Naming of divisions

[Three Putt]

I'm just wondering when the definitions of "competition" and "tournament" got watered down to mean "everybody gets to play with who they want, and only compete against people they deem fair to compete against"

The thing is - I don't begrudge anybody choosing their preferred card for a casual round, or a tag round with bets, or hell even a PDGA League (since divisions are mostly pointless there anyway). However the participation trophy mentality around disc golf TOURNAMENTS is really silly. Ams expect to get more than they paid in, people are unhappy if they're not the favorite to win a 4-person division, etc.

Rather than constantly trying to re-define a word that people understand globally, maybe some golfers should ask themselves if tournament competition is really for them? There's so many more avenues to compete at the level of seriousness that you desire, maybe a PDGA sanctioned event isn't the right place if you need so many accommodations...

I think it goes back to the painfully small sport running one-size-fits-all tournaments. Some people went to PDGA event to compete. Some went more for the recreation/social aspect. Everybody had to get together at the same place/time, though. There were not enough of us to do it differently. Some things were done to cater to the recreation/social golfers because they were a pool of money that the competitive golfers could tap into, either through the payout via the wholesale/retail differential or through vending. Some thing from those days have lived on in a "this is how we do it" sort of mentality.

One of those things is me as an old guy getting to sort-of pick and choose which group of guys I want to tag along with that day. In a strictly competitive environment, I can't do that. However if it's a strictly competitive environment, I wouldn't be there.

 

[Jay Dub]

Winning NCAA March Madness is not really much better than the NIT because #1 in College B-Ball is like winning MA1 versus the NBA title. And winning the NIT is more like MA2. Should we ignore winners of Division 2 and 3 B-ball titles? Is winning a High School State championship like winning MA3 or MA4 in an A-tier?

While winning something called the World Title in any sport should probably be reserved for only the top open pro level, and really have competitors from around the world, not primarily the U.S., there's certainly a place for other kinds of championships that bring together the best in some category however you slice it whether by age, gender, country, Pro/Am (suspect), league level and even ratings.

Winning a competition for the Red level title, and repeating, is more of an accomplishment than most of the other slices because everyone in that competition is verified to be at your skill level that year, presuming no one below red level is allowed to enter that division. And if limited to age 40+, there are likely few if any phenoms quickly rocketing up the skill ladder on their way to white, blue and beyond. And fully agree there's no need to call it a World title, just a Championship moniker of some sort.

Without looking it up can you name one of those winners? I think most people already do ignore them.

 

[Hyzflip10]

I'm just wondering when the definitions of "competition" and "tournament" got watered down to mean "everybody gets to play with who they want, and only compete against people they deem fair to compete against"

The thing is - I don't begrudge anybody choosing their preferred card for a casual round, or a tag round with bets, or hell even a PDGA League (since divisions are mostly pointless there anyway). However the participation trophy mentality around disc golf TOURNAMENTS is really silly. Ams expect to get more than they paid in, people are unhappy if they're not the favorite to win a 4-person division, etc.

Rather than constantly trying to re-define a word that people understand globally, maybe some golfers should ask themselves if tournament competition is really for them? There's so many more avenues to compete at the level of seriousness that you desire, maybe a PDGA sanctioned event isn't the right place if you need so many accommodations...

Someday the disc golf world will be large and self supporting enough to accomodate this view of "only the best of the best", but we aren't there right now. When the AM pools are basically there to support the pro side of things in many tournaments, it probably isn't a good idea to try and exclude them.

The PDGA obviously thinks that tournament are for these players, and the players who play in the age protected divisions, so I have no idea where you are coming from telling people who are playing by rules not to play tournaments?

 

[Cgkdisc]

Without looking it up can you name one of those winners? I think most people already do ignore them.

I think point is that these titles are important benchmarks for the participants, even if no one else cares about them except their friends, families and schools. Even our World title from a PGA perspective is maybe like their NCAA Championship. Yet our Worlds, still with mostly U.S. players, is an important life benchmark for our participants, even if few care outside our sport.

 

[Putt for D'oh]

Winning a competition for the Red level title, and repeating, is more of an accomplishment than most of the other slices because everyone in that competition is verified to be at your skill level that year, presuming no one below red level is allowed to enter that division. And if limited to age 40+, there are likely few if any phenoms quickly rocketing up the skill ladder on their way to white, blue and beyond. And fully agree there's no need to call it a World title, just a Championship moniker of some sort.

??

I don't want to sound like Sonicguy but being serious enough to want to compete in a National or World level championship years in a row and being stagnant at a Red level rating? 825? Especially under 50... that would take effort to stay that low.

In my experience there are many 40+ guys starting to pickup the sport. Athletic people looking to play a relaxing game and also compete and we start out around the 880 range and within a few tournaments are 915-930 range. PLENTY of 40+ guys "rocketing up the skill ladder".

 

[DavidSauls]

Winning NCAA March Madness is not really much better than the NIT because #1 in College B-Ball is like winning MA1 versus the NBA title. And winning the NIT is more like MA2. Should we ignore winners of Division 2 and 3 B-ball titles? Is winning a High School State championship like winning MA3 or MA4 in an A-tier?

While winning something called the World Title in any sport should probably be reserved for only the top open pro level, and really have competitors from around the world, not primarily the U.S., there's certainly a place for other kinds of championships that bring together the best in some category however you slice it whether by age, gender, country, Pro/Am (suspect), league level and even ratings.

Winning a competition for the Red level title, and repeating, is more of an accomplishment than most of the other slices because everyone in that competition is verified to be at your skill level that year, presuming no one below red level is allowed to enter that division. And if limited to age 40+, there are likely few if any phenoms quickly rocketing up the skill ladder on their way to white, blue and beyond. And fully agree there's no need to call it a World title, just a Championship moniker of some sort.

Age- and gender-protected divisions in disc golf recognize inherent biological handicaps in those groups. (The Pro/Am split is a little iffier, being essentially an elective status.)

College football divisions recognize inherent handicaps in the size of schools, and thus ability to compete with larger, better-funded ones. High schools recognize the handicaps of age, and lack of recruiting. Within high schools, there are division championships based on school sizes.

These are all "the best of...…" a group that is otherwise limited, in some way.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Age- and gender-protected divisions in disc golf recognize inherent biological handicaps in those groups. (The Pro/Am split is a little iffier, being essentially an elective status.)

College football divisions recognize inherent handicaps in the size of schools, and thus ability to compete with larger, better-funded ones. High schools recognize the handicaps of age, and lack of recruiting. Within high schools, there are division championships based on school sizes.

These are all "the best of...…" a group that is otherwise limited, in some way.

These slices are still blunt instruments in terms of getting players/teams in the same skill range competing versus some form of ratings that's more precise if still not perfect. Even the open divisions in colleges and high schools do not provide an even playing field due to recruiting and facilities disparities.

 

[Cgkdisc]

??

I don't want to sound like Sonicguy but being serious enough to want to compete in a National or World level championship years in a row and being stagnant at a Red level rating? 825? Especially under 50... that would take effort to stay that low.

In my experience there are many 40+ guys starting to pickup the sport. Athletic people looking to play a relaxing game and also compete and we start out around the 880 range and within a few tournaments are 915-930 range. PLENTY of 40+ guys "rocketing up the skill ladder".

Anecdotal evidence. Actual stats show the average increase in rating for your first three years as a PDGA propagator is about 30 points at all ages. Again, that's an average for players actively playing sanctioned tournaments/leagues. Considering that color ranges are 50 points wide, very few players will be "rocketing through" especially when the stats also show it's all you can do to hang on to your rating after age 40 once you've peaked. Again, we're talking weekend warriors, not the more serious athletes who can aspire to even blue or gold level when starting after 40. The thing is, they'll start or quickly be playing in those colors, not white, red or green.

 

[Putt for D'oh]

Anecdotal evidence. Actual stats show the average increase in rating for your first three years as a PDGA propagator is about 30 points at all ages. Again, that's an average for players actively playing sanctioned tournaments/leagues. Considering that color ranges are 50 points wide, very few players will be "rocketing through" especially when the stats also show it's all you can do to hang on to your rating after age 40 once you've peaked. Again, we're talking weekend warriors, not the more serious athletes who can aspire to even blue or gold level when starting after 40. The thing is, they'll start or quickly be playing in those colors, not white, red or green.

I'm assuming those stats are cumulative, I would like to see what changes might there be looking at smaller increments of time as the sport has boomed the last few years. I guess on one hand I wouldn't be surprised if it were similar since more athletic types could be balanced by more of the fringe "that looks wacky enough for me to try" non-athletes that gravitate toward fringe sports.

I guess in one way I fit those stats going from 880 to 910 my first three years so there is the average 30 point gain on the dot, but at the same time I started over 40 and started at 880 which I felt was horrible.

 

[DavidSauls]

These slices are still blunt instruments in terms of getting players/teams in the same skill range competing versus some form of ratings that's more precise if still not perfect. Even the open divisions in colleges and high schools do not provide an even playing field due to recruiting and facilities disparities.

I'm not sure parity is the goal, of any of them.

The idea of MP50 is that by age 50, age has taken its toll on everyone. They aren't equal in skill, but they are all subject to that limitation.

In Division II football, all teams are limited by scholarships (and, I assume, other criteria). After that, they're not equal. Same with the high schools; there'll be a division of schools with under 600 attendance, in which every school has a smaller pool of players to draw from---a shared handicap. After that, they're unequal.

Ratings are great for what they do---allowing players of similar skill level to compete with each other.

 

[Cgkdisc]

I'm not sure parity is the goal, of any of them.

Really? Otherwise, why do any parsing? Just have MPO and FPO like several have promoted, or in the case of disc golf, include MA1 and FA1 to provide, uh... we all know why. A key reason for parsing is to spur participation, and in some cases, safety, i.e., when physical size is a factor in contact sports. Not sure there are any "natural" parsing methods, gender/age, as good as an effective method to group players by skill range.

 

[DavidSauls]

Really? Otherwise, why do any parsing? Just have MPO and FPO like several have promoted, or in the case of disc golf, include MA1 and FA1 to provide, uh... we all know why. A key reason for parsing is to spur participation, and in some cases, safety, i.e., when physical size is a factor in contact sports. Not sure there are any "natural" parsing methods, gender/age, as good as an effective method to group players by skill range.

I believe you've misread me.

 

[davetherocketguy]

The "M" in "MPO," "MA1," etc. stands for "mixed," no I
Generally we don't, though, because it's more fun to play with other women, we don't much care for getting our asses relentlessly kicked, and if we go by ratings, I play either FPO with committed pro women who are courteous, know the rules, act like pros, etc., or. now my whole afternoon is spent coddling the hurt feelings of a grown-ass adult man.

(This is not made-up. I have played a LOT of tourneys as the only FPO player, and the TD looked at ratings and threw me on a card with three or four rec dudes. Almost every time, one of them was a problem man-child like I described above.)

Why are you putting any emotional effort into coddling anyone? I get a pissy individual on my card and I stop talking to them. Eff them...Not my circus not my monkeys. Just let them wade in their own self pity and walk away.

 

[Nova P]

Why are you putting any emotional effort into coddling anyone? I get a pissy individual on my card and I stop talking to them. Eff them...Not my circus not my monkeys. Just let them wade in their own self pity and walk away.

If they can keep it to themselves, I do. It's when they externalize it and bring others down that I speak up.

 

[abarker]

Well the thread about transgender players got me thinking about how we named our divisions...

Mpo isnt really "M", women can play there too. FPO isnt really "O", cause men can not play there.

MPO should be "PO"
FPO should be "FP"
MP40 should be "O40"
FP40 is fine
MP50 should be "O50"
FP50 is ifne

etc.

Thoughts?

Completely agree. Your acronyms make much more sense. Open means the division is open to everyone regardless of age or ability (if you don't have ability you will lose, but technically, you are eligible to play). FP restricts males, and all of the age restrictive divisions are open to only those people that are in the age division least the age.

 

[davetherocketguy]

There are basically 2 types of tournament players out there. Pro and Am. I think the first letter designation needs to be either A or P. The next designation should be whatever qualifier or limitation assigned to that division. MPO should just be "P" because any pro at any level can play in it. MP40 ought to be "P40" and so on. The Am divisions would be like this...MA1 should just be A1. The ladies advanced would be AF1, juniors would be something like AJ18, etc. As mentioned earlier, the current designation of "MA" confuses a lot of people into thinking it is "Men's amateur" as opposed to "mixed armature." I've had to explain that many times.

 

[Steve West]

There are basically 2 types of tournament players out there. Pro and Am.

I think there are three types of players. Pros (those who are paid to play), Amateurs who hope to win cash, and Amateurs who don't need to win cash.

 

[_MTL_]

We use the word professional way too much in disc golf.

I am, by definition, a professional. My lifetime earnings are $7,603.02. I don't remember every getting two pennies in a payout, but whatever.

There is no way that anyone should be able to call themselves a professional if in 15 years of competing they've earned half of what a part time salary would earn in 1 year.

IMHO, we only have about 30 - 50 professionals in disc golf.

Those of us that play for cash but work should be referred to as semi-professionals at best.

 

[Geer_Boggles]

??

I don't want to sound like Sonicguy but being serious enough to want to compete in a National or World level championship years in a row and being stagnant at a Red level rating? 825? Especially under 50... that would take effort to stay that low.

In my experience there are many 40+ guys starting to pickup the sport. Athletic people looking to play a relaxing game and also compete and we start out around the 880 range and within a few tournaments are 915-930 range. PLENTY of 40+ guys "rocketing up the skill ladder".

I think it depends on your region too. 880 in Maine is top tier MA2 and mid-low tier MA1. For someone like myself, that is a great rating. I started this year (first year with a PDGA #) at 758. I've played 4 sanctioned tournaments this year each with 2 rounds and as of 8/13 ratings publishing I should be around an 805 (800 was my goal for the year). Our top top pro level tier players are between 950-999 right now.

I'm 31 years old and when I started I knew my rating was terrible, I had a bad first tournament but knew I could play better. Regardless there are kids aged 10-12 in this state who regularly compete in the MA2 division and place top 10. The 12 year old often winning most events against grown ass men. They are rated 850-895 and play generally well above their rating. Age in my books doesn't make a difference unless we are talking about amateur/pro transitions (of course that barrier is also coming down with the 16 YO who blasted people at finnish nationals).

The hard part with ratings is that they are specifically region based or player based depending on who is playing. What we consider here in Maine, may not necessarily be the same in California. Or, our ratings could be inaccurate and we could be on par with California. There are a lot of variables in play to just say that "anyone under 50 who isn't 825 yet is horrendous".

 

[wolfmandragon]

...

I'm interested in learning more about this system. Can you enlighten me (or share some links that explain this well)?

...

I could point you to the rule section of IHRA, but I am taking ideas from multiple different classes... and the rules sound like a lawyer wrote them... if I had not grew up around racers, it would be almost useless for me to read.

Overly short answer is that if one break ones index, one is dq'ed. Different classes have different rules... and different indexes.

I will try to put aside an hour or two this weekend to write up a short article explaining the overview of the concept. My super short answer has a lot to be desired.

If you want a head start, look at the rules for bracket racing and for the IHRA super series, and I will clearify asap.