Forums

Champion Saturation

• alosso 21,087 Posts

  Sun, Mar 12 2017 10:02 AM

  Pardon me for tearing your sentence into parts.

  ttuna1234:

  It's my understanding that P3's and P5's do not count toward average

  True.

  ttuna1234:

  and therefore are not considered ranked rounds. Same goes for CC Custom Course rounds.

  Not true. They are ranked, therefore shown  in your score history, but they do not count to the average.

  I can't do a recount on your rounds, I only saw a few Par3s and a good dozen Par5s in the last weeks.

  Believe me or not, the number is 200, as confirmed by many Champions.

• Robert1893 7,729 Posts

  Sun, Mar 12 2017 10:25 AM

  ttuna1234:

  Further, the only P3 rounds I've played were in the latest clash and came after my post in here;  I've played P5's but nowhere close to 27 rounds.

  
  
  With all due respect, in just your last 200 rounds, you've played at least 24 rounds that don't count toward average (i.e. they were either a par 3 or par 5 round).
  
  And the recent par 3 scores do not appear to have taken place after you posted here. Those scores are listed as taking place on the 10th; your post here is dated the 11th.

• ttuna1234 526 Posts

  Sun, Mar 12 2017 12:15 PM

  alosso:

  Pardon me for tearing your sentence into parts.

  ttuna1234:

  It's my understanding that P3's and P5's do not count toward average

  True.

  ttuna1234:

  and therefore are not considered ranked rounds. Same goes for CC Custom Course rounds.

  Not true. They are ranked, therefore shown  in your score history, but they do not count to the average.

  I can't do a recount on your rounds, I only saw a few Par3s and a good dozen Par5s in the last weeks.

  Believe me or not, the number is 200, as confirmed by many Champions.

  Pardon me, I misspoke. I should have said, "It's my misunderstanding....etc" LOL

  You are correct, sir. I had hoped to get a correcting post in before my previous post cleared moderation and minimize my embarrassment. After playing a couple of rounds and checking the counter I did indeed determine that 3's and 5's do count as ranked while not counting toward average.

  Robert1893:

  ttuna1234:

  Further, the only P3 rounds I've played were in the latest clash and came after my post in here;  I've played P5's but nowhere close to 27 rounds.

  
  
  With all due respect, in just your last 200 rounds, you've played at least 24 rounds that don't count toward average (i.e. they were either a par 3 or par 5 round).
  
  And the recent par 3 scores do not appear to have taken place after you posted here. Those scores are listed as taking place on the 10th; your post here is dated the 11th.

  You, too, are correct, sir. After reviewing my score history, I noticed I had completely forgotten about the 14 rounds of P5 that occurred during a clash. Clash participation must have a deleterious effect on my ability to recall events. You are also correct that the 6 P3 rounds were indeed before my post. While the negative impact of clash participation may have had a role in my misremembering the timing of the P3 rounds, it's more likely that it's attributable to sudden and extensive ingestion of whisky in the après clash. Additionally, the P5 rounds I was remembering turned out to be 8 rounds in the form of RG's, weekly and CC tournaments. So, yeah, that's 28 rounds and the score history only goes back to January 20th. Since I made TL on the 12th, there may a few more rounds to go before saturation.

  But before the self-flagellation goes any further I would like to point to a minor point to make my point--a pointless endeavor, I'm sure. P3, P5 and Custom Course rounds count as ranked rounds for the ranked round counter, but do not count as a ranked round for saturation because they are not applied to average. The same terminology is used for two different types of ranked rounds. I think it is pretty easy to overlook the fact that the ranked round counter is useless unreliable in tracking ranked rounds for tier progression. That said, is there a valid reason for the ranked round counter to count ranked rounds that don't apply to average or saturation? Seems to me that if a round doesn't count toward average or saturation, it shouldn't be counted as a ranked round. And I'll agree with the other post that rounds from shorter tees than a player's tier should not count toward average or saturation and are thus not really ranked rounds.

  Pardon my longwinded ramble. I'm pretty sure I've met my saturation point for the year on posting to the general forum. Cheers to Alosso and Robert for setting me straight.

• Robert1893 7,729 Posts

  Sun, Mar 12 2017 5:20 PM

  @ttuna1234
  
  Cheers to you as well! And that's an awesome post! Well done.
  
  And I'm right there with you, if it doesn't count toward average, what's the point of including it? Of course, there are a lot of stats that one could look at and say "What's the point?" :-) 
  
   

• alanti 10,564 Posts

  Sun, Mar 12 2017 6:46 PM

  pmm711:

  I disagree as the playing field isn't level.  Some people choose to "buy" balls and that makes the game play "easier".  Give me top balls and give me the time and I'll eventually reach Champion tier from the tips.

  I agree, this game has not been about equity or a level playing field for years.

  Everything about this game is about generating cash flow. If everyone was lumped together few players would be willing to lose credits in RG's etc. The more tiers, the greater the chance people will play with "peers".

  Even better when someone cannot compete at the arrival of their new tier......they just start again. Look at any lower tier leaderboard.

  Balls and equipment is introduced so players will upgrade, we are buying pixels that we never actually own, nothing tangible. So players jump on the gravy train. Yes we buy our way to better scores, or we would all be using starters kit with personal goals as the only incentive. Like a cartel, that is fine if everyone does the same, but at some stage someone will work out a way to make money.....and a lot of it and break the cartel rules.

  Of course, if everyone used starters, we probably would not have a game.....WGT is a business, thus must make money.

  This game has gone so down that track, good players average 300 yards, 90 odd per cent fairways in regulation, same for GIR, average distance to the pin of a gimmie.......

  On the other hand, life is not a level playing field either, for a multitude of reasons, but money is one of them. Like in this game, people can buy themselves success to a degree.

  This game is way past the point of no return......but if you have a tiered system, then at least there should be certain criteria that should be met......red tees, like Par 3 courses should be excluded from the calculations.

  At least when someone makes their new tier, it should be deserved.....but again saturation never really allows for that.....it is only time that the worst players drop off their higher scores to meet the new number for any tier.

  WGT is about money, not integrity.

• MBaggese 15,375 Posts

  Sun, Mar 12 2017 9:26 PM

  alanti:

  I agree, this game has not been about equity or a level playing field for years.

  I disagree.

   

  You have either the right to play and learn the game, or wallow along as many will pass you by.

   

  When I say "you", think of a 3rd person, not directly meant at you, Alosso.

   

  So, why do I disagree?

   

  Well, I'm not a survey guy, but early on I took advantage of some offers, you know, "buy this...and get xxxx credits", allowed me to gear up.

  Needed printer ink anyways, etc.

   

    Anyone can do that.

   

    Puts credits in everyone's pockets..allows everyone to invest in what they want.

   

  Allows anyone to get a feel for the game with good gear, and take their earnings and parlay them.

   

    Seems equal to me, I'm not credit heavy by any means, and have had some help along the way-which I am most grateful for, but it's been at least 4 years since I opened my wallet to try an offer, in order to get some credits.

   

  It's like anything in life (referring to WGT), if you don't put the time in, you'll be left behind.

   

  So, as a semi-long-term-player here, I say we all are on an even playing field (sans-unethical BS), and all have the opportunity to succeed, (san's hand/eye coordination) ;)

   

• shoeshinethis 1,090 Posts

  Sun, Mar 12 2017 9:58 PM

  Damm cheater....

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

  EFFER

• MBaggese 15,375 Posts

  Sun, Mar 12 2017 10:35 PM

  Effin Doughboy came out for this? :)

   

  How ya doing Steve?

   

  Don't answer, I'm heading to bed and will forget about this thread by the time I wake up.

   

  So in parting...

   

  N/M;)

• alosso 21,087 Posts

  Sun, Mar 12 2017 11:39 PM

  Thanks for clarification and insight - no harm involved.

  ttuna1234:

  I would like to point to a minor point to make my point--a pointless endeavor, I'm sure. P3, P5 and Custom Course rounds count as ranked rounds for the ranked round counter, but do not count as a ranked round for saturation because they are not applied to average. The same terminology is used for two different types of ranked rounds. I think it is pretty easy to overlook the fact that the ranked round counter is useless unreliable in tracking ranked rounds for tier progression. That said, is there a valid reason for the ranked round counter to count ranked rounds that don't apply to average or saturation?

  One reason may be the game's development over time. In the first half of it's existance, while course Pars were between 68 and 72, all ranked rounds would count towards average. Then, Par3s and Par5s were introduced and the rules were amended. It (partly) shows in the FAQs.

  Next, the special mobile games (Head-to-Head etc.) were added as practice rounds, none of them counting towards average. They even linked tier advancement to level numbers in that environment.

  Concerning the latest addition of Custom Courses, it appears to me that they chose the simple way: Instead of distinuishing between course Pars, just exclude them all.

   

  And don't forget a more hidden item: IMHO, transparency is not a strong quality of the company, obivously not in the subject of average & tier. In the Olde Times, you could take the score history and re-calculate the average, then you had to seek and exlude the Par3s and Par5s. Now it is (must be) a nuisance to pick out all the excluded tournaments...

• alanti 10,564 Posts

  Mon, Mar 13 2017 1:02 AM

  MBaggese:

  You have either the right to play and learn the game, or wallow along as many will pass you by.

  Agreed Mike, but those with top clubs have a huge advantage over someone with starters clubs.

  Sure "free credits" may be available to some.....but not for all. The best I could ever do "free credit wise" was 1 survey - never had one available since, the 6 or 7 carousel views a day, and on a great day, a video worth 2 credits.......takes a long time to get anywhere.......Some people may not gamble either due to where they live, or by ethical reasons. 

  There is never a level playing field on skills, like in life, some people are naturally better than others at different pursuits.

  Is WGT equal for all? No, but nor is real golf where someone from the ghetto who has no money probably has less chance of seeing a golf course let alone playing on one, whereas the rich kid raised with a silver spoon in his mouth will have the best equipment, look the part in designer clothes, but swing like arthritic geriatric. 

  For everyone to genuinely play on a level playing field (even though there is no such thing) in this game means everyone would have the same base equipment - then skill is the defining factor.

  But the game is what it is, and up to the players to play it as they wish. WGT/TG have no interest in anything other than the bottom line, and as a business that is fine......