Lloyd Weema article in Ultiworld Disc Golf

[ThrowBot]

It's not that we should change to be like other sports - it's that Open has never meant what you think/feel it does (in the context of sporting events)

It's untrue to say that it's never meant that, because it did mean that in MPO for as long as I've known or cared about disc golf tournaments.

Ironically you mention Nate Perkins in this as an example. He was in the room when the vote passed and was part of the standing ovation thrilled about it.

Sadly unsurprising that Nate Perkins was part of the crowd eager to poop in Weema's breakfast cereal. That's a pretty solid argument against the rule change, in my opinion.

 

[perklc]

Not sure why it's ironic. I acknowledge that the rule as it currently stands won't have any impact at all, aside from on the sub-900 rated players themselves. It just makes the pros look like snobs.

What will impact players like Nate is expanding on it, like some in this thread have suggested, to include sub-950 or sub-1000 players as well.

That's the irony - that a player like Nate is giving a standing ovation to a rule that, if expanded, would hurt his own ability to be a touring pro.

 

[Steve West]

If the problem was that sub-XXX players are in the same card as top players, why isn't the solution to change the rules about how first round cards are set up?

 

[sidewinder22]

If the problem was that sub-XXX players are in the same card as top players, why isn't the solution to change the rules about how first round cards are set up?

In the case of a division that is large enough to be in multiple pools or sections, the players should be split by rating (example: 72 highest ratings in Pool A and 72 lowest ratings in Pool B) and then randomized within each pool for the first round.

 

[DiscgolfStu]

In the case of a division that is large enough to be in multiple pools or sections, the players should be split by rating (example: 72 highest ratings in Pool A and 72 lowest ratings in Pool B) and then randomized within each pool for the first round.

If the problem was that sub-XXX players are in the same card as top players, why isn't the solution to change the rules about how first round cards are set up?

^Was thinking about this yesterday, it seems like the simplest solution.

 

[biscoe]

That's the irony - that a player like Nate is giving a standing ovation to a rule that, if expanded, would hurt his own ability to be a touring pro.

Myopia is a fairly common condition on tour...

 

[biscoe]

In the case of a division that is large enough to be in multiple pools or sections, the players should be split by rating (example: 72 highest ratings in Pool A and 72 lowest ratings in Pool B) and then randomized within each pool for the first round.

Because the higher rated players obviously should have an advantage prior to a single shot being thrown in an event? :\

 

[JC17393]

Because the higher rated players obviously should have an advantage prior to a single shot being thrown in an event? :\

What sidewinder posted is verbatim how the Competition Manual dictates a field should be split over multiple pools (1.06.B.3), and it should solve the issue for those poor put-upon pros who don't want to play with the unskilled folks...when there are pools.

Problem, from their perspective, is that most elite events aren't split into multiple pools. They're run on tee times where everyone is essentially in the same pool and then first round groups are randomized from there. A clever TD might work around it by setting up morning and afternoon flights of tee times, and calling them different pools even though they're all playing the same course. Say Pool B tees from 9am to 11:50am then Pool A (top 72 players by rating) tees from 12:30pm to 3:20pm. "Problem" solved.

 

[robdeforge]

It's untrue to say that it's never meant that, because it did mean that in MPO for as long as I've known or cared about disc golf tournaments.

Could you sign up for an NT event without ever having played a round of disc golf before this rule change?

Sadly unsurprising that Nate Perkins was part of the crowd eager to poop in Weema's breakfast cereal. That's a pretty solid argument against the rule change, in my opinion.

lol what do you have against Perkins?


also nice slippery slope fallacies yall

 

[Odedge]

Could you sign up for an NT event without ever having played a round of disc golf before this rule change?

I believe you need to have a certified "Official Status" to play in a NT event, but I think that is it. That's just a test to make sure you know the rules.

 

[Aylien]

and now a 900 rating or higher

 

[ballgolfconvert]

Myopia is a fairly common condition on tour...

Actually some people believe in doing what is right, regardless on the direct affect on them. Most people put their selfish interest first. I commend him his for his honesty and self sacrifice.

 

[wolfmandragon]

Actually some people believe in doing what is right, regardless on the direct affect on them. Most people put their selfish interest first. I commend him his for his honesty and self sacrifice.

Bull patties

 

[robdeforge]

I believe you need to have a certified "Official Status" to play in a NT event, but I think that is it. That's just a test to make sure you know the rules.

That's the point I was getting at, as well as the fact that you need to be a Current PDGA member. So just to clarify for everybody: there used to be 2 requirements to play in NT or worlds. Now there are 3.

It. Was. Never. Open. To. EVERYONE. It was, and still is, open to everyone*
*that can meet meet all the requirements.

 

[ejvogie]

Actually some people believe in doing what is right, regardless on the direct affect on them. Most people put their selfish interest first. I commend him his for his honesty and self sacrifice.

You're assuming he's thought this through completely and knows all of the unintended consequences.

 

[cheesethin]

That's the point I was getting at, as well as the fact that you need to be a Current PDGA member. So just to clarify for everybody: there used to be 2 requirements to play in NT or worlds. Now there are 3.



It. Was. Never. Open. To. EVERYONE. It was, and still is, open to everyone*

*that can meet meet all the requirements.

$75 for Pro membership, and $10 for the open book, take as long as you want, test.

So $85 and some reading.

They're not really what we mean by 'eligibility criteria' are they? Why not include 'must be able to navigate to venue' and 'must be in possession of shoes and a disc'. [emoji3]

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

 

[DavidSauls]

While we're being literal absolutists about "Open", we could do the same about "Professional" and whittle the field to about a dozen people.

 

[Hampstead]

Actually some people believe in doing what is right, regardless on the direct affect on them. Most people put their selfish interest first. I commend him his for his honesty and self sacrifice.

 

[davetherocketguy]

While we're being literal absolutists about "Open", we could do the same about "Professional" and whittle the field to about a dozen people.

Agreed. The term "professional" for 99.9% of the "professional" disc golfers out there is a joke.

 

[mojorooks]

Agreed. The term "professional" for 99.9% of the "professional" disc golfers out there is a joke.

One disc I found had the guys PDGA number on it so I looked up this 'professional'. He had earned winnings of about $2000 in the past 5 years. :\

In a disc golf tournament 'professional' means playing for money. 'Amateur' means playing for stuff. Any where else, 'professional' means you get paid for what you do, which would be the few people who play for Discraft, Innova etc.