MA1 for Worlds is FULL!!!

[TOURNEYPLAYER]

Without speaking with Paul... I have never seen someone that puts as much time into practicing specific shots for hours on end. He's worked very hard for over 2 years to have an opportunity to win the Charlotte Am Worlds. Many of us in Charlotte would love to compete with him forever as an AM but I imagine that Am worlds will be one of his last events in Advanced. Sure he got second in the Clash this year... but I believe that he tried to play open and it was full and was on the wait list for both Open and Advanced and Advanced is the only one that opened up. The CAC and Bowling Green are AM only tournaments, and besides that he has played open in the only other event he has played in this year. Isn't that all you could expect from someone that has the goal to win BG, and win Worlds... to play the major Am events for experience and a goal, and play open in the others?

This was all I was suggesting players rated that high do.

 

[scarpfish]

That wouldn't be a bad idea, except for one thing. The guy that has only played one tournament and did unusually well. We have all seen it. The player that we have played casual or league rounds with, and has a skill set that places him firmly in Intermediate. Then at his first tournament has the day of his life, and sets his first rating at 950.

But can't the existing system punish said guy just as badly if his first event puts his rating in donator range for his division?

Perhaps we need something akin to letting players get "x" number of rounds under their belt before their rating becomes "official".

 

[The Hammer]

Without speaking with Paul... I have never seen someone that puts as much time into practicing specific shots for hours on end. He's worked very hard for over 2 years to have an opportunity to win the Charlotte Am Worlds. Many of us in Charlotte would love to compete with him forever as an AM but I imagine that Am worlds will be one of his last events in Advanced. Sure he got second in the Clash this year... but I believe that he tried to play open and it was full and was on the wait list for both Open and Advanced and Advanced is the only one that opened up. The CAC and Bowling Green are AM only tournaments, and besides that he has played open in the only other event he has played in this year. Isn't that all you could expect from someone that has the goal to win BG, and win Worlds... to play the major Am events for experience and a goal, and play open in the others?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not knocking his skills or work ethic. It is obvious that he is a great golfer. I would love to be rocking a rating that high, and have the record he is sporting. If he tried playing Open, then kudos.

I'm just saying that sticking around in the Am divisions for the sole purpose of winning Worlds, after taking 4th, or another major, is pretty weak. I understand guys that do it for one year. I don't understand the guys that are clearly rated high enough to be a competitive pro, continuing to play Am year after year until they finally win.
How many of the guys that finished top ten at Am Worlds last year, are still playing advanced? My guess is very few if any. My fellow Arizona golfer Pete Ulibarri did it the respectable way. He held on to his Am status to make one good run at Worlds. He took 10th and moved up. He didn't keep trying until he won.
I think I've made my points on this. I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind. I'm just voicing my opinions, which I am entitled to. Just as you are yours. Keep one thing in mind though. I'm not the only guy out there that thinks this way. I'll go back to my bad analogy.
What did you think about the big kid in the 3rd grade that picked on all the kids that were smaller than him?
Anyway, good luck to everyone that is playing. Paul, you better win.

 

[The Hammer]

But can't the existing system punish said guy just as badly if his first event puts his rating in donator range for his division?

Perhaps we need something akin to letting players get "x" number of rounds under their belt before their rating becomes "official".

That is actually, what I was getting at. I guess I didn't phrase it well.

 

[grodney]

I wish we would get rid of having one firm set of ratings breaks and have local TD's or state coordinators set them instead (at least for B&C tier events) as the talent pool in some parts of the country is a bit higher caliber than others. They could have as many or as few ratings breaks as they want.

That is EXACTLY what I proposed 10 years ago as an official member of the Ratings Committee, as we were first introducing Ratings and deciding the ratings breaks and the division names.

I got NOWHERE, almost entirely because of "points", and to a lesser extent "because the computer system isn't set up to handle that". So lame.

 

[pineappletrees]

I would assume that signing up for the PDGA would mean you're going to play at least 6 rounds a year so that you can benefit from the discount at sanctioned tournaments. I signed up over a month ago and have 6 santioned rounds under my belt so far with 4 more this weekend at the GBO, 2 next weekend in Omaha and however many at the STL Open. I have shot from 880's to 970's so far and believe that my rating will correctly reflect my skill when they are updated in May. If you're only playing 1 tournament every 6 months, then you probably shouldn't be a member of the PDGA.

 

[really]

I would assume that signing up for the PDGA would mean you're going to play at least 6 rounds a year so that you can benefit from the discount at sanctioned tournaments. I signed up over a month ago and have 6 santioned rounds under my belt so far with 4 more this weekend at the GBO, 2 next weekend in Omaha and however many at the STL Open. I have shot from 880's to 970's so far and believe that my rating will correctly reflect my skill when they are updated in May. If you're only playing 1 tournament every 6 months, then you probably shouldn't be a member of the PDGA.

u should go to the graceland open in lamoni insted of omaha better event same distance

 

[The Hammer]

I would assume that signing up for the PDGA would mean you're going to play at least 6 rounds a year so that you can benefit from the discount at sanctioned tournaments. I signed up over a month ago and have 6 santioned rounds under my belt so far with 4 more this weekend at the GBO, 2 next weekend in Omaha and however many at the STL Open. I have shot from 880's to 970's so far and believe that my rating will correctly reflect my skill when they are updated in May. If you're only playing 1 tournament every 6 months, then you probably shouldn't be a member of the PDGA.

Eh, this is true from a financial perspective. However, some people like to be a member for other reasons. Pride in the org, wanting to "grow the sport", wanting a rating, getting the magazine, etc.

 

[GLong]

does anyone REALLY join just to get the magazine?!???!?

 

[Garrett76zt]

I think I've made my points on this. I know I'm not going to change anyone's mind. I'm just voicing my opinions, which I am entitled to. Just as you are yours. Keep one thing in mind though. I'm not the only guy out there that thinks this way.

Just curious, what exactly entitles you to an opinion about what someone else does within the rules of our sport? Its THEIR choice and its your choice to enter a tournament and compete against them. The only people that have a problem with these MA1 players are other players playing MA1 and getting beat. Trust me the pro's arent losing any sleep over it. Its been said in this thread multiple times that these guys need to grow a pair and step up to the challenge and push themselves, etc. What about you guys whining and complaining? "Every weekend I enter tournaments against [insert bagger MA1 name here] and he keeps beating me! I only get $60 in plastic instead of $100! Waaaaahhhhhh."

I'll go back to my bad analogy.
What did you think about the big kid in the 3rd grade that picked on all the kids that were smaller than him?

You're right, its a bad analogy and here's why. You are CHOOSING to get in the ring with the "Bully". If you're a 930 rated MA1 player and hate losing to that 970 rated guy then by all means drop down to MA2 and be competitive. If you don't want to do that then shut up and play.

We're talking about competitive golf here and you can't compete well when you're focused on someone else. Do yourselves a favor and focus on your game and let the rest go . . .

Sorry for sounding harsh but I hate complaining. We are so lucky to have the opportunity to compete in this sport. Whats going on here is not unjust, immoral or wrong. It is, however, out of your control. Play or don't play. Whichever you do, please do it with a good attitude.

 

[The Hammer]

does anyone REALLY join just to get the magazine?!???!?

I know of one person here that does. Doesn't make sense to me, but it's not my money. I think the magazine sucks.

 

[Spinthrift]

No, the 965 pro thinks the guy that won the Carolina Clash, took 4th at Worlds, and is the 3rd highest rated Am "should" move up.

Get your facts right if you're going to rant. Brad Ramsey (968) won Advanced at the Clash.

 

[TOURNEYPLAYER]

Get your facts right if you're going to rant. Brad Ramsey (968) won Advanced at the Clash.

did he not also win Advanced at the CAC last year? is he still playing AM?

 

[The Hammer]

Just curious, what exactly entitles you to an opinion about what someone else does within the rules of our sport? Its THEIR choice and its your choice to enter a tournament and compete against them. The only people that have a problem with these MA1 players are other players playing MA1 and getting beat. Trust me the pro's arent losing any sleep over it. Its been said in this thread multiple times that these guys need to grow a pair and step up to the challenge and push themselves, etc. What about you guys whining and complaining? "Every weekend I enter tournaments against [insert bagger MA1 name here] and he keeps beating me! I only get $60 in plastic instead of $100! Waaaaahhhhhh."

So we aren't allowed to have opinions? Is this China we live it. In case you have missed it, I play open. Therefore, you point is wrong that the only ones that care are MA1 guys that are getting beat.

You're right, its a bad analogy and here's why. You are CHOOSING to get in the ring with the "Bully". If you're a 930 rated MA1 player and hate losing to that 970 rated guy then by all means drop down to MA2 and be competitive. If you don't want to do that then shut up and play.

What about the guy rated 940?

We're talking about competitive golf here and you can't compete well when you're focused on someone else. Do yourselves a favor and focus on your game and let the rest go . . ..

I compete just fine, thanks.

 

[Spinthrift]

did he not also win Advanced at the CAC last year? is he still playing AM?

Yes, Brad won in 2011, as well. Brad is playing where he belongs, until he decides otherwise.

 

[The Hammer]

Get your facts right if you're going to rant. Brad Ramsey (968) won Advanced at the Clash.

LOL. Get your facts straight. 1st place Carolina Clash.

http://www.pdga.com/player_stats/51060/2011

 

[TOURNEYPLAYER]

Yes, Brad won in 2011, as well. Brad is playing where he belongs, until he decides otherwise.

thought so....... wasnt he on the top card in 2010 also.. when Wiggins was getting like 15 straight birdies?

 

[Spinthrift]

LOL. Get your facts straight. 1st place Carolina Clash.

http://www.pdga.com/player_stats/51060/2011

There's a glitch somewhere. The event results show Ramsey first:
http://www.pdga.com/tournament_results/62421

 

[1978]

What about the guy rated 940?
.

He won Bowling Green.

 

[The Hammer]

There's a glitch somewhere. The event results show Ramsey first:
http://www.pdga.com/tournament_results/62421

No glitch in the Matrix. You're looking at the CAC. I'm mentioned the Clash. Two different tournaments. Before you tell me to get my facts straight, you should do the same.