PDGA rules on Groupings at Tournaments

[bwgort]

There have been recent discussions in the Competition Committee about better ways to do tee time groupings. The way USADGC does it is fairer for "contenders" than either of the current approved methods. But there's even a better, fairer way it could and probably should be done, following some of the ways ball golf does it.

Question:

Does that mean TDs can disregard the rulebook if in their opinion it is "fairer for contenders"?

Seems like a weird position for the PDGA to take.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Fairer for contenders does matter. There are examples in many sports where they get preferential lanes, pole positions, front of the pack in marathons and ski races, etc. Holding off on posting "better, fairer way(s)" for those to analyze on DGCR and Facebook until more discussions in CompCom. If some wish to speculate, go right ahead. Maybe some ideas here would be considered.

 

[Cgkdisc]

Question:

Does that mean TDs can disregard the rulebook if in their opinion it is "fairer for contenders"?

Seems like a weird position for the PDGA to take.

I'm not making those calls. However, I am bringing some new data and analysis to the CompCom indicating some improvements are needed.

 

[bwgort]

I'm not making those calls. However, I am bringing some new data and analysis to the CompCom indicating some improvements are needed.

What's the end result for a TD who disregards the rules though? Why is it allowed? I get that fairness is subjective but the rules aren't.

 

[Cgkdisc]

You'll have to speak to PDGA officials about it.

 

[biscoe]

My preference has always been for random grouping of players other than making sure there is a player who has played the course before in as many groups as possible.

 

[Cgkdisc]

I'm not sure there's any "best way" to do groupings for shotgun rounds. All methods used seem to be reasonable since players are essentially playing at the same time. It's tee time rounds where leveling out potential weather differences over a long day, with a consistent procedure, is important for competitive fairness in large divisions over say 80 players. That's where a better, more consistent method should be developed.

 

[brutalbrutus]

I'm not sure why doing it by ratings shouldn't be allowed, considering that after the first round everyone is grouped by the rating/score they shot... So why not allow them to be grouped by the scores they previously shot? If someone thinks that is unfair, then they should work to get a better rating. Seems to me that is the only "fair" way...

 

[bwgort]

I'm not sure why doing it by ratings shouldn't be allowed, considering that after the first round everyone is grouped by the rating/score they shot... So why not allow them to be grouped by the scores they previously shot? If someone thinks that is unfair, then they should work to get a better rating. Seems to me that is the only "fair" way...

Right, but a bunch of really smart people got together and created our rulebook. They created a procedure for grouping by ratings, tested the procedure and added it to our rulebook. Whether or not the way the Major grouped the pairings was "fair," it was not done according to the rules of the sport we play.

edit: I answered why sorting by ratings from top to bottom isn't fair in my blog posted above. I also think the PDGA board agreed that grouping by ratings isn't fair, otherwise why would they create these standards for grouping?

 

[brutalbrutus]

...because some 950 open player complained about not ever getting to play with the big dogs.

Both times I went to BG AMs('14 and '15) they grouped everyone from top to bottom by rating. Was this a new rule put in this year?

 

[bwgort]

...because some 950 open player complained about not ever getting to play with the big dogs.

Both times I went to BG AMs('14 and '15) they grouped everyone from top to bottom by rating. Was this a new rule put in this year?

They just clarified the old rule. I take the position that we should follow the rulebook, especially at NTs and Majors. If that's controversial or wrong, so be it.

 

[DiscFifty]

IThat's where a better, more consistent method should be developed.

Force shot gun starts all the time. Problem solved?

 

[ToddL]

Was this a new rule put in this year?

No. The exact rule has been in place since 2011, and the PDGA has never allowed the first rounds groups to group the best players together. From 1986 to 2010, the PDGA only allowed random grouping for the first round. For the subset of 1990-1996, the PDGA allowed only random or seeded groups. You can infer what they meant by seeding from reading the rules about pooling players - seeded means equal number of good players and bad players on each card.
The only thing they did in the 2018 rules was further clarify the existing rules and add an additional note explicitly forbidding supergroups (they were already forbidden before) except for live video footage.

1986: 4.4.2 All players will be randomly grouped for the first round and grouped by cumulative score for each round thereafter

1990: 804.06.A All players will be randomly grouped or seeded for the first round and grouped by cumulative score for each round thereafter.

1997: 804.06.B All players within a division shall be randomly grouped for the first round and grouped by cumulative score for each round thereafter.

2002: 804.06.B All players within a division shall be randomly grouped for the first round and grouped by cumulative score for each round thereafter.

2006: 804.06.B All players within a division shall be randomly grouped for the first round and grouped by cumulative score for each round thereafter.

2011: CM1.6.B All players within a division for the first round should be grouped via two methods:
(1) Random grouping: players within a division may be randomly grouped for the first round.
(2) Player Rating grouping: players within a division may use player rating to set first round groups. Highest rated player starting on the lowest number hole, the second highest rated player starting on the following hole, etc. This process would continue until all starting holes have been filled.

2013: CM1.6.B All players within a division for the first round should be grouped via two methods:
(1) Random grouping: players within a division may be randomly grouped for the first round.
(2) Player Rating grouping: players within a division may use player rating to set first round groups. Highest rated player starting on the lowest number hole, the second highest rated player starting on the following hole, etc. This process would continue until all starting holes have been filled.

2018: CM1.06.B All players within a division should be grouped for the first round via one of the following methods:
(1)Random grouping; players within a division may be randomly grouped for the first round.
(2) Player Rating grouping; players within a division may be grouped by player rating to set first round groups. Highest rated player starting on the lowest number hole, the second highest rated player starting on the following hole, etc. This process would continue until all starting holes have been filled. For example, a division of 12 players across 3 holes set by the ranking of their ratings would be:
Hole 1: Players 1, 4, 7, and 10
Hole 2: Players 2, 5, 8, and 11
Hole 3: Players 3, 6, 9, and 12
CM1.06.J First round "Super Groups" for media purposes are NOT allowed unless for live coverage and previously approved by each player within the group and by the PDGA Tour Manager.


Side note about making pools (and also seeing what the PDGA meant when they said "seeded"):

1982: II.2.0.2 Sectioning should be by an equal seeding of players to each section, e.g. both sections should have an equal number of top players and average players and amateurs.

1986: 4.4.3 Sectioning should be by an equal seeding of players to each section, e.g. both sections should have an equal number of top players and average players.

1990: 804.06.D When there are more entrants than can play together in one round, the field of competitors may be split into sections. These sections shall be seeded, i.e., each section should have an equal number of top players and average players.

1997: 804.06.D When there are more entrants than can play together in one round, the field of competitors may be split into sections. These sections shall be seeded, i.e., each section should have an equal number of top players and lesser players.

2002: 804.06.D When there are more entrants than can play together in one round, the field of competitors may be split into sections. These sections shall be seeded, i.e., each section should have an equal number of top players and lesser players.

2006: 804.06.D When there are more entrants than can play together in one round, the field of competitors maybe split into sections or pools.

2011: CM1.6.E When there are more entrants than can play together in one round, the field of competitors maybe split into sections or pools.

2013: CM1.6.F When there are more entrants than can play together in one round, the field of competitors maybe split into sections or pools.

2018: CM1.06.B 3. In the case of a division that is large enough to be in multiple pools or sections, the players should be split by rating (example: 72 highest ratings in Pool A and 72 lowest ratings in Pool B) and then randomized within each pool for the first round.
CM1.06.H When there are more entrants than can play together in one round, the field of competitors may be split into sections or pools. Players within a division must play the exact same layouts during competition.

 

[pauldst]

Right, but a bunch of really smart people got together and created our rulebook. They created a procedure for grouping by ratings, tested the procedure and added it to our rulebook. Whether or not the way the Major grouped the pairings was "fair," it was not done according to the rules of the sport we play.

edit: I answered why sorting by ratings from top to bottom isn't fair in my blog posted above. I also think the PDGA board agreed that grouping by ratings isn't fair, otherwise why would they create these standards for grouping?

FWIW, I agree, but still I couldn't help but be amused by "a bunch of really smart people," thinking, You know we're talking about disc golfers, right? That's kind of like being told regarding a science fiction convention, "A bunch of people who are very well adjusted socially got together..."

So, serious question...

CM1.06.J First round "Super Groups" for media purposes are NOT allowed unless for live coverage and previously approved by each player within the group and by the PDGA Tour Manager.

What does the creation of "Super Groups" do to the order for other groups (I suspect it is done per the rules as if the SG members were not there), and what if live coverage is following more than one group?

Personally, I like seeing new, or less often seen, faces on in the first round coverage, rather than the same top players over and over.

 

[araytx]

Force shot gun starts all the time. Problem solved?

That's one way to limit the overall numbers in the field, for (formerly) bigger events.

 

[mullethead326]

That's one way to limit the overall numbers in the field, for (formerly) bigger events.

I'm really not a fan of this misconception.

At nearly all times of the year on nearly all courses, you can cleanly get 144 players through by doing two shotgun starts, one in the morning and one in the afternoon. 2 flights of 72. Players can warm up on the course they're about to play and everyone has the same weather within the flight.

The biggest waste of space in a tournament is for the first and last groups--at which point 17 full holes aren't being used. It would be a LOT more efficient to have the course at full capacity for as long as possible.

 

[JC17393]

I'm really not a fan of this misconception.

At nearly all times of the year on nearly all courses, you can cleanly get 144 players through by doing two shotgun starts, one in the morning and one in the afternoon. 2 flights of 72. Players can warm up on the course they're about to play and everyone has the same weather within the flight.

The biggest waste of space in a tournament is for the first and last groups--at which point 17 full holes aren't being used. It would be a LOT more efficient to have the course at full capacity for as long as possible.

You can still get more players through with a tee time round. 8am-3pm in foursomes at 10 minute intervals is the potential for 172 players (43 groups of 4), more if you start earlier and go longer as daylight allows. The "inefficiency" of having 17 empty holes at the start and finish is somewhat negated by the fact that with a shotgun round, assuming say a 10am and 2pm start, you've got a totally empty course for 4-5 hours of the ~10 hours the tee time round will take. I'd argue that the course is at "full capacity" (group for every hole) for the same amount of time in 2 shotgun rounds as it is in a tee time round.

The notion of having the course available to warm up on is overrated. As long as there's space available for players to use as a driving range and there are a couple available baskets for putting, it's entirely unnecessary to use the course for warming up.

 

[Cgkdisc]

144 players can play two rounds in a day with shotgun starts on two courses versus just one round with tee times, even if you have two courses available. What you gain from maybe getting 172 players through with tee times, you lose in competitive fairness for players competing under the same conditions.

 

[araytx]

144 players can play two rounds in a day with shotgun starts on two courses versus just one round with tee times, even if you have two courses available. What you gain from maybe getting 172 players through with tee times, you lose in competitive fairness for players competing under the same conditions.

True, but am I missing something? Didn't the one-round-per-day, no more than two courses for MPO come about at the behest of the MPO players??? Does their opinion not matter anymore?

 

[araytx]

I'm really not a fan of this misconception.

At nearly all times of the year on nearly all courses, you can cleanly get 144 players through by doing two shotgun starts, one in the morning and one in the afternoon. 2 flights of 72. Players can warm up on the course they're about to play and everyone has the same weather within the flight.

The biggest waste of space in a tournament is for the first and last groups--at which point 17 full holes aren't being used. It would be a LOT more efficient to have the course at full capacity for as long as possible.

What does efficiency have to do with it?