First of all, thanks for all the feedback.
Second, please ignore any rambling I may do, because I have a million ideas floating through my head and will jump around like crazy probably.Problem #1
The whole reason that we need 6 women to compete that wish to play in the team championship
is to make sure we are getting the best women on each team and that one team is left with a default of the only 2 women that wish to play ending up finishing 20th and 30th in the diva tournament. No offense, but that is not the "best of the best". If there isn't at least 6 women that legitimately want to play and know they can play the weekend of June 18th/19th, then we will end up only getting the 2 women that wanted to play qualifying, regardless if they finished 1st or last. It is not fair to either side of the line, if one team has 2 good players that qualify out of 6, and the other team has 2 poor players qualify out of 6, because the top 4 competing were not going to be able to play in the team challenge anyway. Hope that makes some sense.
Diva weekend may not be the best now that I think about it, unless there are a significant amount of women playing that are 1)from KC or surrounding, and 2)Can legitimately play on the team challenge weekend.
My solution...but I need to ok with Zeke...is:
I like Amy's idea to get the ball rolling.
I want to summarize some thoughts that have been shared this morning and start a discussion:
For a tournament that is designed to showcase KC's "best of the best," it's important that women earn a place (by defeating other women), and not get there by default." Having a qualifier/qualifiers is totally reasonable. But 3-5 women is a decent showing, even for a large local tournament, and that's from the metro as a whole. Setting a requirement of six women from each state feels like we're being set up to fail. From the most recent PDGA demographics report, the membership was 92% male, 8% female. Using the teams of 16 men as a starting point, that means that adding just one woman to each team, and a qualifying event of 2-3 women would be more likely to succeed, particularly in the shadow of last year's drama (that last fragment is completely my (Amy's) opinion).
Perhaps a better starting place would be 3-4 women minimum (per state) competing for 1-2 spots on each side, with 1 getting the alternate spot. This would convey a sincere interest in opening the event to women, and therefore are encouraging more women to try and qualify.
Lastly, I would remind anyone reading this that I said my intent is to "start a discussion," not to demand rule changes.
It would be better to start with a fewer number of women, and by adding only 1 woman to the team, that frees the captains up to mix and match the match-ups, instead of having to face the same 4 women off against each other for every round.
This would allow women to start to gain ground into the challenge, but not ask for too many to step up too fast. Of course they would be teamed up with a man in both doubles rounds, but this allows some great strategy to both captains. Then the women would play against each other in the final singles round. Could be the deciding match So 3 women competing for 1 spot, + an alternate, sounds like a good starting point. This could probably be managed on Diva weekend, or we could hold a separate qualifier on each side of the state line on a day that works out best for you ladies. We just need a YES I WOULD PLAY IN THE TEAM CHALLENGE ON JUNE 18/19, from at least 3 women before the qualifier is held, and at least 3 have to show up and compete. I don't want 4 women to show up, and then when finished, the top 2 tell me they can't play that weekend, so I am stuck with the bottom 2. This is not the best of the best. Agreed?
If and only if Zeke agrees: Then any women from Kansas that wish to qualify, and can play June 18/19, please PM me with your contact info. From there we can start to work on a date to hold a qualifier that will work for all. Missouri contact your representative: Zeke
But please wait until I get a response from Zeke, or it might be all for nothing.
With only 1 woman added, I would hope to keep the teams to 16, +4 men alternates, and 1 extra woman alternate. But that needs to be decided on as well.
JoeT - I'm not sure I want to open that can of worms up this year. I understand your point, but where do we draw the line? What about 850 and lower rated players, 40 and older, 50 and older, lefties, turbo-putters of America. We have had 50 and older players on each side every year. I think the age discussion will have to wait. I do not have the time this year. But you can start a 60 and older team challenge if you like. Or you can come out and kick some a$$ and qualify. Maybe we will hold a Wyco qualifier
Think on these ideas and I will do the same. I'm off to Nashville to golf, eat, drink, and sleep until Tuesday. I'll check back then.