Naming of divisions

[Geer_Boggles]

In response to the original proposal of division changes:

I'm in the ratings based division camp but I feel that women should have their own tier of those ratings based divisions. It's not for divisiveness, it's for parity. Unless we are talking about Paige Pierce or Jennifer Allen, most women don't have the distance of men and should not be forced to compete on that level. And regardless, it's just plain respectful.

I like playing against people better than me and seeing myself improve so I think those ratings divisions should be a broader range like 75 or more points instead of the typical 50. This would deter sandbaggers as it would be a requirement.

The measurement of the ratings upon tournament time would have to be settled though. As others mentioned, ratings change each month a sanctioned tournament has been completed. Maybe a ratings "lock" could be put in place once someone registers for an event so that regardless of changes that person can compete for what they signed up for. For example, someone rated 850 signed up for an event that ranges 800-875. 3 months later it's event time and that person has jumped up to 880 in that time frame, they would still be allowed to compete in the 800-875 division and vice versa.

Also, introductory tournaments for new players or players with a new number who begin competing would need to have a division to themselves in order to establish a semi-stable rating. I would say they either need to play 8-12 sanctioned rounds to establish a baseline before being assigned to a tier or play for a full calendar year whichever happens first. This would take the question that every single new player has ever asked out of the equation (which division should I start in?) and also give them an idea of where they sit and feel comfortable in.

 

[Geer_Boggles]

Also as a side note in relation to a couple comments regarding player's packs:

I understand that players have become entitled brats when it comes to players packs but I don't think of them as participation trophies. I think of them as;
A. A way for brands to get their name out there and put their products in people's hands that wouldn't normally buy them off the shelves.
B. A fun incentive to encourage people to keep coming back.

No players I've ever played with has said they only come to tournaments for the player's packs. Everyone comes to compete, regardless of the packs. I like them for the first reason I provided. I get to try new plastic that I normally wouldn't have bought on my own.

 

[DiscFifty]

....regardless of the (player) packs. I like them for the first reason I provided. I get to try new plastic that I normally wouldn't have bought on my own.

Nothing wrong with that at all, I just wish the PDGA would mandate we could opt out of player packs in return for a discount on the event fee.

 

[JC17393]

Nothing wrong with that at all, I just wish the PDGA would mandate we could opt out of player packs in return for a discount on the event fee.

Never going to happen, particularly at the levels of PDGA sanctioning where they require tournaments to give a player pack.

Additionally, when tournament directors are supplying player packs by making a bulk purchase of said items (discs, shirts, whatever), no one should be able to tell them they have to allow for players to skip out on paying for them. They're budgeting based on a certain percentage of what they buy going out the door on the day of the tournament. Forcing them to make it optional is only going to make it harder and/or more expensive to source the player pack items (lower quantities = higher cost per item). Besides, if you don't want your player pack item, especially if it is a disc, there's a pretty robust secondary market where you should be able to easily sell it at cost.

All that said, TDs are already allowed to offer a discounted entry fee for which the player foregoes all payout (player pack included) in order to just play for a trophy. Can't hurt to ask your local TD if they're willing to offer such a discount if full price is too high for your taste. They may say no, but that should be their prerogative as a TD. They're the ones putting in the work and in a lot of cases, fronting money to pull the event off.

 

[JTacoma03]

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.

I hear your argument, but I think it's due to other factors, namely logistics. It would be impossible to schedule a field that large if every school was in the same grouping. Plus, not everybody has the luxury of choosing their school, and it's not contained within a zero-sum system...i.e. there's not a hard cap on the number of schools in a particular set, it varies from place to place.

Contrast that with a disc golf tournament, where you're all playing for the same pot of money, just some people are demanding to play for a side pot. It's a zero sum game - if one player gets into a protected division, that counts towards the total and theoretically takes a spot away from an Open competitor to play for the prize.

 

[Three Putt]

Contrast that with a disc golf tournament, where you're all playing for the same pot of money, just some people are demanding to play for a side pot. It's a zero sum game - if one player gets into a protected division, that counts towards the total and theoretically takes a spot away from an Open competitor to play for the prize.

I was at an event a long time ago where there was a very heated conversation involving the amount of added cash that went to the Masters division as a notable Pro player who was in his late 30's was playing Masters (the age break was 35 then.) This rather notable pro player screamed at a group of us that he built disc golf, if it wasn't for him there wouldn't be any disc golf for us to play and we OWED him a big fat Master's payout.

I'm not sure how prevalent this idea that the older generation (who played for years when the turnouts were small and the payouts were flimsy) were owed something was in the creation of the Master's divisions in disc golf. Age protected competition is pretty common. It was something I heard mentioned back in the day, though.

Now that I'm old and I've spent a lot of years volunteering my time toward disc golf, the idea that anybody owes me anything for that time is laughable. If you want to be monetarily rewarded for your time, do something that pays. :|

 

[roblee]

I'm surprised that none's mentioned that the PDGA once offered 3 divisions in each amateur age category; Rec, Int, & Adv. I don't know when it started or when it ended. This from October 2001 Big Arms on the Brazos in Lubbock, TX.


Intermediate Masters (10)
Hide round ratings
Place
Name
PDGA#
Rating
Rd1
Rd2
Rd3
Finals
Total
1 Rob Lee 13218 58 0 77 866 69 0 0 0 204
2 Joe Acosta 17355 867 68 0 76 875 64 0 0 0 208
3 Vicente Trujillo 13248 894 69 0 74 891 66 0 0 0 209
4 David C. Jeter 12697 62 0 78 858 70 0 0 0 210
5 Bob Habert 18017 835 61 0 79 850 71 0 0 0 211
6 Bobby Logan 18118 62 0 81 833 73 0 0 0 216
7 Robert George 17581 64 0 83 816 71 0 0 0 218
8 Tom Bussard 61 83 77 0 221
9 Bill Leslie 14073 839 68 0 83 816 80 0 0 0 231
10 Chris Morriss 70 83 80 0 233

 

[DavidSauls]

I'm surprised that none's mentioned that the PDGA once offered 3 divisions in each amateur age category; Rec, Int, & Adv. I don't know when it started or when it ended. This from October 2001 Big Arms on the Brazos in Lubbock, TX.

It was actually mentioned a few times, a ways back in this thread, as evidence that this had been tried before, wasn't terribly popular, and only lasted a year or two.

 

[JC17393]

It should be noted that in the days of age-protected divisions in Intermediate and Rec, there were no ratings guidelines for divisions at all. Ratings weren't officially used as part of determining divisions until 2002. I don't think the introduction of ratings breaks and the elimination of those extra age-protected divisions coinciding was accidental.

 

[DiscFifty]

They're budgeting based on a certain percentage of what they buy going out the door on the day of the tournament.

I could see opting out of player packs as something available for a limited time, early in the registration.

Besides, if you don't want your player pack item, especially if it is a disc, there's a pretty robust secondary market where you should be able to easily sell it at cost.

yah...the irony of player packs, winning merch and then selling it. Turning ams everywhere into unofficial pros. I used to be that guy, I get it. Not a fan of it anymore and I fully believe it stagnates some players into not going pro when it may be easier to "am cash out" instead.

All that said, TDs are already allowed to offer a discounted entry fee for which the player foregoes all payout (player pack included) in order to just play for a trophy. Can't hurt to ask your local TD if they're willing to offer such a discount if full price is too high for your taste. They may say no, but that should be their prerogative as a TD. They're the ones putting in the work and in a lot of cases, fronting money to pull the event off.

I never knew the PDGA allowed the TD to have this option. So it's clear the PDGA understands the potential for players wanting to opt out in return for lower entry fees. Like I said earlier, I want TDs to make as much money as they can, we need the good TDs to be paid for their time. I just don't see the need to force me to buy something I don't want, in order to further said profits. Instead...bring that merch, discount it and sell the hell out of it during the tournament. You have a captive audience!

 

[biscoe]

All that said, TDs are already allowed to offer a discounted entry fee for which the player foregoes all payout (player pack included) in order to just play for a trophy. Can't hurt to ask your local TD if they're willing to offer such a discount if full price is too high for your taste. They may say no, but that should be their prerogative as a TD. They're the ones putting in the work and in a lot of cases, fronting money to pull the event off.

I offered a trophy only option in addition to "normal" (for disc golf and no other sport in the world) payout/pp option many years ago when the PDGA first allowed it. Players were not going for it at that point. Our "normal" entry fees were still pretty low compared to a lot of places so that may have been a factor. This was prior to Disc Golf Scene making offering different options much easier on TDs. Recently we have run a number of trophy only events both with players packs and without and they are generally well received.

I keep threatening to do an "ala carte" entry system with options for buying into both player's packs and/or payout but have not done it as of yet. Even with DGS making things easy on that side it generates more logistics for the TD to deal with than a cookie cutter event.

 

[JC17393]

I offered a trophy only option in addition to "normal" (for disc golf and no other sport in the world) payout/pp option many years ago when the PDGA first allowed it. Players were not going for it at that point. Our "normal" entry fees were still pretty low compared to a lot of places so that may have been a factor. This was prior to Disc Golf Scene making offering different options much easier on TDs. Recently we have run a number of trophy only events both with players packs and without and they are generally well received.

I keep threatening to do an "ala carte" entry system with options for buying into both player's packs and/or payout but have not done it as of yet. Even with DGS making things easy on that side it generates more logistics for the TD to deal with than a cookie cutter event.

I ran a few a la carte style events many years ago. Base entry fee was $10 (covered greens, PDGA fee, and trophies), with an optional $10 upcharge to play for prizes. Decided to stop when it caused friction in some of the smaller divisions. One player out of four or five wanted to play for prizes, the rest didn't, and the one player would always be a little bitter about it. Particularly if he/she won the day.

So I went the other way with a full entry fee (usually $20) with a trophy-only option of $10. No one ever paid the $10. Kind of a strange phenomenon as in many cases, we're talking about the same players who weren't paying the extra $10 when it was considered an add-on. So now I will give the trophy-only option to anyone who asks but I don't really promote it. Most folks aren't that bothered since I'm only charging $20-25...less than half of what they're paying at most other PDGAs in the area. I've had people who weren't interested in the player pack disc or tee shirt just choose not to take it. Haven't had anyone ask for a discount or partial refund for doing so.

 

[DiscFifty]

Most folks aren't that bothered since I'm only charging $20-25...less than half of what they're paying at most other PDGAs in the area.

Nice. I would agree at that entry fee, it's a no brainier. :clap:

 

[TAFL]

At $20, I'd be interested in playing. May or may not want the tee shirt.

 

[JTacoma03]

I never knew the PDGA allowed the TD to have this option. So it's clear the PDGA understands the potential for players wanting to opt out in return for lower entry fees. Like I said earlier, I want TDs to make as much money as they can, we need the good TDs to be paid for their time. I just don't see the need to force me to buy something I don't want, in order to further said profits. Instead...bring that merch, discount it and sell the hell out of it during the tournament. You have a captive audience!

Agree with this, other than the price model - American Capitalism says that when your audience is captive, you gouge them, not give them a break.

I'm being snarky, but you get the point.