What is sandbagging?

[smobro]

I am not sure I understand what this term means. I assume it refers to a person who chooses to play in a division that they are on average too skilled to play in.
For example: If I am an 873 PDGA rated player and that rating method is the most widely accepted rating method in the sport, then I would be sandbagging if I played any event in the MA4 division which is for 850 rated players and under according to the current PDGA rules.
Isn't that correct?

[Trozzle!!!]

Well, if it was a PDGA event, you woulnt be allowed to play in that lower division. If it was a non sanctioned event, you could actually play any division you wanted. In your case, an 873 rated player, playing in a division that is normally for 850 and below rated players, then yes you would be sandbagging.
If you are playing in your correct division for a PDGA event, and you beat the competition by 5, 10, even 20 strokes. I wouldnt consider it sandbagging, since you were playing in the division that your rating allowed. Of course if you dominate a round by too much, your rating might just go up, pulling you out of that division after the next PDGA ratings update.

[shonfry]

Sandbagging is when you load your dragster down with sandbags for the
qualifying race and then take them out before the actual race to make your
opponents think your car is slower then it really is. :biggrin2:

[CarlitosBonitos]

Definition: 1. Generally, any golfer who misleads others about his ability level, claiming to be worse than he actually is at golf.
2. More specifically, a golfer who artificially inflates his handicap index in order to better his chances of winning tournaments or bets.

A sandbagger is considered by many to be the lowest form of life on a golf course. Sandbaggers can inflate their handicap indexes by selectively leaving out their best rounds of golf when they post scores for handicap purposes.

Then, when the sandbaggers enters a tournament, they show, for example, a handicap index of 18 when, in fact, their true handicap might be closer to, as an example, 12. Voila, they've just bought themselves 6 extra strokes off their net score, and lowered their odds for winning their flight or the tournament.

Sandbaggers are, at base, cheaters and hustlers. Golfers who are found out to be sandbaggers are often ostracized and always berated and looked down upon.

Winning a tournament or bet in this fashion is called "sandbagging." A golfer who has won by sandbagging is said to have "sandbagged" his opponents.

Now i know this is for ball golf, but i think it applies to our sport as well, and nice reference to Drag racing, I also remember hearing that Boxers would put sand in their gloves, and as they punched the sand would shift and make their punches more forceful, thus gaining an unfair advantage over their competition.

[smobro]

Right on Shonfry. is that the origin? So, what that infers is that the bagger is modifying their game or device to get an advantage over others by using non-sanctioned methods. If a person is playing in a division that is sanctioned specifically for their rating by the organization that is sponsoring the event, then I can not figure out how that can be called sandbagging.

"Look at FPO - think Toni will be getting a trophy? " While I am totally stoked to see a female pro play this event, she will have to play down or play with the men open players if 3 more women don't play pro. If she plays down, then the Advanced women have to play against someone that is more skilled and should be in a different division. If she plays with the Open group, then she has that hill to climb.
This question illustrates just why people should start playing in their PDGA assigned divisions. If we had uniform registration according to a standard, then we would rarely see the problem of small divisions in events because accepted uniform rules and regs will grow the sport quickly in all divisions.
If players in Oregon would register for events according to their current PDGA rating then a TD would not have to provide trophies for small divisions very often because the divisions would grow through the acceptance of uniform standards. If TD's and players continue to disagree about where a player should play, that dissention and disarray can only lead to stunting the growth of this sport. I happen to believe that many of the more experienced players want to stunt the growth of the sport for a variety of selfish reasons. I have often overheard conversations between experienced players about this and many feel that growth brings slower casual rounds due to course overcrowding, More difficult to get into major tournaments, and tougher competition that pushes them lower down the cash chain.

We need to make a decision in Oregon to adopt PDGA standards related to divisions for the betterment of the future of the game. We have a huge amount of regional clout on the PDGA board and committees. If you don't like some of the PDGA rules, then talk to your PDGA reps and they will voice those for you.

[all2common]

Here's what Wiki had to say...

"Sandbagging is a term used in drag racing when a racer has a dial-in time much slower than the car can actually perform. The function of sandbagging is to guarantee a win by outperforming the slower opponent at first, and then hitting the brakes near the finish line in time to just barely beat the opponent. However, sandbaggers run the risk of beating their dial-in time, thus disqualifying them from the race. Sandbaggers must be experienced in controlling this technique, and therefore, it should not be attempted by beginners. Sandbagging faces much criticism, as many argue that it is essentially cheating."

[smobro]

"2) I have ordered a limited amount of trophies so the number awarded per divsion will vary based on the size of the division with just 1st place for smaller divisions. I decided to spend much more on nicer functional trophies this year, but there will be a few less to hand out."

So, let me get this straight. Only 4 divisions have more than 5 registered players in the Festivus. Of those, 1 is a non-trophy division, so 3 divisions have more than 5 players registered. The rest have 5 players or less. So does that mean that MM1, MA1 and MA2 get trophies for 1st,2nd, 3rd and all the other divisions (who have less than 5 players) should get a trophy for their first place finisher? But Greg said that MA3 and FW3 will not get trophies, because of the name of the division? I am so confused.
I don't wish to cause any bad blood, I just really don't understand the thought process that went into this.
Why just not offer MA3 and FW3 if you don't want to treat them the same as the other divisions?

[Flatroc]

IMO ratings have absolutely nothing to do with where a "bagger" or anyone else could or should play.
Example:
A player has been playing pro for 15 years but has a PDGA rating which allows him to play amateur. :whistler:
I think a true sandbagger would grasp this chance.
It's easy to decide where you should play, IF you have any integrity.
Reach way down inside and ask yourself where you should really be playing and then do it.
If your ratings say you can't, I guess you're screwed.:laughing:

[Scott]

IMO ratings have absolutely nothing to do with where a "bagger" or anyone else could or should play.
Example:
A player has been playing pro for 15 years but has a PDGA rating which allows him to play amateur. :whistler:
I think a true sandbagger would grasp this chance.
It's easy to decide where you should play, IF you have any integrity.
Reach way down inside and ask yourself where you should really be playing and then do it.
If your ratings say you can't, I guess you're screwed.:laughing:

The really cool thing about ratings is that they are objective. They don't get hung up on labels (pro, recreational, etc) and they don't care who you are or how long you've been playing.

If someone has been playing 15 years and has a rating that allows them to play AM2 or AM3 they are not sandbagging. That's just who they are.
I've been playing 3 1/2 years and am rated <900. Others have been playing less than a year and are rated > 900. Everyone develops their game at different speeds. Time playing should not be factor in deciding which division someone should play in. Ratings should.

[proto something or other]

"SANDBAGGER!" is what you shout at people during awards ceremonies if you respect them and admire their abilities. It was pretty common about 9 years ago to hear people being called sandbagger, that, for a while, it was reclaimed as a positive. I think those days may be gone now. :)

[Jason Philips]

Sandbagging is simple in my eyes. If you are playing the lowest division you are able, just to place in the top 5 you are most likely bagging. When prizes and top finishes become more important than fighting for a win or stepping your game up then maybe it is time to look at why you play.

Personally Kent I think you are a great guy but I am baffled as to why you are not playing intermediate. I know that Bob and Scott and everyone are fun to play with but at some point if you are improving more rapidly than your friends at least in competition there will be a time to step forward to allow people who do belong in the lower division to compete and improve their games in tight races.

[smobro]

Sandbagging is simple in my eyes. If you are playing the lowest division you are able, just to place in the top 5 you are most likely bagging. When prizes and top finishes become more important than fighting for a win or stepping your game up then maybe it is time to look at why you play.

Personally Kent I think you are a great guy but I am baffled as to why you are not playing intermediate. I know that Bob and Scott and everyone are fun to play with but at some point if you are improving more rapidly than your friends at least in competition there will be a time to step forward to allow people who do belong in the lower division to compete and improve their games in tight races.

Whatup Philips. I have 22 rounds included in my most recent PGA rating. That means that out of 22 competitive rounds, I have averaged a rating of 873. That puts me 27 points below the MA2 minmum rating to play it. It has taken me two years of competitive rounds and alot of practice rounds and putting just to get to that point. My first rating in August of 2007 was 843. From that it doesn't appear that I am progressing as rapidly as you may think. But thanks for rubbing salt in that wound. :whistler:
Heres the deal, I am playing in the division I am supposed to play in. There is a MA4 division available for sub 850 rated players. I am not playing in that, but I just barely made it out. I can not for the life of me understand why you would go here when you know how critical it is for TD's and players to stick to a standard of divisional play for the betterment of the game. If the 40% of the MA2 field that continue to register for an incorrectly rated division would just play MA3 as they are supposed to, I would get that competition you are referring to. BTW I have not won an event in MA3 either. Thanks for rubbing salt in that wound as well.:slapface:
Dude, you had an awful injury that I am proud to see you come back from. I always enjoy playing disc with you too. I am certain that if you and I were properly placed divisionally along with everyone else, disc and life in general would be just a little rosier. Until then goodanya and I hope to throw with you again soon.:rockon:

[smobro]

Whatup Philips. I have 22 rounds included in my most recent PGA rating. That means that out of 22 competitive rounds, I have averaged a rating of 873. That puts me 27 points below the MA2 minmum rating to play it. It has taken me two years of competitive rounds and alot of practice rounds and putting just to get to that point. My first rating in August of 2007 was 843. From that it doesn't appear that I am progressing as rapidly as you may think. But thanks for rubbing salt in that wound. :whistler:
Heres the deal, I am playing in the division I am supposed to play in. There is a MA4 division available for sub 850 rated players. I am not playing in that, but I just barely made it out. I can not for the life of me understand why you would go here when you know how critical it is for TD's and players to stick to a standard of divisional play for the betterment of the game. If the 40% of the MA2 field that continue to register for an incorrectly rated division would just play MA3 as they are supposed to, I would get that competition you are referring to. BTW I have not won an event in MA3 either. Thanks for rubbing salt in that wound as well.:slapface:
Dude, you had an awful injury that I am proud to see you come back from. I always enjoy playing disc with you too. I am certain that if you and I were properly placed divisionally along with everyone else, disc and life in general would be just a little rosier. Until then goodanya and I hope to throw with you again soon.:rockon:


Oh, and I am baffled why I can not seem to progress to MA2 either. It frickin kills me every time I throw a stupid shot in a tourney. I seem to do it alot. Sucks being lame

[Sam]

No, Kent. I think Jason is right. Include me among the baffled, "Mr. -18 at Orchard". If you move up and challenge yourself, you will find the reward huge.

[Scott]

"Mr. -18 at Orchard".

In Doubles. At Orchard. C'mon Sam. Surely you see that that may not be as accurate of skill indicator as, say, 22 rated PDGA rounds.:rolleyes:

[smobro]

No, Kent. I think Jason is right. Include me among the baffled, "Mr. -18 at Orchard". If you move up and challenge yourself, you will find the reward huge.

More salt in the wound. You gotta stop bringing up Doubles accomplishments just so I will tell you how great you are. :biggrin2:
I don't follow how a doubles score has any bearing on how an individual performs in tournament play. apparently, I could use some lessons from Sexton.

["Over the Hill" Bob]

More salt in the wound. You gotta stop bringing up Doubles accomplishments just so I will tell you how great you are. :biggrin2:
I don't follow how a doubles score has any bearing on how an individual performs in tournament play. apparently, I could use some lessons from Sexton.

See the thread on Nate offering golf lessons? ;)

Bob

[Sausage Fingers]

They are just looking to pad their division so they can win more $$$!:shooting:

You are dead on! If you have 22 rated rounds and your rating says you should play MA3 then do it and show the "you're number one" sign to any who say you are wrong.
When your tournament game (not doubles or 3-headed monster or casual rounds) improves enough to compete in MA2 your rating will make it so you HAVE to play MA2.
All of the old-school "if you win a division you have to move up" or "you'll get better faster by playing higher divisions" is a bunch of crap.
And the wussies who get browbeaten into playing a division 25+ rating points above their rating (assuming a good sample of rated rounds) because of the stupid NAME of the division, DESERVE to get fleeced by the players playing in the correct division for their rating.

Now there is a MAJOR difference between playing Pro and playing AM. When to turn Pro and jump into the big pond is a totally different discussion. But what division to play in AM is pretty cut and dried. Unless there is some outside reason why your rating is artificially low (injury, very few rated rounds, took extended time off from competition etc.) then you should be playing in a division that your rating dictates. And as soon as you start to play consistently in competition, your rating will increase and force you to play in the next division.
The system can work, but only if we all play by the same rules.:pirate:

Mr. Phillips and Sam can bite me!:shooting:

[Sausage Fingers]

See the thread on Nate offering golf lessons? ;)

Bob

Bob and I are gonna do it, you should join us!:pirate:

[Sausage Fingers]

"SANDBAGGER!" is what you shout at people during awards ceremonies if you respect them and admire their abilities. It was pretty common about 9 years ago to hear people being called sandbagger, that, for a while, it was reclaimed as a positive. I think those days may be gone now. :)

Hell, I yell 'SANDBAGGER' when the Pro winner is announced and 'AGEBAGGER' when the Master winner is announced! It's all good!:pirate:

[smobro]

Bob and I are gonna do it, you should join us!:pirate:


Done. Let me know when.

[LegoRules]

Bob and I are gonna do it, you should join us!:pirate:

My husband and I are thinking about enlisting Nate's services as well.

Cindy :)

["Over the Hill" Bob]

My husband and I are thinking about enlisting Nate's services as well.

Cindy :)

Not to Hijack the thread but Nate is willing to come up to do multiple or group lessons. Personally? I'd rather go to Adair but if it works better for everyone else I'll do it where ever.

Now back to our regularly scheduled discussion on Bagging, Bagger, Sand Banger, etc. etc. ect.

Bob

[smobro]

Not to Hijack the thread but Nate is willing to come up to do multiple or group lessons. Personally? I'd rather go to Adair but if it works better for everyone else I'll do it where ever.

Now back to our regularly scheduled discussion on Bagging, Bagger, Sand Banger, etc. etc. ect.

Bob


ROADTRIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[LegoRules]

ROADTRIP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Didn't mean to invite ourselves into your group, but it would be way fun to clinic with you guys, and girls right? Kim? Antonia? We would be up for either a P-town thing or traveling south.

Cindy :)

[Jason Philips]

Oh, and I am baffled why I can not seem to progress to MA2 either. It frickin kills me every time I throw a stupid shot in a tourney. I seem to do it alot. Sucks being lame


As much as I have a long way to improve my game the last Slosh series is the only tournament I will be entering in MA3. I want to up my game and if it means losing money to better players in a division well above where I should be playing so be it. I don't think it is fair to ask anyone to play down a division where as the inverse I completely agree with. You will play where you choose to play. It definitely does not mean I have to agree with it. Again I am not trying to bag on ya (pun definitely intended) I enjoy playing rounds with ya. I'll see you out soon and we'll share a beer and conversation as we always have.

[proto something or other]

Hell, I yell 'SANDBAGGER' when the Pro winner is announced and 'AGEBAGGER' when the Master winner is announced! It's all good!:pirate:

That's because you're awesome.

[DexterHawk]

I honestly think that sandbagging is really only people holding themselves back... If you are capable of playing competitively in a higher division and you choose to play in a lower one you are only costing yourself the opportunity to learn from more skilled and experienced players. Let's face it, sandbagging is about winning... there is no question that you learn more and improve more by playing with stronger players... so if improvement is your goal you should try to move up as fast as possible... but if your goal is winning, well then, it time to grab some sand!

[Ol' Bob]

For me, only one player's score matters. I'll have to worry when I catch that guy bagging.

[SMOKIN JOE]

playing a division you don't belong in that's why you play pdga tournaments so your ranking decides where you can play :rockon::trophy:

[Scott]

Based on the description, I don't think we have any sandbaggers in the area. :eek:

Think about it. Most of this discussion has been about whether or not a few guys in the AM3 field should play up to AM2. We're not talking about AM2 guys who purposely try to tank a round so they can play down - I haven't ever heard of anyone doing that.

YOU ARE NOT SANDBAGGING if you play in the division the PDGA says you should.

[smobro]

As much as I have a long way to improve my game the last Slosh series is the only tournament I will be entering in MA3. I want to up my game and if it means losing money to better players in a division well above where I should be playing so be it. I don't think it is fair to ask anyone to play down a division where as the inverse I completely agree with. You will play where you choose to play. It definitely does not mean I have to agree with it. Again I am not trying to bag on ya (pun definitely intended) I enjoy playing rounds with ya. I'll see you out soon and we'll share a beer and conversation as we always have.

Sorry, I know I should leave this alone but I have one more question that starts with a statement.
PDGA events allow players to play up if they want to. If it, however, means that a player is giving up say 80 to 100 or more PDGA rating points to the card they are playing up to and if the pace and game of that player negatively affects the rest of the card, should, ethically that player enter that division in PDGA competition?
That is not rhetorical. I really don't know the answer.
I wonder if it wouldn't make sense for a person to play their casual rounds with better players and then play their competitive rounds against players of similar caliber to test what they have learned?
Again, sorry to belabor this discussion, but it has me curious.

[Jason Philips]

Sorry, I know I should leave this alone but I have one more question that starts with a statement.
PDGA events allow players to play up if they want to. If it, however, means that a player is giving up say 80 to 100 or more PDGA rating points to the card they are playing up to and if the pace and game of that player negatively affects the rest of the card, should, ethically that player enter that division in PDGA competition?
That is not rhetorical. I really don't know the answer.
I wonder if it wouldn't make sense for a person to play their casual rounds with better players and then play their competitive rounds against players of similar caliber to test what they have learned?
Again, sorry to belabor this discussion, but it has me curious.

So your reasoning for someone to step down is that they slow a group down? And because a player is giving up say 80 to 100 or more PDGA rating points to the card they are playing up to? Please spell out how someone is giving up the points? Are they a detriment to their card or themselves? Help me understand. If someone so chooses to compete on a tougher level I would guess it is their choice to lose ratings points. If it affects the other players rating on the card please provide the info. I am sure many people would love to read it.

Again, I get defensive when someone keeps telling me to play down. I feel like saying "move up". I am definitely rated lower than anyone in the MA3 field but feel I want a better learning and professional experience. That is my personal opinion and what I see as an advantage to playing MA2. Can you tell me an honest advantage for playing MA3? I am not a PDGA member so round ratings aren't going to do it for me.

[smobro]

I hear ya dawg. I appreciate your fire. We just differ on our opinion some.

Peace out,

[Trozzle!!!]

"PDGA events allow players to play up if they want to. If it, however, means that a player is giving up say 80 to 100 or more PDGA rating points to the card they are playing up to and if the pace and game of that player negatively affects the rest of the card, should, ethically that player enter that division in PDGA competition?"

Is this an actual quote from PDGA rules? or just something you heard somebody say before? As far as I know anyone at anytime can play up. its the playing down part that is determined by your rating. I dont believe its against the rules at all for anyhone of us MA3 guys from playing MA2, MA1, or even Open. If we played open would we slow own the play of the group and piss off the other guys on the card? Possibly, depending on who is on the card. mostly cause we wouldnt be ddriving as far and have to do more throws to keep up. But, as far as i know, there is no rule against it.

The one and only time I played pro in any event was at the Orchard Winter series the first year it was ran. did I slow that group up? nope!!! playing AM the week before, I even beat the 2 pros on my card.

[Scott]

Again, I get defensive when someone keeps telling me to play down. I feel like saying "move up". I am definitely rated lower than anyone in the MA3 field but feel I want a better learning and professional experience.

Who is telling you to play down to MA3?!? Nobody.
Here's a newsflash. If you are rated <850 and play MA3, you are not playing down. You are playing UP. Move to AM2 and you are playing two divisions above your ability.

[Scott]

"PDGA events allow players to play up if they want to. If it, however, means that a player is giving up say 80 to 100 or more PDGA rating points to the card they are playing up to and if the pace and game of that player negatively affects the rest of the card, should, ethically that player enter that division in PDGA competition?"

Is this an actual quote from PDGA rules? or just something you heard somebody say before? As far as I know anyone at anytime can play up. its the playing down part that is determined by your rating. I dont believe its against the rules at all for anyhone of us MA3 guys from playing MA2, MA1, or even Open. If we played open would we slow own the play of the group and piss off the other guys on the card? Possibly, depending on who is on the card. mostly cause we wouldnt be ddriving as far and have to do more throws to keep up. But, as far as i know, there is no rule against it.

The one and only time I played pro in any event was at the Orchard Winter series the first year it was ran. did I slow that group up? nope!!! playing AM the week before, I even beat the 2 pros on my card.

I think you misunderstood the question, Troz. Kent said SHOULD you play up, not CAN you play up. Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

[JMan]

So amazing, but this is the type of discussion is bound to occur when people link self worth to things like, money, possessions, profession, or their skills with a disc. Play and have fun, if you win or lose you're still a viable human who hopefully does more good than harm.

[proto something or other]

So amazing, but this is the type of discussion is bound to occur when people link self worth to things like, money, possessions, profession, or their skills with a disc. Play and have fun, if you win or lose you're still a viable human who hopefully does more good than harm.

Well said.

[Sausage Fingers]

So amazing, but this is the type of discussion is bound to occur when people link self worth to things like, money, possessions, profession, or their skills with a disc. Play and have fun, if you win or lose you're still a viable human who hopefully does more good than harm.

Wow, isn't there some non-violent war protest you should be attending? But that is another subject for another day.:biggrin2:

If we are to believe the propaganda that we all get better much faster by playing with players who are better than us: THEN WHY DON'T WE JUST HAVE ONE BIG DIVISION FOR EVERYBODY!!!! If you believe in something then BELIEVE IT ALL THE WAY and not some stupid half steps. J-Man talks his talk and then WALKS HIS WALK! And I respect him for it, even if we have different views on some subjects.:cheers: But if you are dogging someone for playing MA3 when you are playing another AM division you are talking out your ass! We should just have 1 division and the winner gets it all every time! 1 Trophy, 1 Payout and 1 Winner! That is the logical extension of your 'playing up' theory. And if your theory is correct we should all become top Pro players in NO TIME AT ALL!!

Scott Papa ran a great event with just such a format: Put Up or Shut Up! Maybe all PDGA tourneys should adopt this format, then we will all be a nation of super Pro players!:pirate:

[Nate Sexton]

Playing up with better players can be a good way to improve your game because it helps you expand your knowledge of what can be done with a disc and necessity is a great motivator for making yourself practice and improve.

However, passively trying to glean knowledge/skills from mediocre golfers during a tournament round in a lower amateur division can only help you improve so much, and there is a pretty good chance you will pick up some pretty bad habits along the way. In an event you have your own score to think about and you can't freely ask questions of better player without disrupting their game/being annoying.

Those who rationalize playing up saying it is a small price to pay to become a better player should save themselves some money and seek out an experienced player and ask some questions or try to set up a lesson. This way your learning is direct and active and tailored to you, instead of just watching someone with bad technique throw slightly further than you for 8 straight hours.

I am happy to try and answer questions and critique technique if you catch me on the course or at an event. While my technique is certainly not perfect, I have played with and talked to many of todays elite players. I am always happy to help newer players in any way I can. Good luck to everybody, don't spend so much time worrying about who plays where or why they do it, let just all keep improving and have another fun ORS year.


P.S. I'd love to come up to Portland or and do a big group lesson or multiple smaller lessons in succession for all those who have expressed interest earlier in this thread. If you can all agree on a date and let me know that would be great.

[Sam]

That's a 1000 rated posted right there - even if it differs from my opinion on the subject. Points well made.

Thanks, Nate. :cheers:

[Jason Philips]

This question illustrates just why people should start playing in their PDGA assigned divisions. If we had uniform registration according to a standard, then we would rarely see the problem of small divisions in events because accepted uniform rules and regs will grow the sport quickly in all divisions.
If players in Oregon would register for events according to their current PDGA rating then a TD would not have to provide trophies for small divisions very often because the divisions would grow through the acceptance of uniform standards.


Scott this is what my comments were referring too.

And Sausage Fingers, I would be happy to play in a one division event. I think it would improve my game. YMMV

[Jason Philips]

Nate well spoken. As with Sam I don't agree 100% but I do find valid points there.

[snap7times]

just an idea I have thought of from time to time, which I am sure is not the first time anyone has mentioned this. Maybe with the PDGA rating guideline, add another guideline that those who are 10-15 points or less from the next level have a choice to either stay in their PDGA given right divison or play up. The ones who are more than 10-15 points from the next division cannot play up. There are many pros and cons with this. It would prevent 890 rated players from playing in AM1 or even pros, which I know some pros or AM1's are sick of sometimes, but it still gives them the option of playing AM2 or AM3. Just a quick thought.

[thread killer]

I honestly think that sandbagging is really only people holding themselves back... If you are capable of playing competitively in a higher division and you choose to play in a lower one you are only costing yourself the opportunity to learn from more skilled and experienced players. Let's face it, sandbagging is about winning... there is no question that you learn more and improve more by playing with stronger players... so if improvement is your goal you should try to move up as fast as possible... but if your goal is winning, well then, it time to grab some sand!

In total agreement, sorry Sausage, but I remember the first time I played with ams again after stepping up. Completely threw my game off. Most of the time I spent explaining rules and etiquette to the newbs. I realize this isn't always the case, but playing up I learned some great physical techniques as well as mental processes that have been invaluable to me.

Are you implying that once you hit master, you no longer learn anything from playing with those who are more skilled?

[snap7times]

Hey, since we are talking about sandbagging, I was looking through the AM division that has signed up for the memorial and wow, was I suprised to see who's name has signed up for Ams, Sean Philips who is rated 975 playing AMS? I hope that is a mistake lol.. since Pro is recomended 970+
Sean?? Any comments? *Am just having fun with this* :laughing:

["Over the Hill" Bob]

Hey, since we are talking about sandbagging, I was looking through the AM division that has signed up for the memorial and wow, was I suprised to see who's name has signed up for Ams, Sean Philips who is rated 975 playing AMS? I hope that is a mistake lol.. since Pro is recomended 970+
Sean?? Any comments? *Am just having fun with this* :laughing:

Have you seen Sean play lately? :D His best shot at last cash is if he shoots lights out in the Rec division. :biggrin2: As with snap, I'm just having some fun here. :whistler: No really! :wink2: Honest! :eek: Yep, just kiddin'. :biggrin2:

Bob

[Magilla]

Hey, since we are talking about sandbagging, I was looking through the AM division that has signed up for the memorial and wow, was I suprised to see who's name has signed up for Ams, Sean Philips who is rated 975 playing AMS? I hope that is a mistake lol.. since Pro is recomended 970+
Sean?? Any comments? *Am just having fun with this* :laughing:

I believe Sean realized, in his travels last year, that IF he wants to compete NATIONALLY that he needs to stay right where he is in ADVANCED at the LARGE events, such as Memorial.

Note that last years winner at Worlds in AM1 was in the 990's.......:puke:

Though I dont know, Im sure he will be playing OPEN locally (maybe not BSF) to keep his skill level on the rise.

:cheers:

[Magilla]

just an idea I have thought of from time to time, which I am sure is not the first time anyone has mentioned this. Maybe with the PDGA rating guideline, add another guideline that those who are 10-15 points or less from the next level have a choice to either stay in their PDGA given right divison or play up. The ones who are more than 10-15 points from the next division cannot play up. There are many pros and cons with this. It would prevent 890 rated players from playing in AM1 or even pros, which I know some pros or AM1's are sick of sometimes, but it still gives them the option of playing AM2 or AM3. Just a quick thought.

The PDGA will NEVER put a rule in place that limits a persons chioce to play UP.
WHY would a rule similar to what you stated be a good thing??

As stated before by many others......By playing up a player LEARNS the finer aspects of the game by seeing how better players manage their game.

FORCING players to stagnate their game would not be good.....

:cheers:

[snap7times]

Was just thinking out loud. Well I wonder what the pros think about it? If the first round of a tournament, a 1020 rated player gets an 880 rated player in thieir group. Sure it's better for the 880 guy but does it have the slightest impact on the 1020 guy? Am curious about that.

[thread killer]

In total agreement, sorry Sausage, but I remember the first time I played with ams again after stepping up. Completely threw my game off. Most of the time I spent explaining rules and etiquette to the newbs. I realize this isn't always the case, but playing up I learned some great physical techniques as well as mental processes that have been invaluable to me.

Are you implying that once you hit master, you no longer learn anything from playing with those who are more skilled?


Over the past week, I've been discussing this issue with more and more people and have completely changed my mind! I never saw what was wrong with the divisions since that was how the tournament set up was when I started playing. Now I'm understanding that point is more how arbitrary the divisions are. I get that that's why we have the PDGA ratings system. But as players, we are inconsistent from day to day and depending on weather conditions. Separate divisions for men and women, that makes sense, the boundaries are clear. 18 years and under is clear. Pro (playing for cash) VS am (playing for fun prizes) is clear. What really is the clear difference between AM and Int if you've never played a tournament before, but are not new to the sport? Why not have one division, one trophy? In a tournament format, it's a competitive sport & we want to know who the best REALLY is! If you want to win, step up your game, don't down drop down a division.

[TreeLove]

Ratings-Based Divisions = no need to segregate by age, gender, race, etc. A fair contest against an equal competitor - who could ask for anything better?

[snap7times]

i love this topic... so i understand sean wanting to stay in adv at larger tournaments to see if how much he can kill the competition by, since his closest rated player is 974 and 968 while he is 981, i'm all for sean handing out toilet paper *I think that is a Deaf joke relating to kicking serious azz*.
But my question this time is, what is the point of view for those rec, int players who are one point away from being forced up, thoughts on this, i know quite a few that are like 899 or 934? I'm bored and i decided i would play with fire on this...

[Chuck Kennedy]

The PDGA will NEVER put a rule in place that limits a persons chioce to play UP. WHY would a rule similar to what you stated be a good thing??

There have been informal discussions about preventing a player with rating from completely hopping over a division. A Rec level player with a rating in the 850-899 range could play up in Intermediate but couldn't enter Advanced until their rating got to at least 900. The only exception would be if both Rec and Intermediate divisions weren't offered at the event. Not happening in the near future but just a discussion item that gets presented to the Competition Committee every so often.

Another informal discussion item is to set a minimum rating requirement to enter each pro division at Worlds. For Open, it might be something like 900 so it wouldn't be too restrictive. But it would prevent a newbie without a rating or with two rounds averaging 835 from playing in the top division at Worlds. Could be a few years off, maybe never, but raising the bar for standards needs to gradually happen as the sport grows.

[essjay]

One problem I could see with an obligatory minimum to play in a division would be in the case of a player that has a rating that doesn't accurately reflect his level of play. For example, it could be someone with very few rated rounds, or someone who's rating is a few years old, and who hasn't maintained current PDGA membership.

Just a thought, but I do see the line of thinking with regard to restricting players whose ratings are significantly lower from playing the upper divisions.

[Ken Smith]

Great thread and replies. I always find this topic interesting. I agree with Gawain ... it's great to have a battle with a comparable player. Here's my 2 cents, and I'll compare my experiences with tennis/sandbagging.

I worked at a tennis club and helped the pros (unofficially) rate players, as I was the court director (basically, setting up players with similar ratings play singles/doubles). I would tell players that the goal was to (1) play 60% of the time with players your own rating; (2) 20% with players better than you and (3) 20% with players below your level (in tennis, a half to a point below or above your ranking, not too much up or down). That way, it would allow people to get a chance to play with better players, and allow less experienced/talented players to play with you to help better their games.

As far as bagging does, I can beat this dead horse further. If a player wins 10 tourneys in a row in a particular division, it's pretty clear that the player should highly consider moving up. Some players might/will resent that player for staying in that division and continuing to beat up on the players that are trying to compete and possibly win, but can't. Could these "borderline" players (say, adv. am to pro borderliners) switch up where they play ... play pro one tourney and adv. the next. If they are very good adv. amateurs, I am assuming they will likely not cash in the pros ... if they do, they can take script to save their amateur status. No one appreciates a serial bagger (could I trademark that?), but it's certainly acceptable for a person that is new to the game (or improving dramatically and quickly) to win a few tourneys and spank the competition ... as long as they don't linger too long (not considering the quest for a world championship, which I can appreciate).

Nate, I'd really like to consider (when you're up in Seattle) playing a round or two with advise/lessons (for pay, of course, and mileage reimbursement).

I'm not necessarily loyal to the ODSA, but it was my first (:whistler:), but it's been down for over a week. Welcome me back.

[Darr]

I am not sure I understand what this term means. I assume it refers to a person who chooses to play in a division that they are on average too skilled to play in.
For example: If I am an 873 PDGA rated player and that rating method is the most widely accepted rating method in the sport, then I would be sandbagging if I played any event in the MA4 division which is for 850 rated players and under according to the current PDGA rules.
Isn't that correct?
THIS IS SANDBAGGING!!!! (http://www.nwdiscgolfnews.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1015&page=15/)
:waaah::laughing::waaah::laughing::waaah: :laughing::smash:

[Scotty B]

I would like to know how you can figure out your rating if you only play in a couple of PDGA events and you are not a member. I don't mind playing up because I just enjoy playing the sport win or lose I learn more every time I play a round. Lets say that I shoot 2 rounds at Pier how can I translate my scores to a rating.

[Sausage Fingers]

I would like to know how you can figure out your rating if you only play in a couple of PDGA events and you are not a member. I don't mind playing up because I just enjoy playing the sport win or lose I learn more every time I play a round. Lets say that I shoot 2 rounds at Pier how can I translate my scores to a rating.

Go on the PDGA website for the tourneys that you played. Look for a current member that shot the same score that you did and use that rating for that round. Add up all of your round ratings for PDGA tourney play and divide by the number of rounds and you'll get an average of those rounds. That is your rating.

[Scott]

I would like to know how you can figure out your rating if you only play in a couple of PDGA events and you are not a member. I don't mind playing up because I just enjoy playing the sport win or lose I learn more every time I play a round. Lets say that I shoot 2 rounds at Pier how can I translate my scores to a rating.

Do you know anyone who is a member and has a rating?
Comparing how you play against them can often give you a rough idea of which division would be best for you.

You mentioned that you've already played in a couple of PDGA events. What divisions did you play in? Were you competitive and did you have fun? If so, you were in the right place. If not, move up or down accordingly.