Not to take anything away from those candidates, they are all deserving, but why narrow the candidates to only a few?
My feelings were that these players showed a higher probability of qualifying for the open flight of the USDGC in the future and that the more practice a player has at the championship course - the better prepared they'll be when possibly representing the state in the future.
If anyone has a player they'd like to see added to the list - by all means - my ears are open. Please feel free to nominate a player, or yourself, and I will give it serious consideration. I'm sure that I may have easily missed many players that should be considered - especially those that are not current PDGA members.
Please, only nominate players that are registered pros with the PDGA & have a current rating of at least 960.
I will update the same link above with any additional players to the list.
I would like to nominate Chris Waugh. Thank you for considering me but I will not be able to go this year. (no time or $$$$)
I also think you should consider having people earn their way to a "performance based" (i.e. handicap or rating) tournament by qualifying using performance based criteria. The person who has the best shot at winning the Performance Based half of the USDGC is a person who is steadily improving and has only met the minimum criteria (12 rated rounds). It is the nature of a rating based tournament that the player with the least accurate rating will win. Look at last years winner. He had the minimum rated rounds in qualifying and averaged 50+ points above his rating. I would love to think that i could maintain that kind of shooting for a whole weekend but it is not realistic. I think the person who should go is the person who has the best shot to win. IMHO
I understand your reasoning behind your selections. But, I think if more people had a shot at qualifying it would be a lot more exciting. Just my 2 pennies.
Just a question here...after reading what Mr. Anderson posted, wouldn't the best candidate be someone who has a lower rating capable of playing above their rating with a little practice and some determination? All the candidates are great golfers already so I would ask, would they have a chance to really compete in a performance based tournament?
They would have chance but it would be easier for someone who is lower rated and had a "higher rating ceiling" to do better. Feldberg made a serious run the USDGC last year but I think this tells more about his consistency than his ceiling.
The more rated rounds you play the more accurate your rating is. (usually your peaks and valleys in reference to you rating are smaller aka deviation) Soo a person with an inaccurate rating with potential of becoming good has an advantage at a rating based tournament compared to a person with a accurate rating. I'm not a mathamagician and could not explain the equations to you but this is my understanding of how ratings work. Mr. Chuck Kennedy can chime in and correct me.
New ideas can be entertained for 2013, but I donít want to deviate anymore from my original format for 2012.
The link you posted, John, is the same link I have at the bottom of my linked page in the first post. Thank you for making it more readily available for readers here to quickly read up on the topic.
My personal opinion of the performance flights at the USDGC Ė not good, but I do understand that this isnít the way everyone in Washington feels. Innova made a decision to take the USDGC in this direction and thatís cool; itís their decision to make. I would be much more supportive of performance competition in a less prestigious event. So, for 2012, I still want to send the stateís best available pro to this championship course even though they may lose their flight to a 910 rated player.
I have been super busy lately so I will be very slow to respond to general discussion on this topic, but I will be paying attention to nominated players.