Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies

Expand Messages
  • Jean Colbert
    I think thats a great idea.  Should we discuss possible criteria for judging the combatants on?  Heres a few I could think of.  Well, of course chivalry
    Message 1 of 22 , Mar 27, 2009
      I think thats a great idea.  Should we discuss possible criteria for judging the combatants on?  Heres a few I could think of.  Well, of course chivalry should top the list, ratio of wins to losses, best death, technigue, most improved from first to last match, best showmanship or crowd appeal, size differences (a 4'9" 90# combatant defeating 3 opponents over 5' and 120# should be worth more than a 5'9" 175# combatant defeating 3 opponents under 5'5" and 150# or even 3 opponents that are the same height and weight as him/her, this ratio is just an example).  Any other ideas?
         YIS,
           Lord Jean-Pierre Colbert le Chasseur de Lorraine

      Youth Armored Combat Warden for the Barony of Glymm Mere
      Member of the Beevarian Guard of the Barony of Glymm Mere
      Senior Youth Armored Combat Marshal
      Junior Heavy Combat Marshal
      Heavy Combatant
      Rapier Combatant
      Leatherworker
      Fletcher
      Epicurian
      Chanteur Extraordinaire!
      Tout autour du gentil type

      myspace.com/jpcolbert

      --- On Fri, 3/27/09, ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...> wrote:
      From: ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...>
      Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
      To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Friday, March 27, 2009, 8:23 AM

      I am begining to wonder if maybe we should try to work up some sort of gallery form, that would be optional to use, but would help people come up with ways to determine an overall tourney winner that is not done on raw win/losses only. It might help people follow the new rules, instead of falling back all the former ways overall tourney winners were picked, that are no longer allowed. It could be as simple as an instruction sheet for gallery judges on what to look for, or it could be a proper form with points for chivalry and technic and such.

      I think we will be in an "educate the populace" mode for the next year or two, so maybe offering some guidance for galleries would be helpful in getting people to understand the new rules and how people beyond the combatants, parents, and marshalls can be involved. It might also lend an certain feel of officaldom to youth touneys that has often been lacking in the past.

      Just a thought,

      Ursula

      --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroup s.com, <hallgrim@.. .> wrote:
      >
      > Hi Daði:
      >
      >
      >
      > You are encouraged to let them play. I would add, it would be a mighty poor
      > YACMIC that would send the child home without playing. The cross-division
      > prohibitions mainly have to do with tallying wins and losses. As long as
      > there is no tally taken in a cross division bout for purposes of
      > determining a division or overall "victor" and the appropriate directions
      > are given to the senior participants, there is no problem.
      >
      >
      >
      > Plain English Rule of Thumb: One on one, anyone can fight anyone, but you
      > don't tally cross-division bouts.
      >
      >
      >
      > Does that make sense?
      >
      >
      >
      > Hallgrim
      >
      >


    • Daði Mánaskröggr Vébrandsson
      Hallgrim, I understand your message below, makes sense. Ursula, Sounds like a great idea, I like where you are going with that. I see there are other messages
      Message 2 of 22 , Mar 27, 2009
        Hallgrim,

        I understand your message below, makes sense.

        Ursula,

        Sounds like a great idea, I like where you are going with that.

        I see there are other messages on the topic and will reply after reading
        them all. :-)

        Daði

        > It’s a good idea Ursula. This fall, I’m going to be working on the YAC
        > Marshallate Handbook. We will put that in if you remind me.
        >
        >
        >
        > Hallgrim
        >
        >
        >
        > From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
        > Of ursula_of_fowlkeep
        > Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 8:23 AM
        > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
        > Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
        >
        >
        >
        > I am begining to wonder if maybe we should try to work up some sort of
        > gallery form, that would be optional to use, but would help people come up
        > with ways to determine an overall tourney winner that is not done on raw
        > win/losses only. It might help people follow the new rules, instead of
        > falling back all the former ways overall tourney winners were picked, that
        > are no longer allowed. It could be as simple as an instruction sheet for
        > gallery judges on what to look for, or it could be a proper form with
        > points
        > for chivalry and technic and such.
        >
        > I think we will be in an "educate the populace" mode for the next year or
        > two, so maybe offering some guidance for galleries would be helpful in
        > getting people to understand the new rules and how people beyond the
        > combatants, parents, and marshalls can be involved. It might also lend an
        > certain feel of officaldom to youth touneys that has often been lacking in
        > the past.
        >
        > Just a thought,
        >
        > Ursula
        >
        > --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com <mailto:AnTirYAC%40yahoogroups.com> ,
        > <hallgrim@...> wrote:
        >>
        >> Hi Daði:
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> You are encouraged to let them play. I would add, it would be a mighty
        > poor
        >> YACMIC that would send the child home without playing. The
        >> cross-division
        >> prohibitions mainly have to do with tallying wins and losses. As long as
        >> there is no tally taken in a cross division bout for purposes of
        >> determining a division or overall "victor" and the appropriate
        >> directions
        >> are given to the senior participants, there is no problem.
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> Plain English Rule of Thumb: One on one, anyone can fight anyone, but
        >> you
        >> don't tally cross-division bouts.
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> Does that make sense?
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> Hallgrim
        >>
        >>
        >
        >
        >
        > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        > Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.29/2024 - Release Date: 03/26/09
        > 07:12:00
        >
        >


        --
        "All for one, and one for all!"

        -= Daði Mánaskröggr Vébrandsson
        MKA: Daniel
      • Daði
        Oops.. a little pre-comment based on my proof reading before sending: I realize this thread is discussing champion tournaments, and may or may not apply to
        Message 3 of 22 , Mar 31, 2009

          Oops.. a little pre-comment based on my proof reading before sending:  I realize this thread is discussing champion tournaments, and may or may not apply to all tournament formats.

           

          Hi Jean-Pierre (and everyone else!),

           

          I was thinking about this thread for the last couple days and I could just swear there was something on the rules mailing list we discussed, since I archived it, I searched and found this from Earl Cire.

           

          If you read through it, there are some of the thoughts which we are now discussing, but it seems like his idea was to keep it more simple, and more subjective.     I guess the part that grabbed me the most was this bit:

           

          Rather than an objective recognition system, let the recognition
          system be more subjective (again, a more period practice). Let the
          presiding nobility, a ladies gallery, the knights present, or some
          other body, reward the combatant or combatants that most impressed
          them, using whatever criteria they choose (prowess, courtesy,
          appearance, chivalry, etc.).

           

           

          Another point I’d like to make before signing off is that I believe it is up to the organizers of the tournaments to create special rules and judging conditions.   I don’t think we want to limit the creativity of our YAC activities unless it is really a safety issue.   I have run a variety of very creative and not run-of-the-mill activities, and all of them have come off very well received.   One of the things we do is the Doggie - Dagger tournament.  This is a simulated alley fight with each combatant having 2 daggers.  We also did an offhand daggers tournament, in which there was a soft rope which each combatant held with their “good” hand while attempting to score a hit with a dagger in their offhand.       I guess I would just hate to see the creativity be flushed out of the game because we over-regulate tournament formats.

           

          Here is the post in its entirety. I remember liking it when I read it, but I don’t recall it getting a lot of support.    Perhaps this is something that we can look at pursuing? 

           

          Thoughts?

           

           

          Earl Cire’s Post:

          Sorry for chiming in so late. I've been out of town on business.
          First let me state that I am not the parent of any kid in YAC (my
          children are adults now), but I have been invested in Society combat
          for thirty years.

          Perhaps we should not be trying to emulate any modern world sports
          models. We may not even want to emulate much of what the heavy
          fighting community does regarding tournaments. Rather than focusing
          on tournaments with winners and losers, perhaps we should treat YAC
          in a more period fashion, in the context of a passage of arms -
          fighting for the joy of fighting alone.

          Instead of trying to devise a system to match up opponents using any
          number of criteria, perhaps we just leave it up to the combatants
          themselves (with consultation/approval of their parents for safety
          reasons). Let them challenge each other to tests of arms. As the
          challenger, they will not be "forced" to fight anyone that they may
          have concerns about. And the challenged can always refuse the
          challenge (in accordance with the rules of the lists) without loss
          of honor.

          Rather than an objective recognition system, let the recognition
          system be more subjective (again, a more period practice). Let the
          presiding nobility, a ladies gallery, the knights present, or some
          other body, reward the combatant or combatants that most impressed
          them, using whatever criteria they choose (prowess, courtesy,
          appearance, chivalry, etc.).

          Instead of building a complicated system, perhaps we should
          simplify to the extreme, and rely on the combatants, their
          parents, and the spectators to use their own good judgment.

          Just some thoughts from an old knight.

          Earl Cire

           

           

           

           

          From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jean Colbert
          Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 12:30 PM
          To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: Re: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies

           

          I think thats a great idea.  Should we discuss possible criteria for judging the combatants on?  Heres a few I could think of.  Well, of course chivalry should top the list, ratio of wins to losses, best death, technigue, most improved from first to last match, best showmanship or crowd appeal, size differences (a 4'9" 90# combatant defeating 3 opponents over 5' and 120# should be worth more than a 5'9" 175# combatant defeating 3 opponents under 5'5" and 150# or even 3 opponents that are the same height and weight as him/her, this ratio is just an example).  Any other ideas?
             YIS,
               Lord Jean-Pierre Colbert le Chasseur de Lorraine

          Youth Armored Combat Warden for the Barony of Glymm Mere
          Member of the Beevarian Guard of the Barony of Glymm Mere
          Senior Youth Armored Combat Marshal
          Junior Heavy Combat Marshal
          Heavy Combatant
          Rapier Combatant
          Leatherworker
          Fletcher
          Epicurian
          Chanteur Extraordinaire!
          Tout autour du gentil type

          myspace.com/jpcolbert

          --- On Fri, 3/27/09, ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...> wrote:

          From: ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...>
          Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
          To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
          Date: Friday, March 27, 2009, 8:23 AM

          I am begining to wonder if maybe we should try to work up some sort of gallery form, that would be optional to use, but would help people come up with ways to determine an overall tourney winner that is not done on raw win/losses only. It might help people follow the new rules, instead of falling back all the former ways overall tourney winners were picked, that are no longer allowed. It could be as simple as an instruction sheet for gallery judges on what to look for, or it could be a proper form with points for chivalry and technic and such.

          I think we will be in an "educate the populace" mode for the next year or two, so maybe offering some guidance for galleries would be helpful in getting people to understand the new rules and how people beyond the combatants, parents, and marshalls can be involved. It might also lend an certain feel of officaldom to youth touneys that has often been lacking in the past.

          Just a thought,

          Ursula

          --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroup s.com, <hallgrim@.. .> wrote:

          >
          > Hi Daði:
          >
          >
          >
          > You are encouraged to let them play. I would add, it would be a mighty
          poor
          > YACMIC that would send the child home without playing. The
          cross-division
          > prohibitions mainly have to do with tallying wins and losses. As long as
          > there is no tally taken in a cross division bout for purposes of
          > determining a division or overall "victor" and the appropriate
          directions
          > are given to the senior participants, there is no problem.
          >
          >
          >
          > Plain English Rule of Thumb: One on one, anyone can fight anyone, but
          you
          > don't tally cross-division bouts.
          >
          >
          >
          > Does that make sense?
          >
          >
          >
          > Hallgrim
          >
          >

           

        • ursula_of_fowlkeep
          I remember that post. While I liked where he was going with it, my main concern is that at this point, I don t think there people are aquainted with how a
          Message 4 of 22 , Mar 31, 2009
            I remember that post. While I liked where he was going with it, my main concern is that at this point, I don't think there people are aquainted with how a gallery works. So I could see that leading to the "lets line the kids up, and the kid that gets the loudest cheer is the winner" far too easily, but if an overall winner is to be chosen by gallery, the method should include things like chivalry and skill, and not simply who has the biggest loudest household present. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing the "loudest cheer" method of choosing a winner banned by the rules.

            I would also like to see, from those that plan to be in the gallery, people who will commit to staying for the whole tourney. Then they will see who actually fought well, instead of letting anyone who happens to be on hand at the end of the tourney decide, even if they missed most of the tourney.

            That is why I would like to see a little guidance in starting the tradition of winner by gallery, which is my main purpose with suggesting an optional gallery info or score sheet. Once people get the feel for how galleries work, then score cards or info sheets won't be nessisary, but to get galleries off the ground, and to involve the populace, having a bit of guidance at the get go could help.

            YIS

            Urusla

            --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com, Daði <dan@...> wrote:
            >
            > Oops.. a little pre-comment based on my proof reading before sending: I
            > realize this thread is discussing champion tournaments, and may or may not
            > apply to all tournament formats.
            >
            >
            >
            > Hi Jean-Pierre (and everyone else!),
            >
            >
            >
            > I was thinking about this thread for the last couple days and I could just
            > swear there was something on the rules mailing list we discussed, since I
            > archived it, I searched and found this from Earl Cire.
            >
            >
            >
            > If you read through it, there are some of the thoughts which we are now
            > discussing, but it seems like his idea was to keep it more simple, and more
            > subjective. I guess the part that grabbed me the most was this bit:
            >
            >
            >
            > Rather than an objective recognition system, let the recognition
            > system be more subjective (again, a more period practice). Let the
            > presiding nobility, a ladies gallery, the knights present, or some
            > other body, reward the combatant or combatants that most impressed
            > them, using whatever criteria they choose (prowess, courtesy,
            > appearance, chivalry, etc.).
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Another point I'd like to make before signing off is that I believe it is up
            > to the organizers of the tournaments to create special rules and judging
            > conditions. I don't think we want to limit the creativity of our YAC
            > activities unless it is really a safety issue. I have run a variety of
            > very creative and not run-of-the-mill activities, and all of them have come
            > off very well received. One of the things we do is the Doggie - Dagger
            > tournament. This is a simulated alley fight with each combatant having 2
            > daggers. We also did an offhand daggers tournament, in which there was a
            > soft rope which each combatant held with their "good" hand while attempting
            > to score a hit with a dagger in their offhand. I guess I would just
            > hate to see the creativity be flushed out of the game because we
            > over-regulate tournament formats.
            >
            >
            >
            > Here is the post in its entirety. I remember liking it when I read it, but I
            > don't recall it getting a lot of support. Perhaps this is something that
            > we can look at pursuing?
            >
            >
            >
            > Thoughts?
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Earl Cire's Post:
            >
            > Sorry for chiming in so late. I've been out of town on business.
            > First let me state that I am not the parent of any kid in YAC (my
            > children are adults now), but I have been invested in Society combat
            > for thirty years.
            >
            > Perhaps we should not be trying to emulate any modern world sports
            > models. We may not even want to emulate much of what the heavy
            > fighting community does regarding tournaments. Rather than focusing
            > on tournaments with winners and losers, perhaps we should treat YAC
            > in a more period fashion, in the context of a passage of arms -
            > fighting for the joy of fighting alone.
            >
            > Instead of trying to devise a system to match up opponents using any
            > number of criteria, perhaps we just leave it up to the combatants
            > themselves (with consultation/approval of their parents for safety
            > reasons). Let them challenge each other to tests of arms. As the
            > challenger, they will not be "forced" to fight anyone that they may
            > have concerns about. And the challenged can always refuse the
            > challenge (in accordance with the rules of the lists) without loss
            > of honor.
            >
            > Rather than an objective recognition system, let the recognition
            > system be more subjective (again, a more period practice). Let the
            > presiding nobility, a ladies gallery, the knights present, or some
            > other body, reward the combatant or combatants that most impressed
            > them, using whatever criteria they choose (prowess, courtesy,
            > appearance, chivalry, etc.).
            >
            > Instead of building a complicated system, perhaps we should
            > simplify to the extreme, and rely on the combatants, their
            > parents, and the spectators to use their own good judgment.
            >
            > Just some thoughts from an old knight.
            >
            > Earl Cire
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
            > Of Jean Colbert
            > Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 12:30 PM
            > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
            > Subject: Re: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > I think thats a great idea. Should we discuss possible criteria for judging
            > the combatants on? Heres a few I could think of. Well, of course chivalry
            > should top the list, ratio of wins to losses, best death, technigue, most
            > improved from first to last match, best showmanship or crowd appeal, size
            > differences (a 4'9" 90# combatant defeating 3 opponents over 5' and 120#
            > should be worth more than a 5'9" 175# combatant defeating 3 opponents under
            > 5'5" and 150# or even 3 opponents that are the same height and weight as
            > him/her, this ratio is just an example). Any other ideas?
            > YIS,
            > Lord Jean-Pierre Colbert le Chasseur de Lorraine
            >
            > Youth Armored Combat Warden for the Barony of Glymm Mere
            > Member of the Beevarian Guard of the Barony of Glymm Mere
            > Senior Youth Armored Combat Marshal
            > Junior Heavy Combat Marshal
            > Heavy Combatant
            > Rapier Combatant
            > Leatherworker
            > Fletcher
            > Epicurian
            > Chanteur Extraordinaire!
            > Tout autour du gentil type
            >
            > myspace.com/jpcolbert
            >
            > --- On Fri, 3/27/09, ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...> wrote:
            >
            > From: ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...>
            > Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
            > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
            > Date: Friday, March 27, 2009, 8:23 AM
            >
            > I am begining to wonder if maybe we should try to work up some sort of
            > gallery form, that would be optional to use, but would help people come up
            > with ways to determine an overall tourney winner that is not done on raw
            > win/losses only. It might help people follow the new rules, instead of
            > falling back all the former ways overall tourney winners were picked, that
            > are no longer allowed. It could be as simple as an instruction sheet for
            > gallery judges on what to look for, or it could be a proper form with points
            > for chivalry and technic and such.
            >
            > I think we will be in an "educate the populace" mode for the next year or
            > two, so maybe offering some guidance for galleries would be helpful in
            > getting people to understand the new rules and how people beyond the
            > combatants, parents, and marshalls can be involved. It might also lend an
            > certain feel of officaldom to youth touneys that has often been lacking in
            > the past.
            >
            > Just a thought,
            >
            > Ursula
            >
            > --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroup <mailto:AnTirYAC%40yahoogroups.com> s.com,
            > <hallgrim@ .> wrote:
            > >
            > > Hi Daði:
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > You are encouraged to let them play. I would add, it would be a mighty
            > poor
            > > YACMIC that would send the child home without playing. The cross-division
            > > prohibitions mainly have to do with tallying wins and losses. As long as
            > > there is no tally taken in a cross division bout for purposes of
            > > determining a division or overall "victor" and the appropriate directions
            > > are given to the senior participants, there is no problem.
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Plain English Rule of Thumb: One on one, anyone can fight anyone, but you
            > > don't tally cross-division bouts.
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Does that make sense?
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Hallgrim
            > >
            > >
            >
          • Jean Colbert
            I whole heartily agree.    YIS,      Lord Jean-Pierre Colbert le Chasseur de Lorraine Youth Armored Combat Warden for the Barony of Glymm Mere Member of
            Message 5 of 22 , Mar 31, 2009
              I whole heartily agree.
                 YIS,
                   Lord Jean-Pierre Colbert le Chasseur de Lorraine

              Youth Armored Combat Warden for the Barony of Glymm Mere
              Member of the Beevarian Guard of the Barony of Glymm Mere
              Senior Youth Armored Combat Marshal
              Junior Heavy Combat Marshal
              Heavy Combatant
              Rapier Combatant
              Leatherworker
              Fletcher
              Epicurian
              Chanteur Extraordinaire!
              Tout autour du gentil type

              myspace.com/jpcolbert

              --- On Tue, 3/31/09, ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...> wrote:
              From: ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...>
              Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
              To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
              Date: Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 9:50 AM

              I remember that post. While I liked where he was going with it, my main concern is that at this point, I don't think there people are aquainted with how a gallery works. So I could see that leading to the "lets line the kids up, and the kid that gets the loudest cheer is the winner" far too easily, but if an overall winner is to be chosen by gallery, the method should include things like chivalry and skill, and not simply who has the biggest loudest household present. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing the "loudest cheer" method of choosing a winner banned by the rules.

              I would also like to see, from those that plan to be in the gallery, people who will commit to staying for the whole tourney. Then they will see who actually fought well, instead of letting anyone who happens to be on hand at the end of the tourney decide, even if they missed most of the tourney.

              That is why I would like to see a little guidance in starting the tradition of winner by gallery, which is my main purpose with suggesting an optional gallery info or score sheet. Once people get the feel for how galleries work, then score cards or info sheets won't be nessisary, but to get galleries off the ground, and to involve the populace, having a bit of guidance at the get go could help.

              YIS

              Urusla

              --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroup s.com, Daði <dan@...> wrote:
              >
              > Oops.. a little pre-comment based on my proof reading before sending: I
              > realize this thread is discussing champion tournaments, and may or may not
              > apply to all tournament formats.
              >
              >
              >
              > Hi Jean-Pierre (and everyone else!),
              >
              >
              >
              > I was thinking about this thread for the last couple days and I could just
              > swear there was something on the rules mailing list we discussed, since I
              > archived it, I searched and found this from Earl Cire.
              >
              >
              >
              > If you read through it, there are some of the thoughts which we are now
              > discussing, but it seems like his idea was to keep it more simple, and more
              > subjective. I guess the part that grabbed me the most was this bit:
              >
              >
              >
              > Rather than an objective recognition system, let the recognition
              > system be more subjective (again, a more period practice). Let the
              > presiding nobility, a ladies gallery, the knights present, or some
              > other body, reward the combatant or combatants that most impressed
              > them, using whatever criteria they choose (prowess, courtesy,
              > appearance, chivalry, etc.).
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Another point I'd like to make before signing off is that I believe it is up
              > to the organizers of the tournaments to create special rules and judging
              > conditions. I don't think we want to limit the creativity of our YAC
              > activities unless it is really a safety issue. I have run a variety of
              > very creative and not run-of-the-mill activities, and all of them have come
              > off very well received. One of the things we do is the Doggie - Dagger
              > tournament. This is a simulated alley fight with each combatant having 2
              > daggers. We also did an offhand daggers tournament, in which there was a
              > soft rope which each combatant held with their "good" hand while attempting
              > to score a hit with a dagger in their offhand. I guess I would just
              > hate to see the creativity be flushed out of the game because we
              > over-regulate tournament formats.
              >
              >
              >
              > Here is the post in its entirety. I remember liking it when I read it, but I
              > don't recall it getting a lot of support. Perhaps this is something that
              > we can look at pursuing?
              >
              >
              >
              > Thoughts?
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > Earl Cire's Post:
              >
              > Sorry for chiming in so late. I've been out of town on business.
              > First let me state that I am not the parent of any kid in YAC (my
              > children are adults now), but I have been invested in Society combat
              > for thirty years.
              >
              > Perhaps we should not be trying to emulate any modern world sports
              > models. We may not even want to emulate much of what the heavy
              > fighting community does regarding tournaments. Rather than focusing
              > on tournaments with winners and losers, perhaps we should treat YAC
              > in a more period fashion, in the context of a passage of arms -
              > fighting for the joy of fighting alone.
              >
              > Instead of trying to devise a system to match up opponents using any
              > number of criteria, perhaps we just leave it up to the combatants
              > themselves (with consultation/ approval of their parents for safety
              > reasons). Let them challenge each other to tests of arms. As the
              > challenger, they will not be "forced" to fight anyone that they may
              > have concerns about. And the challenged can always refuse the
              > challenge (in accordance with the rules of the lists) without loss
              > of honor.
              >
              > Rather than an objective recognition system, let the recognition
              > system be more subjective (again, a more period practice). Let the
              > presiding nobility, a ladies gallery, the knights present, or some
              > other body, reward the combatant or combatants that most impressed
              > them, using whatever criteria they choose (prowess, courtesy,
              > appearance, chivalry, etc.).
              >
              > Instead of building a complicated system, perhaps we should
              > simplify to the extreme, and rely on the combatants, their
              > parents, and the spectators to use their own good judgment.
              >
              > Just some thoughts from an old knight.
              >
              > Earl Cire
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroup s.com [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroup s.com] On Behalf
              > Of Jean Colbert
              > Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 12:30 PM
              > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroup s.com
              > Subject: Re: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > I think thats a great idea. Should we discuss possible criteria for judging
              > the combatants on? Heres a few I could think of. Well, of course chivalry
              > should top the list, ratio of wins to losses, best death, technigue, most
              > improved from first to last match, best showmanship or crowd appeal, size
              > differences (a 4'9" 90# combatant defeating 3 opponents over 5' and 120#
              > should be worth more than a 5'9" 175# combatant defeating 3 opponents under
              > 5'5" and 150# or even 3 opponents that are the same height and weight as
              > him/her, this ratio is just an example). Any other ideas?
              > YIS,
              > Lord Jean-Pierre Colbert le Chasseur de Lorraine
              >
              > Youth Armored Combat Warden for the Barony of Glymm Mere
              > Member of the Beevarian Guard of the Barony of Glymm Mere
              > Senior Youth Armored Combat Marshal
              > Junior Heavy Combat Marshal
              > Heavy Combatant
              > Rapier Combatant
              > Leatherworker
              > Fletcher
              > Epicurian
              > Chanteur Extraordinaire!
              > Tout autour du gentil type
              >
              > myspace.com/ jpcolbert
              >
              > --- On Fri, 3/27/09, ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@ ...> wrote:
              >
              > From: ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@ ...>
              > Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
              > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroup s.com
              > Date: Friday, March 27, 2009, 8:23 AM
              >
              > I am begining to wonder if maybe we should try to work up some sort of
              > gallery form, that would be optional to use, but would help people come up
              > with ways to determine an overall tourney winner that is not done on raw
              > win/losses only. It might help people follow the new rules, instead of
              > falling back all the former ways overall tourney winners were picked, that
              > are no longer allowed. It could be as simple as an instruction sheet for
              > gallery judges on what to look for, or it could be a proper form with points
              > for chivalry and technic and such.
              >
              > I think we will be in an "educate the populace" mode for the next year or
              > two, so maybe offering some guidance for galleries would be helpful in
              > getting people to understand the new rules and how people beyond the
              > combatants, parents, and marshalls can be involved. It might also lend an
              > certain feel of officaldom to youth touneys that has often been lacking in
              > the past.
              >
              > Just a thought,
              >
              > Ursula
              >
              > --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroup <mailto:AnTirYAC% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com,
              > <hallgrim@ .> wrote:
              > >
              > > Hi Daði:
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > You are encouraged to let them play. I would add, it would be a mighty
              > poor
              > > YACMIC that would send the child home without playing. The cross-division
              > > prohibitions mainly have to do with tallying wins and losses. As long as
              > > there is no tally taken in a cross division bout for purposes of
              > > determining a division or overall "victor" and the appropriate directions
              > > are given to the senior participants, there is no problem.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Plain English Rule of Thumb: One on one, anyone can fight anyone, but you
              > > don't tally cross-division bouts.
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Does that make sense?
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Hallgrim
              > >
              > >
              >


            • Daði
              I also agree! I had not thought of the “loudest cheer” issue. I have run into problems with finding folks who are committed to stay for the whole
              Message 6 of 22 , Mar 31, 2009

                 

                I also agree!   I had not thought of the “loudest cheer” issue.   I have run into problems with finding folks who are committed to stay for the whole tourney to judge “most Chivalrous, best death, etc.    Some of those are best judged by peers, and the answers the kids give sometimes is a hoot!   

                 

                Anyway, I think that some kind of appendix in the marshals handbook could be a tourney structure guide?  With suggestions, do’s and don’ts ?

                 

                Just a thought,

                -= Daði

                 

                 

                From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jean Colbert
                Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 12:26 PM
                To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: Re: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies

                 

                I whole heartily agree.
                   YIS,
                     Lord Jean-Pierre Colbert le Chasseur de Lorraine

                Youth Armored Combat Warden for the Barony of Glymm Mere
                Member of the Beevarian Guard of the Barony of Glymm Mere
                Senior Youth Armored Combat Marshal
                Junior Heavy Combat Marshal
                Heavy Combatant
                Rapier Combatant
                Leatherworker
                Fletcher
                Epicurian
                Chanteur Extraordinaire!
                Tout autour du gentil type

                myspace.com/jpcolbert

                --- On Tue, 3/31/09, ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...> wrote:

                From: ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...>
                Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
                To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
                Date: Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 9:50 AM

                I remember that post. While I liked where he was going with it, my main concern is that at this point, I don't think there people are aquainted with how a gallery works. So I could see that leading to the "lets line the kids up, and the kid that gets the loudest cheer is the winner" far too easily, but if an overall winner is to be chosen by gallery, the method should include things like chivalry and skill, and not simply who has the biggest loudest household present. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing the "loudest cheer" method of choosing a winner banned by the rules.

                I would also like to see, from those that plan to be in the gallery, people who will commit to staying for the whole tourney. Then they will see who actually fought well, instead of letting anyone who happens to be on hand at the end of the tourney decide, even if they missed most of the tourney.

                That is why I would like to see a little guidance in starting the tradition of winner by gallery, which is my main purpose with suggesting an optional gallery info or score sheet. Once people get the feel for how galleries work, then score cards or info sheets won't be nessisary, but to get galleries off the ground, and to involve the populace, having a bit of guidance at the get go could help.

                YIS

                Urusla

                --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroup s.com, Daði <dan@...> wrote:

                >
                > Oops.. a little pre-comment based on my proof reading before sending: I
                > realize this thread is discussing champion tournaments, and may or may
                not
                > apply to all tournament formats.
                >
                >
                >
                > Hi Jean-Pierre (and everyone else!),
                >
                >
                >
                > I was thinking about this thread for the last couple days and I could
                just
                > swear there was something on the rules mailing list we discussed, since
                I
                > archived it, I searched and found this from Earl Cire.
                >
                >
                >
                > If you read through it, there are some of the thoughts which we are now
                > discussing, but it seems like his idea was to keep it more simple, and
                more
                > subjective. I guess the part that grabbed me the most was this bit:
                >
                >
                >
                > Rather than an objective recognition system, let the recognition
                > system be more subjective (again, a more period practice). Let the
                > presiding nobility, a ladies gallery, the knights present, or some
                > other body, reward the combatant or combatants that most impressed
                > them, using whatever criteria they choose (prowess, courtesy,
                > appearance, chivalry, etc.).
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Another point I'd like to make before signing off is that I believe it
                is up
                > to the organizers of the tournaments to create special rules and judging
                > conditions. I don't think we want to limit the creativity of our YAC
                > activities unless it is really a safety issue. I have run a variety of
                > very creative and not run-of-the-mill activities, and all of them have
                come
                > off very well received. One of the things we do is the Doggie - Dagger
                > tournament. This is a simulated alley fight with each combatant having 2
                > daggers. We also did an offhand daggers tournament, in which there was a
                > soft rope which each combatant held with their "good" hand
                while attempting
                > to score a hit with a dagger in their offhand. I guess I would just
                > hate to see the creativity be flushed out of the game because we
                > over-regulate tournament formats.
                >
                >
                >
                > Here is the post in its entirety. I remember liking it when I read it,
                but I
                > don't recall it getting a lot of support. Perhaps this is something that
                > we can look at pursuing?
                >
                >
                >
                > Thoughts?
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > Earl Cire's Post:
                >
                > Sorry for chiming in so late. I've been out of town on business.
                > First let me state that I am not the parent of any kid in YAC (my
                > children are adults now), but I have been invested in Society combat
                > for thirty years.
                >
                > Perhaps we should not be trying to emulate any modern world sports
                > models. We may not even want to emulate much of what the heavy
                > fighting community does regarding tournaments. Rather than focusing
                > on tournaments with winners and losers, perhaps we should treat YAC
                > in a more period fashion, in the context of a passage of arms -
                > fighting for the joy of fighting alone.
                >
                > Instead of trying to devise a system to match up opponents using any
                > number of criteria, perhaps we just leave it up to the combatants
                > themselves (with consultation/ approval of their parents for safety
                > reasons). Let them challenge each other to tests of arms. As the
                > challenger, they will not be "forced" to fight anyone that
                they may
                > have concerns about. And the challenged can always refuse the
                > challenge (in accordance with the rules of the lists) without loss
                > of honor.
                >
                > Rather than an objective recognition system, let the recognition
                > system be more subjective (again, a more period practice). Let the
                > presiding nobility, a ladies gallery, the knights present, or some
                > other body, reward the combatant or combatants that most impressed
                > them, using whatever criteria they choose (prowess, courtesy,
                > appearance, chivalry, etc.).
                >
                > Instead of building a complicated system, perhaps we should
                > simplify to the extreme, and rely on the combatants, their
                > parents, and the spectators to use their own good judgment.
                >
                > Just some thoughts from an old knight.
                >
                > Earl Cire
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroup
                s.com [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroup s.com] On Behalf
                > Of Jean Colbert
                > Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 12:30 PM
                > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroup
                s.com
                > Subject: Re: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
                >
                >
                >
                >
                > I think thats a great idea. Should we discuss possible criteria for
                judging
                > the combatants on? Heres a few I could think of. Well, of course
                chivalry
                > should top the list, ratio of wins to losses, best death, technigue,
                most
                > improved from first to last match, best showmanship or crowd appeal,
                size
                > differences (a 4'9" 90# combatant defeating 3 opponents over 5' and
                120#
                > should be worth more than a 5'9" 175# combatant defeating 3
                opponents under
                > 5'5" and 150# or even 3 opponents that are the same height and
                weight as
                > him/her, this ratio is just an example). Any other ideas?
                > YIS,
                > Lord Jean-Pierre Colbert le Chasseur de Lorraine
                >
                > Youth Armored Combat Warden for the Barony of Glymm Mere
                > Member of the Beevarian Guard of the Barony of Glymm Mere
                > Senior Youth Armored Combat Marshal
                > Junior Heavy Combat Marshal
                > Heavy Combatant
                > Rapier Combatant
                > Leatherworker
                > Fletcher
                > Epicurian
                > Chanteur Extraordinaire!
                > Tout autour du gentil type
                >
                > myspace.com/ jpcolbert
                >
                > --- On Fri, 3/27/09, ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@ ...> wrote:
                >
                > From: ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@ ...>
                > Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
                > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroup
                s.com
                > Date: Friday, March 27, 2009, 8:23 AM
                >
                > I am begining to wonder if maybe we should try to work up some sort of
                > gallery form, that would be optional to use, but would help people come
                up
                > with ways to determine an overall tourney winner that is not done on raw
                > win/losses only. It might help people follow the new rules, instead of
                > falling back all the former ways overall tourney winners were picked,
                that
                > are no longer allowed. It could be as simple as an instruction sheet for
                > gallery judges on what to look for, or it could be a proper form with
                points
                > for chivalry and technic and such.
                >
                > I think we will be in an "educate the populace" mode for the
                next year or
                > two, so maybe offering some guidance for galleries would be helpful in
                > getting people to understand the new rules and how people beyond the
                > combatants, parents, and marshalls can be involved. It might also lend
                an
                > certain feel of officaldom to youth touneys that has often been lacking
                in
                > the past.
                >
                > Just a thought,
                >
                > Ursula
                >
                > --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroup <mailto:AnTirYAC% 40yahoogroups. com>
                s.com,
                > <hallgrim@ .> wrote:
                > >
                > > Hi Daði:
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > You are encouraged to let them play. I would add, it would be a
                mighty
                > poor
                > > YACMIC that would send the child home without playing. The
                cross-division
                > > prohibitions mainly have to do with tallying wins and losses. As
                long as
                > > there is no tally taken in a cross division bout for purposes of
                > > determining a division or overall "victor" and the
                appropriate directions
                > > are given to the senior participants, there is no problem.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Plain English Rule of Thumb: One on one, anyone can fight anyone,
                but you
                > > don't tally cross-division bouts.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Does that make sense?
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Hallgrim
                > >
                > >
                >

                 

              • ursula_of_fowlkeep
                Perhaps asking near the end of opening court for a gallery member sign up, and being sure the town crier annouces the tourney and reminds gallery members to
                Message 7 of 22 , Apr 1, 2009
                  Perhaps asking near the end of opening court for a gallery member sign up, and being sure the town crier annouces the tourney and reminds gallery members to show up? That would add a little public pressure to remind people that comitted in writing earlier in the day. This is an area where engaging the populace may be tricky at first.

                  For years, in my region, there has been so many sloppy YAC tourneys, that people don't really take them seriously, so I would not be surprised if we see some of this issue. Currently in my barony, both the seneshal and baron are very pro YAC, so getting one of them to commit to sitting in the gallery a couple of times might help draw the right attention to YAC.

                  I had thought about having a do's and don't's section on tourneys too, with "loudest cheer" to determine winner being the second don't, after "allowing cross class matches to count for raw/win loss numbers" for the first don't. "Loudest cheer" is such a lowest common denominator way of picking a winner, because the dynamics of crowds and noise, and that crowds will build in noise if they are asked to repeat it, so the first kid in line never gets much noise and the last kid often gets a very big cheer that has more to do with people feeling rowdy from cheering.

                  While I'm not crazy about a score card, it could be useful in educating the populace on galleries. There is no need to require it's use, if its published and put in an easy to find place, some people will use it because it's easier then making up their own criteria and some situations need that leg up. Plus handing a sheet of paper to gallery members adds to the feeling of "I need to stay and fill this thing out".

                  I like the gallery idea and fully support it, but since we don't do it in heavy fighting we are building a YAC culture that is it's own unique beastie, and drawing people without YAC kids into it will be a bit of a challenge. I think that bringing attention to the program in court with some sort of YAC annoucement frequently, may be a good method of publicity to draw people in. Maybe have some sort of gallery prizes or gifts for the gallery members might also help bring interest in doing gallery for YAC. Heck even a plate of cookies made special for the gallery members could be enough to make some folks stay for the whole tourney.

                  YIS

                  Ursula




                  --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com, Daði <dan@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > I also agree! I had not thought of the "loudest cheer" issue. I have run
                  > into problems with finding folks who are committed to stay for the whole
                  > tourney to judge "most Chivalrous, best death, etc. Some of those are
                  > best judged by peers, and the answers the kids give sometimes is a hoot!
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Anyway, I think that some kind of appendix in the marshals handbook could be
                  > a tourney structure guide? With suggestions, do's and don'ts ?
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Just a thought,
                  >
                  > -= Daði
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                  > Of Jean Colbert
                  > Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 12:26 PM
                  > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
                  > Subject: Re: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > I whole heartily agree.
                  > YIS,
                  > Lord Jean-Pierre Colbert le Chasseur de Lorraine
                  >
                  > Youth Armored Combat Warden for the Barony of Glymm Mere
                  > Member of the Beevarian Guard of the Barony of Glymm Mere
                  > Senior Youth Armored Combat Marshal
                  > Junior Heavy Combat Marshal
                  > Heavy Combatant
                  > Rapier Combatant
                  > Leatherworker
                  > Fletcher
                  > Epicurian
                  > Chanteur Extraordinaire!
                  > Tout autour du gentil type
                  >
                  > myspace.com/jpcolbert
                  >
                  > --- On Tue, 3/31/09, ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...> wrote:
                  >
                  > From: ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@...>
                  > Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
                  > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
                  > Date: Tuesday, March 31, 2009, 9:50 AM
                  >
                  > I remember that post. While I liked where he was going with it, my main
                  > concern is that at this point, I don't think there people are aquainted with
                  > how a gallery works. So I could see that leading to the "lets line the kids
                  > up, and the kid that gets the loudest cheer is the winner" far too easily,
                  > but if an overall winner is to be chosen by gallery, the method should
                  > include things like chivalry and skill, and not simply who has the biggest
                  > loudest household present. Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing the "loudest
                  > cheer" method of choosing a winner banned by the rules.
                  >
                  > I would also like to see, from those that plan to be in the gallery, people
                  > who will commit to staying for the whole tourney. Then they will see who
                  > actually fought well, instead of letting anyone who happens to be on hand at
                  > the end of the tourney decide, even if they missed most of the tourney.
                  >
                  > That is why I would like to see a little guidance in starting the tradition
                  > of winner by gallery, which is my main purpose with suggesting an optional
                  > gallery info or score sheet. Once people get the feel for how galleries
                  > work, then score cards or info sheets won't be nessisary, but to get
                  > galleries off the ground, and to involve the populace, having a bit of
                  > guidance at the get go could help.
                  >
                  > YIS
                  >
                  > Urusla
                  >
                  > --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroup <mailto:AnTirYAC%40yahoogroups.com> s.com, Daði
                  > <dan@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Oops.. a little pre-comment based on my proof reading before sending: I
                  > > realize this thread is discussing champion tournaments, and may or may not
                  > > apply to all tournament formats.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Hi Jean-Pierre (and everyone else!),
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > I was thinking about this thread for the last couple days and I could just
                  > > swear there was something on the rules mailing list we discussed, since I
                  > > archived it, I searched and found this from Earl Cire.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > If you read through it, there are some of the thoughts which we are now
                  > > discussing, but it seems like his idea was to keep it more simple, and
                  > more
                  > > subjective. I guess the part that grabbed me the most was this bit:
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Rather than an objective recognition system, let the recognition
                  > > system be more subjective (again, a more period practice). Let the
                  > > presiding nobility, a ladies gallery, the knights present, or some
                  > > other body, reward the combatant or combatants that most impressed
                  > > them, using whatever criteria they choose (prowess, courtesy,
                  > > appearance, chivalry, etc.).
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Another point I'd like to make before signing off is that I believe it is
                  > up
                  > > to the organizers of the tournaments to create special rules and judging
                  > > conditions. I don't think we want to limit the creativity of our YAC
                  > > activities unless it is really a safety issue. I have run a variety of
                  > > very creative and not run-of-the-mill activities, and all of them have
                  > come
                  > > off very well received. One of the things we do is the Doggie - Dagger
                  > > tournament. This is a simulated alley fight with each combatant having 2
                  > > daggers. We also did an offhand daggers tournament, in which there was a
                  > > soft rope which each combatant held with their "good" hand while
                  > attempting
                  > > to score a hit with a dagger in their offhand. I guess I would just
                  > > hate to see the creativity be flushed out of the game because we
                  > > over-regulate tournament formats.
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Here is the post in its entirety. I remember liking it when I read it, but
                  > I
                  > > don't recall it getting a lot of support. Perhaps this is something that
                  > > we can look at pursuing?
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Thoughts?
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Earl Cire's Post:
                  > >
                  > > Sorry for chiming in so late. I've been out of town on business.
                  > > First let me state that I am not the parent of any kid in YAC (my
                  > > children are adults now), but I have been invested in Society combat
                  > > for thirty years.
                  > >
                  > > Perhaps we should not be trying to emulate any modern world sports
                  > > models. We may not even want to emulate much of what the heavy
                  > > fighting community does regarding tournaments. Rather than focusing
                  > > on tournaments with winners and losers, perhaps we should treat YAC
                  > > in a more period fashion, in the context of a passage of arms -
                  > > fighting for the joy of fighting alone.
                  > >
                  > > Instead of trying to devise a system to match up opponents using any
                  > > number of criteria, perhaps we just leave it up to the combatants
                  > > themselves (with consultation/ approval of their parents for safety
                  > > reasons). Let them challenge each other to tests of arms. As the
                  > > challenger, they will not be "forced" to fight anyone that they may
                  > > have concerns about. And the challenged can always refuse the
                  > > challenge (in accordance with the rules of the lists) without loss
                  > > of honor.
                  > >
                  > > Rather than an objective recognition system, let the recognition
                  > > system be more subjective (again, a more period practice). Let the
                  > > presiding nobility, a ladies gallery, the knights present, or some
                  > > other body, reward the combatant or combatants that most impressed
                  > > them, using whatever criteria they choose (prowess, courtesy,
                  > > appearance, chivalry, etc.).
                  > >
                  > > Instead of building a complicated system, perhaps we should
                  > > simplify to the extreme, and rely on the combatants, their
                  > > parents, and the spectators to use their own good judgment.
                  > >
                  > > Just some thoughts from an old knight.
                  > >
                  > > Earl Cire
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroup <mailto:AnTirYAC%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
                  > [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroup <mailto:AnTirYAC%40yahoogroups.com> s.com] On
                  > Behalf
                  > > Of Jean Colbert
                  > > Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 12:30 PM
                  > > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroup <mailto:AnTirYAC%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
                  > > Subject: Re: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > I think thats a great idea. Should we discuss possible criteria for
                  > judging
                  > > the combatants on? Heres a few I could think of. Well, of course chivalry
                  > > should top the list, ratio of wins to losses, best death, technigue, most
                  > > improved from first to last match, best showmanship or crowd appeal, size
                  > > differences (a 4'9" 90# combatant defeating 3 opponents over 5' and 120#
                  > > should be worth more than a 5'9" 175# combatant defeating 3 opponents
                  > under
                  > > 5'5" and 150# or even 3 opponents that are the same height and weight as
                  > > him/her, this ratio is just an example). Any other ideas?
                  > > YIS,
                  > > Lord Jean-Pierre Colbert le Chasseur de Lorraine
                  > >
                  > > Youth Armored Combat Warden for the Barony of Glymm Mere
                  > > Member of the Beevarian Guard of the Barony of Glymm Mere
                  > > Senior Youth Armored Combat Marshal
                  > > Junior Heavy Combat Marshal
                  > > Heavy Combatant
                  > > Rapier Combatant
                  > > Leatherworker
                  > > Fletcher
                  > > Epicurian
                  > > Chanteur Extraordinaire!
                  > > Tout autour du gentil type
                  > >
                  > > myspace.com/ jpcolbert
                  > >
                  > > --- On Fri, 3/27/09, ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@ ...> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > From: ursula_of_fowlkeep <solem_atrum@ ...>
                  > > Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
                  > > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroup <mailto:AnTirYAC%40yahoogroups.com> s.com
                  > > Date: Friday, March 27, 2009, 8:23 AM
                  > >
                  > > I am begining to wonder if maybe we should try to work up some sort of
                  > > gallery form, that would be optional to use, but would help people come up
                  > > with ways to determine an overall tourney winner that is not done on raw
                  > > win/losses only. It might help people follow the new rules, instead of
                  > > falling back all the former ways overall tourney winners were picked, that
                  > > are no longer allowed. It could be as simple as an instruction sheet for
                  > > gallery judges on what to look for, or it could be a proper form with
                  > points
                  > > for chivalry and technic and such.
                  > >
                  > > I think we will be in an "educate the populace" mode for the next year or
                  > > two, so maybe offering some guidance for galleries would be helpful in
                  > > getting people to understand the new rules and how people beyond the
                  > > combatants, parents, and marshalls can be involved. It might also lend an
                  > > certain feel of officaldom to youth touneys that has often been lacking in
                  > > the past.
                  > >
                  > > Just a thought,
                  > >
                  > > Ursula
                  > >
                  > > --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroup <mailto:AnTirYAC% 40yahoogroups. com> s.com,
                  > > <hallgrim@ .> wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > Hi Daði:
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > You are encouraged to let them play. I would add, it would be a mighty
                  > > poor
                  > > > YACMIC that would send the child home without playing. The
                  > cross-division
                  > > > prohibitions mainly have to do with tallying wins and losses. As long as
                  > > > there is no tally taken in a cross division bout for purposes of
                  > > > determining a division or overall "victor" and the appropriate
                  > directions
                  > > > are given to the senior participants, there is no problem.
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Plain English Rule of Thumb: One on one, anyone can fight anyone, but
                  > you
                  > > > don't tally cross-division bouts.
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Does that make sense?
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Hallgrim
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > >
                  >
                • Daði
                  Trimmed this for the sake of keeping our inboxes a bit smaller. .. All this great conversation makes me think that we should plan some kind of summit or
                  Message 8 of 22 , Apr 2, 2009

                     

                    Trimmed this for the sake of keeping our inboxes a bit smaller. ..

                     

                    All this great conversation makes me think that we should plan some kind of summit or meeting of people interested (and active) in YAC.   Perhaps a kingdom event this season?   Any suggestions on an event that the folks on this list might have in common?

                     

                    Hallgrim, do you know your plans for the season yet?

                     

                    Cheers,

                    -= Daði

                     

                     

                     

                     

                    From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ursula_of_fowlkeep
                    Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 10:05 AM
                    To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies

                     

                     

                  • ursula_of_fowlkeep
                    I think a couple of YAC meetings at different kingdom events would be great, so more of the kingdom can take part in the conversation. The next three Kingdom
                    Message 9 of 22 , Apr 6, 2009
                      I think a couple of YAC meetings at different kingdom events would be great, so more of the kingdom can take part in the conversation. The next three Kingdom events are May Crown in Montengard(Calgary AB) , July Coronation in Three Mountains (Portland Or.) , and September Crown in Terra Pomeria (Salem Or.). I would also suggest Sport of Kings in Three Mountains be considered for this list, because it draws folks from all over AnTir for combat classes, and so far there are plans to have some YAC classes. Of course this is all contingent on Hallgrim's schedule.

                      So, for what it is worth, I will be at July Coronation, September Crown, and Sport of Kings, and would like to join in.


                      Ursula



                      --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com, Daði <dan@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Trimmed this for the sake of keeping our inboxes a bit smaller. ..
                      >
                      >
                      > All this great conversation makes me think that we should plan some kind of
                      > summit or meeting of people interested (and active) in YAC. Perhaps a
                      > kingdom event this season? Any suggestions on an event that the folks on
                      > this list might have in common?
                      >
                      >
                      > Hallgrim, do you know your plans for the season yet?
                      >
                      >
                      > Cheers,
                      >
                      > -= Daði
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                      > Of ursula_of_fowlkeep
                      > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 10:05 AM
                      > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
                      > Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
                      >
                    • hallgrim@greathall.org
                      Hi All: There’s no reason that folks can’t get together for YAC just because I can’t be there. The YAC Ministers would be ideal to lead a meeting. =) I
                      Message 10 of 22 , Apr 6, 2009

                        Hi All:

                         

                        There’s no reason that folks can’t get together for YAC just because I can’t be there.  The YAC Ministers would be ideal to lead a meeting.  =)

                         

                        I am kaput until August.  So Sport of Kings and Sep Crown will be the events that I will be going to.  I hate to be absent this Summer but there’s no helping it due to real life.

                         

                        Hallgrim

                         

                         

                         

                         

                        From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of ursula_of_fowlkeep
                        Sent: Monday, April 06, 2009 8:30 AM
                        To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
                        Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies

                         

                        I think a couple of YAC meetings at different kingdom events would be great, so more of the kingdom can take part in the conversation. The next three Kingdom events are May Crown in Montengard(Calgary AB) , July Coronation in Three Mountains (Portland Or.) , and September Crown in Terra Pomeria (Salem Or.). I would also suggest Sport of Kings in Three Mountains be considered for this list, because it draws folks from all over AnTir for combat classes, and so far there are plans to have some YAC classes. Of course this is all contingent on Hallgrim's schedule.

                        So, for what it is worth, I will be at July Coronation, September Crown, and Sport of Kings, and would like to join in.

                        Ursula

                        --- In AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com, Daði <dan@...> wrote:

                        >
                        > Trimmed this for the sake of keeping our inboxes a bit smaller. ..
                        >
                        >
                        > All this great conversation makes me think that we should plan some kind
                        of
                        > summit or meeting of people interested (and active) in YAC. Perhaps a
                        > kingdom event this season? Any suggestions on an event that the folks on
                        > this list might have in common?
                        >
                        >
                        > Hallgrim, do you know your plans for the season yet?
                        >
                        >
                        > Cheers,
                        >
                        > -= Daði
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > From: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
                        [mailto:AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                        > Of ursula_of_fowlkeep
                        > Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 10:05 AM
                        > To: AnTirYAC@yahoogroups.com
                        > Subject: [AnTirYAC] Re: A Question About Champion Tournies
                        >

                        No virus found in this incoming message.
                        Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                        Version: 8.5.285 / Virus Database: 270.11.43/2043 - Release Date: 04/06/09 06:22:00

                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.