biscoe
* Ace Member *
Anyone who runs PDGA events planning on offering the new 5 year age break divisions?
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
TD Question- 5 year divisions
- Thread starter biscoe
- Start date
I plan to do 10-year breaks, but if a large enough group of players (say, 4) want to "create" a 5-year break without turning another protected division into less than 4 I'll try to accommodate the request.
I won't be doing this for my event, because I feel like there won't be enough age-protected players anyways. The only way this seems practical is if you have a large field with a large population of age-protected players.
I'll be lucky if I can fill a single Masters division :/
I'm holding out for the single year breakout divisions, I only want to play with other born during the same year as me.
I'm holding out for the single year breakout divisions, I only want to play with other born during the same year as me.
I offer all divisions - and do not force players to move "down in age" if they do not want to. Play yourself and the course if you want . . . of on smaller events make the choice of where to play day of show.
As an elder - I rarely find events that offer my division but when I do I tend to travel to find other elders.
As an elder - I rarely find events that offer my division but when I do I tend to travel to find other elders.
biscoe
* Ace Member *
I won't be offering them at my "normal" events- seems counterproductive to divide what are already smallish divisions. I am thinking about offering them at our new big am event (Spotsy Amateur Championship (SpAm)- 200 plus players hopefully- not on the scale of HB's event yet 
) but leaning against for that as well.
) but leaning against for that as well.I see no real reason for any tournament to add 55+ or 65+ unless it is hosting in excess of 200 players OR it is an age-protected only tournament.
At my two PDGAs this year (72 and 80 player fields), I had a total of 7 players aged 50 or more, all playing MG1. Four of those players are, or will be in 2018, 60+. I'm planning to add MA60 next year because of that. No reason to further divide the field with an MA55 option as well.
At my two PDGAs this year (72 and 80 player fields), I had a total of 7 players aged 50 or more, all playing MG1. Four of those players are, or will be in 2018, 60+. I'm planning to add MA60 next year because of that. No reason to further divide the field with an MA55 option as well.
mfcastillo17
Eagle Member
Hell no. There are enough divisions already.
I won't be adding them either. It's kind of absurd, but I probably go against the grain with age protected AMs in that they shouldn't exist. There are ratings for that, an 825 rated player is am 825 rated player whether they are 35 or 45. I think there should only be age protected for Juniors, strictly because there are some kids that shouldn't be playing with some adults, and pro age protected divisions.
Dcinmd
Double Eagle Member
At the maximum I would offer the 55+ division. You "might" have around 25 PDGA competitive Amateurs above the age of 50 in the general area depending on how many people want to travel for a 3 day event. Or how many Pros want to play in this awesome event.
You probably already know the following but it is a slow day at work. The following events that had registrations above the normal 72 players had the following numbers players in amateur divisions in +50 divisions. I would assume that maybe half of them are above the age of 55.
Loriella 7
LOT 7
TDR 4
Couple of Days 9
Loco 17
Fall Colors 10
I would think you would be hard pressed to fill a card in the 65+ division given that none of these events had anyone register for Advanced Senior Grandmaster last year.
So it would be around 20 in one division or dividing that group in half with a 55+ division.
You probably already know the following but it is a slow day at work. The following events that had registrations above the normal 72 players had the following numbers players in amateur divisions in +50 divisions. I would assume that maybe half of them are above the age of 55.
Loriella 7
LOT 7
TDR 4
Couple of Days 9
Loco 17
Fall Colors 10
I would think you would be hard pressed to fill a card in the 65+ division given that none of these events had anyone register for Advanced Senior Grandmaster last year.
So it would be around 20 in one division or dividing that group in half with a 55+ division.
da Crippler
Eagle Member
The success or failure of these new divisions is entirely in the hands of TDs. Keep that in mind.
biscoe
* Ace Member *
As it should be... my suspicion is they will exist only at worlds and a few of the huge events. I really see no use for them beyond that.
Not sure I agree with that. Yes, the TDs need to host the divisions for them to exist, but there needs to be demand for them as well. TDs can't and shouldn't be adding any division in the blind hope that players will sign up for it.
I'm also not sure what exactly determines "success" or "failure" with these divisions. Is "success" seeing them regularly offered/held at most typical B and C-tiers? Is it "failure" if they aren't?
These 55+ and 65+ divisions are going to be treated like most other age-protected divisions (juniors and seniors), and they likely aren't going to go away if they largely go unplayed. The ones that get held the most are going to be the ones that are best populated, meaning a whole lot of them won't be seen at all outside of larger scale events (200+ participants) and age-protected events.
If players want to play these divisions, they're going to have to band together and show up frequently enough to make the demand for them clear. That isn't and shouldn't be up to the TDs.
da Crippler
Eagle Member
All I'm saying is give them a chance. Offer all the age protected divisions when you can and see what happens. This is new to EVERYONE, and the new divisions and rule changes need to be given time to either succeed or fail. I just want all you TDs to keep an open mind this year, let the situation play itself out, try to work the new divisions into your tourneys whenever possible, see where you are after this year, and go from there.
Of course, if you just don't want us OGs at your tourney, that's fine too. We don't want to be where we're not wanted.
Of course, if you just don't want us OGs at your tourney, that's fine too. We don't want to be where we're not wanted.
Oh, come on. At tournaments already offering divisions for 50+, there's a spot for you "OGs" such that adding 55+ wouldn't really make much sense most of the time. Same goes for 60+ and 65+.
As I said upthread, I generally see somewhere between 4-8 players aged 50+ at any of my events. That simply isn't a large enough group of players to justify even considering adding MA55 if I'm already holding an MA50 division. At least not in a C or B-tier with a 72 player cap and 10 other divisions on tap.
Different story if it's an age-protected division only event. Or an event with a capacity for 200+ players. No one is saying that they shouldn't be given a chance there. They're only saying that in events that are already crowded in terms of divisions offered, adding more isn't that practical. Especially when the only result in doing so is subdividing already small divisions.
What might be interesting is if a TD decides to offer these divisions only 'on the 5s', i.e. ma55, ma65, (but no ma60), etc. No reason they can't...just hoping they divulge all up front. And hoping there's no 'gamesmanship' done here (although there is now a better chance for such).
Among the considerations is that each additional division is a little bit of extra work and aggravation for the TD. Depending on how the event is run. At the very least, it's a splintering of groups on the scoreboard, and cobbling together all of the divisions that won't fit all together. And more last-minute requests for changes. If there are some sort of trophies, it means having them on hand, in advance, not knowing whether you'll need them; worse if they're customized by division. It means longer awards ceremonies.
At smaller events, it could also be counterproductive to the players. If you have 5 people age 50-59, and the 2 older than 55 want to play MA55, then the guys left in MA50 may decide it's not worth their time. It's already an issue with the current divisions, getting enough players to make it a worthwhile tournament experience, for those of us who don't feel a competition with just 1 or 2 other people is worth it.
I'm with JC---it's more useful, and more likely to be used, at big events and Masters+ events.
At smaller events, it could also be counterproductive to the players. If you have 5 people age 50-59, and the 2 older than 55 want to play MA55, then the guys left in MA50 may decide it's not worth their time. It's already an issue with the current divisions, getting enough players to make it a worthwhile tournament experience, for those of us who don't feel a competition with just 1 or 2 other people is worth it.
I'm with JC---it's more useful, and more likely to be used, at big events and Masters+ events.
