That's kind of harsh; where do you draw the line between payout eligible and non payout eligible? A hard and fast line at the payout cut? Everyone within 3 strokes? Within 5 strokes?
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
2017 MPO Worlds - Augusta
- Thread starter DinosaurThunder
- Start date
That's kind of harsh; where do you draw the line between payout eligible and non payout eligible? A hard and fast line at the payout cut? Everyone within 3 strokes? Within 5 strokes?
WildlyMediocre
Bogey Member
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2014
- Messages
- 76
That's what a cut line is. A very specific percentage of the field that didn't get the job done in the first 2 rounds. In ball golf, those people just go home.
Tournaments already have a payout line. If you're going to have the size of an event that requires A/B pool playing on different courses, then that should be the understanding at the outset.
Joe 925 rating already knows he's not cashing at Pro Worlds. He's just there for the experience. So the end result is not that different from what's already happening (no one in B pool is cashing today). This just solidifies the rules so that the actual top players aren't getting thrown for a loop because people at +26 for the event can't play the same holes.
brutalbrutus
* Ace Member *
That's why Chuck brought up the old semifinals format. They would cut top half of the field, and ties i'm assuming, all those people would be eligible for payouts. Then like Wildly purposed you could still do that but have the people that didn't make the cut able to play their final round(s) and still get full value and the rating(s).
Last edited:
brutalbrutus
* Ace Member *
Dunno. All it says is ACE! and scoring hasn't caught up yet.
WildlyMediocre
Bogey Member
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2014
- Messages
- 76
I'd even add a stipulation that if you don't want to finish after missing the cut line, you don't get any penalties for the DNF. If some people want to pay the entry fee but not finish, that's their call. Makes it easier on the TDs if they have less cards to worry about.
But that would be an all or nothing decision. No cutting out after round 3. Once they determine the cut line, players make the call so the TDs can plan before round 3 starts.
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
With the old format, players in the B pool who played well after the initial shuffle had a chance to get into semis because there was another A/B shuffle for the cut to the semis.
AzteC
Eagle Member
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2014
- Messages
- 549
Colglazier.
WildlyMediocre
Bogey Member
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2014
- Messages
- 76
But what would happen in a situation like today if they didn't have the opportunity to restart? Wouldn't it be the same scenario of only being able to count rounds 1 and 2 because it was the last time the entire field played the exact same holes?
14???
@iDiscGolf
* Ace Member *
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2013
- Messages
- 3,805
Congrats to Paige and Rick. They both smashed!
bwgort
Birdie Member
That's not correct. Multiple people in b pool are cashing.
Cgkdisc
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
That's correct. However, with your suggestion to simply cut the B pool, it would take away any chance for B pool players to qualify for the cash payouts by playing well in the final two rounds even if there wasn't a semi.
OK, so again; where's your cut line? 3 strokes out of cash? 5? 10?
Talk about a cure that's worse than the disease. One day, perhaps, Worlds might have such bad weather that results have to be backed up to the last evenly-completed rounds---in the current format, to the finish of round 2. It could happen. It never has, but of course it could.
So the solution proffered, for the current 2-pool, 4-round format, is to always do this for those who don't make the A-pool after the shuffle? Let them play if they want, but deem all of their scores below the cash line, regardless of how well they play in the second half of their tournament.
Instead of ignoring their 3rd & 4th rounds (for cash purposes) on very rare occasions, do it always?
So the solution proffered, for the current 2-pool, 4-round format, is to always do this for those who don't make the A-pool after the shuffle? Let them play if they want, but deem all of their scores below the cash line, regardless of how well they play in the second half of their tournament.
Instead of ignoring their 3rd & 4th rounds (for cash purposes) on very rare occasions, do it always?
Anyone else find fault in the ratings system on courses like these? Ricky beat the rest of the field by 8, yet only averaged about a third of a stroke over his rating per round. Maybe its just me, but the ratings don't quite seem to reward his stellar play.
Soiler Alert
Rick was consistently on a different level this tournament. His "bad" rounds were better than everyone else's bad rounds, and his good rounds were a cut above everyone else's good rounds. I wasn't rooting for him (I can't ever root for the favorites), but he played out of his mind and definitely earned that second straight world title.
Rick was consistently on a different level this tournament. His "bad" rounds were better than everyone else's bad rounds, and his good rounds were a cut above everyone else's good rounds. I wasn't rooting for him (I can't ever root for the favorites), but he played out of his mind and definitely earned that second straight world title.
You may be onto something. I read either on here or Reddit someone making an argument that Rick won in part because Paul played below his rating. If the ratings were low in general, it would rule out that argument. I'm gathering that the round ratings for this tournament might not accurately reflect the players' level of play.
Similar threads
