After last year’s results I would have thought PAC would get less and SPA more in 12U boys. Looks like #9 from this weekend’s SPA quals will be winning a gold in Classic at JOs again.
Pretty sure it is based upon zone size and not performance.
2 Likes
CEN looks larger by area. “Size” seems like a poor measure given NEZ and others are larger by almost every measure except depth of teams.
Late edit: the only measure that should matter for allocations is depth/# of teams.
It is not land mass either. I believe it is USAWP registrants by zone as a starting point.
1 Like
7-9 seeds for SPA 12U boys are CDM SOCAL Patriot. Any of those teams would likely easily win Gold division but instead will win every game by 10+ in Classic.
But PAC will have B teams in Championship, and CEN will have multiple teams in Championship that won’t beat a team from California.
Smh what an insane allocation system
2 Likes
I guess for a 12U kid the medal means a podium spot regardless of whether it is platinum, gold, silver, or bronze level. Last year SPA swept the top three spots in Classic Silver level (San Clemente, Newport B, CHAWP) hope it happens again.
Can we get a sense of whose ox(en) was (were) gored in the 18u Boys allocations? I note PSW picked up a Classic spot (still only 3 Championship spots for 3 teams that have a strong chance to find themselves in the top 12 based on Futures and National League results), that SEZ is now getting zero allocations at 18u, and SoPac gets 10 teams (8 from USAWP and counting 2 teams in MTN zone if prior rumors of MTN-SPZ collabs are correct).
1 Like
Yeah, for 18UBs, PSW seems to be getting hosed. 6 Championship spots for MID that usually all finish in Gold seems like a misallocation to me. Though, 10 MID teams is an improvement. Last year, CCA’s lowest finish was a gold medal in Gold then had 4 top 10 finishers in classic. PAC’s lowest finish was 29 with a gold medal in classic silver. SPA had 7 of 8 in Platinum.
1 Like
I am not sure about it unless this year is a clear aberration 
Last year, 8th best 12u boys team from SPA (Back Bay) finished 7th in Gold. Two years ago, 8th best team (North Irvine) finished 2nd in Gold, and 9th best team (OWPC) finished 4th in Gold.
P.S. I have also looked back three and four years. In 2023, 7th best SPA 12u boys team (Los Alamitos) finished 5th in Gold, and 8th best SPA team (Socal Black) finished 10th in Gold. In 2022, 8th best 12u SPA team (OCWPC) finished 2nd in Gold, and 9th best team (San Clemente Red) finished 21st in Gold (fourth from the bottom).
Bottom line, I am sure that 7th-9th best SPA teams are all decent teams but they are not competitive enough to make noise in Platinum, most of the years.
3 Likes
I’ve had kids medal in Platinum, Gold, and Bronze. Smiles and memories all around. But you don’t build many skills destroying everyone in the wrong division. Half the folks on this board could devise a system of divisions and promotions and relegations that would solve this.
But unfortunately that isn’t the half that is actually involved in such things
3 Likes
Point well made. I do think that 9 and 10 last year would have been at least competitive in Gold.
Will maybe 3 of the 10 PAC teams be in platinum this year?
1 Like
You might be right. As for the annual heartbreak of some decent Socal teams relegated to play in Classic. Look at international men’s water polo. Every Olympics, some decent European national teams (around 8th-9th in Europe?) do not qualify and “their rightful place” is taken by one or two weaker teams from Asia, Americas, Australia, or Africa. Is it fair? I would say yes. If you are say 9th best team in Europe (Netherlands, Germany, etc) you are not likely to medal anyway and it is fun to see teams from different continents.
At the NJO’s the allocations are proportional to the number of zone’s USAWP members (athletes). Makes sense to me.
3 Likes
Guys, if you read the USAWP Rules on Allocation from the Conduction of Championships outlined in the website, all of this is clear.
- each Zone will be allocated entries equal to a fraction, the numerator of which is the number of members in that Zone (as specified above) and the denominator of which is the total number of USA Water Polo members (as specified above) times the number of teams needed to complete the field for the Championship Finals,
- in the event that a Zone is allocated entries pursuant to this provision that exceed the number of teams entered in the Championships (or a team entered in the Championships decline to participate in the Championship Finals), the additional vacant entries so created shall be reallocated to other Zones as provided herein
So zones get allocations based on membership. If they do not fill/desire to fill those allocations, the redistribution is based on membership again. So first allocation goes to largest zone, second goes to second largest zone. If a zone is 2x larger than another zone, it gets a second allocation prior to lower zones.
This has nothing to do with who is good, better, deserving, performed better. Simple math, outlined in bylaws. Objective, not subjective. Perhaps not rewarding “best” teams, but it is the system. Please review the process.
5 Likes
Excellent discussion and informative. Thank you all. Good luck!
There are three zones sending more 10U boys teams than SEZ is sending in total for Girls and Boys, combined. That’s a catastrophe. Come on Florida water polo!
2 Likes
Florida water polo is fairly well represented in Dallas for session III. As are a lot of the other eastern zones.
2 Likes
It is the 10u part of the equation that I find far more troubling. Last year there was a 48-team and a 22-team 10u Coed bracket for a total of 70 teams. This year in 10u Coed there are only 58 teams.
Last year 10u Boys had a 41 team bracket. This year the 10u Boys bracket is 35 teams.
This is the pipeline of the sport and the decrease in these numbers cannot be blamed on the rise of girl’s football.
3 Likes
If you look back for 10 years, especially in 10U and especially in girls 10U, there is more participation for JO teams during the SoCal years than the NorCal years. It is a funtion of the cost of teams traveling for a 8,9,10 year old tournament when teams are just starting. I am not going to provide data for this, but it has been my experience that this is the case. If someone wants to prove me wrong with data, I am open to it.
But a single year comparison when typically more teams particpate in odd years, is not a trend.
Wait for the final numbers.
got tired of waiting on a reply. Covid messed with some of the data, but SoCal JO typically better atteneded by teams than the NorCal version in 10U.
Covid messed with thins in 2020 and 2021.
