FORUM CLOSING ON 14th JANUARY

Ever since I started playing pool in the Abingdon League, It's always struck me that many teams don't seem to stay together for very long, and i've always wondered this is. I understand that there are of lots of perfectly good reasons why players may wish to move teams from one season to the next, why players leave teams or why teams might wish to add to their squad but it always appears to me that some teams line ups are in a constant state of flux. I don't think this sort of thing helps when trying to build any sort of team spirit or morale, and I'd be interested to hear other players opinions on this. 

To check out my theory I had a look at the most wins stats for the Prem/Section One from the first five games. Of the 80 players who have played so far this season, 30 (37.5%) are new to the Abingdon League from last season (either they haven't played before or didn't play last year as far as I can remember). That's a lot of new players but it's a mainly positive shift because it shows that we're attracting more players, and a high quality of player to boot. However, of the remaining 50 players, 18 (36%) have moved teams from last season, which leaves only 32 (64%) who are playing for the same team as last season. That might not seem that low but add back in the new players and that's only 40% (of the 80) who played last season and are still playing for the same team now. That doesn't seem a lot to me but that's only my opinion. What does everyone else think? 

A lot of it may be down to how a team is structured, or it could be just an individuals own personal preference or mentality. Are you someone who likes to stick with the same team and have a good time with your mates, whether or not you win or lose, or do you prefer to win at all costs and be part of a team that's constantly changing in order to try and find the perfect, winning line up? 

In terms of actual structure/system, my own preference in the Abingdon League is to have a bare five, playing three frames each, and have someone who can fill in whenever necessary - ie holidays, emergencies. You may favour that as well, or possibly one of the following: 

A core group of six or seven players, who all play two or three frames each night, which has the advantage of built in cover should one or two be absent.
A core of two or three players who play every night, with another group of four to six (for example) players who are rotated from week to week.
A core of two or three players who play every night, plus whoever else is available at the time.

It would seem that most teams favour the second option of six or seven players because this is the number of players used by nine of the eleven teams in the top two divisions so far this season.

This is purely a discussion topic, designed to provoke debate, not argument, and is something that i'm genuinely interested in hearing others opinions of - all opinions are welcome.