|
Post by Author By Night on Feb 15, 2009 9:52:59 GMT -5
Discuss Quidditch Through the Ages here.
|
|
|
Post by cuthbertbinns on Jun 15, 2009 21:42:39 GMT -5
(This topic seems a little forlorn, so . . . )
"Ok folks, put on your team colors and get out your omnioculars! Its sports time! Today on Quidditch talk, yours truly will step in front of the bludger and get into the Good, the Bad and the Ugly of our favorite wizard sport."
(So, what do you think, could I make it on my own sports show? Ok, maybe I wont quit my day job just yet!)
The Good
I have to say that Jo did a good job of creating an enjoyable and viable game for her witches and wizards to play. I thought it was great that she took the time to imagine an entertaining history of the game, outlining its evolution over time and showing modifications in the equipment and pitch as well as controversial rules changes. Since some of the game and its background is modeled on soccer (and maybe a little on cricket), I'm guessing that either Jo or someone she knows is a sports history buff. As an American, I'm more familiar with American football, but there too can be seen some of the same changes: an evolution of the basic elements of the game, the introduction of new equipment, and rule changes designed to make the game safer which at the time were not well received by fans.
The Bad
Now, I say it is a viable game, but there is one significant flaw that can't be overlooked. That is, of course, the snitch point value. Now, I know that Jo has defended her choice of 150 points, but she has also acknowledged that the majority of Quidditch games are won by the team who's seeker catches the snitch. Thats well and good, but I think she has failed to consider the affect this would have on the game and its players.
First off, this would be very disheartening to a teams chasers - they would go into every game knowing that the number of goals they scored would be unlikely have any influence on the outcome of the match. As it is a team sport, it will only be successful and popular if all members of the team feel they are contributing.
The Ugly
The other likely affect of this lopsided scoring would be significant changes in strategy. With goal scoring having limited value, teams would redirect their efforts into helping their seeker catch the snitch while interfering with the other teams seeker. The beaters would focus their efforts on hampering the opposing teams seeker while one or two of the chasers could assist in spotting the snitch. The remaining chaser or chasers and the keeper could focus on limiting the number of goals their opponents make. Remember, they only need to keep the opponents below 15 goals. Chasers, for example, could simply hang onto the quaffle as long as possible to prevent anyone from scoring. This tactic is already used in soccer: if a team gains a lead, they employ delaying tactics to run the clock out - much to the dissatisfaction of the fans - but they do it because it wins games. If both teams employ this tactic in Quidditch, then there could potentially be no one trying to score goals as most players were focused on the snitch.
"So, fans, what are we to do about our fine sport? Give it up and play Gobstones? No, I say! We are going to save our beloved Quidditch and bring it into the twenty first century. I urge everyone listening to immediately send an owl to the head of the Department of Magical Games and Sports and demand action now!"
There seems to be an explanation for how the game got to this point contained within the history Jo has outlined in Quidditch Through the Ages. One thing that has steadily changed in the more recent history of the game is the quality and capabilities of the brooms used. They have become faster and more maneuverable and have had other features added, such as the braking charm, to increase a brooms versatility. During this time the performance characteristics of the snitch have remained the same. The result of this - and here's the key point - would be a steady decrease in the average time required to catch the snitch. This in turn would decrease the time available for scoring, which would mean lower scoring games and a reduced likelihood that a team could gain the 150+ point lead that is necessary to win without catching the snitch. The games Kennilworthy Whisp mentions in QTA often took many days to finish, giving ample time for scoring, but I would say those days are in Quidditches past.
Two easy solutions to this problem exist. One, of course, is to lower the point value of catching the snitch. The other would be to make the snitch more difficult to catch. The later would have the affect of lengthening games, which may not be popular with modern fans who tend to not want to spend 5 days waiting for a match to finish.
"As always, send your comments on todays topic by owl to Quidditch Talk at Wizard Radio. And for those listeners with a bone to pick, remember that our crack team of mail inspection wizards will remove any jinxes, hexes, wortcap powder, etc. that may inadvertently make their way into your letters before they reach me. (Though I have to complement the witch or wizard who managed to transfigure a bludger into a sheet of parchment. This gave our staff quite a bit of trouble when it flew out of the envelope and proceeded to smash our offices half to pieces. You can't say our listeners don't take their sport seriously.)"
|
|
|
Post by queenie on Jun 16, 2009 14:45:24 GMT -5
(Though I have to complement the witch or wizard who managed to transfigure a bludger into a sheet of parchment. This gave our staff quite a bit of trouble when it flew out of the envelope and proceeded to smash our offices half to pieces. You can't say our listeners don't take their sport seriously.)
*SNORT*
What you outline is very true, cuthbertbinns. But, I read an observation on TV Tropes that the games at Hogwarts, though they're the most common games that we see, are extremely on the amateur level, to the point where the main strategy of the game is "Catch the Snitch." However, as we saw in the World Cup, the Olympics of Quidditch, at the professional level the Chasers work like mad, so fast that even the commentator can only blurt out the name of who's got the Quaffle. Ireland won even though Krum got the Snitch - and though this was treated as an unusual, unexpected occurrence, it probably happens enough that Fred & George were willing to gamble everything on it. There's probably a murky line when rising up from Hogwarts games to the World Cup, where the Snitch stops being the absolute, ultimate, deciding factor, where the Chasers and Keeper are good enough to keep up with the Snitch's incredible point gain.
But, I agree, Quidditch would probably be a much better game if the Snitch was worth less.
"I have been a faithful listener of Quidditch Talk for years and years now and I just want to say, keep up the good work! And it has to be a lie that the Appleby Arrows have been using performance-enhancing potions - some people can't recognize genius if it bites them on the -- er, leg. Leg."
|
|
|
Post by vegablack on Jun 16, 2009 15:02:37 GMT -5
Maybe there is a range in the quality of the snitch and the ones used professionally are so hard to catch the other players have already run up a huge amount of points, so much that the 150 points don't mean as much. I believe I remember a game at Hogwarts where a seeker caught a snitch and the other side won because the other team had run up so many points the 150 still didn't allow the seeker's team to win.
The game lasts a long time and ends when the seeker catches the snitch so it must be harder than it seems. Perhaps it's easier to run up points than we think. Or there is a range in the ability of snitches to avoid capture.
I have loved reading the Quidditch commentary, by the way.
|
|
|
Post by cuthbertbinns on Jun 17, 2009 0:48:22 GMT -5
The amateur/professional distinction could certainly make a difference, but I don't think the amount of scoring would be too different as the field is balanced in that area - professional vs professional and amateur vs amateur. Just considering the matches at Hogwarts I think a change is necessary so that the efforts of the chasers have more value.
Yes, I was thinking the same thing about the snitch. It would make sense that there were snitches of different types - at least an amateur and a professional version. If this is true, than in a professional game the role of the chasers may be more important and the outcome of a match more dependent on the entire team. But that would only be if the typical game lasted long enough. I like the snitch and think it adds an interesting twist to the game, I just don't want it to dominate outcomes.
A set of amateur rules seems like a good idea. A less challenging snitch would keep a match to a reasonable time - they are students after all - and a lower point value to a catch would keep the scoring in balance so that the game is fun for everyone.
On a more general sports note, Quidditch does seem to provide the opportunity for a variety of strategies. The World Cup is an interesting case of this. I've assumed from the admittedly limited information we have that the Bulgarian team probably isn't that strong overall and that the exceptional skill of Krum is what carried them to the Cup game. If such statistics were available, I would expect the Average Time of Play in a winning game (ATPw) for Bulgaria to be one of the shortest of any team (not to be confused with the Average Time of Play in a loss - ATPl).
(You know, I have to say, I think Quidditch would be a great sport for stats. There are so many numbers to track!)
The Irish I imagine as a strong all around team with good players in all positions. In the Cup game, the Irish no doubt recognized Krum as the main danger. I would expect them to employ tactics designed to hamper Krum so that the Irish chasers could run up the score. For example, the Irish beaters would send as many bludgers Krums way as they could and the Irish seeker would dog him at all times so as to keep him distracted and off balance as much as possible. This could be why Krum used the Wronski Feint - to get the Irish seeker off his back. Against other teams the Irish would use other strategies, but this is what would work against the Bulgarians and Krum.
"And for those listeners who have been following the recent controversy over the use of certain questionable potions by professional Quidditch players, you will be interested to know that we have received word Rita Skeeter is coming out with a new tell all book which she claims "reveals all of the tawdry facts" on the subject. I'm sure we can expect the usual fair and unbiased hatchet job we've come to love her for. And who knows, she may just hit a few of the right branches. Rest assured, we will keep our listeners on top of this breaking story."
|
|
|
Post by queenie on Jun 19, 2009 19:50:31 GMT -5
If such statistics were available, I would expect the Average Time of Play in a winning game (ATPw) for Bulgaria to be one of the shortest of any team (not to be confused with the Average Time of Play in a loss - ATPl).
On the other hand, a team with a very strong Keeper probably has a very long Average Time of Play in a Win. They'd put emphasis on preventing the other team from scoring, yes, but probably more would go into making sure they can score. A game with two strong keepers but two weak Seekers could go on forever.
"And now it's time to address those steamy rumors about Puddlemere United's Madrigal Harrier and the Caerphilly Catapult's Stephen O'Keefe. Could there be love a-blooming on the turf? Well, Harrier, or "Maddy" as she's known to her fans, has denied any such entanglements, but that denial was surprisingly loquacious. Doth the lady protest too much? And our agents in the field have observed that many an owl has been seen flitting from O'Keefe's house in Wales to the sweet fields of Puddlemere. Certainly, next week's game between the two will be something to watch!"
|
|