general pdga rating question - division choice

[Brall]

this question is only directed for players that have played quite a few tournaments and have a pdga rating that reflects their correct skill level.

why is it that there could be arguments over 'who' should play 'what' division if the player is playing in the right division according to their pdga rating?

Pro - 970 +
Adv - < 970
Int - < 935
Rec - < 900
Nov - < 850

and by this, i'm only referring to an incident like; Mr. Smith has an 895 rating, signed up for Rec, takes heat because so-and-so believes Mr. Smith should be in Int.

the only thing i can come up with is that the pdga rating scale is a 'suggestion' as to where you should play. and if Mr. Smith constantly wins Rec tournaments in the area and maintains a rating under 900, his peers may push him to go to the next level to give others a chance.

the reason i ask is that i saw a few times on this site where people were called out for playing too low even though their rating showed they chose the correct division.

(there are a ton of threads about ratings/divisions, but i could not find any thread asking this kind of question. my appologies if i missed it and this has already been posted)

 

[biscoe]

2 things:
anyone who succeeds in any division not mpo is always labelled a "bagger" by someone.

the pdga ratings breaks when originally set did not mirror the divisions players were playing in of their own volition, most stayed where they already were playing. (moving to "intermediate" when you had been playing "advanced" would've been like going from third grade to second in some players eyes) this has continued as newer players have moved through the ranks.

 

[craigg]

Generally, there is significant overlap between divisions - which could be a common source for sandbagging claims. The way the ratings breaks are set up - those overlaps are unavoidable.

If you look at any set of event results, you will find scores in ANY division will have a spread of between 9-14 strokes per round from the top scores to the bottom. When the scoring spread across ALL divisions is usually in the 25-30 stroke per round range - having ratings breaks that average 4-6 strokes per round means that every divisions scores will overlap the one above it.

 

[Cgkdisc]

When enough players play up a division as occurs in some areas, it lowers the rating average of the higher division. That allows some of the lower rated players entering it to win prizes. They then point to a lower rated player with the same rating as themselves who wins the next division down as bagging even if that person is in the correct division based on rating. A player can't really camp out in a division lower than Advanced and keep winning because their rating will move them up into the next higher division within half a year if not before.

 

[Brall]

very good information. thank you.

let me rephrase this a bit and get another angle.

Mr. Smith has an 895 rating, signed up for Rec, takes heat because so-and-so believes Mr. Smith should be in Int.

should Mr. Smith not care if someone thinks he should move up to Int because he has lately been winning? ... Mr. Smith believes he is playing in the correct division per the pdga division/rating table.

in other words; should Mr. Smith give so-and-so the middle finger and stay in Rec, or, should Mr. Smith move up to Int to appease so-and-so?

 

[Brall]

from my minimal knowledge, i'd say Mr. Smith should give them the middle finger and shove the PDGA Divisions Ratings Table into their face.

however, if i were in that situation, i'd prob move up so i don't feel like everyone around me is thinking i'm sandbagging. conflict sucks and it'd ruin my game.

it's a tough decision. i'm just curious which is the more 'right' answer.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Depends on how important peer pressure and "being one of the guys" is in the way you make your decisions.

 

[biscoe]

mr. smith has a right to play in the division dictated by his rating. however, i personally find players camping out with multiple victories in lower am divisions to be in bad taste and also likely detrimental to their own game over the long term. no right answer exists and the situation differs from region to region.

top ams in north carolina do not equal top ams in new england for example...

 

[Brall]

thanks to all for the info!

 

[CoachQ]

Depends on how important peer pressure and "being one of the guys" is in the way you make your decisions.

I agree this ^^ is one thing to consider.

A player must also consider WHY they play tournaments...i.e. do they want to compete, win, have fun, get to know others, etc??? These could all be synonymous or they could be very independent.

As long as the participant is playing where they are comfortable (and allowed to within ratings), let them play.

Remember: People might yell "bagger" when a winner collects a prize, but nobody yells "donator" when the guy in DFL walks back to his car!

 

[chrishysell]

very good information. thank you.

let me rephrase this a bit and get another angle.



should Mr. Smith not care if someone thinks he should move up to Int because he has lately been winning? ... Mr. Smith believes he is playing in the correct division per the pdga division/rating table.

in other words; should Mr. Smith give so-and-so the middle finger and stay in Rec, or, should Mr. Smith move up to Int to appease so-and-so?

I'm curious what other people thank the purpose of the rec division is? I thought it was like a developmental division with ribbons for 1st. I've never offered it in my tournaments because I don't think I know any rec players that play in tournaments. Isn't a recreational tournament player a contradiction? Someone is going to read this as me being an ass but i'm serious.

 

[CoachQ]

Chris, I understand your point about the division name..."rec." I think this confusion or thought is consistent across the board. I think division titles should just be AM1, AM2, AM3, etc. I think it would more likely encourage players to play in their rating range and the other divisions might be used more. Rec is rarely offered around here and I dont think I have ever seen novice. I have an 888 rating and play Int even though I qualify for rec.

 

[Cgkdisc]

The Novice and Rec divisions are many times the largest Am divisions in places where they offer them. Check any of the IOS series events in Illinois or in Lexington, KY. IOS has dual one day events on weekends with some divisions on Sat and some on Sunday to handle the number of entrants. Example: http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=10893#Advanced

 

[3monsterboys]

i'd say don't move up till you are ready, play your rating it's O.K. on the other hand if you are winning rec division more then a handful of times, move up and give yourself a new challenge. your only as good as the people you play with.

 

[chrishysell]

The Novice and Rec divisions are many times the largest Am divisions in places where they offer them. Check any of the IOS series events in Illinois or in Lexington, KY. IOS has dual one day events on weekends with some divisions on Sat and some on Sunday to handle the number of entrants. Example: http://www.pdga.com/tournament-results?TournID=10893#Advanced

lame

974 rated rounds in the rec division

 

[Cgkdisc]

974 rated rounds in the rec division

Statistically expected about 1 in 20 rounds for players who consistently average 850-899 overall. So, out of 5 Rec players playing a 4-round event, at least one would be expected to shoot a round rated in the 970-985 range.

 

[chrishysell]

i'd say don't move up till you are ready, play your rating it's O.K. on the other hand if you are winning rec division more then a handful of times, move up and give yourself a new challenge. your only as good as the people you play with.

that's pretty much the point

I won't play where my rating tells me to because it isn't fair. My rating is lower than the rounds I typically shoot.

 

[chrishysell]

Statistically expected about 1 in 20 rounds for players who consistently average 850-899 overall. So, out of 5 Rec players playing a 4-round event, at least one would be expected to shoot a round rated in the 970-985 range.

don't you get all statistical on me

 

[1978]

very good information. thank you.

let me rephrase this a bit and get another angle.



should Mr. Smith not care if someone thinks he should move up to Int because he has lately been winning? ... Mr. Smith believes he is playing in the correct division per the pdga division/rating table.

in other words; should Mr. Smith give so-and-so the middle finger and stay in Rec, or, should Mr. Smith move up to Int to appease so-and-so?

As long as you are within the suggested ratings range, don't move up until you are ready. Just like you wouldnt throw a hole so a person on your card would win an event, you shouldnt feel obligated to move up in divisions so other less talented players can win. Its up to them to practice and improve, not up to you to move out.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc
Statistically expected about 1 in 20 rounds for players who consistently average 850-899 overall. So, out of 5 Rec players playing a 4-round event, at least one would be expected to shoot a round rated in the 970-985 range.
Hysell responded:
don't you get all statistical on me

It's relevant because this is another reason that triggers bagger talk. The the normal ratings range a player at any level can shoot in one round can be +/- 80-90 points from their rating depending on their consistency. But when players in a higher division see lower rated players shoot a hot score/rating it looks like they might be bagging when it's more likely normal variance in their performance. The lower a player's rating, the wider the range of performance expected on average. That 890 Rec player can just as easily throw an 835 round after their 974 round.