Did yall see this yet? I think this is great for smaller pro divisions. Am I reading it right? I can take cash one weekend in my division and the next weekend I can play down and win plastic if there is not a division for me, within my rating of course? This really helps out the Pro Women.

http://www.pdga.com/documents/td/05TourStandards.pdf

And in case my link doesnt work I am talking about the first page of the 2005 PDGA Tour Standards.

Yes, you are reading it right. And, Pro Women divisions will be one of the smaller divisions to benefit from the change along with MPG and MPS. But, it's not playing down, just sideways :)

Thank you PDGA!!!!!

Yes, I am already looking at next years schedule to see when I may play a big Advanced tournament. That is unless I play real good this Sunday and my ratings go up too high :D

So, I guess you'll be playing advanced next year.
:cool:

Advantage:

PDGA events are now more affordable. Pros can play in the Advanced division for a lower entry fee instead of the sometimes outrageous Open entry fees that are charged.

Disadvantages:

1) Competing for prizes/trophies only and no PDGA points. Some people actually prefer playing for money. A lot of veterans may have little need for discs or yet another t-shirt. Some people like earning PDGA points, even though they are usually not required to get into Worlds.

2) Why can pros play as amateurs in all tournaments but Amateur Majors? Why are they excluded?

3) The changes have resulted in the abandonment of the Pro 2 division option, which was never really even given a chance. Ratings-based events, the smartest and fairest way to organize divisional play that was ever created, have also been abandoned.

It help women a lot because I, and many other women in my are, have been struggling with the decision to go pro, but dont want to play open against the guys when there are no open women. This gives me and many other females the option. This will really help the women out and I thank you PDGA.

2) Why can pros play as amateurs in all tournaments but Amateur Majors? Why are they excluded?



Not to stir the pot (but why not?), at some point I believe our current Advanced might also be excluded from Am Majors, so we're starting with the (semi) Pros now. I believe the new Mid-Nationals (not so secret Ratings Major) will emerge as the championship for those who are essentially semi-pros and the merch Ams. Then, the Am Worlds might actually include only 'true' Ams (Nick will almost be too excited to hear this). Not saying this will all happen, but it's in the realm of possibilities.

Seems like putting a whole lot of faith in our current ratings system, but also makes alot of players that took $50 and never cashed again happy along with the Women 50/50.

My new slogan for the PDGA

"We came up with something dumber than Pro 2"

I like this move because I want to play pro next year, and I still want to go to A tiers where I won't have a chance at cashing in pro. This way I can play pro at B and C tiers and Adv. at A tiers if I don't have the money to play pro. This definitely is helping. me move from Am to Pro

Very good point also...

Let's give it a whirl :D

I like it because it is what I proposed a year or two ago. :)

Drop the whole "pro" and "am" designation thing. We all know the progression by skill is rec/int/adv/open. Only Open should play for cash, prizes to all others. No restrictions in moving "down" as long as your rating is sucky enough. Who cares if you took $1000 back in 1987, if your rating is 835 you should get to play against other 835 rated players.

Now if we can just get rid of these graduated entry fees we can put a max rating on Advanced. No better way to get people to quit playing tourneys than to kick them up to Open and then charge them $125 entry instead of $45. Should be same entry for all divisions, IMHO. Or maybe $5 steps.

Okay, If I am reading this correctly then a Pro can play an AM event even if his/her division IS offered. Am I reading this right? Can a PRO come to an AM event only and play? If I am reading this right, then this really STINKS.

I have moved up this year to play MM1 and I have been able to compete at a couple of events, but I am still trying to feel my way around the bigger division. AS someone who is trying to move up and play, this really hurts when you have a PRO come down to play because THEY cannot compete...CAN YOU SAY BAGGER. If this is going to be the case then I never want to hear ANYBODY call a REC or and INT player a bagger again just because they want to stay in that particular division to compete. The PGA, USTA, NRA, NHL and other leagues DO NOT allow their PRO players to go back and play against Ams in sanctioned tournaments. I have played and coached in two of those leagues and know this for a fact. All of these leagues have much larger Amateur divisions then the PDGA and these leagues also know that the Amateur divisions of their leagues are what supports and cultivates the up and coming professional. If a player cannot compete in the Pro rankings then more divisions need to be offered to help cultivate this area of our sport.

I agree that there are some divisions that will benefit from this such as the ladies, but for others, it is not going to do anything but tell people, you might as well not move up because now you will be playing against pros.

What will happen to the ratings now and what happens to the player who is trying to work his way up and gain the experience so that he can play pro. All the PDGA has done now is move us backwards. I can now see many people staying in the lower divisions, as long as their rating lets them, so that they can be competitive and come away from a tourney with a good experience.

My suggestion is this and I know that the PRO2 thing didn't work out but how about a division on the amateur side of the coin that allows for this but it is a protected division that allows for those who want to move-up and test the waters of the PRO's without the sacrifice of losing the shirt off of their backs and allows for these so called 'lower' PRO's to move down and be competitive. I know it sounds alot like the PRO2 format, but allowing a PRO to come down, and this is a "PLAYING DOWN" move not a sideways move really STINKS.

It stops sandbagging, not make it worse.

If a Rec player starts to play better, he has to move up.

On the other hand, players like me who's rating has gone down can play without donating anymore.

Okay, If I am reading this correctly then a Pro can play an AM event even if his/her division IS offered. Am I reading this right?




It's great for when there's a division of 1 or 2, but bad when there's a division of 5-10, and half can bail out.

I predict it'll cause problems in the smaller divisions:
Leslie, Juliana, and Des show up for an A-tier in SC, and all the local ladies under-950 bail to the Adv Men's division?

Sorry Paul but very few of our pros are truly pros and hardly any of our ams are ams. They're both out there playing for fun (hopefully). And, if they have the same rating, they're playing at the same skill level, but one wins cash and the other wins merch. A 930 Master Pro is playing sideways if he's playing a 930 Advanced player. Most other sports do not have ams who win the kind of merchandise our so called ams do so you can't even compare with disc golf.

If a Pro Master is the same as an Advance Master then please tell me how a Pro Master gets a higher round rating then an Advance Master when they play the same course, same tee pads and the same pars. Maybe this is not suppose to happen but it has. It did not happen to me but last year when I looked at a tournament result it was there in black and white.

I will agree with you about the merchandise the ams receive in tournaments. I have played at the local, state and regional levels, in both the juniors and adult leagues of the USTA and have never received anything more than a tournament package and some sort of a trophy for placing. In PGA events I have won long distance drives and closest to the pin on several occassions, but again, except for the tournament package I received nothing but a trophy or medal.

If you are going to have Pro's and they want to turn Pro then they need to be treated as one and the Ams treated as Ams and no going back and forth. It might be healthy in the short term for those who will use this and for TD's, but I think you will see others who cannot compete start to slip away from playing in sanctioned tournaments and play more unsanctioned tournaments and leagues only.

If you want the sport to grow then you start at the lower levels and make changes there and move your way up. This sport is growing and maybe the sport is outgrowing its Pro members, but to go and do this then you will lose those lower level ones who are the backbone of any sport.

All that you hear form Pro's and the PDGA is if you don't like the payouts or the playing situations is "MOVE UP and play Pro so that you don't have to complain. This was a major complaint at the Texas State Championships this year, and both Pro's and PDGA officials said to Shut up and Move up(in a nutshell).

I didn't start playing this game competitively for the merchandise. My first tournament I placed 5th in the old Novice division and won several discs. I was heading to the truck when someone told me that I had placed fifth, and I said thanks. They had to stop me to tell me that I had won some discs and a t-shirt. I might play the "True AM" tourney if they offer it, but I have grown acustomed to merchandise, even though I am not placing much anymore. That might change when I start seeing Pro's in my division. That is when I will decide if I should go back to a division where I can compete and enjoy the game. because I can pretty much tell you that I will not enjoy getting beat by players who have that much more experience than me.

By the way, rating wise it might be a lateral move, but division wise it is a move down and could be considered a 'pansy' move by others. I also like what a previous poster said,

"It's great for when there's a division of 1 or 2, but bad when there's a division of 5-10, and half can bail out.

I predict it'll cause problems in the smaller divisions:
Leslie, Juliana, and Des show up for an A-tier in SC, and all the local ladies under-950 bail to the Adv Men's division?"

Or the Advance womens division, and hey, they don't have to be under 950, they just have to be over 800 for the advance womens division. And the same goes for the men if they see Climo, Shultz, Todd, just to name a few.

Well, if a 955 rated Pro sees Climo, Schultz, Todd etc, they are giving up about 8 strokes a round to those players. Would it be better if they stayed home, or played in Adv. ?

I predict it'll cause problems in the smaller divisions:
Leslie, Juliana, and Des show up for an A-tier in SC, and all the local ladies under-950 bail to the Adv Men's division?



That would not be a smart move if these women are concerned about winning and recouping their entry fees. Granted, the entry fees are slightly less in the Am divisions, but their probability of winning or placing in the cash/plastic are much worse. Leslie=934, Juliana=946, and Des=945 and they are the best in the world. There are boatloads of Adv Men in this scoring range.

On the topic, I see both sides of this coin. However, the problem lies in the fact that we have (especially in Texas) a bunch of Pros with ratings between 930-950 who probably shouldn't be playing Open--and nowadays they don't play at all (or very little or are planning on cutting back). Allowing them to play Advanced gives these players a chance to be involved again. Of course it will be up to them to use this mechanism. If Pro2 was any indication (which I thought was a better idea), I have my doubts that it will be accepted by the majority.

Plus, we have women who are, or are on the verge of becoming, Pros and effectively reducing their field size to 3 or 4 (if they're lucky). Are they suppose to keep playing events in their 1-person divisions?

And how will Ams start slipping away? If I as an Am player am playing against another player rated similarly, why should it matter if that player is designated Pro or Am? Our skill levels are similar, so it doesn't matter. Anyone who doesn't think that needs to work on their mental game and not be as rattled by a word on a piece of paper. To me, it's just one more player in my division. The ratings don't lie as much as we think they do.

Leslie, Juliana, and Des show up for an A-tier in SC, and all the local ladies under-950 bail to the Adv Men's division?



First off EVERY Pro Open female is rated under 950 so if all the competition moves over to Advanced men the Juliana, Des, and Leslie can move over right along with them. Hell i would love to play a tournament where Juliana Des Leslie Mandi Brita Valerie or any of those pros were on my card in Advance men. Hell i bet they can whip more then half the Advanced field in the country.

I dont mind that the Women can move from division to division if there is not a good sized division for them to play in. If they are playing in a 2 person division for cash and there is a 40 person Advanced division for prizes they are liable to win more in merch then they would have in cash. They can then sell the merch and make more then they would have in the Cash division.

The thing i DO have a problem with is the 955 Rated pros being able to play in the Advanced division. THEY Decided to go PRO. NO ONE forced them to do so. If they went pro too early and cant hack it then sorry "SUCKS TO BE YOU!!!"
you made the choice, DEAL WITH IT!!!!!!!!

You guys want to eliminate SANDBAGGING as you call it but your going to let a 955 Rated pro move down at play against AMs who have never accepted cash and never decided to go pro because they KNOW they cant hang. Now you are going to have so really PISSSSSED off Advanced players. You guys keep telling everyone MOVE UP MOVE UP but now your letting people MOVE DOWN.

I thought Pro 2 was a WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY better idea then this. This in my opinion is just plain STUPID and anyone who actually moves DOWN will be a pretty big SISSY for doing so. Maybe not the pros who are rated 929 or 935 or that range but if these 955 rated pros start moving down your going to have a upset Advanced division because no one wants to play against PROs if they did they would MOVE UP. Then your going to have a upset Pro division because you just cut out half of their competition and money.

When you move up your going to be donating for a while unless your a SANDBAGGER like Coda and JJ and Dave Shaw to name a few :o( no offence guys ). This donating is called PAYING YOUR DUES. If you didnt want to donate you shouldtn have moved up so soon. PURE AND SIMPLE!!!!

The Womens side of it is GREAT because it gives them more competition and a chance to have a division bigger then 5 people at every local tournament they play.

The men have enough competition and the set up was fine how it was in 2004. I just think this is a really bad idea and it takes away from being a PRO. No other sport lets you just go back and forth back and forth. IMO its rediculous. If your really that bad you should apply for your AM status back. IMO you should get rid of this and bring back Pro 2

Again, a 950 Pro is no more a Pro than a 950 Advanced player is an Am. One wins bills, the other wins plastic coins (as Harold calls them) that are many times worth more. No one really 'turns pro' in this sport until they hit the road and that becomes their way of living. If Advanced players gave up winning merch then you could squawk more about equally rated players from the pro ranks moving sideways into a truly amateur division. You already admitted that the Women who are truly pros 'could win more' doing well in Advanced. That sounds like Advanced is a better 'pro division' for the Women, eh?

That sounds like Advanced is a better 'pro division' for the Women, eh?



Yes it is a better "pro division" for the WOMEN. Only because it gives them a chance to have more competition then just 3-4 people. Then its gives them a chance to win more since there are more people entered in the division. The guys have enough competition as it is. They dont need to MOVE DOWN to get more competition. IMO if a female played in the Mens divisions her whole career she would prolly develope into a better player because she would be pushed to keep up with the men. (No thats not a sexist comment so dont take it like that) More competition and better players produces better players.

I think its great that the WOMEN are going to get more competition out of this. They arent trying to move down they just want to play against more people. Its not their fault that they are only 5% of the competitive disc golf community. Thats the idea. More competition. Not hey you turned pro by your own choice but now you suck so you can move back down. That says nothing for becoming a pro.

How are you going to define someones ROOKIE YEAR now. I mean turning pro really doesnt mean ANYTHING now since you can just jump back and forth from Open to Advanced.

Bring back Pro 2. That is where all these people who would be moving down or moving up belong. Its like a Buy.Com tour for Disc Golf :D

I dont see the problem here. Being "pro" is really just a title until you get to the 1000+ mark, imo. If people with the same ratings are playing in the same division then thats where they should be. I think the PDGA is doing the right thing here. Remember its all about growing the sport and over all attendance. This might just help accomplish that.

Pimp, the arguement you make about playing with better players incubates better players....can be said for all divisions. If a 950 pro is playing a 914 am, dont you think the 914 am is going to be pushed more than if they were to just play with other 914 ams? And think how good it will feel to say, I beat a pro that played am today!

Again, I dont see the big deal here. As far as I am concerned, let the pro drop down and 'donate' for a change. I look forward to playing better players than I so I will play better myself. ;)

Whatever they want to do. Im still going to play 35 sanctioned tournaments and win a bunch of plastic either way. :D

How do you think those pros that drop down are going to feel when they get whooped by a 929 rated am??? :o

How do you think those "pros" that drop down are going to feel when they get whooped by a 929 rated am??? :o

what he said!

The problem with the womens divisions is that there seems to be trouble moving up . Rec women dont want to play with the advanced women because of the difference in skill. There is rarely an intermediate womens division because the lack of women playing anyway. Then there are the advanced girls, where it seems most of the girls are right now. Some of them are advanced and some should be pro. But the problem there is that once you reach the top of the advanced division, where do you go? With the men it is different, there are plenty of men at the same skill level in open so they can still compete. But with the women if an advanced girl goes pro and then there are no pro women, her only choice is/was to play with the open men. Many of the women dont want to take the step and play open at hometown minis and tournies. The chance that more than one pro woman will show at a mini or a smaller tournie is very slim. The thought of that is scary. So the girls in advanced go from being at the top of there division to the very bottom of the open men with no chance of competing at all. I cant speak for the womens pro division because I have not played there enough but I think this step has taken some great girls out of the game in the past. I really think this change in 2005 will help the womens pro division grow because it will give the advanced girls a chance to test the waters of open and still protect them from having to play open at minis and every other event with the pro men. I really dont think pro women will run and hide in the mens divisions if Julianna, Des and crew show up even if they are rated below 850 like you have to be. I would love to play with those girls and any good female disc golfer should fell the same way. I applaud the PDGA for making this change and I am sorry if it had a negative effect on other divisions.

The problem lies not with the freedom the 950 player now has to drop down, the problem lies with a system that encourages that 950 player to drop down.

It's a no brainer for the 950 player: I can pay $100 bucks to play against the best and lose $100; I can pay $50 and have a good chance to win that $50 back, or possibly $250; or I can stay home. For a lot of people, that's an easy decision.

Bring back Pro 2. That is where all these people who would be moving down or moving up belong.



I too am (was?) as big fan of Pro2. It made sense for people in my stage of life - approaching 40, changing life priorities, will never be better than a 975 rated player (maybe more likely having a declining rating from my 949 of today). It gave me the chance to compete with the more serious/mature players while saving me $ (my family's $).

In all honesty, your gripes about the new system sound about right for a player with a 929 rating (that is trending upwards). Now there is more competition for you in the chase for plastic. It makes sense that you don't like it.

That is the problem with any ratings based system. You and me both have reason to feel "cheated" by the division structure of the new Mid-Nationals where we would be competing in the 926-975 ratings group. It is not a ratings group that caters to us winnning. What did we do wrong that puts us at long odds of "cashing"? I'm sure everyone would love it if that event had a ratings group with "their rating + 5" as the top end of the division. But, you gotta draw lines somewhere....

Bottom line, we all need to step back and take a 30,000 ft view of these new structures before making gripes (or applause) based on our current ratings and priorities. I have not taken time to do this, but I am convinced that the PDGA did - just look at the "Goals" listed at the outset of the document.

The problem lies not with the freedom the 950 player now has to drop down, the problem lies with a system that encourages that 950 player to drop down.

It's a no brainer for the 950 player: I can pay $100 bucks to play against the best and lose $100; I can pay $50 and have a good chance to win that $50 back, or possibly $250; or I can stay home. For a lot of people, that's an easy decision.



You answered your own question/criticism here. It looks like the goal is for the <950 Pro players taking choice C (staying at home) to start enjoying PDGA tournaments again. And, there are a lot of those types. Many more than those who play (and lose) regularly. At least in these parts.

The 950 players who for whatever reason (pride, camaraderie, competition, etc.) wish to donate to play with the Pro's are still free to do so.

I dont not like it because people better then me can now MOVE DOWN and play against me. I dont like it because it now means NOTHING to turn pro because you can always turn back. Thats stupid. If i make the choice to go pro which i will prolly be doing in the next couple of years. I want that to MEAN SOMETHING. With this new change it really doesnt mean anything because if i cant hack it i can just move back down to Advanced. Hell i love the fact that i going to get to whip on some pros this year :D Maybe i wont get in groups filled with HACKS now. I play better when i play with people who are the same or better then i am.

I say bring it on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It will only help my game to elivate at a more rapid pace :D Then i can leave those guys behind in Advanced when i MOVE UP to play with the BIG GUNZ :D

Plus it will be great calling them all SANDBAGGERS and SISSYS that couldnt hack it up top. That and i will get to laugh at them when they move down and I WHIP THEIR ACE with a 929 rating :eek:

Plus it will be great calling them all SANDBAGGERS and SISSYS that couldnt hack it up top.


And that attitude right there is the reason the <950 pros are in the place they are. That being, at home, playing minis and leagues....

most all of the pros that are 955 rated or less don't cash in pro tournaments so what is the matter with them playing advanced. There are plenty of am players that are rated over 960, I used to be one of those. :DIf you like winning discs instead of money go ahead and play advanced. :p

It will also give advanced players the chance to test the field in open and see if they are ready to play open, and if they cash they can accept the money and not have to be pro for good.Just think of it as a learning experience. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

If you go Pro and your rating rises above 954, there is no turning back (for a while at least) once you've cashed. CB, it's not turning pro that will mean something. It will mean something when your rating goes above 954 AND you cash in Pro.

How do you think those pros that drop down are going to feel when they get whooped by a 929 rated am??? :o



Steve, in 23 sanctioned events where you played Advanced this year, you have averaged 19.78th place. You should focus on 'whooping' the Advanced players before you start calling out equally-rated Pros. :eek:

And that attitude right there is the reason the <950 pros are in the place they are. That being, at home, playing minis and leagues....



They are there because they made a bad decision and either dont have any desire to become better or just dont want to compete anymore. They can always apply for Am status again.

I could really care less. Im going to play Am all year and maybe a few Pro events. If i cash i will decline because i would like to still be eligible for rookie of the year when i do decide to go pro. I also want to be able to play worlds if i choose and Nationals for sure.

I dont care. I will continue to compete no matter what they put into affect because i love the sport and i love playing in tournaments.

That is the problem with any ratings based system. You and me both have reason to feel "cheated" by the division structure of the new Mid-Nationals where we would be competing in the 926-975 ratings group. It is not a ratings group that caters to us winnning. What did we do wrong that puts us at long odds of "cashing"? I'm sure everyone would love it if that event had a ratings group with "their rating + 5" as the top end of the division. But, you gotta draw lines somewhere....



I disagree. The Mid-Nationals Blue division draws the appropriate line and absolutely caters to our skill group, the 926-975 pros. Any player whose rating falls into that bracket can be competetive with those of ratings up to 975. The inequities occur when the 926-950 rated players are forced to compete with 990+ and 1000+ rated players in the Open division in the standard PDGA format. Even on a bad day, 990+ and 1000+ rated players will typically always outscore a 926-950 rated player on his best day. Is it fair that they are in the same division?

Previously, golfers could opt for tournaments that featured Pro 2 or ratings-based divisions, of which there were several in my region each year. I'm sure there weren't as many tournaments of this format that the PDGA would have liked, but a seemingly growing number each year. With the 2005 changes, we're forced to choose between either donating to the Open division or playing for merchandise and no PDGA points against golfers in the advanced division whose ratings typically reach all the way down to 900 or below. How many will take the latter option, and risk the inevitable "sandbagger" labels that will follow?

There are plenty of am players that are rated over 960, I used to be one of those. :DIf you like winning discs instead of money go ahead and play advanced. :p



I suppose 'plenty' is a subjective word. According to the ratings, 24 of 4247 Am Men in the whole world are 960+. That's only 0.57%! Maybe that is plenty. :cool:

Just a minor correction, Blue is 925-974. Although players with ratings below 925 will be allowed to play up, if there's still room about a week before the event, but not during pre-reg to make sure there's enough room for all 925-974 players who enter.

Steve, in 23 sanctioned events where you played Advanced this year, you have averaged 19.78th place. You should focus on 'whooping' the Advanced players before you start calling out equally-rated Pros.



You must have alot of time on your hands to be researching all my tournaments and figuring that out.

Your including the 129th at Bowling Green in there. You are also using the 2 tournaments i DNFed because of either threat to health or events i could not control. So throw those out. Then do the average. Then do it for the last 5 months. Then look at how long i have been playing.

What did you average this year???

I am not talking about this year am I??? I am talking about next year :D

You must have alot of time on your hands to be researching all my tournaments and figuring that out.


It took approximately 31 seconds to copy your Advanced Standings into Excel, and then use the Average mathmatical function to compute the average. Heck, it took longer to explain it to you than it took to figure it out.

Your including the 129th at Bowling Green in there. You are also using the 2 tournaments i DNFed because of either threat to health or events i could not control. So throw those out. Then do the average. Then do it for the last 5 months. Then look at how long i have been playing.


Throw them out? No thanks, you don't get to hand select your data set. I used what was publicly and readily available.

What did you average this year???


Fair enough -- in 14 sanctioned Intermediate events (only a 878 rating), I've averaged 10.21th place. But thats apples and oranges.

I am not talking about this year am I??? I am talking about next year :D


No...you're just talking. We're used to it. But it's still fun to call you out on it from time-to-time. And watch you get all huffed up trying to defend rhetorical rubbish.

I started this year as an 866 rated player playing in the ADVANCED division.

I was only rated into the Advanced division with this past ratings update. I just cant wait untill next year. My 2nd year or tournaments should be a little better then this year. We shall see though. My tournaments start back up again with the Gentlemens Club Classic on the 26th of Feb. I cant wait!!!!!!!

You are right about one thing though. I DO like to TALK :D

Well, if a 955 rated Pro sees Climo, Schultz, Todd etc, they are giving up about 8 strokes a round to those players. Would it be better if they stayed home, or played in Adv. ?



http://pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=3988#Open
Check the rating of the guy in 16th place that finished 3 strokes behind Climo.

No other sport lets you just go back and forth back and forth.



Yeah, that would be like a washed out NFLer playing in the Canadian, European, or Arena league trying to make it back to the top.

Or Baseball players bouncing back and forth between the Majors, and minors, or bounching around the various minor leagues, or playing in Japan, or South America.

That stuff never happens.

[/sarcasm]

Well, if a 955 rated Pro sees Climo, Schultz, Todd etc, they are giving up about 8 strokes a round to those players. Would it be better if they stayed home, or played in Adv. ?



A 955 rated Pro would be stuck, as he wouldn't be eligible to play Advanced.

http://pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=3988#Open
Check the rating of the guy in 16th place that finished 3 strokes behind Climo.



On a side note, I find it amazing that you averaged 1010 golf for three consecutive rounds, yet your player rating has not budged since then!

There are plenty of am players that are rated over 960, I used to be one of those. :DIf you like winning discs instead of money go ahead and play advanced. :p

I suppose 'plenty' is a subjective word. According to the ratings, 24 of 4247 Am Men in the whole world are 960+. That's only 0.57%! Maybe that is plenty. :cool:



Who said this new event or our new competitive system is for WWCC ams? The disc golf player demographic with ratings between 925 and 975 is by far the largest on in disc golf. Before our current competitive system and new major only guys playing for discs and baskets or over 40 or 50 had any reason to show. Once 975 becomes hard for both am and pro in the Blue Division, ALL GOLFERS PLAYING FOR PROFIT will again become just disc golfers.. and we will finally end institutional sandbagging.

Nick, you are so full of crap it isn't even funny.

There are very few people on this planet that play disc golf for profit, and only a handful of them actually make a profit.

Just because some people play for cash doesn't mean they play for profit. And just because some people play for plastic doesn't mean they play for profit.

And just because there are 5 or 10 ams who win plastic sell it for cash every year doesn't mean that every friggin' am player in the world plays for profit. And it CERTAINLY doesn't mean that every friggin single am player that has every hoped to "merch" and win a disc has ever made a "profit" at disc golf.

Nick is an idiot.

Nick, you are so full of crap it isn't even funny.

There are very few people on this planet that play disc golf for profit, and only a handful of them actually make a profit.

Just because some people play for cash doesn't mean they play for profit. And just because some people play for plastic doesn't mean they play for profit.

And just because there are 5 or 10 ams who win plastic sell it for cash every year doesn't mean that every friggin' am player in the world plays for profit. And it CERTAINLY doesn't mean that every friggin single am player that has every hoped to "merch" and win a disc has ever made a "profit" at disc golf.

Nick is an idiot.



Ah, feel the love. ;)

If they are not playing for profit then you should have no problem making all your WWCC am events trophy only then, right?

Rhett is an oxiMoron. LOL! :D

Yeah, that would be like a washed out NFLer playing in the Canadian, European, or Arena league trying to make it back to the top.

Or Baseball players bouncing back and forth between the Majors, and minors, or bounching around the various minor leagues, or playing in Japan, or South America.

That stuff never happens.




All those other Basketball leagues are still PRO leagues they are not college or highschool or AAU or anything that involves amatures. Hockey players and Baseball players that bounce back and forth between the Major and Minors leagues are still playing PRO hockey and PRO baseball. They are still getting PAID to be PROs.

They are not going from PRO to AM to PRO to AM. They are going from PRO to PRO to PRO to PRO. So nice try but its DOESNT happen. Those people are bouncing around to different PRO leagues not going back to being AMs. Get your facts straight before you start comparing things that cant be compared :o

Like i said before Pro 2 was a good idea. It created a Buy.com tour for Disc Golfers :D

That's right CB, get your facts straight. What does it take to persuade you that our Ams ARE NOT AMS (at least in the Advanced division)? They're not necessarily pros but semi-pros. The analogy provided earlier is perfectly apt. Lots of players in those sub-major leagues better have another job for the small amounts they make, just like our Advanced players.

and for that matter, our pros aren't really pros.

99.999% of the PDGA "pros" have other jobs too.


The payout difference between the NFL, and the other leagues is orders of magnitude greater than the payout difference between Advanced and Pro disc golfers.

The disc golf player demographic with ratings between 925 and 975 is by far the largest on in disc golf.



I have no idea what point Nick was trying to make, but this statement isn't even *close* be being correct.

There are far more members with ratings 875-924 than with ratings 925-974.
There are more members with ratings under 875 than with ratings 925-974.
There are nearly as many unrated members as there are with ratings 925-974.

And that's just for members. I imagine for the disc golf player population as a whole, the largest demographic is nowhere near a 925-975 rating.

Sept ratings with Sept 1 membership info:
<table border="1"><tr><td> Rating</td><td>Count
</td></tr><tr><td>975+</td><td>358
</td></tr><tr><td>925-974</td><td>1665
</td></tr><tr><td>875-924</td><td>2303
</td></tr><tr><td><875</td><td>2131
</td></tr><tr><td>Unrated</td><td>1491
</td></tr><tr><td> </tr></td></table>

Trees for the forest Rodney.

Now factor in average number of events played by these skill ranges. I garrantee that the 925 to 975 play in more events and travel to more events than any other range, and if you throw in the 890 and up (which often play up in Advanced and Masters divisions) the margin is even greater. This is no spin this is direct observation at PDGAs, of which I played in over 20 this year, and you Rodney? How many did you play in?

Interesting how you placed the <875 all within one range when really there are about 4 within that range� trying to substantiate your �not even *close*� a little over zealously there Rodney?

You are wrong Rodney:

More correctly:
There are far more members with ratings 925-974 than with ratings 975+.
There are 30% more members with ratings 875-924 than with ratings 925-974, however players with rating over 925 play in more events and travel far more than do players with rating below 925. And if you factor in how many players play up in the 875-924 range that number only increases.
There are fewer members with ratings 825-874 than with ratings 925-974.
There are fewer members with ratings 775-824 than with ratings 925-974.
There are less than half the members with ratings 725-774 than with ratings 925-974.
There are only a small fraction of members with ratings below 725 and 675 than with ratings 925-974.
Unrated members have nearly no statistical relevance to this discussion.
*Data from July PDGA PR Update file

And the *Point* is that our competitive system would do well not to neglect the demographic that is:

a) The most participatory at multiple PDGA events
b) The heart of our professional divisions as well as WWCC am divisions.
c) Most likely to walk (Draw a conclusion for once Rodney! Why did you walk? Do you have any idea why Advanced players pushed into Open quit? Or are you simply incapable of decisiveness?)
d) That the *meaningless* distinction between those who play for �easily converted to cash� prizes and those who play for cash is both �divisive� and �harmful� to our overall competitive system, and significantly contributes to the �Exit Door� aspect of the Advanced and Open divisions.

I�m not sure if any of these things matters to you Rodney, but they do to me, and I suspect that they do to many disc golfers (particularly the ones who have yet to even pick up a disc yet).

Now factor in average number of events played by these skill ranges. I garrantee that the 925 to 975 play in more events and travel to more events than any other range


Bzzzzzzzzzzzzzzt. Not even *close*.

975+ play in far more tournaments per player than 925-974.
875-924 play in more total tournaments than 925-974.

For tournaments in 2004 through Sept 15:
<table border="1"><tr><td> Rating</td><td>Total events played</td><td>Average per member</td><td>Average per member who played at least 1 tournament
</td></tr><tr><td>975+</td><td>2469</td><td>6.9</td><td>7.2
</td></tr><tr><td>925-974</td><td>6253</td><td>3.8</td><td>4.3
</td></tr><tr><td>875-924</td><td>6434</td><td>2.8</td><td>3.3
</td></tr><tr><td><875</td><td>3827</td><td>1.8</td><td>2.3
</td></tr><tr><td> </tr></td></table>





Interesting how you placed the <875 all within one range


Since the pdga's competitive system places them all together, I thought it reasonable to do the same.






There are 30% more members with ratings 875-924 than with ratings 925-974


Bzzzzzzzzzzzzt.

38%, not 30%, by the numbers I posted above.

Whatever they want to do. Im still going to play 35 sanctioned tournaments and win a bunch of plastic either way. :D

How do you think those pros that drop down are going to feel when they get whooped by a 929 rated am??? :o



Umm, happens to me every tournament

I like it because it is what I proposed a year or two ago. :)

Drop the whole "pro" and "am" designation thing. We all know the progression by skill is rec/int/adv/open. Only Open should play for cash, prizes to all others. No restrictions in moving "down" as long as your rating is sucky enough. Who cares if you took $1000 back in 1987, if your rating is 835 you should get to play against other 835 rated players.





hey rhett
you talking to me :Dyou might be seeing more of me next year :D

Umm, happens to me every tournament



Doesnt look like you even PLAYED any tournaments this year :eek:. What is it that happens to you in those tournaments that you didnt play???

Those in charge of tournament series in each state will need to discuss and determine how you're going to handle Pros playing in Am divisions in 2005 regarding whether they will earn series points and can qualify for final playoffs or series awards. It might be cool to win the Advanced title next year in MN. I only played Advanced once in 1990 and have been an (older) pro ever since.

In particular, I think Pro Women should probably be given the opportunity to compete for Adv or Int final series prizes since most rarely get enough players for much competition to win their Womens title. Not sure pro guys playing sideways should necessarily have the opportunity to win final series prizes in Advanced but that will be a series by series decision.

I just came across an old Ralph Williamson NW mailing list. I saw so many of my past golfing friends on that list that I don't see anymore; most of whom couldn't make the jump to pro, couldn't take the then PDGA policy and tier structure, and dropped out. I was ashamed to admit that I hadn't thought of many of them for years, despite all the rounds we played, and halftime lunches at McDonalds, and talks about golf and life. Almost to the man, these golfers were GREAT people, a credit to the human race.

I think of this as part of the price we pay to elevate the sport, but it's a high price. I would give every penny I've ever won in disc golf to have those guys playing again and being happy with disc golf.

I personally am willing to try almost any hare-brained proposal with the object of keeping the most people involved and happy in disc golf competition.

Well, ol' Hef had a 'hare-brained' proposal all those years ago and look how well he did... :p

hey rhett
you talking to me :Dyou might be seeing more of me next year :D


I think that would be great. Maybe we can survey the field and see if we have enough for an MM1 division before we commit to playing MA1.

Oh, wait. You're rating would have to be under 915 for MM1. Is it? :o

I have played 5 or 6 events this year. All one day events and all not PDGA events.

Mostly time and Cash were the reasons. Plus I did not want to pay $125 to play any of the tournaments. Even the B-tier events that are over $80 is too much.

I am playing sunday (If my arm stops hurting) This will be my first PDGA even in almost 2 years. The entry fee was $80 for a one day event. That is WAY TOO HIGH, but because of what type and all the added cash, I made sure I qualified and ponied up to play.

Yes, I am lucky to play more than 2 rounds a month right now. With the economy being down and lots of people being out of work, My business is down too. I have 4 mouths too feed plus all my employees mouths and there families.

Note, I asked to be moved down last year and was turned down.

I pushed for the Pro2 option and wanted to play Houston (which didn't have that division because no one wanted to play it) I was unable to afford to take a weekend off and pay $125 plus travel expenses to play. I was going to play a local event but wound up going to a funeral instead.

That is a bum deal man. Sorry to hear your biz is down right now. I dont know what i would do if i didnt get to play golf all the time. Good luck with the BIZ and hope to see you back out playing tournaments again soon.

hey rhett
you talking to me :Dyou might be seeing more of me next year :D


I think that would be great. Maybe we can survey the field and see if we have enough for an MM1 division before we commit to playing MA1.

Oh, wait. You're rating would have to be under 915 for MM1. Is it? :o



it should be because i play like crap most of the time but sadly it's 940 why ?
becuase thats what the pdga thinks people who play like crap should be rated at :D

i feel your pain PG :(

becuase thats what the pdga thinks people who play like crap should be rated at :D


Then my rating should go up 20 points! :D

One might reasonably ask you the same question Rodney:

What point are you trying to make?

And thanks for confirming my point about that demographic playing more events than the others. Mighty nice of you...

He said they play more often, not that they play more events.

On a side note, I find it amazing that you averaged 1010 golf for three consecutive rounds, yet your player rating has not budged since then!



Maybe I'll quit playing tournaments for two years, so that those will my only rounds that get counted. :)

And thanks for confirming my point about that demographic playing more events than the others.



Huh? What part of this don't you understand?

Nick: "Now factor in average number of events played by these skill ranges. I garrantee that the 925 to 975 play in more events...than any other range"

Rodney: "975+ play in far more tournaments per player than 925-974. [6.9 events per player versus 3.8 events per player]"

My point? I don't have one. All I have are facts. Facts that contradict and disprove erroneous statements made by you.

Maybe it means that there are more 925-974 people in everyday tourneys than 975+ ?

And thanks for confirming my point about that demographic playing more events than the others.



Huh? What part of this don't you understand?

Nick: "Now factor in average number of events played by these skill ranges. I garrantee that the 925 to 975 play in more events...than any other range"

Rodney: "975+ play in far more tournaments per player than 925-974. [6.9 events per player versus 3.8 events per player]"

My point? I don't have one. All I have are facts. Facts that contradict and disprove erroneous statements made by you.



Come on Rodney, you are spinning your "Facts" and you know it. You base your "facts" on numbers that can be interpreted to support my statements, while I base mine on being at events in one of the busiest regions in the world.

If you want to really make your point (numbers based point alone) provide the number of players with ratings below 925 that play up at PDGAs?

The point is not the primary one I am making anyway; what I am saying is that there is a huge demographic within active PDGA tournament players that is basically left out to dry, and that it would benefit us as an organization to pay them a little more attention. This Mid-American Major and the new competitive system is a step in that direction in my opinion.

while I base mine on being at events in one of the busiest regions in the world



When did you move to Texas? :D

The point is not the primary one I am making anyway; what I am saying is that there is a huge demographic within active PDGA tournament players that is basically left out to dry, and that it would benefit us as an organization to pay them a little more attention. This Mid-American Major and the new competitive system is a step in that direction in my opinion.



The jury is still out on that. For starters, we've replaced the offering of the Pro 2 division and ratings-based events at tournaments all across the country with one weeklong event in remote northern Wisconsin. More importantly, no one knows what effect the new competitive system will have on player retainment. It's a great mystery at this point as to how many from said demographic will opt for the option of playing in Advanced again for prizes/merchandise and no PDGA points.

It's a great mystery at this point as to how many from said demographic will opt for the option of playing in Advanced again for prizes/merchandise and no PDGA points.



While points are meaningless, I personally have no desire to go back to playing for merch. The only thing worse than another stinking T-shirt that I won't wear is another pile of discs that I won't throw. When I get to the point where I'm no longer competitve in the pros, I'll probably want Nick's True Am division. Competition for the sake of competition. Low entry, low payout.

another pile of discs that I won't throw.



Not an Issue in NorCal since our payouts are not "PRE- Packaged" Scrip is converted in the "Store" at your will. :D

I dont see this rule affecting the MPO division that much. It bascially helps the MPG, and Pro Womens divisions.
In areas where competition is lite they still have the ability to compete against comp with similar ability regardless of age or gender.

Can I use the Scrip to buy groceries or beer?

I can (theoretically) see it impacting the Open division. There are quite a few under-40 pros who are not really competetive. Some play quite a bit, some have gotten burnt out. I understand the BOD's goal of getting those guys who have dropped out back in the sport, but I'm not sure this will work.

Worst case scenario is that the guys that have dropped out think like me and don't want to play for merch, but the ones that are still playing decide they'd rather go back down. If all the Mullet-pros move back down, then the open division shrinks, and today's middle pros will become the new mullets.

HHHHMMMM, Why moved to Texas,,,,,more golf there and more money ion Texas............
Heres my opion on the why pro should be able to play am::::
For the open division, should not be allowed,i really dont think their that dumb to step down.
For the open Masters,Grand,Senior,Legends why not
There is not enough of them to even form a division.
I have seen them moved because TD's will not let them play their rightful division.. My wife is a open master player and she has to pplay in the open women divsion because theres not enough of them. Its not right.
Theres hardly enough women anyway,,,, Why discourage somebody because of age. Its not just women either. A big fuss was raised because Doctor Doom( I believe his number is 1234)
played am master at a Tulsa Tournament.
Big Deal i told some of them. If you cant beat a senior or grand master then play rec
I really think the PDGA should let and make the TD's let masters play their own age group even if theres just 1 of them......
They may be over the hill which I'm rapidly aproaching but they still have the spirit and desire to play golf with others.

All of us sometime in Life will grow old and lose the strength and hormones of the young buck.

Why descriminate something we all will reach

Thers's no such thing as Open-Master.

While points are meaningless...


I just love that sentiment.

I'll probably want Nick's True Am division. Competition for the sake of competition. Low entry, low payout.



I've been ready for that since 1987.

Did yall see this yet? I think this is great for smaller pro divisions. Am I reading it right? I can take cash one weekend in my division and the next weekend I can play down and win plastic if there is not a division for me, within my rating of course? This really helps out the Pro Women.

http://www.pdga.com/documents/td/05TourStandards.pdf

And in case my link doesnt work I am talking about the first page of the 2005 PDGA Tour Standards.

So it is just about a year later. How did this work out for everyone? I saw it working out good for a couple of pro women. Did the sky fall anywhere?

A year ago I thought this would be good for a few scattered players and otherwise would turn out to be a tempest in a teapot. More or less correct?

I haven't taken advantage of being able to play Advanced, but it is reassuring to know that I can.
The sky is not falling :)

A year ago I thought this would be good for a few scattered players and otherwise would turn out to be a tempest in a teapot. More or less correct?



The real kicker was that if you took cash and then all the sudden became rated 955 or better you were stuck play Open which is why myself and alot of other choose not to take advantage of that rule because if I had I wouldnt be able to play Advanced next year as I plan to :D

For those of us who have been playing for more than two years, that was neither a kicker nor all of a sudden. That has been the rule ever since the invention of the so-called amateur division[s]. That was nothing new, that if you took cash you had to play pro afterwards.

Sheesh.

The only place I saw people blatantly taking advantage of this was at Ca$hville 2005 (http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=5278&year=2005&include_ratings=0#Advanced). Several Pro's chose the cash skins (separate event from the PDGA event) over an A-tier 270 miles away.

None of those Pro's won any skins as far as I remember (SuperDave might have won one).

In my observation, I have seen far more Adv players playing up than Pro players playing down. On a scale of 1-100 on how this new rule affected competition, I would rate it a 2.3.

I recall that in one of the more recent board meeting minutes that the board reflected on the pros playing am and the trophy only options as the pros playing am being fairly successful and the trophy only options needing to be promoted better in 2006. I think someone with the initials of JK (and no, it is not Julianna) is going to owe me a beer in two months! :D

Some folks have taken advantage of it around here, with good results. A Pro GM has enjoyed playing against (and beating) MA2 players and also competing with the MM1 guys.

I agree. I got to play quite a few tournaments this year and I played most in Pro Grandmasters, but also a handful in Pro Masters, one tournament (non PDGA but still) there were only two pro masters so the TD asked Open or Advanced, the other guy went open I went Advanced. Worked for all. I played about average or perhaps just less than my average and was rewarded with last place plastic, just about right.....

Shouldn't Am's , be playing Pro ?

Pro's ,should not play AM.

Easy for you to say with that 984 rating

Well ..............sometimes ratings don't exactly state the level of someone's playing ability !!!!!!

Played with this guy , who smoked my game and his player rating is 920. :confused:

I have a pro card. Very often, I am the ONLY pro woman in the field. It is nice to have the option to play in a division that actually has people in it for a change. I've played men's advanced and men's masters before. What's the harm?

I think the bottom line is that it gives someone like me an option to play in a division with actual contestants instead of having to kick my own butt. I don't see it as a bagging mechanism for border line pro guys.

Notice that in 2006, Pros playing in Am divisions can pay a reduced entry fee (if the TD allows) and just play for trophies. This should reduce any whining from Ams that the Pros are somehow poaching.

I have a pro card. Very often, I am the ONLY pro woman in the field. It is nice to have the option to play in a division that actually has people in it for a change. I've played men's advanced and men's masters before. What's the harm?

I think the bottom line is that it gives someone like me an option to play in a division with actual contestants instead of having to kick my own butt. I don't see it as a bagging mechanism for border line pro guys.



A good friend of mine is doing something very similar. She is an Advanced women, but there is no female amateur competition in our area. All the females play pro to get cash. She could play against them and beat them but would lose her amateur status by accepting cash. On a national level she is a good advanced female. So on the local level she plays MA2. More people equal better competiion and a better payout.

The women in our area give her grief about it, but I applaud her for it. She has even won an MA2 division at an event at a very long 7800ft course. She is also the only woman to win a mixed gender division Major Title.

I have always personally thought the pros playing Am rule benefited women players more then anything else.