Idea about sanctioned play that I have had kicking around for a bit. (long post)

[AndyJB]

This really must be a regional thing. I just do not see it around here. Even our women's global event had mostly PDGA current players. When Junior divisions are offered it is even rare to see Juniors without PDGA numbers.

What is more often the occurrence here is people with PDGA numbers, but no rating. Often, those people actually play too high, rather than too low. Many tournaments I've seen new PDGA members play Advanced, probably because they are good at their local course but maybe have never played the tourney course, and see them put up 800 or worse rated rounds. Most times, they come back for more tournaments, buy in a more appropriate division vis a vis their skill level.

Again, that's probably just regional. But it shows there are a lot of players here in CO and the sport is growing.

 

[Three Putt]

This is funny...

"The Bagger" is always going to be a perceived problem. Am's are up and down, so a guy who is going to get crushed in INT next week might win by eight strokes in a one-day event when his putting was really on. Nobody cares when he doesn't cash the next week, but that eight stroke win that would have cashed in ADV is a big freaking humongous deal.

I know a lot of good players that are INT players. On a good day they can hang in ADV. On a bad day they can't cash in INT. They have skill but are inconsistent. Disc golf for some reason always expected you to play in the division you could cash in on a good day and had people play up. When it doesn't happen, everybody FREAKS OUT like it's the end of the World.

Wanna kill bagging? Open is cash. ADV is merch. Everybody else gets a trophy. OR...give INT merch but take a hatchet and cut the living **** out of the payout; make it like 45-50% payback so the payouts are way smaller. Then when that guy has a hot round he doesn't win very much and everybody can chillax.

 

[mashnut]

This really must be a regional thing. I just do not see it around here. Even our women's global event had mostly PDGA current players. When Junior divisions are offered it is even rare to see Juniors without PDGA numbers.

What is more often the occurrence here is people with PDGA numbers, but no rating. Often, those people actually play too high, rather than too low. Many tournaments I've seen new PDGA members play Advanced, probably because they are good at their local course but maybe have never played the tourney course, and see them put up 800 or worse rated rounds. Most times, they come back for more tournaments, buy in a more appropriate division vis a vis their skill level.

Again, that's probably just regional. But it shows there are a lot of players here in CO and the sport is growing.

The section I bolded is my experience too. Even at big tournaments I've never seen more than one or two people without ratings who seemed to be playing in too low a division, and they were almost always players in their first PDGA event so it's really tough to say they were in the wrong for starting out in a lower division. There are a lot more people playing up into divisions above their skill level then complaining about the "baggers" who are in the right division and beat them.

 

[Three Putt]

The section I bolded is my experience too. Even at big tournaments I've never seen more than one or two people without ratings who seemed to be playing in too low a division, and they were almost always players in their first PDGA event so it's really tough to say they were in the wrong for starting out in a lower division. There are a lot more people playing up into divisions above their skill level then complaining about the "baggers" who are in the right division and beat them.

I think where it happens (or appears to happen) is evident to people in local Clubs. You have player A; he seems to be pretty solid but he's not a joiner. He doesn't belong to the Club or the PDGA, but he's around enough that a lot of people have played with him. He doesn't travel but he has the local course down pat. That guy shows up for one day PDGA event as local course, pays an extra $10, signs up for Rec or Int and wipes the floor with the competition.

He doesn't have a number or a rating, so the perception is that he is "getting away" with something. The reality is that if he did have a number and played some events at courses he didn't have so much experience on, his rating probably would allow him to play Rec or Int. However, if he was a joiner and belonged to the Club and PDGA everyone could call him a bagger and he would play up because he would care. He's not a joiner and he doesn't care what you think, so calling him a bagger has no effect.

These guys really, really irritate the Club guys because a) they play locally and enjoys the fruits of the Club's labor without contributing and b) they seem to be getting away with something by not having a PDGA #. So he's a guy that people plugged into the traditional Club/PDGA scene really, really want to "get."

 

[AndyJB]

I agree with your point, but most clubs (MOST, not all) I have seen get very snooty when people who aren't part of the club do any sort of organized event. They are definitely the first to call someone out as a bagger.

It's tricky, because clubs do a lot of good for local courses. I've also seen many clubs (again, not all) be very hoity-toity when it comes to new players on their courses. It's tricky.

Luckily the club here has got rid of some of their jerkier members so it's not a problem in my region. Then again, they also do nothing to curb the problem I mentioned of players who are PDGA members but not rated playing too high. Club guys expect to win or at the least place high because it's their territory and they are the "serious"players. They get really wrapped around the axle when someone who is not one of them beats them at their own game on their own course.

That's a generalization, and it doesn't add much to the discussion at hand. But it is my experience.

 

[whentherainscome]

Many of the events I play have this disclaimer:

"To help address the sandbagging issues at the Michigan State Championships;
a. For the Am2/Am3 (including the women) divisions in Featured Events
, if there is a player that takes 1st or 2nd place and that player has never had a
PDGA membership the Featured Event will deduct from that player's payouts
$35 to cover the cost of buying them a PDGA membership.
b. The remaining $10 was initially paid by the player at entry.
c. The last missing $5 is because the MDGO is an Affiliate Club.
d. Non-current PDGA members do not apply."

It gets put into effect fairly often.

 

[AndyJB]

Does it work? Or do people still cry sandbagging?

How many of those who win memberships continue to play?

 

[mball1684]

To help address the sandbagging issues at the Michigan State Championships, a motion was made and the Motion was passed:
a. For the Am2/Am3 (including the women) divisions in Featured Events, if there is a player that takes 1st or 2nd place and that player has never had a PDGA membership the Featured Event will deduct from that player's payouts $35 to cover the cost of buying them a PDGA membership.
b. The remaining $10 was initially paid by the player at entry.
c. The last missing $5 is because the MDGO is an Affiliate Club.
d. Non-current PDGA members do not apply.
e. The MDGO will reimburse $17 to the FE to help cover any loss.
f. It is HEAVILY stressed that this needs to be advertised so the player base is aware of this prior to the event.

This was passed to address the issue of players not having player ratings. Even if they are not current, the TD does get a file from the PDGA that includes the player's rating.


So this is what I was talking about. It has been adopted for the Michigan State series events. I think something like this could work on a bigger scale

Good idea!

 

[Jacques]

With that being said, do we need another option for people without a PDGA number that want to play sanctioned events?

We do. Host a tournament and sanction with the SN. $2/player, nothing to join and you automatically qualify for the year end championships where the sanctioning fees get returned to the players.

 

[Three Putt]

I agree with your point, but most clubs (MOST, not all) I have seen get very snooty when people who aren't part of the club do any sort of organized event. They are definitely the first to call someone out as a bagger.

It's tricky, because clubs do a lot of good for local courses. I've also seen many clubs (again, not all) be very hoity-toity when it comes to new players on their courses. It's tricky.

That was the point I was trying to make. The "bagger" and "play up" mentality is driven by Clubs. The guys without a PDGA # don't follow that mentality. That makes them a target of the Clubs, and the Clubs run a lot of the events. Things like using their payout to force them to join the PDGA is how the Clubs are going to "get" those guys they don't like.

It becomes like working at the grocery story when you are in high school and they tell you that you have to join the Union. I didn't really want to join anything, I just wanted a summer job. I don't think anybody should be forced to join anything.

 

[ru4por]

That was the point I was trying to make. The "bagger" and "play up" mentality is driven by Clubs. The guys without a PDGA # don't follow that mentality. That makes them a target of the Clubs, and the Clubs run a lot of the events. Things like using their payout to force them to join the PDGA is how the Clubs are going to "get" those guys they don't like.

It becomes like working at the grocery story when you are in high school and they tell you that you have to join the Union. I didn't really want to join anything, I just wanted a summer job. I don't think anybody should be forced to join anything.

I agree, but that does not address the percieved issue of bagging. In today's age, I am not sure what prevents clubs from keeping record of non PDGA players ratings and using them for future tournament division enforcement. I get that it is a bit of work to record and rate the round, but it is the clubs that have most of the issues.

 

[DavidSauls]

I think where it happens (or appears to happen) is evident to people in local Clubs. You have player A; he seems to be pretty solid but he's not a joiner. He doesn't belong to the Club or the PDGA, but he's around enough that a lot of people have played with him. He doesn't travel but he has the local course down pat. That guy shows up for one day PDGA event as local course, pays an extra $10, signs up for Rec or Int and wipes the floor with the competition.

He doesn't have a number or a rating, so the perception is that he is "getting away" with something. The reality is that if he did have a number and played some events at courses he didn't have so much experience on, his rating probably would allow him to play Rec or Int. However, if he was a joiner and belonged to the Club and PDGA everyone could call him a bagger and he would play up because he would care. He's not a joiner and he doesn't care what you think, so calling him a bagger has no effect.

These guys really, really irritate the Club guys because a) they play locally and enjoys the fruits of the Club's labor without contributing and b) they seem to be getting away with something by not having a PDGA #. So he's a guy that people plugged into the traditional Club/PDGA scene really, really want to "get."

If he's known to the club, the club or someone in it is running the event, and thus know how good he is, at least on his home course.....the TD can put him in an appropriate division.

The solution to bagging is pretty simple. (1) Run a PDGA event and comply with the ratings guidelines, and (2) have the fortitude to put any non-members into appropriate divisions, and (3) don't listen to anyone who played above his rating, and complained about properly-rated players in the same division.

No adjusted payouts, trophy-only, membership-as-prizes, or anything else required. That will pretty much eliminate the problem, unless a stranger with no discoverable tournament history wanders in.

 

[JC17393]

I agree, but that does not address the percieved issue of bagging. In today's age, I am not sure what prevents clubs from keeping record of non PDGA players ratings and using them for future tournament division enforcement. I get that it is a bit of work to record and rate the round, but it is the clubs that have most of the issues.

You're dead on correct. It's something easily handled by the club/TD, and it really wouldn't even take a lot of extra effort. If past events are PDGA, the records are there on the PDGA website. If a given player has played there or other PDGA events before, then their results are easy to find and their rounds easy to estimate ratings for (just look at similar scores by members in that event).

Only potential trouble spot is events with a good deal of walk-up traffic. It's harder to have info on hand and ready to go. But with pre-reg, there really shouldn't ever be an issue of a known player without a PDGA number being allowed to play a division which he's overqualified for (based on objective measures only).

 

[Tfire25]

that could be done but it's not necessary




i'm not following this logic




bull$hit. there is no evidence either assertion nor can i think of a valid argument for them.

We have differing opinions. I believe the pdga is growing the sport in the right direction. They aren't to invasive and the rules are pretty growth friendly.

I guess you have never been to a non sanctioned event where the baggers are ridiculous?

Do you not see the way tournaments are heading? All ams will eventually become trophy only IMO. And why would the pdga continue to allow non member participation when tournaments are going to fill with members?

All I'm saying is that it would be better for the pdga and for dg to start working towards this goal rather than saying it isn't going to happen. Can you imagine if the pdga just changed it all(trophy only, required membership) at once? It would kill them.

Right now they let Tds have a lot of power but it benifits them as well. They get to beta test things and collect data without much overhead.

I'm rambling, but I think you understand what I'm saying.

 

[jeverett]

Do you not see the way tournaments are heading? All ams will eventually become trophy only IMO. And why would the pdga continue to allow non member participation when tournaments are going to fill with members?

All I'm saying is that it would be better for the pdga and for dg to start working towards this goal rather than saying it isn't going to happen. Can you imagine if the pdga just changed it all(trophy only, required membership) at once? It would kill them.

Right now they let Tds have a lot of power but it benifits them as well. They get to beta test things and collect data without much overhead.

I'm rambling, but I think you understand what I'm saying.

I think you're understating the role of the TD here. TD's don't have "a lot of power", TD's have essentially *all* of the power, and all of the responsibility, too. The PDGA is essentially a sanctioning body, rather than an organizing body. Under the current model, giving TD's as much flexibility as possible is absolutely necessary, because in the end TD's don't need the PDGA to run events.

I mean, I can definitely imagine the PDGA instituting a method (beyond sanctioning an A-tier event) by which TD's have the option of restricting their events to members only. But mandating that for all events? Why on earth would the PDGA ever do that? All it serves is to reduce the potential income pool. Same with trophy-only. Giving TD's the option of trophy-only is great, but the minute it gets mandated there are suddenly fewer TD's wanting to sanction events, because there are plenty out there who like the Am-payout model just fine.

Edit: the only way I can see those kinds of changes mandated is the day when the PDGA goes "boots on the ground", and runs their own events with their own TD's.. and I don't think disc golf is there yet.

 

[scarpfish]

We do. Host a tournament and sanction with the SN. $2/player, nothing to join and you automatically qualify for the year end championships where the sanctioning fees get returned to the players.

That's not sanctioning. That's running a points series. Our statewide organization and a number of others do the exact same thing.

 

[Tfire25]

Edit: the only way I can see those kinds of changes mandated is the day when the PDGA goes "boots on the ground", and runs their own events with their own TD's.. and I don't think disc golf is there yet.

I agree with you completely. But that day will come. Basically where we are all disagreeing is where the game is at right now.

I like it the way it is but eventually all the tournaments are going to fill up really early. At that point, if I was the pdga, I would make an early registration for members only. This will lead to more memberships.

That's when the pdga needs to get boots on the ground. The op was asking how to fix bagging. I think more strict membership for tournaments is the answer. I might have gone off on a tangent about how I believe the pdga will fix this issue with their own growth.

You're right though. We aren't ready for all that yet. We will just have to embrace the growing pains.

 

[teemkey]

The big problem is in MA2 because, at least in my area, MA3 & MA4 are rarely offered (nor is FA2, btw). This means MA3 & MA4 rated players end up in a division that permits a 934 rating. Although most players above 900/800 play advanced MA1/FA1, it's not unusual to see a 150+ spread between the lowest and highest rated players in MA2. A 910+ player registered for MA2 would be called a bagger around here -- more a courtesy violation than a rules violation.

*Most* TDs don't care because MA2 fills super quick; in fact, I have seen TDs say they eliminated a division because it filled too slowly the year before.

The only solution I can see to this problem (if it is a problem) is for the PDGA to find some incentive for TDs to offer more divisions ... maybe they do, I don't know; but if they do, it's not effective.

 

[jeverett]

The big problem is in MA2 because, at least in my area, MA3 & MA4 are rarely offered (nor is FA2, btw). This means MA3 & MA4 rated players end up in a division that permits a 934 rating. Although most players above 900/800 play advanced MA1/FA1, it's not unusual to see a 150+ spread between the lowest and highest rated players in MA2. A 910+ player registered for MA2 would be called a bagger around here -- more a courtesy violation than a rules violation.

*Most* TDs don't care because MA2 fills super quick; in fact, I have seen TDs say they eliminated a division because it filled too slowly the year before.

The only solution I can see to this problem (if it is a problem) is for the PDGA to find some incentive for TDs to offer more divisions ... maybe they do, I don't know; but if they do, it's not effective.

I agree. In the last 4 years of playing events, I think I've seen a division below MA2 offered twice (total). The big/popular events even tend to drop MA2 (e.g. the Beaver State Fling) as well. Unfortunately, I think the bigger issue is total event size. With a max of ~80 players in a field, if events can still fill with fewer divisions, there is little incentive to offer more. Offering move divisions in this case probably comes down to splitting weekends, using multiple courses (i.e. much more elaborate/time-consuming events), or extra days (e.g. Friday-Sunday events).

 

[JC17393]

The big problem is in MA2 because, at least in my area, MA3 & MA4 are rarely offered (nor is FA2, btw). This means MA3 & MA4 rated players end up in a division that permits a 934 rating. Although most players above 900/800 play advanced MA1/FA1, it's not unusual to see a 150+ spread between the lowest and highest rated players in MA2. A 910+ player registered for MA2 would be called a bagger around here -- more a courtesy violation than a rules violation.

*Most* TDs don't care because MA2 fills super quick; in fact, I have seen TDs say they eliminated a division because it filled too slowly the year before.

The only solution I can see to this problem (if it is a problem) is for the PDGA to find some incentive for TDs to offer more divisions ... maybe they do, I don't know; but if they do, it's not effective.

The solution is the MA3/MA4 rated players should be demanding that MA3 or MA4 be offered. No sense in making the player(s) who belongs in the division out to be the bad guy(s).

PDGA Competition Manual
2.1 General
J. A Tournament Director may, by giving adequate public notice, restrict the divisions offered. Absent such notice, the Tournament Director shall offer for competition any division which has four or more players that are eligible and wishing to compete. Tournament Directors may offer divisions with less than four players at their discretion.

Please note I'm talking about local events of the C and maybe B-tier variety. Larger events that are A-tier or higher are a different animal all together.