#21  
Old 06-10-2013, 08:29 PM
denny ritner's Avatar
denny ritner denny ritner is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: deep in the heart . .
Years Playing: 16.6
Courses Played: 161
Posts: 666
Shawn's a quality guy who'd make an excellent board member. I just might need to pony up and renew my membership so I can vote for him. (well, that and so I can play the Outlaws this fall
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-10-2013, 08:57 PM
dashiellx's Avatar
dashiellx dashiellx is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Baltimore
Years Playing: 2.9
Courses Played: 13
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 1,012
What about enforcing the equipment specs more? One of the biggest complaints I read is manufacture consistantcy, etc...
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-10-2013, 11:26 PM
shawnsinclair shawnsinclair is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by dashiellx View Post
What about enforcing the equipment specs more? One of the biggest complaints I read is manufacture consistantcy, etc...
You are exactly right! We have tech standards that are not enforceable. The only enforceable tech standard is the weight. However, do we require all TD's to carry a scale? Then do we expect them to weigh every disc in play? A TD barely has enough time to get scorecards filled out let alone time to weigh all discs.

Now what about the nose radius of a disc, the diameter, and the flexibility? With the nose radius and the flexibility you need very specific tools. As far as the diameter it's easy to measure, but over time it's very possible for a disc to lose a couple millimeters.

I think a better solution than putting the responsibility on the TD's would be for the PDGA to do spot checks. Kind of like random drug testing. I don't know how the logistics would work but the idea would be to just randomly pull discs from each manufacture and retest them. There would then need to be some type of system in place if a disc doesn't meet the standards. Maybe x number of months to fix the problem then retest. The harder problem comes when a 2nd or 3rd problem arises. Do you make it so all discs by ______ manufacture are not legal for tournaments for 6 months? That's a hard question to deal with.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-10-2013, 11:28 PM
onemilemore's Avatar
onemilemore onemilemore is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: San Marcos, CA
Years Playing: 3.8
Courses Played: 25
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 4,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawnsinclair View Post
You are exactly right! We have tech standards that are not enforceable. The only enforceable tech standard is the weight. However, do we require all TD's to carry a scale? Then do we expect them to weigh every disc in play? A TD barely has enough time to get scorecards filled out let alone time to weigh all discs.

Now what about the nose radius of a disc, the diameter, and the flexibility? With the nose radius and the flexibility you need very specific tools. As far as the diameter it's easy to measure, but over time it's very possible for a disc to lose a couple millimeters.

I think a better solution than putting the responsibility on the TD's would be for the PDGA to do spot checks. Kind of like random drug testing. I don't know how the logistics would work but the idea would be to just randomly pull discs from each manufacture and retest them. There would then need to be some type of system in place if a disc doesn't meet the standards. Maybe x number of months to fix the problem then retest. The harder problem comes when a 2nd or 3rd problem arises. Do you make it so all discs by ______ manufacture are not legal for tournaments for 6 months? That's a hard question to deal with.
If the PDGA were to actually enforce this, they would need to sanction the manufacturers with fines, or withhold any new model approvals until the problems were fixed. Otherwise, the enforcement rings hollow.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-10-2013, 11:30 PM
mashnut's Avatar
mashnut mashnut is offline
*Super Moderator*
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Temecula, CA
Years Playing: 12.8
Courses Played: 817
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 14,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawnsinclair View Post
You are exactly right! We have tech standards that are not enforceable. The only enforceable tech standard is the weight. However, do we require all TD's to carry a scale? Then do we expect them to weigh every disc in play? A TD barely has enough time to get scorecards filled out let alone time to weigh all discs.

Now what about the nose radius of a disc, the diameter, and the flexibility? With the nose radius and the flexibility you need very specific tools. As far as the diameter it's easy to measure, but over time it's very possible for a disc to lose a couple millimeters.

I think a better solution than putting the responsibility on the TD's would be for the PDGA to do spot checks. Kind of like random drug testing. I don't know how the logistics would work but the idea would be to just randomly pull discs from each manufacture and retest them. There would then need to be some type of system in place if a disc doesn't meet the standards. Maybe x number of months to fix the problem then retest. The harder problem comes when a 2nd or 3rd problem arises. Do you make it so all discs by ______ manufacture are not legal for tournaments for 6 months? That's a hard question to deal with.
If you believe that disc spec enforcement is a priority, what program(s) would you take the money from to pay for that kind of testing and enforcement? Also, if a disc already in production doesn't pass, how would you differentiate that run of discs from other runs of the same disc already in circulation?
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-10-2013, 11:32 PM
Disc Fiend's Avatar
Disc Fiend Disc Fiend is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Dirty Jersey
Years Playing: 5.6
Courses Played: 62
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 2,675
Mike Solt FTW!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-10-2013, 11:33 PM
Ripper's Avatar
Ripper Ripper is online now
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Hebron, KY
Years Playing: 4.8
Courses Played: 22
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,200
Does the magazine generate advertising revenue?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-11-2013, 08:42 AM
bikinjack's Avatar
bikinjack bikinjack is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Charlotte, NC
Years Playing: 5.7
Courses Played: 108
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by shawnsinclair View Post
Here is my first big question.

If you have not joined the PDGA or decided not to renew your membership, how come?

I want to start compiling a list and see what the major reasons are for not joining or renewing. I will get the list started.
  • To expensive
  • I don't play any tournaments
  • I only play 3-4 events a year so I just pay the $10
  • I don't know what I get for my membership fee
  • I don't care about the magazine or a rating

I really want to hear from players on DGCR that are not members. Members feel free to chime and tell me what might get you to renew.
I have never joined, and don't currently have any plans to do so. My interest in disc golf is much more on the recreational side of things, and also in course work/construction. I don't see any benefit that's worth the $50 or whatever. I might possibly join if there was a much lower cost "Supporting Member" option. I've only ever played one sanctioned tourney, and didn't particularly enjoy it. I've actually spent way more time volunteering at tournaments than playing in them. (Admittedly, I'm probably an oddity there.)

I don't see that the PDGA does very much on the advocacy side of things. If there was an organization that worked mainly to get new courses installed, I would support it financially and otherwise.

For comparison, I've been involved in the cycling community for many years. There are many advocacy groups such as IMBA, Bikes Belong, and the League of American Bicyclists. These groups have no official ties to the competitive side of cycling (USA Cycling or the UCI). I think disc golf needs something along these lines, and I'm not too sure that role can be properly filled by the PDGA. Show me that it can, and I'll join in a heartbeat.

Long story short, there's not enough in it for me.

All that said, I wish you luck Shawn.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-11-2013, 08:50 AM
grodney's Avatar
grodney grodney is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Years Playing: 33
Courses Played: 117
Posts: 2,631
Hi Shawn, what's up?

I think a lot of people see the PDGA as a tournament player's org. The sense I get is that a lot of people want it to be MORE than that (and/or LESS of that).

As for your retention question, the standard reply has always been: "Retention rate for PDGA is similar to other orgs.". Period. End of discussion.

But really, isn't there more to it? Doesn't the PDGA have the data to look at who is renewing and who isn't, and therefore hypothesize WHY people are renewing or non-renewing? Here's something I posted a couple-few weeks ago:

"
In whatever year I studied it (probably 2003), I found 2222 new members from the prior year, 1395 of which renewed, for a NEW MEMBER retention rate of 63%.

It broke down by rating as:
Unrated (30% of the new members) - 41% renewal rate
Rated <900 (49% of the new members) - 68% renewal rate
Rated 900+ (21% of the new members) - 82% renewal rate

So,
30% of new members were unrated after 1 year, and 4/10 renewed.
21% of new members were rated 900+, and 8/10 renewed.

"


Quote:
Originally Posted by shawnsinclair View Post
Here is another interesting membership issue, retention. Where are they going and how do we keep them?

PDGA # 2012 2013 % change
19001 - 20000 161 160 0.6%
20001 - 21000 151 167 -9.6%
21001 - 22000 172 173 -0.6%
22001 - 23000 183 188 -2.7%
23001 - 24000 159 184 -13.6%
24001 - 25000 177 201 -11.9%
25001 - 26000 209 239 -12.6%
26001 - 27000 216 248 -12.9%
27001 - 28000 221 248 -10.9%
28001 - 29000 236 284 -16.9%
29001 - 30000 237 291 -18.6%
30001 - 31000 214 238 -10.1%
31001- 32000 235 284 -17.3%
32001 - 33000 256 301 -15.0%
33001 - 34000 287 335 -14.3%
34001 - 35000 340 414 -17.9%
35001 - 36000 321 380 -15.5%
36001 - 37000 293 350 -16.3%
37001 - 38000 315 380 -17.1%
38001 - 39000 351 429 -18.2%
39001 - 40000 299 382 -21.7%
40001 - 41000 314 406 -22.7%
41001 - 42000 384 496 -22.6%
42001 - 43000 426 544 -21.7%
43001 - 44000 419 524 -20.0%
44001 - 45000 403 521 -22.6%
45001 - 46000 463 735 -37.0%
46001 - 47000 557 990 -43.7%
47001 - 48000 545 988 -44.8%
48001 - 49000 513 965 -46.8%
49001 - 50000 535 941 -43.1%
50001 - 51000 862 1037 -16.9%
Reply With Quote
 

  #30  
Old 06-11-2013, 09:02 AM
jenb's Avatar
jenb jenb is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: DFW TX USA
Years Playing: 9.5
Courses Played: 82
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 3,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by grodney View Post
Hi Shawn, what's up?

Here's something I posted a couple-few weeks ago:

"
In whatever year I studied it (probably 2003), I found 2222 new members from the prior year, 1395 of which renewed, for a NEW MEMBER retention rate of 63%.

It broke down by rating as:
Unrated (30% of the new members) - 41% renewal rate
Rated <900 (49% of the new members) - 68% renewal rate
Rated 900+ (21% of the new members) - 82% renewal rate

So,
30% of new members were unrated after 1 year, and 4/10 renewed.
21% of new members were rated 900+, and 8/10 renewed.

"
My impression is that tournaments cater to those rated over 900. For example, men's intermediate gets a 35 point spread in that division of 900-935, for a much more closely competitive experience. And if there are new, unrated layers capable of throwing advanced rated rounds, they usually start out in rec and bag that division, instead of ruining the experience for the int men. Meanwhile, men's rec is usually being dominated either by unrated players throwing one or more advanced rated rounds, or players rated near 900 throwing int rated rounds. So the average player rated below 875 is usually out of luck, and those rated under 850 rarely cash at all. These observations are based on the divisions that are typically offered around here, and that does not include novice. So I think TDs have to share some of the credit for lower rated players feeling left out in the cold as far as PDGA tournaments are concerned.
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

Disc Golf Center

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:33 PM.


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