Alabama   •   Arkansas   •   Florida   •   Georgia   •   Kentucky   •   Louisiana   •   Mississippi   •   Oklahoma   •   Tennessee   •   Texas
Welcome! » Log In » Create A New Profile

Serious Question on Eligibility

Posted by ww 
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 21, 2008 03:46PM
Quote
John K
Honestly Bob you are the only person saying that the SN fees should go somewhere other than the division they played in the sn qualifier.

John k

lol, I was the first person to tell the pDGA that the mag should be optional ;o]
Now it is!

I was also the one that suggested ordering directly and getting the baskets for the host.



It just makes sense. If a player is competing where he did not put money in makes no sense. If the money is elsewhere so should the player.

Take a vote!

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 11:46AM
so you would be punishing players who could have played masters all year, but played "up" into the open division, thus giving money to the open division for pro championships - money they won't even be playing for at the championship, because they are now going to play masters

nevermind the fact that you basically saying go back to the old way of doing things and eliminating all the ams from playing the pro championships unless they have pro points
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 12:58PM
Quote
bazkitcase5
so you would be punishing players who could have played masters all year, but played "up" into the open division, thus giving money to the open division for pro championships - money they won't even be playing for at the championship, because they are now going to play masters

No, Bob is say if allowed to play OPEN, then put his $2 in the OPEN division, not the Masters division.

Terry Zeringue
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 02:01PM
OK, Bob is not alone. I agree that if a player plays in one division all year to qualify for the SNPC, then the player should play in the division where they have the most points. I know sometimes there is not enough Masters or GrandMasters to field a division and then those players play Open and that is understandable, but for a player to play all year in Open and then at the SNPC they sign up for Masters or GrandMasters, that is not fair.

Example:

Willy BT accumulated 135 Masters Points and 108 Open Points last year....now I don't know why he played both, but by default he should play Masters in the SNPC because that is where most of his points were.

In the 2006-2007 year Lavone Wolfe accumulated 18 points as an Open Player and he was allowd to play and win the GrandMasters Divsion. According to the rules as they exist today that was OK. But do you think the GrandMasters were happy with that.

In the 2007-2008 OGB had 70 Open points and 38 GrandMaster points....he should have played Open but again as the rules now apply he can play where ever he wants given his age. P.S. he won over second place by 19 strokes.

Given the two last scenarios the SN BOD needs to rethink lots of things.....

Dangerous Don
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 02:18PM
So Don if you only played in one sn tournament last year and there were no other grandmaster so you played in the masters division. You'd be ok with someone legislating where you should play.

I think if what has been proposed is adopted you'd have older skilled players, say a gmaster,

1. Playing in only gmaster beating up on them ALL year
2. Playing a smaller number of tournament
3. Playing only large tournaments

I don't think you should penalize a masters or grandmasters age player because of their skill level...

John k
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 02:19PM
What DON just posted is another type of Bagging,,, the "Hide in a protected division unless I think I can win" bagging.

Terry Zeringue
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 03:02PM
Well John K you are right, there are times when an age protected division does not have three players so if you want to play you have to play somewhere else, but I posted what I did for the reason Zinger said...to me it is just another form of Bagging...however I accept all challenges and will play anybody anytime, not because I think I would win, just for the pure pleasure of playing and comparing my play to someone who is better. But to play in open all year, where Masters and GrandMasters were offered and then to play in an age protected divsion you never played in all year and wipe out everyone is BAGGING.

Dangerous Don
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 03:12PM
Quote
TheZinger
What DON just posted is another type of Bagging,,, the "Hide in a protected division unless I think I can win" bagging.

WORD!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SN Top25 Bag Tag database
BRDGA Top10 Bag Tag database
MADGA Top10 Bag Tag database
SFC Top10 Bag Tag database
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 03:24PM
its hard to call that bagging, considering they are playing at the top level reserved for people of their age group - you could argue they are doing their competitors a favor throughout the year by playing up, then playing where they belong for the championships - if the other people in that same age group can't compete, maybe their playing above their head? (which is the case for MOST SN players, as has been pointed out in the past)

but with that said, I personally think all protected divisions should be done away with - either that or just have 1 overall pro master group at say 50+, and that be it

while Don's idea sounds good in theory, there just aren't enough master and grandmaster players to sustain such a system, at least in the majority of SN land (some bigger disc golf cities might be able to pull this off, but thats about it)
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 03:40PM
If you can beat MattO at a large tournament and then when the heat is turned up a little you run back to grandmasters then I think there is something wrong with that.

Sure he COULD technically bag all year in that division but he wants his cake and to eat it also.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SN Top25 Bag Tag database
BRDGA Top10 Bag Tag database
MADGA Top10 Bag Tag database
SFC Top10 Bag Tag database
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 03:51PM
I have heard of some players doing something similar to the following when there weren't enough people to create a division for them at a tournament.

They play in the next closest division as allowed by their status (i.e. Advanced Master plays Advanced) and simply ask the TD to report their points/results in their traditional division. Obviously if there was only one person in attendance that wanted to play Advanced Master then they would receive only 2 points and no extra points for the players that they beat who intended to play in the Advanced Division. But this does ensure that they are given credit for what division they would LIKE to have played in throughout the entire year, even when it wasn't possible for it to be offered. This would also put their $2 into the correct division for the SNC.

Judy
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 03:57PM
your basically saying a guy who is 45 years old should not play in the top division created specifically for pros his age group because he is too good?

its not his fault the others aren't good enough - he's playing where he's allowed to play

I'm not saying there isn't anything wrong with what is happening, but it isn't the player's fault, its the system we've created to cater to everybody - we don't need 10 divisions when very few tournaments get more than 100 players
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 04:03PM
I agree... and like Judy said, if it's because of not enough people then a grandmaster person should move to masters not Open.

What I'm talking about is the guy that just looks at the competition and if they think they can take Open they play open, if they are worried then the run off and hide and play an age protected division. I say if you can compete with some of the best and win then do so... stick it out through thick and thin.

There are other reasons a person might move "up" a division but the one I stated above is kind of messy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SN Top25 Bag Tag database
BRDGA Top10 Bag Tag database
MADGA Top10 Bag Tag database
SFC Top10 Bag Tag database
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 04:06PM
I never said it wasn't sandbagging...and I'm not sure how much fun Lavaone had beating the grandmasters at Wall Doxey by 18 strokes but it's his option, as was Dean Tannocks at the same SNPC beating the rest of the masters by 11 stokes...
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 04:40PM
once again there where ample masters players at every event he played so, he had the option and chose open not masters. now he is wanting to play in the other disison. if he is allowed then his money/fees should go with him. If not why should he be allowd to play without putting in?

Does that not make sense?

Can we take a vote?

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 22, 2008 07:12PM
and Judy is correct, if there are not enough for the divison{which is not the case with this person} then they need to ask for there money to be allocated to the divison in which they intend to play in the SNPC. Otherwise they are taking where they did not put in.

Now there are players showing up with points in masters that did not even play masters all year?? They are showing points that they earned in open? But another is showing no points which is how many masters points he has? Once again there money is in open not masters.

I do not understand how this can be any different then me being told that my masters points{even thou I had not cashed} could not be used to play advanced in the SNAC.





Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 08/22/2008 07:43PM by Tax Man.
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 23, 2008 01:55AM
if an 40+ year old can hang with everyone else in the OPEN division, then why hide behind the age protected division??????? Is it because he might not win because Matto, Fowler, etc is playing????? Why won't an Adv player that is kicking @ss moving up??? Because he doesn't believe he can't beat those people? Is this not the same thing???

Pro Master should be for the EX PROS that have lost a little bit because of their age. It shouldn't be for the ones who can still hang with the big dogs,, but now have an option because they are old enough. The winner of this years PRO Worlds in the PRO Masters division would of tied for 15th out of 145 players with AVERY JENKINS!!!!!! He can hang,, but he knew he can win more money in the age protected division,,,,,,same thing as ADV and INT does!!!! They stay down because they realize they can win more prizes if they stay in the lower division. WillyBT decides on which division to play by guessing the payout of the two divisions.

Terry Zeringue
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 23, 2008 09:49AM
like I said, they are doing what they are allowed to do, but its the fault of the system that allows them to do these things - its the system that allows them to qualify for 2 different divisions, regardless of what was "meant"

the system should be changed, but until this happens, I'm not sure you can blame them for competing where they qualify to compete
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 23, 2008 11:03AM
I agree the system is at fault... that's what is wrong with a lot of the "bagging" issues. But as someone said elsewheres "it's a gentleman's game" so, shouldn't those people be held to a higher ethical standard?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SN Top25 Bag Tag database
BRDGA Top10 Bag Tag database
MADGA Top10 Bag Tag database
SFC Top10 Bag Tag database



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/23/2008 11:04AM by Gilligan.
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 23, 2008 03:31PM
Yes Clayton! but there is an easy fix. I was told NO and so should they. Unless of course there fees move to the correct divison. Otherwise they should play OPEN!

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 24, 2008 10:31AM
Ditto to what Judy posted about having your points placed where you ask, in case there are not enough players for your division.

Dangerous Don
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 06:32AM
Quote
dangerousdon
Ditto to what Judy posted about having your points placed where you ask, in case there are not enough players for your division.

what about your cash? It appears you no longer even need a point to play masters or grandmasters. Not sure why;[

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 01:14PM
This is truly a case of: "something is broken and it needs to be fixed".

Dangerous Don
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 01:22PM
Quote
dangerousdon
This is truly a case of: "something is broken and it needs to be fixed".

well I am trying but no board member wishes to say anything.

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 02:37PM
Bob
Nice blanket statement... I've already stated that I don't think anything is broken. I disagree with you in regards to having the money follow the individual instead of the division. That is just creating work in my opinion and would just cause confusion.

The fact that you think something needs fixed doesn't mean that is does. And requiring players to have masters points to play masters ect is going backwards in regards to excluding am players from the snpc again...

John k
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 03:21PM
Well for the record, there are two people that are saying something is broken so it's not JUST bob.

I don't see what is wrong with requiring am players to have PRO points to play the snPc?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SN Top25 Bag Tag database
BRDGA Top10 Bag Tag database
MADGA Top10 Bag Tag database
SFC Top10 Bag Tag database
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 03:27PM
Quote
John K
Nice blanket statement... I've already stated that I don't think anything is broken. I disagree with you in regards to having the money follow the individual instead of the division. That is just creating work in my opinion and would just cause confusion

John k

well the other posters think it is. I know you directed the answer at me but I am not the only one who feels this way. as for the confusion, why if the player does not have a point in a divison they cannot play there. It was fairly simple at the SNAC and should be at the SNPC. If they have not put in then they should not be able to take from it. Once again I say have an open vote and see if people think it is broke. I see a few others that agree.

as for the am players, they also should need a point{in the open divison} and most of the ones who are planning on coming do so.

it is at least something the BOD should consider. they should also consider allowing players with pro points that have not cashed to be allowed to play in the snac. one for all and all for one;o]~

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 04:03PM
3 people still don't constitute a majority :) But if other people feel that same way chime in...

Am needing pro points, that was the way it USE to be and was changed 3 years ago to allow anyone with sn poinst to play in the SNPC, but that doesn't work the other way Bob...
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 04:06PM
Quote
John K
3 people still don't constitute a majority :) But if other people feel that same way chime in...

Am needing pro points, that was the way it USE to be and was changed 3 years ago to allow anyone with sn poinst to play in the SNPC, but that doesn't work the other way Bob...

It does if you are on the BOD!!!

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 06:40PM
Why was it changed?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SN Top25 Bag Tag database
BRDGA Top10 Bag Tag database
MADGA Top10 Bag Tag database
SFC Top10 Bag Tag database
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 36
Record Number of Users: 19 on January 14, 2013
Record Number of Guests: 244 on February 20, 2013