Pro and AM mixed groups

[bettsjc]

You know, I think I have to side with Pete on this one, regardless of which side you look at it...

Its fairly common knowledge to anyone who plays seriously competitive sports will tell you that you only play as good as the people around you. As this may not always be true, it can have an effect on the mental competitiveness, and if it is a clear rule in the book, then I see a truly valid arguement here. You also have to understand that the slower play of AMs compaired to Pros will throw off the rhythm.(keep in mind that this is coming from the standpoint of an AM)

As an AM, as much as I'd like to play with better players or possibly a bigger name in the game, I think this would throw me off tremendously. Being demoralized by someone on my card is tough to take, whether they are in your division or not.

In general, when you are carding with your division you have a greater possibility of knowing where you stand amongst your competitors and having a better feel for how you should play certain shots. Especially in Pete's case, where he is a Pro Grandmaster, its quite possible that his division may only make up one card anyways, which would put you right with your entire competition. In a game where you are ultimately playing against yourself on any given day it brings more of a competition to the round, rather than shooting with a few others who you couldnt give a darn what they are shooting. Make sense?

[bettsjc]

Originally Posted by mashnut

Letting them know early in the round that they're expected to follow the rules and what kind of behavior is expected might just solve that problem if you went into it with a good attitude.

This may be another agruement that holds up in theory, but doesn't exactly pan out so wonderfully when implemented. Most players(in my experiences) who do not follow correct DG ettiquite don't really care that they are, as even more novice players who are looking to seriously get into it would have understood this prior from playing casually with someone who knows, or just knowing from playing other organized sports. Most of it is common sense and the ones who ignore ettiquite usually don't care about it, and when you try to babysit, police or parent/coach someone while playing in a round that they paid to play they feel like they are being told what to do and the rest of the round seems to be not so fun

[DavidSauls]

I'd be more comfortable if the TD got a waiver, and published the fact that he was mixing divisions in the first round. Pete would then at least know what to expect.

My first ever tournament was done like this. I was the equivalent of a Rec player (a long time ago), grouped with an Advanced and an Open player. I was a little lost and intimidated, and the Advanced player was a jerk. It did not leave a good taste in my mouth.

Much more recently I've been in this format, as kind of a "middle of the group" player. I got to play with an Open player who I'd never otherwise get to play with, which was nice. But I felt for the very weak player who was grouped with us. I don't know if his throws were good for him, or in his division, but they were much worse than the rest of the group, for the entire round, and I'm not sure how much he enjoyed that.

[tallpaul]

I understand the argument, but we have the opposite deal in my home area; and I miss the days when divisions played together. I had the opportunity to play with some awesome players of both sexes and all skill levels in earlier times; when cards where mixed much more. Players in my own division are much more likely to be douchey in my opinion.

[bnbanbury]

Originally Posted by bettsjc

You know, I think I have to side with Pete on this one, regardless of which side you look at it...

Its fairly common knowledge to anyone who plays seriously competitive sports will tell you that you only play as good as the people around you. As this may not always be true, it can have an effect on the mental competitiveness, and if it is a clear rule in the book, then I see a truly valid arguement here. You also have to understand that the slower play of AMs compaired to Pros will throw off the rhythm.(keep in mind that this is coming from the standpoint of an AM)

As an AM, as much as I'd like to play with better players or possibly a bigger name in the game, I think this would throw me off tremendously. Being demoralized by someone on my card is tough to take, whether they are in your division or not.

In general, when you are carding with your division you have a greater possibility of knowing where you stand amongst your competitors and having a better feel for how you should play certain shots. Especially in Pete's case, where he is a Pro Grandmaster, its quite possible that his division may only make up one card anyways, which would put you right with your entire competition. In a game where you are ultimately playing against yourself on any given day it brings more of a competition to the round, rather than shooting with a few others who you couldnt give a darn what they are shooting. Make sense?

I agree completely. The last tourney I attended mixed cards for the 1st round and the result for me was a card with 3 solid players (all ratings north of 950) and an am3. The three higher rated players shot middling rounds in the 60s while the am3 threw 100 shots. 100. seriously. None of us were able to get a rhythm and spent the second round playing catch up in our divisions.

[mfcastillo17]

As a TD, this is something that I always try to avoid as much as possible. I don't particularly care to play with ams in a tournament round. But sometimes it is unavoidable. For example, a full tournament with 90 players on an 18 hole course (meaning a fivesome on each hole), the divisions don't always shake out to be equally divisible by 5. When I'm presented with the situation (for the first round anyway), of course I will mix pro divisions to try and resolve it, but if it still doesn't work out evenly, I hand pick an advanced player that I know has proper etiquette and will not upset the group. Under no circumstances will I ever mix players on the same card that are throwing from different tees, and never a lower division than MA1. That would be a nightmare and certainly unfair to all players on the card, the am included.

[bettsjc]

Originally Posted by mfcastillo17

As a TD, this is something that I always try to avoid as much as possible. I don't particularly care to play with ams in a tournament round. But sometimes it is unavoidable. For example, a full tournament with 90 players on an 18 hole course (meaning a fivesome on each hole), the divisions don't always shake out to be equally divisible by 5. When I'm presented with the situation (for the first round anyway), of course I will mix pro divisions to try and resolve it, but if it still doesn't work out evenly, I hand pick an advanced player that I know has proper etiquette and will not upset the group. Under no circumstances will I ever mix players on the same card that are throwing from different tees, and never a lower division than MA1. That would be a nightmare and certainly unfair to all players on the card, the am included.

If there is no way around it as stated above^^ this would be a circumstance that is understandable, and the fact that you would work it out to put a more proper etiquette-minded player with higher caliber players shows that you understand the issue at hand. I'm sorry, but there is NO reason to mix divisions on cards except for this situation

[Pete Kenny]

Originally Posted by DavidSauls

I'd be more comfortable if the TD got a waiver, and published the fact that he was mixing divisions in the first round. Pete would then at least know what to expect.

I would be good with that. I could then consider that, with other factors, in deciding whether or not to play that event.

[Pete Kenny]

Originally Posted by mashnut

You made a slippery slope argument and pulled the holding the sport back card in the first few posts about the topic?

I see your point, however, while the debate is new to you, I'll been having it for years to no effect.

[bettsjc]

I second David, not that I would support it, but if it were stated up front even w/o a waiver it would have to be acceptable. At least you'd have the choice of playing or not, knowing this info up front, even though it seems like you already know up front from repeated use of this standard from this TD and it doesn't pain anyone else enough for them to say something