2009-10 New England TC Rules/Guidelines.

[Todd Lapham]

Team Burgess

#1 Cow

Todd - just to recap, this is the most pertinent part of the thread!

No doubt!

[Steven Dakai]

seriously Todd, what the heck. You can't take the morning off!

Ya cuz if you do, Solbo starts answering questions and we all know what a great communicator he can be!!

So, Tully is cool with the current roster and nobody is gonna give them any more crap, right.
We are just going to bring an extra player to the last challenge to accommodate them...very simple.

As usual, a lack of reading comprehension. Todd said MAX 14 with 1 Woman, that's 15.

based on that^ I would hope that a person could INFER that the max number of people at a challenge is 15 per team? am I wrong?

and I know I am being crass, oh well.

obtuse, not just crass.

[Steve Solbo]

seriously Todd, what the heck. You can't take the morning off!

Ya cuz if you do, Solbo starts answering questions and we all know what a great communicator he can be!!

So, Tully is cool with the current roster and nobody is gonna give them any more crap, right.
We are just going to bring an extra player to the last challenge to accommodate them...very simple.

As usual, a lack of reading comprehension. Todd said MAX 14 with 1 Woman, that's 15.

based on that^ I would hope that a person could INFER that the max number of people at a challenge is 15 per team? am I wrong?

and I know I am being crass, oh well.

obtuse, not just crass.

get the answer you were looking for?

yeah, im lacking sensitivity, not intelligence , I know that much. I don't really care. I lack sensitivity for people who don't go back and read the rules, instead they ask if a scenario is ok, when they know it's not.

[Steven Dakai]

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ....you are funny, like a clown.

[Steve Solbo]

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ....you are funny, like a clown.

I wish I was as funny as you.

[Bård Soleng]

I really think we should look into the Virginia Team Invitational format. 1 weekend, 2 days....9 per team (seeded), 4 pros, 2 masters, 2 amateur, and 1 female.

we are taking away from Icebowls etc.


whats your views?

[Matt DeAngelis]

I went back and read the 'rules' in this thread and couldn't find anything that concretely said what needed to be done.

A team shows up with 10 players and the opponent shows up with 9.
Singles is played with 9 players.

What happens for the doubles round? Since it is an odd number, are we forced to play 4 doubles teams and a singles match in order to have the same number of points?

I know that earlier in the season it was a rule that captains can decide on a case by case basis. Is this still the rule? Thanks guys.

[Steve Solbo]

I really think we should look into the Virginia Team Invitational format. 1 weekend, 2 days....9 per team (seeded), 4 pros, 2 masters, 2 amateur, and 1 female.

we are taking away from Icebowls etc.


whats your views?

what do we do for the other 4 months?

also, much more exclusive than what we have now.

maybe no break for Xmas/Thanksgiving next year, and end in Feb. Finals in March..

[Steve Solbo]

I went back and read the 'rules' in this thread and couldn't find anything that concretely said what needed to be done.

A team shows up with 10 players and the opponent shows up with 9.
Singles is played with 9 players.

What happens for the doubles round? Since it is an odd number, are we forced to play 4 doubles teams and a singles match in order to have the same number of points?

I know that earlier in the season it was a rule that captains can decide on a case by case basis. Is this still the rule? Thanks guys.

Yes, you can decide to put the potential "tiebreaker" out on the course in a 1 on 1 matchup if you would like, I hate doing that, as it ends up being the potential tiebreaker, If it ends up being tied, I'd rather my best duke it out vs. their best.

just my .02, that's how we've handled it...

[Mike Zorovich]

please, finals in march next season

[J_Disc]

A team shows up with 10 players and the opponent shows up with 9. Singles is played with 9 players.

What happens for the doubles round? Since it is an odd number, are we forced to play 4 doubles teams and a singles match in order to have the same number of points?

We've typically only played the dubs matches -- no singles and 3 guys had to sit.

I'm not really opposed to a singles match during the doubles round, we just haven't gone that route (perhaps once that I remember).

I've also offered to do a group of triples, but nobody has ever accepted that offer. It kinda depends on the course, but trips can be fun with a bunch of AMs on a tough course.

[Mike Dussault]

We have played the extra point in singles a couple of times. Just trying to avoid sitting one more player.

[Eric Kevorkian]

Is there any way to require teams to post specific results from previous challenges (i.e. matchups and scores)? Is that something that can be put on the table for next year?

[ekap]

Is there any way to require teams to post specific results from previous challenges (i.e. matchups and scores)? Is that something that can be put on the table for next year?

Good idea

[Jim Bobka]

Agreed, in that way captains can scout recent play.

[Shawn Mullen]

And you can track roster moves. The home team should be responsible for posting them.

[Steve Solbo]

Is there any way to require teams to post specific results from previous challenges (i.e. matchups and scores)? Is that something that can be put on the table for next year?

Why is this necessary? Ill post who beat who, but I dont feel like specific score is necessary, most of the time, I don't keep the scorecards, just jot down the Win or Loss, and move on.

If you want to scout, go watch the teams play, or learn more about the opponent, by other means... look at Tourney results, etc... PDGA ratings, (if they have them)...

I'll continue to post W/L, and maybe scores (if I have them), but I dont think it should be mandatory, matchups and winner should be mandatory, SCORE should not be.... Just something else to worry about. Most captains of the home team do a good job and post results in some fashion. I think not posting the actual score is like anti-scouting, which, in this league, where I check tourney scores, etc, I do my homework, and it actually matters...

[Steven Dakai]

Good idea Kovo.

[John Cooper]

Question: If a player plays 3 rounds (say 1 full challenge and a singles match in another challenge) do they qualify for finals? Just making sure its not 3 full team challenges (6 rounds) to qualify.

[Todd Lapham]

It's atleast 1 round in 3 separate challenges.

[John Cooper]

Alright thanks. I thought it was just 3 rounds in total.

[Eric Kevorkian]

Is there any way to require teams to post specific results from previous challenges (i.e. matchups and scores)? Is that something that can be put on the table for next year?

Why is this necessary? Ill post who beat who, but I dont feel like specific score is necessary, most of the time, I don't keep the scorecards, just jot down the Win or Loss, and move on.

If you want to scout, go watch the teams play, or learn more about the opponent, by other means... look at Tourney results, etc... PDGA ratings, (if they have them)...

I'll continue to post W/L, and maybe scores (if I have them), but I dont think it should be mandatory, matchups and winner should be mandatory, SCORE should not be.... Just something else to worry about. Most captains of the home team do a good job and post results in some fashion. I think not posting the actual score is like anti-scouting, which, in this league, where I check tourney scores, etc, I do my homework, and it actually matters...

Really steve?? If you want to scout, go watch teams play??? People are busy enough on the weekends with personal matters, tournaments, and challenges as it is. Going to watch another teams challenge seems a little ridiculous (good to see you yesterday ) and unlikely to happen.

Specific stats may not be needed, but I think people enjoy dissecting/analyzing those types of numbers. Granted the actual results may not be a good gauge of how the round went, but i'm sure people would like to see it. Is it necessary, no.

I do think matchups are worth noting though. It can give you a gauge as to how teams pair doubles, and how they attack their matchups.

It would also enable a team to see who HAS to play if they want to qualify for finals...

You may not see it as necessary, and that's great, but it sounds like so far you are the only one to, as Tatro says, "poo-poo" the idea. I say put it on the table for next year and see how people respond to it.

[Todd Lapham]

If I'm commish next year teams will be required to post who played who, results optional. This will be the best way to keep track of who has played.

[Steve Solbo]

Is there any way to require teams to post specific results from previous challenges (i.e. matchups and scores)? Is that something that can be put on the table for next year?

Why is this necessary? Ill post who beat who, but I dont feel like specific score is necessary, most of the time, I don't keep the scorecards, just jot down the Win or Loss, and move on.

If you want to scout, go watch the teams play, or learn more about the opponent, by other means... look at Tourney results, etc... PDGA ratings, (if they have them)...

I'll continue to post W/L, and maybe scores (if I have them), but I dont think it should be mandatory, matchups and winner should be mandatory, SCORE should not be.... Just something else to worry about. Most captains of the home team do a good job and post results in some fashion. I think not posting the actual score is like anti-scouting, which, in this league, where I check tourney scores, etc, I do my homework, and it actually matters...

Really steve?? If you want to scout, go watch teams play??? People are busy enough on the weekends with personal matters, tournaments, and challenges as it is. Going to watch another teams challenge seems a little ridiculous (good to see you yesterday ) and unlikely to happen.

Specific stats may not be needed, but I think people enjoy dissecting/analyzing those types of numbers. Granted the actual results may not be a good gauge of how the round went, but i'm sure people would like to see it. Is it necessary, no.

I do think matchups are worth noting though. It can give you a gauge as to how teams pair doubles, and how they attack their matchups.

It would also enable a team to see who HAS to play if they want to qualify for finals...

You may not see it as necessary, and that's great, but it sounds like so far you are the only one to, as Tatro says, "poo-poo" the idea. I say put it on the table for next year and see how people respond to it.

I dont go out and watch teams play. However, I also think that match-play and doubles match-play is the WORST judge of talent out there, like I said, I look at tourney results, I look at the number a person can shoot at a certain course and if my team is at that course, I try to pair them up against someone that can shoot better than that number from scores, etc...

Ill never post scores, from this point on. I'd love to see what the penalty is, cuse I wont post exact results, I dont keep them anymore.

[Steven Dakai]

I'm taking my ball and going home!

[Stephen Ditter]

I don't think we need exact results like Ralph over dittermange 4/3. But it would be nice if the capts posted Ralph over dittermange (B). Same with doubles, Josh/Drew over dittermange/Laner is fine. Yes, we lost by six strokes, but you don't have to list it.

I think most of the teams have been posting match-ups and win/loss breakdowns. That's all I'm asking for, keep the painful scores private.

-ditterman

[Shawn Mullen]

I don't think we need exact results like Ralph over dittermange 4/3. But it would be nice if the capts posted Ralph over dittermange (B). Same with doubles, Josh/Drew over dittermange/Laner is fine. Yes, we lost by six strokes, but you don't have to list it.

I think most of the teams have been posting match-ups and win/loss breakdowns. That's all I'm asking for, keep the painful scores private.

-ditterman

I usually just post who won/lost each match. The home team should be keeping track of all of that.

[Eric Kevorkian]

That's all fine with me. As I had said...the specific results don't need to be posted, but certainly the matchups in singles and doubles should be noted, along with the winner.

[Steve Solbo]

I don't think we need exact results like Ralph over dittermange 4/3. But it would be nice if the capts posted Ralph over dittermange (B). Same with doubles, Josh/Drew over dittermange/Laner is fine. Yes, we lost by six strokes, but you don't have to list it.

I think most of the teams have been posting match-ups and win/loss breakdowns. That's all I'm asking for, keep the painful scores private.

-ditterman

I agree 100 percent Ditter, b/c during our challenge, we mainly used the sweet cards you provided, and thus erased the scores, I don't know the exact scores. I think we should have to post matchups and the winner of the matchup, as I've been saying, but that's just me. This btw is from a Captains perspective, not the commish perspective or NEFA Pres perspective.. okie dokie?

[Charlie Holmgren]

Matchups and winners should be mando. Otherwise...whats the point?!?!
That's half the fun! There have been several matches where I wished I saw who played who. Is there anyway we can go back and start posting all the results from this year? That would be sick!