Where We Fail

[Moderator005]

The following was posted by Nick Kight on the Mid-Atlantic Disc Club message board.

I'm re-posting it here for two reasons:

1) I scoff at the notion that Nick's post on a message board is 'copyrighted material.' I think Nick needs to familiarize himself with copyright law and how to obtain an official copyright, instead of just arbitrarily declaring that anything he may write is copyrighted.

2) I'm wondering if anyone also finds it hypocritical that someone who has previously been one of the biggest supporters of all things PDGA, as well as a PDGA leader (PDGA State Coordinator for Pennsylvania, PDGA Course Evaluation Program Director) would publicly declare that "the PDGA is not going to be the organization that leads us to the promise land" and "our PDGA competitive system has become an incestuous self-perpetuating dysfunctional mess."

Read for yourself Nick's words:

Note: This is copyrighted material and may not be copied or reproduced in any form for any use without written permission by the copyright owner.

Disclaimer: I know that folks are doing the best that they can, and I respect and honor their efforts and heap all praise I can on them, regardless of whether I feel their efforts may be futile or misguided. My desire is not to insult anyone or their efforts but to open up the discussion beyond tinkering so that we can SEE what challenges face us. After all, that is the first step in solving them isn?t it.

It pains me to say it, but I think we need to face the fact that the PDGA is not going to be the organization that leads us to the promise land. This is not saying anything bad about them, us, it is just acknowledging that we are what we are. We have become an entrenched bureaucracy so attached to our shortcomings and misguided attempts to increase participation at our events that we have lost all perspective of what our true goals are and should be; to promote disc golf at every level and bring it into mainstream focus.

I disagree with idea that by spreading the goodies to ever increasing numbers of protected divisions we will see the growth that will really put disc golf in the mainstream consciousness. Or there assumptions based on PDGA or personal experience (all founded in the entanglements of the PDGA Competitive System).

I also disagree with the idea that by taking the protected divisions candy away from them and forcing them to play against the elite players that we will see that growth either.

In short, our PDGA competitive system, once suited for the numbers of events and players 10 to 20 years ago, has become an incestuous self-perpetuating dysfunctional mess, entrenched in outdated and unproductive squabbling over still limited resources and misplaced priorities. Incapable of looking at itself and it?s place in the greater goal of disc golf promotion.

No, tinkering with an inherently flawed and grandfathered system will not result in any quantum shift back towards our stated but neglected goals; only a fresh, clean and complete divide from those organizational and personal layers of bindings and shackles will free us up to focus on the PRIMARY TASK before us. And that is developing strong, vital, active and lasting local disc golf communities.

The focus of the PDGA should unfalteringly be aimed at preparing a place at our table for folks ready to step beyond the local boundaries (AND THIS IS NOT EVERYONE) and refrain from half-hearted attempts to attract anyone else. Because when they do, it not only harms those ready to commit to a more regional. National or worldwide level, it also damages local efforts as people jump up too soon and find no appropriate place at the table for them. This would free the PDGA from being overburdened with issues and challenges they are completely and totally incapable of addressing, which can and should only be addressed by local or regional organizations. The PDGA needs to focus on taking pride and a personal stake in the setting and promoting the ?Highest Standards? of excellence, sportsmanship at the National and Worldwide level and leave the building of the sport to local and regional entities who are far better positioned to take on such challenges.

As it stands now, in my opinion, we are entirely too susceptible to an outside entity with the proper funding and marketing to come in and completely supplant our position, with fresh thinking, new approaches, and a willingness to fail.

Yes, that?s right, I said ?fail? and I meant fail. There is no learning or growth without failure. Somehow it has gotten into the American consciousness that ?failure? is unacceptable. Perhaps it is our president who is incapable of admitting any form of failure, or our near complete insecurity concerning our increasingly fragile place in the world. Whatever it is we are so numb and terrified of it that we continue to put things in place that preclude us from ?real? success. Our goals of mainstream acceptance, player/course growth and retention have been slowly and stealthily supplanted by things like bribing players to come to our events to win junk based on other players entry fees and we don?t need to be attractive to a wider group of players/sponsors, we?re fine just as we are.

It reminds me of the little girl in the movie ?The Labyrinth? who after countless adventures finds herself back in her bedroom and starts to pile more and more of her belongings onto her back, gaining comfort, wanting to leave nothing behind, until she is just two legs burdened with a 10 foot pile of junk on her back, lost in a trace of ?attachment?.

Note: This is copyrighted material and may not be copied or reproduced in any form for any use without written permission by the copyright owner.

Disclaimer: I know that folks are doing the best that they can, and I respect and honor their efforts and heap all praise I can on them, regardless of whether I feel their efforts may be futile or misguided. My desire is not to insult anyone or their efforts but to open up the discussion beyond tinkering so that we can SEE what challenges face us. After all, that is the first step in solving them isn?t it.

[morgan]

I thought you would get a life when you got a wife. What does your bride think of you spending so much time typing spench on your computer? Spend some time with her and leave Nick (and the rest of us) alone

[Moderator005]

*** You are ignoring this user ***

Ah, blissful peace - thank God for the ignore function. I haven't had to read anything of Morgan's in years.

[bruce_brakel]

I guess all I could say to that would be:

At the IOSeries we're running a game we can sell. Often we're approaching sold-out, maximum capacity. We don't require anyone to play for each other's entry fees and yet that is the preference of 95% of our players. We do accomodate the other 5% with a reduced entry fee option that is a great bargain in light of the player pack and the benefits of PDGA sanctioning. If Nick can sell some other format, in or out of the PDGA, I wish him well. I've tried to sell competition for competion's sake and I have not succeeded at that.

"Optional" may be the reason. I wonder what would happen if you ran the exact same event and did it all trophy only without other options how it would effect turnout.

I realize the possibility of the PDGA going all trophy for Am could/would lead to alot of unsanctioned events doing the current plastic money payout, but I still have to wonder what players would do if trophy only was the only option.

[Parkntwoputt]

This has been brought up numerous times in the short period I have been active on this discussion board.

Sadly, this sport has aligned itself with paying out it's amateurs with high value merchandise. Now is this an incredibly bad thing? No, but it has been so long ingrained, that newbies to the sport see traveling advanced players coming back from A-tiers with a dozen or so discs, and then the newbies want a piece of the action too.

I agree with the notion that amateurs should only compete for trophies. And pros play for actual value.

I am running an event in April. At first it was a pro only event, offering only one divsion, MPO. But I witnessed a demand for a 1 day option. So I am offering an Amateur trophy only division. I do have a sizeable demand for this, the players know what they are going to get. Now the regional top advanced players have decided to play up and play open. One because they want to play two days, and secondly because they do not want trophy only. Of course they will have to deny the cash to remain amateurs, but that is their choice.

I think that the PDGA needs to promote the trophy only Amatuer divisions. And perhaps can use their collective weight to create relationships with trophy manufacturers to allow TD's to purchase trophies for lower prices. A decent 12 inch trophy is pretty expensive. And then even clubs can go in and purchase trophies in bulk and change name plates for different events and places. Even being able to give the top 1/3 players in Amateur divisions trophies.

We need to create a defined rift between pro and am.

[bruce_brakel]

"Optional" may be the reason. I wonder what would happen if you ran the exact same event and did it all trophy only without other options how it would effect turnout.

I have run that format. It cuts attendance by about 80% around here. I can think of no better way to lose money running disc golf tournaments than by doing them trophy-only.

The moral purity of trophy-only competition is attractive to anyone with a strong moral sense, but it does not sell well outside Maine. The guy doing trophy-only competition in southwestern Michigan does one-day tournaments that get 2/3rds full.

[bobenman]

To make it work all you have to do is .............. Stop giving out prizes

[bruce_brakel]

To make it work all you have to do is .............. Stop giving out prizes

I have run that format. It cuts attendance by about 80% around here. I can think of no better way to lose money running disc golf tournaments than by doing them trophy-only.

The value of giving out prizes, to a TD, is that the mark up on the prizes pays for sanctioning, insurance and course use fees, and yet the players get full value for their entry fee. When I have run trophy-only events, usually I have not had enough players to cover all those costs.

[ck34]

If they charge course fees for events in Maine in addition to entry fees, then those pay-for-play facilities can make money in a way that events in public parks do not.

You don't HAVE to lose by running trophy only. The profit on the player pack should be more then suffecient to cover expenses. You may ask " Then where is the profit for the TD?", my answer is to get a couple of sponsors to cover the expenses then pocket the profit on the player packs. Raffles, silent auctions, dollar a throw CTP tosses etc.for the merch sponsor stuff is another way to pull funds in.

I understand that itis not "just that easy" because the number of participants will more then likely suffer becasue there is probably another PDGA event around the corner within the next week or two that is doing huge plastic payouts. But the factremains that it CAN work if done right.

[Parkntwoputt]

[QUOTE]

"Optional" may be the reason. I wonder what would happen if you ran the exact same event and did it all trophy only without other options how it would effect turnout.

I have run that format. It cuts attendance by about 80% around here. I can think of no better way to lose money running disc golf tournaments than by doing them trophy-only.
[QUOTE]


How much are you charging for that Trophy only event?

You can get a decently sized trophy with a customized name plate for $20.

Heck if you get 4 players to enter at a net fee of $5 then bingo you made your money back and paid a decent % of the players.

For my event, to play Pro PDGA members pay $32 for three rounds, to play Am PDGA members pay only $15 for two rounds on the first day. Am's are getting a players pack with a retail value of $10. So they get almost all their money back before they even tee off.

Granted I had my trophies donated, but I would only need 5 players to net zero on the Amateur division if I paid full retail. Right now potential demand is looking like having 9 or 10 players in that division.

In order to facilitate a reduced payout for the amateurs, aka trophy only, you need to severely reduce the entry fee.

I would not play a trophy only event for $50, no matter what the format or the courses. For a trophy only event I expect a deeply reduced entry fee. If I am paying $50 for my entry, then I am expecting back a valued pay out.

Personally I am not far from playing Pro, and I have pretty much preregistered for my last Amateur event unless I qualify for USADGC. But I am looking at it as a matter that I am not the only player who feels this way, and not on personal bias.

[james_mccaine]

I realize the possibility of the PDGA going all trophy for Am could/would lead to alot of unsanctioned events doing the current plastic money payout, but I still have to wonder what players would do if trophy only was the only option.

This is a very interesting question. I suspect that disc golf would do just fine. There will always be plenty of people who will be lured in by big turnouts, great courses, fun events and the joy of competition.

As for the threat of unsanctioned events, I've always thought that over the long haul, that is something of an idle threat for the following reasons:

1) What keeps "pro baggers" from entering these events? I'm not sure how these TDs could keep the best players from swooping in and taking all the merch. I'm not sure the TD has a legal right to exclude anyone.

2) How does the divisional structure work at these events? It seems that a use of the PDGA ratings could be legally contested by the PDGA, or even a use of the rules.

Ultimately, if the PDGA fought against these types of tournies that use PDGA products without permission, and if individuals were willing to test the ability of TDs to exclude them, then I'm not sure that this whole "unsanctioned tourney" threat is that real.

Ultimately, these folks would have to form their own association, and go through the same travails that the PDGA endured, just to end up in the exact same place that they first rebelled against. Would that be ironic, or just obvious?

[bruce_brakel]

I prefer to play sanctioned events. You need to add $50 to $250 to your fixed costs if it is a sanctioned C-tier somewhere that requires insurance and charges a course use fee.

I think our TD from Maine may be having success with trophy-only tournaments because he has a monopoly on tournament offerings in his locale. Or, people from Maine are different. Do you competition running prize-format events?

I have not given up on running trophy-only tournaments. I've just given up on hoping to break even on them!

I prefer to play sanctioned events. You need to add $50 to $250 to your fixed costs if it is a sanctioned C-tier somewhere that requires insurance and charges a course use fee.

Are you saying that you "can't" get that VERY small amount in sponsor money? Or, you "can't" come up with a creative way to raise that VERY small amount of money?

If your answer to either is Yes then I say: You "can't" be trying very hard.


I have heard this all my life "Can't never Could".
[ you gotta say that fast and with a southern accent to get the full effect ]

[jconnell]

If they charge course fees for events in Maine in addition to entry fees, then those pay-for-play facilities can make money in a way that events in public parks do not.

Why do events in public parks need to be any different than at a pay-to-play course? Why couldn't the public park tournaments charge a similar "greens fee" to cover adminstrative costs ($2 a player, $3 a player, whatever is necessary)?

IMO, even in a public park, if you set your am entry fee at the retail cost of a premium disc (to cover players' pack, brass cash, however you want to do it) plus administrative costs (PDGA player fees, local series fees, park and insurance fees, cool trophies), you can break even on the day. Will you alienate some of the indoctrinated in-it-for-the-buttload-of-prizes ams? Absolutely. So that might knock your numbers down at the start, but as you plug away at it, you're going to build a new base of tournament players who aren't expecting the buttload of prizes. Believe me, we're starting to see just that around here.

We may be a "still developing" area as far as the PDGA goes, but we've been running tournaments around here for years. The primary structure of tournaments here for years was a one-division handicapped deal with cash payouts to top scratch and handicap scores. When we started running PDGA-style (not even PDGA sanctioned) events, folks heard about prize-not-cash, no-handicap divisions and they went running away. They saw no chance to beat the top players scratch in Pro and had no desire to play for prizes in an Am division.

We realized that trying to convert those folks wasn't the solution to growing our tournament crowds, it was to develop a new crop of players weened on low-entry, trophy-only am divisions. That's starting to pay dividends. We ran an event this past weekend that saw the highest turn-out we've had for a PDGA event at this particular course. 37 amateurs came out, got a disc for entering, and played for trophies.

The other argument I keep hearing about the negative aspect of trophy-only is that ams won't travel for such events. We realized that was another shortcoming of our events in the past...we were relying too much on drawing players from out-of-state to fill out our fields. It wasn't unusual for a 30-player field here to consist of 10 Mainers (mostly in the pro division) and the rest from New Hampshire, Massachusetts and elsewhere.

This weekend, the majority of our ams were local players, not out-of-town am mercenaries looking for more plastic. The out-of-town folks who did come knew what they were getting into because we've been doing this for three years and don't hide the fact that there are no am prizes to win. No complaints were heard during awards ("where're the prizes?", etc), none have cropped up on any of the local message boards ("we got ripped off, don't go to Maine", etc).

We charged $25 to each Am.
$5 to greens fees (discounted from normal $8 daily rate)
$2 to PDGA player fee
$1 to NEFA Series fee
$1 to Maine Points Race
$1 to CTP prizes
$15 to player pack disc (a choice of anything in the pro shop...Star, ESP, Champ, Z, whatever they want)

Trophies, sanctioning fees (PDGA, NEFA, Maine Series), lights, course employees, coffee/hot chocolate, course maintenance, scorecards, exclusive use of the course for the day, etc all out of the greens fee. I see no reason that any public park TD couldn't charge a similar upfront fee to cover similar expenses and combine it with the players' pack "profit" to break even. Make full disclosure to the players about it and if they object, they don't have to play.

This really isn't something that only a pay-to-play private course can pull off. Anyone can do it. And this doesn't even take into consideration getting sponsors to cover expenses so that you can charge the players even less. It's really not that hard.

--Josh

[jconnell]

I think our TD from Maine may be having success with trophy-only tournaments because he has a monopoly on tournament offerings in his locale. Or, people from Maine are different. Do you competition running prize-format events?

I have not given up on running trophy-only tournaments. I've just given up on hoping to break even on them!

Interesting question Bruce. Yes, our "competition" does offer prize-format events. Because the whole New England region has a very local feel, I'd call our neighboring states "competition" and almost all run prize-format events (the only ones I can recall that weren't were events in which _BE_ co-TDed and had influence). Some even run non-PDGA sanctioned events within the NEFA Series that pay *gasp* cash in all divisions. Even New England's most well known event, MSDGC, paid cash to their ams last year. Payouts were low and extremely flat due to the large players pack, but they were still cash. In fact, I thought they could have done without the payout given the player pack and amenities, but it was their compromise to try to appease the payout-seeking folks. No ams at MSDGC this year, so no need to worry about that any longer.

More locally, there are other courses in Maine that offer prize divisions for ams. They still don't offer the buttload of prizes more common at other events, but that's probably a product of the market...they can't reasonably charge high am entries (say $40-50) to fund large payouts because their competition (us) never charges more than $30 for ams and that's only at our B-tier.

So, no, we don't have any kind of monopoly on tournaments in state. There are alternatives out there. We even offer our own alternatives, including the same handicap/scratch cash tournaments that we have had for years. Numbers for those have stagnated a bit while we continue to see increases at our divisional, PDGA and PDGA-style events. Perhaps our most popular format is one restricted to newer players. We only allow players with course handicaps over 10 (equates to under-900 rated players) or players with zero tournament experience and we run it like our PDGA am divisions. Entry covers a disc and greens fees and the day is about learning and having fun. Great crowds for those.

--Josh

[mcthumber]

It's really not that hard.

--Josh

Great post, Josh.

And folks, Josh says it's not that hard but don't kid yourself-- the ME TDs make it look that way with a lot of hard work.

--Mike

[morgan]

I can't believe disc golfers are so cheap they balk at paying $2 greens fees. It's absurd. They should pay $20 greens fees and stop griping. You go skiing, you spend $200 a day. Rock climbers spend hundreds on equipment. Kayakers spend thousands, and forget ultralight plane pilots. Yet disc golfers are playing $2 rounds and friggin arguing about it. It's pathetic, completely pathetic. I never saw a more cheapskate sport, I think kindergardeners spend more money on baseball cards than disc golfers spend on greens fees, yet they spend hundreds on discs, clothes, shoes, don't get me started. A typical disc golfer will drink $6 of beer and smoke $15 worth of "Maui kine" for each round, but refuse to pay $2 to use the course? It's friggin incipidulous.

GET JOBS YOU CHEAP SKATES!

[paul]

All the theorizing about the system being broken ignores the reality that disc golf tournaments are exhibitions. They've evolved from a bunch of friends getting together 1st followed by a competition second. The guy(s) running the event are not socially allowed to make money because the competition among the organizers is to see who can give away the most stuff. If events were run for profit the sport would have a chance to re-organize itself that would make more sense. Without money to motivate guys will come and go as their interest and rewards wane. If you spend 100 hours to run an event and your only reward is a pat on the back from the other guys that run events -- you will burn-out eventually. Treat golfers like house guest and you'll tire of them. Treat them like customers and get every nickel you can from them you'll want them back as often as possible. As long the inmates are running the asylum, it'll never be well-run.

There are some organizations out there turning a profit from disc golf -- they run events as ways to make money. Hopefully more can figure out to do it because then it will really get interesting to see what happens with the competition structure. Money can motivate to a much higher and more creative level than just trying to put on a good show for "the good of disc golf".

Just my usual .02 -- hasn't changed much like the rest of this discussion for the past 3-4 years .. . . . no worries.

[terrycalhoun]

1) I scoff at the notion that Nick's post on a message board is 'copyrighted material.' I think Nick needs to familiarize himself with copyright law and how to obtain an official copyright, instead of just arbitrarily declaring that anything he may write is copyrighted.

Jeff, everything Nick writes is in fact copyrighted. Everything anyone publishes is copyrighted at the moment of publication, regardless of statements or filings. That's the basic element of copyright law in the US No one has to file anything. I know that sounds silly, but it's the law: "In the United States, copyright has relatively recently been made automatic, which has had the effect of making it more like a property right. Thus, as with property, a copyright need not be granted or obtained through official registration with the government."

[bruce_brakel]

Wiki and Terry's opinion of the law jibes with mine. The US signed on to a treaty regarding intellectual property which makes copyright automatic upon publication. The point of registering is to put others on notice of a claimed right and to establish the burden of proof in a copyright violation case

I don't know whether something posted in an internet discussion forum has been "published." Moreover, the fair use doctrine would probably protect Jeff's quote of Nick's post for purposes of discussing the points contained therein. The purpose of the copyright law is not to stifle free speech but to protect the commercial value of published communications. Jeff has not deprived Nick of the commercial value of Nick's editorial. [Think about that. Fill in your own punchline.]

[tbender]

So if Nick claims it's his 2 cents, I can pay him 2 cents and use it as I see fit?

[rhett]

I think Jeff must be cringing in pain when he checks this thread every three minutes and sees, yet again, that Nick has not taken the bait and replied with a rant!

Great job on that, Nick. Please don't ruin it and reply now.

[Moderator005]

Good points, Terry.

However, one could argue that:

1) the work did not meet minimal standards of originality in order to qualify for copyright.

2) merely stating a copyright without registering is of little benefit:

While a copyright need not be officially registered for the copyright owner to begin exercising his exclusive rights, registration of works (where the laws of that jurisdiction provide for registration) does have its benefits: serving as prima facie evidence of a valid copyright and enabling the copyright holder to seek statutory damages and attorney's fees (whereas in the USA, for instance, registering after an infringement only enables one to receive actual damages and lost profits).

[Moderator005]

I think Jeff must be cringing in pain when he checks this thread every three minutes and sees, yet again, that Nick has not taken the bait and replied with a rant!

Great job on that, Nick. Please don't ruin it and reply now.

He's likely got me on Ignore and doesn't see anything I write.

But what's even funnier is that Nick's original "copyrighted" post on the Mid-Atlantic Message Board also included a poll. To date, there have been 146 views of the post with not a single reply, and only one vote: a yes vote, presumably from Nick!

LMAO!

[morgan]

...and after 5 days there have been no replies to your post (when there were 24 replies in the 2 days before it).