PDGA# tie breaker

[ru4por]

If you are remotely serious, your post serves as evidence that it is a bad system.

Lol...I was being factious. I cannot imagine what benefit there is to what card you end up on. Each has several possible, perceived benefits and detriments. These are very personal and really should have no bearing on the simple task of card building. But, membership has its privileges. I have seen no better arbitrary solutions offered here. From an organizing/TD perspective, PDGA number is easy to use, readily available and self explanatory and fair.

Is sending out older age protected cards, on early tee times unfair?

 

[txmxer]

Lol...I was being factious. I cannot imagine what benefit there is to what card you end up on. Each has several possible, perceived benefits and detriments. These are very personal and really should have no bearing on the simple task of card building. But, membership has its privileges. I have seen no better arbitrary solutions offered here. From an organizing/TD perspective, PDGA number is easy to use, readily available and self explanatory and fair.

Is sending out older age protected cards, on early tee times unfair?

No. They aren't competing against the later cards.

Ultimately it is very minor, and it's only relevant to the pro tour top 3 cards in general.

 

[biscoe]

The order for ties is either high to low or low to high. Coin flip makes it truly arbitrary.

So if one spot in the (supposedly advantageous) lead group is available the player whose number is in the middle of a 3 way tie has zero chance at it? Or if 2 spots are available the player in the middle of the 3 is automatically in? For that player nothing has changed.

If it needs to change (which imo it does not) then score on the final hole would be the closest to equitable way to do it for tee time events.

 

[Orioles_Lefty]

Number of volunteer hours officially logged with DGPT and the PDGA should the the tiebreaker. These pros just want everyone to work for them!

/s

 

[foxdawg10]

So if one spot in the (supposedly advantageous) lead group is available the player whose number is in the middle of a 3 way tie has zero chance at it? Or if 2 spots are available the player in the middle of the 3 is automatically in? For that player nothing has changed.

If it needs to change (which imo it does not) then score on the final hole would be the closest to equitable way to do it for tee time events.

The way players are packed at the top of the leader boards these days, they will need a set of multi-sided dice to break ties. If 4 players are tied, use the 4 sided die, if 6 are tied, use the 6 sided die, and so on.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

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.

 

[txmxer]

The reason it occurred to me was something Philo said on coverage. About a player not getting on the lead card or maybe the chase card because of the tie breakers. I don't recall what his comment was and yes, it's not a huge deal.

 

[DavidSauls]

No. They aren't competing against the later cards.

Ultimately it is very minor, and it's only relevant to the pro tour top 3 cards in general.

As opposed to the start of this thread...

Should go away. Particularly on the pro side, but really everywhere. It's a ridiculous tie breaker that nobody controls but gives advantage repeatedly.

...I tend to favor TD flexibility, particularly with waivers/advanced notice. So I'd have no problem with a system at top-tier events, for the top 2 or 3 cards, changing the tie-breaker to most recent holes in the previous round. Among other things, it would be few enough players to not be much effort, and with one round per day there'd be no rush at lunch to sort it out.

 

[txmxer]

As opposed to the start of this thread...



...I tend to favor TD flexibility, particularly with waivers/advanced notice. So I'd have no problem with a system at top-tier events, for the top 2 or 3 cards, changing the tie-breaker to most recent holes in the previous round. Among other things, it would be few enough players to not be much effort, and with one round per day there'd be no rush at lunch to sort it out.

I did say that. I think it was originally dreamed up as a way to get people to join the PDGA.
It feels manipulative and that is why I take issue with it on a larger scale.

That said, all you folks that run events find it useful (like Biscoe's comment above) and I wouldn't want to make that job any more of a PITA because I appreciate the effort, hence my revised stance.

 

[DavidSauls]

Before electronic scoring we used to break the ties randomly -- shuffling the cards before putting them in the scoreport. The player cards didn't have the PDGA number on them, so it was easier. No one complained.

Nowadays, at Stoney Hill we run team play events, with alternative formats, so it hardly matters.

I can see a little appeal, at elite events, of the local or rising teenager winning a spot on the lead card with a hot finish to the previous round.

But I don't have any problem with the PDGA rewarding seniority. Everyone in an elite event is a member, but the longterm members have paid their dues, literally and figuratively.

 

[glassila]

Before electronic scoring we used to break the ties randomly -- shuffling the cards before putting them in the scoreport. The player cards didn't have the PDGA number on them, so it was easier. No one complained.

Nowadays, at Stoney Hill we run team play events, with alternative formats, so it hardly matters.

I can see a little appeal, at elite events, of the local or rising teenager winning a spot on the lead card with a hot finish to the previous round.

But I don't have any problem with the PDGA rewarding seniority. Everyone in an elite event is a member, but the longterm members have paid their dues, literally and figuratively.

I'll take the other side of the debate, give the tiebreak to the higher PDGA number. This gives the younger player a moment in the spotlight.

But as I said earlier, I think actual scores should be used to break ties rather than PDGA numbers.

 

[txmxer]

Ultimately it's still a minor issue, but with parity, we are liable to see larger groups if ties as well as this extending further in to the pack.

I'm not a fan of these Portland courses, but on the MPO side we are seeing a lot of similar scores. And I think it has a lot to do with how these are setup. Luck seems to be a big factor.

 

[biscoe]

Before electronic scoring we used to break the ties randomly -- shuffling the cards before putting them in the scoreport. The player cards didn't have the PDGA number on them, so it was easier. No one complained.

Nowadays, at Stoney Hill we run team play events, with alternative formats, so it hardly matters.

I can see a little appeal, at elite events, of the local or rising teenager winning a spot on the lead card with a hot finish to the previous round.

But I don't have any problem with the PDGA rewarding seniority. Everyone in an elite event is a member, but the longterm members have paid their dues, literally and figuratively.

We used to do inverse alphabetical order in this area for a while. It started because I felt sorry for a guy whose last name started with Z and took.

 

[ballgolfconvert]

Lol...I was being factious. I cannot imagine what benefit there is to what card you end up on. Each has several possible, perceived benefits and detriments. These are very personal and really should have no bearing on the simple task of card building. But, membership has its privileges. I have seen no better arbitrary solutions offered here. From an organizing/TD perspective, PDGA number is easy to use, readily available and self explanatory and fair.

Is sending out older age protected cards, on early tee times unfair?

It can mean the difference between playing with folks still in contention or playing with that one guy who is in the older division by himself and really isn't playing against anyone.

 

[DavidSauls]

It can mean the difference between playing with folks still in contention or playing with that one guy who is in the older division by himself and really isn't playing against anyone.

For the most part, we're talking about whether you play Round 2 with people who scored a stroke or two better in Round 1, or a stroke or two worse.

 

[txmxer]

We used to do inverse alphabetical order in this area for a while. It started because I felt sorry for a guy whose last name started with Z and took.

Lol. Even though everyone agrees this is a non-issue, it is an imbalance.

 

[foxdawg10]

It can mean the difference between playing with folks still in contention or playing with that one guy who is in the older division by himself and really isn't playing against anyone.

We are talking about folks in the same division at DGPT events, but there are some local events where people are lumped together on same cards.

 

[Steve West]

I'll take the other side of the debate, give the tiebreak to the higher PDGA number. This gives the younger player a moment in the spotlight.

But as I said earlier, I think actual scores should be used to break ties rather than PDGA numbers.

What would be the tiebreaker if two players got the same score on every hole the previous round?

 

[txmxer]

What would be the tiebreaker if two players got the same score on every hole the previous round?

Rock paper scissors

 

[foxdawg10]

What would be the tiebreaker if two players got the same score on every hole the previous round?

Rochambeau, Eric Cartman style.