Derek Aggleton
I went to register and discovered there's no MA40. There's every other division under the sun, but no amateur age-protected division. Was this an oversight? I'd certainly appreciate if you would add this division, and I know a couple of other guys who were planning to sign up for it to. Thanks! Feb 14
As I have in past years, we do not offer age protected amateur divisions for this tournament. Rating ...
show more ›
As I have in past years, we do not offer age protected amateur divisions for this tournament. Rating protected amateur divisions ensure competitive divisions. I believe that eliminating age protected amateur divisions removes redundant and unnecessary divisions, while maintaining larger, more competitive divisions. Thanks!
I hope I can convince you otherwise! I don't see why larger divisions are the goal (a goal that seem ...
show more ›
I hope I can convince you otherwise! I don't see why larger divisions are the goal (a goal that seems undermined by offering four junior divisions, for example, that currently have no one in them)? Having larger divisions does not inherently increase competition (just make it a B-tier, which is why there is such a thing). Some of the most competitive matches I've ever played in MA1 and MA40 were with intense, small fields. Moreover, why wouldn't your same logic about competition apply to the professional age protected divisions, which currently only have a person or two in them each? I really can't see how this logic is consistent with the other divisions that you are offering. It seems like only MA40 is being targeted; that is, your scope is narrower than what your philosophy should include. Perhaps most importantly, your claim also just don't line up with my my own experience of playing MA40. The vibe and competition are very different than playing MA1, which I played for years before turning 40. From what I've seen recently, this division has been growing in popularity because it offers a different kind of experience. Why not support a legitimate amateur experience that many people enjoy? I'm really not trying to be a jerk or give you a hard time, Andy. I just feel sad that I won't be able to play South Hills (which I love!) in the division that is most comfortable and appropriate for me.
Just to address a couple of your counterpoints directly
Junior divisions are not at all the same s ...
show more ›
Just to address a couple of your counterpoints directly
Junior divisions are not at all the same situation as age protected AM divisions - unless a ten year old is a savant, the rating cap of 849 in MA4 makes that division significantly above their skill level. So offering a division where they can compete against more similarly skilled players makes perfect sense. (Also, for any mixed division that is offered I must by pdga rule offer the female equivalent, hence 4 junior divisions)
Regarding age protected Pro divisions - again, a completely different scenario than Ams. There is zero rating protection in pro divisions, so asking 40 year olds and even more so 50, 60 and even older players to compete with the highest rated players in a tournament makes no sense. This is far from the case in AM divisions. If your game begins to decline due to age, so will your rating, and then you can move to the appropriate rating protected division for your skill level.
My personal goal as a TD of a competitive sanctioned tournament is to provide the most competitive divisions (by which I mean, as much as possible, a division where anyone in the division could theoretically compete for the win, not two or three people are fighting it out at the top, tournament after tournament, and the rest of the field has zero chance) NOT to provide the preferred social experience or vibes of one demographic.
This policy is far from targeting MA40 alone - the age protected divisions I could offer are in 5 year increments starting at 40 and going to at least 80 - and of course I then need to also offer the female equivalent of any divisions I do offer. In trying to pare down the total number of divisions, this has been my solution. I understand that ma40 would be by far the largest of these divisions if I did offer them. However as I believe that all age protected AM divisions are redundant when also offering rating protected divisions, I will not be offering them. I am sorry that this decision negatively affects your experience. We would love to still have you, and for whatever it’s worth “Battle at the Hills” is two weeks after this tournament, is at South Hills, and offers age protected AM divisions.
Thanks for your thoughts, this is certainly something I will continue to hear feedback on.
I still disagree with some of your reasoning (I'd say you are precisely offering a social experience ...
show more ›
I still disagree with some of your reasoning (I'd say you are precisely offering a social experience and vibe, just a different one than I'm interested in), but I really, really do appreciate you taking the time to detail your thinking on this matter, Andy. Ultimately, that's all I could ask for. I'll see if I can make it out for Battle of the Hills!
????
Junior divisions are not at all the same situation as age protected AM divisions - unless a ten year old is a savant, the rating cap of 849 in MA4 makes that division significantly above their skill level. So offering a division where they can compete against more similarly skilled players makes perfect sense. (Also, for any mixed division that is offered I must by pdga rule offer the female equivalent, hence 4 junior divisions)
Regarding age protected Pro divisions - again, a completely different scenario than Ams. There is zero rating protection in pro divisions, so asking 40 year olds and even more so 50, 60 and even older players to compete with the highest rated players in a tournament makes no sense. This is far from the case in AM divisions. If your game begins to decline due to age, so will your rating, and then you can move to the appropriate rating protected division for your skill level.
My personal goal as a TD of a competitive sanctioned tournament is to provide the most competitive divisions (by which I mean, as much as possible, a division where anyone in the division could theoretically compete for the win, not two or three people are fighting it out at the top, tournament after tournament, and the rest of the field has zero chance) NOT to provide the preferred social experience or vibes of one demographic.
This policy is far from targeting MA40 alone - the age protected divisions I could offer are in 5 year increments starting at 40 and going to at least 80 - and of course I then need to also offer the female equivalent of any divisions I do offer. In trying to pare down the total number of divisions, this has been my solution. I understand that ma40 would be by far the largest of these divisions if I did offer them. However as I believe that all age protected AM divisions are redundant when also offering rating protected divisions, I will not be offering them. I am sorry that this decision negatively affects your experience. We would love to still have you, and for whatever it’s worth “Battle at the Hills” is two weeks after this tournament, is at South Hills, and offers age protected AM divisions.
Thanks for your thoughts, this is certainly something I will continue to hear feedback on.