Much ado about.... no thing.
The sport already uses the scores from the previous hole to determine tee order. This seems like a pretty logical extension of that. I see no issue with using PDGA # to break a tie within a tie.
If a player gets their panties in a bunch over who is placed on which card in the event of their scores being tied at the end of a round, maybe they should put in a bit more putting practice, or shouldn't have thrown OB. Chances are they left a stroke somewhere on the course.
This is not something that needs fixing.
LOL.
Y'all act like a tie breaker based on something from actual play is rocket surgery.
On the one hand, I hear--it doesn't matter, then it would be a practical impossibility, then it works perfectly as is, any other system would require an AI to evaluate the tie breaker, etc.
Given the amount of comments/replies and the intensity and certainty of the responses that an arbitrary and biased method is best, it is apparent that using the PDGA # sucks and the defenders actually see it is a much bigger issue than I do.
You could use something as basic as when the individual signed up for the particular event. Same type of manipulation, but it would at least be related to the event. Ehh...maybe that's too complicated.
If anything (and I don't advocate for this either the current is fine with me), a computerized RANDOM selection might be better (as a rule) than anything I've seen suggested herein. Coin flips, RPS, and six-sided dice, all imply the player has to be present. Not a good idea-- and you'll see why in my first example below.
OK, I am going to give the counter - arguments. In a tee-time event, the players finishing might be 2- 3 hours apart. Do you make every competitor in the top two-three cards hang around or be available on phone close by in case of a tie. At PDXO, Carter Ahrens was already in the clubhouse at -8 on day 1 when the broadcast
came on. The feature card didn't tee off for another 25 minutes. And it is my understanding he'd been finished for at least 30-45 minutes. so Carter was at least 5 1/2 hours ahead of them time wise. So when the four others all finish tied in the lead at -8 (perhaps some 6 hours later if you account for double checking before scores are finally submitted), you want him to come back to tourney HQ or Skype for a coin flip or something else? Seems senseless to me. If I were him there were so many other things to do, health and hydration, wellness options, extra practice, etc. -- not waiting around for a "tiebreaker just to see who is on lead card."
And last hole doesn't work at shotgun start events, because not every player will have the same last hole. And doing it by hole number isn't fairer either, because they may have played those holes at different times.
I don't think that going to lowest PDGA number a few years ago was intended to be "fair" or intended to "get people to join PDGA", either. It was simply an administrative tool that TDs had that was readily available, that like, as some said, eliminated any claims of favoritism. Because I do remember the days, as a TD, of us just shuffling the cards and that is how it came about. And even then we got accused of showing favoritism.
So other than some computer generated random (which would also have players waiting), I don't see another way that has the same level of overall effectiveness. After all, the players actually should KNOW their own PDGA number before the round starts and they should GET IT, that is I tie with these people in round one, they'll be "ahead of me in card order and these others I'll be ahead of them.
