This is to help clarify the mechanics of NDFP Classified Events in sanctioned and ranking tournaments in general and the Baliwag Open Classified Draw Doubles in particular. This article will also provide some insights into the so called Classified Events.

Herein is the mechanics as shown in the website for the past couple of years
NDFP Classified Players

The objective of Classified Events is to even out the playing field and to at least give equal chances to all participants of Classified Events. In all NDFP sanctioned Classified Events all NDFP Classified Players cannot be paired together.

The NDFP Classified Players are the top 30% of the total players with ranking points or the players that have accumulated the average ranking points of the total ranking point available – whichever is higher of the two will be classified. Classified Players will be determined based on the rolling 3-years accumulated ranking performance points of players.

All Masters will be classified up to five (5) years since last earning the requirements of a master’s title irrespective whether they do not meet the requirements of being classified.

Notes:
The objective of Classified Events is clear – to even out the playing field and to at least give equal chances to all participants whether a player is hard core, novice, youth, female, senior or enthusiast to win a classified event.

Thus some players need to be classified so that “two strong players” will not be partners. This concept of giving parity to all players in an event is not an easy task to formulate but must stand scrutiny. To objectify the classification of classified players we went beyond the usual rated / non-rated classification and looked for individual performances as the basis for classification. Individual performances can be extracted from the NDFP Performance points of the Singles events. Thus the accumulated rolling 3-years performance ranking points of players is a good gauge of individual performances and the top 30% of these players are being classified.

Def of Rolling 3 Years – means June2006 to May 2009, therefore in the subsequent accumulated points this will mean July 2006 to June 2009 and all points earned before those dates will be dropped.

The question arises why 30% and not 50% or 10% etc... Our initial computation suggests that the average points earned is in the top 30% of all players. The average point is computed by dividing the total points earned within the time period divided by the total number of players with ranking points. We foresaw the impact of big events that may radically change averages thus we made the ruling of top 30% with ranking points or those who have earned the average ranking points as the cut-off for classified players whichever is more.

The next question arises why 3 years of accumulated points. The three year period is a better gauge to classify players based on consistency of performance for a specific time period. This also takes into consideration the decline in performance and the stripping of points earned after three years.

All Masters will be classified for 5 years and masters are defined as players who are Champions and 2nd placers in National Tournaments (P75,000 and over) and champions in Regional Tournaments (P75,000 and below). Every time a player wins a singles tournament and comes in second in a National tournament, his performance needs to be classified irrespective whether he has enough points to be classified.

Addendum:
Further additional clarifications are in order. All ladies and youth players are automatically in the non-classified grouping of players. All National Masters and Regional Masters carry a lifetime classification as classified in all NDFP sanctioned tournament.

Drawing of Players:
Once players are grouped as classified players and non-classified players all other players are grouped together and drawn into the remaining balance of the classified and non-classified groups for drawing.

Baliwag Open
The Baliwag Open became an issue out of the misunderstanding of the basics of the NDFP sanctioned Classified events. We realized the mind-set of players based on the old practices before and the low level of awareness on the methodology we are implementing. But we gratefully welcome all comments, criticisms and recommendations. Nothing is etched in stone and if changes need to be done to improve this system we will do so. Further, terminologies can be interpreted differently that can lead to misunderstandings.
Clarification:
1.) Is Eric Matic Classified - no he is not classified at the time of the Baliwag Open and up to this time. His ranking performance points from the Singles Events are not enough to classify him.

2.) How many points to be classified – there are no exact number of points at any one time for classification is based on the top 30% of players with ranking points or has attained the average points (see above def. of average ranking points) whichever is more.

3.) Why only 12 players were classified – I am not privy to the exact number that were classified but if there were only 12 players who met the classification of being classified then only 12 players were classified.

4.) Why some masters are classified though they do not meet the ranking points requirement – As explained above attaining the title of master is a stiff accomplishment of being Champions and 2nd placers in National Tournaments (P75,000 and over) and champions in Regional Tournaments (P74, 999 and below). This is a separate level of achievers and a separate criterion for classification from the ranking performance points.

5.) “Magtugma ang NDFP Player Ranking at ang Classified player ranking” – hindi po magtutuma yan because the Player Ranking is Rolling two years and for the Classified Players ranking is Rolling three-years, we maintain 2 separate rolling years because they have different objectives.

Alternative Classification System:
We continuously seek ways and means to meet the objective of classified events which is to even out the playing field in a fair, transparent, simple and acceptable manner. As we accumulate more data (average of 2 ranking events per month nationwide in the past 18 months) we now have a more objective basis for classification.

1. All players with ranking performance points will be classified up to the 50% of the total participants in doubles classified event. For example: In a classified draw doubles with 100 participants. The classified players will be all masters then the players with the most ranking points present in the tournament. If there are 180 players then correspondingly the 90 players with the most ranking points and masters present will be classified. In the order of classification all masters will come first.

2. In Classified Draw Triples of 120 players the first group of 40 players will be players present with the most ranking points and masters followed by the 2nd group of 40’s with the most ranking points down the 3rd group or till all players with ranking points present have been classified.

3. There will always be the pros and cons of every proposal for there will no full-proof classified events. But, this will greatly minimize novice players with no ranking points to be drawn in the classified group and this will give both the novice and the hard core darters equal chances of winning.

What do you think of this alternative system? We would be grateful for any feedback you can provide.

Classified Events in Local Tournaments:
What we have discussed so far is the classification of nationally sanctioned tournaments. On the local level we see local classifications being implemented from Baguio to Sulu. Each and every organizing entity embarks on the best way to classify their local talents in order to even out the playing field. Examples of these systems are varied but the objective is the same. Thus do not expect that the classification we have enumerated above will be implemented by the local NDFP affiliates nationwide but will be the basis for NDFP sanctioned national tournaments.

Trend towards Fix-Events:
To further develop our top players we need to strike a balance between classified draw events and the fixed open events. Yes there are more players in the classified events but we need to generate more competitive players. Entry fee receipts should come secondary if we are to motivate our top darters. We need to create an environment conducive for excellence.

When the NDFP first started the unrestricted open Fixed-Four Person Team event we were hesitant that this will not be accepted due to prevailing practice wherein the 4 person team is composed of 2 rated and 2 non-rated players.

The Open-Unrestricted Four-Person Team event was launched in Mindanao and to our amazement Mindanao darters saw this as a challenge. They feel this is the best way to improve as darters - play against the best teams and the sense of fulfillment is greater when they beat teams loaded with classified players. There were no major negative feedbacks and ever since the Open Fixed-Four Person Team Event is a major fixture of NDFP sanctioned events and something darters are preparing for.

Fixed Doubles are next in our agenda and so far we have seen good participation in the Fixed Doubles of NDFP organized Darterong Pinoy, 2 Million Manny Pacquiao Darts Classic and in the recently concluded Robson Summer Dartfest.

The preponderance of the P10,000 to P15,000 weekend tournaments can be the proper venue for more classified draw events and the proper avenue to nurture our aspiring new players.

History of Classified Events
Classified Events are uniquely Philippine phenomena. There are no classified events in all major tournaments in the world. The closest events that can approach the classified events are the handicap events in soft tip wherein the PPDA (Points Per Dart Average) are utilized.

In the early part of Philippine darts the good players consistently won and to give chances to other players the so called “rated players” came into existence as a means to classify players. The classified events started in the formative years of Philippine darts as a means to encourage its growth.

In the early part of the rating system players were rated if one becomes a champion of the 4-man draw, draw doubles and different placing in the singles event of the DCP’s Rating and Sanctioned events. Subsequently this was changed and rated players were based on the Open Singes and players who officially represent the Philippines in international competition. Additional rated players came into existence to include singles champions of the non-rated singles. Sad to say there were players who were rated due to the playing prowess of their partner in the doubles and their partners in the 4man draw.

The concept of rated players eventually evolved into a title of recognition. It is worthy to note that prior to 2000 there were DCP sanctioned tournaments that were not given a rating classification such that champions in these tournaments were never rated.

“Once a Rated Player always a Rated Player” became the drawback of the basic essence of the classified events relying on the rating system. This drawback stems from collapsing the concept of rated players into both a classification and a title of recognition. There is no argument that rated players have achieved a level of performance that needs to be recognized and given a title.

But with the passage of time rated players declined in their playing abilities and for some their long absence in the competitive arena affected their high level of performance. Further some players were rated as part of the draw events and being representative to foreign competitions. Thus, to still classify them at this time may run contrary to the essence of leveling the playing field. On the other hand there are a lot of players who are better than rated players and can be a rated player but refuses to do so in order to maintain their non-rated status. The decline of rating events further compounds the classification of good players who could have been classified.

Historically the rated / non-rated classification is the start of the evolution of the so called classified events. Present day realities dictate the search for better alternatives. There are no full-proof systems and the NDFP is still in search of a better system.