#11  
Old 07-03-2009, 04:04 PM
DSCJNKY's Avatar
DSCJNKY DSCJNKY is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Asheville, NC
Years Playing: 13.2
Courses Played: 284
Posts: 1,934
If the PDGA wants to make it fair... the most fair it can be... then they must have rating levels where people of a higher rating can not play below their rating.

I used to play tournament table tennis and their rating system is excellent. You can only enter events higher than your rating. So if I was a 1425 rating... I could only enter the 1500 and under event... or the 1600 and under event. I could not enter the 1400 and under event.

However, there was always the guy who new how to lose rating points so that he could strategically be in the division he wanted for the next big tournament and win. So, I guess there is no real way to prevent all sandbaggers from bagging... just most of them.

There was a huge issue with this at our last tournament where the TD thought the person was bagging and kicked them out of the tournament 30 minutes before it began. What made it worse was the guy was a local and he wasn't even the highest rated player entered in the division - two other players were rated higher... and nothing was said or done to them. Instead the TD's - both of whom are good friends are mine - tried to take the rating system into their own hands. Unfortunately, it wasn't their job to do... it's the PDGA's. I'm glad something like this is being done... where your rating determines the level at which you can not play below.
DSCJNKY
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-03-2009, 04:09 PM
blang's Avatar
blang blang is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Bonaire, GA
Years Playing: 6.7
Courses Played: 44
Posts: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by blang View Post
If I were doing ratings.

<800 Novice
<850 Rec*
<900 Int
>or = 900 Advanced
no limit Pro**

* All non rated players would be encouraged to begin at Rec
** if you want to donate to the filed with cash you may do so at any rating.

The reasoning is that many beginning players would never even qualify for Novice therefore give the average mediocre player a chance to compete and not be discouraged in Rec or Novice by 890 rated players. By the time a player reaches a 900 rating they have already put a lot of effort into reaching their level of play and would be less likely to quit based on the field as oppsoed to the under 800 rated players that are afraid to play or the 825 rated players that are forced to either take a win from a true novice player in A-4 or get beat by a 890 rated player in A-3. Sandbagging would not matter as much and people would accept that the amateur and pro divisions are where you want to try to play if possible. Also to discourage bagging I would limit Rec, Novice, and possibly Int. to player packs and trophies only.
We seem to be having the same conversation in two places so I copied this fro the other thread.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-03-2009, 04:32 PM
DSCJNKY's Avatar
DSCJNKY DSCJNKY is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Asheville, NC
Years Playing: 13.2
Courses Played: 284
Posts: 1,934
Here is the bigger issue...
The pros are mad because not enough people play in their division and therefore the payouts are small... So they complain that people below them are bagging, when to the people below don't see it that way. Here is why...

The ratings are too closely bunched. Let's use my friend Steve Rico as an example... He is rated 1023 (last time I checked)... To me, the difference between his skills and my skills is enormous, especially over a four round tournament on a long course. So... how are my 970 rated skills supposed to keep up in the open? Let's do some math.

Under the system every stroke is 7 points. Thus, 1023 - 970 = 53 points... 53 divided by 7 = 7.5 strokes per round... times 4 rounds... means I lose by 28 - 30 strokes. Uh... That's not competitive. No wonder no one wants to move up.

Clearly there needs to be another division called Semi-Pro. Where you're too good for the Int-Ams... but not quite ready to compete with the big dogs. This would give those top level ams a place to go where they didn't feel like they were completely donating.

How do we do this???
Double everone's rating so Steve's 1023 becomes a 2046... my 970 becomes a 1940... now there is 100 points between our ratings and the difference is clearer. This would spread out the ratings and make clearer divisions... say:
2000+
under 2000 - semi-pro
under 1900 - adv am
under 1700 - int am
etc...

Am I making sense here?
DSCJNKY
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-03-2009, 04:40 PM
Roc1Time's Avatar
Roc1Time Roc1Time is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: TX
Years Playing: 13.4
Courses Played: 126
Posts: 4,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSCJNKY View Post
Here is the bigger issue...
The pros are mad because not enough people play in their division and therefore the payouts are small... So they complain that people below them are bagging, when to the people below don't see it that way. Here is why...

The ratings are too closely bunched. Let's use my friend Steve Rico as an example... He is rated 1023 (last time I checked)... To me, the difference between his skills and my skills is enormous, especially over a four round tournament on a long course. So... how are my 970 rated skills supposed to keep up in the open? Let's do some math.

Under the system every stroke is 7 points. Thus, 1023 - 970 = 53 points... 53 divided by 7 = 7.5 strokes per round... times 4 rounds... means I lose by 28 - 30 strokes. Uh... That's not competitive. No wonder no one wants to move up.

Clearly there needs to be another division called Semi-Pro. Where you're too good for the Int-Ams... but not quite ready to compete with the big dogs. This would give those top level ams a place to go where they didn't feel like they were completely donating.

How do we do this???
Double everone's rating so Steve's 1023 becomes a 2046... my 970 becomes a 1940... now there is 100 points between our ratings and the difference is clearer. This would spread out the ratings and make clearer divisions... say:
2000+
under 2000 - semi-pro
under 1900 - adv am
under 1700 - int am
etc...

Am I making sense here?
DSCJNKY
You do make since but it doesnt change anything. The difference is more clear but so what. That still doesnt mean you are going to play open more or anything like that. The divisions stay the same and the problem still remains
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-03-2009, 04:42 PM
Roc1Time's Avatar
Roc1Time Roc1Time is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: TX
Years Playing: 13.4
Courses Played: 126
Posts: 4,348
And why in the hell are there 2 threads on the same topic???? Someone? Bueller anyone bueller?
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-03-2009, 04:49 PM
blang's Avatar
blang blang is offline
Birdie Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Bonaire, GA
Years Playing: 6.7
Courses Played: 44
Posts: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSCJNKY View Post
Here is the bigger issue...
The pros are mad because not enough people play in their division and therefore the payouts are small... So they complain that people below them are bagging, when to the people below don't see it that way. Here is why...

The ratings are too closely bunched. Let's use my friend Steve Rico as an example... He is rated 1023 (last time I checked)... To me, the difference between his skills and my skills is enormous, especially over a four round tournament on a long course. So... how are my 970 rated skills supposed to keep up in the open? Let's do some math.

Under the system every stroke is 7 points. Thus, 1023 - 970 = 53 points... 53 divided by 7 = 7.5 strokes per round... times 4 rounds... means I lose by 28 - 30 strokes. Uh... That's not competitive. No wonder no one wants to move up.

Clearly there needs to be another division called Semi-Pro. Where you're too good for the Int-Ams... but not quite ready to compete with the big dogs. This would give those top level ams a place to go where they didn't feel like they were completely donating.

How do we do this???
Double everone's rating so Steve's 1023 becomes a 2046... my 970 becomes a 1940... now there is 100 points between our ratings and the difference is clearer. This would spread out the ratings and make clearer divisions... say:
2000+
under 2000 - semi-pro
under 1900 - adv am
under 1700 - int am
etc...

Am I making sense here?
DSCJNKY
I see your point, but do not think it should apply for pro the level. In the PGA, Nascar, and Pro Tennis many pros will have stellar careers and never win a tournament. If I were a 970 rated player I would still play pro but instead of being disappointed if I were not on the top card after every event perhaps my goal would be to cash in every event. This would still be a better payout than a stack of plastic from advanced. Do not forget if you play long enough, you will be very competitive in Open Masters by the time you are 40 and be better for the years of competition from playing in open.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-03-2009, 04:59 PM
Midnightbiker's Avatar
Midnightbiker Midnightbiker is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Humble, TX
Years Playing: 7.5
Courses Played: 54
Posts: 8,673
The problem I have is I don't have a rating yet because I am not a member of the club. I started out playing Rec last year, and did that for quite a while. I have watched some of the Rec players, and I feel, I am better than most I have seen, so I have moved to to playing Intermediate. So far I have only done this twice. The first time I tied for 16th, and the second time I tied for 11th. I also have notice that they guys I usually play with, play at about the same level that I do, so I feel, even thought I am not scoring high right now, that this is where I belong. My goal is to get better and make at least the top 3 a few times. Once that happens, I will move up. I like a challenge.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-03-2009, 05:01 PM
80playedin10states 80playedin10states is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: ithaca, NY
Years Playing: 21.3
Courses Played: 84
Posts: 1,260
i never hear pros crying bagger...that's ridiculous..tiger beats people by 30 strokes in 4 rounds...at 970 you are borderline advanced in some areas of the country..here(NY) 970 cashes everytime..gonna be hard to get a universal system that works for everyone..

Last edited by 80playedin10states; 07-03-2009 at 05:06 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-03-2009, 05:04 PM
Roc1Time's Avatar
Roc1Time Roc1Time is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: TX
Years Playing: 13.4
Courses Played: 126
Posts: 4,348
Thats the other problem. The ratings only work when you play and pay the PDGA to do the math. It doesnt take into account the rounds you play all the time or the rounds that arent in a "sanctioned" event. I wonder if there was a way to input SSA's into the scorebook feature here? That would be very cool and maybe something that could help alot of people out
Reply With Quote
 

  #20  
Old 07-03-2009, 05:05 PM
Roc1Time's Avatar
Roc1Time Roc1Time is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: TX
Years Playing: 13.4
Courses Played: 126
Posts: 4,348
Quote:
Originally Posted by 80playedin10states View Post
i never hear pros crying bagger...that's ridiculous..
I since a little sarcasim
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:03 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.