Rosedale Winter Wonderland - Unsanctioned

[LKillian]

hmmm. me making a comeback on Arturo...

Thanks Scott, ur the man.

[dickthediscparker]

On the bagger situation... Has anyone thought that maybe the Intermediate guys stepped up to Advanced while the other guys just stayed in their division? I know it isn't as fun to think of it that way but... just sayin.

[hberciunas]

Surely it is time for some sort of player rating system???

[Flying J]

On the bagger situation... Has anyone thought that maybe the Intermediate guys stepped up to Advanced while the other guys just stayed in their division? I know it isn't as fun to think of it that way but... just sayin.

Sorry, but six of the twelve Intermediate competitors were within one stroke of one another and ten strokes away from the other six.  The top six were clearly playing at another level compared to the bottom six, and that level is the Advanced level. 

Having said that, I don't know these competitors and how they compete on a daily basis.  It is posible and probable for one or two competitors to play out of their minds one day and crush the competition, and based on the results of that one day alone they should not me made to move up to the next level.  Nor should they.  Consistency is the determining factor.  Being in the top 3 over and over again.
 
But there wasn't one or two.  There were six.  Six competitors playing the lowest level they could with one motive in mind.  To get a win.  They probably felt that they "could not win" in Advanced, so they played Intermediate.  It wasn't about "being competitive" in advanced, for I'm sure they knew they could be. It was about the belief that they couldn't win it.  In my humble opinion.

If one or two of you six is trully an intermediate level player and killed it on the course that day, then I extend my sincere congratulations to you.  Great job out there.

[Utz]

In unsanctioned events there needs to be one division for Amateur. Then a Recreational division for those who are amateur but aren't quite into the spirit of competition. Without ratings, and the low number of attendance having 2 AM divisions is silly.

Oh, there's no such thing as sandbagging. If you're given a choice of a division without a rating requirement then who the hell are we to tell someone where they want to/should play? I know all of the people playing that tourney in AM had no intention of sandbagging, They probably feel that at a PDGA level their game is Intermediate.

You could also say Ed/Bill were bagging in AM, when they should be been playing in Open...see what'm saying?

Seriously though. Just 1 AM division solves all this malarkey.

[jamidanger]

if rosedale was attacked by insurgents, who better to build the bunkers then those with bags of sand? thank you baggers for being well prepared.

[eeastwood]

I agree with Utz.  One AM division and maybe a rec division for new players would solve this problem.  I played in the Afternoon D-Lite a few years ago and the divisions were Pro-1, Pro-2, Advanced, Intermediate, Masters, Rec, Jrs, and Women.  At the time, I had only played in 2 tournaments as Intermediate and was ready to move up to Advanced.  So that's what I played, but I should have played Pro-2 since it was unsanctioned and there many more players in that division. Plus, I would have finished 2nd in Pro-2 and won more.  Back then, I didn't know the difference between sanctioned or unsanctioned or why it mattered.  I think part of the issue with this and similar tournaments is that several normally Advanced level players (in PDGA sanctioned events) moved up to play Open since it was un-sanctioned.  Also, I think the number of players in each division can influence it, especially if someone is borderline Intermediate to Advanced to player.  Or it could be a group of guys of similar level all want to play and compete together in the same division.  But really who cares?   

Do you know what breeds winning? More winning!

[jack]

I agree with Utz.  One AM division and maybe a rec division for new players would solve this problem.  .....  But really who cares?....

Perfect, this is about the sport that we want to grow, so lest us not cast out those that are playing, and alienate them at an event that isn't sanctioned.  It's a choice, just like I chose to rejoin the Am ranks this past year.
 

I made the decision that I don't care what division you want to call me as a player, but I don't want to be limited in my decisions as well.

Speaking of SAND BAGGERS....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Jones_%28golfer%29

How would you treat him?  None of us in this forum only play disc golf, so in my mind all of us should be am's, and then at what level is what I make a conscience decision, not you to decide for myself.

That being said, goading your friend into playing the correct division should always be happening in my mind.  How they respond is a testament of their own belief in your opinion of them.....

[eeastwood]

I should probably explain myself a little more concerning the "who cares" comment.  What I meant was, who cares if they choose to play in a lower division.  My last statement "what breeds winning?  more winning!" was meant to say that allowing new players to have success and win (in intermediate or novice or rec or jr) will motivate them and give them confidence to continue and grow as a competitor and be a winner.  I'm not saying I recommend eliminating divisions, I'm saying that I agree with Utz that if you only had one AM division then this issue of people getting called bagger and alienating them would end.   

[zumagun]

I'm D.S. who threw 130 in Intermediate.  That was 58 down under and 72 up top ; my worst round ever.

If I would have thrown my average round up top, between 58 and 62, I would have been considered a bagger too.  I don't know about the guys below me, but they could have either played up from Rec., or just had a bad day like me, which led to the ten-throw gap on the intermediate scores.

[hberciunas]

The problem is with those who continually play down and finish top 5 several strokes better than the pack. The ones who have a great round and win by several is not the problem. Nor is the problem when someone is playing thier level and has a terrible round. I am never upset at those who are playing at my level and beat me, especially if I have a poor round. I am upset with those who have poor rounds when I play well in my division and still beat me and the pack by 5-10 ten strokes.

Now . . . unsanctioned is a different animal. I am thankful that the leadership of those unsantioned tourneys encourage others to move up. I moved up and played ok, and would have been a bagger in the rec division, but I didn't know that at the time. Those I usually play with in rec all moved up and so the intermediate division was last summer's rec. Again there were the few who played at different level then the pack and would have had good showing in Advanced or even Open.

eeastwood has a great point, and it is part of what keeps me playing tourneys: ""what breeds winning?  more winning!" was meant to say that allowing new players to have success and win (in intermediate or novice or rec or jr) will motivate them and give them confidence to continue and grow as a competitor and be a winner."

I have only been playing for about a year and so perhaps I don't know what I am talking about. Or perhaps, you who are playing at the highest levels and been playing for several years might want to listen to and think of those who are new and rising in the sport.

Those of us who are new and buying lots of new equipement and paying to play at the lower levels do make a difference in the payouts for those of you playing pro. Even if the pot doesn't reflect our pay-in, sponsors are less likely to sponsor 20 guys playing a tourney as they are a group of 100 plus in men's, plus women's and juniors with families spectating.

By the way, "thank you's" to those who are at those higher/pro levels for being welcoming and helpful to us newbies and wannabees and going to bes.

[discglover]

Shooting a good round to accomplish a win is important. But not near as important as having fun no matter how well you shoot. In my eyes those that portray a fun attitude no matter their score is the real winner. Thus "The most fun wins!"