why can't ams win cash?

we pay for an event. place. get a prize that is usually donated or script that needs to be redeemed for a prize. usually this involves getting more plastic. no one needs anymore plastic. usually it is purchased through the event organizers which then ends up reducing what they are actually paying out.$100 script is like a $60 cash payout.

the cash vs. other than cash payout restriction is arbitrary and detracts from people taking tourneys and rules seriously. if it is a difference in me getting $40 script or $35 script i'm probably going to let violations slip to not appear to be a jerk.

we should make the difference in accepting cash prizes be wether or not you are in an adult division or a junior division.

[dannyreeves]

If you want cash, get better and play Pro. Sheesh.

[bruce_brakel]

Are you just trolling for Nick or what?

Ams CAN play for cash. Where do you live where ams aren't playing for cash?

Q: Why can't amateurs win cash?

A: By definition.

;)

[neonnoodle]

I say,"Let'em get paid out in cash!"

Really! No Lie!

Perhaps then the need for a real amateur class will be make clearly evident to everyone.

GO FOR IT! You'll hear no objection from me!

[Moderator005]

In short, that amateur divisions play for prizes has more to do with the definition of "amateur" and legal/tax implications of accepting money for participating in a competition.

I have seen (obviously unsanctioned) tournaments where TDs too lazy to deal with prizes paid all divisions in cash which I thought set a horrible precedent. For one, it encouraged sandbagging because players on the bubble had no reason to move up to the next higher division when they could stay and take easy money. That lure of money overcomes the loss of pride every time, imo.

There was also the ridiculous scenario where a 10 year old kid in the Junior division would win $40 while his best friend won nothing.

As for your point that TDs buy prizes at bulk price and award based on retail price and use that difference for other purposes is a completely separate issue which I'm not touching. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

i looked at 804.08 section E which dictates no cash to ams. maybe i missed something.

i haven't experienced this sort of script scam in other sports. either we have played purely for glory-trophies and all the money went into the event or there was a reasonable cash payout. i guess if i had the option between the current choices, i'd take my money going to a stylin' tourney and no prizes just glory.

[rhett]

...get a prize that is usually donated...



I hear this all the time and I'll be damned if I can figure out how to get this donated stuff to give out when I run tourneys. The best I've done is a mini for the player's pack.

Do any tourneys actual get merch sponsors that they pay the ams with? It sounds great as you suddenly have money for amenities.

[dsahagian]

Professional: Engaging in a given activity as a source of livelihood or as a career: a professional writer.
Performed by persons receiving pay: professional football.

Amateur: A person who engages in an art, science, study, or athletic activity as a pastime rather than as a profession.
Sports. An athlete who has never accepted money, or who accepts money under restrictions specified by a regulatory body, for participating in a competition.

I would say my answer to your question is the dictionary definition of a professional.

[dannyreeves]

or maybe Amateurs could do like every other sport and play for trophies.

[dsahagian]

i wouldnt mind winning some non disc golf related stuff, but gift certificates would only work for locals. if someone comes from out of town to play and wins something only useable in that town, it it useless to them.
I like the fact that some t.d.'s are getting more creative and starting to give out things that can be used by the average disc golfer. Ive already seen coolers, sunglasses, polos, hats, and some other random stuff that makes road trips more tolerable.
But I dont mind playing for plastic because i just get back to my home course and sell it to my friends, so I guess ams can play for cash, but they have to do a little extra work to get it.

What about an all amateur tournament? I mean, if there aren't any Pros, can amateurs get cash? With an Amateur only tournament I believe this prevents sandbagging?? (well maybe within amateur divisions, but at least not like a Pro playing in an Amateur division). I don't see the harm in doing an Am-only tournament and allowing cash pay outs.

Wynne

[boru]

Isn't winning merchandise the same thing as winning cash for tax and legal purposes? I doubt the IRS cares right now because our prizes are so small, but if people start taking home thousands of dollars worth of discs, they're gonna want in on the action.

I can see why it annoys people if they feel like the victims of price gouging, i.e., $100 in winnings only gets $85 worth of discs at retail price. To avoid this, a TD could instead give out vouchers, redeemable at many different disc vendors. This way, the prize would be worth fair market value. Also, as long as the vouchers didn't expire right away, the player could get the new plastic later, when he needed some. Because I think most of us need new discs sometimes.

Actually, TDs could probably negotiate with vendors to get players better deals than they could otherwise expect. Basically, they could "bid out" the scrip rights for big events. I don't know what vendors pay wholesale, but I imagine many would be willing to knock off a dollar or two per disc if they were guaranteed the entire amateur pot from a big event.

[dannyreeves]

I vote this for dumbest thread ever.

[cbdiscpimp]

Ill second that vote.

The reason we cant with cas is BECAUSE we ARE AM's.

If you want to with CASH move up and become a PRO!!!!!

[coda_hatfield]

If ams got cash you would never get anyone to move up...And the fact that Clubs make money off plastic that ams get paid out, they make boocoo money off ams. The answer is move up if you don't like it.

[bulldog399]

I would agree if AM's cashed there would be no reason for the Pro divison. You could just play AM for the rest of your life

[dannyreeves]

Why do you? How have you earned it?

You really are an assclown.

[neonnoodle]

Nothing points out the professional nature of our current amateur class as much as the concept of "moving up" to win even more prizes or cash.

The motivation is clearly EXACTLY the same; as is the actual underlying classification of these players.

The mistake folks make is equating skill level with amateur/professional status. How good a player is does not make a player a professional. And playing for cash doesn't make them a professional any more than playing for trophies only makes them an amateur. As the dictionary (not to mention every other established sport) points out true amateurs are motivated to compete for entirely different reasons.

At least they ought to.

scrip.

I can't believe you let that one go, Rhett.

[dannyreeves]

Who was the college basketball player that got in trouble for accepting a free jersey from a store? (sorry for being so vague, I only heard about this in passing) Does anyone know the complete story behind this?

[Jake L]

King Labron James!

[Jake L]

but Lebron was in high school at the time.

[dannyreeves]

okay, so what about the hundreds of "amateur" disc golfers that have accepted over $500 in merchandise? How is that different?

I have heard from a couple Advanced players (sandbaggers) that they can't play Open because they are still in high school and want a scholarship.

Does the NCAA see them taking cash as any different than taking discs? :confused:

[rhett]

I have heard from a couple Advanced players (sandbaggers)....



You have a 936 rating, which is clearly a rating for the Advanced Am division. With a 21k+ PDGA number, I thinked you moved up way too early. Unless you play Advanced and just have that much disdain for you own division.

[jasonc]

Results from the last TX10
Pro Open
Finish Name Mead Hill Total Payout Points
1 Nolan Grider 54 56 110 $300.00 25.00
2 Vinnie Miller 56 60 116 $170.00 24.43
3 Shannon Fosdick 58 59 117 $140.00 23.86
4 Danny Reeves 58 61 119 $95.00 23.29
5 Michael Olse 58 62 120 $80.00 22.71
6 Alan Kubala 57 64 121 $65.00 22.14
T7 Jon Burpee 58 64 122 $50.00 21.57
T7 Keith Baker 59 63 122 $50.00 21.57
T7 Jay Reading 63 59 122 $50.00 21.57
10 Pete Lopez 61 62 123 $40.00 19.86
T11 Joe Torres 58 66 124 $20.00 19.29
T11 Judah Moser 59 65 124 $20.00 19.29
T11 Paul Kreke 60 64 124 $20.00 19.29
T11 Clayton Bethmann 62 62 124 $20.00 19.29
15 James McCaine 62 63 125 $0.00 17.00
16 Chad Miltenberger 59 67 126 $0.00 16.43
T17 Zane Jarrett 63 64 127 $0.00 15.86
T17 Lisle Updike 64 63 127 $0.00 15.86
19 Chris Ware 61 67 128 $0.00 14.71
T20 Bryan James 59 70 129 $0.00 14.14
T20 Chris Flesner 62 67 129 $0.00 14.14
T22 Alex Gonzalez 61 70 131 $0.00 13.00
T22 Chris Albert 61 70 131 $0.00 13.00
T22 JD Ramirez 65 66 131 $0.00 13.00
T25 Kris Hartley 63 69 132 $0.00 11.29
T25 Russell Stokely 64 68 132 $0.00 11.29
27 Ben Poole 63 70 133 $0.00 10.14
28 Clay Stallcup 64 70 134 $0.00 9.57
29 Brian Schmidt 63 72 135 $0.00 9.00
T30 Nate Morgan 65 73 138 $0.00 8.43
T30 David Rose 67 71 138 $0.00 8.43
32 Mike Brown 66 888 954 $0.00 7.29
33 Jeff Kinder 67 888 955 $0.00 6.71
34 Ryan Lynch 69 888 957 $0.00 6.14
35 Robert Gomez 72 888 960 $0.00 5.57


With Danny in 4th place Open I don't think he moved up to early.

[dannyreeves]

Rhett, while I usually agree with your points, this is way out of left field. What does that have to do with this discussion?

By the way, you don't know me. Do you think because you looked up my player rating that you know my skill level? If you looked at my ratings detail, you would see that (other than 1 event) my lowest rounds are all almost a year old. I have improved very quickly in this sport and my rating has not had time to catch up. I played a 1 day event last weekend. I played the 2 courses blind and shot a 980 round and a 983 round.

Just because I play Open does not mean that I think I am "too good" to play Advanced. I did not move up because I was sandbagging or dominating the division. I moved up because I had the ability to play on the pro level but my weakest point was consistancy. I felt that I would improve my game more quickly if I moved up and played with more consistant players. After speaking with some top level pro players, they agreed that in the long run, my game would benefit more if I played Open now instead of treading water in Advanced.

I moved from Intermediate to Advanced before I was on the level of the Advanced field. I got my butt kicked. But within 6 months I had adapted and was a major compeditor. My logic is that it would work the same way in the Open division.

I am trying to better myself, and I have already seen benefits in my game from having the courage to take the leap.

He was just a sandbagger forever before joining..... :D


Or maayyyyybeeee.....he was one of those lucky asswipes that picked the game up uber fast, and makes all us old timers look bad. :mad:

Hint: He is one of thise second asswipes.

Heavy on the [*****]. :D

Nice Shooting Dannyboy!

[rhett]

I stand corrected and apologize.

You are indeed fortuntate to be on the rise like that. I'll keep in mind that you can't just look at ratings from either direction and draw any conclusions. :)

I made an [*****]umption based on your region. Again, I apologize.

[dannyreeves]

No problem. It's all good.

Back to my question, does anyone know anything about what the NCAA considers an amateur? Does anyone know someone who turned pro before college and still received some kind of scholarship?

[slo]

I have heard from a couple Advanced players (sandbaggers) that they can't play Open because they are still in high school and want a scholarship.

Does the NCAA see them taking cash as any different than taking discs?



No, but I'd sure like to know the skinny...there's someone @ my home course who just took $$ in Open, who is possibly good enough at hoop to get a 'ride', and we're all wondering if he made a 'mistake'. Different sports, $$ earned, prize values [is there a threshold, 'safe' amount]...does it make a difference? I hope someone can say for sure...

[kyle]

I believe an athlete can take money in other sports. If I remember right Chris Wienke (2000 Heisman trophy winner yet looser to OU in the championship game :D:D:D) played a little Pro baseball and then went back to college and played for Florida State at 28 years old.

http://seminoles.collegesports.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/weinke_chris00.html

[idahojon]

Danny Ainge played major league baseball for the Bluejays all the time he was an all-star basketball player at BYU. Gave up baseball for an NBA career.

[slo]

...just so it's a different sport, it's OK?
...I'll bet they don't let PDGA Pros in NCAA Disc Golf, though!

Hey Jon, did you decline to respond to my PM, or are you not enabled for such?

[rhett]

I think there is a Wyoming football player on scholarship who plays pro disc golf and takes cash.

I think you need to get back to what Amature means. Basically "not for money" if a person is Pro at say skatebaording, but plays college footbal, you speaking of apples and oranges, there is no point.

The bottom line is this, when you turn Pro, (take cash) you give up your right to compete in amature events, like the Am worlds, or the Olympics (kinda)

The other assumption is that as a Pro, you get paid by some body to practice on a daily basis, as opposed to Ams who are not afforded that luxury and therefor it'snot "fair"for them to compete againsteach other.

Anyway, in Skate or Surf, of an Am wins money in a pro event, say testing their skills before they move up, the money goes to a trust fund, that thye get when they turn Pro.

Do Junior Varsity players get letters in High School?

Then why should JV players get paid cash?

If you want to play for CASH come play with the big dawgs!

[Jake L]

In the days-of-old, on the PGA tour, a rookie, if lucky enough to cash, didn't their winnings go to the Tour, and not the players pocket?
Off subject, but that trust fund thing made me think of this.

[letho]

well put! :D

[danniestacey]

I play open and I attend the University of Oklahoma on scholarship.

[terrycalhoun]

Here's something from the NCAA Division I about amateurism: http://www1.ncaa.org/membership/governance/division_I/management_council/2004/April/19_Att_COI.htm

[idahojon]

NCAA rules seem pretty clear. Until there is varsity NCAA sanctioned disc golf, you don't have a problem if you accept cash playing disc golf. Key words: "in that particular sport."

That's my reading too, but I wonder where one draws the line between sports. Would playing in the Arena Football League make one inelligible for NCAA Football? Could one play pro softball, and still play NCAA baseball? Can you receive money for running a marathon, but run shorter distances in NCAA track & field? Disc Golf / Ball Golf.

[boru]

The other assumption is that as a Pro, you get paid by some body to practice on a daily basis, as opposed to Ams who are not afforded that luxury and therefor it'snot "fair"for them to compete againsteach other.



But at the world-class level, that created huge inequalities. Athletes from communist countries were supported by their governments. They didn't get paid, but they lived well and were able to devote all their time to athletics. Western athletes, by contrast, had to support themselves, and often could not afford to be full-time athletes. This was a huge injustice, like anything that tips the scales against America, so we, and other countries, successfully campaigned to allow pro athletes to compete in the Olympics. Now that those communist governments have mostly collapsed, our pro athletes enjoy far greater resources than their competitors, and the huge inequality is ok. My point? The Olympics aren't really a good model for true amateur competition.

Neither is the NCAA. Maybe nobody else sees a problem with an organization that allows everyone but the players to get rich off "amateur" sports. Schools make tons of money off D-1 sports, which they can then pour back into recruiting, infrastructure, and coaches' salaries. Or maybe good coaching, cutting-edge facilities, and access to the best talent don't affect the outcome of the game.

I don't think ams should win cash either, but if you look carefully, I don't think it's the cash itself that's the root of peoples' complaints. I've seen the subject of am payouts come up a couple times, and the issue has been the perceived value of what's being paid out. Here's the way I understand it: An am wins "$100" worth of scrip, but when redeemed, that scrip buys far less than $100 worth of goods. It doesn't matter if ams "deserve" big payouts or not. TDs use payouts as a way to attract people to their tournaments. Advertising a $500 am purse that turns out to be worth $415 when redeemed is dishonest. If clubs want to make money, fine. But just take it upfront. If PDGA payout rules need to be revised to allow this, that should be done.

At the end of the day, it's a matter of customer satisfaction. Payouts may not be the best reason to compete as an amateur, but they're a factor, especially when entry fees are high. Some of you say that anyone who doesn't like it shouldn't play in tournaments. That's exactly what will happen.

that ncaa thing is wack.. for example look at the colorado football player who is an olympic skiier.. he will lose his eligibility due to needing to take endorsement money to sponsor his trip...

that ncaa thing is wack.. for example look at the colorado football player who is an olympic skiier.. he will lose his eligibility due to needing to take endorsement money to sponsor his trip...



Quite apart from the fact that the US Ski and Snowboard Association and/or the US Olympic Committee could pay Jeremy Bloom's training and travel costs without affecting his NCAA eligibility status, should the deem him worthy of them, the NCAA's rule regarding endorsement exists to prevent a member of Football U's/Basketball U's booster club from offering to pay recruits to "endorse" his/her company's products, as a means of enticing prospective recruits to attend Football U/Basketball U. (Does anyone besides rabid Oregon Ducks fans sincerely believe, to cite but one example, that if if such a rule didnt exist, Phil Knight wouldn't be handing out Nike endorsement money to lure blue chip football and basketball players to Oregon?)

Wow. I didn't think this was that big of a discusion. Amatuers don't get cash, that is the whole basis of Pro & Am. If you want money play Pro if you want to play for fun in a competive atmosphere play Am. As a wise man told me once " Ams play for the love of the game. Pros play for the love of money. "

and my main point isn't that i necessarily want to win cash but want to have the most fun at tourney's no matter the division i or others play. if your happy with the current state of payouts and redemption of cash value awards great. i have wondered what the "logic" was in disc golf in allowing payouts based upon dollar amounts but not actual moolah. perfect world to me is one am division(what intermediate really wants to be the best of all the people that aren't so good anyway-no probs with sandbaggers then except for pro/am) and no masters division until 50+(you get crippled or something when you turn 40?) and either just trophies and extra cash going to tourney fun, or cash awards for ams just to make things simple, honest, quick, etc.

I got cash @ Bruce Brakel's Cass Benton event last year in November. Was an all Cash payout to divisons, not a Tier event of course but fun none the less.

[j_d]

Maybe more Ams would play pro (and some ultimately move up) if they could collect plastic when they cash in a pro event. I believe it used to be that way but for reasons unfathomable to me, the PDGA took it away. The pros are simply **** good and given that it is nearly impossible to go back to AM once turned pro and no dangling carrot (you get to collect plastic if you cash) any more, there simply isn't enough incentive to try unless you got a lot of talent and time to invest in getting better.

Given that I am committed to staying Am unless my player rating rises above 960, it would be dumb for me to play pro and simply donate my money without any chance to recoup it even if I played really well. Or if I could declare myself as an Am who will not collect even if in the cash and pay 1/3 or 1/2 entry fee, I would definitely consider playing pro in some events. There are a lot of pro tournaments that do not even come close to filling -- lower entry fees for declared amateurs could very well pull more people in.

[gdstour]

JD,
This is a great point you make.
I think the pdga made a huge mistake when they changed the rule for Ams when playing pro.
Allowing Ams to test the waters without losing the ams status was how most made the jump until they changed the rule.
But this is what happens when an Amateur joins an association for professionals.
Gateway disc sports is running over 50 events this year in cities all over the country where ams can play in the semi-pro, collect cash and not lose their pdga amateur status.
Hopefully we will have many more next year as the growth of advanced ams who cannot cash on the pdgs tour will create a demand for this!

PS,
if ams would have been playing for cash since disc golf started you could decrease the # of discs ever sold by close to 50%!
Most players in our area get started playing disc golf by having someone give them their first discs.
Most of these discs came from winning them at events!!!

[neonnoodle]

I think the pdga made a huge mistake when they changed the rule for Ams when playing pro.
Allowing Ams to test the waters without losing the ams status was how most made the jump until they changed the rule.
But this is what happens when an Amateur joins an association for professionals.



What does Amateur mean then? Playing for cash value merchandise rather than cash? Do you propose that we have everyone play together and just give merchandise to the Ams and cash to the Pros?

I suppose we could. It would only be one little change away from what we already do.

But this doesn't sound like it involves Amateurs at all. More like protected professional divisions. "If you want to play just for cash value merchandise then you don't have to play against better players..."

I think it is about time these Cash Value Merchandise players realize that they are really just divisions of protected professional players and drop this false and misleading pretense of being "Amateurs". Sure, let them remain in protected divisions competing for prizes, but any claim they have to "Amateur Status" is next to ridiculous.

We really ARE the "Professional Disc Golf Association", and we need to accept it and get our competitive system lined up appropriatedly. It's silly to divide up all of these disc golfers simply because some play for merchandise and others for the same value in cash. There's no difference!

Mr. Gateway has admitted as much!

[boru]

After some consideration, I think there's a perfectly good reason to keep the system more or less as it is.

As an am, I can't win money in a tournament . . . but I can win the tools to improve my game. After all, what does every disc golfer need? Discs. And the more you play, the more you need. If you're serious about improving, you're going to play a lot. You're also going to put in a lot of time on the practice field. When you're out there, you'll lose some discs, beat others up . . . maybe discover a need for one you don't have. So if you're winning am tournaments, you'll have a constant source of those new discs you need to improve. If you really have too many, donate your extras . . . to me, for instance.

If ams are getting paid in anything but discs (or bags, baskets, or scrip), then I agree, they're just playing as protected professionals.

[bulldog399]

There is a reason for pro and AM and that is for the pro's to win money and the Ams not to end of story my friend Kid Roc sums it up with the following!@!!

[bulldog399]

If you want cash, get better and play Pro. Sheesh.


Amen Roc and that should be the end of this discussion right there which was said about a week ago!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


hey Roc when are you headed up to KC?

JD,
This is a great point you make.
I think the pdga made a huge mistake when they changed the rule for Ams when playing pro.
Allowing Ams to test the waters without losing the ams status was how most made the jump until they changed the rule.
But this is what happens when an Amateur joins an association for professionals.
Gateway disc sports is running over 50 events this year in cities all over the country where ams can play in the semi-pro, collect cash and not lose their pdga amateur status.
Hopefully we will have many more next year as the growth of advanced ams who cannot cash on the pdgs tour will create a demand for this!

PS,
if ams would have been playing for cash since disc golf started you could decrease the # of discs ever sold by close to 50%!
Most players in our area get started playing disc golf by having someone give them their first discs.
Most of these discs came from winning them at events!!!



So exactly which point of JD's are you agreeing with Dave?

Let's see:

You think the PDGA made a mistake. Hmm, there's a shocker.

Ams testing the waters. Well, they still can and still do. If you're "testing" decline. Seems simple enough. Besides, there's plenty of events out there that are unsanctioned who don't use the hokey Semi-Pro thing and Ams get their first taste of competiting against "OPEN" players without the accept/decline dilema.

"But this is what happens when an Amateur joins an association for professionals." Waaaaaaaaa. Go start your own association then. You and Nick can get together and run a tour for Ams with trophies only. I'm sure it will be all the rage. Personally, this Am, although working to see the needs of Ams addressed as much as they should be, is happy to belong to this "professional" association.

"Gateway disc sports is running over..." Blah, blah, blah. So a bunch of Ams, that can't cash in Open, get to come to a one day event to play in a division where there are no legit Open players and pick up some cash. This is gonna help them how? They will learn what? I'm sorry, Ozark Devil-speak is not my native tongue. Could you please explain what the actual benefit of this is?

"Hopefully we will have many more next year as the growth of advanced ams who cannot cash on the pdgs tour will create a demand for this!" Yes. Let's encourage more watering down of the divisions. That'll solve everything. Although I'm not certain what the pdgs tour is.

"if ams would have been playing for cash since disc golf started you could decrease the # of discs ever sold by close to 50%!" So you support Ams playing for cash and believe this will reduce disc sales? Don't you manufacture discs? You want disc sales decreased? Great business model there. How 'bout we just reduce the number of one particular brand of discs sold.

[Dick]

every gateway disc i've tried is a stinker. they just don't like the model because nobody gives away their discs. :D

[neonnoodle]

I like the speed deamon. Replaced INNOVA's RAM as the most stable disc on earth. Great pitching wedge.

[terrycalhoun]

I've thrown the Ram, the Speed Demon, and the Z-Xtreme, and I think that the Z-Ztreme is actually more overstable than the other two.

I like the speed deamon. Replaced INNOVA's RAM as the most stable disc on earth. Great pitching wedge.



I have both and generally use them as 'get out of trouble' discs, which means I use them A LOT. I prefer the Ram for spike hyzers, however, for one main reason: It doesn't bounce when it hits the ground. When I want to stick the landing, that's the disc I use. The Speed Demon is great for longer, more-glide-needed types of shots, and for crosswind-coming-from-the-right monster forehand drives. With that type of wind you can throw it like a 3/4 sidearm baseball pitch as hard as you possibly can and it will go for days with a guaranteed return to the right at the end. Terrible for form, but great for results.

Sorry for the drift, return to your regular programming.

[neonnoodle]

DISC-agree! I thrown RAMs since 1992, and have tried the Z-Xtreme and the Speed Deamon is the King of Blade Runners.

Max Weight, Sparkling New, it is an absolute. It is so staple that when thrown with an "|" spike hyzer (righty) it will nearly finish with a "\" negative flight pattern. Something the RAM never did.

Now if the RAM came out in CE Plastic, I'd have to reevaluate. (Hint Hint Wink Wink)

I'd never use the thing for anything other than an 300' and in spike approach shot. But Dan I know what you mean about the Baseball throw, it is WAY cool and very useful for extreme left/right shots. It comes around so far it nearly spikes in the ground! Starting "/" and finishing "\"!

Don't worry about thread drift, it is tradition... /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

[Lyle O Ross]

I also love the G5i the most overstable midrange on the market. Actually, this disc is sort of between a midrange and a driver. Consequently, in my hands, it flies somewhere in between. On short second drives with heavy wind it is ideal. It still skips but not nearly as much as a driver and with heavy wind (between 15 and 20 miles/hour) in your face or left to right (rhbh) thrown flat it comes out fast and stays flat for 200 -250 feet and then dives hard left. Be careful the wind isn't right to left or it will dive in at 100 - 150 feet.

BTW - I find the Z-extreme, Speed Demon, and Champion Monster to be about the same in terms of overstability but the monster feels the best in my hand. The knife edge on the Speed Demon is hard on the palm but I'm a whimp.

what i like about the g5i demon is when you skip it around corners into the wind it doesn't get much lift during the skip. just a couple quick hops and then sticks the landing. taken the place of my firebird on tricky shots under 125' or so.

[cormack]

... and what does any of this have to do with "why can't Ams win cash?" :confused: :D

[Jake L]

cause if they can't throw the G5i well, they'll never cash!

What I like about the J2.3i or whatever its called, is...oh wait, nevermind.

Pros win money, Ams win prizes, this thread is stupid and has turned to nothing but a suckfest for the Ozark Devil.


Where's that ignore button?

[neonnoodle]

Pros win money, Ams win prizes



No.

Pros play for winnings, Ams play to just win!

A gigantic distinction!

[paul]

No - pro disc golfers play to win a little money and amateur disc golfers play to win a little less money. A teeny tiny distinction.

[rhett]

Nick refuses to let go of the semantic game. Even his research into the Olympics has shown than "amateur" is defined by the sanctioning body of each sport. Somehow the fact tthat the PDGA has defined amateur for disc golf golf just isn't good enough for him.

Probably because it differs from the definition he favors. A definition, BTW, that almost *NO* sport in the world agrees with. :)

[neonnoodle]

Probably because it differs from the definition he favors. A definition, BTW, that almost *NO* sport in the world agrees with.



You keep saying this again and again Rhett, but answer this; Just because a sports governing body defines amateur status in a way that goes against the very definition of amateur sportsmenship itself, does that mean that there is no true definition of amateur sport?

And Rhett, have you ever noticed how "Amateur" sport happens to work in every educational institution in the United States of America?

Put that in your pipe!

[neonnoodle]

No - pro disc golfers play to win a little money and amateur disc golfers play to win a little less money. A teeny tiny distinction.




No.

Pros play for winnings, Ams play to just win!

A gigantic distinction!



I wasn't talking about disc golf, obviously...

[paul]

No - pro disc golfers play to win a little money and amateur disc golfers play to win a little less money. A teeny tiny distinction.




No.

Pros play for winnings, Ams play to just win!

A gigantic distinction!



I wasn't talking about disc golf, obviously...



Oh - gotcha. I'll check around for the bored where you post your disc golf thoughts . . . . so sorry.

[rhett]

And Rhett, have you ever noticed how "Amateur" sport happens to work in every educational institution in the United States of America?



Are you talking about schools where $20k+ tuition plus food and rent are paid to the athletes so that they will compete in the name of the school? How "amateur" is that???

Of course you will bring up high schools now, but your words were "every educational institution in the United States of America".

[neonnoodle]

So you are saying that scholarships represent Professional Status?

You are grasping at straws Rhett.

And yes, I will bring up other Amateur Sports Organizations; which you claim do not exist; which clearly do...

And regardless, "Amateur Sportsmenship" IS a pure and worthy concept which happens to be accepted and recognized by a huge majority of Amateur Sports Organization, whether you are able to open the door to the possibility or not (as well as whether so called amateur organizations abuse it or not).

I hope you know that to be true on some level; even if it is a level you will never admit to.

[gnduke]

Did you ever notice that the most successful amatuer sports are those that have a good Pro structure above them where players can eventually make a living playing ?

[neonnoodle]

I haven't witnessed a sport growing from nothingness to full maturity yet. But seems like a healthy amateur enthusiast player base and solid amateur competitive structure are the biggest factors in developing any sport. Getting them into educational institutions tends to have a positive effect as well.

Considering that disc golf is essentially all pro, I agree, we do need a good Pro structure. An Amateur Class wouldn't hurt either...

[rhett]

So you are saying that scholarships represent Professional Status?



No! That is what YOU are saying Nick!!!

Scholarship athletes are paid tuition, room, and board. According to Nick, that is not amateur because they are not doing it "for the love of the game."

Your words, Nick.

[jconnell]

Arguably the three biggest team sports in America can all find roots in strong amateur bases that thrived long before the pro side of things grew to prominence.

In the earliest stages of professional baseball in the 1870s and 1880s, players who played for money were looked down upon as the less admirable class of players. The "elite" players tended to remain amateurs throughout their career. It wasn't until the turn of the century that professional baseball gained respect and prominence and was widely considered as the elite level of the sport.

Basketball was similar, growing as a physical education/YMCA staple long before the founding of the NBA and other professional leagues. It wasn't until the 1960s and 70s that basketball gained attention on the professional level. The college game was always the bigger draw back in the 40s and 50s.

In the same vein, professional football was second banana to the college game for decades in the first half of the twentieth century. Some of the "great" college players back then never moved on to the pro game. It wasn't until the late 1950s that the combination of Pete Rozelle and television caused the NFL to explode in popularity.

Golf's best players were also career amateurs for years and years until the PGA slowly began to grow. Players like Bobby Jones never went pro, yet are considered some of the best to have ever played.

I think Nick's on the right track with the idea that "true" amateurs need a place to play and compete in a true "amateur spirit". After all, where would baseball be without the tee-ball/Little League/Pony League/High School track of truly amateur competiton, leading into the Rec League Baseball/Softball track for adults to keep them involved.

I can see that Nick is trying to emulate that kind of thing on his "true amateur" side, while preserving our current system to some degree on the "professional" side. Don't know if this proposal is the end-all of perfect systems, but I can see it working in some facisimile down the road.

BTW, just as an aside, I think most big-time college athletes are for all intents and purposes, professionals. They are recruited/admitted (hired) expressly to play their sport for a scholarship/room/board (a form of remuneration). Most are poorly paid for their efforts considering the large income that some schools can generate from a big program, but they are compensated for their work just the same. JMHO.

--Josh

[neonnoodle]

Getting a scholarship at a college and winning a car during the NCAA Basketball finals is NOT the same thing Rhett. That is what YOU are saying, not me. There is a difference.

I'm really trying to understand your position on this. Please define what you believe is the common understanding of "Amateur Sport & Competition"? And how it differs from "Professional Sport * Competition"? Not in terms of our system, or any system but as basic commonly understood concepts.

[rhett]

There is no common defintion of amateur anymore. Different sports define it differently for them. The NCAA says a football/basketball player can accept a high-priced scholarship plus room and board and still be an amateur, but if an agent buys you dinner you might be in trouble. In the PDGA world of disc golf, if you accept cash in a sanctioned tourney you lose am eligibility. In ball golf you can accept up to x-dollars worth of merch and retain am status.

I'm okay with all of this. Am isn't simply am anymore.

[neonnoodle]

So "Amateur Sportmanship" is defined by the sports that govern them, whether appropriate or in the spirit of amateur play or not, right? Yes, that is correct. But it does not change the fact that some of what goes on is not appropriate or that it does not serve amateur sport well.

What exactly do you feel would be lost by bringing these cash-value players into larger divisions based on skill and leaving the Amateur Classification to a type of player more in line with other sports definition of amateur classification (if you are able to acknowledge that other sports, particularly ones within eductional institutions, based competition primarily on competitions sake, without the financial profit aspect more commonly associated with pro and semi-pro classifications)?

Whatever the various definitions of "amateur", the question I'm asking you is this: Is amateur sport worth protecting from professional sport? Why and how?

[discgolfdog]

Don't really know if this applies here but, Tennessee Vols punter (Dustin?) Colquitt won a putting contest at a local golf course. The prize was cash. There were questions if this hurt his am status and if he could still play NCAA football. The NCAA ruled he could still play college ball. Here's the kicker: the governing body of golf ruled he can no longer play golf as an am. Don't know how that applies here, just thought it was interesting that two governing bodies saw the same situation, but ruled in different ways. :confused:

if you are able to acknowledge that other sports, particularly ones within eductional institutions, based competition primarily on competitions sake, without the financial profit aspect more commonly associated with pro and semi-pro classifications



Nick, I'm not able to acknowledge that.

NCAA, the pinacle of amatuer sports in this country pays it's athletes with scholoarships. And (shockingly), the better athletes generally get the better pay. Star players in the big sports (football & basketball) get full scholarship, room, board books, and probably a stipend. Others, get partial scholarships (most notably probably in baseball where it's very typical to get a "partial" scholarship. In fact NCAA div 1 schools are limited to 11.7 full scholarships per year in baseball.

There are many "true" amatuers at the college level, but I do hope that you'll acknowledge that there are also many many athletes that don't meet your definition of amatuer.

[Lyle O Ross]

Sorry for the thread drift but as I read here I decided to look up the formal definition of amateur. I didn't have a dictionary so I googled definition and amateur. Every hit was a porn site. So apparently you're only an amateur if you have posed nude or made a porn flick (for free). :D

A sad commentary on what the internet is becoming...

[neonnoodle]

There are many "true" amateurs at the college level, but I do hope that you'll acknowledge that there are also many many athletes that don't meet your definition of amateur.



I have admitted as much in my reply to Rhett. However, I do not acknowledge that because their are aberrations, abominations, and misuse of the "amateur" label, that it is ok, or that it can be used to substantiate further misuse and defilement. Do you and Rhett propose that it does!?! (That is exactly what it seems.)

It really is not far different than saying, “Well, because others have jumped off this bridge to their deaths then I suppose that is the way it is and we should all jump off the bridge.”

(Place one of my favorite words here)!

Amateur Sport is ABSOLUTELY worth introducing and deserves our fullest attention in developing and PROTECTING it from those who would abuse it or diminish it. I do hope that you’ll acknowledge that there is some truth in this.

[boru]

Amateur Sport is ABSOLUTELY worth introducing and deserves our fullest attention in developing and PROTECTING it from those who would abuse it or diminish it. I do hope that you’ll acknowledge that there is some truth in this.



Fine, but you weaken your argument every time you bring up college sports. Even at the lowest levels, college sports bring benefits to schools and players that fall outside the scope of "love of the game."

I went to a small school that was NCAA D-III for every sport except skiing. I think - though I may be wrong - that D-III schools can't offer sports scholarships. We also belonged to a league called the New England Small College Athletic Conference, or NESCAC. NESCAC's stated purpose was to preserve the integrity of amateur college athletics; its members agreed to a code of conduct that, among other things, prohibited giving athletes special consideration for admissions.

My school, and every other school in the league, violated this rule as a matter of policy. Promising athletes, especially in sports like football, often got in despite clearly being out of their element in the classroom. The worst example I know of was a classmate of mine - a high school lacrosse All-American - who was admitted sophomore year after being expelled from two other schools.

Once admitted, student athletes were constantly reminded of the benefits of a college sports career. The biggest of these was a connection to the numerous influential alumni who had also been athletes. As for the school, successful sports teams brought in more generous donations from alumni and parents. They also drew more applicants each year, which would drive down the percentage admitted, making the school seem more selective and drawing even more applicants the next year.

My point is that even at this supposedly pure level of amateur competition, participation is driven by a lot more than "love of the game." Beer-league softball is probably the best example of true amateur sports so far. But it's also a lot less structured and formal than Major League Baseball. Is there an example of a truly amateur sports organization that's national in scope, with the same strict adherence to rules as its professional conterpart? Because that's what you seem to be suggesting.

[neonnoodle]

I don't think it weakens anything to bring it up. Again, as I've now said to Rhett and then Jim, examples of abuse are JUST THAT, examples of abuse.

When true "Amateur Sport" is invoked even they MUST know what it is, or they wouldn't be able to site examples of what it is not. Because we can still discern a difference, means that it still exists, and so long as it does it deserves some attention, consideration, and defense.

Seems like you guys are just throwing up your hands and saying, well because the definition of “amateur” has become so corrupt why bother to remember what it is supposed to mean or the benefits it can bring if properly introduced, managed and protected.

Again, why exactly are we defending what our competitive system currently calls amateurs? What are we protecting them from? What good does it do them or our sport?

And

What would be the benefits of actually having an amateur class WORTH protecting?

[whorley]

These are the questions they [Pro2/AM Payout backers] can't answer. The Pro2 backers only want to give the weak reasons why Pro2 is good (i.e. retaining low-ranked pros). They obviously don't want to consider other options.
The problem is, Nick, that they won't consider any alternatives because they hate you. Furthermore, I think people are now afraid to agree with you in the forum for fear of being categorized with you.
It's a shame, though. You have novel ideas, your argument about "True amateurism" is irrefutable, and it's reccomendable that you so vigorously stand for what you believe in.
I don't really have a point, just some observations and bad spelling /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif.

[Chris Hysell]

I think they can't win cash because they are ams.

Did this help?

[neonnoodle]

Well, my popularity might be an issue, but not one under my control entirely. I can only state my views as clearly as possible and let people's opinions fall where they might.

Truth is, I'd like to see WWCC (What We Currently Call) Amateurs get paid out in cash. Then there would be not even the slightest pretense that they are anything but an arbitrarily protected semi-pro division.

Folks may see this as an "ANTI-AM" statement. It is not at all, it is actually the exact opposite. When you entice WWCC ams out to play for cash-value prize based on performance and redistribution of entry fees you are not promoting Amateur Competition or Sport in any way shape fashion or form.

[gnduke]

What is a reasonable cost for a tournament that has no payout, but provides lunch, trophies, drinks, water and a well run, challenging event?

[rhett]

What is a reasonable cost for a tournament that has no payout, but provides lunch, trophies, drinks, water and a well run, challenging event?



$25 bucks. That's what it cost a PDGA and SoCal current am player to play the wintertime open. Plus all the "merchers" basically won a pro-line Orc. (Top three or so had somethng else thrown in, but basically a "flat payout" in that all people who won got basically the same thing.)

I thought it was great and a great value.

[neonnoodle]

From free to $100 depending on costs and whether the organizers raise any sponsorship funds.

If there's no payout, why would a player care if the TD raises sponsorship $$$$? What specificaly would make a no-payout tournament worth $100 entry fee?

Well, location might (I suppose), we ran a tourney with one round on a golf course with $20 greens fees. Four rounds like that...

[neonnoodle]

If there's no payout, why would a player care if the TD raises sponsorship $$$$? What specificaly would make a no-payout tournament worth $100 entry fee?

Well, location might (I suppose), we ran a tourney with one round on a golf course with $20 greens fees. Four rounds like that...



I leave that to the imagination of the TD. Regardless of payouts, I'm sure you have been to a few events that have been worth the entry fee alone. A few that come to mind are Japan Open, Laurel Springs Open, Paw Paw, etc.. Payouts should not always be the deciding factor for participation (particularly in an amateur class).

Payouts should not always be the deciding factor for participation (particularly in an amateur class).



I absolutely agree with you here Nick. My question was to your response to the question [paraphrased] "How much would you pay for a trophy-only tournament". Your reply [heavily paraphrased] was "Up to $100 if the TD raised a lot of sponsorship". I'm questioning what sponsorship has to do with a trophy-only tournament. Those two seem like a contradiction to me... unless all that sponsorship is going to a charity or something...

Well, I'd pay a $100 entry if there was sponsorship that covered transportation to, and lodging during the tournament. Seriously, a $100 entry is minimal relative to what I'd spend on travel, time-off-work, hotel fees, pet-boarding, etc for any tournament outside of driving distance (which is basically anything outside of Arizona, SoCal, or New Mexico). I've never been to the Japan Open (or any touney outside of North America), but if I were to attend something like that, the entry fee would be so minimal compared to all the other costs, it wouldn't matter.

[neonnoodle]

Jim,

You get the general idea though, right?

If the TD and event offer substantial enough services and return of value to the participants, the skies the limit on entry fees. But in general, for a Sweeney Day School event, you’d probably just cover local, regional, and PDGA fees plus event costs (Park Rental, Supplies, and Trophies), so the entry fee would run between $8 and $15.

Consider the NY Marathon though. Thousands of participants putting out $80 or more for a chance to place 3892nd with only a number pinned to their shirt and maybe a package of promotional junk (I’m guessing, but it certainly isn’t much unless you win or are top 10).

Nick

[Moderator005]

Consider the NY Marathon though. Thousands of participants putting out $80 or more for a chance to place 3892nd with only a number pinned to their shirt and maybe a package of promotional junk (I’m guessing, but it certainly isn’t much unless you win or are top 10).

Nick



There's a distinction involved with being a participant in the NY Marathon though. Other than possibly the Worlds or the USDGC, there are few disc golf events with that sort of merit.

[rhett]

Plus if you get an event anywhere near one tenth the size of the NY Marathon you will also have the associated fees of crowd control and extra police and all that other stuff that humongous event like that has.

What I'm saying is that the expenses to put on the NY marathon are far more than any $300-$500 park permit a disc golf tourney would have to pay.

[neonnoodle]

Consider the NY Marathon though. Thousands of participants putting out $80 or more for a chance to place 3892nd with only a number pinned to their shirt and maybe a package of promotional junk (I’m guessing, but it certainly isn’t much unless you win or are top 10).

Nick



There's a distinction involved with being a participant in the NY marathon though. Other than possibly the Worlds or the USDGC, there are few disc golf events with that sort of merit.



True enough, but we have to start somewhere.

Rhett, what about the travel expense for those marathon runners, that's got to be equal to our larger DG events. People will pay a premium for a premium service and experience. If value is returned, but to everyone instead of the top 25% - 45%, then more folks should come away with a more memorable and satisfying view of the event.

No if they are looking to "cash" then they likely would not pay much if anything for such an event. This kind of event essentially does not cater to them. There are already tons and tons of events that do and probably always will take care of golfers with that mindset. What there is not available is one for these folks: Amateurs.

[esalazar]

lack of big sponsor ship!

[tdwriter]

Lyle, you typed the word "amateur" into google and got porn sites? I did the same thing and the whole first page was nothing but amateur sports sites, amateur radio sites, amateur science resources, etc. Maybe you have one of those porno search bars in your computer :D rWc :cool:

[neonnoodle]

I type it into google and got the following:

"That which does not exist in disc golf." ;)

Lyle, you typed the word "amateur" into google and got porn sites? I did the same thing and the whole first page was nothing but amateur sports sites, amateur radio sites, amateur science resources, etc.



Try spelling it wrong.

"amateur" brings up what you said.
"amatuer" brings up what Lyle said.