• 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)

"amateurs", cathegories, how can we improve them?

First of all, you can't force anyone to go pro, that's an integral part of having amateur competition in the first place. Secondly, the national amateur championships shouldn't be filled a bunch of 930 rated golfers, it should be representative of the best amateur golfers in the country and those players are going to be capable of posting 1000 rated rounds. Also, understand that several of the players that placed well this weekend are really young and in the grand scheme will only be ams for a short period of time.
 
I submit there are four rather than the two conventional classes: Pro & Am. I believe there are:
Pros
Faux Pros
Faux Ams
Ams

The majority of PDGA players and divisions are Faux Pros and Faux Ams. I see no reason down the road why Faux Ams couldn't be forced to move up to Faux Pro divisions since there's no precedence in the few other sports that have Faux Ams from being forced to move up to Faux Pro competition. Faux Pros would have to qualify by ratings and/or performance in events or qualifiers to become true Pros similar to how players must qualify to become pros in other sports. Ams would be those who only play for trophies. This group will hopefully develop from efforts to build disc golf competition in the school system the way Ams develop in most other sports.
 
Skill level and rating is arbitrary. The difference between 1000 rated and top pro's is the same as 1000 to 950. The system was just set up to make 1000 rated seem amazing.

There are 3 important points that I haven't heard a good answer to for Am payout, multiple divisions, etc.

1. Am payouts pay for the expansion of local disc golf.
While disc golf is light on sponsorships, local clubs need the proffit from payout to support building and maintaining courses and clubs or at least break even on the tourny prep, etc. Trophy/players pack only tournaments net no additional proffit to the club. Overtime, players would expect lower entry fees and all money would be spent on the trophies, players pack, and prep to prepare the courses for the event.

2. Payout encourages trial and proliferation of discs from new molds or manufacturers. Smaller companies do not have the funding to donate to players packs. Players do not have the knowledge of all the discs enough to purchase them unless money comes from payout. Eliminating payout or the number of people payed out would absolutly restrict growth of the product side. I am almost 990 rated, play all over the country and I would know 0 about anything but Innova if it werent for payouts. As it stands, I could tell you something about 10 discraft and maybe 5 other discs. I would not purchase other discs online; never, if it wasnt for trialing them from a payout. I have never received (outside of worlds, sunking tournaments, and Am nats) a disc other than Innova in a players pack.

3. We as players are able to purchase discs and smaller manufacturers are able to sell them because we have great club stock, online retailers, and traveling proshops. Without payouts, there would be no Dynamic Discs, LS Discs, and probably Sunking would struggle. They have made a business and grown to even manufacture discs and sponsor players because they are running tournaments and handling the payout.

-------
In my mind 95% of the arguements I hear are from Am players that do not like losing to someone better than them or from pro players who want more in the pool so their payout is bigger. Again, like I've said before, it is like high rated Am's arguing against Rec and Intermediate. And arguing for 1 Am division (so that payout is bigger in Am fields).

AND - I'm 35, have a corporate level mangement type job, a 5 year degree plus an MBA. Im conservative and wear collared shirts to play. When I throw a round, I have to ice my arm that evening to be able to play again the next day. I envy the 500' 16 year olds and the great putters. I copmete against them by being smart and plugging away. Many holes I cannot birdie, but I don't push for a "throw under 400'" division.
I have to play with these so called "punk flat brims that have their parents pay for everything" up close. These kids have skills and most of them are nice and down to earth. Infact, I can't think of a time where I didnt enjoy playing with them. I'd prefer most of them to the rude smelly drunks and pot heads that play in ripped up shorts and dirty tee shirts. It takes all kinds of people to make a community I don't appreciate some of the prejudging comments by misinformed and poor manored posters in this topic.
 
Everybody keeps arguing about semantics. Change this, don't change this, blah, blah, blah. There is only one principle that applies. Take a cross section look at any group in society and there will be a certain number of people who are less ethical than the rest. Call them whatever you like, sandbaggers, cheaters, pencil whippers, etc. In a perfect world the issue would indeed be to create the best system/rules and everybody would toe the line and play to the best of their ability. But that isn't how it will ever be. Some people will always try to job the system to get ahead. I don't think anybody would be naive enough to disagree with that basic point. So, that being said, let TD's/ the PDGA/ the free market response dictate the system/ rules/ competition so as to grow the game best and just go out to play your best every time. I hate a bagger/cheater as much as the rest and have played against them plenty but I know and he knows who the loser is regardless of score, and as a man that's all i need to know. And before there is a bunch of posts saying a bagger isn't the same thing as a cheater, it's the same principle, one's just easier to prove than the other.
 
Perhaps it was obvious but I'll be clear with what I meant in my previous post:
Faux Pros: Players who play for cash but do not or cannot make a living as a "true" pro.
Faux Ams: Players who prefer to compete for full payout merchandise prizes, CTPs and player packs in addition to trophies.
 
Everybody keeps arguing about semantics. Change this, don't change this, blah, blah, blah. There is only one principle that applies. Take a cross section look at any group in society and there will be a certain number of people who are less ethical than the rest. Call them whatever you like, sandbaggers, cheaters, pencil whippers, etc. In a perfect world the issue would indeed be to create the best system/rules and everybody would toe the line and play to the best of their ability. But that isn't how it will ever be. Some people will always try to job the system to get ahead. I don't think anybody would be naive enough to disagree with that basic point. So, that being said, let TD's/ the PDGA/ the free market response dictate the system/ rules/ competition so as to grow the game best and just go out to play your best every time. I hate a bagger/cheater as much as the rest and have played against them plenty but I know and he knows who the loser is regardless of score, and as a man that's all i need to know. And before there is a bunch of posts saying a bagger isn't the same thing as a cheater, it's the same principle, one's just easier to prove than the other.

Sandbagging is very different than cheating (in most cases). The only rules governing this issue or maximum ratings for divisions. If you are just under the line, many will call you a sandbagger even if your rating puts you in that division.

And as for pro/am, there is no maximum rating for am1, so "bagging" in am 1 is not unethical or illegal.
 
Instead, it's that too many tournaments cater to too many groups such that we have tournaments with 60 players split among 8 or 9 divisions, and for those garden-variety B and C tiers, I would like to see fewer divisions offered.

Nothing in the PDGA's regulations is stopping folks from running such an event.

The thing many of you clamoring for fewer divisions aren't coming to terms with is that you don't want to make that tournament possible by adding that option for yourselves. You want to make it possible by taking away options from others and force them to use your system. Have you ever heard the term "the customer is always right"? Well, unlike internet idealists, real world TD's understand that maxim, I assure you. That's why we have the goofy division structure that we do.

There were 29 Intermediates and 7 Advanced Masters at the B-tier I went to this weekend. Had those 7 guys played Intermediate because they had to, they would have all cashed instead of just half of them. Do you really think the rest of us in Intermediate would have wanted that?
 
Everybody keeps arguing about semantics. Change this, don't change this, blah, blah, blah. There is only one principle that applies. Take a cross section look at any group in society and there will be a certain number of people who are less ethical than the rest. Call them whatever you like, sandbaggers, cheaters, pencil whippers, etc. In a perfect world the issue would indeed be to create the best system/rules and everybody would toe the line and play to the best of their ability. But that isn't how it will ever be. Some people will always try to job the system to get ahead. I don't think anybody would be naive enough to disagree with that basic point. So, that being said, let TD's/ the PDGA/ the free market response dictate the system/ rules/ competition so as to grow the game best and just go out to play your best every time. I hate a bagger/cheater as much as the rest and have played against them plenty but I know and he knows who the loser is regardless of score, and as a man that's all i need to know. And before there is a bunch of posts saying a bagger isn't the same thing as a cheater, it's the same principle, one's just easier to prove than the other.

Not sure why I am biting. Because someone in 1 division is slightly better, maybe a stroke or 2, but 7-9 worse than another division, they are the same as someone who changes scores? Lol. I give 100% when I play. When you come to a tournament, you better play at least 990 rated golf to beat me. If you play 1000 rated you probably will.
The ONLY type of bagger is someone who purposly shoots poorly to remain in a specific ratings range for whatever reason. There are VERY VERY few of these and there are very few events where having a low rating matters. Who talks about the Rec. winner at Bowling Green.
 
Not sure why I am biting. Because someone in 1 division is slightly better, maybe a stroke or 2, but 7-9 worse than another division, they are the same as someone who changes scores? Lol. I give 100% when I play. When you come to a tournament, you better play at least 990 rated golf to beat me. If you play 1000 rated you probably will.
The ONLY type of bagger is someone who purposly shoots poorly to remain in a specific ratings range for whatever reason. There are VERY VERY few of these and there are very few events where having a low rating matters. Who talks about the Rec. winner at Bowling Green.

Why so sensitive? Feeling guilty? :D
 
Nothing in the PDGA's regulations is stopping folks from running such an event.

The thing many of you clamoring for fewer divisions aren't coming to terms with is that you don't want to make that tournament possible by adding that option for yourselves. You want to make it possible by taking away options from others and force them to use your system. Have you ever heard the term "the customer is always right"? Well, unlike internet idealists, real world TD's understand that maxim, I assure you. That's why we have the goofy division structure that we do.

There were 29 Intermediates and 7 Advanced Masters at the B-tier I went to this weekend. Had those 7 guys played Intermediate because they had to, they would have all cashed instead of just half of them. Do you really think the rest of us in Intermediate would have wanted that?

You are a smart person. Most of the time its the havenots wanting what the haves worked to get. People that don't pay taxes don't complain about tax rates. People who shoot 936 rated golf complain about those who shoot 934 and win Intermediate AND those in advanced who shoot 950 and beat them.
 
Nothing in the PDGA's regulations is stopping folks from running such an event.

The thing many of you clamoring for fewer divisions aren't coming to terms with is that you don't want to make that tournament possible by adding that option for yourselves. You want to make it possible by taking away options from others and force them to use your system. Have you ever heard the term "the customer is always right"? Well, unlike internet idealists, real world TD's understand that maxim, I assure you. That's why we have the goofy division structure that we do.

There were 29 Intermediates and 7 Advanced Masters at the B-tier I went to this weekend. Had those 7 guys played Intermediate because they had to, they would have all cashed instead of just half of them. Do you really think the rest of us in Intermediate would have wanted that?

Silly question. Those who cashed would have wanted them in because the payout would have been higher, those who cashed but wouldn't have with the extra players would want them out, and those who would not cash in either scenario wouldn't care one way or the other.

And what does "the customer is always right" even mean in this context? Not all of the customers want the same thing. We have the goofy structure because TDs often have to offer the more inclusive, fragmented structure to get a fully attended event.

This is more about supply and demand. All I am saying is that if given the choice between 30 sanctioned area events a year each offering a wide variety of divisions I would rather have 20, with maybe 12-15 a year that I could reasonably play in. IMO this would create greater demand and lead to growth organically rather than the current system which I believe has devalued the tournament experience. There are plenty of other weeklies, leagues, and non-sanctioned events going on that I can go to if I want more action.
 
Silly question. Those who cashed would have wanted them in because the payout would have been higher, those who cashed but wouldn't have with the extra players would want them out, and those who would not cash in either scenario wouldn't care one way or the other.

And what does "the customer is always right" even mean in this context? Not all of the customers want the same thing. We have the goofy structure because TDs often have to offer the more inclusive, fragmented structure to get a fully attended event.

This is more about supply and demand. All I am saying is that if given the choice between 30 sanctioned area events a year each offering a wide variety of divisions I would rather have 20, with maybe 12-15 a year that I could reasonably play in. IMO this would create greater demand and lead to growth organically rather than the current system which I believe has devalued the tournament experience. There are plenty of other weeklies, leagues, and non-sanctioned events going on that I can go to if I want more action.

Pretty much answered your own question right there.
 
Unethical behavior is any action that is aimed at taking advantage of another without their knowledge or consent. Most define this as manipulating someone without their permission. Unethical actions are not necessarily illegal.

Having now posted a sum total of 9 times on the internet in my entire life, I am just trying to put in my 2 cents not be a troll. I tried to be clear. I chose my words carefully to avoid the bagging vs cheating response (semantics). I checked my post again, the word "illegal" was nowhere in it. Unethical was, and I believe that according to the definitions I just looked up I used it appropriately to describe sandbagging. I tried to only make broad points that spoke to the issue at the beginning of the thread, i.e., systems to solve sandbagging. I'll compete with anybody, win or lose, with my head held high knowing that I simply tried to shoot the lowest score I could, without exception. My main point is the the fact that not all people do that. I'm not arguing whether or not its "illegal" to sandbag or bitching that somebody bagged into my division and beat me, or saying you did it, or saying anyone should be forced to go pro. I could care less. I either shot good or bad according to my own standards. I like winning, but can take losing like a man, hence the moniker TheUnderdog. But I am saying that sandbagging does exist and it is unethical and no "system" will eliminate it so go out do your best and let the chips fall where they may. That opinion shouldn't anger anyone. Except a bagger.
 
Having now posted a sum total of 9 times on the internet in my entire life, I am just trying to put in my 2 cents not be a troll. I tried to be clear. I chose my words carefully to avoid the bagging vs cheating response (semantics). I checked my post again, the word "illegal" was nowhere in it. Unethical was, and I believe that according to the definitions I just looked up I used it appropriately to describe sandbagging. I tried to only make broad points that spoke to the issue at the beginning of the thread, i.e., systems to solve sandbagging. I'll compete with anybody, win or lose, with my head held high knowing that I simply tried to shoot the lowest score I could, without exception. My main point is the the fact that not all people do that. I'm not arguing whether or not its "illegal" to sandbag or bitching that somebody bagged into my division and beat me, or saying you did it, or saying anyone should be forced to go pro. I could care less. I either shot good or bad according to my own standards. I like winning, but can take losing like a man, hence the moniker TheUnderdog. But I am saying that sandbagging does exist and it is unethical and no "system" will eliminate it so go out do your best and let the chips fall where they may. That opinion shouldn't anger anyone. Except a bagger.

The fact that the PDGA has defined maximum ratings for each division takes the ethics argument away entirely. How can you say it's unethical for someone to play in a division that is absolutely allowed within the rules??
 
Sandbagging is the act of artificially lowering your rating to get into a division in which you would not normally compete. again, why doesn't everyone agree with the simple assumption that sandbaggers exist and that the name "sandbagger" directly implies its an unethical practice? I assumed the entire spectrum of system changes written about earlier in this thread was with the acceptance of the existence of sandbaggers!? Why would somebody post in a thread about systems to solve sandbagging and then postulate that they don't exist or that its ethical?
 
Sandbagging is the act of artificially lowering your rating to get into a division in which you would not normally compete. again, why doesn't everyone agree with the simple assumption that sandbaggers exist and that the name "sandbagger" directly implies its an unethical practice? I assumed the entire spectrum of system changes written about earlier in this thread was with the acceptance of the existence of sandbaggers!? Why would somebody post in a thread about systems to solve sandbagging and then postulate that they don't exist or that its ethical?

First, the term "sandbagger" in disc golf generally does not refer to someone who artificially lowers his rating. We all agree that doing that is unethical and illegal. More often than not, the term is used to describe someone who "should" play up based on some arbitrary determination, which often comes down to how he plays against others in the division. For instance, my rating puts me in the middle of Am 2. But if I consistently played am 2, I would certainly be labelled as a bagger around here because I would win...a lot.

Second, my earlier responses were not about creating a system that "solves" sandbagging, I have plenty of other reasons that I don't like the current system and would love to see it changed (although I know that will never happen).
 
You are a smart person. Most of the time its the havenots wanting what the haves worked to get. People that don't pay taxes don't complain about tax rates. People who shoot 936 rated golf complain about those who shoot 934 and win Intermediate AND those in advanced who shoot 950 and beat them.
Thank you for completely missing my point.
 
You are a smart person. Most of the time its the havenots wanting what the haves worked to get. People that don't pay taxes don't complain about tax rates. People who shoot 936 rated golf complain about those who shoot 934 and win Intermediate AND those in advanced who shoot 950 and beat them.

I think this is a misconception. I think people dislike high rated ams because it goes against the progression and strive for excellence that people often feel is an inherent part of athletic pursuits. When a 988 rated am continues to compile amateur wins people sometimes find it hard to understand why that person doesn't challenge themselves to compete at a higher level and compete with the players that are, by rating, said person's peer group.
 
You don't want to be beat by 990 advanced players, and those 990 advanced players don't want to donate to 1040 pros, or don't want to play open for some other reason. Why are your desires more important than theirs?
 
Top