If there’s a way to have the TD input the number of qualifiers and you can draw a line there, that would make it far easier to know how many people advanced (versus having to look up the calendar submission with those details).
Assuming 16 qualifiers this tournament the average score was 62, which would have had a PGM of 1.15 (so full value).
I’m guessing if you know the number of qualifiers at that point you could do that PGM calculation on the page itself? That would be pretty sweet 
If I read the example right, it shouldn’t affect our PGM value negatively so long as the average score for each hole, for the entire event, is better than a 3. I’m trying to set up our score goals such that 45 (we play 9 holes for time considerations) is the median score per round so even with the more forgiving falloff, we’re already way above a 3 average.
Edit: I see that it’s only the qualifiers which are used to create the PGM vs. the entire field. That will bring the number down some but we’d still be well above 1.0. So long as the goals are set such that 5 is approximately par, this shouldn’t be a problem. This will be more difficult to manage or predict for those that want to run goal based events I suspect.
For qualifying it’s very simple for me to calculate the PGM. Match Play doesn’t do pingolf finals (Pinmasters style), but when I get around to adding that tournament format I’ll keep in mind to calculate and display the PGM values.
I look forward to whatever the 2017 WPPR abuse cases are.
People have 6 months to figure it out. And by people I mean tournament directors in Manhattan. 
Very similar boat to Steve. Only open for qualifying when I’m there to open but I have all players submit scores via matchplay so these games don’t count unless I personally write them down? If that’s the case I’ll just take the TGP hit 
I’m there to take care of all issues but we also have other leagues running so I can’t be score keeping fit 6 hours every Monday night.
If I understand, both the NY Super League and the Tokyo “League” at Neverland should be basically unaffected by the changes? In both cases, staff write down all the scores? (Other than removing ‘non-participants’, which I’m all in favour of.)
That’s correct
Correct. Those tournaments are covered 100% by the TD.
However the NY league is of course drastically affected by other changes in 5.3, most notably the requirement that 50% of games be played by all participants.
And their finals format
This explains the sudden hacking cough I had briefly this afternoon.
We could instead just start calling this the Josh format
Yes, but they won’t need to change their finals format, because they already have many qualifying games being played to feed the finals.
It’s interesting that such a shallow finals format could still happen. I wonder what the shallowest possible finals format is? 4 players per game, only the single winner advances, 1-ball multiball rule in effect?
It would be neat if there were a TGP cap to the qualifying phase. With the current 5.3 proposal it will be possible to get 100% from qualifying, then have a crapshoot final.
It was discussed (all the way back to 5.0 talks actually).
If he loads up qualifying games played he won’t get enough players to commit (value goes way down).
So now he has to back load the finals, which he can’t do with his ‘first to multiball’ rule because that’s now 1/3rd of a game played.
No doubt they will find the way that works best for them, but I can tell you from the FLR messages I have so far, he hasn’t figured it out yet
Wait… “first to multiball” is/was actually being used as a playoff format?? 
Yeah it’s quite a “SUPER” format.
Sadly, yes.
So Blackwater 100 just becomes an XFL-like scramble to get to the machine?
Is this also a good place to speculate about the SCS changes @pinwizj has hinted about via other channels? I’ll start:
Lol I can see that being universally accepted
But will the total amount of hate for this new requirement be more or less than the out-of-state carpetbaggery hate previously expressed by a select few very passionate pinball people? (SFVPPPs, if you will.)
And isn’t doing these kinds of calculations what pinball is all about?