PDGA# tie breaker

[Steve West]

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.

Everyone could be issued a "get on the card" random number before the event starts. Use that in place of PDGA#.

 

[araytx]

Everyone could be issued a "get on the card" random number before the event starts. Use that in place of PDGA#.

I love that!!!!!!. Start drawing numbers out of a hat for all who-knows-how-many-competitors before the tournament starts. ALL end of round tiebreakers will then broken by random draw number. Question -- would you then have to make every player draw? And then would you publicize every player's drawers, er, uh, draw number?

Again seems like extra/more work for TDs...

 

[Cgkdisc]

Use alphabetical order of last name followed by first letter of first name then PDGA#. At the Press conference, the last person speaking, usually Jeff Spring, flips a coin. Heads > Follow regular alphanumeric order, Tails > Follow reverse alphanumeric order. Adds a little spice to the press conference and easily programmed flag to automatically switch sort order to one direction or the other for tied players at that event.

 

[txmxer]

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.

Maybe I'm missing something. The difference for those players on day 2 was going to be 15 minutes as to when they would actually tee off. Those tee times would be posted after the days round is finished like always. If the methodology is arbitrary but unique, then nobody has to hang around to see what happens as far as I can see.

When I said coin flip I was referring to PDGA# order (low to high or high to low). While it's only psuedo random, and a player in the middle stays in the middle, they won't necessarily always be in the middle. They could tie with Nikko or they could tie with Chandler Cramer (a 6 digit guy).

But, since that one has flaws and the bonus of the PDGA# is it's data readily available, I said use sign up time. Those will always be a unique number. Earlier sign ups get the tie breaker if necessary.

It encourages players to sign up earlier which is a plus I would think.

Although I would think this is just as efficient and a "programming" thing just like the current system, I wouldn't suggest there is a need to change none DGPT events unless everyone just felt that made the most sense (if a change is to be made).

Which of course, nobody wants to change it (except me I guess).

 

[WD09]

But, since that one has flaws and the bonus of the PDGA# is it's data readily available, I said use sign up time. Those will always be a unique number. Earlier sign ups get the tie breaker if necessary.

It encourages players to sign up earlier which is a plus I would think.

Sounds like you have just explained the current system. Sign up early for the PDGA, get a unique number, hang around playing events for a long time and perhaps occasionally get something that some people might interpret as a benefit.

Problem solved!

 

[gr8flkev]

Another thread with a solution in search of a problem. This one might be the most meaningless one ever though.

 

[uncle pennybags]

The PDGA Live site could just generate random numbers for all players at the beginning of the tournament. These numbers would be used as tie breakers for the whole event. Next tournament, new numbers. No bias on weather or not your parents bought you a PDGA number when you were born or have an A or Z for your last name.

 

[araytx]

When I said coin flip I was referring to PDGA# order (low to high or high to low). While it's only psuedo random, and a player in the middle stays in the middle, they won't necessarily always be in the middle. They could tie with Nikko or they could tie with Chandler Cramer (a 6 digit guy).

Ahhhh, I see now that I WAS missing something. I thought you meant a coin flip among the two (or 3, or 4, or 5, etc.) players involved. That's why I posed the question I did. I now see why my question didn't make sense to you. Although, even with your method, if the TD is the one doing the coin flip, I could see us TDs STILL be accused of favoritism.

But, since that one has flaws and the bonus of the PDGA# is it's data readily available, I said use sign up time. Those will always be a unique number. Earlier sign ups get the tie breaker if necessary.

It encourages players to sign up earlier which is a plus I would think.

Which of course, nobody wants to change it (except me I guess).

Which would work with regular dicscgolfscene sign-ups but not with DGPT events and tour-card holders, since their registration is simultaneous.

 

[txmxer]

Ahhhh, I see now that I WAS missing something. I thought you meant a coin flip among the two (or 3, or 4, or 5, etc.) players involved. That's why I posed the question I did. I now see why my question didn't make sense to you. Although, even with your method, if the TD is the one doing the coin flip, I could see us TDs STILL be accused of favoritism.



Which would work with regular dicscgolfscene sign-ups but not with DGPT events and tour-card holders, since their registration is simultaneous.

Is it? I don't see how given the masters cup flop. And ultimately even if it's a pool of players, the computer processes signups linearly. It's a database and each entry will be unique.

 

[uncle pennybags]

Is it? I don't see how given the masters cup flop. And ultimately even if it's a pool of players, the computer processes signups linearly. It's a database and each entry will be unique.

That's a more concise way of saying what I was driving at earlier.

 

[Doofenshmirtz]

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

What a weird melt. When you have to look this hard to find something that you claim is "ridiculous," you know you need more hobbies.

 

[biscoe]

Is it? I don't see how given the masters cup flop. And ultimately even if it's a pool of players, the computer processes signups linearly. It's a database and each entry will be unique.

The way it worked for the Silver Series I ran last year:
Tour players opt in with DGPT.
DGPT sends list of Tour players who are in to TD.
TD uploads those en masse to Disc Golf Scene.

Going back and looking at the times associated with the individual registrations out of the Tour player mass registration it appears they went in 4-5 a second with first letter of first name dictating where they fell.

 

[txmxer]

What a weird melt. When you have to look this hard to find something that you claim is "ridiculous," you know you need more hobbies.

Please feel free to keep your opinions directed to the subject and not me.

 

[araytx]

Is it? I don't see how given the masters cup flop. And ultimately even if it's a pool of players, the computer processes signups linearly. It's a database and each entry will be unique.

That's a more concise way of saying what I was driving at earlier.

You must be thinking of the 2023 Champions Cup -- which, of course was NOT a DGPT event. It was PDGA Major, and, therefore, it was a regulars dgscene registration like local events. Which is why some tour pros didn't get registered timely like they do for DGPT events which go like this:

The way it worked for the Silver Series I ran last year:
Tour players opt in with DGPT.
DGPT sends list of Tour players who are in to TD.
TD uploads those en masse to Disc Golf Scene.

Going back and looking at the times associated with the individual registrations out of the Tour player mass registration it appears they went in 4-5 a second with first letter of first name dictating where they fell.

meaning, they were all pretty much simultaneous...

 

[Dcinmd]

You must be thinking of the 2023 Champions Cup -- which, of course was NOT a DGPT event. It was PDGA Major, and, therefore, it was a regulars dgscene registration like local events. Which is why some tour pros didn't get registered timely like they do for DGPT events which go like this:

I agree, 2023 Master Cup was neither a DGPT event nor a PDGA major. Simple A tier this year.

 

[foxdawg10]

I am just curious. Have any touring pros made issue of the tie breaker? I am wondering what kind of feed back we would receive if a method they felt was less random were imposed.

 

[txmxer]

 

[foxdawg10]

I heard the conversation between Philo and Terry Anderson, when they made a mention during live coverage. It really wasn't a complaint, but they just made a joke about signing your kids up early.

I'm wondering if anyone has actually heard any of the touring players affected by this complain about the rule. It seems they would be the folks most impacted. As a viewer I really don't care who is on the lead card. If player X, Y and Z all have the same score during the tourney, as a viewer it doesn't matter to me since they all played well enough to get there.

It seems that if the people supposedly most affected by this rule (players, sponsors, etc. ) aren't saying a word, then maybe it really is a non-issue?

 

[txmxer]

I heard the conversation between Philo and Terry Anderson, when they made a mention during live coverage. It really wasn't a complaint, but they just made a joke about signing your kids up early.

I'm wondering if anyone has actually heard any of the touring players affected by this complain about the rule. It seems they would be the folks most impacted. As a viewer I really don't care who is on the lead card. If player X, Y and Z all have the same score during the tourney, as a viewer it doesn't matter to me since they all played well enough to get there.

It seems that if the people supposedly most affected by this rule (players, sponsors, etc. ) aren't saying a word, then maybe it really is a non-issue?

It probably is. It's a stream of consciousness thing. They talked about it, I responded.

 

[foxdawg10]

It probably is. It's a stream of consciousness thing. They talked about it, I responded.

It really has generated alot if conversation though. I never thought about it really until now, lol.