2015 Pro Worlds full- Another registration fiasco?

[Jabumbo]

Someone please correct me if I am wrong (because I know nothing beyond this thread about it), but...

The points one obtained to qualify for Worlds have no bearing beyond a qualification? As in, a person with 5x as many points is not "more qualified" or "more likely" to get into the tournament?

If this is the case, why do we need to debate about tiered entry based on ratings and just do it based on points? If the bigger events are (presumably) weighted heavier and worth more points, the ones who are placing well in things like NT and A tier events will be those 1000+ guys that should probably be included over 900+ Joe Schmo who only plays and wins his local stuff.

 

[JC17393]

Someone please correct me if I am wrong (because I know nothing beyond this thread about it), but...

The points one obtained to qualify for Worlds have no bearing beyond a qualification? As in, a person with 5x as many points is not "more qualified" or "more likely" to get into the tournament?

If this is the case, why do we need to debate about tiered entry based on ratings and just do it based on points? If the bigger events are (presumably) weighted heavier and worth more points, the ones who are placing well in things like NT and A tier events will be those 1000+ guys that should probably be included over 900+ Joe Schmo who only plays and wins his local stuff.

Because what if it's one of those 1000+ guys who only plays and wins his local stuff (say the one local A-tier or NT) and thus has just over the minimum points needed? Or if 950 rated guy travels all over his area, plays 35 events and racks up monster points without winning a ton of events or beating top-tier talent? More points doesn't necessarily mean better play. They can be accumulated by more play instead. Somehow, I foresee the same "Joe Schmo 950 got in" complaints with this system as with the current system.

 

[Timeetyo]

Because what if it's one of those 1000+ guys who only plays and wins his local stuff (say the one local A-tier or NT) and thus has just over the minimum points needed? Or if 950 rated guy travels all over his area, plays 35 events and racks up monster points without winning a ton of events or beating top-tier talent? More points doesn't necessarily mean better play. They can be accumulated by more play instead. Somehow, I foresee the same "Joe Schmo 950 got in" complaints with this system as with the current system.

Assuming it is communicated in advance....

That local pro should play a few more tournies. He'll still rack up points faster if he is winning, so he won't have to hit as many as the lower level guy who plays them all.

Also - the tiered system could be done with a combination of factors - ratings, events played, top finishes, etc.

 

[JC17393]

Assuming it is communicated in advance....

That local pro should play a few more tournies. He'll still rack up points faster if he is winning, so he won't have to hit as many as the lower level guy who plays them all.

Also - the tiered system could be done with a combination of factors - ratings, events played, top finishes, etc.

If the changes are communicated in advance, then that's fine. In order for any changes to be implemented fairly, in advance, we're talking about 2017 Worlds at the earliest before they take effect. Qualifying for 2016 Worlds has been going on for five months. It was a bit of BS for them to raise the minimums for 2015 with only about three months to go in that qualifying season (2014). It would be worse to make larger scale changes to the 2016 qualification process at this point.

The powers that be have a good seven months to come up with a comprehensive plan for the future to be unveiled for the 2016 season affecting the 2017 Worlds. The question is whether there really is a need to make significant changes.

 

[stratedge]

That local pro should play a few more tournies. He'll still rack up points faster if he is winning, so he won't have to hit as many as the lower level guy who plays them all.

Agree with this.

Step 1: Decide what matters when it comes to qualifying for tourneys... is it points, rating, or both? If it's both, come up with a way to coalesce the two.
Step 2: Open registration for big tournaments for a fixed period of time, i.e., 1 week. Everyone is allowed to register during the week, no limit.
Step 3: Sort the players registered by the method of preference determined in step 1. If the tournament is open to 250 players, then the top 250 players qualify. Players ranked 251 onward go onto the wait list if players drop out.
Step 4: Enjoy as the drama is gone, and participation in B & C tiers goes up, as it should, if players are serious about qualifying for major events.

 

[Jabumbo]

I guess I am just more confused by the system as a whole than anything else.

Why is Worlds (or even the USDGC) not part of the NT? What purpose does the NT even serve then? Why do we have the NT and so called Majors?

It seems like this point system is very complicated with all the different weightings but in the grand scheme of things is also pretty useless. I mean, what is the incentive to get loads of points if you're just as likely to get into Worlds as the guy who got just enough to qualify?

 

[diskey river]

They should let the top 100 rated players have first dibs at early registration, when that's over let the rest with enough points race for the last however many spots.

Although I also believe there should be no limit on players at Worlds.

 

[Cgkdisc]

The PDGA would need to be convinced that a change is needed to the current system that provides equal access to members who have qualified based on points. It is a "membership" organization and each pro member has one vote and has access to the same pro benefits. The only real change needed, which apparently will be addressed in the next few years, is to add capacity by having separate Worlds for Open and the Age divisions. No additional qualification or tiered registration process needed.

 

[oddjob]

They should let the top 100 rated players have first dibs at early registration, when that's over let the rest with enough points race for the last however many spots.

Although I also believe there should be no limit on players at Worlds.

a better version of this would be giving touring card pro's first dibs and then opening it up.

 

[bhadella]

Although I also believe there should be no limit on players at Worlds.

Sounds great in theory but completely impractical to run. How many potential Worlds "host" regions have enough courses to hold more than 4 flights of MPO + WPO groups? What if 500 people sign up, are you going to have 7 different courses to distribute the players?

 

[optidiscic]

define touring pro?

Are the best players always touring?

Joey Bishop is a touring pro

 

[Steve West]

Let's take a look at Worlds as nothing more than a means to encourage people to enter a lot of events. The chance to go to the "Big Show" is the carrot.

The points for getting an invite can be set to maximize the total amount of events entered by all players. So, no more needs to be said about that.

Establishing Rating-based or any other minimum standard would leave out some players. These players would then not have incentive to enter a lot of events to try to get in. That would reduce the total number of events entered.

However. Maybe the perception is that it isn't the "Big Show" without the top players. Perhaps some players lose interest in trying to qualify if they can't measure themselves against the very best.

If that's the case, then it might make sense to reserve a few slots for the top players. The trade-off is slightly reducing the number of slots available to the heavy event consumers, in exchange for making sure the carrot tastes sweet.

 

[bwgort]

define touring pro?

Are the best players always touring?

Joey Bishop is a touring pro

http://www.pdga.com/pdga-documents/touring-pros/current-list-of-touring-pros

 

[optidiscic]

http://www.pdga.com/pdga-documents/touring-pros/current-list-of-touring-pros

put me in my place lol

 

[art_vandelay]

Thank you for this!!! :thmbup::clap::hfive:

Thanks. I'm a big Fight Club fan and it seems about right. You have to hear Brad Pitt delivering the lines for it to work. Sorry if it seemed like a troll post.

 

[urwatuh8]

http://www.pdga.com/pdga-documents/touring-pros/current-list-of-touring-pros

From the criteria, this looks like what people want. No reason to invent another random set of criteria. Just open registration up to touring pros one week early. Given that there are only 119 current touring pros, even if they all had signed up early, there would be spaces left.

 

[stratedge]

From the criteria, this looks like what people want. No reason to invent another random set of criteria. Just open registration up to touring pros one week early. Given that there are only 119 current touring pros, even if they all had signed up early, there would be spaces left.

I think it's a mistake to stop at touring pros, the ability for higher rated local players to get in to take a shot at the touring pros should also be extended to those who have earned it.

 

[urwatuh8]

I think it's a mistake to stop at touring pros, the ability for higher rated local players to get in to take a shot at the touring pros should also be extended to those who have earned it.

The "Touring Pro" label actually includes the best local players. One way to qualify for "touring pro" is to meet the following criteria:
(1) have a rating over 1000
(2) have played at least 8 events in 2014
and
(3) have won at least $3000 in 2014

If a player doesn't meet (1), they have basically no chance of winning worlds. If a player doesn't meet (2) or (3), it's hard to argue they've earned a place, given that they've player pretty little in 2014.

 

[threej21]

SERIOUS QUESTION!!!!

How is this being looked at as such a BIG problem, when it didn't fill for over like 10 hours!!???

You didn't have to set an alarm for midnight, or stay up crazy late, or have some wizardly internet connection. All you had to do was be eligible, and be able to make it to a computer over a 10+ hour time period!

If you didn't get into worlds, no matter what your rating is, IT'S YOUR DAMN FAULT!!

Stop blaming the system for your lack of fulfilling part of your "CAREER"

 

[DavidSauls]

SERIOUS QUESTION!!!!

How is this being looked at as such a BIG problem, when it didn't fill for over like 10 hours!!???

You didn't have to set an alarm for midnight, or stay up crazy late, or have some wizardly internet connection. All you had to do was be eligible, and be able to make it to a computer over a 10+ hour time period!

If you didn't get into worlds, no matter what your rating is, IT'S YOUR DAMN FAULT!!

Stop blaming the system for your lack of fulfilling part of your "CAREER"

Relax.

Is anybody saying that? Other than the original post?

The consensus seems to be that this year's registration is not a problem. The discussion is whether, if the trend continues and it becomes a matter of minutes, not 10 hours, in the future, whether a change will be in order. And whether that change might be made before the problem occurs.