Bill Stewart wrote:Jaxon Sheehy wrote:Bill Stewart wrote:Hey let's have 72 different divisions so everyone gets a trophy!
Any rec (other than nyles) who plays 5 tournies in a year, is usually good enough to score in the middle of the AM 2 pack in my opinion. Starting at age 52 is tough. All distance gained from 52 on out is going to be from technique gains, not strength gains. It's also an anomaly--congratulations Nyles. Rec is rec. It means playing recreationally, not competitively. I like the season cumulation of points for funny money and no need to save a slot for Rec in finals--good move.
AM GM? Overkill. Am Masters is competitive, and when a "closer to 40" AM Masters player gets too good, he usually goes to AM1 or Pro Masters. If a "closer to 50" AM masters gets too good, he usually goes pro master then Pro GM.
As a TD, I can say the extra divsions are an unnecessary amount of work and expense. Every year when ordering trophies, I gotta think economically about how many places to buy trophies. Do you go to a 2nd place trophy when the division might have 3 players? Ugh. How about zero players? Then you have to eat the expense. Keep it simple. Paring down the number of divisions won't have any effect on "growing the sport."
i played my first tournament in 2010- at Pye. i tried to play "rec" but Stew didn't want me to win a trophy so he made me play AM-2. it was a bit like when Tom Brady got picked in the 6th round... or something.
Even though you were young at the sport, I knew you played the regular tees at Pye so the idea of having you play the short tees seemed silly. Nyles played rec last year as I don't think he'd had the same familiarity with the course.
Here's a question: often we'll get players who haven't played in an organized tourney before ask what division to play in. Two guys (locals, Nyles age) last year finished at the bottom of AM2, but definitely didn't want to play the short tees (Pye is their home course). Nyles, would you keep the REC division playing the (too) short tees, or have everybody play the same layout? I'm leaning toward changing to the full-length course for recs this EMC.
Without trying to completely drag this post out from the dead, here's a few points and questions....
1) The very mindset listed in the quote above is why we are even considering dropping the REC division. Local or not does not determine skill... just familiarity. Even if they play well on their home course, it does not make them more skilled.
2) If you look through most Amateur NEFA players with PDGA ratings, you will find that most players play in a division above their rating, and not just by a small amount. Many AM1 players only have ratings that require them to play in at least AM2, and only just barely.
3) Given the above 2 points, shouldn't we, instead, be asking ourselves whether or not we want to INCREASE the value of the REC division by introducing the Novice division, a perfect place for first time tourney goers to get their feet wet for a significantly reduced fee?
In the past, we've all seen some huge variances and differences in the REC division scores because of that "I haven't played in a tourney, yet" excuse. And it pains me greatly to hear a newcomer say they're entering the REC division for that reason, rather then because they feel that is where their skill level belongs. I always encourage them to step into the AM2 division because then they can get a better comparison for their skill level, as opposed to playing against the REC first-timer who's actually a true AM2. The REC division in the PDGA is an amazingly competitive division as far as PDGA rating rounds go. Especially since a single mistake doesn't mean the end of their round when on the next hole, they can very easily do things right and make up that stroke or two.
The REC division isn't the "bottom" division or just a stepping stone. It's a skill based division, and to treat it as anything but that is insulting to anyone who considers themselves a NEFA REC player. If scores for our REC division more closely reflected the scores of true REC players, I'm sure it would be easier to attract more of them to the tournament scene by offering a division in which they truly belong, and can compete against other players of similar skill... which is the entire point of tournament play.
If you get rid of the REC division, it will be the first step towards becoming a group of elitists who no longer care about promoting the sport or helping newcomers find more ways to enjoy it. Groups like NEFA and it's local leagues are what help make disc golf stand out from all the other sports where elitist competition drives players to treating it like a job rather then a hobby.
I plead for you all to go back to your roots, and give our less skilled followers a division to call home without feeling alienated because they can't throw as far as you do, or can't get out and play as often. Perhaps you should go back and read the PDGA's rough guidelines for what a player in a division should be able to do. While doing that, remember that some players are surprisingly amazed when they get that "perfect" drive that goes 200 feet as a personal best distance.
