Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

The tiers are upside down

48 replies

DappledThings · 15/10/2020 20:06

This is obviously entirely unimportant and only an idle musing.

It's counter-intuitive to me that 3 is riskier than 1. 1 is the top of the tree, the winner in any placing which to me makes it seem the most important and therefore Tier 1 ought to be the what the top tier is, the one with the strictest measures.

Tier 3 ought to be the least important, the bronze level, so should be the one with the least restrictions.

Anyone else think that?

OP posts:
FuzzyPuffling · 15/10/2020 20:07

Yes. It crossed my mind!

MagpieSong · 15/10/2020 20:08

I wondered if it was to give space to add a higher tier if needed?

Notonthestairs · 15/10/2020 20:08

I guess this way they can add tiers...

Thatwentbadly · 15/10/2020 20:09

It will be so they can add a tier 4 with stricter rules.

ceeveebee · 15/10/2020 20:09

Yes I think it’s so they can add a tier 4 and 5...

Original poster
DappledThings · 15/10/2020 20:10

@Thatwentbadly

It will be so they can add a tier 4 with stricter rules.
That's a good point.
OP posts:
ErrolTheDragon · 15/10/2020 20:10

No, it's bigger number for more of everything. More covid, more restrictions. And allows both additional tiers and the option of creating a totally unrestricted tier 0 - unlikely for a long time but hopefully at some point.

MiddleClassMother · 15/10/2020 20:15

It's just so they can add extra tiers if needed, like the GCSE grades, eg a 9 is the best but sounds the worst

Meruem · 15/10/2020 20:18

I wondered why they made it medium/high/very high as opposed to low/medium/high but then I figured it’s probably because they don’t want to say the risk is low anywhere.

PinkDaffodil2 · 15/10/2020 20:20

I guess if anywhere is low risk they can have tier 0 with 0 restrictions, but this way round leaves lots of options for tier 4, 5 etc as things progress.

Inkpaperstars · 16/10/2020 03:05

I agree OP, seems upside down to me.

HeronLanyon · 16/10/2020 03:09

I agree ! Top tier should be no 1

Pixxie7 · 16/10/2020 04:20

The whole tier system is crazy, an area near me has gone to tier 3 across the road tier 1 how does that work?

IronLawOfGeometricProgression · 16/10/2020 05:00

I'd imagine that there were meetings about how Tier Zero implies zero restrictions when movement in the other direction is entirely more likely.

There is definitely at least a a Tier 4 in Boris's Tiers of a Clown system.

Buckwheat80 · 16/10/2020 05:33

They should've gone with the chilli rating - Medium, Hot, Extra Hot.

Or possibly Jalfrezi, Madras, Vindaloo, and keep Korma in reserve of the get cases down to a completely safe level.

Buckwheat80 · 16/10/2020 05:33

If they*

Mummyoflittledragon · 16/10/2020 05:41

Doesn’t seem it to me. It maybe that’s because I have lived in other countries, where review go from a scale of 1 to 10, 1 is the best ever and 10 the worst.

It’s the opposite to DEFCON levels.

LynetteScavo · 16/10/2020 06:10

I think it makes sense because if anywhere was on zero there would be very low Covid and nob restrictions. So we're aiming for zero everywhere.

DebbieFiderer · 16/10/2020 07:39

Well to be fair, calling them tier 1/2/3 is from the media, the official names are medium/high/very high

nether · 16/10/2020 07:47

This little sentence buried towards the bottom of the new guidance for the shielded strongly suggests that plans for restrictions higher than tier 3 are already planned

"we may advise more restrictive formal shielding measures for the clinically extremely vulnerable in the worst affected very high alert areas, based on advice from the Chief Medical Officer. This will only apply to some very high alert areas"

I suspect they're hoping it wont come to that, but are realising that they might. And so named the tiers with the possibility of going further in the series.

JaJaDingDong · 16/10/2020 07:50

I feel the same about GCSE grades. 1 should be the best/highest grade, not the lowest. But by making 9 the highest they can add more grades instead of using, for example, 9* etc when they need to.

starfish4 · 16/10/2020 07:55

As said above, this way around gives the flexibility of another tier

Original poster
DappledThings · 16/10/2020 07:56

@JaJaDingDong

I feel the same about GCSE grades. 1 should be the best/highest grade, not the lowest. But by making 9 the highest they can add more grades instead of using, for example, 9* etc when they need to.
Yes, I agree. If A is the best then 1 should be the best too.

And TV channels that are +1 should be -1 it is what was broadcast an hour ago not an hour later.

OP posts:
AuntieStella · 16/10/2020 07:57

I feel the same about GCSE grades. 1 should be the best/highest grade, not the lowest

I was for O levels, before they changed to A-E in the 70s. CSEs were also numeric with 1 as the highest. I suspect they put them the other way up this time round to minimise confusion - though there can't be that many over 50s still relying on CSE grades, or over 60s on numerically graded O levels on their CVs this century!

Brighterthansunflowers · 16/10/2020 08:18

I agree it’s so they can add extra tiers when required. We’ll have a tier four by Christmas I expect

Swipe left for the next trending thread