Sudden Death Options

[coupe]

Post 73 above.

That's scarcely a cogent reason, much less a compelling one.

compelling
Pronunciation: /kəmˈpɛlɪŋ/
ADJECTIVE

1 Evoking interest, attention, or admiration in a powerfully irresistible way
1.1Not able to be refuted; inspiring conviction
1.2 Not able to be resisted; overwhelming

 

[coupe]

I'm not sure about compelling reasons, but a reason worth considering is to simply have things settled when regulation play is over, and thus save time---for the players, and everyone who has to wait on them.

Unless the tied card is the last to finish and doesn't finish until all the other cards have been tallied, there is no good reason that the TD can't send the tied players out to start the playoff while the rest of the cards are coming in and being tallied, and nothing mandated by PDGA tournament procedures to prohibit doing so. Even in the case of a playoff in a tournament involving a staggered start, there is no reason that the final standings, save for the identity of the winner and second place finisher(s), can't be set while the playoff is taking place.

So if the TD is on the ball, in most cases (multi-hole playoffs, such as at the '03 USDGC, being the exception) the "time savings" should be minimal.

So, no, it's not a compelling reason; and, like the reason proffered in post 73, it's scarcely a cogent one.

 

[joecoin]

Just go to hole 1 and playoff and stop whining. If you are good enough to tie for first place in a division then you are probably on an equal skill level with your competitor. You both practiced and played every hole on the course so tough luck if it's not a gender neutral, politically correct, creampuff hole that favors no one. Learn the shot. And forget CTP, putting contest, scorecard, or rock-paper-scissors playoffs, I wanna win a playoff by playin DISC GOLF.

Two men enter, one man leaves.

 

[teemkey]

One option is to designate safari holes for playoffs.

 

[ERicJ]

I also want to reiterate what I think is larger issue of fairness than a hole favoring one throwing style vs. another (which I agree is almost a non-issue at upper levels, but can be significant at lower ones): by rule the same player tees first on every hole of a sudden death playoff.

That gives subsequent player(s) an advantage in sudden death format. There's a good reason college football alternates offense and defense in overtime. The first fairness issue I rather see addressed is rotating the teebox order in sudden death.

What is this purported advantage that subsequent players have?

Knowing the result of the first player's throw is only an advantage to subsequent players if the first player failed to execute a good shot. If the first player parks the basket or sticks the landing zone, it ups the pressure on subsequent thrower(s) to match or better the first throw. See, e.g., Paul McBeth's commentary on hole 16 at last year's European Open.

I suspect that if given the choice between having the opportunity to put pressure on their opponents by throwing first, knowing that a poor throw rachets the pressure on subsequent throwers way down, or facing the pressure of having to match or better their opponent's good throw, most would still opt to throw first. And I further suspect that that holds true regardless of division.

I couldn't disagree more with that.

If my sudden death opponent tees before me and they throw OB that takes a ton of pressure off me. I can now play a safer / higher probability shot and likely win the hole.

And if my sudden death opponent tees before me and parks the hole it gives me the information that I also need to "go for it". Maybe that's more pressure, maybe not, but I now know what shot I have to attempt making my choice of shots easier.

But even if I'm completely wrong and you're completely right that the advantageous position is to be first up on the box, that doesn't change my stance that the teeing order should alternate / rotate on each sudden death hole.

 

[ERicJ]

How do you pick a random hole?

If you do it after the round, you're essentially flipping a coin.

If you announce it in advance, then you get the same effect as if you took the final hole, then worked backwards, except that the tiebreaker is determined before the round ends.

How: random.org app on my phone.

When: after the round.

Why: if you start on the last hole and work backwards or first hole and work forwards then you can have the same predetermined perceived throwing style favoritism that Chuck started this thread with. If you pick the tiebreak starting hole at random (assuming the course is balanced) you take away that predetermined favoritism. So it is basically flipping a coin to see who gets the favoritism but the final determination is still based on the outcome of the holes not the coin flip itself.

 

[ERicJ]

If you want to go off scorecards in regulation (compelling reasons to do so exist)

Examples?

vv This vv

I'm not sure about compelling reasons, but a reason worth considering is to simply have things settled when regulation play is over, and thus save time---for the players, and everyone who has to wait on them.

I wouldn't call that "compelling", unless you're likely to run out of daylight. But it's a benefit of resolving the contest without any sort of "overtime".

It's also a compromise for that benefit, since it's a less satisfying way of determining a winner.

Unless the tied card is the last to finish and doesn't finish until all the other cards have been tallied, there is no good reason that the TD can't send the tied players out to start the playoff while the rest of the cards are coming in and being tallied, and nothing mandated by PDGA tournament procedures to prohibit doing so. Even in the case of a playoff in a tournament involving a staggered start, there is no reason that the final standings, save for the identity of the winner and second place finisher(s), can't be set while the playoff is taking place.

So if the TD is on the ball, in most cases (multi-hole playoffs, such as at the '03 USDGC, being the exception) the "time savings" should be minimal.

So, no, it's not a compelling reason; and, like the reason proffered in post 73, it's scarcely a cogent one.

TD's wouldn't have to specify playoff loops. They don't have to now, and that's probably not a good thing. So scorecard resolution of ties would get rid of that whole issue.

Say you're running an event on tee times and REC tees off first and finishes (in a tie) at 11am, but the last MPO card doesn't go off until 2:30pm. Are you going to make the REC tiebreakers wait until 2:40pm to tee off when there's finally an open hole?

If you run events on temp courses the clean up can begin as soon as a the last card on a hole is done. We run an event that uses a dozen temp baskets and a mile of string and flags. As organizers we need to get the course cleaned up before we can go home. If the clean up starts and then you find out there's a playoff you get into a sticky situation. So playoffs just delay things for the staff.

From a TD perspective the overtime golf is unpredictable and any time you can minimize the unpredictability of an event you try to do that.

Despite all that, as I said before, I still prefer a sudden death playoff to settle the matter of ties.

 

[DanJon]

One option is to designate safari holes for playoffs.

Safari holes need to be designated before the rounds start though.

Otherwise I can see a situation where the local hero ties with an out of town guy and the TD then creates safari holes that cater to the local.

 

[araytx]

Isn't the scorecard---the final holes---just as prone to bias as sudden death?

Or moreso, if the TD picks a suitable loop of tiebreaker holes?

Even on a balanced course, the last stretch of holes could be biased towards one type of throw, or another.

If I were to go with a scorecard rule, it would be the final round, not the final holes in reverse order.

The problem I have with using round score is that it always picks the player who was trailing before the round as the winner.

If going into the final round I have a one stroke lead over David, then he (and everyone) knows that he only has to make up one stroke to win, not tie, but win... because for anyone trailing a tie is equivalent to a win.

David & ERic, you are right about that, but the player at least has the information before the round starts, and he knows what he has to score. He might know, for example, going in that he needs to win by one against player A in second place, by three to beat player B (two strokes behind) in third place etc. Yes it does reward the player who's hot at the end, but a) you know it going in, and b) that's what the entire playoff system in sports is about -- not rewarding the best team over an entire season with the championship but the one who is hottest toward the end.

What is this purported advantage that subsequent players have?

Knowing the result of the first player's throw is only an advantage to subsequent players if the first player failed to execute a good shot. If the first player parks the basket or sticks the landing zone, it ups the pressure on subsequent thrower(s) to match or better the first throw. See, e.g., Paul McBeth's commentary on hole 16 at last year's European Open.

I suspect that if given the choice between having the opportunity to put pressure on their opponents by throwing first, knowing that a poor throw rachets the pressure on subsequent throwers way down, or facing the pressure of having to match or better their opponent's good throw, most would still opt to throw first. And I further suspect that that holds true regardless of division.

The data suggests otherwise. TD'ed several events that had ties and I can't remember one where the coin toss winner elected to throw first. Just like in NCAA football where the coin toss winner typically chooses "defense" -- the option they never choose at the beginning of the game.

Examples?

Time is the biggest one --
plus e.g., the one below.

Maybe those are more compelling for the TD, but you must admit it's very much so from the TD perspective.

vv This vv




TD's wouldn't have to specify playoff loops. They don't have to now, and that's probably not a good thing. So scorecard resolution of ties would get rid of that whole issue.

Say you're running an event on tee times and REC tees off first and finishes (in a tie) at 11am, but the last MPO card doesn't go off until 2:30pm. Are you going to make the REC tiebreakers wait until 2:40pm to tee off when there's finally an open hole?

If you run events on temp courses the clean up can begin as soon as a the last card on a hole is done. We run an event that uses a dozen temp baskets and a mile of string and flags. As organizers we need to get the course cleaned up before we can go home. If the clean up starts and then you find out there's a playoff you get into a sticky situation. So playoffs just delay things for the staff.

From a TD perspective the overtime golf is unpredictable and any time you can minimize the unpredictability of an event you try to do that.

Despite all that, as I said before, I still prefer a sudden death playoff to settle the matter of ties.

 

[coupe]

The data suggests otherwise. TD'ed several events that had ties and I can't remember one where the coin toss winner elected to throw first.

Your experience may suggest otherwise, but in 31 years of playing disc golf, I've can't recall an occasion, either casual or competitive, where a player who had the opportunity to choose whether to throw first or second chose to throw second.

Maybe those are more compelling for the TD, but you must admit it's very much so from the TD perspective.

Sorry, that ship sailed when the TD decided to go with a staggered start or to use temp holes.

The possibility of a tie for first exists by virtue of the fact of competition, and the necessity of breaking ties for first place via playoff is mandated by the PDGA. TDs know that going in, and need to take that into account in their planning.

The use of temporary holes and staggered starts is completely discretionary. Neither are mandated or urged by the PDGA. Consequently, if I as a TD choose to utilize either option, I implicitly accept the "inconveniences" that a playoff, should one eventuate, creates as the price of exercising those options.

You make your choice, you live with the consequences. Don't want the inconveniences? Don't use those options. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

 

[ERicJ]

Your experience may suggest otherwise, but in 31 years of playing disc golf, I've can't recall an occasion, either casual or competitive, where a player who had the opportunity to choose whether to throw first or second chose to throw second.

Man, with [il]logic like that I would like to play poker with the crew that you disc golf with.

Sorry, that ship sailed when the TD decided to go with a staggered start or to use temp holes.

The possibility of a tie for first exists by virtue of the fact of competition, and the necessity of breaking ties for first place via playoff is mandated by the PDGA. TDs know that going in, and need to take that into account in their planning.

The use of temporary holes and staggered starts is completely discretionary. Neither are mandated or urged by the PDGA. Consequently, if I as a TD choose to utilize either option, I implicitly accept the "inconveniences" that a playoff, should one eventuate, creates as the price of exercising those options.

You make your choice, you live with the consequences. Don't want the inconveniences? Don't use those options. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

While those might all be true statements. It's not just the TD/staff that's inconvenienced.

How happy are those two tied REC players going to be sitting around for four hours so they can play their playoff (which will probably only last a couple holes) to determine who gets an extra Frisbee worth of payout?

The devil's advocate point I was trying to make is that there are positive reasons to utilize a scorecard based tiebreaker.

 

[ERicJ]

[...] Yes it does reward the player who's hot at the end, but a) you know it going in, and b) that's what the entire playoff system in sports is about -- not rewarding the best team over an entire season with the championship but the one who is hottest toward the end.

I'm not sure the analogy here is quite the same. We're not talking about breaking a tie at the end of a season. We're talking about breaking a tie at the end of a game, or potentially the end of a playoff series.

Even so, in most sports the leader at the end of the season gets some reward going into the playoffs like a first round bye, or home field advantage. Using hot final round goes completely against that. That's like saying "Hey Golden State Warriors you won 73 regular season games, but if you go up 3-0 on the Rockets in the playoffs and they come back to tie the series 3-3 then the Rockets get to go on to Round 2".

 

[teemkey]

Safari holes need to be designated before the rounds start though.

Otherwise I can see a situation where the local hero ties with an out of town guy and the TD then creates safari holes that cater to the local.

How about this? Choose 3 - 5 safari holes and draw them on the course map(s). Post the holes at tournament central, then, if a playoff is needed, do a blind drawing to determine the order of play.

 

[araytx]

Your experience may suggest otherwise, but in 31 years of playing disc golf, I've can't recall an occasion, either casual or competitive, where a player who had the opportunity to choose whether to throw first or second chose to throw second.



Sorry, that ship sailed when the TD decided to go with a staggered start or to use temp holes.

The possibility of a tie for first exists by virtue of the fact of competition, and the necessity of breaking ties for first place via playoff is mandated by the PDGA. TDs know that going in, and need to take that into account in their planning.

The use of temporary holes and staggered starts is completely discretionary. Neither are mandated or urged by the PDGA. Consequently, if I as a TD choose to utilize either option, I implicitly accept the "inconveniences" that a playoff, should one eventuate, creates as the price of exercising those options.

You make your choice, you live with the consequences. Don't want the inconveniences? Don't use those options. Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

But that's why we're discussing it. The question Chuck proposed is basically, "should it be that way?"

Otherwise we all know that. If you're now hanging your hat on what the PDGA mandated, there is no discussion, there is no thread. Sudden death - no options -- starting at the hole predetermined and announced prior to tournament by the TD, or hole #1 if the TD did not announce anything at all.

 

[araytx]

Your experience may suggest otherwise, but in 31 years of playing disc golf, I've can't recall an occasion, either casual or competitive, where a player who had the opportunity to choose whether to throw first or second chose to throw second.

Can someone remind me who won the toss at the famous 2013 Memorial when Will forgot to total his scorecard before turning it in?

 

[JC17393]

Can someone remind me who won the toss at the famous 2013 Memorial when Will forgot to total his scorecard before turning it in?

Paul threw first because he had the hot previous round. There was no toss.

Can't say I've ever witnessed a coin toss to determine teeing order for a playoff...it's always been hot round in any playoff I've witnessed or participated in. IMO, it's treated no differently than setting the tee order for any other round. Low total score goes first...in the event of a tie, it's the better score from the most recent round.

 

[araytx]

Paul threw first because he had the hot previous round. There was no toss.

Can't say I've ever witnessed a coin toss to determine teeing order for a playoff...it's always been hot round in any playoff I've witnessed or participated in. IMO, it's treated no differently than setting the tee order for any other round. Low total score goes first...in the event of a tie, it's the better score from the most recent round.

Interesting. Is that from PDGA or tradition? We always flip a coin down here, and allow the winner the choice.

 

[JC17393]

Interesting. Is that from PDGA or tradition? We always flip a coin down here, and allow the winner the choice.

I take it to be from the PDGA since I'm following Competition Manual 1.9...

A. Between rounds when the groups are being reset, tied positions shall be broken. The player with the lowest score in the most recent round shall have the highest ranking when the scorecards/positions are reset. In the event of ties for lowest score across all previous rounds, the ties shall be broken by the Tournament Director through a consistently applied manner such as lowest PDGA number or alphabetical by last name.​

A playoff round, be it sudden death or aggregate, is a new round of play for the participants. So the players should be ordered in the same manner that they would for any other new round of a tournament.

I suppose if it came down to the last part of the rule because the players tied in each round, a coin toss could be a consistently applied manner of tiebreaking. But I'd argue that if you're not tossing coins to break ties for the purpose of ordering players in previous rounds, then using a coin toss for the playoff wouldn't be utilizing a "consistently applied" manner in which to determine teeing order.

 

[ERicJ]

I take it to be from the PDGA since I'm following Competition Manual 1.9...

A. Between rounds when the groups are being reset, tied positions shall be broken. The player with the lowest score in the most recent round shall have the highest ranking when the scorecards/positions are reset. In the event of ties for lowest score across all previous rounds, the ties shall be broken by the Tournament Director through a consistently applied manner such as lowest PDGA number or alphabetical by last name.​

A playoff round, be it sudden death or aggregate, is a new round of play for the participants. So the players should be ordered in the same manner that they would for any other new round of a tournament.

I suppose if it came down to the last part of the rule because the players tied in each round, a coin toss could be a consistently applied manner of tiebreaking. But I'd argue that if you're not tossing coins to break ties for the purpose of ordering players in previous rounds, then using a coin toss for the playoff wouldn't be utilizing a "consistently applied" manner in which to determine teeing order.

^ QFT

There's no provision in the rules for coin flips. And I've never seen it done at any events I've played.

 

[araytx]

I take it to be from the PDGA since I'm following Competition Manual 1.9...

A. Between rounds when the groups are being reset, tied positions shall be broken. The player with the lowest score in the most recent round shall have the highest ranking when the scorecards/positions are reset. In the event of ties for lowest score across all previous rounds, the ties shall be broken by the Tournament Director through a consistently applied manner such as lowest PDGA number or alphabetical by last name.​

A playoff round, be it sudden death or aggregate, is a new round of play for the participants. So the players should be ordered in the same manner that they would for any other new round of a tournament.

I suppose if it came down to the last part of the rule because the players tied in each round, a coin toss could be a consistently applied manner of tiebreaking. But I'd argue that if you're not tossing coins to break ties for the purpose of ordering players in previous rounds, then using a coin toss for the playoff wouldn't be utilizing a "consistently applied" manner in which to determine teeing order.

Again, interesting. I see your reasoning, I think I did when you originally told me that. I guess since I come from a background of officiating, it's not really "the next round" to me. And maybe that's a Texas thing, because I obviously have not been in this as long. The analogy is the the difference between basketball and baseball or baseball and soccer. I see this type of sudden death as more like basketball and soccer. It's a specialized playoff not a continuation of the same game/event, like baseball. Just like basketball has a new tip-off and doesn't give the ball to who has the next possession, we've always flipped.

I recall sending an email to Big Dog about this very question. I think I remember him saying either was correct, but I didn't keep the email.