Yep, your proposed schedule works in a vacuum but not the real world. The four courses are unlikely to be equally distant for pairing travel. Unlikely all four courses have the same foliage density to balance variable winds. The schedule is usually balanced with three rounds before the shuffle, not 4. If those are the four best courses, they cannot be "hogged" by MA1 to box out a few other divisions playing them, especially MM1 which usually has two pools. Typically, MA1 will play gold level configurations on at least one or two courses where you would not want to play a second round that day.
But most importantly, there's even less incentive to worry too much about balancing course timing now that the event is "True Am" with no prizes other than top 10 trophies. The winner and likely top 10 will all come from the initial A pool which is seeded by rating with at least top 18 and maybe 36. The seeding is the most fair process independent of course schedule to make sure the contenders play the same course at the same time. They may have a worse weather schedule than other pools which is the luck of the draw. But at least they had the same conditions.
Pairing travel is just as problematic under the schedules for the past few years, hasn't it been? I mean, two days with two rounds and two days with one round.
As far as courses with different foliage density, I have already pointed out that "I understand that adverse conditions affect different courses differently, and that part could cause some unfairness. However, that unfairness is much less in my opinion than my earlier example of two pools playing the same course at different times and potentially very different conditions" in post #19.
As far as MA1 hogging the good courses, there is plenty of room for other pools to play those courses on day 3 and day 4. I could have added in course 5 and course 6 and have all of the MA1 pools play those on day 3 and day 4. Or some sort of mix of either course 5 or 6 and courses 1 or 2 or 3 or 4.
Here are some examples. The first has AM1 playing the 3rd and 5th best course, assuming that maybe the 6th course really isn't appropriate to for the bigger more accurate arms. The second example takes into account that maybe the 5th and 6th courses aren't great, but they still have enough difficulty to them for the AM1s. There are other possibilities, but the main point is that this is possible to do.
As far as the event being a "True Am" event, I think that is great, but I don't see why that makes it unnecessary to try and make things as fair as possible for all players. I agree that putting the top 18 or 36 players in the A pool is a fair way to do things, but there are people outside of those numbers that are there to compete as well. Everyone is there to have a good time, but more people than 36 are there to do more than just have a good time. I would actually be fine with seeding everyone into pools by rating, but even then that would not be an excuse to try and do any less than make the ground as level as possible between each pool competing in the same division.
