Freestate Doubles

Nate. Thanks for your interest. I've been giving a lot of thought to your post. For the year end event I'd to have the top 3 placers from each league based on the TD's scoring system. That makes C ... show more ›

Nate. Thanks for your interest. I've been giving a lot of thought to your post. For the year end event I'd to have the top 3 placers from each league based on the TD's scoring system. That makes Calvert an issue because there is no scoring system for those leagues. I'm thinking about using Scaboro's method (win, get a point) to give berths. Then perhaps the top 20 freestate players who didn't get a berth from their league. This will reward people for traveling to different courses. I'd like the championship to be inclusive, rather than exclusive. Any thoughts?

Jerry-Was reading your discussion with Papa Bear. I play as many as 3 doubles events a week between Calvert/Rockburn. I've sat at first and now second in the overall standings. Due mostly in part ... show more ›

Jerry-Was reading your discussion with Papa Bear. I play as many as 3 doubles events a week between Calvert/Rockburn. I've sat at first and now second in the overall standings. Due mostly in part to playing more doubles events than many others. It doesn't mean I'm the better player and I wouldn't want to get a spot at the year end event over someone who was. I can find plenty of folks lower in the standings that I know are better players. I guess part of what plays into figuring out the scoring is what the purpose/overall goal of the league is. I do think it's cool to promote playing other courses. I'm playing better and meeting more good folks. I like that the rounds feel a little more competitive, but still are a good time. I think the points have contributed somewhat to these results.

I realize this is a Beta Run year. Just figured I'd bring it up now rather than later. Also gives you something to think about for next year. I like the idea of participants having the ability to get ... show more ›

I realize this is a Beta Run year. Just figured I'd bring it up now rather than later. Also gives you something to think about for next year. I like the idea of participants having the ability to get more point by playing more courses because it promotes more play at multiple courses. It is a little unfair tho to those in outlying areas but it could give us more visitors in the summer with metro players coming to the beach. The problem as I see it would develop if a top 2 player from Calvert was also one of the top 2 players from another course. Should the player have the decision who to play for or should it be the league/admin?

Good question chris. The biggest overlap is calvert/rockburn because of their proximity. The championship berths are determined by course league standings. I'm still unsure about a couple of thin ... show more ›

Good question chris. The biggest overlap is calvert/rockburn because of their proximity. The championship berths are determined by course league standings. I'm still unsure about a couple of things. How to award berths to calvert, should I use freestate standings or just the points fm calvert? And should the at-large berths come fm freestate or course standings. Part of the reason i'd like to have an at-large fm each course is because the 3 outlying courses don't have the same opportunity that calvert/rockburn players to play 2 or 3 events a week. Thanks for help with the scores. I really appreciate it.

@kevin. I checked the scores and it looks like papa bear got it right. Don't hesitate in the future to point out errors. @sean. Initially, I tossed out the anomalous 91 and figured the avg. I'v ... show more ›

@kevin. I checked the scores and it looks like papa bear got it right. Don't hesitate in the future to point out errors.

@sean. Initially, I tossed out the anomalous 91 and figured the avg. I've redone the seneca scores since there was no provision to arbitrarily do so. In the future I will use 72 as the highest score allowed for 18 hole courses.

Additionally, I'm thinking of expanding at-large berths for the championship. I think there should be the winning doubles team and one at-large player from each league.

And so forth down the line. I should have received Maybe I am understanding the scoring wrong, but it seems as though the Seneca Folks should have gotten more points? If the event average was 58 and ... show more ›

And so forth down the line. I should have received Maybe I am understanding the scoring wrong, but it seems as though the Seneca Folks should have gotten more points? If the event average was 58 and the two first place teams shot 50, wouldn't they get 13 points? They start with 5 and shot 8 better then average thus getting 8 points on top of the 5? And so forth down the line.