|
|
Post by Moe Slorkman on Oct 28, 2015 8:11:30 GMT -5
If possible. Would it not be a better reflection if players WGR was grouped by Card then points/money as currently done.
So You could only be in top 300ish if you had PGA or Euro
No higher than 300 no lower than 450 in Web.
450-600 CCA
601-750 CCB
and so forth and so on. It is just an annoyance for me and others seen some on in CC in the top 100 and someone in PGA ranked 1500.
Its just not right that someone with a PGA / Euro Card should be ranked hundreds of places lower than a driving range pro
|
|
|
|
Post by bogeyman on Oct 28, 2015 8:19:29 GMT -5
I voted no. These things even out naturally and the cream always rises to the top. You'll always have the odd player who blitzes Q school and arrives in PGA or Euro with a high or no rank at all - so what?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2015 9:04:23 GMT -5
It is just an annoyance for me and others seen some on in CC in the top 100 and someone in PGA ranked 1500. There is no one in the top 100 in the CC tiers. I just checked, and there is no CC player in the top 200, either. The highest ranked CC player is at 201 as of this posting. Also, number of events played is a big factor in WGR. A newer PGA member who qualified straight out of Q-School would have to climb the WGR ranks from 0.0000 pts just like everyone else did. While not perfect, the system in place does a pretty good mimic of the actual WGR using the actual real life WGR formula. |
|
|
|
Post by feng187 on Oct 28, 2015 9:04:36 GMT -5
Not sure exactly how I feel on this one so I won't vote. I'm not a fan of the rankings as they are as they are open to abuse where guys could bomb q school on purpose and starting off at a low level where they can shoot up the rankings with wins/top 10's etc. I don't think they should be strictly card based though as guys can also blitz q school as suggested here, I think maybe offer lower multipliers for top 30 finishes in the lower ranks. I know it is supposed to even out but I don't see how, if a PGA guy has no rank straight from q school its very hard for them to climb with the competition in their field and if its based off money the pro tours have cuts but CC doesn't so those players earn money regardless
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2015 9:17:14 GMT -5
Someone with zero to five events played on PGA/Euro should not automatically outrank someone in WGR on Web, CC-A, CC-B, etc that has 20, 30, or even 40 events played just because of the card they hold. Like I said up above, amount of events played is certainly a factor as it should be.
|
|
|
|
Post by Moe Slorkman on Oct 28, 2015 9:23:27 GMT -5
It is just an annoyance for me and others seen some on in CC in the top 100 and someone in PGA ranked 1500. There is no one in the top 100 in the CC tiers. I just checked, and there is no CC player in the top 200, either. The highest ranked CC player is at 201 as of this posting. Also, number of events played is a big factor in WGR. A newer PGA member who qualified straight out of Q-School would have to climb the WGR ranks from 0.0000 pts just like everyone else did. While not perfect, the system in place does a pretty good mimic of the actual WGR using the actual real life WGR formula. Please ignore my exaggerations, they were for effect. Although the system uses the formula as in real life. Please note also in real life the Pro Rankings and Amateur rankings are capped and seperated. You wouldn't see a non tour card holder sandwiched in between a bunch of season Tour card holders. This is my gripe that the lads in PGA & Euro are the best golfers hence should have the top ranking. When Tiger was out injured and came back he wasn't ranked in between Jerry the driving range pro from Memphis and Billy the swing doctor from Tinahely. |
|
|
|
Post by feng187 on Oct 28, 2015 9:32:21 GMT -5
That is why I didn't vote in the poll, I didn't think it should be card based. I agree with what you are saying regarding number of events played and if some people have played 40 events then fair enough but it seems there are plenty of guys joining in July/August that are ranked really high despite being in lower tiers so I was not sure how it is working exactly.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2015 9:52:02 GMT -5
I thing what feng is saying translates to having CC tiers WGR rank points be less than are currently accrued. Keep in mind there is a strength of field multiplier in effect across all tours. This is where the OP posts' concern strengthens the CC fields' WGR point accumulation. Our Web field is a stronger WGR field than IRL, and our CC-A, CC-B, and CC-C fields are MUCH stronger than a semi-pro / (low handicap) amateur event IRL. The number of players in real life are far greater among "Professional" golfers.
A tour like CC-A or CC-B has many more players in the top 400-500 than actual semi-pro/ good amateur golfers are in real life here on TGCT. This is just simple participation factor. There are way more PGA, Euro, and Web players (do not forget that there are also Pro Australian, Japanese, and a Euro equivalent of the Web factored in in real life) in real life that actively play than we have here.
|
|
|
|
Post by Moe Slorkman on Oct 28, 2015 10:29:45 GMT -5
Im sure if I was handed the WGC Points scoring for Dummies text book I would give her a read and go fair enough.
But as my uneducated brain processes the data that I am in the 3rd tier and have lads in D,E,Z 1-400 places higher ranked even if some are shooting -50 in comps (thats another discussion). It is comps on easier courses with no cuts with less competition. It leaves it open to lads to stay hanging around in CC to climb the WGC.
Personally I was climbing till I got in Web and I've stagnated since. So that would in turn say Im up 2 Tiers and am worse.
Same as saying Bournemouth had a better squad in League One because they finished higher in that league than in the premiership!
|
|
|
|
Post by feng187 on Oct 28, 2015 11:51:02 GMT -5
Thanks for clearing that up swaeromotion, I didn't know how those rankings were done I had seen discussions on it somewhere before but it wasn't for concrete. I always saw some high ranked players in the lower flights but you can see that the majority have been here since the start so I'd completely understand understand their was think wondering how it was working as when I was in CC-A I would see lads in CC-C and CC-D that joined the same time as me and were ranked well above me and they were scoring better than most of A most weeks so I assume a top 30 finish in any of the flights is still quite highly rewarded in points compared to say a top 50.
|
|
|
|
Post by c-flo4344 on Oct 28, 2015 17:25:23 GMT -5
I'm fine with it as is. I think the way the end-of-season events worked out made it much better. I was in the 170-180 range on CC-A for a while, because I'd played all year and had some high finishes but never could stick on a higher tour. Eventually I was able to get a Euro card which seems to fit my ability (will likely have made 2/3 cuts so far). Even if I hadn't moved up from CC-A, I don't think a 170 would be enough to qualify me for any special events.
Obviously there will be some anomalies with people who are just starting out, but those get ironed out as time goes on.
|
|
