Crimson Nagus
Caddy
Xbox: Crimson Nagus
Posts: 29
TGCT Name: Chris Williams
Tour: CC-Pro
|
Post by Crimson Nagus on Jan 23, 2015 11:09:43 GMT -5
That's what I fear is going to continue to happen if the scores continue to be this low, more and more web.com members will just stop playing. I've kept my mouth shut because I have made the cut each week so far but, I don't feel like I will ever have a shot at cracking the top 20. I think most of us were under the impression that the tours would be more evenly matched.
I had a bad Q-school, played well below my practice rounds. I really thought I would squeak into the bottom of the PGA until my poor performance. In the end, I was happy with my web.com status and figure I'd have a shot of cracking the top 20. I'm not saying I want to win every week but, it would be nice to feel like you had a outside chance of winning if you had a good week, right now I don't feel that way. If I had a great week (for me) I'd probably still be 10 shots shy of the winner. I think many web.com members probably wish they were on the Champions Tour, I know I do. I would have finished in the top 10 each week on the champions tour, I'm just making the cuts on web.com. If I had a choice, I would probably move but then that would probably upset current Champions tour members. Maybe a 4 tour needs to be created to help even the playing fields a little more?
We basically have 3 tours (PGA, Euro, Web) with all the same skill level of players at the top but the Web.com has the bigger gap from top to bottom because all the lower skill level of players are in that tour as well. I also don't like how each month's q-school players are dumped in the this tour even if there skill level is obviously much higher then what was intended for this tour. That's just not fair for those of us who are at this skill level. Yes, I know they have exemptions but, that doesn't seem to have weeded out enough of the top level players.
I'm not sure what the answer is but the Web.com tour is very unbalanced from top to bottom, a problem that the other 3 tours don't seem to have quite as bad.
|
|
|
Post by BMann1976 on Jan 23, 2015 11:21:47 GMT -5
I'm not sure what the answer is but the Web.com tour is very unbalanced from top to bottom, a problem that the other 3 tours don't seem to have quite as bad. +1 - I agree with most of what you have said but especially the last sentence. It is still early, but the trend is leaning this way. There are way too many players in this Tour. I think you should of kept the other Tour that you got rid of. There are enough courses to go around and they don't have to all be 5 stars to host a tournament.
|
|
|
Post by Tim on Jan 23, 2015 11:24:43 GMT -5
Guys, we will address this when the time comes. Remember, it takes a lot to introduce a new tour (coding changes, tournament marshals, creating the tournaments, exemption rules, etc)... So please, let it play out more than just 2 weeks. We will have like 10-15 guys earn pro exemptions and 40+ more moving up to play on next tour based on this week's performance. This will continue to happen week in and week out. It will balance out the more we progress, just need to be patient.
Believe me, when we feel it's time to add a new tour -- we will!
|
|
|
Post by schatuk on Jan 23, 2015 12:20:48 GMT -5
I'm not sure what the answer is but the Web.com tour is very unbalanced from top to bottom, a problem that the other 3 tours don't seem to have quite as bad. The performance deltas don't back that up at all. Only one week of full competition on the PGA and the delta from 1st to cutline was 28 strokes, with a further 15 strokes from 1st MC to last On the Euro we have 30 and 39 stroke deltas from first to MC then 23 and 14 from 1st MC to last On the Web.com first to MC is 38 and 44 strokes with 1st MC to last of 25 and 41 strokes. (I'm ignoring 1 outlier on the 38 stroke delta that was a full 9 strokes off 2nd last due to a bad 3rd round) On the champs tour the first to last deltas (no cut, remember) are 95 and 135 strokes. What this indicates is that while the top 2 tours are broadly comparable given the extremely small sample size, the web.com tour does have larger deltas, BUT the fields are twice the size and the deltas are not increasing proportionally and thus is technically a more competitive tour (smaller delta per player from first to last) The Champions Tour deltas dwarf the others even though the fields are smaller.
|
|
|
Post by schatuk on Jan 23, 2015 12:40:23 GMT -5
To stat it up a bit further, after all completed tourneys so far (excluding Hyundai TOC), the total stroke deltas and averages are....
PGA
43 (119 players) 0.36 strokes per player
Euro
53 (170 players) 0.31 spp
53 (112 players) 0.47 spp
Web
63 (168) 0.375 spp
85 (212) 0.4 spp
Champs
95 (90) 1.05 spp
135 (134) 1.01 spp
|
|
rustymike12
Caddy
Posts: 63
TGCT Name: Michael D Chaney
|
Post by rustymike12 on Jan 24, 2015 7:42:54 GMT -5
To stat it up a bit further, after all completed tourneys so far (excluding Hyundai TOC), the total stroke deltas and averages are.... PGA 43 (119 players) 0.36 strokes per player Euro 53 (170 players) 0.31 spp 53 (112 players) 0.47 spp Web 63 (168) 0.375 spp 85 (212) 0.4 spp Champs 95 (90) 1.05 spp 135 (134) 1.01 spp Where are your numbers about the number of players missing the cut?
|
|
|
Post by schatuk on Jan 24, 2015 7:54:35 GMT -5
You mean player numbers making the cut vs those missing? Okay These are simply taken from the tournament results pages and are raw totals for players making the cut and those missing the cut (excluding withdrawals) for all completed tournaments PGA 68 made cut / 50 MC EURO 85 made cut / 83 MC 70 made cut / 41 MC (a lot of withdrawals in this one) WEB 75 made cut / 92 MC 114 made cut / 97 MC No cuts in the Champions Tour If this isn't what you meant then please elaborate, because I'm not sure what you're driving at.
|
|
rustymike12
Caddy
Posts: 63
TGCT Name: Michael D Chaney
|
Post by rustymike12 on Jan 24, 2015 9:02:13 GMT -5
You mean player numbers making the cut vs those missing? Okay These are simply taken from the tournament results pages and are raw totals for players making the cut and those missing the cut (excluding withdrawals) for all completed tournaments PGA 68 made cut / 50 MC EURO 85 made cut / 83 MC 70 made cut / 41 MC (a lot of withdrawals in this one) WEB 75 made cut / 92 MC 114 made cut / 97 MC No cuts in the Champions Tour If this isn't what you meant then please elaborate, because I'm not sure what you're driving at. Even with the expanded cut line, more players miss the cut. There are over 1000 TGC players vying for 260 positions to make the cut. I don't know what the real world numbers are, but I'd guess there aren't 1000 real world players trying to make 260 positions, that's what I'm driving at. I know the management is doing a good job at trying to keep things real, but some things just won't add up.
|
|
|
Post by Doyley on Jan 24, 2015 9:22:23 GMT -5
I'm not quite sure where you are coming up with that number (1000)? The player fields were approx 125 for each PGA and Euro and 240 for Web - that gives us approx 500 players vying for 260 cut positions. The champ Tour had another 200 players but they all make the cut since there is none.
|
|
rustymike12
Caddy
Posts: 63
TGCT Name: Michael D Chaney
|
Post by rustymike12 on Jan 24, 2015 9:44:58 GMT -5
I'm not quite sure where you are coming up with that number (1000)? The player fields were approx 125 for each PGA and Euro and 240 for Web - that gives us approx 500 players vying for 260 cut positions. The champ Tour had another 200 players but they all make the cut since there is none. Thanks Doyley, I like the way you respond to me so quickly. There are 1335 players on the TGC, and not very many make it to Sat. I think the point is clear.
|
|
|
Post by Doyley on Jan 24, 2015 10:06:06 GMT -5
I'm not quite sure where you are coming up with that number (1000)? The player fields were approx 125 for each PGA and Euro and 240 for Web - that gives us approx 500 players vying for 260 cut positions. The champ Tour had another 200 players but they all make the cut since there is none. Thanks Doyley, I like the way you respond to me so quickly. There are 1335 players on the TGC, and not very many make it to Sat. I think the point is clear. While there are many people registered to the site, I think your point needs to take into account the number of users actually registered for the week's event. Lots of inactive, unregistered (playing qschool) and duplicate accounts are in the 1300 you are using.
|
|
rustymike12
Caddy
Posts: 63
TGCT Name: Michael D Chaney
|
Post by rustymike12 on Jan 24, 2015 10:38:40 GMT -5
Thanks Doyley, I like the way you respond to me so quickly. There are 1335 players on the TGC, and not very many make it to Sat. I think the point is clear. While there are many people registered to the site, I think your point needs to take into account the number of users actually registered for the week's event. Lots of inactive, unregistered (playing qschool) and duplicate accounts are in the 1300 you are using. Well, I'm sure it's obvious that a number of people aren't happy but it's your ball so do as you like, and again, Thanks for the personal attention , it's almost like being followed around
|
|
|
Post by schatuk on Jan 24, 2015 10:52:18 GMT -5
Even with the expanded cut line, more players miss the cut. There are over 1000 TGC players vying for 260 positions to make the cut. I don't know what the real world numbers are, but I'd guess there aren't 1000 real world players trying to make 260 positions, that's what I'm driving at. I know the management is doing a good job at trying to keep things real, but some things just won't add up. No, not really. I provided the numbers on request above and you then completely ignore them. From the 5 tournaments completed to date, 412 players have made the cut and 363 have missed it. There have been a total of 44 withdrawals across the 5 tourneys in the distribution 4, 5, 8, 5, 22 which is non-significant in the grand scheme of things (in terms of the statistics). The number of players registered on the site or even to a specific tour are entirely irrelevant as these are not the playing numbers.
|
|
|
Post by Mick on Jan 24, 2015 13:40:57 GMT -5
While there are many people registered to the site, I think your point needs to take into account the number of users actually registered for the week's event. Lots of inactive, unregistered (playing qschool) and duplicate accounts are in the 1300 you are using. Well, I'm sure it's obvious that a number of people aren't happy but it's your ball so do as you like, and again, Thanks for the personal attention , it's almost like being followed around I'm not sure what to make of this but it sounds rather rude. Doyley has been nothing but gracious and attentive that I can see. I've been practising before events and that has helped a lot. Plus I calibrated my controller (XBOX 360 controller for PC) that I didn't know I could do before and now my drives are almost always down the middle. Putting is still sometimes questionable especially on severe grades. I made the cut this week so I'm extremely happy. Thanks again for hosting this site, it really is excellent.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 27, 2015 5:44:25 GMT -5
I will say that automatically inserting new players to the web.com tour (Even with the PGA exemptions) after Q-School regardless of their score doesn't make much sense to me. If they score good enough they should be placed accordingly.
|
|