.

Thus, the poll question is

Describe the State of Your city's Indoor/Winter High Level Leagues?

• Growing
• Peaking
• Dwindling
• Winter League What? (No League)

Have a couple of awesome interviews coming up.. looking forward to posting them!

The Lazy Star.. How does one Motivate?

Nation,

It's off season training time.

If you play competitive ultimate, whatever division, you've probably played with someone who possesses great talent but fails to get optimal performance from said ability. Let's take a look at the list of players that frustrate coaches and teammates

• The millon dollar body with the 5 cent mind star
• The dominates in tryouts but chokes at nationals star
• The skilled/intelligent guy who can't pass the baseline physical tests star
  
• The can't take the next step star
• The recreational drug star
• The can't stay healthy star
• The mentally weak star
  
• The plays for himself star
• The skips practice star

Randy Moss 'I just don't respect you enough to run hard'
Photo Source: www.sfgate.com

Some of these players are easier to spot than others. However, many Canadian teams in May tryouts overlook the negative faults of these players and focus on the positives. Especially when dealing with the great athletes. These are not bad people- they just simply haven't been conditioned to improve outside of their comfort zone, have had bad examples to follow or have been able to get by on existing talent.

Unfortunately, rewarding players with team spots when they refuse to address their weaknesses (i.e. Fitness, Throws, Team Play, Drug Use, Injury Prevention, Off season training habits, Playing for the team) does not help your team. That amazing 6'5 lane cutter who cuts off everyone else will be your kryptonite when your chasing a national title. The great thrower who looks off the easy throw on game point doesn't hoist high level trophies without a whole lotta help. Any player susceptible to injury is worth a lot less to your team than you probably think/calculate at tryouts.

So, the poll question is

Can an ultimate team/captain coach motivate "lazy" star players?
Yes
No

How do you handle the type of players listed above. Do you try to work with these players? Do you cut these players from your team? Do you bite your lip and put up with these players for the sake of wins?

Paul Cobb: The antithesis of the lazy star.
Photo Source: www.ultypics.com
Photographer: Dave Knowles

Poll Result Analysis: Ultimate- Team Game of Game of Stars

Nation,

Last week I posed a question about the game of ultimate-

Does an Ultimate team with several elite players outperform teams with greater depth?

Here is the results of the poll:
Yes: 6
No: 8
Depends on the Stars: 8

It doesn't get much more even than that (okay, 7/7/7 would be the most equal result). There is really no right answer here.

• People voting Yes to this question simply pointed out trios like Cruickshank/Lugsdin and Grant who can dominate you on offence.
• Other Yes voters pointed out that stars can play offense and defence in ultimate, and can dominate on both sides of the disc (I would say once again that it's easier to manipulate star power on offense)
• People voting No seem to be of the mindset that greater depth indeed carries the day. This becomes more evident at the end of the tournament, and more importantly at the end of a long summer/fall.
  

Long story short, People should strive to stack their team with stars who compliment one another, and bolster their roster with plenty of depth to lower risk against injury.

If I have to pick stars versus depth, I'll take ultimate's version of KG/Allen/Pierce and go for broke.