BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Does what it says on the tin!
User avatar
rhatton1
Posts: 1692
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by rhatton1 » Thu Dec 15, 2016 1:02 pm

bruce wrote:
To me you're over complicating things massively to try to overlay a separate divisional structure over the PDGA ones.
It's what we've been doing for years! All i'm trying to do is find a way to sensibly include players on two different systems, I think this works. for Open/masters/fpo there is no difficulty at all, for The am divisions competing for MA1 in the points race and PDGA reporting but then splitting that into season long held divisions at the levels already used seems sensible? This stuff does have an effect on peoples decision making.

It suits the players spread in MODS a lot better and the players we are after, the growth, the new the developing, it allows me to run a season long points race for lower divisions, which, whilst a lot of people don't think means anything because it's based on an arbitrary number, I do and the popularity of it this year has proven it is a big thing to those players involved. I'm tempted to chuck in another lower one for next year. I don't really see the difference between these and any league system from football to rugby to whatever. People like competition at their level.

and quite frankly the word "novice" is pretty demeaning to players that IMO are a lot better than that, it's not a great marketing word, i'm surprised the PDGA have stuck with it!
www.discgolfuk.com
richard@discgolfuk.com
Home of the Midlands One Day Series
Talk to us about courses!

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by bruce » Thu Dec 15, 2016 1:37 pm

rhatton1 wrote:
bruce wrote:
To me you're over complicating things massively to try to overlay a separate divisional structure over the PDGA ones.
It's what we've been doing for years! All i'm trying to do is find a way to sensibly include players on two different systems, I think this works. for Open/masters/fpo there is no difficulty at all, for The am divisions competing for MA1 in the points race and PDGA reporting but then splitting that into season long held divisions at the levels already used seems sensible? This stuff does have an effect on peoples decision making.

It suits the players spread in MODS a lot better and the players we are after, the growth, the new the developing, it allows me to run a season long points race for lower divisions, which, whilst a lot of people don't think means anything because it's based on an arbitrary number, I do and the popularity of it this year has proven it is a big thing to those players involved. I'm tempted to chuck in another lower one for next year. I don't really see the difference between these and any league system from football to rugby to whatever. People like competition at their level.

and quite frankly the word "novice" is pretty demeaning to players that IMO are a lot better than that, it's not a great marketing word, i'm surprised the PDGA have stuck with it!
I think you've missed my point. I expect the vast majority of players will continue to play in the divisions they have always competed in, so there is no need for you to overcomplicate your own tour by reporting results in one way and tracking them in another. The ratings boundaries being so high means you'd never have to 'force' another player to move up so your season-long divisions still work in exactly the same way next year as this one. Players were quite content to play MA2 or MA3 in BDGA events last year with no overall title to contend, so I don't see why players of that level will have an issue playing in a PDGA MA2 division in a MODs event (contending an overall MODs title but no BDGA one). That being the case I don't see why you would want to report everyone as MA1.

I used novice as a term for a new/first-time player, I was simply saying that they would naturally join the lowest available division
Novice, noun: a person new to and inexperienced in a job or situation
Can't see anything demeaning in that, it's a perfectly sound description.
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

User avatar
rhatton1
Posts: 1692
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by rhatton1 » Thu Dec 15, 2016 1:46 pm

bruce wrote:
Novice, noun: a person new to and inexperienced in a job or situation
Can't see anything demeaning in that, it's a perfectly sound description.
Wasn't having a go at you, it's the PDGA term for anyone 850 rated and below - novice does not describe the bulk of those players and is fairly demeaning.
www.discgolfuk.com
richard@discgolfuk.com
Home of the Midlands One Day Series
Talk to us about courses!

User avatar
Del
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by Del » Thu Dec 15, 2016 1:57 pm

At the AGM I suggested that all Am divisions get points to go into the table from which British Championships invitations would be determined. This would serve several purposes: -
1. AM players in divisions other than AM1 have some interest in the tour rankings.
2. It could be that there are very few AM1 players, which would make the table look very puny. If an outsider looks at the Amateur standings and sees 15 players, they will think it is a very small sport and the title is of little consequence
3. Being the number one Am player in a table of 200 players is something to be proud. Whereas beating 10 or 20 players is not something that is going to command many column inches in the local paper.

I think there should be a common points system for the Am divisions which are not restricted to age or gender. This would allow and encourage players to move up and take their points with them. The problem of course is how to merge results from 2 or 3 separate divisions. I would suggest that if there are say 8 AM1, 10AM2, and12 Recs
The top AM1 player gets 30 points and the bottom AM1 player gets 23 points
The top AM2 player gets 22 points and the bottom AM2 player gets 13 points
The top Rec player gets 12 points and the bottom Rec player gets 1 point
This could all be multiplied by 5 to make bigger numbers.

What is the BDGA Boards thinking on this topic?

I also mentioned in a thread somewhere that Matchplay qualification will need some eligibility criteria to be laid down. How does nationality and residency affect eligibility?
Player X has UK nationality but has not lived in the UK for years, can he say that he will come back here to compete in the Matchplay?
Player Y does not have UK nationality but studying in the UK for a few months or a year. Is he eligible?
Derek Robins
Quarry Park Disc Golf

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by bruce » Thu Dec 15, 2016 2:58 pm

Del wrote:I think there should be a common points system for the Am divisions which are not restricted to age or gender. This would allow and encourage players to move up and take their points with them. The problem of course is how to merge results from 2 or 3 separate divisions. I would suggest that if there are say 8 AM1, 10AM2, and12 Recs
The top AM1 player gets 30 points and the bottom AM1 player gets 23 points
The top AM2 player gets 22 points and the bottom AM2 player gets 13 points
The top Rec player gets 12 points and the bottom Rec player gets 1 point
This could all be multiplied by 5 to make bigger numbers.
Del, it reads to me that this is exactly the system that is being implemented at the overall tour level, i.e. the table of amateurs reads MA1: 1 to N, then MA2: N+1 to X, then MA3: X+1 to Y.

If it's valid at an individual event then it's valid at an overall system I think. The overall system has the benefit of being able to use PDGA points and order the table very swiftly.
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

User avatar
Del
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by Del » Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:03 pm

Where are you reading that?
Derek Robins
Quarry Park Disc Golf

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by bruce » Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:11 pm

On the FB thread:
Derek Robins wrote:I would like to see Am division points based on a linear scale that has all AM1 players ranking above AM2 who in turn all rank above AM3. So it's always worth playing up if you are bothered about points, but you still have a meaningful position in the Am points ranking.So 2 AM2 victories beating 9 players would gain the same total points as 1 AM1 victory over 9 AM1 players and 10 AM2 players.

Tom Lowes wrote:That first bit is what we're doing. I'm not sure I really understand the second part though
Your first sentence (bold) describes what I described, and Tom agreed with it. The second part I think is you suggesting it at an event level rather than overall, which is why Tom didn't get it.
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

User avatar
LostMeow
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:34 pm
Location: London

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by LostMeow » Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:17 pm

Hi Del,

we certainly listened and I took forward what I understood of your plan, which is evidently slightly different to what you meant, but will hopefully still work. Our intention is to list all Ams, ranked first by division and then by points, for example:

1 Player 1 MA1 115pts
2 Player 2 MA1 65pts
3 Player 3 MA1 20pts
4 Player 4 MA2 80pts
5 Player 5 MA2 50pts
6 Player 6 MA2 5pts
7 Player 7 MA3 205pts
8 Player 8 MA3 160pts
9 Player 9 MA3 35pts
etc

When a player moves up, they simply start scoring in a new division, so let's say Player 4 above starts playing in MA1 and scores 35pts, it would look like this:

1 Player 1 MA1 115pts
2 Player 2 MA1 65pts
3 Player 4 MA1 35pts
4 Player 3 MA1 20pts
5 Player 5 MA2 50pts
6 Player 6 MA2 5pts
7 Player 7 MA3 205pts
8 Player 8 MA3 160pts
9 Player 9 MA3 35pts

Does that make sense? In my mind it achieves what you're asking for (ranking all amateurs) while encouraging moving up, but also still allows us to use the PDGA points.
Tom
ND

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by bruce » Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:41 pm

I think the board's solution is the most elegant one.

Incidentally I do get the possible objections, as in why is someone with 5 MA2 points more deserving of an invite to BCs than the MA3 with 205 points, but that's simply the nature of divisions. It doesn't matter that Newcastle have 46 points at the top of the championship whereas Sunderland only have 11 at the bottom of the Premier League, Newcastle are still below them, and pundits do talk about a club being X number of places lower in the football league even when that spans divisions.

The benefit of our divisions is that if Johnny Newcastle feels he is a better player than Billy Sunderland, he can move up and prove it!

I fear any points system that tries to somehow assess the relative merits of event performances across the divisions will be a) entirely arbitrary, and b) a nightmare to administer.
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

CookeeMonzter
Posts: 20
Joined: Mon Aug 15, 2011 7:06 pm
Location: Trowbridge, Wiltshire

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by CookeeMonzter » Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:44 pm

Ok I thought I had sussed this who is running what points system / division business but now I this. To what end does this proposed Ams points thing reach?

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by bruce » Thu Dec 15, 2016 3:56 pm

CookeeMonzter wrote:Ok I thought I had sussed this who is running what points system / division business but now I this. To what end does this proposed Ams points thing reach?
The entire point of the points is to determine invitations to the British Championships, where the British Champion in each division will be crowned.
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

User avatar
Del
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by Del » Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:04 pm

I prefer my suggestion (well I would wouldn't I :)
What you propose encourages people to move up at the start of the year, but discourages mid-year change when they would end up losing the prior points. I see that as quite a downside.
Your proposal does have the advantage of using the PDGA points with amendment to insert points for non-PDGA members. What I suggested would require a reworking of points.
I'm not the best person to judge what AM players will make of this, so I'll leave it there. I guess the advantage of a short season is that feedback can be taken and acted on in a shorter timespan.
Derek Robins
Quarry Park Disc Golf

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by bruce » Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:14 pm

Del wrote:I prefer my suggestion (well I would wouldn't I :)
What you propose encourages people to move up at the start of the year, but discourages mid-year change when they would end up losing the prior points. I see that as quite a downside.
I'm not sure why that's a downside, as 5 MA1 points beats 1,000,000 MA2 points you're not losing anything, you're moving up the rankings?
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

User avatar
LostMeow
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 2:34 pm
Location: London

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by LostMeow » Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:26 pm

bruce wrote:I think the board's solution is the most elegant one.

Incidentally I do get the possible objections, as in why is someone with 5 MA2 points more deserving of an invite to BCs than the MA3 with 205 points, but that's simply the nature of divisions. It doesn't matter that Newcastle have 46 points at the top of the championship whereas Sunderland only have 11 at the bottom of the Premier League, Newcastle are still below them, and pundits do talk about a club being X number of places lower in the football league even when that spans divisions.

The benefit of our divisions is that if Johnny Newcastle feels he is a better player than Billy Sunderland, he can move up and prove it!

I fear any points system that tries to somehow assess the relative merits of event performances across the divisions will be a) entirely arbitrary, and b) a nightmare to administer.
Thanks, Bruce - I think you've understood what I was trying to get across!

It is my hope that Amateurs will feel they are playing for something, wherever they are - they can look at their position relative to the other competitors in their division. However, if they are serious about wanting an invite to the BCs, they will need to move up.

The one single niggle I've thought of so far is what if someone wants to move down again. In that case there would be two options for them:
Either hold their position in the higher division and ignore the points they subsequently score in the lower one, or abandon their points in the higher division and go back to what they had in the lower one (if they realised, say, that what they really wanted was to compete with others of similar ability, rather than aim for BC qualification). I'm sure we can easily deal with either decision.
Tom
ND

User avatar
rhatton1
Posts: 1692
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by rhatton1 » Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:30 pm

bruce wrote: That being the case I don't see why you would want to report everyone as MA1.
I get asked a lot of questions privately from a host of different people. One similar question that still keeps coming up from lower rated players during the last week is a variation of "why do I want BDGA membership if my MA4 points aren't likely to get me qualification to the championships" (paraprhased) this is from some people that are likely to play close to the 10 events required to break even on the £10 membership fee.

If I can tell them that they will all gain MA1 points (basically guaranteeing them an invite) whilst still being able to compete across the MODs season in a division they feel comfortable in and by the end of the season they have the chance to have improved enough to actually make the trip to BC's worthwhile, it's a better sell for BDGA membership. I will get in players to the BDGA that are otherwise vacillating. I don't think I will lose anyone as a result.
www.discgolfuk.com
richard@discgolfuk.com
Home of the Midlands One Day Series
Talk to us about courses!

User avatar
Del
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by Del » Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:37 pm

I understand that Bruce and Tom think of the points table as being purely about qualifying for the British Championships, but for many AM2 and most if not all AM3 players it will not be about that. I may be wrong, but I think they will be interested in being part of a ranking, and that ranking is undermined by a last place AM1 finish trumping any amount of AM3 points.
Incidentally I do get the possible objections, as in why is someone with 5 MA2 points more deserving of an invite to BCs than the MA3 with 205 points, but that's simply the nature of divisions. It doesn't matter that Newcastle have 46 points at the top of the championship whereas Sunderland only have 11 at the bottom of the Premier League, Newcastle are still below them, and pundits do talk about a club being X number of places lower in the football league even when that spans divisions.
The benefit of our divisions is that if Johnny Newcastle feels he is a better player than Billy Sunderland, he can move up and prove it! .
To continue your analogy, I think we will find that Johnny Newcastle will prefer the glory of winning the Championship to joining the Premiership with zero points half way through the season.
I fear any points system that tries to somehow assess the relative merits of event performances across the divisions will be a) entirely arbitrary, and b) a nightmare to administer.
It is not "entirely arbitrary" AM1's should be AM2's who should beat AM3's. There will be overlap in performances, and that gives the incentive to people to move up.
I don't think it's difficult to administer. How about paste all the AM1's at the top of a spreadsheet, then paste all the AM2's beneath and then the AM3's. Put a "1" in column B and fill down in sequence. Nightmare over.
Derek Robins
Quarry Park Disc Golf

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by bruce » Thu Dec 15, 2016 4:49 pm

rhatton1 wrote: "why do I want BDGA membership if my MA4 points aren't likely to get me qualification to the championships" (paraprhased) this is from some people that are likely to play close to the 10 events required to break even on the £10 membership fee.

If I can tell them that they will all gain MA1 points (basically guaranteeing them an invite) whilst still being able to compete across the MODs season in a division they feel comfortable in and by the end of the season they have the chance to have improved enough to actually make the trip to BC's worthwhile, it's a better sell for BDGA membership. I will get in players to the BDGA that are otherwise vacillating. I don't think I will lose anyone as a result.
A couple of things there. Benefits: Other than the financial incentive, it's true the BDGA still needs to see if it can get the insurance benefit sorted. The Club League idea would also be a big pull I think and points from all divisions would apply to that. I'd also say you can't have your cake and eat it here, you kicked off on the idea of compulsory membership and the resulting pitiful £1 per event benefit to BDGA membership is largely down to yourself! The better compromise position would have been £2 IMO.

Guaranteed invite: Not if everyone is doing that it won't be, it'll be more or less the same ordered list doing it your way as it would the proposed MA1, 2, 3 ordering. It just seems to me that you are gaming the system without ever giving it a chance to breathe. My request to you, and other tour organisers, is run it as the BDGA would like it run for this first short season, see how it pans out.
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by bruce » Thu Dec 15, 2016 5:05 pm

Sorry Del, I can't rationalise the first half of your post with the second half, as the second half appears to agree with what is proposed...

The one thing that would undermine the ranking is precisely if any amount of MA3 points trumped a last place MA1 finish. If someone spends all year in the lowest possible division beating up on tournament rookies and players who have only played the game for 2 weeks, amassing hundreds of points in the process, they do not deserve to be any places at all in the ranking above an MA2 player, let alone an MA1, regardless of how many points they have accrued (with a possible minimum event caveat). Their points are not equivalent, and cannot be equated on a single scale especially not across events.
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

User avatar
Del
Posts: 562
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 4:30 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by Del » Thu Dec 15, 2016 5:56 pm

Yes they can be put on the same scale... by putting them on the same scale. That is what Richard is proposing with his work around to the deficiencies of the system.
If you have 20 AM players in a single division, Player A finishes 15th to score 6 points and player B finishes 10th and scores 11 points. If in the next tournament Player A repeats his performance and scores 6 points, he has a total of 12. Player B doesn't compete and still has 11 points. Player A heads player B in the table.
For the sake of giving more players a chance of winning something we introduce arbitrary divisions, lets call them AM1 and AM2, but players who opt for AM2 do so at the expense of not being able to score more points than players in AM1. Choosing the lower division may cost them points if it turned out that they beat a player in AM1, otherwise they score the same points either way. That's what I proposed - seems pretty rational to me.
Derek Robins
Quarry Park Disc Golf

bruce
Posts: 2581
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 4:13 pm
Location: Leamington Spa
Contact:

Re: BDGA 2017 Tour proposal

Post by bruce » Thu Dec 15, 2016 6:33 pm

Maybe I need to work up some examples in a google sheet to show why it doesn't. It's a binary choice, either one Am division ranked completely, or divisions ranked sequentially, you cannot mix the two ideas in any fair way.

I cannot see any deficiencies in a system that says "players in Division 1 are better than those in Division 2", that is the basis of every divisional sport in history. Add to that that promotion and relegation to/from these divisions is entirely self selective, I just can't construe any way these players are being somehow let down!
[Standard post disclaimer] My posts are never intended to undermine the work of the Board or individuals putting in effort to grow the sport, they are my honest thoughts on the best ways to grow the game

BDGA: 145
PDGA: 8824

Post Reply