Is "Recreational" misleading?

[DanJon]

I'm not good enough to be an Open player, but do I like to play Open in the local tournaments sometimes, because I enjoy the experience more.

I used to pay a good chunk of money just to compete in other organized sporting events, with no hope of cashing or prizes, so I guess it's easier to transition that into competitive disc golf.

That and most of the TD's around here won't let me play anything but Advanced or Open.

But as other people mentioned, often times you'll have a better experience with your fellow cardmates in higher divisions.

 

[Carolina Crushers]

There IS no required MINIMUM rating for ANY division, only a rating cap.

So you played in the wrong division for your skill level and won because you beat a bunch of other people playing in the wrong division for their skill level, because everyone who SHOULD have been playing in the division based on their skill level were playing in the wrong division. That's not a problem with the division breaks; that's an ego problem.

Technically, there are minimum requirements, according to PDGA''s "suggested Minimum ratings" on their Ratings and points factors sheet. However most Non-Pdga members won't know this info.

 

[Carolina Crushers]

 

[philstine]

Technically, there are minimum requirements, according to PDGA''s "suggested Minimum ratings" on their Ratings and points factors sheet. However most Non-Pdga members won't know this info.

"Suggested minimum ratings" are exactly that: "suggested."

You DO understand the difference between a "suggestion" and a "requirement," don't you?

 

[Carolina Crushers]

"Suggested minimum ratings" are exactly that: "suggested."

You DO understand the difference between a "suggestion" and a "requirement," don't you?

LOL, dude just move on.... I know you been a member on this site for all of 4 months now and are good and Pro and understand rules better than veteran players. So you will have to forgive guys like myself who post actual facts (pdga rating sheet) instead of screaming opinions (generally wrong) to others...

 

[Carolina Crushers]

Before posting back, why don't you link your PDGA number to your profile, so we can see the many events you have played in to learn these great suggested guidelines..... or our you just a typical little troll!

and yes I understand what suggested means, which is why I tried to play in my suggested division when I played a tournament.

 

[ejvogie]

Technically, there are minimum requirements, according to PDGA''s "suggested Minimum ratings" on their Ratings and points factors sheet. However most Non-Pdga members won't know this info.

...and yes I understand what suggested means, which is why I tried to play in my suggested division when I played a tournament.

No, technically there aren't. I was able to play a PDGA Major in 2010, registering as MA1 while still rated as MA4. And Open is just that. Open to anyone who wants to have their a$$ handed to them.

Your first post seems to contradict your second...

 

[Carolina Crushers]

No, technically there aren't. I was able to play a PDGA Major in 2010, registering as MA1 while still rated as MA4. And Open is just that. Open to anyone who wants to have their a$$ handed to them.

Your first post seems to contradict your second...

My point was, and still is..... the PDGA has guidelines to go by, whether they are "required or suggested".... People should use these rating guidelines to allow better competition. Not everyone in the "Rec" division sandbags, just like not everyone in higher divisions have an "ego problem" as the guy i was responding to stated in his original post.
In the end it doesn't even really matter, I would guess 90% of the people heated over this debate will 1) never become a PDGA member and 2) never play in a pdga event. So talking in this tread is a waste of time.....

 

[ejvogie]

Agreed that, in general, competition would be better if people played in their properly rated division. You'll always have someone on fire playing WAY above their rating, or someone whose rating hasn't yet caught up with their skill level, but IMO the rating scale works. Not perfectly, but well enough.

 

[Stardoggy]

Force people to play their ratings, and it doesn't matter what you call the divisions.

All those w/o a rating play the highest available Open or Am division, with exceptions for age protection.

Easy peazy, lemon squeezy.

The only thing this may require is more frequent ratings updates.

 

[DavidSauls]

I believe any TD who wants, can do that now, by offering the color-coded, ratings-based divisions.

 

[DavidSauls]

My point was, and still is..... the PDGA has guidelines to go by, whether they are "required or suggested".... .

As I read it, those minimum suggested ratings only apply to pros, not ams. The am divisions merely have a cap; you might infer that the cap for the next division down implies a minimum, but it doesn't say that.

 

[DavidSauls]

Force people to play their ratings, and it doesn't matter what you call the divisions.

All those w/o a rating play the highest available Open or Am division, with exceptions for age protection.

Easy peazy, lemon squeezy.

The only thing this may require is more frequent ratings updates.

Not quite as easy as you make it sound:

* You might reduce attendance, since some people will be prohibited in playing in the division of their choice, or friends playing together if their ratings aren't close, or whatever. The evidence is that plenty of people are happy playing about their rating, for whatever reason; I surmise they'd be less happy if not allowed to.
* Much more checking of ratings for the TDs to do, particularly on late morning-of registrants. As it is now, it's rare that we deal with someone who's rating is too high (and we don't have to check at all of MA1).
* What if only 1 person in a given rating range registers? Force him to play in a division of 1?
* Much harder to get first-timers to try the tournament experience, if it demands being put in the toughest division.

 

[Future_Primitive]

hmmmmm

how about requiring PDGA membership to play PDGA events, and let rating/age sort you into what field you should play, instead of it being more of a "guideline."

All those w/o a rating play the highest available Open or Am division, with exceptions for age protection.

It would be nice if the PDGA took a good long look at non-PDGA members playing in PDGA sanctioned events. I wonder if it might be best to simply make a special division strictly for non-members. Make it lower in cost and trophy only to discourage any so called bagging. This gives them a chance to experience a PDGA event and get some rated rounds. If they like it they can always become members and have an idea what divisions they should sign up for moving forward. If they don't then they are not out much for a day of disc golfing.

 

[biscoe]

solutions in search of a problem once again. can anyone direct me to the results of an event/events where this "problem" actually occurred? it sure isn't happening around here.

 

[Three Putt]

To me, the entire bagging concept was created because the sport started with a Professional division and added Amateur later. Amateur was added by the people running the sport at the time (i.e. Professional disc golfers) as a way to attract more players to PDGA event with the idea that EVERYBODY who joined as an Amateur would play Am for a short time and then join the Pro divisions. When that didn't happen and people stayed in the Amateur divisions, the idea of sandbagging was created as a social pressure feature to try to force people to do what the people running the sport wanted them to do instead of what the player actually wanted to do.

As Amateur play expanded and there were more divisions, the sandbagging concept was ingrained in what we do and filtered down. I've been playing disc golf for over 20 years and I don't think I've ever been to an event where someone wasn't accused of sandbagging. It's probably run a lot more people away from disc golf that it has resulted in making someone who doesn't want to move up a division move up. I could be wrong, but I've always seen it as a made-up problem that did more harm than good.

 

[elmexdela]

And there's the Dunning-Kruger effect.

You link it like I dont know what it is.

 

[Three Putt]

Lol at the Dunning-Kruger effect. My ineptitude at disc golf shows up on the scorecard. Every. Single. Time.

I think I'm going to open a disc golf business to cater to my kind. I'm going to call it "Bottom Card Disc Golfers." I'm only going to sell Stingrays. What do you think?

 

[NegaSnapples]

I got accused of Sand Bagging in the very first tournament I ever played. I had no PDGA number, a $20 Innova bag, and most of my discs I had either found or they were given to me. But it didn't stop the Rec players from accusing me of sandbagging :doh:

 

[DavidSauls]

Accusations of sandbagging are commonplace, both in jest and in ignorance. Actual sandbagging is rare.