Name of Tournament / Championships : World Open LA LOUVIERE


Ranking Factor Applied for : 30


Responsible Federation : Nico VERSPEELT


Chairman of Organising Committee : Nico VERSPEELT


Dates of Play : 4-6 November 1999


Name of Technical Delegate : Vincent BOURY


Report submitted to IPC and ITTC the : 30 November 1999


Version : 2.0


Tournament for wheelchairs and standing players: 225 players

9 different sites, for players, staff, organizers, and umpires ad referees: 350 persons.

Centre Saint Vaast: most of wheelchairs (about 80) at this place, and 40 standing people.


Other places were OK.

But in one case, some people complained they were too many in the same area: 11 people in the same ‘studio’.



25 tables.

No training tables available during the competition.

Hall 1:16 tables

Ground in linoleum.

play areas 8.50*4m, for standing and some classes in wheelchair. For standing players, that were too small areas. (cf. Remark 1)

Hall 2: 9 tables

2 toilets for wheelchairs were in the building between the 2 halls.

Not many players received this information, that was given during the meeting for nations.

Cold and hot water available in both halles.

Lunches were organised in 2 halles during the competition:



4-Competition Days

RQ= normally, in such a ranked tournament, some doubles are mandatory. We did not organised the events. Nobody claimed about that decsision…

5-Number of Participants

Players: 225

Number of escorts: 70

Referees/Umpires: 50

Total = about 350

RQ= some Belgian players or staff were sleeping at home.

So, people really involved = about 330







Basic rule used: if more than 5 players or teams in one class, then no round robins with more than 4 players. Ex: 10 players, 2 groups of 3, 1 group of 4.

Merge of 2 classes in team event for women, after having asked to all countries concerned.

We used the snake system, based on ranking list to make all the tables and draws. We earned lots of time, energy, and coaches and players could plan very early their schedule for matches.


classification for 9 players, all classified in expected classes.

3 classifiers: Art KRUIMER, Jorgend ANDERSEN, Ton BROUWER.

Ton BROUWER was not able to come. Art came for the evening, and had to leave because of his flight for PanAm Games. Nico VERSPEELT helped for classification.



12-Other Staff

Lots of work, lots of people, many things to manage for this huge organisation:

Ball Boys:

13-Any Other Matter

Well, the challenge as TD for this competition was high. I got exhausted and realized that some points have to be improved in my mind. I don’t mean only about the organisation, but also about the definition of ITTC responsabilities.

Please consider the following remarks, and give some feed-backs.

Remark 1

There were some pre-visits done by ITTC, which approved the playing conditions, knowing that it would be a problem. Maybe it was a mistake, or at least, participants should have been more informed of the real conditions for playing.

Nico Verspeelt agreed to consider all entries so that the tournament was really an "open", and stay fair, with no pre-selection.

The competition in hall 1 was really uncomfortable for all players. But it was not possible to welcome every players applying to the tournament, and to give good conditions to players.

Proposal 1:

Proposal 2 :

Remark 2

For such an important event, referees should be more prepared.

I explain:

Remark 3

Remark 4

What was negative is that because of some delay in events schedule, I did not manage attended meeting, and got considered as not reliable.

Last remark…

I think we did a good work with Nico before and during the competition. Nico and all his staff made a huge work. That was not easy for me to be designed a few days before such an important event. It was not easy for him neither…

I spent lots of time and energy receiving all critics, complains about the tournament. At least, I was "filtering" all that negative inputs all days long, that let to Nico some resources to take care more quietly about the global organisation.

But that made me discover a critical point:

Who knows what is a TD ?

I was impressed by this fact: the role, responsabilities, competencies of the TD are ignored. Not totally of course, but enough so that it is very hard to be efficient as TD.

How can the TD make a good job, when people he has to work with don’t even know what is the job????

I had the same problem when being TD in Dublin, and let me confess that it was really disapointing to realize this: The TD has a critical job to do with everything involved in a competition so that the competition is as good as possible. But in both cases (Dublin and La Louviere) I could not do the good job I wished, just because basic definitions of TD role had never been precisely established with organisers.

In a result, I spent many hours trying to explain some standards about what should be expected –in my mind- from a TD. Then sometimes I wasted resources in explanations instead of improvments when possible.

We spent some dedicated moments with Nico Verspeelt and Clare O’Neill about that point, and I asked them to make a report, from their point of view, with the main idea

"what do you expect from a TD, when you are responsible for an international tournament?"

I hope it will help for the future.