Great article about AM divisions.

[DavidSauls]

Given how much this makes me cringe - If I were a TD and only had MA40 and MA60 on my pre-reg list, but was approached by players wanting me to form a 45/50/55 - do I have to do it? Let's say there is at least 3 players from each age bracket.

Honestly, as a TD I would want to combine all 3 of the above divisions into one. I would put in ear plugs when the crying began.

To be fairer, and clearer, the TD was offering those divisions from the start. (Actually, a mix of them: MA40, MA50, MA55, MA60, and I'm not sure from there). Somebody was registering me, as a favor, and I told him MA50, not expecting there to be an MA55.

I don't know what was behind the decision to split them, but it was done in advance, and publicized, so I have little complaint. Other than to wish he hadn't.

The irony is that I didn't expect to see anyone do it, outside of Worlds.

 

[DavidSauls]

You can't offer any level of amateur Worlds without it being a complete sandbagathon.
.

Not in the sense of players deliberately playing poorly, to qualify. Which is what the 40+, ratings-split championships would be.

 

[DiscFifty]

We have different tastes.
I'd rather try to be the best over 60, or face the fact that I'm not; than be the best over 40 who's rated under 900. In the latter, I have a better chance for something I want less.
There's an argument for it in local events, but I'm not sure there's a good one for it at Worlds.

The PDGA schema is based on ratings and not age. So I personally don't see how any age protected player can feel good about beating a similar aged player with a much lower rating. The fact that we have ratings allows us to better match up players against each other.

Bottom line for now at least... it's good to be a high rated old dude. lol..

 

[biscoe]

I don't really see the point of double protected divisions for able bodied male competitors. As it currently stands they can pick one form of protection or another. Don't like the talent gap in an age protected division? Play MA3 (or whatever is applicable). Don't like playing with the youngsters? Play MA40 (or whatever is applicable).

 

[JC17393]

Given how much this makes me cringe - If I were a TD and only had MA40 and MA60 on my pre-reg list, but was approached by players wanting me to form a 45/50/55 - do I have to do it? Let's say there is at least 3 players from each age bracket.

Honestly, as a TD I would want to combine all 3 of the above divisions into one. I would put in ear plugs when the crying began.

Per Competition Manual 2.01

K. A Tournament Director may, by indicating it on the registration form, restrict the divisions offered in their event. Absent such notice, the Tournament Director shall offer for competition any division which has four or more players that are eligible and who wish to compete. Tournament Directors may offer divisions with fewer than four players at their discretion. (See Section 1.03 I)​

So it's ultimately up to you as the TD what you want to do with those requests.

As a TD myself, I always limit the divisions I offer. However, my policy is that I will open a division not on my list if there are four or more interested players. I feel that's the fairest way to do it.

 

[JTacoma03]

As a TD myself, I always limit the divisions I offer. However, my policy is that I will open a division not on my list if there are four or more interested players. I feel that's the fairest way to do it.

In my limited TD experience (2 events, 1 sanctioned) - I've said the same thing, but I do warn the interested parties that their potential 4-person division won't be paid out much because I'm not going to divert added cash to a 4-player side pot.

Personally I'm wary of people doing that because it feels like gaming the system to me. There's some inherent cognitive dissonance in showing up and trying to be the best* while asking for competitive protections.

Spoiler

*only the best in a 4-player division with other people I know that I can beat, but I'm too scared and/or my ego is too fragile to actually compete when the odds aren't in my favor.

Brb, gonna go try out for a NBA squad, but only if they promise that nobody over 6'6" can guard me. In fact, the idea that the NBA doesn't offer a 6'5" and under division and pay them equally with LeBron James is ridiculous. I deserve to have the same chance to win a NBA championship as LeBron does...I'm just not as good of an athlete and I don't train as hard, so you have to cater to me.


Maybe I'm just a jerk...I've been called worse...

 

[PMantle]

Brb, gonna go try out for a NBA squad, but only if they promise that nobody over 6'6" can guard me. In fact, the idea that the NBA doesn't offer a 6'5" and under division and pay them equally with LeBron James is ridiculous. I deserve to have the same chance to win a NBA championship as LeBron does...I'm just not as good of an athlete and I don't train as hard, so you have to cater to me.


Maybe I'm just a jerk...I've been called worse...

Are you for abolishing age protected division?

 

[JC17393]

In my limited TD experience (2 events, 1 sanctioned) - I've said the same thing, but I do warn the interested parties that their potential 4-person division won't be paid out much because I'm not going to divert added cash to a 4-player side pot.

I'm not sure the level of event you've run but if it is B-tier or higher, and therefore has a minimum added cash requirement, you have to add cash to all professional divisions no matter the attendance. Specifically, if it is a B-tier, then the first $500 added cash has to be distributed across all the divisions proportionally. Any added cash above and beyond the minimum required can be distributed as you see fit (including not adding it to certain divisions).

Of course, even with those requirements, the added cash to a 4-player division isn't a big chunk so they wouldn't be getting much. So the warning would probably be worthwhile anyway.

 

[krupicka]

Specifically, if it is a B-tier, then the first $500 added cash has to be distributed across all the divisions proportionally.

That was the case in 2017, but I believe was removed from the standards for 2018.

 

[JC17393]

That was the case in 2017, but I believe was removed from the standards for 2018.

Huh. Guess I missed that. I'll stop feeling guilty about shorting MP50 by about $15 of added cash at my B-tier then.

 

[DavidSauls]

In my limited TD experience (2 events, 1 sanctioned) - I've said the same thing, but I do warn the interested parties that their potential 4-person division won't be paid out much because I'm not going to divert added cash to a 4-player side pot.

Personally I'm wary of people doing that because it feels like gaming the system to me. There's some inherent cognitive dissonance in showing up and trying to be the best* while asking for competitive protections.

Spoiler

*only the best in a 4-player division with other people I know that I can beat, but I'm too scared and/or my ego is too fragile to actually compete when the odds aren't in my favor.

Brb, gonna go try out for a NBA squad, but only if they promise that nobody over 6'6" can guard me. In fact, the idea that the NBA doesn't offer a 6'5" and under division and pay them equally with LeBron James is ridiculous. I deserve to have the same chance to win a NBA championship as LeBron does...I'm just not as good of an athlete and I don't train as hard, so you have to cater to me.


Maybe I'm just a jerk...I've been called worse...

When I was young and had functioning knees, I used to play a lot of pickup basketball around town. A lot.

I generally found places where people were more or less like me, and we competed among ourselves. Often competed very hard, and were happy to win, though with no pretentions that we were better than the pros.

I rarely did so in places full of ex-college players, where I'd be so over my head that it would be senseless for me, and a drag for them.

That's how I see the ratings-based divisions---a bunch of people of roughly the same skill level, competing among themselves to see who can beat who that day. I wouldn't crown a "champion" that way, but see no problems with a competition and winner. Or gambling on it, which is what entry fees and prizes come to.

 

[teemkey]

...
That's how I see the ratings-based divisions---a bunch of people of roughly the same skill level, competing among themselves to see who can beat who that day. I wouldn't crown a "champion" that way, but see no problems with a competition and winner. Or gambling on it, which is what entry fees and prizes come to.

This. Also Am Worlds is comprised of people who have 10-14 days and a few thousand dollars available to travel and stay at the site. It is not reasonable to assume *all* the best players qualified for any one division are present and competing.

As a general note, the PDGA structure permits different approaches to populate a tournament, the TD can then pick one approach, the players can play in tournaments that offer their favorite approach. I'm not sure there's a problem.

 

[Steve West]

This. Also Am Worlds is comprised of people who have 10-14 days and a few thousand dollars available to travel and stay at the site. ..

Add those to the list of disc golf skills, I guess. Plus, fast on the computer.

 

[Steve West]

Another reason fro ratings-based divisions, win-your-card, etc.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180808193647.htm

 

[JTacoma03]

Are you for abolishing age protected division?

Straight answer, no. However, the issue is more nuanced. This will get a tad drifty so forgive me.

I'm not really in favor at this point in time of promoting the Masters division on tour. I see no problem in offering it, but I've yet to hear a compelling argument for giving it a sizeable share of the limelight due to the Open divisions. Competition is competition, I'm old school in that way of thinking. Additionally, there's very little return on investment, plain and simple.

Going down the chain of regional ----> local events, I think the system of allowing the TD's to tailor the groups to the demographic of the local scene works just fine. I don't think it needs to be changed until a demonstrably better system is created (and maybe there's not one after all).

What I'm "anti" in this case is people playing protected divisions and demanding equal treatment to Open divisions in competitive environments. Keep in mind I'm talking PDGA events here (see my other posts + Golden Tuna's great breakdown for further info), and I'm also talking about ratings protected in addition to age protected.

The competitive sports scene is, and should be, a meritocracy. Some people just want to try to backdoor-install a handicap into scratch scoring events and I don't agree with the tactic. Moral victories are fine for your individual growth as a golfer, but you can't program them into the larger culture of the sport. That's my paradigm.

I'm not sure the level of event you've run but if it is B-tier or higher, and therefore has a minimum added cash requirement, you have to add cash to all professional divisions no matter the attendance. Specifically, if it is a B-tier, then the first $500 added cash has to be distributed across all the divisions proportionally. Any added cash above and beyond the minimum required can be distributed as you see fit (including not adding it to certain divisions).

Of course, even with those requirements, the added cash to a 4-player division isn't a big chunk so they wouldn't be getting much. So the warning would probably be worthwhile anyway.

Good point, sorry I was typing quickly. I should have said "none above the minimum".

When I was young and had functioning knees, I used to play a lot of pickup basketball around town. A lot.

I generally found places where people were more or less like me, and we competed among ourselves. Often competed very hard, and were happy to win, though with no pretentions that we were better than the pros.

I rarely did so in places full of ex-college players, where I'd be so over my head that it would be senseless for me, and a drag for them.

That's how I see the ratings-based divisions---a bunch of people of roughly the same skill level, competing among themselves to see who can beat who that day. I wouldn't crown a "champion" that way, but see no problems with a competition and winner. Or gambling on it, which is what entry fees and prizes come to.

Great explainer. I see it the same way. The important thing to note is that you and your fellow mid-level players knew your place. You also knew that if you wanted more spotlight and a chance at bigger prizes, you had to go against tougher competition.

Some people get full of their MA3 or MA50 selves and lobby for treatment on the level of MA1/FA1/MPO/FPO, but they're afraid to play against those people and prove that they deserve it.

I do the same thing when I play volleyball. I know my level and my place...in fact my wife teases me that I play volleyball like a basketball player. If I wanted to be recognized on the Volleyball court my first step would be to work on me and get better, but some disc golfers would rather talk cuz their game is more hustle and less substance.

 

[JTacoma03]

Also - old dude divisions hustle and play more mind games with one another than any division. Masters Worlds last year was an eye opener for me. Whooo boy, once that testosterone production slows...let's just say it's convinced me that when that day comes for me I'll be looking into supplements to stay balanced!

 

[teemkey]

Also - old dude divisions hustle and play more mind games with one another than any division. Masters Worlds last year was an eye opener for me. Whooo boy, once that testosterone production slows...let's just say it's convinced me that when that day comes for me I'll be looking into supplements to stay balanced!

Haven't you ever played a round with Tom Schot? You miss one 15' putt, he wants to bet $5 on your next one.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Another reason for ratings-based divisions, win-your-card, etc.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/08/180808193647.htm

I can just see the Cialis-like commercial to attract baby boomers with Holly admiring a guy's WI Tour disc for winning the gray division.

 

[Steve West]

...
What I'm "anti" in this case is people playing protected divisions and demanding equal treatment to Open divisions in competitive environments. ...

Unless it's sex-protected, because that's different, right?

 

[ru4por]

Also - old dude divisions hustle and play more mind games with one another than any division. Masters Worlds last year was an eye opener for me. Whooo boy, once that testosterone production slows...let's just say it's convinced me that when that day comes for me I'll be looking into supplements to stay balanced!

This is conjecture, supposition and a totally unsubstantiated comment. Come back and talk this nonsense when you have the life experience to do so.

There are a grand total of one, non-competition protected division in the entire PDGA pro/am divisioning structure. It seems myopic to dismiss the rest of potential players in any tournament you run. You can cater to the 18-30 y/o, male, open players all you want, but that is not growing the sport or servicing your local scene as a TD.