256
WYCO / Re: Jan. 25th Kan-U-Wyglow
« on: January 25, 2013, 09:40:32 AM »
Yep, I'll be there. Probably racing to get there by 6.
KCFDC.org
News:
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
257
WYCO / Re: 1/18 Night Mini
« on: January 18, 2013, 08:58:17 PM »
Four turned out for a very nice evening of golf. We played Wolf/calisingles/skins/buckbuckbuck or something like that. After the round was done, instead of trying to do all the math for payout, we agreed on basic singles. $5 in with $15 for 1st $5 for second. These are my best guesses at the actual scores:
1st - Joe H. - 56
2nd - Nick A. - 58 (with one disc and a putter)
3rd - Travis D. - 60
dfl - Tracy W. - 64
1st - Joe H. - 56
2nd - Nick A. - 58 (with one disc and a putter)
3rd - Travis D. - 60
dfl - Tracy W. - 64
258
WYCO / Re: 1/18 Night Mini
« on: January 18, 2013, 03:53:57 PM »
I'll be there this evening. if just before 6.
259
Tournaments / Re: SMP Frostbreaker - Shawnee Mission Park - Feb 17th, 2013 - C Tier
« on: January 08, 2013, 01:20:30 PM »
260
Tournaments / Re: SMP Frostbreaker - Shawnee Mission Park - Feb 17th, 2013 - C Tier
« on: January 08, 2013, 01:11:22 PM »261
Tournaments / Re: SMP Frostbreaker - Shawnee Mission Park - Feb 17th, 2013 - C Tier
« on: January 08, 2013, 10:47:14 AM »
Anyway, I'll be fairish weathering this one. I enjoy SMP, but will wimp out if excessive snow is on the ground or cold rain is in the air.
262
Tournaments / Re: SMP Frostbreaker - Shawnee Mission Park - Feb 17th, 2013 - C Tier
« on: January 08, 2013, 10:44:01 AM »I have always felt I need to specify Pro or Open, otherwise there are a lot of people that do not know what all of the divisions mean and sign up for the wrong division. From a TD standpoint, i feel that the detailed information makes for less problems.
Specifying Pro is indeed for the best to avoid confusion. But there is still only one Open. Open Men and Open Women is incorrect. There is nothing to stop a Pro woman player with a high enough rating from playing in the Open division against men. But the Pro Women division excludes men, therefore, it is not Open.
We'll eventually beat it into him, Kevin.
263
General Banter / Re: Wanna train like a champion?
« on: January 08, 2013, 10:38:43 AM »
Right on TanK, keep it up! I can't wait to see how it has helped your game. Though, I'm pretty sure I know the answer.
264
Tournaments / Re: SMP Frostbreaker - Shawnee Mission Park - Feb 17th, 2013 - C Tier
« on: January 08, 2013, 09:57:53 AM »Again with the divisions......ARGH!
Open Men
Pro Masters
I know it's semantics, but I thought that we had gotten to you already on this one Scott!
I get the feeling Scott is doing it on purpose now, Jack. But to fall into the trap, there are no Men only divisions and there is one and only one Open division. Classifications are:
Open
Pro Masters
(etc)
Pro Women
(etc)
Advanced
Advanced Masters
(etc)
Advanced Women
Int
Int Women
Rec
Rec Women
Jr's
*laffs* Scott got half way there as I was typing.
265
WYCO / Re: Wyco Fall/Winter Glow
« on: January 04, 2013, 05:07:25 PM »
Mike T sent a message to me saying he's not coming. So, looks like the mights turned into nots. Perhaps another evening. :-)
266
WYCO / Re: Wyco Fall/Winter Glow
« on: January 04, 2013, 03:32:56 PM »
Don't know the condition of pads out there. However, if those "mights" changed to "gonna be there", I could head out a bit early with a snow shovel to ensure the pads are clear.
267
General Banter / Re: Hey the PDGA got something right; 888 rule
« on: January 04, 2013, 12:26:05 PM »
worse than just a number, only a $ sign to the PDGA.
268
General Banter / Re: Hey the PDGA got something right; 888 rule
« on: January 04, 2013, 10:23:15 AM »Isn't bagging a round meant to hold your rating down? How do penalty points actually punish someone who is trying to lower their rating?
And really, what is the point of keeping your rating down other than wanting to play in a lower group?
A better penalty woult be to DQ the round and not include it in the ratings score.
Having a poor round removed from their ratings, to keep their rating up, is what the ratings manipulators are trying to accomplish. Once they realize they are having a bad round they intentionally play extra poorly, of just DNF. This had worked in the past because all rounds are not necessarily included in ones rating calculation (dnf's were never included). If a rating falls outside a calculated deviation from the mean, then it is not included in the averaging. Whenever you see a "no" on the included column of your ratings list, the deviation from the mean must have been met for that round.
And so this rule is meant to discourage people from bagging their round such that it falls outside of the deviation.
269
General Banter / Re: Hey the PDGA got something right; 888 rule
« on: January 03, 2013, 04:58:52 PM »but that points could then put someone in a category to drop a level......though I am uncertain that would be the case, though Palmer may make me do it.....
I wonder as people see my erratic rounds what they would think of my playing......
It says that Ams can't have their rating drop to such a point to where it would allow them in a lower division. Same should go for Pro's that do or potentially play as Ams.
270
General Banter / Hey the PDGA got something right; 888 rule
« on: January 03, 2013, 04:46:53 PM »
Bagging a round to have it be a "no" on the ratings inclusion list is now a reportable rules infraction. The part I like the most is that DNF'ng without notifying the TD is punishable under the rule. But I think it should be a 10 or 20 points deduction or an escalating scale.
http://www.pdga.com/ratings-manipulation-addressed
http://www.pdga.com/ratings-manipulation-addressed