2008 PDGA Format

[tree]

LOL

[tree]

The non-variable in this equation is that Bruce plays on Saturday. Everything else revolves around that.

Recently the whole world has been revolving around me.  But today it went back to revolving around the sun. 

Now if the sun plays intermediate...

LOL

[Dan Michler]

Adding another amateur division only makes all of the divisions smaller, which in my opinion is bad for the game.

The draw of alot of bigger amateur events is playing in a large advanced field (Bowling Green for example).  It will be interesting to see if the top division still has 300+ players for BG, or if the fields all get smaller when alot of people sign up for Advanced instead of "Expert".  Supposedly this helps the 950-980 player who doesn't want to play pro, but I don't understand how.  They won't be competing against any different or better players than before, they'll just have the lower half of their field cut off, therefore decreasing their payout.

They should be cutting divisions instead of adding them.

[Jon Brakel]

Adding another amateur division only makes all of the divisions smaller, which in my opinion is bad for the game.

The draw of alot of bigger amateur events is playing in a large advanced field (Bowling Green for example).  It will be interesting to see if the top division still has 300+ players for BG, or if the fields all get smaller when alot of people sign up for Advanced instead of "Expert".  Supposedly this helps the 950-980 player who doesn't want to play pro, but I don't understand how.  They won't be competing against any different or better players than before, they'll just have the lower half of their field cut off, therefore decreasing their payout.

They should be cutting divisions instead of adding them.

Whoever said it helps the 950-980 rated Am player is full of crap. It helps the 915 to 925 rated ams who didn't have much of a chance to compete against the 950+ rated Ams. Advanced was the only division above jrs that had an 80 point ratings spread. I'm not sure how well this will help but I just thought I'd throw out one of the reasons behind the decision.

[Bruce Brakel]

It does not work for my self-interest.  I've gone from being above the cash line in Advanced to bottom feeder in Expert.  Nonetheless, for the reasons advanced by Jon, I'm for it.

I think something has to be changed with the amateur obelisk, though.  It makes no sense to award it to the Advanced player who gets the most points when the better Expert player who plays the same number of tournaments has no chance of winning it because he is playing in an eight-man field at most well attended tournaments.

Sometimes all I put on the Open 1st place trophy disc is "Champion".  If Expert becomes a one-trophy microdivision, their trophy might just say, "Expert".

[damonshort]

I'm not convinced that this is a good idea, but it does have an interesting effect on mediocre players like myself.

The only real goal I've ever set for myself, and have failed miserably at so far, is getting to a 900 rating. With any degree of consistency over the next few months, I could finally attain that this year; and come January, I'd then be an 'Advanced' player... which is a joke. So where I'm reasonably competitive in the current Intermediate system, I'll get hammered playing in the new Advanced division.

But, being old, the new 'ams playing pro for plastic' rule has some advantages. In a lot of WI tournaments, for example, where there's rarely an Am GM division (although that's changing), I'll be more inclined to play in a pro GM division, where with a couple of exceptions I can be competitive.

Although I've got way too much plastic anyhow.

The trophy-only option makes a lot of these dilemmas moot, but it's still a rarity outside of the IOS series, as far as I can tell. And since I tend to inhale great wind through pursed lips at most IOS events, this doesn't help me anyhow. 

[Bruce Brakel]

inhale great wind through pursed lips

 

Hey, moderator, could you move this thread to PDGA topics?  I started it in here because the document was not yet public, but now it is. 

[mirth]

Ask and, well.... you know.

[pickax]

Here are what the IOS 2006 and 2007 tournaments would look like based on Sep 2007 ratings. In the table below I've ground the Am Women together and the Juniors together for simplicities sake.

	ALL	AMW	JRS	AM1	AM2	AM3	AM4	FPO	MG1	MM1	MPM	MPO
IOS #1 at Kenosha	203	7	8	30	54	46	8	6		9	11	23
IOS #4 Forest City Frenzy	224	6	6	41	59	43	8	6	1	12	9	33
IOS #5 Streamwood Sturgeon	163	5	5	22	43	37	6	4	3	8	7	22
IOS #6 at Aurora Borealis	143	3	5	18	32	44	6	5	3	8	4	15
IOS #7 Fairfield Fairwell	162	2	7	28	42	47	7	3		9	6	11
IOS #2 at Lombard	202	10	5	31	51	50	9	6	2	9	9	20
IOS #3 Crystal Cruise	209	8	8	34	63	45	8	4	3	6	4	26
IOS #1 at Kenosha	172	3	5	25	44	39	17	8	7	1	4	19
IOS #2 at Lombard	165	6	8	16	48	32	22	4	6	2	3	16
IOS #3 Crystal Cruise	186	4	14	17	47	52	18	2	5	6	2	19
IOS #4 Discontinuum's Midwest National Qualifier	171	4	4	27	45	28	15	4	6	7	6	25
2006 Average	187	6	6	29	49	45	7	5	2	9	7	21
2007 AVerage	174	4	8	21	46	38	18	5	6	4	4	20
Average	182	5	7	26	48	42	11	5	3	7	6	21

Note also the jump in AM4 rated players from 2006 to 2007.

[Bruce Brakel]

When you look at those numbers by skill level, you really can see the bell curve, if you're one of those people who can look at tables full of numbers and see curves. 

If you want to play around with this:  Add MPO, Am 1 and Am 2 together and then add all other divisions together and see how that splits the field, tournament by tournament.  Also, add Am 1 and Am 2 as a total, and add all other divisions as a total and see how that splits the field.  Finally, add all pros and Am 1 together and add all other divisions together to see how that splits the field. 

Can anyone think of any other useful combinations?  It would be nice to split the field so that there is room on both days for our 2007 attendance in 2008.  Also, the split should be something easy to communicate, like "Open, Am 1 and Am 2 on Saturday; all other pro and amateur divisions on Sunday." 

[pickax]

The unlabeled columns are the other for each scenario in the preceding column. Best bets so far seem to be grouping either MPO/AM1/AM2 or grouping AM1/AM2 with the age protected divisions(/MM1/MG1/MPM)

		|||			|||	MG1		|||			|||
		|||			|||	MM1		|||			|||
		|||			|||	MPM		|||			|||
		|||	MPO		|||	MPO		|||			|||	AGE
		|||	AM1		|||	AM1		|||	AM1		|||	AM1
	ALL	|||	AM2		|||	FPO		|||	AM2		|||	AM2
IOS #1 at Kenosha	203	|||	107	96	|||	79	124	|||	84	119	|||	104	99
IOS #4 Forest City Frenzy	224	|||	133	91	|||	102	122	|||	100	124	|||	122	102
IOS #5 Streamwood Sturgeon	163	|||	87	76	|||	66	97	|||	65	98	|||	83	80
IOS #6 at Aurora Borealis	143	|||	65	78	|||	53	90	|||	50	93	|||	65	78
IOS #7 Fairfield Fairwell	162	|||	81	81	|||	57	105	|||	70	92	|||	85	77
IOS #2 at Lombard	202	|||	102	100	|||	77	125	|||	82	120	|||	102	100
IOS #3 Crystal Cruise	209	|||	123	86	|||	77	132	|||	97	112	|||	110	99
IOS #1 at Kenosha	172	|||	88	84	|||	64	108	|||	69	103	|||	81	91
IOS #2 at Lombard	165	|||	80	85	|||	47	118	|||	64	101	|||	75	90
IOS #3 Crystal Cruise	186	|||	83	103	|||	51	135	|||	64	122	|||	77	109
IOS #4 Rockford	171	|||	97	74	|||	75	96	|||	72	99	|||	91	80
2006 Average	187	|||	100	87	|||	73	114	|||	78	108	|||	96	91
2007 Average	174	|||	87	87	|||	59	114	|||	67	106	|||	81	93
Average	182	|||	95	87	|||	68	114	|||	74	108	|||	90	91

[shawn]

Why does the PDGA keep messing with the Am's?  For a minute there I thought that this is a good thing, till I saw that my rating is 936!  I guess I have step up my game as I am now the bottom of the top am division...  I beleive this new structure will not have me playing any events that are not trophy only...  Should I even bother renewing my pdga membership till I am a master in 2009?  This change is good for few and a bad thing for most Advance players.

[Dan Michler]

When you look at those numbers by skill level, you really can see the bell curve, if you're one of those people who can look at tables full of numbers and see curves. 

If you want to play around with this:  Add MPO, Am 1 and Am 2 together and then add all other divisions together and see how that splits the field, tournament by tournament.  Also, add Am 1 and Am 2 as a total, and add all other divisions as a total and see how that splits the field.  Finally, add all pros and Am 1 together and add all other divisions together to see how that splits the field. 

Can anyone think of any other useful combinations?  It would be nice to split the field so that there is room on both days for our 2007 attendance in 2008.  Also, the split should be something easy to communicate, like "Open, Am 1 and Am 2 on Saturday; all other pro and amateur divisions on Sunday." 

i wish Am 1 and Am 2 would be on separate days so I could play both. 

[pickax]

One item that will be hard to predict is depending on the split, can we encourage more double dipping? e.g. Often the FPO division has a lot of players that are playing also on Sunday. If AM1 and MPO are on separate days will more AM1's test out MPO especially with the new merch instead of cash rules.

[Bruce Brakel]

Dan and Mike's double dipping point is a good one.  But let me talk about the data first. 

The splits Krupicka is showing above strongly favor the MPO M1 M2 / All others or the one Mike came up with, M1, M2, 40+ / All others.  Because of the strong internal resistance to putting juniors on the MPO day, MPO M1 M2 / All Others is looking like early leader. 

Chuck Kennedy has a split idea where you put every other division on one day so that both days anyone can play up one division, like Dan was talking about.  That would start off like

Day X:  MPO M2 M4/FW1
Day Y:  M1  M3  FW2

Chuck's plan does not say what to do with the 40+ divisions and Jr. divisions because he would eliminate those divisions.  I don't think we want to go that way, but I'd be o.k. with eliminating my age protected division if we were eliminating all of them.  My problem with Chuck's plan is there is no simple way to remember and tell people what division plays what day other than to say, "Go to double you double you double you brass cash dot com and see.  They made it to complicated to remember."   

[pickax]

		|||	Pro
		|||	AM2
		|||	AM4
		|||
		|||
	ALL	|||
IOS #1 at Kenosha	203	|||	102	101
IOS #4 Forest City Frenzy	224	|||	115	109
IOS #5 Streamwood Sturgeon	163	|||	82	81
IOS #6 at Aurora Borealis	143	|||	62	81
IOS #7 Fairfield Fairwell	162	|||	69	93
IOS #2 at Lombard	202	|||	95	107
IOS #3 Crystal Cruise	209	|||	105	104
IOS #1 at Kenosha	172	|||	92	80
IOS #2 at Lombard	165	|||	93	72
IOS #3 Crystal Cruise	186	|||	88	98
IOS #4 Rockford	171	|||	95	76
2006 Average	187	|||	90	97
2007 Average	174	|||	92	82
Average	182	|||	91	91

[pickax]

The one nice bonus of every other division idea is that (unless you are a pro), if you show up on the wrong day, there is a sanctioned division that you are eligible for.

[Bruce Brakel]

Chuck thought the every other format would split the field evenly based on the bell curve when we were talking about this.  I don't know if this was by e-mail or on a message board.  Looks like he did some hypotheticals from real tournaments. 

[Bruce Brakel]

I really like Chuck's idea but, as some of you may have surmised by now, I'm mentally ill.  If my less crazy brother and Brett both liked it, I could remember MPO, MA2 and MA4 play Sunday, because the even divisions are playing on the second day.  Then again, maybe I could remember all that but someone who does not have "a beautiful mind" could not. 

Oh, and while I'm on that topic I've been wondering, can everybody else see Jon and Brett, or to you does it look like Diana and I run these things alone?   

[can't putt]

Looks to me like Brett does the course prep., lays out temp. holes and runs the new player clinic on Sundays.  Jon organizes the cards, tabulates scores, does all the reports.  You just sell merch.