I am putting this discussion into the public forum to get others' opinions and suggestions.

In attempting to provide the best experience we can for the players, and promoting the events in NC, I would like input from the golfers on what improvements you would like.

In the past, as well as this time, the changes we make in the points series (if any) DEPEND on the TDs accepting and following these changes. So, its important to remember that the NC points series is not and chooses not to "dictate" what changes there are, but to encourage us all to willingly "up the ante" and provide these upgrades.

The purpose of any changes is simple, and that's to strengthen the NC series and make it both more significant and competitive (the season points) for more people, and not just the hand full of guys/gals that can make the most events.

By doing so, it would naturally transfer to a greater importance being placed on events that are part of the series.

Ok, so far, most people would all be on board with this. The elephant in the room, however, is HOW.

Suggestions so far:
1. Offer an early registration period (48/72 hrs?) to the top 75% points earners from previous season. Kind of like top 50 - 75% earns their NCpoints "card". This would have to be voluntarily enforced, however at this stage.
But the effect would be to make earning points more significant, and therefore events that offered points more significant.

2. Draw 2$ from each entry (kept in same division, so NO am $ would go to pros) to apply towards the end of year "prize".
This would be very transparent. i.e. 20 events average 35 ADV = $1400 in ADV payout at end of season to the top 10 or whatever.
Think FEDEX CUP.
That, boys and girls, is a lot of plastic!

3. Update points system. Spread out points value slightly in each event, rewarding each position a little more. Limit the number of events that are counted towards your season total. Like your top 8 events.

4. Elect (or assign) positions in the NC points series "staff" to share the load, so to speak, so Kirk and Norris don't have to do all the work and take on all the tedious updates of websites, etc.
Also, to give others a chance to contribute, and give the "regulars" a break from running things.

Anyone care to ad?

And lets then decide and get this season FRICK'N started!

Mike Gordon

I meant "add"

I think it's a brilliant Idea. It's always exciting to watch players compete throughout the year. Transparency would show each player where he/she stands.
Kudos

I strongly agree with the picking of top 8 events, this will leave ALOT more people in the running of the overall points total. In the past it has never been more than couple of people able to play all the events to even be in the running.
This change should be made immediately in my opinion. The points total shouldnt go to who plays the most events, but who plays the best.

I strongly agree with the picking of top 8 events, this will leave ALOT more people in the running of the overall points total. In the past it has never been more than couple of people able to play all the events to even be in the running.
This change should be made immediately in my opinion. The points total shouldnt go to who plays the most events, but who plays the best.



2nd.

. The points total shouldnt go to who plays the most events, but who plays the best.


I don't think it ever has. Please tell me one person that has won this award that was not one of the top amateurs or pro's in the state at that time?

Doc i like your thinking for sure. but top 8 will be a tough one to put together. it will have to be weighted somehow with respect to smaller and larger draws of competitors in a widely diverse skill level of fields. if someone wins a tournament like the sneaky pete or crosstown that draws hundreds of competitors will they receive the same amount of points as a player that wins a local c-tier with a field a third of the size against his local buds?

what ever is decided however i have the up most confidence that it will be done in all fairness and i will help in any way that i can.

To me, the fairest way of doing the points series is simple.

1. There are 4 regions. These are based on both geopgraphy, number of events and quality of events (Charlotte people read the 2nd part. You guys complain about having to travel, but you only run 2 weekends of PDGA events). The regions are East of 95, Triangle, Peidmont, West.

The events would be*** :
East of 95
1. Coastal Plains Open
2. Azeala
3. Kings Cup
4. Down East Players' Cup
5. Fall Disc Golf Classic
Triangle
1. Buckhorn
2. Crosstown
3. Tarheel
4. Raleigh Disc Golf Championship
5. Bull City
Piedmont
1. Mookys' Cup
2. Yadkinville Spring
3. Alamance County
4. OHO
5. Sneeky Pete
West
1. Carolina Clash
2. Mountain Sports Festival
3. Points Bonanza
4. West Jefferson
5. Hickory

***This is not an official schedule, only my opinions of which events should be included.

2. So now we have 20 good events. In order to be elidgeable for the title, you have to meet 1 simple requirment - play an event in each region. This encourages traveling throughout the state

3. Out of the 20 events, only count your top 12. What this does is allows players to miss events and still have a chance. If you play more than 12, your lower totals get counted. This rewards players for traveling. This is the best of both worlds.

4. Add bonus points for things like "playing all 5 events within a region that you don't live in" or "winning all events within a region."

5. Like Doc said, add 2 bux to every entry and then payout at the end of the year. The 20 events I mentioned last year had :

340 Open Players
108 Masters
466 Advanced

That means with 2 a head, you get 680, 216 and 932 dollars.

A statewide tour could attract a large 500 tour sponser, so now you have roughlyt roughly a 1,000 in Open, 425 in Masters and 932 in Ams.

Payout top 5
1. 35%
2. 25%
3. 20%
4. 15%
5. 5%

So that would mean based on the numbers from last year and attracting a 500 coroporate sponsor, the payout would be...

Pro
1. 350
2. 250
3. 200
4. 150
5. 50

Masters
1. 150
2. 100
3. 80
4. 60
5. 20

Ams (In Merch)
1. 330
2. 230
3. 190
4. 140
5. 50

That would be SICK

Let me reword what i was saying Wave. I meant it is the top 8 finishes a person has, if he or she plays 20 tournaments that is great. But I think it would be more fair if someone didnt have to play all 20 tournaments. But was based on how they performed in the touraments they were able to attend. But i agree some need to be weighted higher than others based on size and tier.

2nd on your statement of im sure it will turn out of the best and with the most fairness.

Also i agree in the past the top has won. No disputing that. But i also believe some of the races may have ended differently or alot closer if some people could play as many tournaments as others.

some of the races may have ended differently or alot closer if some people could play as many tournaments as others.


Maybe maybe not

I like the idea of only your top events get included but I think it needs to still be a high number. If there are 20 events I think the top 14-16 need to be counted. You need to show you can compete at a high level constantly not just 50% of the time

: ) :

2nd. 8 events is not enough.

I am curious how many people played in 14 events?

I am curious how many people played in 10 events?

I am curious what it would take to get some folks out of Charlotte?

Also, I think that there would have to be a tie-break procedure, and perhaps extra weight on the last event or two.

Big Wave, Look at who finished second in open (MTL). Consistently decent, but no wins and one second place. Of course I am only able to see up until Hickory last year, but anyway, Hofmannnnnn 3rd, and MJ 4th each had a win and a couple of seconds, but did not play in the same amount of tournaments.

The goal or point of the series, for the most part, is to elevate the game in NC, and grow participation in NC events.

So we need to put the number of events counted low enough to encourage those less frequent players to get in an extra event or two.
Also, what about requiring a minimum number of points to get your NC Card? What benefits can we offer those that have a Card? Too soon for this idea? Besides an early registration benefit, can anyone else think of something to encourage people to get their NC Card ?
What would TD's be willing to do? Will the TD's accurately get the 2$ in to NC Series and what to do if they don/t?

There is actually a lot to figure out, and a relatively short time to do it.

The devil is definitely in the details, but I believe we can all agree on it when we get it.

What about the A, B, C tier differences? 2x, 1.5x, and 1 as multipliers? That would give all the Queens a chance since they would have clear access to two A tiers, and the bonus points, but not necessarily have to travel to the beach.
How important is it that a competitor play in all four regions?

If the Azalea fills, do you guys care if anyone from Charlotte or Asheville is there?

To get to 10 or 12 events, certainly some travel will be required.

Keep the discussion going guys, the Horn is around the corner.

I will agree 8 is not enough i was just basing on the suggestions in the early post. Max has a good number i think. 12 would be a fair number to everyone or atleast 10.

I like the idea of a NC Card but doubt it is a viable option currently. You would probably need a central system where registration would be handled for all events in the Point Series, but that opens up all new pains.

I think you definitely need to play at least one event in every region. This isn't the RADL Points Series, or Triangle Points Series. It's the NC Points Series.

: ) :

Big Wave, Look at who finished second in open (MTL). Consistently decent



Haha! That is signature material right there.

I may not be good, but I'm consistently decent.

LOL

I love it.

I would personally like to see those that are interested in competing in the NC Point Series travel. I know that I would have never played the courses or met the incredible people that I met had it not been for chasing after the points. To me, the honor of winning the NC Points series was about sacrafice, as it was to those that competed with me. Dave, Ben, and I played the majority of the events and in doing so traveled from one end of the state to the other. Whatever we do, we should continue to hold the NC Points Series high and encourage particiaption. In no way should we make it easier to obtain, less copetitive, or regionally weighted. It should be a shoot out until the end whenever possible and though attendance shouldn't determine the winner, as it didn't during my participation in 2007, it does show willingness to sacrafice and compete for the Points. There should be a minimum number of events played per region to make up the total.

IBig Wave, Look at who finished second in open (MTL). Consistently decent, but no wins and one second place. Of course I am only able to see up until Hickory last year, but anyway, Hofmannnnnn 3rd, and MJ 4th each had a win and a couple of seconds, but did not play in the same amount of tournaments.


Doc this is a good point. but the N.C. Points series is winner take all. for the competitor it is all about seein your name on that big trophey w/ some of the state and worlds greatest. i can tell you as well as anyone second place in the series gets you nothing. (outside a great experience)

|N.C. Points series is winner take all |-True, for the trophy, but I am in favor of the $2 per entry suggestion for the end of year top 5 also.
What ever we can do to get more peeps involved and into the series chase, rather then not.

Which begs the question, if we go with the $2 per person/event can that be done at buckhorn? Who is the TD and are you willing to deduct that and rework (if you already worked) the numbers?

I agree, the NC Card is premature, but perhaps viable in the next year or two.

I like traveling as much as anyone, and am personally fine with mandatory regional play, only I question its necessity. No problem on this point with me though. Is there anyone out there that objects to mando regional play? 1 event minimum?

What Joe says is completely true to me also, and its the cross-state friends and competition that makes this such a special series.

MTL, (Pie), can you figure out how many NC players played 10 or more events last year?
Does that seem reasonable to everyone? (top 10 events)
What about the $2? TDs, thats on you to do, so we want your input/objections on this, please.

Doc,
there is already a fee per player taht is payed to be in the NC Series. so are you asking to up this by $2.00 more? that could push the fee to at least $3 maybe 4$ per player (i can not remember if the existing fee is $1 or $2 per player). that to me might be getting a little excessive. Sorry it is not my intention to sound negative here. i am in full support of this discussion!

I think there is supposed to be a fee if you are associated with the NC Points series. I am not sure though, that all parties surrender their deducted portions. I think Alan and Kirk provide this information best. Each tournament should have to agree to be a leg of the series and then be responsible for the deduct per player. They also should be responsible for gettnig these funds to the Point Series board.

lots of great discussion/ideas on here!

I have trouble with stuff like this because I see both sides in things too often.

If we do go with counting more events there are def. pluses but the negative is you could have someone who consistently finishes 5th-10th in every event being declared the best in the state even though they never actually win or come close (not sure if this has happened but it could depending on how points are counted).

if we do fewer events it might show who is the best based on needing to actually win events or place really high (2nd/3rd placers) but it might not encourage attendance or travel around.

As far as points I do think more weight should go to winning and placing high as well as events with more participants. I don't think it should be based on the tier A, B, C but based on attendance. If you win a C tier that has 40 in your field and someone else wins a B tier w/ only 15 the C tier person beat more people. Just because the payout structure was different didn't mean they had to play much harder for the win.

What does the NT series do? Could we mimic their structure?

I personally like the idea of 8 (or even 6 but i'm sure that'll get people upset over the thought) events and the mandate that you have to attend at least 1 event in each region. 8 events is still 2 solid months worth of disc golf events! We're not talking about someone stepping on the scene and playing a couple events and being declared the best... they are getting out there and playing quite a bit and probably placing well. I think to go into the 12+ range sounds good on paper but you are immediately ruling out a lot of people in the disc golf world. I know there are always exceptions to the rule but i'm talking about... people with families that might not be able to get away that often, people with job situations that can't let them take that much time off, money strapped people, etc.

Btw... under the structure above I would say that if you only want your top 8 events to count and you had to have played @ least 1 event in each region... if you only went to one event in the Piedmont region and you stunk it up... sorry but it needs to count towards your 8 to keep you eligible. I think that would help with encouraging travel/attendance as well. Not to mention possible encourage participation in events later in the season since more people could 'be in the hunt' or be trying to improve their best 8 tournies.

As far as taking some money from each entry... i like that idea if its 1 or 2 dollars... would be enough to give some sort of award other than just bragging rights.

finally so all of this talk isn't hypothetical... can't the results from the past years be used to figure out what would happen under a changed structure? how much would it have changed things to award it based on the top 8?

i think there are a lot of different factors that could be weighted/discussed that probably need to be parsed out to help with the discussion. I know I find myself jumping all over the place mentally when thinking about this because you have ... how many tournies should count? how would you score points? what regional requirements should there be if any? what do you award the participants? if am/pro place same layout at same tourney should am get pro points for every pro they beat and pros get points against the whole field? do you dock the payout/entry for awards? and if so how much? what if a TD doesn't want to go along w/ taking $ from payout? etc. etc.

anyway... like i started with... great discussions so far and glad this is being talked about (although w/ buckhorn this weekend I think something probably needs to be decided soon for this year and maybe this discussion could be about 2010 ... or is it already?)

Yea, if there has been $2 deducted already, where is it?

That is the first I heard of that, yo.

another argument to fewer events 'counting' (like 6 or 8) would be that it wouldn't penalize those that travel outside of NC to bigger events or other tournies.

people wonder why Charlotte people 'don't travel' (sidenote... which I think has changed in the past year or so with more guys going all over... even if seemingly mostly SC). One of the reasons I think is we are blessed here to have a tourney structure in place where we have a local club tourney every weekend. We also have a club points series that might tend to keep people in Charlotte on some weekends to collect CDGC points to qualify for the end of the year tourney instead of traveling to a PDGA tourney a couple hours away. Now we do have ours split into 4 seasons which helps somewhat with that issue since once someone is qualified for a season they are set for the end of the year but I think this is potential issue that could come up by requiring too many NC events.

The state looks at Charlotte a lot and says... 'why don't those guys travel to area PDGA tourneys'... under a structure that requires too many NC points tourneys the same could eventually start to be said about NC guys on the regional level... 'why don't the NC guys ever come to _____ (insert nearby state).

not trying to quantify if that would be a good/bad thing and sure there are a lot of other factors but just something to think about when looking at the macro/micro level of things.

Doc and all,

Having traveled to most of the events last year and likely this year, here is my 2 cents.

1. I think one event a month would be ideal. If one counts Feb (Buckhorn) through Nov (Bull City) that makes 10. Many people plan their calendar on a month to month basis. These 10 tournaments would be a highlight of my month, and the tournaments themselves would tend to become signature events for NC. (such as USDGC qualifiers are nationwide.) IMoreover I think one tournament a month is a fair balance between dedication and performance. Geographically, they could be spread fairly across the state. At that point I think you could count them all and let the players decide how important it is to get to each event - after all dedication should be a factor. I betcha that in this format these tournaments would develop enough prestige to give Kirk or whoever the director is the ability to ask a little more of the TD's of these events per suggestions already noted. After all the status that goes along with being one of the points series events should benefit the TD.

2. I realize this is a volunteer effort, but the best way to up the visibility of the series would be to raise its visibility. God Bless Mike Norris he does enough, but perhaps someone with web skills could be found to keep the points series up to date. Also the point series standing should be posted at all series events and other too if possible, and mention should be made of the current leaders in each division at the awards in each points series event. Perhaps club web sites could inculde a mention of their players who are doing well in the points series and a link to the points series web site.

3. With all this, I think there is an excellent chance a corporate sponsor (sponsors) could be found to sponsor the series.

actually i stand corrected. it is a flat $50.00 per event. and i would thik that this money is used for the administrative expenses of running this series. i.e. web hosting fee and web site expenses engraving costs etc. etc.

Ok Wave, that sounds about right and I had forgotten about it and not taken that into consideration.

anyway, I still feel that the 2$ idea is good and worth it to "spread the love" to more people besides the trophy winner.

Big Wig is totally correct, in my opinion. Limit the number of NC series events, and elevate them. The tournament updates, website updates, sponsor promotion, etc. is EXACTLY what I would like to see.

If you have a limited number of included point events, you will more then likely FILL everyone. Similar to what happens at Azalea and perhaps like what we saw with EARLWOOD.
How would you like to have a 24 hour preferred registration period in that case? Well, earn your NC Series "Card", and you can.
Then you will have multiple layers of competition within the series, PLENTY of incentive to attend and earn points in the events, etc.

To make that a reality though, we would need to explain it to all, and qualify the previous season, so factor that in the calculations
and thoughts.

We would need to hear from all the TDs to see what events would want to be a part of that and what TDs would not want the hassle of collecting the extra $2, and other minor hoops they would have to jump through.
As a non-TD, I particularly want to emphasize that my perspective is that of a player, and the suggestions I make need to be balanced with the realities of running events by those experienced TDs out there.

I will bet that if we offer a mature series, like what is being formulated here, with enough series staff,
with all the bells and whistles, corporate sponsor, end of year prizes, and more as we think of it, we could find 12 or so events that want to be a part of it.
That gets me fired up just thinking about it!
What am I forgetting or where am I completely out of touch with this?

Consider also what Stack said. The current NC point series ranks somewhere below the 4 separate seasons that Charlotte has, in their minds. Not that thats wrong or anything, but WTF?

just saying its a factor... im sure there are other factors like $$, time, etc.

to say that would be like saying... i can't believe Schweb, Hofmann, JJ, MJ, etc are playing NC points series events when they should be out on the NT tour ;)

it also might prove the point that if the standards are set too high to qualify for something then why bother... if we set the bar too high for the NC points series then some may not bother to try... if its a little more attainable or realistic then maybe more would come out.

back on topic... i think one important question needs to be answered in regards to the NC points series... what is the goal?

is the goal to recognize the best NC has to offer (pro/am)? is the goal to encourage participation at as many NC events as possible? ... maybe all of the above and then some.

but i think if everyone knows which direction the flock is flying in its easier to get the geese in a row.

if the aim is purely one or the other then it would change my thoughts entirely.

Great points Stack, and my comment was no intended knock on Charlotte.

We need to balance competition and accessibility to more players. I like the discussion going on but I want to go back to what Joe Noble said earlier. Wanting to win and going out to do it requires sacrifices by those trying to win NC Points in there division. Joe is a great example, he attended the FDCs a day or two after the birth of his daughter to lock up the advanced points series.

: ) :

Joe missed FDC's in 2007 it was OHO that he showed up to 2 days after his daughter was born though.

But that is somewhat besides the point.

I uploaded the completed file that I thought I had previously uploaded as well tonight for all to look over.


http://www.ncdiscgolf.com/results/ncpoints08.pdf

I also added a column now for Doc so he can see how many events each person played so that nobody has to calculate that.

First some quick history from what I know about the series.

Alan Beaver (and somebody else) started the NC Points series many years ago. At the time the series was started there were not many events in the state and we had lots of people that traveled to all of the events. People came from other states to compete even.

Now we are somewhat blessed to have so many events to be able to play. For example in Charlotte they have lots of local events so it might not be "worth" it to travel when one can stay at home and play where they do not need a hotel and other things.

Since I have been involved the series fees have changed from year to year. Some years there was a flat fee of $25. Some years some events were $25 and some were $50. Some years events were $50. Some years it has been $1 per player. I "personally" think it is easier for the TD to keep up with $1(or whatever) a player as the TD report allows for this easily. Going with a flat fee means that either it does not come out of the entry fee (sponsors) or that the TD has to determine how much comes out of each players entry fee based on their field size.

One year we tried to offer a womens division for NC points but there were not enough women participating to keep the division in future years. We would love to have a pro/adv womens division but we would want to have enough women willing to participate so that there is some competition and the award is not just an "attendance" award. We could also add other divisions as well. But depending on how this is set up you could have an intermediate golfer who started at 880 at buckhorn and by FDC's they are rated 975 but by PDGA rules they could play down in int because it is a points series. This then makes the event not as much fun for other Intermediate golfers.

But Currently there are only 3 "divisions" and then the USDGC spot is awarded as well based on certain events. Those events must use the same pads/courses for the Pro, Pro Masters, and Advanced divisions to allow for fair play.

The talk of changes to the NC series is great but we also need to remember that the state rep spot for NC is also awarded based on these events when making changes.

I have all the data from 07 and 08 easily available and could likely dig up the other results given enough time. This means that I could alter the calculations in any way that is needed to show what "would" have happened.

I have rambled a bit here and some of this may not make sense and I have to get back to work now on buckhorn and my "real" job, then to pack because I have to go home to take my mom to the dr thursday, but I am willing to discuss any of this at buckhorn this weekend for anybody that is attending.

thanks for putting up the pdf Mike...from the looks of it maybe 12 events is too many to expect when there were only 2 in pros, none in masters and 2 in advanced with 12 or more events... even 8 looks like a lot when looking @ the number of people that made more than 8 events (especially if you don't allow people to drop an event if its their only one to count towards that region). Although the more and more I think about it... who cares if someone doesnt travel to all regions... if the # of tournies is 8 then the person would have to travel to at least 2 regions and probably 3 to get in enough tournies. Does anyone really care if someone doesnt make it to their region? to me it still comes down to what is the 'goal' of the points series.

and big wave mentioned $50 per ... if that was the case last year then where did the $950 go? (just curious)

thanks again for the pdf Mike! also maybe you could put up the xls files so if someone wanted to play with the numbers or run thru different scenarios they could on their own without bothering you?

side note... when it does get hashed out it will really suck if buckhorn is weighed any heavier than normal or if it counts towards USDGC NC spot or anything since this hasn't been decided yet and the tourney is already full/waitlisted.

so I had a spare min tonight and decided to work on a chart of the data for the top 25 in each "division".

Presenting the data this way helped me to see how the top 25 got their points. In other words look at Pro Schweb played 13 events but he won most of them. Then look at MTL who played 14 events but did not play as well as schweb. Then look at hofmann who only played 10 events and only lost to MTL by less than 50 points. Had hofmann played one more event he likely would have passed MTL. So this chart shows where each of the players points came from and helps me to better see how things were distributed.

http://www.ncdiscgolf.com/results/ncpoints_chart.pdf

Would be interested to hear opinions on this data as well.

As far as posting the XLS document it is posted you just have to know the URL.. ;) I have to have backups as this document took me about 10 hours to write initally and all the tweaks over the years. It is also a VERY LARGE file. In fact I crashed my excel tonight and I have 4 GB of ram in my machine. I actually got the out of memory error... oops.

So I can look to post at least most of the data in static form so it is not so dynamic for people to play with if they would like.

Selecting the top X events would be VERY easy to do in excel though.

Commenting on the number of events people play. Perhaps people do not play more events because they have no chance to catch the person in front of them? Perhaps they do not care to play an event on the series due to various factors.

If we have 20 events on the series again then 12 events is only 60% of the events at 8 events that is 40%. Do we really want to reward somebody who is at the top of their game 40% of the time? What about 60%? or do we just drop your lowest 2 events. Which is not quite the same as then you have to play at least 3 events as the first 2 would be dropped.. ;) But a player could play 10 events and win with 8 wins if they wanted. Completely different in calculation but valid as well per say.

Because Buckhorn is this weekend it is unlikely that the points table would change for this year to something along the lines of how many you beat. All events being weighted equal helps for other reasons as well. For example there could be an event that for what ever reason players did not enjoy. But by it being on the series players would go regardless to get the points "potentially". Not saying this has happened but if a poorly run event was weighted higher due to tier or how much snow they got in Feb or whatever that could cause players to have a bad opinion of the series. What do players want from the series?

It would be "ideal" to have representation from each region of the state as well to make sure that each regions needs are met.

as far as where did the money go.. Well the last I heard it has not gone anywhere as the series had not received the fees from several events. So therefore it could not be distributed back out. (this could be wrong though as I generally stay out of that part and just stick to doing the points part.)

oh yeah and I like the idea of playing an event in each region as this is the NC series not the Triangle/Coastal/Triad/Mountain Series..

Thanks Mike! I'm sure you realize how much I and others recognize your (and Chris') tremendous contributions and that my comments regarding the points series were not in any way intended to cajole you into doing even more work.

Anyway, looking at the advanced standings I see there was a particularly tight race for 17th between Mike Norris and Mike Norris. 191 guys on that list and you two were side by side. What are the odds of that? (rhetorical question only :) )

Love the discussions. I don't feel that requiring less tourneys will encourage more players, just my opinion though. Like Joe said it should be about a commitment one makes to get the title. I definitely had to attend a ton of tourneys the year I won the title. I committed to getting it and thats how it should be. I'm sure if you only took my top 8 events from that year I probably wouldn't have won but I feel like I deserved it for competing in so many events. If you only require 8 events, well, Schweb won 8 events by the OHO last year, so there was no possible way to catch him after that if only 8 events counted, thats not encouraging.

I do like the idea of the flat $2 fee from everyone and monetary prizes at the end for the top 3 or 5 folks. That, imo, is more of an incentive to play more tourneys, even when the number 1 spot may already be accounted for. I feel like thats the method which was used the year I won. Was nice to get a little monetary bonus for all my efforts.

I think it would be a good idea to take a look at the Homegrown tour as an example. I believe part of their huge attendance numbers lie in how they conduct their points race. They have 17 events spread out from Yadkinville to Greenville (I think) and you count your top 13 events. 13 of 17 events is a little over 75%, which I feel like is a good ratio. As an incentive to try to make at least 13 events they give away a basket to divisional winners. The combination of these two things I think is a big part of the HG Tour's success (definitely not the only part ;)).

However, since the NC points series is more spread out, Ashe County to Wilmington, counting 75% of events might be difficult for a lot of people. Somewhere in the 60%-70% range is ideal I think. If you want to encourage attendance/faster registration, you not only need to have more than half of the events count, but you also have to give the players a good enough incentive to play more than half the events. I agree with what most people are saying, in that cash for Pro winners and Merch for Am winners would give the NC Points series that incentive for players to actually try to play 60-70% of the events on the series. It would make the NC Points series prevalent to people and ultimately make it more competitive.

I've only been playing PDGAs for 2 years now, but in the past 2 years it seems like there are 2 or 3 people going for the points and no one else really is trying. If you make X number of events count and provide an additional incentive for winning, I think a lot people would actually try to win.

Obviously, it's about impossible to implement this when the first event this weekend, but this is a great discussion for next year.

The good news is that this conversation has spread to other threads, and we are getting input from Minn, N, central and Southern Cal, as well as Switzerland!

"In general, I believe our Minnesota tour participation has been higher and more fair when fewer results count. For example in your proposed system where all count, if a player misses one of the first few events, they may feel they are out of contention which reduces their incentive to try as hard to make all of the remaining events. Likewise, if you are recruiting new players during the season, they don't have a chance to contend if they already missed the first several events.

However, if you set it up so the best X out of Y events count, where X is 50% or one event LESS than 50%, more players not only have a chance to win but they have an incentive to keep playing to either improve their "best" event points and/or enter more events to defend against someone else improving their points."

"So Cal Series holds 12-15 events each year, but only the best of five events for pros and the best of four for Ams count. We also collect $2.00 per event and have a very special trophy for first and pay the top finishers (cash to pros, prizes to ams). We award bonus points at the So Cal Championships. This helps break ties and also "forces" players to play this event. A player is not likely to win the top spot if they do not play in the Championships.

When we researched changing how points were awarded last year, we looked at "100 points for first" system that Nor Cal uses. The biggest flaw in this system is that players can "pick" events with few players in their division and then get 100 points for beating only a handful of players. This diminished wins for players at 100+ player events like Master's Cup or St. Patrick's. Joe Blow could get 100 points for only beating 5 people at a small event while Joe Pro only got 100 points for beating 120 people at a huge event.

So Cal players get points for every round they play and for every player they beat. This automatically places a premium on larger events and events with more rounds without artificially "weighting" events. Also players can only earn points in the division they play in. This means Super Pro Grandmaster Steve Wisecup can't earn 140 Grandmaster points by playing well in the Open division at Golden State while all the other Grandmasters are competing for minimum points in a 10 player division. "

There are good arguments for counting approximately 9 or 10 events out of our 19 that we offer.
Another suggestion would be to require attendance in 3 out of 4 regions. That keeps everyone's "required" drives to 3 hours or less. Otherwise, its not really fair to all our competitors that live in Murphy, NC.
$2 per entry seems fair, and we would have to set some basic parameters for TD conduct, such as COLLECTING that money, and TURNING it in. Same with scores..... Failure to live up to these basic standards would simply result in the tournament losing its NC Series status the next year.

Final details to be haggled out at Buckhorn, I suppose, but these seem to be the general ideas for this year and provide a glimpse of where we can take it.

Doc

Anyone know for sure what the next point series event is? Is mookies cup one?

tia,

Dave

Anyone know for sure what the next point series event is? Is mookies cup one?

tia,

Dave




?

:confused:
-|-
/\

updates anyone?

Anyone know for sure what the next point series event is? Is mookies cup one?

tia,

Dave


Let me preface this post with it is only my opinion.

but with the lack of a response and no further information provided to the contrary i would go on the assumption that the points series will have the exact same format as last year.

www.ncdiscgolf.com (http://www.ncdiscgolf.com) has the schedule from last year so even though the dates may be different this year i would assume the same events (given they are going on this year) will be used. so it looks like Mookies is the next. the coastal plains winter open is now the coastal plains open and has moved to the last weekend in march and i would assume again it will be included in the points race.

what we have to understand and i know you guys probably do is that the people responsible for this are volunteers and have real jobs and lifes outside of disc golf. Patience is a virtue and understanding goes a long way.

well put, Dave. Obviously Mookies is not an issue for us, but CPO is the same weekend as the Atlanta Open. If CPO is a points series event as I assume it will be, we will probably miss it for the Atlanta Open. In that case it is a bit important to know the format of the points series to make sure that we get to the necessary number of events.

For now, I'm assuming it is the same as last year, but as you know there has been a lot of discussion of alternative formats. It's really hard to tell at this point who stands where or how the final format will be decided, so assuming that things will be exactly the same as last year does not feel like a sure thing.

there has been a lot of discussion of alternative formats.


I totally understand where you are coming from David. But most of the discussion has been from outside the governing body of the points series. while it is great discussion and very well based and healthy i would have to assume that the discussion is about 2010 seeing as how the current season is already underway (again this all conjecture). Good luck in ATL i hope David has a GREAT showing!

The only change that I know of for this year is that the North Carolina Flying Disc Championship will not be a part of the series. Replacing it will be the Raleigh Disc Golf Championship.

Kirk and I have scheduled a call to iron things out while I am at the hospital with my mom as she is getting her chemo now though. I will be talking with others at Mooky's cup this weekend if they have any questions as well and then I will work to get things updated.

Thanks for the clarification Mike. Your family should certainly come first. It looks like you have your priorities straight. I'm looking forward to seeing you this Sat. Lunch is on me if you'd like.

Announcements forth coming!
Big Wave- "But most of the discussion has been from outside the governing body of the points series"
?????

just slow, due to Life, Chemo (Norris and I have something in common, my Mom is at Duke as we speak) and other impingements, but we move on!

We have had a sponsor "Step up", we have plans to elevate the visibility of a point race in NC, and plans to showcase NC's best events.

I expect the Sponsor to make the "grand announcement" to clarify the details shortly after Mooky's cup.

Of course, this addition to the NC series will enhance the current state of affairs, but also will DEPEND on the key TD's, as always. You guys are the "governing body" of the series.

North Carolina Rocks! and so does our discgolf.

peace,
Doc

Big Wave- "But most of the discussion has been from outside the governing body of the points series"
?????



I am assuming the state coordinator is who decides how the points series is decided and implemented and he has not posted once on this thread. there fore this discussion taking place here is outside of the governing body that actually makes up the rules.

what i am trying to say is that while this topic and discussion is healthy and i am all for i am hoping people reading this and involved in the points chase aren't taken this discussion as literal change to the 2009 race. i am guessing like we have discussed we are talking about new implimentation for the 2010 season at the earliest. but as always i could be wrong. it has happened before.