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)
Please explain why a tournament as big as the Memorial (Scottsdale in two weeks) did not OFFER anything beyond Senior Grand Masters at time registration opened. If not enough sign up collapse entries into the lower group. As to trophies, if that is really important to you then you have other problems that need to be addressed some where else.
The argument usually states that there are too many age protected divisions. I tend to agree.
I have continually attempted to get TDs to offer older age groups. A large tournament, like the Memorial, should automatically offer all the age groups designated by PDGA. A stipulation should be on the entry form stating that if less than X number of players register entrants will be moved the closest available group. Simple.
Just out of curiosity, what do you think X should be, how big should Y be (with Y being the maximum number of spots available for these divisions) and how far in advance should that X be met before eliminating a division and opening more spots for divisions that having waiting lists?
Also, how big in terms of total number of spots available should a tournament be before requiring them to offer all divisions?
A large tournament, like the Memorial, should automatically offer all the age groups designated by PDGA.
I have continually attempted to get TDs to offer older age groups. A large tournament, like the Memorial, should automatically offer all the age groups designated by PDGA. A stipulation should be on the entry form stating that if less than X number of players register entrants will be moved the closest available group. Simple.
Simple from your perspective. But doing things that way creates more headache for the TD for what is likely to be little benefit.
In your attempts to persuade TDs to offer these divisions, have you ever demonstrated there is truly a need for it? By that I mean shown them that there are X number of players that would readily sign up if it were offered?
I know that as a TD, I'd be far more willing to add a division to my registration forms if I knew that by doing so, I'd be assured of at least 3-4 players signing up for it (rather than blindly hoping for some). And if I did get that many or more signed up, I'd very much be inclined to offer the division right up front without being asked the following year.
On the other hand, it would only take a year of having to monitor deadlines, fold single-player-divisions into larger ones, and contacting waitlisters to fill those unused spots before I'd give up holding spaces for every single division the PDGA has.
Ever notice a trending theme in threads like this?
Namely the part where someone else has to accommodate the complainant, rather than the complainant taking it upon themselves to perhaps run/promote the event they would want to play in.
When you hit 50 or 60 you'll understand better where Iver is coming from.
Not every player can start a new tournament. There need to be more players than TDs. Otherwise, all we would have is 1-person tournaments. Albeit, perfectly suited to that one person - with no complaints ever.
If someone doesn't like how a PDGA-sanctioned event is being run, it doesn't make sense to contact the organization who is sanctioning the event? Really? Please explain.
When you TD, you'll understand better where JC is coming from.
......or perhaps you do, and it's a foolish assumption on my part. Then again, I hit 50 a good while back, and am about to hit 60, and though I understand Iver's disappointment, I agree with JC.