Division switching

[BogeyNoMore]

What I'd really like to see are more regional age restricted only destination events, so these divisions that may only see a single player or two at a traditional event can have the enjoyment of a fuller field.

^this. I've seen a few women only tournaments, which attract a lot more women than most of traditionally formatted tourneys in this area. I think this would do the same for the age restricted divisions.

 

[Bradimous1]

By language, I mean having an intelligent conversation with someone my own age, as opposed to having infantile conversations with people much younger than me and with whom I have nothing in common. I'm not at all interested in playing with Gen Xers or millennials, as I find most of them to be empty-headed and superficial. I just want to play with the old guys, and if I can't, I want the option to withdraw and get a refund. What did you think, that I was some sort of racist?

Wow, you should try to live a little. I feel for you if this is your true outlook. As a Gen Xer, I feel that I can hold a pretty good conversation. I don't think I would be where I am today if I couldn't. I've also raised same damn good kids. I also play, primarily, with a Millenial (or my oldest son), and believe it or not (hope you are sitting down cause this might REALLY blow you away), he can hold a pretty good conversation.

It's tough to make a beautiful painting with just broad brush strokes. You should tried a more detailed brush and you might find you have a lot more in common with a lot more people. I don't get why anyone would want to limit themselves so much.

I have no doubt that if we got paired together in a tournament, that we would have a blast.

Now, my Gen X butt has to take some Ibuprofen for my back and get to bed.

 

[ScottyLove]

It's a crazy short course Tom... like putter or mid on every hole but 1. I think the average length is barely 200... so you'll be fine. Deuce or die! Just park every shot.

See you Sunday!

 

[Consult20]

I've found disc golf talk to be a universal language, so I have no problem throwing with anyone at any age. I don't really find the need to get into deep conversations about life during a round, but maybe I'm just too shallow or too focused. If you start talking about your new dentures or your Pokemon conquests I'm probably going to tune that out and think about my next shot instead. But if you have a good joke, I'm all in.

 

[DavidSauls]

I won't go as far as da crippler, but I understand his viewpoint, and I prefer to play with older players.

Doesn't matter so much in a single round, and indeed my casual rounds are spent with a wide spectrum of ages, and skill levels. One benefit of playing with the young guys is witnessing some incredible long shots, and often some incredible long shots go incredibly awry. They can reach bad places that Advanced Grandmasters need not fear.

But....for a tournament, at tournament pace, with some waits at the tees, and for a full weekend, I much prefer the company of the Masters+ crowd. Besides the conversation, in my localized experience, the general conduct is much better. With exceptions, both ways, of course. It could be different elsewhere but, not being elsewhere, that's where I prefer to take my chances.

 

[ru4por]

I won't go as far as da crippler, but I understand his viewpoint, and I prefer to play with older players.

Doesn't matter so much in a single round, and indeed my casual rounds are spent with a wide spectrum of ages, and skill levels. One benefit of playing with the young guys is witnessing some incredible long shots, and often some incredible long shots go incredibly awry. They can reach bad places that Advanced Grandmasters need not fear.

But....for a tournament, at tournament pace, with some waits at the tees, and for a full weekend, I much prefer the company of the Masters+ crowd. Besides the conversation, in my localized experience, the general conduct is much better. With exceptions, both ways, of course. It could be different elsewhere but, not being elsewhere, that's where I prefer to take my chances.

This is spot on. I do play in Rec from time to time. Not that it is a bad time, I just find the company of players my age more enjoyable. I also agree with the generalizations above in regards to conduct and conversations.

 

[Karl]

Karl, you can play in Open if you wish with your old school values. It's clear that the PDGA membership overall prefers to play against players in their skill range or slightly above so they have a chance to occasionally cash or win. A membership org responds to establish guidelines for the types of organized competition the players want, not based on some Darwinian imperative.

Chuck,
And I have! In fact about 78% of my tournament play over the past decade or so has been "playing up" (in divisions considered 'better' than my home division). I just want to guard against having ALL play pigeoned-holed into your (and other's) silly color-coded divisions. We already have that in the Adv, Int, etc. concept; to force - or even 'push' TDs into such - having age-groups segregated THAT way also would be NG.
Just ensure that the PDGA (and thus the TD) allows lots of options for 'splitting out' divisions.
Karl

 

[teemkey]

Has there been a study of whether PDGA membership divisions are represented proportionately in tournament play? (Based on reported tournament results)

(a) If 3% of members are MJ2 are 3% of the tournament slots MJ2?

(b) How often do players in a membership division play tournaments in another division when their age/gender division isn't represented?

 

[Cgkdisc]

Has there been a study of whether PDGA membership divisions are represented proportionately in tournament play? (Based on reported tournament results)

(a) If 3% of members are MJ2 are 3% of the tournament slots MJ2?

(b) How often do players in a membership division play tournaments in another division when their age/gender division isn't represented?

Difficult to track since most players are not restricted to enter just one division. Only pro males between the ages of 20-39 are restricted to one division. Everyone else might play in up to 5-6 divisions in a year. Here are the membership distributions from 2012 but not in comparison with percentage of fields in events which isn't directly tracked. http://www.pdga.com/files/Ratings_YE2012_Detail_Stats_0.pdf

 

[Cgkdisc]

Chuck,
And I have! In fact about 78% of my tournament play over the past decade or so has been "playing up" (in divisions considered 'better' than my home division). I just want to guard against having ALL play pigeon-holed into your (and other's) silly color-coded divisions. We already have that in the Adv, Int, etc. concept; to force - or even 'push' TDs into such - having age-groups segregated THAT way also would be NG.
Just ensure that the PDGA (and thus the TD) allows lots of options for 'splitting out' divisions.
Karl

The proposal is for TDs to have the option to offer the Master+ color divisions, not a requirement. Whether it's used by TDs or its resulting popularity with players are in their hands.

 

[Improbably]

The proposal is for TDs to have the option to offer the Master+ color divisions, not a requirement. Whether it's used by TDs or its resulting popularity with players are in their hands.

Has there been any discussion of changing the names of the under 40 divisions to just the color codes?

 

[ru4por]

It has been rumored that consideration has been given to further breaking down the age protected divisions. Though I am not sure how this will help the switching division problems. In this area, it would only serve to decrease the size of these divisions even further and make point acquisition even harder in A,B and C tier events. It would also force more age protected players to move around to younger divisions.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Has there been any discussion of changing the names of the under 40 divisions to just the color codes?

I wish. I've been proposing this off and on over the years but can't get the Comp Com or Exec Director to move on it. When the color skill levels were developed to match course design considerations, my plan was that skill level divisions would eventually get those names. How easy would it be for new players to discover their level once rated and then find the course layouts designed for them specifically and what the next step up or below them would be without descriptive and possibly negative division titles like Novice or Recreational?

We know that many (perhaps most) amateur players don't really like the Rec and Novice names but no one has come up with alternative words either that are satisfactory. Extending the old numbering system (Am1, Am2, etc.) would be discriminatory/flawed because Am women would mostly be in Am4, Am5 and Am6. Maybe by getting started with the Master color divisions, the logic will eventually break down the resistance in the CompCom to broaden their use.

 

[Improbably]

That makes too much sense.

However just in case it ever happens I'm going to get a head start on using purple as a pejorative when trash talking my buddies.

 

[shanker156]

By language, I mean having an intelligent conversation with someone my own age, as opposed to having infantile conversations with people much younger than me and with whom I have nothing in common. I'm not at all interested in playing with Gen Xers or millennials, as I find most of them to be empty-headed and superficial. I just want to play with the old guys, and if I can't, I want the option to withdraw and get a refund. What did you think, that I was some sort of racist?

I don't mind the Gen Xers and millennials. It's the Jews that I can't play with. I think they should have their own division. By the way, you left your mustache at last weeks meeting

 

[biscoe]

My interpretation is that, in advance, a TD must offer all divisions (unless he announces a restriction), but once registration closes, he can close any divisions with less than 4 players. Otherwise, I'm not sure what the "less than 4" provisions applies to. He can't know in advance, and for many events he can't know until 15 minutes before the players' meeting.

That's what the TD can do. Not necessarily what he should do.

Our policy here is, if we end up with a division with 1 or 2 players, to meet with them and give them the option of moving. Sometimes, to lean on them a bit. But if someone paid the money and wants to play solo---why, I can't fathom---fine.

In practice, it often doesn't even get that far, as players in low-populated divisions will come to us and request a change. Sometimes an entire division evaporates. The touchy part is when there is a 4-person division, and 2 people request a change.

I agree that a TD shouldn't move players without consulting with them. If he's not going to provide that division, he ought to offer them the option of withdrawal, or transfer to any other division for which they qualify.

this is how i do it as well.

 

[JeremyKShort]

I've ran one sanctioned tourney (an am event) and I had two players in divisions by themselves. The guy in grandmasters approached and told me to move him to advanced, he had some friends playing there so he was happy to move there. The lady in int women's was really insistent on staying there and not moving to rec with the other women. It was her first tournament and I tried to convince her to move. Rec played a slightly different layout so I couldn't even put her on the card with the other women. Looking at her score, she probably needed to move.

 

[Oldstump]

looking for feedback

after the Bowling Green Experience this morning my thoughts came back around to this:



Thinking strongly about this concept in NW Michigan..

4-5 courses over as many days. Age protected Divisions only WITH NO ENTRY CAPS!

Becoming increasingly jaded with how organizers view age protected divisions..


A different course each round (we have 24 hole courses here for some reason) played Tue - Sat.

Thoughts?

 

[Cgkdisc]

You'll have the first Master Pro Worlds in Grand Rapids near there this year. Unless a future event in that area is an age based major of some sort, it may be more difficult to draw the same number of age based players as Bowling Green due to its more central location.

 

[sisyphus]

Thoughts?

As a 55 year old with only 5 years' experience, I'd say the pros and cons of a weeklong event are the cost for out of towners. Travel, hotel, entry fees, food, etc. make it a $600-$1000 investment, and mean time off from work. So the big events (Worlds, etc) have to make it REALLY appealing with players' packs, and so on. Which really means you'll need to do a TON of work building up sponsors, etc.

BG Ams has evolved over 40 years to have 'extra' events and attractions for the folks who make it the one big trip of the year, but regional players like me can get there and stay just two nights, if we want.

Just my opinion, but if you don't already have a popular event started, I'd suggest testing the waters with a one day B-tier (two rounds of 24, for instance), and if you make it really attractive, it might grow to a weekend A-tier, THEN stretch back into the earlier days in the week.