Membership Pct

[tacimala]

AMIV has an upper limit of 850 next year. Get that drive of yours 6" higher and you'll be there.

Yes, but what Pitner is saying is that since it is no longer a shadow division it is also no longer protected from unrated/non-member players. I would be in favor of protecting the lower divisions by making non-pdga members play trophy only but I am only one vote in the IOS consortium. Let your voice be heard now if you support this idea.

I think that most everyone that participates here is a PDGA member so the votes will probably be slanted a bit. I like the current setup that you guys have that after a rating update you calculate the non members as well to make sure that they are also moving up as necessary so as to create a better set of competitions inside the groupings. Maybe someone doesn't know about the PDGA before they play their first tournament and it would be unfair to apply that idea to these types of players before they know their options.

[pickax]

It may be that for first time players in a PDGA tournament, telling them to play trophy only might be a good thing for them if they don't know what to expect. I was better than my friends, but still finished last in my first tournament.  If they have a calculated rating (and we could use unofficials if they have no officially rated rounds), would they then be allowed to play full fee?

I like it in concept, but the tournament flier is starting to resemble those flow charts my Jr High computer teachers were fond of:
If you are PDGA member, MPO, MA2, MA4 plays on Sunday, all other members play on Saturday. If you are not a member you can play trophy only in the bottom divisions or full fee in the top divisions unless you've played in a PDGA tournament in Illinois in the last two years in which case see the list for your appropriate division.

The basic tenets we do need to follow are:
PDGA members with ratings must follow the ratings marks for the AM divisions.
PDGA members w/o ratings can play in any division where they are of proper gender and age.
It needs to be simple.
Now, the question is how do you make it fair to those that are not members with regards to those that are,
while at the same time making it easier for players to get started playing tournaments. The calculated ratings are good for those that have played PDGA tournaments in the past, but what do you do with first timers? If the division split is MPO/MA2/MA4, pushing players into the higher of the AM divisions puts them in either Expert(935+) or Advanced(900-935). I don't think many at their first tournament belong there. I will try to look at my stats tomorrow to see where first time non-rated players fell ratings wise.

If we said that all non-PDGA members were trophy only (except for Open), then it keeps the registration table simple.

One thing to further complicate matters: If the non-member fee goes up from $5, does that change anything? It will SEEM like a racket if a PDGA member plunks down $30 and can win merch and a non-member plunks down $30 for Trophy only.

[Chainmeister]

The calculated ratings are good for those that have played PDGA tournaments in the past, but what do you do with first timers?

Just let them play wherever they think the should play.  Ask them a few questions about their game, give them a suggestion and let the discs fall there they may.  Some will overestimate their ability and play a divsion too high.  Others will be sandbaggers.  It really doesn't matter.  I like they way the IOS tournaments have estimated a rating for players that reappear.  There is less bagging thatn in the outside world.  Let the first timers play and see how good, or bad, they are.  .

[Bruce Brakel]

Unfortunately, I don't think you could ever completely avoid bagging because even if you restrict a division to PDGA-members only, you'll still get someone that just joined that is unrated and won't be positioned properly until after they get some sanctioned rounds in.

Don't know if it's still that way, but when Mid-Nationals was at Highbridge as an X-Tier you had to have a certain amount of rated rounds in order to participate. not saying to run the IOS that way, just an idea.

Yes, but what Pitner is saying is that since it is no longer a shadow division it is also no longer protected from unrated/non-member players. I would be in favor of protecting the lower divisions by making non-pdga members play trophy only but I am only one vote in the IOS consortium. Let your voice be heard now if you support this idea.

I'd support non-PDGA members being restriced to Trophy Only

Mid-Nationals is unique as it is the only Major that has ratings protected divisions so they kind of had to decide on some standards.

Mid Nationals is not unique in that way, actually.  But what Chuck has done with Mid-Nationals is far to be preferred to what the PDGA has done with Women's Nationals.  I cannot remember when, if ever, the Intermediate Women's division was won by a woman with an intermediate rating. 

[Jon Brakel]

Unfortunately, I don't think you could ever completely avoid bagging because even if you restrict a division to PDGA-members only, you'll still get someone that just joined that is unrated and won't be positioned properly until after they get some sanctioned rounds in.

Don't know if it's still that way, but when Mid-Nationals was at Highbridge as an X-Tier you had to have a certain amount of rated rounds in order to participate. not saying to run the IOS that way, just an idea.

Yes, but what Pitner is saying is that since it is no longer a shadow division it is also no longer protected from unrated/non-member players. I would be in favor of protecting the lower divisions by making non-pdga members play trophy only but I am only one vote in the IOS consortium. Let your voice be heard now if you support this idea.

I'd support non-PDGA members being restriced to Trophy Only

Mid-Nationals is unique as it is the only Major that has ratings protected divisions so they kind of had to decide on some standards.

Mid Nationals is not unique in that way, actually.  But what Chuck has done with Mid-Nationals is far to be preferred to what the PDGA has done with Women's Nationals.  I cannot remember when, if ever, the Intermediate Women's division was won by a woman with an intermediate rating. 

Exactly. I stand by my original statement.

[pickax]

I took the first two rounds chronologically for each unrated player (makes a bad assumption that it was their first tourney) for the past two years at IOS tournaments. This includes juniors and women which skews it down. I could not correlate what division they actually played in.
2008 Division - Number of rounds played at this level:
MA4 - 205
MA3 - 123
MA2 - 72
MA1 - 33

[Bruce Brakel]

Did you get laid off, or what? 

[pickax]

It took like 5 minutes while I was waiting for a build.

[Bruce Brakel]

I don't think the non-member fee will go up for 2008.  I have not seen or heard anything about that other than Peter Shive spouting off on his Ask Peter Shive thread. 

Economically, it would not make any sense to do what Peter is suggesting.  The $5 fee is $5 of profit to the PDGA.  For that $5 they give the non-member absolutely nothing.  If they were to jack that up to $10, a lot of non-members would join or not play.  The PDGA would gain members and lose revenue. 

I'm not sure the PDGA could ram that down the throats of their TDs, especially this year while they are trying to ram a new amateur divisional structure down the throats of their TDs.