I'm sure if there was a bid given at regionals, then all those Reno teams would have stayed home. I don't know if I have a definite opinion on how the bid is given. I definitely see both sides of the argument with one team showing consistency throughout the season vs. playing when it counts. I think I would be behind either decision that would be made. I do find that my team (15's) playes differently against 16 yo vs. 15 yo teams. They see that nothing is on the line with the 16's so they play their hearts out, then against 15's where it matters more, then you never know...though they've been better as of late.

I like the initial seeding as is. It's nice to have the tough competition at times, but it would be nice if we did go to a highest ranking bid process, maybe the last two or three Power league/ Prime Time tournaments would be only age specific. Then you can really weigh in on the teams in your specific pool.

VK is right about how a fluke can throw you off. At Lone Star, we lost one match in a crossover. 9-1 for the weekend, and the highest we were able to take was 17th because of the one fluke loss. That team went on to take 5th overall, and they were definitely a beatable team. Makes me wonder if it's wise to try Club at the earlier national qualifiers, then try the open divisions later on. I can see definite reason to go for open at Reno with 5 of the top teams already securing bids. I know that technically leaves only one bid, but that's assuming that the top 5 place 1-5 (not a horrible assumptions, but you never know)

I just heard that Bill Neville('84 Men's Olympic gold medal coach) is in the running against Tony Miranda for Junior program director for Puget Sound. It will be interesting to see how that plays out.