2011 Washington State Series

[Rideout]

So it’s time to start planning for the 2011 Washington State Series. I will not be a coordinator for the series next year. I will help everyone that wants to be involved next year to get the ball rolling.

Everyone who wants to help plan and run the 2011 Washington State Series needs to send me their name and email address. Post it on this forum thread, send me a PM, or send me an email at mikerideout@challengediscgolf.com .

On September 30th I will send out an email to everyone who has responded and I will send out the email to everyone that has been involved in 2010. This email will explain how we will have our discussion until a new state coordinator is elected.

There will only be one topic discussed: Who will be the Washington State Series coordinator for 2011. People involved will be able to nominate themselves or someone else in the group for the position. The election for the series coordinator will take place October 8th – 10th. Everyone involved will be able to vote. Majority wins.

I will then transfer all info I have to the new state coordinator (budget, results, bank account info, ECT). Then I will be done with the state series.

It’s been fun, I hope there are others ready to get involved and I hope some of the same people involved in 2010 will continue their hard volunteer work into 2011.

Mike Rideout

[LJ Jubner]

You can add me back on the list. I am ready willing and able to particpate.

The only problem I see is the voting period is the same weekend as F.Z.D.

[Rideout]

Cool Jub, I put you on the list. Same email address?

I will extend the date until October 13th. This should give everyone plenty of time to vote, because you're right; I don't want to run the election during a big event.

The election process will run from October 8th - 13th.

Mike Rideout

[LJ Jubner]

Yup and I am glad to help anyway I can

[Wobbly Bob]

If everyone feels that I've done an adequate job maintaining the points for the series I would take care of them for the 2011 season. I'd also like to report the amounts of cash accrued at each tournament and the totals for the whole series. This would bring a level of transparency the players deserve but have not had in past years.

[LJ Jubner]

I am sure your experience will once again prove helpfull, Bob

[Rideout]

bump

[olydiscgolf]

If everyone feels that I've done an adequate job maintaining the points for the series I would take care of them for the 2011 season. I'd also like to report the amounts of cash accrued at each tournament and the totals for the whole series. This would bring a level of transparency the players deserve but have not had in past years.

Sounds good Bob! You do a great job with the points and I would love to see you more involved with the numbers.



Chris

[Rideout]

bump

[Kenny B]

If everyone feels that I've done an adequate job maintaining the points for the series I would take care of them for the 2011 season. I'd also like to report the amounts of cash accrued at each tournament and the totals for the whole series. This would bring a level of transparency the players deserve but have not had in past years.

Have the 2010 series points been published? I went to the website (https://sites.google.com/site/2010washingtonstateseries/) but didn't see anything.

[TreeLove]

Nice hyperlink!

[LJ Jubner]

Have the 2010 series points been published? .

I asked the same question on the 2010 Thread.

http://www.nwdiscgolfnews.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4587

[cefire]

Looks like it is all there to me, just needs the final event points from this past weekend? Am I missing something...

[Rideout]

Sorry about that guys. I have emailed Bob, who has been imputing the points, and he should be taking care of it soon.

Mike

[Wobbly Bob]

The results for the WSSC are attached below.

I've also included the WSS Qualifiers Final Results as a separate attachment.

Thanks to those that helped keep the Washington State Series alive in 2010.

:seeya:

[Yoduh]

Krabs won Open not Holley right?

[Kenny B]

For whoever is going to determine the points scheme for the 2011 Wasington State Series, here is my plea: THROW AWAY THE BOTTOM-UP SYSTEM USED IN THE 2010 SEREIS AND REPLACE IT WITH A TOP DOWN SYSTEM!

I said last year (in the 2010 thread) before the series started that the system used for 2010 needed to be changed. Giving 100 points to last and 100 points + 1 point for each competitor to first is horrible (this is a bottom up system). A top down system gives 100 points to the winner, 99 to 2nd, 98 to 3rd, and so on.

The proof that I am right has now come in. For the 2010 Open division, Kyle Crabtree and Aaron Holley have apparently tied for first in the series with 471 points. Congrats to both of them on well played tournaments; I have the utmost respect for both of these players and will always strive to reach their level of play. However (with no disrespect to Aaron), In the Series tournaments Kyle finished 1st (championships), 1st, 1st, 1st, 2nd, 6th; and Aaron finished 2nd (championships), 2nd, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 9th.

So, I dare someone to try and defend this tie and the bottom-up points system.

Hypothetical situation.....if Kyle and Aaron had tied for 2nd in the championships, then Aaron would have won the series without winning any tournaments in the series while beating a player who had won 3 of the series tournaments.

[olydiscgolf]

I agree Kenny.

I think you should get on board with the 2011 series and help with the point system.

[Kenny B]

I agree Kenny.

I think you should get on board with the 2011 series and help with the point system.

Thanks Chris. I have been thinking about getting more involved, but didn’t end up sending my name to Rideout. I think Bob put together a really great report for the 2010 points and it’s great that he’s volunteered to do it again for 2011, so I’m not sure that there is much for me to add there (other than pushing for a top down points system).

[Rideout]

Hey Kenny, it's not too late to get involved. Just say the word and I'll send you the invite.

Although the vote on this won't be officially over until next Wednesday, so far, it looks like Jub will be the coordinator in 2011. Normally I wouldn't put a prediction like this out there, but nobody else wants the job so it's easy to guess who will win the election.

Mike Rideout

[LJ Jubner]

This conversation about points raises an interesting question

Should a series be more about winning or participating?
It's a fine line between these.(imnsho)


If you look at the stats event participation wains when or after enough events to qualify have been played. This is one of the reasons why having "too many series events" can be a potential problem.

Top loading 100 down fluctuates wildly. Field of 10 DFL gets the same points as finishing 10th in a field of any number 20, 30, 50, This does encourage players to play more.

Base + Bonus At least attempts to address the inconsistency in field sizes.

[olydiscgolf]

This conversation about points raises an interesting question

Should a series be more about winning or participating?
It's a fine line between these.(imnsho)


If you look at the stats event participation wains when or after enough events to qualify have been played. This is one of the reasons why having "too many series events" can be a potential problem.

Top loading 100 down fluctuates wildly. Field of 10 DFL gets the same points as finishing 10th in a field of any number 20, 30, 50, This does encourage players to play more.

Base + Bonus At least attempts to address the inconsistency in field sizes.

Some people play the series to participate, others play it to win. Its not an either or, its both. The people at the top of the field are playing to win, the people at the bottom are playing to have fun and participate.

With only 5 events this year, I don't think the issue of too many events came into play.

The issue that came up for me, was the fact that the smallest event (in terms of field capacity/ lowest point's opportunity) was the last event before the finals. This event was essentially a qualifier only event, there wasn't enough points available for it to matter. A top loading system keeps all events relevant and in turn keeps participation up.


Your right that "top loading down fluctuates widely" but, the most competition is going to be in the top ten spots, and there wasn't many more than ten qualifiers in most divisions anyway.

[Wobbly Bob]

Thanks Chris. I have been thinking about getting more involved, but didn’t end up sending my name to Rideout. I think Bob put together a really great report for the 2010 points and it’s great that he’s volunteered to do it again for 2011, so I’m not sure that there is much for me to add there (other than pushing for a top down points system).

Hey all, I'm working on transposing the 2010 WSS points from bottom up to top down so that all may compare.:jumpspin:

[Kenny B]

A top loading system keeps all events relevant and in turn keeps participation up.

Exactly.

Except for the series championship, a top-down system makes all tournaments in a series equal, which I think is the point of the series. We cannot say that winning the Whiners in the Woods tournament is better and more important than winning the White River tournament just because it had two courses and more players were able to play. Otherwise, people would think "oh, I'm not going to go to that (insert smaller one course tournament) because even if I win, I can't get more points than I already have."

So, with a top-down system, participation will be high for people who want to play and have fun, and participation will be high for people who want to play to compete and win.

[Kenny B]

Top loading 100 down fluctuates wildly. Field of 10 DFL gets the same points as finishing 10th in a field of any number 20, 30, 50, This does encourage players to play more.


On the contraty, this is exactly what will encourage players to play. Players who are low in total series points will want to play because they could improve their series standing even if they get last! Players who are high in total series points would be motivated to play to protect their place in the series; in other words, if they don't play and get first, then someone else will get first and could pass them.

Base + Bonus At least attempts to address the inconsistency in field sizes


Jub, could you please explain Base + Bonus more? I'm not sure I know what it is.

[LJ Jubner]

Base of 100 points + a point for everyone you beat no matter how big or samll the field

[Kenny B]

Base of 100 points + a point for everyone you beat no matter how big or samll the field

That's what I've been calling a bottom up system. Are you saying your happy and content with Aaron and Kyle in a tie for first in the series after Kyle won 4 tournaments and Aaron none?!?

[Kenny B]

Mike Rideout,

I would like to participate in the decision making process for the 2011 series (especially which points system will be used), but without being the coordinator. Is this something that will be possible? Or is whoever the coordinator going to be just going drop the hammer down and force whatever points system he wants upon the State Series?

Can you please add me to future correspondance regarding the 2011 series?

[LJ Jubner]

Mike Rideout,

I would like to participate in the decision making process for the 2011 series (especially which points system will be used), but without being the coordinator. Is this something that will be possible? Or is whoever the coordinator going to be just going drop the hammer down and force whatever points system he wants upon the State Series?

Can you please add me to future correspondance regarding the 2011 series?

Hopefully the process will determine the points system not just the Coordinator

[Wobbly Bob]

The true participation booster is to count all events and throw no points out. This system also favors a smaller amount of tournaments.

It also begs the question, how committed are you to winning.:trophy:

[Rideout]

I disagree.

[LJ Jubner]

I disagree.

Mike,
Bobs point follows a logical conclusion of the facts*


What is it you disagree with with?



* Disclaimer Bob has stats for 5 + years of INWS attendance to base his conclusion on.


Bob This might help explain the issues

Can you generate the %'s for (of the final number of total qualifiers)
How many qualify as iron arms?
How many qualify as quickly as possible?
Do they attend events after they have qualified?
How many need the entire series to be qualifiers?

and the most important questions
How often are they willing to travel to qualify?
How far are they willing to travel to qualify? (more than 50 miles round trip)

Can you also post the results on the planning site.

I am really trying hard here NOW, Bob
Thanks man

[Kenny B]

The true participation booster is to count all events and throw no points out. This system also favors a smaller amount of tournaments.

It also begs the question, how committed are you to winning.:trophy:

I think the prospect of having to play all of the events would discourage players from playing the WSS events over others.

[Rideout]

I'm not sure why this conversation is taking place here.

Anyway, the point of throwing away scores is so the player only needs to count their best scores. If the player qualifies early in the season but doesn't have good scores, they will have reason to continue competing in order to improve their overall score. If the player qualifies early in the season and has good scores, then the player will not have as much need to participate in each remaining event.

I am certainly not trying to trap every player into playing every event. The player should want to play the event or they should feel the need to play to compete for the position they would like to finish in.

Mike Rideout

[LJ Jubner]

Valid answer Maybe if bob can answer my Q's we can hypothesize some some sort of solution.

I think the points discussion should be shared publicly. Clearly the series site is where the discussion is moving forward this is just posting basic info about an important subject. Now that Kenny's on board (subject instigator) he can participate there also.

[LJ Jubner]

Hot of the press

Mike has decided to (once again try and) head up the 2011 Series

Mike we both need to post our ideas here so all can see.

It is my belief as many people possible should join the 2011 Series discussion group. The 10 people who can/will make the decision are just not enough.

The vote between Mike and I will Open on Fri the 15th and go till Mon 8PM. but you have to be a member of the group to vote

This will be your one and only chance to have your voice heard. This is unless I get the nod.

[ericedge]

I would like to see more participation on the invitational google group as well. Anyone that wants to be involved in decision making about the way the series is formated or is even thinking of running a series event next year should seriously consider joining. By joining the group you aren't making any sort of commitment to participate but you are giving yourself the opportunity to have your voice/vote heard. See post #1 on this thread to get on board.

[Wobbly Bob]

Here is a comparison of the 100 pts. for first place / down. and 100 pts. for last place / up using this years Washington State Series Qualifiers.

In my opinion anything other than these two systems would widen the gaps between positions and make the top points in the divisional races seem unobtainable after just a few tournaments.

[LJ Jubner]

Thanks Bob! You really are the points guru and your efforts are very much appericated.