#31  
Old 08-27-2013, 03:31 PM
Radwyn's Avatar
Radwyn Radwyn is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Linden, MI
Courses Played: 37
Posts: 48
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

we played original longs first round, and monster shorts second round. in my opinion, just about any decent player can have a hot round on the monster shorts. -10 was definitely my best score on that course to date, and everything just happened to be working for me that day.
Sponsored Links
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 08-27-2013, 05:37 PM
dealinwithit's Avatar
dealinwithit dealinwithit is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Annandale, Virginia
Years Playing: 4.4
Courses Played: 13
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 11
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thumbs up

I played in my 1st tournament this weekend and we had a sand bagger in my Rec. division.

Apparently he jumped down to our division because he was tripping on mushrooms and didn't want to play in his usual intermediate division.

Despite his tripping handicap he won the division and got a nice stack of discs for it.

That was the only sour spot for my 1st tournament. I had fun and I didnt end up in last place.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 08-27-2013, 05:54 PM
bhadella bhadella is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Charlotte, NC
Years Playing: 19.3
Courses Played: 135
Throwing Style: LHBH
Posts: 3,076
Niced 71 Times in 55 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dealinwithit View Post
I played in my 1st tournament this weekend and we had a sand bagger in my Rec. division.

Apparently he jumped down to our division because he was tripping on mushrooms and didn't want to play in his usual intermediate division.

Despite his tripping handicap he won the division and got a nice stack of discs for it.

That was the only sour spot for my 1st tournament. I had fun and I didnt end up in last place.
And this is why DG fails to become a socially recognized sport
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 08-27-2013, 09:06 PM
dekdo's Avatar
dekdo dekdo is offline
Double Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Years Playing: 5.9
Courses Played: 61
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,630
Niced 8 Times in 6 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Radwyn View Post
we played original longs first round, and monster shorts second round. in my opinion, just about any decent player can have a hot round on the monster shorts. -10 was definitely my best score on that course to date, and everything just happened to be working for me that day.
Yeah for sure, I was initially thrown off when it said you guys played longs on both courses as well.. Congrats on the win! I totally agree with you on having a hot round on monster shorts. I'd say the intermediate division seemed pretty accurate with playing monster shorts.

The rec division seemed to be sandbagged pretty hard though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dealinwithit View Post
I played in my 1st tournament this weekend and we had a sand bagger in my Rec. division.

Apparently he jumped down to our division because he was tripping on mushrooms and didn't want to play in his usual intermediate division.

Despite his tripping handicap he won the division and got a nice stack of discs for it.

That was the only sour spot for my 1st tournament. I had fun and I didnt end up in last place.
That's ridiculous, I kind of doubt he was tripping if he placed first... Probably just some bull**** excuse. This definitely takes away from the professionalism our sport needs.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 08-27-2013, 11:52 PM
DiscChucker's Avatar
DiscChucker DiscChucker is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Concord, NC
Years Playing: 24.5
Courses Played: 44
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 905
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Considering that the definition of sand bagger doesn't fit the situation we so commonly refer to when it appears someone is playing in a division well below their skill level, I propose a new term; glory whore.

Thoughts?
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 08-28-2013, 11:53 AM
deadbody's Avatar
deadbody deadbody is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Years Playing: 13.7
Courses Played: 146
Posts: 747
Niced 2 Times in 1 Post
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by smarkquart View Post
There are too many possibilities and scenarios to throw out the term sandbagger after one tournament. A string of such instances is a different matter, but as the mathematicians have already pointed out, the ratings will take care of themselves or expose their intent even further.

I personally hate the term even when said in jest.

Last year I would couple a 960-980 round immediately with an 860 or so round. I was so hot and cold. But if it was a one round tournament and it was my hot day, it definitely made me look like a bagger. Remembering this trend from last year, and that at the beginning of this year I was rated 914, I signed up for numerous tournaments playing intermediate. I wanted to be competitive and not destroyed. The last time I played advanced I had my worst outing ever, especially since I tried even harder to hang with those I was throwing with. However, this year I found a new level of consistency I had been previously missing. I took first in my first tournament this year, first in the Intermediate State Amateur Championships, fourth in an out of town tournament on courses I had only played once in my life, and when I did step up for advanced once I took fifth.

On the outside it definitely looked like I was bagging.

Yet all these tournaments were in a five week span, all paid for it, and the only tournament that was easy to step up to advanced for I did. I had no idea going into that five week span of tournaments that I could maintain this sudden improved level of consistency. I wanted to play well enough to qualify for next year's Am Worlds. When I sat down and planned out my tournaments, I thought I would squeak by based upon previous experience. I obliterated my expectations, and now having done so, the next tournament I will play in I will definitely go advanced because I am not playing for store credit. I have all the discs I need.

And yet I have been slapped with the bagger term by someone who did not know my situation. I had a friend hear my name thrown out as a bagger when his group at a recent tournament were talking about their experiences at the State Amateur Championships. While it was really awesome to hear that my friend set that person straight, and that person apologized (or at least made it sound like an apology once he realized who he was talking to) once he heard my story, it still burned me to hear that I was tagged as such. I mean, I know I need to grow a thicker skin about that, but that does not mean I do not care to have that label slapped on me, especially after one tournament. And for the record, my win at the Amateur Championship was by one throw and that was determined on the last hole. The person who called me a bagger was not on my card during that tournament and would not have known how that last round played out.

So, basically, knock off the bagger term. In all my years of playing I have seen only one person who truly meets the definition we have been throwing out. Even then, he did not ruin my tournament experience and eventually he moved up.
Shut up bagger
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 08-28-2013, 12:07 PM
Henline's Avatar
Henline Henline is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: West Chester, OH
Years Playing: 4.5
Courses Played: 6
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 27
Niced 0 Times in 0 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DiscChucker View Post
Considering that the definition of sand bagger doesn't fit the situation we so commonly refer to when it appears someone is playing in a division well below their skill level, I propose a new term; glory whore.

Thoughts?

If they're bagging, sandbagger. If not, quit crying. No need to come up with a different term for people who whiners think are bagging when in reality they aren't, they just had a hot round or knew the course better.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 08-28-2013, 12:55 PM
garublador garublador is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Urbandale, IA
Years Playing: 13.6
Courses Played: 7
Posts: 5,081
Niced 33 Times in 19 Posts
Default

I think we should just switch to a Price is Right style scoring system for ratings protected AM tournaments. Whomever gets the closest to the highest allowed rating for their division without going over wins. That way the people who suck a very specific amount will win, just like the people who misuse the term "sandbagging" want.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 08-28-2013, 01:23 PM
DavidSauls's Avatar
DavidSauls DavidSauls is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newberry, SC
Years Playing: 22.4
Courses Played: 124
Posts: 12,916
Niced 681 Times in 365 Posts
Default

I'd settle for any post using the term sandbagger or its derivatives, be required to include whichever particular definition the author intends.

It would save the rest of us a lot of time in rebuttals.

Maybe even a code:

SB1 - deliberately manipulated rating to play down a division
SB2 - circumvented rules to play in a lower division than he otherwise would have been required to (non-PDGA member, etc.)
SB3 - guessed wrong at his first tournament
SB4 - didn't play up when everyone else of his skill level was playing up in the wrong division
SB5 - didn't play in the division I think he should have
SB6 - I lost to him.
SB* - Just kidding.
Reply With Quote
 

  #40  
Old 08-28-2013, 01:56 PM
scarpfish's Avatar
scarpfish scarpfish is offline
Resident Grouch
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Brownbackistan
Years Playing: 14.4
Courses Played: 346
Posts: 7,858
Niced 198 Times in 75 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JC17393 View Post
In our sport, it's never a matter of true sandbagging so much as perceived sandbagging resulting from most players moving up well before their rating mandates. When all the 910-930 rated players in a given area are playing Advanced, a lone 920-rated Intermediate player is going to look like a world beater playing against all the 870-890 rated players who are filling the void in Intermediate left by the departed 910-930 guys.
Look at the results from the tournament the OP is talking about and there doesn't seem to be a lot of this going on. There were only four rated players in Advanced that were eligible for intermediate. There was only one in Intermediate that was eligible for Rec, and only three in Rec that were eligible for Novice.

Quote:
Originally Posted by larrod25 View Post
Like JC said, this problem is created when players play above the division they are rated for, then still expect to compete/win. We could solve all of these arguments by requiring players to actually play their rating. IMO, if you are playing AM1-3, you should have to play in the ratings classification you fit in. If you want to 'play up', play open. The USTA (that is tennis) would never allow a 2.0 player to compete in a 4.0 division. We shouldn't either. If you have no rating, you can play Novice or Open. New players without ratings would continue to dominate the Novice division just as they do now, but the bagging arguments would go away. The choice of what division to play in would be determined by your actual performance in past events.
Yet another solution in search of a problem. If people want to risk being donators by playing against better competition, because they'd rather have a lesson than another stack of plastic, I don't see the harm in that. If anything, that is more an argument that state coordinators and local TD's should have more flexibility in setting ratings brackets for smaller events.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

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 02:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.10
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.