Alabama •
Arkansas •
Florida •
Georgia •
Kentucky •
Louisiana •
Mississippi •
Oklahoma •
Tennessee •
Texas
Welcome!
» Log In
» Create A New Profile
Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal?
Posted by noahat
|
Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 25, 2012 04:51PM |
Registered: 5 years ago Posts: 173 |
I admittedly don't know the rules well, and trying to figure out the SN rules is like trying to solve a Jenga Crossword Rubix Cube.
Below are the last 6 tournaments played by Kirk Mansell, with the final tournament being the SNDC. Based on the new rules, it seems like Kirk should not have been allowed to play in Intermediate in the SNDC. The old rules said 6 months without cashing, which would make his first 2 tournaments in back to Intermediate legal. However, it appears the new rules (which were posted in Novemeber 2011) would make his playing in the SNDC as an Intermediate illegal again.
Can someone please clarify?
11/08/2008 - Advanced - Cashed 2nd place
06/07/2009 - Advanced - Cashed 1st place
02/13/2010 - Advanced - Cashed 6th place
04/10/2011 - Intermediate - Cashed 1st place
07/31/2011 - Intermediate - Cashed 4th place
03/31/2012 - Intermediate - Cashed 1st place
Below are the last 6 tournaments played by Kirk Mansell, with the final tournament being the SNDC. Based on the new rules, it seems like Kirk should not have been allowed to play in Intermediate in the SNDC. The old rules said 6 months without cashing, which would make his first 2 tournaments in back to Intermediate legal. However, it appears the new rules (which were posted in Novemeber 2011) would make his playing in the SNDC as an Intermediate illegal again.
Can someone please clarify?
11/08/2008 - Advanced - Cashed 2nd place
06/07/2009 - Advanced - Cashed 1st place
02/13/2010 - Advanced - Cashed 6th place
04/10/2011 - Intermediate - Cashed 1st place
07/31/2011 - Intermediate - Cashed 4th place
03/31/2012 - Intermediate - Cashed 1st place
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 25, 2012 07:38PM |
Admin Registered: 7 years ago Posts: 5,347 |
I believe I have the answer Noahat, but before revealing it I think it might be wise to ask the following question:
Did the SN BoD actually intend, when they allegedly adopted part of a proposed handbook (and not the whole handbook and nothing but the whole handbook), to render ineligible as many players as they did for the Intermediate Division?
It's not like the BoD announced that when they allegedly adopted part of a handbook that a bunch of players would be ineligible to play Intermediate.
I'm not 100% sure that the following SN rule has been adopted, but if it has, then technically Noahat is correct:
1.3.2 A player not qualified for an Intermediate Amateur division due to having accepted a finishing award in an Advanced Amateur division may compete in an Intermediate Amateur division for which the player would otherwise be qualified after finishing four (4) consecutive immediately preceding Championship qualifying tournaments without accepting a finishing award in any and all Advanced Amateur divisions in which the player accepted a finishing award.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/25/2012 07:39PM by Bluff Magee.
Did the SN BoD actually intend, when they allegedly adopted part of a proposed handbook (and not the whole handbook and nothing but the whole handbook), to render ineligible as many players as they did for the Intermediate Division?
It's not like the BoD announced that when they allegedly adopted part of a handbook that a bunch of players would be ineligible to play Intermediate.
I'm not 100% sure that the following SN rule has been adopted, but if it has, then technically Noahat is correct:
1.3.2 A player not qualified for an Intermediate Amateur division due to having accepted a finishing award in an Advanced Amateur division may compete in an Intermediate Amateur division for which the player would otherwise be qualified after finishing four (4) consecutive immediately preceding Championship qualifying tournaments without accepting a finishing award in any and all Advanced Amateur divisions in which the player accepted a finishing award.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/25/2012 07:39PM by Bluff Magee.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 25, 2012 08:13PM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 326 |
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 25, 2012 08:24PM |
Admin Registered: 4 years ago Posts: 1,559 |
noahat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
. However, it appears the new rules (which were posted in
>Novemeber 2011) would make his playing in the SNDC
> as an Intermediate illegal again.
>
> Can someone please clarify?
>
> 02/13/2010 - Advanced - Cashed 6th place
> 04/10/2011 - Intermediate - Cashed 1st place
if his last advance cash was before the new 4 event rule and he waited the 6 months, then I don't see anything wrong with it... However going by those stats, he needs to move up.
-------------------------------------------------------
. However, it appears the new rules (which were posted in
>Novemeber 2011) would make his playing in the SNDC
> as an Intermediate illegal again.
>
> Can someone please clarify?
>
> 02/13/2010 - Advanced - Cashed 6th place
> 04/10/2011 - Intermediate - Cashed 1st place
if his last advance cash was before the new 4 event rule and he waited the 6 months, then I don't see anything wrong with it... However going by those stats, he needs to move up.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 25, 2012 08:37PM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 403 |
No one "needs" to move up, he doesn't play enough events to want to compete in advanced. However, I think he was eligible because the "new" rulebook is somewhat of a fantasy. By old rules, which are the only ones that are set in stone, he is legal.
Bluff's post somewhat hits the nail on the head.
Bluff's post somewhat hits the nail on the head.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 25, 2012 09:04PM |
Admin Registered: 4 years ago Posts: 1,559 |
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 25, 2012 10:19PM |
Registered: 7 years ago Posts: 1,008 |
I have always believed that whatever happened after June 1st (the new season) had no affect on eligibility for the SNDC or SNAC since those are championship tournaments for the previous season, not tournaments within the current season. Is that not correct?
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Casey Cox
"If you aint first, you're last." -- Ricky Bobby's daddy
2007-2008 SN Amateur Player of the Year
SN advanced single season points record holder - 466 (2007-2008)
SN advanced single season wins record holder - 16 (2007-2008)
SN advanced single season score record holder - 53.40 (2007-2008)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Casey Cox
"If you aint first, you're last." -- Ricky Bobby's daddy
2007-2008 SN Amateur Player of the Year
SN advanced single season points record holder - 466 (2007-2008)
SN advanced single season wins record holder - 16 (2007-2008)
SN advanced single season score record holder - 53.40 (2007-2008)
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 12:08AM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 1,232 |
Great question.
The BOD changed the reclassification rule from 6 months to 4 events on 12/9/2009.
[www.sndg.org]
Five months later, according to noahat's statement of facts, KM cashed in Advanced again. If these facts are correct, KM has been unqualified for the intermediate division in every event he has played since then, including the 2012 SNDC.
The BOD changed the reclassification rule from 6 months to 4 events on 12/9/2009.
[www.sndg.org]
Five months later, according to noahat's statement of facts, KM cashed in Advanced again. If these facts are correct, KM has been unqualified for the intermediate division in every event he has played since then, including the 2012 SNDC.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 02:13AM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 1,232 |
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 06:06AM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 1,406 |
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 08:21AM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 319 |
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 08:42AM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 326 |
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 09:24AM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 319 |
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 10:19AM |
Registered: 4 years ago Posts: 1,077 |
And here it goes once again.......
Likely, I'm dreamin' BUT MAYBE this is the point the Board takes charge "re-issues" whatever rules we, as a series, are gonna follow and TRASH/RETRACT ALL old versions of Rules/Guidelines/etc......
Clearly from this discussion - the rule isn't clear and the discussion shows that we have folks trying to comply or fit under old/replaced rules....
This particular instance is unfortunate "water under the bridge" -- unless this gripe was made to the TDs prior to the end of the tourney and they sat on it (which IAM NOT SUGGESTING AS I WAS NOT THERE).......
In any event, it would be a CLEAR AND SIMPLE FIX for the Board......and one that is CLEARLY NEEDED.........
Crossin' fingers that a positive and concise action of the Board will follow...............I can DREAM can't I???????
Likely, I'm dreamin' BUT MAYBE this is the point the Board takes charge "re-issues" whatever rules we, as a series, are gonna follow and TRASH/RETRACT ALL old versions of Rules/Guidelines/etc......
Clearly from this discussion - the rule isn't clear and the discussion shows that we have folks trying to comply or fit under old/replaced rules....
This particular instance is unfortunate "water under the bridge" -- unless this gripe was made to the TDs prior to the end of the tourney and they sat on it (which IAM NOT SUGGESTING AS I WAS NOT THERE).......
In any event, it would be a CLEAR AND SIMPLE FIX for the Board......and one that is CLEARLY NEEDED.........
Crossin' fingers that a positive and concise action of the Board will follow...............I can DREAM can't I???????
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 10:34AM |
Registered: 5 years ago Posts: 292 |
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 10:34AM |
Registered: 5 years ago Posts: 173 |
So it sounds like the majority of people agree that he should not have been eligible to play in Intermediate. So the Intermediate winner was likely illegal in the Southern National Doubles Championship. Most people still don't think (or won't admit) that there is a major bagging issue in the Intermediate division... whether people even realize they are bagging or not. Codys statement is a perfect example of the delusions people have. Look at the numbers. He cashes in every tournament he plays in, and usually wins.
This is yet another reason why the Tournament Directors should not be the ones responsible for deciding who can play what division. There is just no way a tournament director can check on these things for everyone playing.
We need a new system that determines your division, and leaves no question where you have to play.
This is yet another reason why the Tournament Directors should not be the ones responsible for deciding who can play what division. There is just no way a tournament director can check on these things for everyone playing.
We need a new system that determines your division, and leaves no question where you have to play.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 11:37AM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 326 |
noahat Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So it sounds like the majority of people agree
> that he should not have been eligible to play in
> Intermediate. So the Intermediate winner was
> likely illegal in the Southern National Doubles
> Championship. Most people still don't think (or
> won't admit) that there is a major bagging issue
> in the Intermediate division... whether people
> even realize they are bagging or not. Codys
> statement is a perfect example of the delusions
> people have. Look at the numbers. He cashes in
> every tournament he plays in, and usually wins.
>
> This is yet another reason why the Tournament
> Directors should not be the ones responsible for
> deciding who can play what division. There is
> just no way a tournament director can check on
> these things for everyone playing.
>
> We need a new system that determines your
> division, and leaves no question where you have to
> play.
There will be loop holes in just about every system, a new system will not prevent bagging but it will help. I am all for the ratings system but I don't think the players should have to pay a lot of extra money to get ratings.
Buzzz > Roc
-------------------------------------------------------
> So it sounds like the majority of people agree
> that he should not have been eligible to play in
> Intermediate. So the Intermediate winner was
> likely illegal in the Southern National Doubles
> Championship. Most people still don't think (or
> won't admit) that there is a major bagging issue
> in the Intermediate division... whether people
> even realize they are bagging or not. Codys
> statement is a perfect example of the delusions
> people have. Look at the numbers. He cashes in
> every tournament he plays in, and usually wins.
>
> This is yet another reason why the Tournament
> Directors should not be the ones responsible for
> deciding who can play what division. There is
> just no way a tournament director can check on
> these things for everyone playing.
>
> We need a new system that determines your
> division, and leaves no question where you have to
> play.
There will be loop holes in just about every system, a new system will not prevent bagging but it will help. I am all for the ratings system but I don't think the players should have to pay a lot of extra money to get ratings.
Buzzz > Roc
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 11:44AM |
Registered: 7 years ago Posts: 1,987 |
is .25 cents too much. And the money will go back into tournaments I run! That was and still my offer. And like I said before though most people will be disappointed in the results. There is a lot less bagging than you think. Most of what ratings will do is get people to stop calling out people all the time. I did ratings for 2 years for my personal experiment and mostly there were people playing up in rating not down. There were a few but not as many as most think.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2012 11:45AM by head.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2012 11:45AM by head.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 12:02PM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 47 |
2 things needed from what I can see...
1. Some ratings system, to make people move up. Until then these arguments will go on forever, and everyone knows it's happening. Even the guy the OP was talking about was doing it, and got caught...Now what will be done???
2. Pay the higher classes more money...If you keep having 73 people in one class, and 12 in a harder class, which one is everyone going to take? Well it's very obvious, the one that pays more. So pay more in higher divisions, where people have to earn their wins, and people will gladly move up.
1. Some ratings system, to make people move up. Until then these arguments will go on forever, and everyone knows it's happening. Even the guy the OP was talking about was doing it, and got caught...Now what will be done???
2. Pay the higher classes more money...If you keep having 73 people in one class, and 12 in a harder class, which one is everyone going to take? Well it's very obvious, the one that pays more. So pay more in higher divisions, where people have to earn their wins, and people will gladly move up.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 12:12PM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 403 |
I don't think people will ever gladly move up. For the person we are talking about, he plays very few tournaments throughout the year. He may win all of them he plays, but it doesn't matter, he doesn't feel as if he needs to move up because of his lack of play.
Did you, noahat, get beat by this person this past weekend? Is that why you posted this thread? It is Very hard for a tournament to run perfectly, it is actually impossible! If this is the only problem that was had, I think we can all survive.
Maybe the BOD should take this as a sign to make our rules more clear. There are 2 different places with rules typed out and they both have different rules. So who really knows what's going on anyway?
Did you, noahat, get beat by this person this past weekend? Is that why you posted this thread? It is Very hard for a tournament to run perfectly, it is actually impossible! If this is the only problem that was had, I think we can all survive.
Maybe the BOD should take this as a sign to make our rules more clear. There are 2 different places with rules typed out and they both have different rules. So who really knows what's going on anyway?
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 12:33PM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 47 |
Quote
codyroberts18 Wrote:
I don't think people will ever gladly move up. For
the person we are talking about, he plays very few
tournaments throughout the year. He may win all of
them he plays, but it doesn't matter, he doesn't
feel as if he needs to move up because of his lack
of play.
So with this logic, the guy that won pro can take 2 years off from Southern Nationals, and then come back and play Intermediate???
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 12:39PM |
Registered: 5 years ago Posts: 173 |
Cody, your logic is clearly flawed. I did not play in the tournament. I just don't like seeing people getting pushed around. It may not be a high number of baggers, but it really only takes 1 or 2 per tournament to screw up the field.
Chad has it right. I play Intermediate, and I am all for taking money away from Intermediate and move more of it to Advanced and Pro. To me, this is the best way to move people up. Take away the incentives to bag.
Chad has it right. I play Intermediate, and I am all for taking money away from Intermediate and move more of it to Advanced and Pro. To me, this is the best way to move people up. Take away the incentives to bag.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 01:03PM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 403 |
Yes, If the winner of open took time off, 2 years and came back with no playing and played intermediate it would not be wrong. He hasn't touched a disc in 2 years, I doubt he could compete in open after that.
I'm just saying that no one should have to move. They aren't pushing people around, he was just playing a tournament after a while off from disc golf. I would be willing to bet he is in it for the sport, not robbing people. He is more of an ultimate player than disc golfer.
I'm just saying that no one should have to move. They aren't pushing people around, he was just playing a tournament after a while off from disc golf. I would be willing to bet he is in it for the sport, not robbing people. He is more of an ultimate player than disc golfer.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 01:05PM |
Admin Registered: 1 year ago Posts: 448 |
A tournament the size of the SNDC this year... there is no way a TD or a group of TDs have time to go through all of the tournaments that each player has played to try and decide what division he/she should be playing. As little as Kirk Mansell plays discgolf tournaments, he probably never even heard of such a rule.
Should he have played INT...his skill level...probably not
If these type issues are not going to be predetermined before the events, then we are left with the entigerity of the player to make that decision.
Should he have played INT...his skill level...probably not
If these type issues are not going to be predetermined before the events, then we are left with the entigerity of the player to make that decision.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 01:08PM |
Registered: 8 years ago Posts: 1,232 |
So all this talk of ratings and taking from one division to give to another is premature IMO. What we should try first is a way to enforce the rules we have. Remember the new handbook was not supposed to be a changing of any rule applications, just an accurate statement of the rules as they mostly have always been intended to be and as amended by BOD decisions that pre-existed the new handbook. Notice the answer to the original question did not require any reference to the new handbook. It did require reference to a BOD decision reflected in its minutes that most folks probably would not find even if they went looking for it. There is no reason we can't have a system in which you enter a player name and get their current classification. If you expect TD's to enforce division rules it has to be that easy. It can be done and making new rules will just add confusion until we have a way to enforce the rules we now have in the new handbook, which of course includes clarified publication.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2012 01:13PM by Discjazz.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/26/2012 01:13PM by Discjazz.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 01:20PM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 876 |
Easy fix...have a sign in sheet (at registration) that declares any person who is ruled ineligible(during or after tournament) must forfeit entrance money and return ALL prizes or equal $$$. Any refusal to do so will be an automatic 2 year ban from SN tournaments.
Almost all major sports organizations hand down punishment for cheating.
Done.
Almost all major sports organizations hand down punishment for cheating.
Done.
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 01:31PM |
Registered: 7 years ago Posts: 658 |
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 01:36PM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 226 |
Ok cody u say that km plays in hardly any tourney but yet everyone on facebook knew that the mansell brothers would win...hmmmm sounds like they should have been in advanced...people knew they was gonna take the ams no doubt so whats that tell u....and im confused because when it came to morris moving down it was commented the new rules state this but now this pops up and its the new rules arent etched in stone old rules are....rules are rules which ones we suppose to follow
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 01:40PM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 226 |
|
Re: Was the AM winner of the SNDC legal? July 26, 2012 02:02PM |
Registered: 2 years ago Posts: 47 |
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
18
Record Number of Users:
19
on January 14, 2013
Record Number of Guests:
244
on February 20, 2013