PDGA# tie breaker

[DavidSauls]

My comment was intended as tongue-in-cheek, not critical.

 

[biscoe]

To the folks saying it has almost (or no) impact on the final outcome...I completely agree. ALMOST no impact. There are certainly times competing for a win, or a specific place though, where you'd rather be a card back and see how your competition is doing/has done on a throw before you might have to throw (specifically as we're talking about getting down to the final holes)

The "problem" to me is in large events like the DGPT. Being on lead card regularly might be a significant advantage financially. Seems odd that we just say "if player A & B are tied, we'll give player A the financial advantage every time it happens against player B". Seems particularly dubious when numbers were not handed out in order in all cases.

I actually tend to agree on the Tour events. They can get a waiver to randomize somehow I would imagine.

 

[DavidSauls]

And the response to that is—no big deal, not worth a debate.

People who know me, know that something doesn't have to be a big deal to be worth a debate.

 

[txmxer]

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.

People aren't waiting around in the current system nor would they have to wait in any alternative system that was truly arbitrary so that's a red herring.

You guys like this system. Okay. I don't make the rules. I do however have opinions and I kind of think that as mundane as this issue may be, an online forum dedicated to this sport is the place where one shares such opinions even if they are ultimately deemed to be silly or even ridiculous.

As said, the volume and intensity of responses serves as evidence that no matter how minor it may or may not be, many are. choosing to defend a system that is based on bias. I find that interesting.

The answer seems to be that it's simple and not significant enough to merit change.

For all but the pro tour or covered events, I can accept that—still a biased method which I generally oppose based on principle, but no harm no foul.

I'll also note, the history of rules debates on this forum is all about semantics and minutiae. Don't like this one? There are other threads to kill time in.

 

[txmxer]

People who know me, know that something doesn't have to be a big deal to be worth a debate.

Thank you for clarifying. The internets can be a difficult place to discern such things.

 

[_MTL_]

Why would you have to? Have you had a tie amongst 39 players?

No, but I've had 39 people tied in 29 positions.

 

[DavidSauls]

For all but the pro tour or covered events, I can accept that—still a biased method which I generally oppose based on principle, but no harm no foul.
.

I've said before, for elite events and the top 3 cards, I'd be happy if the PDGA granted a waiver. That's where spectators and media and publicity are in play, and perhaps a little excitement for the newcomer/underdog getting that last prime spot.

 

[_MTL_]

I've said before, for elite events and the top 3 cards, I'd be happy if the PDGA granted a waiver. That's where spectators and media and publicity are in play, and perhaps a little excitement for the newcomer/underdog getting that last prime spot.

Issue with this is the subjectivity of this. Anytime someone like Nikko or Brodie, who is generally polarized, isn't picked, this is a social media crap storm.

 

[Shallows]

PDGA number tie breaking works like bag tags, you have to beat the player to earn their tag, not just tie. In this case, it's their card positioning at stake. The international 8000s number block has inadvertently become a form of affirmative action in card assignments when playing in a field of mostly U.S. players.

American Tee Times for American Players!!!

 

[biscoe]

Issue with this is the subjectivity of this. Anytime someone like Nikko or Brodie, who is generally polarized, isn't picked, this is a social media crap storm.

As it stands now Simon is the only Tour player who comes to my mind who would have a lower PDGA number than Nikko so Nikko "wins" almost all of these situations. That is enough reason for me to want it to change.

They could specify that randomization only applies to cards receiving coverage and use an "official randomization website" of the DGPT. People most affected would be the commentators who love to talk about who will be on lead card the next day as rounds wind down.

 

[DavidSauls]

Issue with this is the subjectivity of this. Anytime someone like Nikko or Brodie, who is generally polarized, isn't picked, this is a social media crap storm.

To be clear, I don't advocate "TD's choice". I advocate for a waiver and an alternative tie-breaker. Probably hole scores at end of prior round, so we can say "Billy earned a spot on the lead card with that birdie on 18!"

 

[Cgkdisc]

The argument against randomization is that it delays the time when players can determine their tee time and card for the next day. Having a set tie-break procedure where players can determine their likely ranking for card assignments in the next round also provides another human interest "stat" for viewers and commentators to discuss as the round is completing and they can speculate on potential drama heading into the next round.

 

[chevis]

... an alternative tie-breaker. Probably hole scores at end of prior round, so we can say "Billy earned a spot on the lead card with that birdie on 18!"

yes. then if previous round(s) all the same, then maybe player rating (high to low)?

 

[_MTL_]

To be clear, I don't advocate "TD's choice". I advocate for a waiver and an alternative tie-breaker. Probably hole scores at end of prior round, so we can say "Billy earned a spot on the lead card with that birdie on 18!"

got it.

I think something like this past weekend where Latitude 64 was the title sponsor that a Lat 64 player gets the tiebreaker would make sense from a marketing side and increase the value of sponsorship.

But from a competition integrity side, would have issues.

 

[PastorofMuppets]

At the end of the day, there has to be an "end all be all" unique to only one player tie breaker. Anything that can be duplicated (previous round score, player rating, score on a certain hole the previous round, etc) can all be exactly the same. So I do get PDGA # because they can't be duplicated. And for the normal disc golf population it works, is quick and efficient, and can be easily done manually by TD's.

But for the DGPT (IF) we wanted to make a switch, why not use DGPT player standings (with PDGA # as the catch all tiebreaker after that)? It allows the players who are playing better get more screen time (on coverage rounds) and it adds more emphasis to playing well on the tour. First event of the year, use the previous years final standings. It's not perfect, but I'd rather see that than allowing TD's or sponsors of the event get to pick favorites. We already have to deal with that for round 1 feature cards.

 

[biscoe]

At the end of the day, there has to be an "end all be all" unique to only one player tie breaker. Anything that can be duplicated (previous round score, player rating, score on a certain hole the previous round, etc) can all be exactly the same. So I do get PDGA # because they can't be duplicated. And for the normal disc golf population it works, is quick and efficient, and can be easily done manually by TD's.

But for the DGPT (IF) we wanted to make a switch, why not use DGPT player standings (with PDGA # as the catch all tiebreaker after that)? It allows the players who are playing better get more screen time (on coverage rounds) and it adds more emphasis to playing well on the tour. First event of the year, use the previous years final standings. It's not perfect, but I'd rather see that than allowing TD's or sponsors of the event get to pick favorites. We already have to deal with that for round 1 feature cards.

agree on all points

 

[Cgkdisc]

Does everyone playing DGPT events have an official "player standing" and a unique one with no ties?

 

[araytx]

People aren't waiting around in the current system nor would they have to wait in any alternative system that was truly arbitrary so that's a red herring.

You guys like this system. Okay. I don't make the rules. I do however have opinions and I kind of think that as mundane as this issue may be, an online forum dedicated to this sport is the place where one shares such opinions even if they are ultimately deemed to be silly or even ridiculous.

As said, the volume and intensity of responses serves as evidence that no matter how minor it may or may not be, many are. choosing to defend a system that is based on bias. I find that interesting.

The answer seems to be that it's simple and not significant enough to merit change.

For all but the pro tour or covered events, I can accept that—still a biased method which I generally oppose based on principle, but no harm no foul.

I'll also note, the history of rules debates on this forum is all about semantics and minutiae. Don't like this one? There are other threads to kill time in.

OK, I am missing something then, txmixer. One alternative system you proposed was coin flip(s). Another was RPS. How, then (without waiting) would you have broken the 5-way tie at -8 for first place and the end of round 1 last weekend among the players with these local approximate) finishing times without waiting?:

Carter Ahrens (1:15 pm)
Adam Hammes (2:25pm)
Corey Ellis (4:30pm)
Aaron Gossage (5:20pm)
Isaac Robinson (5:35pm)
last card (6:39pm) Where Simon began the hole at -7

See, no red herring, these were the actual times ...

never mind that Simon was at -8 through 12 holes, and three others were at -7 by hole 17. Whatever scenario you develop has accommodate for what if the 5 -way tie is for 2nd or 3rd place instead of 1st.

 

[PastorofMuppets]

Does everyone playing DGPT events have an official "player standing" and a unique one with no ties?

Everyone that has a tour card "should" assuming they've played at least one event. You will have fringe cases where some 970 rated players got in and filled empty/vacated slots which is why you need a defacto penultimate individual separator like PDGA # to be the last tie breaker. I'm perfectly fine with other tie breakers coming before it (like hot previous round, or points standings, etc). I come from the Chess world where the tie break system is ridiculously convoluted and complicated and you can go through 8 or 9 different tie breaks before you find separation. More complexity is something I'm gathering we would not want.

One thing I haven't seen proposed is to follow a ball golf setup where the same card plays together round 1 and 2 (and flip flops early tees and late tee times between the two) then whether it's a 3 round or 4 round event shuffle the cards at that point based on score. I'm not necessarily for it (in this instance) but it would handle some other issues players have with having to play early round 1 because they aren't the poster children for DGN.

 

[Cgkdisc]

One thing I haven't seen proposed is to follow a ball golf setup where the same card plays together round 1 and 2 (and flip flops early tees and late tee times between the two) then whether it's a 3 round or 4 round event shuffle the cards at that point based on score. I'm not necessarily for it (in this instance) but it would handle some other issues players have with having to play early round 1 because they aren't the poster children for DGN.

A version of this has been proposed and rejected, more from DG traditions than competitive fairness. One thing that could be done along these lines is to have the R1 FPO and MPO feature cards start during the middle tee times in their fields. Same middle tee times for the leader and chasing cards being streamed or on video in R2. This way, they play during the average weather conditions experienced by the other cards in their fields versus the sometimes-significant wind/precipitation differences between morning and late tee times for feature/lead cards, especially for MPO. Additional benefits would be earlier broadcasts for European viewers and more time for the video teams to prepare their post-round edits for uploading by the next day.