True Ams- those true sportsmen, noble in spirit and intent, competition for competition�s sake, etc, etc. We know there are lots of them in other sports, right? There must also be bunches of them just waiting to be brought into the PDGA if we just cater to them in the right way, right?

I propose that there are few true ams anywhere, in any sport. Sacrilege you say? Nick�ll have a heart attack? Here are my arguments without much hard evidence to support them. But then again, this is the Discussion Board where none is needed. Do you have any evidence to refute them?

1. I say that all of those students playing sports in school for no money are doing so because
a. The competition system is not set up for entry fees or payouts in prizes/cash
b. They have little money to pay for entry fees to start with
c. The system prevents them from winning cash or big prizes to retain eligibility
Conclusion: These potential players seem like true ams because they have to be, not necessarily by choice

2. Adults playing sports organized by Park & Rec operations or independent promoters are participating for no money or prizes because
a. The competition system is not set up for big payouts in prizes or cash
b. Expenses to run the events such as salaries, facility/field rental and fees for referees, umps, officials plus return to promoters leaves little for prizes beyond trophies without entry fees becoming too high
Conclusion: These potential players seem like true ams because the competition systems for their sports are set up that way. It�s not necessarily what these players would choose if they were given event options similar to our DG prize divisions in their sports.

3. It�s providing value that boosts participation, not noble intentions. This is a consumer economy. People make economic choices based on the following:
a. Getting a good return on the money they spend
b. Getting a good value for the time they spend
c. Enjoying the activities they choose for exercise
Conclusion: Hosting events that provide good value to the widest array of consumers is vastly more important to boost participation than the philosophical underpinnings of the competition scheme

4. Summary
a. The assertion that there are vast numbers of true Ams waiting to be tapped if only the PDGA catered to them with low entry fee, trophy only divisions is likely flawed.
b. That a vast number of players remains to be tapped is not in question since we see them at courses and we know there are millions of school kids that might be hooked if only we reached out to them.
c. Schools already have their �true amateur� system in place. Why reinvent the wheel when providing education and support to that existing system might be more productive thru initiatives like E.D.G.E. and Steam?
d. It�s more about value. The PDGA competition system should include a wide array of options for TDs to provide value to the widest array of potential players possible.
e. Those who consider low entry fees with trophy prizes a better value than our current merch oriented am divisions have been overlooked and should be considered. I believe these players will enter low entry fee divisions primarily because they are a good value from their perspective and not primarily due to the purity of amateur competition.
f. Since these �budget� disc golf consumers are primarily interested in value and not amateur purity, there�s not a compelling reason to separate the budget players into separate divisions from the merch players.

That�s my take on it. Have at it Discussion junkies!

<font size=5>YEAH WHAT HE SAID!!!!!!! :D</font>

I know of one "true AM". He has to play Pro or Pro Master because if he played Adv. he would win almost every time. He's declined cash multiple times in Pro. He believes in the spirit of the "true amateur"- he isn't interested in winning money or plastic, he just wants to play tournaments for fun and the intangible benifits.

Why do you think Nick is just on here talking about it and not out running a series of Trophy only events??? I mean that would be better them blowing all this worthless smoke up our [*****]es now wouldnt it??? I can tell you why hes not doing it. Its because there is little, IF ANY market for those types of tournaments. If given the choice between a trophy only tournament and a plastic payout tournament 90 percent of the ams are going to go where the plastic is. Thats just the nature of the world. We are greedy people and if we can go somewhere and WIN cash or prizes most of us ( by us i mean human beings not disc golfers ) are going to go for the cash and prizes if we can afford the entry fee.

If given the choice between a trophy only tournament and a plastic payout tournament 90 percent of the ams are going to go where the plastic is. Thats just the nature of the world. We are greedy people...



Speak for yourself here pimples /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

When I was an AM, I played Trophy Only at every single one of John Biscoe's events when it was offered (he is the only TD that I know to have offered it).

We are not all greedy plastic sucking humans. :o

Perhaps you need to change around your statement to say that YOU are a greedy person, not WE. :eek: :p

Nick has run events in the past... have you?

Speak for yourself here pimples

When I was an AM, I played Trophy Only at every single one of John Biscoe's events when it was offered (he is the only TD that I know to have offered it).

We are not all greedy plastic sucking humans.

Perhaps you need to change around your statement to say that YOU are a greedy person, not WE.

Nick has run events in the past... have you?



I dont even have to answer this one. You make up part of that 10 percent that there are who would play trophy only. If you read what i wrote which OBVIOUSLY most people dont when they respond to me you would have seen that <font size=6>it says 90 percent. THAT DOESNT MEAN EVERYONE!!!!!!!</font>

Has Nick ran any trophy only events or just plastic payout events???

No I havent ran any tournament but hopefully I will be running some next year :D

Did you ever play little league baseball? Did y'all each pony up five bucks before each game and give it to the winner? Well, if you didn't, you really missed out, the fields would have been overflowing. The sport would have been really popular, one that everyone knew about.

It's sad that all those little leagues didn't recognize our sport's genius. If they had, they would have been turning out higher quality baseball players by simply recognizing that the percs for the mediocre players should be greater than those for the players who excel.

When you played little league did you get uniforms and trophys??? I think that you did. We are also not talking about little kids here. We are talking about adults and what they would choose to do. Kids play little league because their parents put them in it. If the little kid is old enough to know what money was and you told him " Hey you can either go play here and get nothing or you can go over here and play and if you win your will get a bunch of candy" Just take a stab in the dark at where the little kid is going to go play. All the sports you talk about dont OFFER a prize payout system and its STARTED that way so everyone is just used to it and accepts it but if they were given a choice to either play for nothing or play for prizes, <font size=6>MOST</font> of them would play for prizes

If the money that were used for prizes in events were used for things that made the event "BIG" as in side events that brought in galleries, more money spent on advertising, like commercials, radio ads, newspaper ads, signs all over the city(things that get the non-player their watching).Money spent on decent food, scoring booklets, a sweet looking awards stage etc etc etc Then I would choose the Trophy only tourney hands down over any prize payout tourney.

Let's face it people,so much is put into the players prizes that the majority of Disc Golf events are just trunk of the car run and little to no effort in making people feel like they are a part of something. Tournements almost always take the easy way out in getting players, and YES waiving large stacks of plastic in front of poeple's noses is the easy way out.


People want to be apart of something big. Cater to the players to make them feel important. Make the players remember the event for the rest of their life. Make them want to say " I was there!".

I propose that there are few true ams anywhere, in any sport.



i have to disagree with you and i wont even leave disc sports to tell you why you are wrong...
ultimate is played from the lowest levels of pick up games to sanctioned international events with out any money for the winners. there have been attemtps at prizing out for teams, but no one shows up. it is not about the money. it is about competition, period.

side note: the upa has over 19,000 current members.
the pdga page shows under 8,000.

i am not going to say that trophy only tournaments would work in the golf world, but as far as true ams in sports, they do exsist.

fritz

I agree. I'm sure when all of the little leagues get wind of the wildly successful disc golf model, they will rush to copy it. Kids will be playing strictly for candy. You will know the winners by their girth.

When I played little league baseball it was $100 per game. The winning team got bats, balls, gloves, matching uniforms and padded, portable dugout benches. The profits on the merchandise were sent to the Chicago Cubs. I remember this clearly. ;)

There is a trophy-and-lunch only tournamet this weekend at Madeline Bertrand Park in Niles, Michigan. I would take the kids and go but Kiralyn has a dance rehearsal and Diana has to work. You can find details by clicking on the link on the schedule at www.mdgo.org. (http://www.mdgo.org.)

Meanwhile, Girlie, my name's Bruce, and this is my brother Jon and this is our friend Brett. We are offering the trophy-only option at all our tournaments. I have for the past few years. We had over 100 players for the IOS#1 and five or six played trophy-only. Two of them finished in the prizes causing prizes to bump down two slots.

It seems to me that if your tournament is not filling this is a way to encourage a couple more players to play. I'm not hearing anyone saying, "If you offer a trophy-only option I'm not playing." I am hearing, "If you had not offered a trophy-only option I would not have played."

Let's face it people,so much is put into the players prizes that the majority of Disc Golf events are just trunk of the car run and little to no effort in making people feel like they are a part of something.


Maybe that's how it is in your part of the country. The SoCal Series was built on that "event feel". People like it. Sometimes it's easy to lose track of that when you are trying to make the first place payout big, though. But I believe that people come back when you make them all feel special, not just the winners. That's the sign of a great tourney, not the payout totals.

At the 2005 IOS #1 (www.brasscash.com) this past weekend we had 102 total players. We had one Am play trophy only in a Pro division and we had 5 Ams play trophy only in Am divisions. Bruce, Brett and I have been offering trophy only options in most of our tournaments for several years now. Not many people play trophy only, but we are glad to offer to those that want to play for trophies and not for prizes.

If there were a bunch of people just waiting to play a true-am event, I'd think we'd be swamped with them. IOS #6 (www.brasscash.com) is going to be a low cost, trophy-only tournament for the ams. Pro divisions will play the same game they've played at all the IOS events. It will be interesting to see how many ams show up to play a PDGA event for $10 to play for points, ratings and trophies only.

i have to disagree with you and i wont even leave disc sports to tell you why you are wrong...



I said people make choices primarily based on value. I assume there are still entry fees to cover field reservations and admin expenses, and players come from long distances for some events. They have determined the value for their money, time and exercise are worth it as I originally stated. Paying even higher entry fees to generate payouts for teams isn't perceived as good of a value at this point. Still wrong?

a. The competition system is not set up for big payouts in prizes or cash



Know why? Because it's not good for the growth of the sport. :eek:

Other sports seem to understand that. This one does not. :o:D

When I say "trunk of the car" I dont mean it literally(although there are alot that literally do that). I've been to a Worldsand I have seen USDGC vids and in my personal opinion as compared to other sports those events are somewhere around where I think (not talking payout here) our B-tier events should be and realistically COULD be if people were focused on the right thing.

IOS#6 is no-payout but there will be a lot of CTPs. If attendance is Blast-normal I think there will be $10 in CTP value for every player who plays in an amateur division.

I think even our regular PDGA member wwcc amateurs will play an occasional trophy-only-only. Plenty of PDGA members play the tournaments at Madeline Bertrand.

And on and on it goes. Only a precious few like McCaine realize there is a bigger picture than just making the current player base happy. Everyone else is either blind, or is scared to do what it takes. Problem is that it might be too late for disc golf. :confused: :eek: :eek: :D

Know why? Because it's not good for the growth of the sport.



How do we know? We do know that disc golf took off outside a constrained school structure partly due to the big prize system. A higher entry fee system with payouts is untenable within the school structure because they try to minimize add-on fees as much as possible for fairness to low income students. Although now you're seeing more of it just to cover the basic expenses for extracurricular activities at schools.

Its all about how you draw people into the sport...Not about true am bagger am or AM....Some people have the need to compete against the top in the sport to justify thier own skills....Others just want to win...no matter who they play....Big deal...BAg BAg BAg....In the long run everyone will know you bag and therefore,,,,well...you know.....Give the top pros more money and non-discgolfers will want to watch them play....If two guys were having a pissing distance competition for a cash prize of 10,000$...I would watch and wonder if i could compete....If they were doing it for 100$ i would not watch....If two people were having a Hackey sac comp for 300$ i (as a tv REPresentive) would not care. However, if it was for 50,000$ i would care and i would jump on the chance to televise it because i know people would watch.....IF the USDGC got up towards first place of 50,000$ everyone would watch...tv would pick it up....and therfore we would tap into the people like us who should be playing DG right now....

Chuck,

Have you ever played in a sport as an amateur?
Did you play organized soccer, football, basketball, baseball, track and field, wrestling, etc?
Do you recall what your motivation was?
Do you recall what the main motivation of nearly every competitor in your sport of choice was?
Do you remember what the reward was for winning or playing well?
Does ANY OF THAT jibe with what we call �amateur� in organized disc golf?

To continue:

<font color="red"> Chuck: �I propose that there are few true ams anywhere, in any sport. Sacrilege you say?� </font>

No, I don�t say, what I say is that that is total and complete nonsense, and that you have no conception whatsoever as to what �true� amateur sport is about or like.

<font color="red"> Chuck: �Do you have any evidence to refute them?� </font>

Absolutely, but I have to wonder if you are capable of acknowledging them since you have such a partisan and jaded view of Amateur Sport to begin with judging by your points of discussion.

<font color="red"> Chuck:� 1. I say that all of those students playing sports in school for no money are doing so because
a. The competition system is not set up for entry fees or payouts in prizes/cash
b. They have little money to pay for entry fees to start with
c. The system prevents them from winning cash or big prizes to retain eligibility
Conclusion: These potential players seem like true ams because they have to be, not necessarily by choice� </font>

So you are saying that if the kids in little league could wager $20 a game over 20 games against the other players of other teams in the little league, that they would and that that would be ok, and considered within acceptable bounds of Amateur Sport? That they don�t do it not because of Amateur Sport Principles but because they can�t afford it and because there Organizing Body has mistakenly (according incorrect Amateur Sports Principles) not offered that option?

That is ludicrous.

<font color="red"> Chuck:� 2. Adults playing sports organized by Park & Rec operations or independent promoters are participating for no money or prizes because
a. The competition system is not set up for big payouts in prizes or cash
b. Expenses to run the events such as salaries, facility/field rental and fees for referees, umps, officials plus return to promoters leaves little for prizes beyond trophies without entry fees becoming too high
Conclusion: These potential players seem like true ams because the competition systems for their sports are set up that way. It�s not necessarily what these players would choose if they were given event options similar to our DG prize divisions in their sports.� </font>

So again Chuck, you are saying that the summer youth swimming programs at public pools would be equally amateur if they allowed 12 year olds to wager $20 to $100 per meet against their direct competition? That if running these events were cheaper a one 12 year old winning the 100M Freestyle would get $2000.00 in cash while the others lost $50 each and that this would be �alright� and within Amateur Principles of Competition?

I can�t believe that you actually believe, on any level you want to choose, that organized disc golf�s idea and actuality of amateur sport is superior to the rest of the world�s idea and actuality. It is as if you have no concept of amateurism from which to even judge!

<font color="red"> Chuck: �3. It�s providing value that boosts participation, not noble intentions. This is a consumer economy. People make economic choices based on the following:
a. Getting a good return on the money they spend
b. Getting a good value for the time they spend
c. Enjoying the activities they choose for exercise
Conclusion: Hosting events that provide good value to the widest array of consumers is vastly more important to boost participation than the philosophical underpinnings of the competition scheme� </font>

Unbelievable! No wonder kids are so very F ed up these days! I bet you are a big believer in �Human Nature� aren�t you Chuck? �We are violent and war like! We take what we want, when we want it. Compassion, Understanding, Love, Empathy are just niceties. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you is just something we say and never do.�

Answer me this then Chuck:

If we are a consumer economy and people make economic choices then why do people have children? Why do people volunteer at hospitals? Why do we help a fallen person to stand? Why do we love our Mothers, Family and Friends? Where is the economic profit in any of that?

In short, where is the economic profit IN DOING ANYTHING OF REAL WORTH?

<font color="red"> Chuck:� 4. Summary
a. The assertion that there are vast numbers of true Ams waiting to be tapped if only the PDGA catered to them with low entry fee, trophy only divisions is likely flawed.� </font>
It also happens to be an assertion I have never made. I am animatedly opposed to �low entry fee, trophy only divisions� being bandied about as if it is what I mean when I say �True Amateur Class�. It is also just part of the �Fear Game� WWCC amateurs and pros play in order to �CONFUSE� and �CLOUD� the very �REAL� and �CLEAR� issue at hand, namely:

THAT ORGANIZED DISC GOLF HAS NEITHER A PROFESSIONAL CLASSIFICATION NOR AN AMATEUR ONE!!!

We just don�t and no measure of twisted idea play or head buried in the sand trap will change that fact. Only opening our dam eyes, recognizing the fact and deciding to create �definition� where no meaningful definition has existed, will we get down to business and really start to move forward in any significant and tangible fashion.

<font color="red"> b. That a vast number of players remains to be tapped is not in question since we see them at courses and we know there are millions of school kids that might be hooked if only we reached out to them. </font>

Nothing, more than that sort of statement, clearly illustrates why disc golfers opposed to the creation of a true Amateur Class just don�t get it.

It is not the Professional Disc Golf Associations mandate or job to reach out and tap ignored or unknown groups of people. That is the direct work of local clubs. Any attempt by the PDGA to undertake such a task would be a complete and total disaster.

What IS the mandate and job of the PDGA is to create standards and the organizational structure that better allows local clubs and organizations to �Plug in� and �Become a Part� of organized disc golf and for them to go out and build the demographic of disc golf.

<font color="red"> c. Schools already have their �true amateur� system in place. Why reinvent the wheel when providing education and support to that existing system might be more productive thru initiatives like E.D.G.E. and Steam? </font>

E.D.G.E. and Steam have my full support, but what the Sam Hill are you talking about in reinventing the wheel? Seriously. Creating a proper classification for players generated via E.D.G.E. and Steam or intramural or community disc golf is EXACTLY the mandate of the PDGA, not some weird side issue.

<font color="red"> d. It�s more about value. The PDGA competition system should include a wide array of options for TDs to provide value to the widest array of potential players possible. </font>

And how does a true Amateur Classification conflict with any of that?

<font color="red"> e. Those who consider low entry fees with trophy prizes a better value than our current merch oriented am divisions have been overlooked and should be considered. I believe these players will enter low entry fee divisions primarily because they are a good value from their perspective and not primarily due to the purity of amateur competition. </font>

Again with this �low entry fees with trophy prizes� junk! That is not what is at issue AT ALL! That belittles what I am talking about to the point of making it a �poor/weak man�s classification� when that is THE FARTHEST THING FROM THE TRUTH!!!

A true Amateur Class based on the fundamental principle of �Competition for Competitions Sake� is the noblest of undertakings and the highest standards of sport and accomplishment. Just ask successful atheletes who have succeeded in amateur and professional sport which had deeper and more significant meaning to them, their amateur acheivements or their professional? (Unfortunately I wonder if any disc golfers can comprehend the sensation of success in either arena considering our lack of clear definition and over-reliance on "gambling".)

<font color="red"> f. Since these �budget� disc golf consumers are primarily interested in value and not amateur purity, there�s not a compelling reason to separate the budget players into separate divisions from the merch players.

That�s my take on it. Have at it Discussion junkies!�</font>

Well, fellow Discussion junky, I hope that you are at least able to reconsider some of your statements here. I know that you are smarter and more caring than this. I know that you have some understanding of altruism and service. I know that you have the vision to see beyond the end of your nose.

Note: This is a dialogue between longtime friends who have for years bounced and plowed ideas over each other. Do not mistake the tone for anything other than serious but respectful discussion and chiding. Other nitwits here may think that they are entitled to join in, you are not� now how you like that?

If the money that were used for prizes in events were used for things that made the event "BIG" as in side events that brought in galleries, more money spent on advertising, like commercials, radio ads, newspaper ads, signs all over the city(things that get the non-player their watching).Money spent on decent food, scoring booklets, a sweet looking awards stage etc etc etc Then I would choose the Trophy only tourney hands down over any prize payout tourney.

Let's face it people,so much is put into the players prizes that the majority of Disc Golf events are just trunk of the car run and little to no effort in making people feel like they are a part of something. Tournements almost always take the easy way out in getting players, and YES waiving large stacks of plastic in front of poeple's noses is the easy way out.


People want to be apart of something big. Cater to the players to make them feel important. Make the players remember the event for the rest of their life. Make them want to say " I was there!".



Well said.

Sounds like you've been talking to the creators of Fear Factor. Your comments match up pretty well with the apparent success of that show.

I propose that there are few true ams anywhere, in any sport.



i have to disagree with you and i wont even leave disc sports to tell you why you are wrong...
ultimate is played from the lowest levels of pick up games to sanctioned international events with out any money for the winners. there have been attemtps at prizing out for teams, but no one shows up. it is not about the money. it is about competition, period.

side note: the upa has over 19,000 current members.
the pdga page shows under 8,000.

i am not going to say that trophy only tournaments would work in the golf world, but as far as true ams in sports, they do exsist.

fritz



Thanks fritz! I knew my recollection of amateur sport and competition 5-12 grade Football, Basketball, Track and Summer Baseball, and including as an adult playing in three basketball leagues in Japan, not to mention ALL but the Japan Open for 4 years in Japan were not figments of my imagination.

What is gained via "Amateur Sport" is simply "NOT AVAILABLE" in pro or gambling league play. It just isn't. I thought most people knew this at a personal level...

i have to disagree with you and i wont even leave disc sports to tell you why you are wrong...



I said people make choices primarily based on value. I assume there are still entry fees to cover field reservations and admin expenses, and players come from long distances for some events. They have determined the value for their money, time and exercise are worth it as I originally stated. Paying even higher entry fees to generate payouts for teams isn't perceived as good of a value at this point. Still wrong?



Yup! Not even in the ball park.

I think the whole lack of divisonal definition in disc golf stems from a greater social conditioning that humans are experiencing over the past 20-30 years.

Everybody wants to know "what's in it for me?" Chuch illudes to this in his original post concerning what the players get for their money. (Granted there are alot of volunteers in the world who provide thier services for the greater good, but I feel they are unfortunately the vast minority).

We (humans) are socially conditioned to expect a return on our money, call it a side effect of capitalism. This is starting to blur over into our sports arenas. Forget about NBA, NFL, MBL, NHL those are true professional athletes who get paid by people who want to watch them play. I am talking about local tournaments in all sports which the entrants expect a reward for their money, and even more if they play well or win. We only have one tournament a year where there are spectators who pay to watch the players compete, that is USDGC. And those entry fees are not enough to give a decent payout to the feild.

Right or wrong this is the way our society now behaves, disc golf does not have a true professional class, and the only true amateurs this sport has are the "1 disc Charlies" that frequent the local courses and hang out with their friends.

If you think about it, even local doubles, singles and team leagues have an entry fee which all the players pay in to, and the winners reap the rewards. Right now the tournament players of all skill levels are nothing but casual gamblers playing for each others money. And we will remain this way until tournaments can pull in major corporate sponsorship and spectators to pay to watch the game.

But I will enjoy my casual gambling amongst my peers, for this is all I have right now, and I like taking their money. :D

Nick, you are Richard Head in that just because there is a payout in plastic, you assume that every am that has ever played in any PDGA sanctioned event ever, has only done so because they are counting on winning some of that plastic.

And you are wrong in that assumption.

I don't have a beef with the school sports system. I'm saying we should embrace it, support it, encourage it, just not duplicate it. I developed the SkillShot competition system adopted for use by E.D.G.E. and wrote their math curriculum. I ran what may have been the first Jr high DG league using handicapping in 1990. I pitched in Little League, lettered in football and track, won the Toledo H.S. chess individual and team titles, competed in 12 sports in college intramural leagues winning one title in horseshoes. I've played on company softball and tennis teams. I also did orienteering for about six years in the 80s before getting into disc golf. We would only win ribbons but then entry fees were also just $2.

I'd say I have an amateur sports background from which to comment. The school structure is there and it works as it is. We just need to tap it. It doesn't mean that structure makes sense to carry over into the adult world beyond schools. Adults are not constrained by the institutionalized strictures of the school system and will make value choices for the reasons stated before, which aren't just economic. The 'spirit of amateur competition' should probably be included but below the other three items.

I'm not hearing anyone saying, "If you offer a trophy-only option I'm not playing."...

thats only because i'm in texas. if you offered a trophy only event here, i would be the first to not show up. maybe thats cuz i can finish in the money in my usual set of divisions. if i had no chance of that, i might be more inclined to reward my mediocrity by paying a smaller entry fee and having no chance to snag a trophy.

Nick, you are Richard Head in that just because there is a payout in plastic, you assume that every am that has ever played in any PDGA sanctioned event ever, has only done so because they are counting on winning some of that plastic.

And you are wrong in that assumption.



Dear Mike Hunt,

I assume no such thing. Why would I when I more or less do not play for nor select events based on financial reward scenarios. I am sure that there are others like me out there, well not completely, who have a desire to compete within a true amateur classification ( and that does not mean among 5 low skill, impoverished, shy folk ), but the option is not entirely there. All there is in organized disc golf is paying in for a chance to win others pay in, the only difference is that you either pay alot to get a chance to win alot, or a little to win a little. There should be an option to just "win".

I'm not sure what is so strange about that idea...

Sincerely,
Ben Dover

why is there this need to compete? who are you proving yourself to?

The answer should be yourself

I don't have a beef with the school sports system. I'm saying we should embrace it, support it, encourage it, just not duplicate it. I developed the SkillShot competition system adopted for use by E.D.G.E. and wrote their math curriculum. I ran what may have been the first Jr high DG league using handicapping in 1990. I pitched in Little League, lettered in football and track, won the Toledo H.S. chess individual and team titles, competed in 12 sports in college intramural leagues winning one title in horseshoes. I've played on company softball and tennis teams. I also did orienteering for about six years in the 80s before getting into disc golf. We would only win ribbons but then entry fees were also just $2.

I'd say I have an amateur sports background from which to comment. The school structure is there and it works as it is. We just need to tap it. It doesn't mean that structure makes sense to carry over into the adult world beyond schools. Adults are not constrained by the institutionalized strictures of the school system and will make value choices for the reasons stated before, which aren't just economic. The 'spirit of amateur competition' should probably be included but below the other three items.



So you are saying that you have participated and understand adult amateurism but feel that it is not necessary in disc golf because it is in our schools already?

A) It isn't in our schools.
B) There certainly is a need for it in adult disc golf. I know, I want it.

PS: I coached a High School Disc Golf Team in 1987-88 at West Nottingham Academy in Rising Sun MD. The school was a private boarding school built on an old ball golf course. I had 12 students (much to the chagrin of the Baseball and Track Coaches) and I had them design the course. It was killer! We'd play a round every day and once a week drive to a course in DE. No other schools had a team, and there was no way in God's Green Earth I was going to take them to a PDGA (I liked my job too much).

I have a question for you Chuck. I think it is pretty straight forward.

How many folks do you think there currently are in PDGA disc golf who play solely for profit? I mean to make a profit over to enjoy the day out with buddies? To make a living rather than travel to meet other folks that love disc golf?

Isn't it true that there are probably more "True Ams" even with no where to compete in PDGA disc golf, than there are "True Professionals"?

Why do we seem to cater EVERYTHING towards the tiniest of groups and not the group that has the most potential for exponential growth?

Is it because it is already covered by schools?

I'm not hearing anyone saying, "If you offer a trophy-only option I'm not playing."...

thats only because i'm in texas. if you offered a trophy only event here, i would be the first to not show up. maybe thats cuz i can finish in the money in my usual set of divisions. if i had no chance of that, i might be more inclined to reward my mediocrity by paying a smaller entry fee and having no chance to snag a trophy.



Other than IOS #6 (www.brasscash.com), our IOS events only offer the option of true-am trophy only. Most people opt to play for prizes.

There should be an option to just "win".

I'm not sure what is so strange about that idea...


Like a lot of people suggested to you yesterday, last week, last month, last year, 2 years ago, and more.....make it so! You could be the savior of disc golf by bringing the masses to tournament play.

But please do a proof of concept (ie, run some tourneys and bring in a ton of True Ams that are waiting in the wings) before you insist on scrapping the system that has evolved to service the people who are actually making the effort right now to go and play in disc golf tourneys.

This thread is a lot easier to read if you just skip all of Nick's posts. They all say the same thing he's been saying about True Am's for a while.

When will you try this out Nick? I like the theory but I'd have to agree that most people aren't going to travel hours to pay $10-$20 to play a trophy-only tournament.

But please do a proof of concept (ie, run some tourneys and bring in a ton of True Ams that are waiting in the wings) before you insist on scrapping the system that has evolved to service the people who are actually making the effort right now to go and play in disc golf tourneys.



Nick doesnt listen at all!!!!!!! Except to the voices in hit head which obviously dont know what they are talking about. So Ill try and talk to Nicks head voices. <font size=5> HEY HEAD VOICES TELL THAT NICK GUY HE NEEDS TO PUT UP SOME OF HIS OWN TIME AND DO A FIELD STUDY BUT UNTILL THEN NO ONE CARES!!!!!!!!!!!!!</font>

i have to disagree with you and i wont even leave disc sports to tell you why you are wrong...



I said people make choices primarily based on value. I assume there are still entry fees to cover field reservations and admin expenses, and players come from long distances for some events. They have determined the value for their money, time and exercise are worth it as I originally stated. Paying even higher entry fees to generate payouts for teams isn't perceived as good of a value at this point. Still wrong?



yes, people travel to compete. however, even when it was all 3rd party money to give the winners, the turn out was lame...
so yes, still wrong.

second of all, i really do not understand your logic. you seemed to have painted this picture that if someone gets something of value, they are not an amatuer anymore ? so if i go to an ultimate tournament, pay my portion of the entrance fee, have fun (value), get some excersize (value), drink a few beers provided by the tournament (value), i am now a professional ultimate player ?

i guess when i eat a subway sandwich, i am a professional eater. and when i drive to work, i am a professional driver.
under normal curcumstances i would not be so worried about flawed logic, but i think you mentioned that you were a teacher, yikes ~!

There should be an option to just "win".

I'm not sure what is so strange about that idea...


Like a lot of people suggested to you yesterday, last week, last month, last year, 2 years ago, and more.....make it so! You could be the savior of disc golf by bringing the masses to tournament play.

<font color="blue"> Rhett, I fully plan on it, but I hope that you as an organizer would agree that it is advisable to have the support of the governing body prior to taking on something as strange and alien as creating an Amateur Class where none has ever existed. Every event I have ever run has been based on the principle of entry fee being just that, entry fee, not a wager. That�s why even for a B Tier with $3,800 added cash the entry fee was only $25 regardless of division. I have no reservations about leading the way, but I see it as important that the governing body of organized disc golf, if not directly supportive, at least acknowledge and provide a place at the table for such competition within our competitive structure. I will begin regardless. </font>

But please do a proof of concept (ie, run some tourneys and bring in a ton of True Ams that are waiting in the wings) before you insist on scrapping the system that has evolved to service the people who are actually making the effort right now to go and play in disc golf tourneys.


<font color="blue"> I am not talking about scrapping the system at all. You want to strike fear into the hearts of who we currently call amateurs by saying the sky will fall, when it will not fall at all; moreover if a true amateur class is established and gains any success at all what we currently call amateurs as well as what we currently call professionals will only benefit.

The cash and prize divisions will go on exactly as before gambling for each other�s entry fees and whatever sponsorship can be scrounged up. TDs will not be forced to offer any divisions or classifications, which is exactly the way it is now.

The difference Rhett, will be that a TD or local club would be able to �choose� to run a true amateur event. Events based solely on the concepts and principles upon which traditional amateur sport has always been run. With a classification and divisions completely separate from what we currently offer. Open to and embraced by educational (hopefully already engaged in E.D.G.E. and Steam) and community groups and clubs. Devoid of the fundamental influence of our current classification and divisional that only playing for profit in the form of either prizes or cash based on other competitors entry fees. Not a place for Cash or Prize PDGA tournament players AT ALL. In fact they would not be permitted, by PDGA classification system standards, to compete at such events. Nor would amateurs be permitted to compete at the cash or prize events, except under special conditions which would clearly maintain their amateur principles and status.

Again, the only thing our current competitive system would have to relinquish is the word �Amateur�. A word, arguably, they have never had a true claim to in the first place.

What exactly is so threatening about the PDGA delineating this new classification? What would be the cost to them in setting this new standard within our competition structure? What skin off your back would it be as a TD? Or off some for profit players back? How many current participants would you lose to such a classification of players?

More importantly how many participants would you possibly gain if such a classification were endorsed, created and nurtured?

I truly fail to see where there is anything to lose in its creation. There is only upside. Can you show me how it would be detrimental to your individual efforts or to the main goals of the Professional Disc Golf Association?</font>

I have no reservations about leading the way, but I see it as important that the governing body of organized disc golf, if not directly supportive, at least acknowledge and provide a place at the table for such competition within our competitive structure. I will begin regardless.




I think the only way this sport is going to go anywhere is if people just stop talking about how sweet something would be and they just DO IT!!!!!! This may sound horrible or bad or antt PDGA but seriously WHO REALLY CARES if the PDGA is behind you or not. If its a good idea and its works then who cares about the PDGA. If you run a smooth event with a great atmosphere and all the right stuff people will show up weather its PDGA sanctioned or not. People go to tournaments for these reasons

How well the tournament is run
The kind and amount of competition
Locationg
PAYOUT!!!!!!!!!
Players Packs and the course that the tournament is held on. I dont base what tournaments I play on if they are PDGA sanctioned or not. I go where the TDs do a great job and where I know there will be good competition and where i know ill get my moneys worth.

Pure and simple if you start and run something better then the PDGA the players will play that and abandon the PDGA but untill someone does that we are all stuck in the PDGA whining and crying about how we wish things were different :eek:

I dont know about you guys but to run a good business and to make money your going to have to [*****] SOME PEOPLE OFF!!!!! Its just the facts of life. We need to STOP catering the the whiners and the people who are quiting the sport and start catering the the people who are on the competitive circuit right now and people who are on their way into the sport.

If your going to quit playing disc golf. Then quit. WHO CARES. Lets not try to bring back the people who quit lets try and bring in NEW people because there will always be an endless supply of people we can bring into the sport. Who cares about the people who quit. If they wanted to play the sport THEY WOULD!!!!!!!!

With that being said.

<font size=5> Nick you need to either PUT UP or SHUT UP!!!!!!!</font>

We all know what you think and how you feel now we NEED to see that you have proof and facts to back up how you feel.

Again, the only thing our current competitive system would have to relinquish is the word �Amateur�. A word, arguably, they have never had a true claim to in the first place.



Why do you need the name ? The little league does not use the name amateur. From what I remember non of the "true" amateur sports use the term "amateur" to describe any of their divisions. Leave the name alone, and build an entire system that involvement in defines you as a true amateur and the name is not required. Go off and have fun with it because you are determined that no one that is currently involved in competitive DG should ever be involved in your system. Have fun with that and let us know how it goes.

Steve, don't think I didn't notice that you carefully skirted every point I raised.

I understand that you only know me from this discussion board, so you don't really know what I do or do not do for disc golf, nor do I you. So without going into great detail I will simply say that I "put up" quite a bit for disc golf, perhaps not as much as some and perhaps more than others.

That is besides the point here, where we are "discussing" whether there is a need for the PDGA, our sanctioning body, charged with setting standards and leading us towards the successful execution of our stated and accepted goals, to create a newly defined amateur classification.

I have presented my reasons for why it is needed, Chuck his reasons for why it is not needed, and I await Rhett's reasons one way or the other. That I should just "do it" without the PDGA is not a reason "against" or "for" the creation of a newly defined amateur class.

So, in short, Steve, I will not stop discussing it, and I will undertake disc golf projects on my own schedule. As I said, I don't know what you do for disc golf, but when I do something I start from the position of gathering support, without it you will have a much more difficult time with whatever you are trying to get done. The support, in this case, is simply that the PDGA redefine amateur competition to be more in line with the rest of amateur sport and its traditional meaning. Whether this effects the Cash or Prize classes is secondary, and as I have said I do not see it being detrimental in any way.

I'm willing to discuss this with you Steve, but if I don't tell you what to do then please extend me the same courtesy.

You may continue to discuss this topic, but if you maintain an exclusive nature where current or future PDGA sanctioned event participants are excluded from the option of competing within the structure you wish to define, why should the PDGA be involved ?

Oh yeah, you want the PDGA to not use the word Amateur so you will have exclusive rights to it.

I disagree with the need for the term amateur, I think it should ramain where it is. As long as there is a wall between the two types of competition that can not be crossed, you have lost all of my support. I think it is a great idea that could work, but don't see it as an exclusive club.

Go off and have fun with it because you are determined that no one that is currently involved in competitive DG should ever be involved in your system.



Gary,

I am surprised at you. That is a complete and total misrepresentation of what I said and mean. Certainly there are players within our current system that yearn for an organized amateur option. HERE I AM! And certainly there are Tournament Directors and organizers that see a need for an organized amateur option (i.e. E.D.G.E., Stream, special divisions and entry fee options at PDGAs, etc.).

An official classification to rally behind sanctioned and included within our competitive structure would be a first step or at least a strong signal that the PDGA understands the situation and supports developers of this new and potentially revolutionary demographic of disc golfers.

You may continue to discuss this topic, but if you maintain an exclusive nature where current or future PDGA sanctioned event participants are excluded from the option of competing within the structure you wish to define, why should the PDGA be involved ?

Oh yeah, you want the PDGA to not use the word Amateur so you will have exclusive rights to it.

I disagree with the need for the term amateur, I think it should ramain where it is. As long as there is a wall between the two types of competition that can not be crossed, you have lost all of my support. I think it is a great idea that could work, but don't see it as an exclusive club.



Somewhere we have not communicated Gary. The line can and will be crossed, as it is in every other sport, the point is that without the line at all (which certainly is the case with Chuck's Ratings Based System and now with the option for pros to play in ams and ams to play in pros) we have the huge dysfunction we currently are experiencing.

Amateurs will in some cases become prize or cash class players, of that there is no doubt. Some, in fact, the vast majority will not, if trends in other sports are applicable, and I think they are.

The thing is, that our Amateur Class can not just be a dumping ground for disaffected pros too poor, lacking the confidence, or just wanting a break from the type of competition they chose to be a part of (though right now no one has any choice because that IS the only choice).

The Amateur Class has got to be protected at all costs from the forces that would corrupt it and try to exploit it. It will yield gigantic dividends, just look at other sports for Pete�s sake, for the prize and cash classifications.

Did any of you see that Enterprise episode where Captain Archer got his brain infected with parasites that normally live outside normal space-time and the effect of that was that he could not form any new memories? Every day he has the same bright idea for a modification to the warp drive that they actually implemented the first time he had that idea. Something I was reading here reminded me of that.

Did any of you see that Enterprise episode where Captain Archer got his brain infected with parasites that normally live outside normal space-time and the effect of that was that he could not form any new memories? Every day he has the same bright idea for a modification to the warp drive that they actually implemented the first time he had that idea. Something I was reading here reminded me of that.



You give Trekkies a bad name Bruce. Aren't you missing your Limbaugh show?

I think its a good idea to have trophy only for the people that want the competition but dont want the exspence but IMO that is what leagues and minis are there for.

I can tell you right now that the crowd you will be catering too is the crowd who can no longer compete in the prize division or people who have played it and dont like it for one reason or another. I highly doubt that you will be attracting NEWBIES to your tournaments because why should they go to your trophy only tournament when they can just play their buddies at the local course for 5 bucks a man. I know if it was me and I had a choice between me and 5 of my buddies playing for 5 bucks a piece or a local trophy only tournament. Id say 99 out of a hundred times im going to go play with my buddies because I dont really get anything out of playing the trophy only tournament. I dont think the competition is as intense and I dont really think the atmosphere is the same. I have a perfect example of a trophy only tournament that I DID play.

Bruce Brakel ran our bag tags last year and he wanted to sanction the Tag Finals so he did a 5 dollar sanctioned trophy only tournament for our tag finals. The ONLY reason I went was because it was out Tag Finals. If it was just a trophy only tournament I would not have attended unless maybe it was a qualifyer for a more prestigous tournament. Mind you the course it was held on is literally 90 seconds from my house. If i hit the light I can make it from my garage to the course in 90 seconds and I would not attend a trophy only tournament there.

Back to the trophy only qualifyers though. You could run a series of trophy only qualifyers to get into the bigger tournaments. That way the people who want to play for trophy only can play and just play for trophys and what not and the people who want to QUALIFY for a plastic prize tournament can do so. This would make the competition and atmosphere a litte more fierce in my opinion but I just dont think trophy only tournaments will have any kind of turn out.

I say make some flyers for a couple trophy only tournaments run the tournaments and see who shows up??? That the only way your really going to know if there is a need for it or not and the PDGA doesnt really need to be involved anyway. People who want to play trophy only prolly dont care about ratings or national points or the number of tournaments that they play anyway and as of right now thats pretty much the only thing that sanctioning gives you. So I say save the sanctioning fees and run a couple of unsanctioned tournaments that are trophy only and see what happens.

In my opinion the future of disc golf is going to end up being unsanctioned tournaments. I have my reasons behind this and will not disclose them because I appreciate what the PDGA does for us and I dont want to bash them anymore then I already have. They do great things for us but I just dont see them as the future of disc golf.

I was just getting tired of saying, "If you want to run a tournament that pays out in player packs, meals and trophies only, you already can. If you want to sanction it you can." I suppose if you want to exclude all current PDGA members because they are not true amateurs you can do that to, but good luck finding players.

Madeline Bertrand Park in Niles, Michigan, is running a trophy-and-lunch-only this Saturday, tomorrow. Unsanctioned. PDGA members are welcome. They have a lunchtime bump rule that might take you by surprise [bagger!] but otherwise it is played by PDGA rules. MB is a fun, short, Ed Headrick designed course. Deuce or die, 90% Roc 'n' Aviar.

And they will have about 50 players. They always do.

Amateurs will in some cases become prize or cash class players, of that there is no doubt. Some, in fact, the vast majority will not, if trends in other sports are applicable, and I think they are.

The thing is, that our Amateur Class can not just be a dumping ground for disaffected pros too poor, lacking the confidence, or just wanting a break from the type of competition they chose to be a part of



That is a blanket statement that is simply not true.

After college I played on a men's league soccer team for a while. True amatuerism - all we paid for was $45 per team per game for a referee. We had several professional (semi-pro, but players who had derived an income from the sport) in the league. They were welcomed and embraced to play on our teams during their off seasons. The highlight of that league for me was scoring a hat trick on a pro goalie.

Playing in the "dumping ground" of pro's made the experience much more fun and rewarding.

In my opinion the future of disc golf is going to end up being unsanctioned tournaments. I have my reasons behind this and will not disclose them because I appreciate what the PDGA does for us and I dont want to bash them anymore then I already have. They do great things for us but I just dont see them as the future of disc golf.



Then my challenge to you is to MAKE the PDGA the future of disc golf. Weren't you just telling me to put up or shut up? Aren't you doing exactly what you accused me of doing by withholding or avoiding getting your hands dirty?

What is the alternative? Little disc golf kingdoms all doing their own thing? Already been there, it doesn't work. Starting an entirely new worldwide organization? Great! You first. I'll be the first to pat you on the back when you succeed.

No, if you are serious, if you are committed, if you are ready to "Put Up" as you say it, then you will put your lot in with the rest of us. In Texas Hold'em they call it "All In". When you do that, then I'll take what you say seriously. Short of that I appreciate your ideas, but understand that the source of those ideas are either sitting safely on the fence or completely outside the fence.

...People who want to play trophy only prolly dont care about ratings or national points or the number of tournaments that they play anyway...



Most of our trophy only players are playing for the rating, points and competition. Usually they already have plenty of plastic and just want to save the money for something else. I'm not sure who you are talking to, but that's what I'm hearing from actual trophy-only/ true-am players.

I don't see where there is a lack of communication. I have repeatedly said my problem with your definition was the hard line between the "Prize" classes and your "True Amateur" classes. You have repeatedly said that "Prize" class players would not be allowed to compete in your divisions. Also that if someone in your amateur divisions competed in a "Prize" class event, they would no longer be allowed to compete in the amateur divisions. I have phrased it different ways on several threads, but have always gotten the same response. The true amateurs must be protected at all costs from the greedy prize class players.

That is more or less my point. I see the opportunity for league/team play organized by academic organizations and parks & rec departments as the logical focus of a true amateur structure. All of the teams involved will be trying to bring in ringers and most teams will have them. I can see limiting the number of players allowed to compete on a team in each competitive event to be based on ratings, but not a blanket restriction of all PDGA prize class players (amateur or pro).

Every coorporate softball team looks for employees with college or higher experience, why should this be different? organize the teams with a cap on players at certain ratings, or have a team total rating cap that can not be crossed (6 players with a total rating less than 5200 pts).

I don't think hard restrictions are needed between the 2 structures, the lack of incentives (for greedy prize class players) should be enough protection.

Bruce, if you are getting tired of it, then perhaps you are approaching the breaking point of being able to hear what I have been saying all along; that "amateur" is and should be more than just a label slapped on a group of players for no significant or useful to the completion of our goals reason. That "NOTHING" need change for folks running and participating in cash/prize events. That what is proposed is the option to run a new kind of event for a new kind of player. To include this option in our competitive structure.

If you say none of the current players (in your experience with low-entry fee trophy only events) are interested in such an option, then I say that that is neither a problem nor a surprise! Of course they don't chose that option. But it proves nothing as concerns the need for a truer amateur classification.

I do not tire of what I see as a vital issue facing organized disc golf, if that annoys you, oh well. Your annoyance has little to do with this topic or our sports need for an amateur classification.

No, if you are serious, if you are committed, if you are ready to "Put Up" as you say it, then you will put your lot in with the rest of us. In Texas Hold'em they call it "All In". When you do that, then I'll take what you say seriously. Short of that I appreciate your ideas, but understand that the source of those ideas are either sitting safely on the fence or completely outside the fence.

Is Nick actually telling someone here that words are not enough, that you must actually take action instead of just running your mouth over and over and over and over and over and over, ad nauseum, before he will take them seriously??

Hmmm.. I find this somewhat ironic. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

In my opinion the future of disc golf is going to end up being unsanctioned tournaments. I have my reasons behind this and will not disclose them because I appreciate what the PDGA does for us and I dont want to bash them anymore then I already have. They do great things for us but I just dont see them as the future of disc golf.



Come on. Please. I'm curious. I really want to know why these unsanctioned tournies will be so attractive.

By the way, the excuse about not wanting to criticize the PDGA is weak. Isn't that what this board is for? :p

I was just getting tired of saying, "If you want to run a tournament that pays out in player packs, meals and trophies only, you already can. If you want to sanction it you can." I suppose if you want to exclude all current PDGA members because they are not true amateurs you can do that to, but good luck finding players.


That was worth repeating. It is a very nice summary. Nick, you can run your formats right now with full PDGA sanctioning. Well, except for the part about excluding all the greedy WNCC "prize-pros".

i guess i could wax poetic about my feelings on the topic, but instead ill post the flyer for the event I'm running in a week. IMO... if you want to attract AM's, you can. You just have to put the work in to create something they want to be at. As I write this, we're 3 people away from having a full 90-player field. Pre-reg'd.

http://www.ravaged.net/act/pdgaActFlyer.jpg

I think the fact that players receive 3 Innova discs in their player packs for $10 entry fee takes it out of Nick's definition of true Am and places it squarely in my value based orientation.

I don't see where there is a lack of communication. I have repeatedly said my problem with your definition was the hard line between the "Prize" classes and your "True Amateur" classes. You have repeatedly said that "Prize" class players would not be allowed to compete in your divisions. Also that if someone in your amateur divisions competed in a "Prize" class event, they would no longer be allowed to compete in the amateur divisions. I have phrased it different ways on several threads, but have always gotten the same response. The true amateurs must be protected at all costs from the greedy prize class players.



First of all, Gary, I do not, nor have I ever categorized current Cash or Prize players as �greedy�. Some may well be, but that has nothing to do with this discussion nor my point about a need for a true amateur classification for organized disc golf.

The point is this; currently in organized disc golf there is only one official, sanctioned, and included classification within disc golf, call it �Professional�, �For Profit�, Prize/Cash�, �Carney/Gambler�, or what we currently call it �Professional/Amateur�, it is founded on the principle of wagering your entry fee against others in the hopes of playing well enough within your division to receive a payout based on other players entry fees and any sponsorship the organizers manage to dig up. That is it. The motivation is inherent in the structure and execution of the competitions. There is no where to compete solely with players motivated to compete for competitions sake, devoid of the gambling or for profit motivation. NO WHERE! Low entry fee trophy only is not an answer to this, because if for profit players are allowed to enter these new divisions, just because they don�t have enough money or confidence to compete in their regular for profit classification/division, does not make them a True Amateur! Being a True Amateur is not some spur of the moment choice like deciding which division gives you the best chance of cashing, it is a �commitment� founded on �principles� and �motivated� by pure and unclouded love of sport and competition.

And it is something �worth protecting� (once created).

Now, Gary, if you want to have an escape hatch for professional disc golfers suddenly lacking cash or confidence, by all and any means I do not want to put up any blockades to you doing so, just for Pete�s sake don�t use it as a substantiation to deny those who would choose a more pure amateur experience the right to form and protect their competitions from corruption. And don�t ask them to recognize these wayward players as �True Amateurs�.

�Delineation� is precisely what our Pro/Am Competitive Structure lacks and it is precisely the cause of most of the conflict that exists within our Competitive Structure.

Perhaps you are correct that it will not be easy to keep professionals out of amateur competition, but anything worth doing is usually difficult, isn�t it?

Finally, Gary, my question to you is this: What is the down side if what I propose is enacted for you, your events and participants in the events you run? If I run an event, based on this new classification, and players from the prize and cash divisions are not permitted to compete, but only people meeting the new amateur classification status criteria, what harm has been done to organized disc golf? How is this detrimental to prize and cash division players and organizers? Considering that the amateur class is a �one-way� classification, meaning that the only option is to turn professional, don�t you think that the cash and prize divisions would benefit greatly from a successful amateur class?

I am still trying to understand the threat this new classification supposedly presents to the existing divisions.

No, if you are serious, if you are committed, if you are ready to "Put Up" as you say it, then you will put your lot in with the rest of us. In Texas Hold'em they call it "All In". When you do that, then I'll take what you say seriously. Short of that I appreciate your ideas, but understand that the source of those ideas are either sitting safely on the fence or completely outside the fence.

Is Nick actually telling someone here that words are not enough, that you must actually take action instead of just running your mouth over and over and over and over and over and over, ad nauseum, before he will take them seriously??

Hmmm.. I find this somewhat ironic. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif



Then you obviously don't know me at all either Ryan.

Amateurs will in some cases become prize or cash class players, of that there is no doubt. Some, in fact, the vast majority will not, if trends in other sports are applicable, and I think they are.

The thing is, that our Amateur Class can not just be a dumping ground for disaffected pros too poor, lacking the confidence, or just wanting a break from the type of competition they chose to be a part of



That is a blanket statement that is simply not true.

After college I played on a men's league soccer team for a while. True amatuerism - all we paid for was $45 per team per game for a referee. We had several professional (semi-pro, but players who had derived an income from the sport) in the league. They were welcomed and embraced to play on our teams during their off seasons. The highlight of that league for me was scoring a hat trick on a pro goalie.

Playing in the "dumping ground" of pro's made the experience much more fun and rewarding.



Fine, then make our prize divisions the dumping grounds. Oh, that's right, we already have...

You have created some catch all criteria, apply it to a real amateur format, and imply that it justifies our present structure? :D

The fact I described the players as "greedy prize players" has nothing to do with the fact you didn't. It was just a way of describing them apart from the "true" amateurs.

I am glad you cleared up the fact there was no communication breakdown. I have nothing to fear from a strict delineation between a new class of player except for the chance to compete in it. What I see as the main problem is that players in that new class won't be able to compete on the dark side without losing eligibility to play in the enlightened side.

That along with the fact that there has not been a "true amateur" opportunity for current players to choose so many that would be interested in playing in the new divisions have already lost their eligibility without ever really making the choice to do so.

I think the fact that players receive 3 Innova discs in their player packs for $10 entry fee takes it out of Nick's definition of true Am and places it squarely in my value based orientation.



I would expect you to look at it that way Chuck, but it is not necessary to. I have never said, nor believed, that true amateur competitions be devoid of amenities; as an organizer I will do everything in my power to secure as much and as high quality sponsorship as I am able to enhance the experience of my events.

The difference is that all participants will "KNOW" going in that none of the sponsorship will be awarded according to performance other than trophies and such.

I forsee huge budgets for some of these events, filled with services and amenities. Imagine if all of the $$$ that went into the payouts at the USDGC went intead to enhancing the participants experience? My understanding is that it is already off the hook, imagine another $20,000 going into it!?! Now expand the potential participants times 1,000 or more. Potential for marketing? Think a few large sponsors would be interested?
At the same time, amateur events could be run on a shoe string.

When the primary "REWARD" is the experience itself all the junk is put in it's proper perspective; for true amateurs at least.

Oh, by the way. I think while a true amateur division is needed, Nick's system is flawed, because it avoids the tough decision. There is no need for a true am structure, a pro structure and the fool-ourselves-into-calling-it-am merch structure. Just do the dirty work, remove the diseased structure and move forward with a system that makes sense and is a worthy creation of a Professional Disc Golf Association.

If those true Ams can have lots of amenities at their events like 3 discs that equal more than their entry fee, then we're already there. We'll just coach our TDs to inform our amateurs that one of their 'amenities' will be prizes for the amateurs that do particularly well at the event. :D

The fact I described the players as "greedy prize players" has nothing to do with the fact you didn't. It was just a way of describing them apart from the "true" amateurs.



Fair enough Gary, however it is not useful in pointing out the actual distinction which is motivation, and the opposite motivation of amateur altruistic competition for competitions sake is not �greed�, it is simply not to solely compete for competitions sake.


I am glad you cleared up the fact there was no communication breakdown. I have nothing to fear from a strict delineation between a new class of player except for the chance to compete in it. What I see as the main problem is that players in that new class won't be able to compete on the dark side without losing eligibility to play in the enlightened side.

That along with the fact that there has not been a "true amateur" opportunity for current players to choose so many that would be interested in playing in the new divisions have already lost their eligibility without ever really making the choice to do so.



I hear you, and this concerns me too. I would give some very serious consideration to wanting to compete in this new classification, if it is ever created. I suspect, though do not know, that if an open door period were created for existing Prize/Cash players to move to this new classification, that the number of players that actually went through that door would be very minimal. I would support such a period, even having it last years up until the new classification has a chance to get its legs under itself (because I consider the people as the main draw to organized disc golf for me and I suspect deep down for most PDGA Members out there, more so than the payouts, so if no Amateur Events or Championships were offered in the first year or two, it wouldn�t be fair to have the cut off date before players and TDs had a chance to test out the waters).

So I am willing for a time, for there to be a mix of Cash/Prize within this newly defined classification, but only as a clearly and precisely defined open-door period and not as a permanent policy. I think I have been quite clear about why I feel this way. Besides, I don�t want this classification to be yet another escape hatch for disenfranchised Cash/Pro players when it has been conceived and designed to bring an entirely NEW and DIFFERENT disc golf demographic into organized disc golf, otherwise a similar malaise may set in with the same 5 people always winning at every event (but perhaps I am projecting a cash/prize mindset with that�).

If those true Ams can have lots of amenities at their events like 3 discs that equal more than their entry fee, then we're already there. We'll just coach our TDs to inform our amateurs that one of their 'amenities' will be prizes for the amateurs that do particularly well at the event. :D



<font color="green"> The difference is that all participants will "KNOW" going in that none of the sponsorship will be awarded according to performance other than trophies and such. </font>

Oh, by the way. I think while a true amateur division is needed, Nick's system is flawed, because it avoids the tough decision. There is no need for a true am structure, a pro structure and the fool-ourselves-into-calling-it-am merch structure. Just do the dirty work, remove the diseased structure and move forward with a system that makes sense and is a worthy creation of a Professional Disc Golf Association.



And what would that "dirty work" be James?

I do not make light of the progress made in the last 5 years or so. We have done ourselves proud in my opinion in testing, building and implementing. Our competitive structure is better than it has ever been in our post-natal era. What I am talking about is taking it to the next step in our evolution.

I can say with confidence that there is zero percent chance of the PDGA throwing out our current competitive structure and starting from scratch. It would be an immeasurable mistake.

It's fine that you disagree, I openly invite you to make your proposal. I'm sure everyone would gladly offer their feedback... ;)

The dirty work is removing the crack from the merch class. My proposal? I've described it way too many times on this board. The feedback ranges from yawn to ignore and everywhere inbetween. :D

I just repeat it every once in a while to perturb Chuck. ;)

Crack for the merchers helps supply the crack for the pros. Just like Nick prefers a clean break from the merchers, I would encourage the pros who feel that the evolving PDGA structure undermines the pursuit of excellence to consider forming their own elite tour organization ala PGA. It's apparent the PDGA and its TDs haven't been doing an adequate job pursuing all of that sponsorship money ripe for the plucking and the adoring fans who will pay to watch that excellence.

Crack for the merchers helps supply the crack for the pros. Just like Nick prefers a clean break from the merchers, I would encourage the pros who feel that the evolving PDGA structure undermines the pursuit of excellence to consider forming their own elite tour organization ala PGA. It's apparent the PDGA and its TDs haven't been doing an adequate job pursuing all of that sponsorship money ripe for the plucking and the adoring fans who will pay to watch that excellence.



And the Prize Class attracts sponsorship and adoring fans?

Puchyah!

And the Prize Class attracts sponsorship and adoring fans?



I didn't say that it did. But excellence hasn't either.

But the Prize Class does attract players...

Nick, you still don't see my point (at least you haven't addressed it directly). While I would like to play in this structure, I think the direction the door needs to remain open is for players that start in the new classification to be able to dabble in the older system without losing their ability to continue to compete in the new system.

That is my problem with the system. I don't see it being dominated by disenfranchised pros because the challenge and rewards are not there for them. I don't even see it as a place where the top level advanced players would be playing very often. Maybe it should be set up as a handicap system to eliminate the ability of those players to dominate at all. I know when our club went to handicapped play, the top players had a very hard time winning.

When our club went to handicapped play, the top players just stopped playing both pros and top advanced. All that was left were the non-tournament players and the league fell apart. The newer players wanted to play with and learn from the top players, and the top players were tired of people "beating" the handicap system after their first few weeks of play. It ended up being lose lose for everyone. :(

Nick, you still don't see my point (at least you haven't addressed it directly). While I would like to play in this structure, I think the direction the door needs to remain open is for players that start in the new classification to be able to dabble in the older system without losing their ability to continue to compete in the new system.

That is my problem with the system. I don't see it being dominated by disenfranchised pros because the challenge and rewards are not there for them. I don't even see it as a place where the top level advanced players would be playing very often. Maybe it should be set up as a handicap system to eliminate the ability of those players to dominate at all. I know when our club went to handicapped play, the top players had a very hard time winning.



How about Amateur Majors like League, State, National and World Championships? Would Kenny and Barry be able to play in them? How about Middlecamp(sp?) or other top advanced players?

Perhaps that it is that you don't like the idea of not having an Amateur Nationals or Worlds where you are not invited as a prize player, perhaps right? That is what things like the Mid-Nationals will replace...

Which point have I not addressed directly? That ams should be able to compete and win prizes and cash in the prize and cash divisions and prize and cash players should be able to compete in the am divisions?

I'm not sure how much clearer or direct I can be in answering that question, how about this: "N" and "O". That is what is essentially messing up our current competitive system and exactly why I want an amateur class. As stated I am open to the idea of a longer open door period but not a permanent open door.

When our club went to handicapped play, the top players just stopped playing both pros and top advanced. All that was left were the non-tournament players and the league fell apart. The newer players wanted to play with and learn from the top players, and the top players were tired of people "beating" the handicap system after their first few weeks of play. It ended up being lose lose for everyone. :(



Interesting, though I am not sure what it has to do with this topic.

It is natural for players to want to play with the best available players in order to improve their games. Why lower skill players want to play with higher skill players and why higher skill players do not want to play with lower skill players.

If you want to play with better players then pay the entry fee for the division the best players play in and play with them, pretty simple. If not, then don't, but don't expect our competitive system to give you free access to them. (All outside this topic.)

A poor handicapping system leads to those problems. Better players always fare better overall than higher handicap players if it's done properly.

On the other hand, the most succesful format we've found is to have two divisions at the league. One uses scratch scores and the other uses handicapped scores. Typically, the better players play scratch and the others play handicap and everyone seems happy.

Actually it is a difference at the most basic level. I don't see a true amateur system working without scholastic or rec dept involvement. Both of those would probably be done in team formats. The team would have to meet eligibility standards and that could be by PDGA classification (1 > 950, 2 > 900, 3 < 900) or age or something else.

You are describing individual competition and I just don't see that having the dramatic drawing power you are describing.

The Amateur Class has got to be protected at all costs from the forces that would corrupt it and try to exploit it. It will yield gigantic dividends, just look at other sports for Pete�s sake, for the prize and cash classifications.



So, Nick, you eschew the Olympic movement as corrupt and exploitative, because most every truly World Class AMATEUR athlete has some sort of sponsorship arrangement, whereby they are paid a salary by Home Depot, ExxonMobil, or another corportation, so they can train and compete, and still live? What about the bonuses that countries give to athletes for bringing home Gold, Silver, and Bronze? What about the expenses paid by national sports federations to keep the athletes out on the road at so-called amateur competitions?

Each of these sports has HUGE grassroots followings that play competitively on local and regional bases (that's the plural of basis, before someone corrects me), without much "corruption" of the amateur notion. If you asked 100 people on the street the difference between amateur and professional, I bet 85 of them would say, in some form, that the professional makes a living at it, and the amateur doesn't. Your puritanical definition of what a "true" amateur is just doesn't compute with the average person.

I'm not at all opposed to your promotion of low entry fee, trophy only competition for those that may choose to play such. But until you can convince me, by running a series of D-Tier events with just those requirements, that you have a player base that warrants creating a whole new class of competition, I'm skeptical. And please leave EDGE out of this. We are fully aware of eligibility standards and other scholastice requirements for competion and will ensure that any competitions we hold will meet such. These may or may not meet your narrow personal definition of "true amateur."

Would you be expecting the PDGA to give a general amnesty to all players that might wish to join your movement, in order to build a player base? Or is there no room on your bus for those that may have, at one time, played in the current competitive structure? Do you think that there are enough "untainted" players out there that know about organized disc golf competitions and that might want to play in a trophy only format, that you would have full, or even partially filled, fields for such events? The only way to know that is for you to run a few and see.

Best of luck.

Actually it is a difference at the most basic level. I don't see a true amateur system working without scholastic or rec dept involvement. Both of those would probably be done in team formats. The team would have to meet eligibility standards and that could be by PDGA classification (1 > 950, 2 > 900, 3 < 900) or age or something else.

You are describing individual competition and I just don't see that having the dramatic drawing power you are describing.



You could be right. There is only one way to find out and all it will cost you is the word "Amateur".

The Amateur Class has got to be protected at all costs from the forces that would corrupt it and try to exploit it. It will yield gigantic dividends, just look at other sports for Pete's sake, for the prize and cash classifications.



So, Nick, you eschew the Olympic movement as corrupt and exploitative, because most every truly World Class AMATEUR athlete has some sort of sponsorship arrangement, whereby they are paid a salary by Home Depot, ExxonMobil, or another corportation, so they can train and compete, and still live? What about the bonuses that countries give to athletes for bringing home Gold, Silver, and Bronze? What about the expenses paid by national sports federations to keep the athletes out on the road at so-called amateur competitions?

Each of these sports has HUGE grassroots followings that play competitively on local and regional bases (that's the plural of basis, before someone corrects me), without much "corruption" of the amateur notion. If you asked 100 people on the street the difference between amateur and professional, I bet 85 of them would say, in some form, that the professional makes a living at it, and the amateur doesn't. Your puritanical definition of what a "true" amateur is just doesn't compute with the average person.

I'm not at all opposed to your promotion of low entry fee, trophy only competition for those that may choose to play such. But until you can convince me, by running a series of D-Tier events with just those requirements, that you have a player base that warrants creating a whole new class of competition, I'm skeptical. And please leave EDGE out of this. We are fully aware of eligibility standards and other scholastice requirements for competion and will ensure that any competitions we hold will meet such. These may or may not meet your narrow personal definition of "true amateur."

Would you be expecting the PDGA to give a general amnesty to all players that might wish to join your movement, in order to build a player base? Or is there no room on your bus for those that may have, at one time, played in the current competitive structure? Do you think that there are enough "untainted" players out there that know about organized disc golf competitions and that might want to play in a trophy only format, that you would have full, or even partially filled, fields for such events? The only way to know that is for you to run a few and see.

Best of luck.



Jon, I do not at this time comment on the policies of a few sports organizing body's policies concerning amateur status. What I am interested in discussing is disc golf's organizing body's policies concerning amateur status. I think that it has already been conceded that disc golf does not really have an amateur class in anything but name. And I concede that other sports make similar (mis) use of the term. What I am discussing and interested in is introducing a classification of player and competition within the PDGA competitive structure that is not a misuse of the term, meaning or actuality of what amateur sport is, should be and is vital to protect.

Consider all of the organizations you site, do any of them play for each other's entry fees in the form of cash or prizes (short of Texas Hold'em Tournaments). There are rules against certain types of corrupting influences in all of those sports, or certainly the major ones. The inclusion of professionals was due in large part to �misuse� of the term �amateur� in countries the US faced, not do to any logical or correct extension of the interpretation of �Amateur Sport�.

Now you and others may be able to fool yourselves into using these clear �abominations� as substantiation for our lack of any amateur class of players or competition, but it still remains a complete misuse of the principles upon which amateur sport are founded.

To say, go out and show me that this will work, without the mildest showing of support or initiative from the PDGA would be like telling me 16 years ago to go our and start Advanced Only competitions. The primary difference being that I do not expect, granted I don't know, many current PDGA members to make the switch, whereas back them, there would have been at least a few brave souls opting for Advanced. But that is part of my point, that these be new PDGA members, with singularly unique and new needs, motivations and expectations.

If an amateur class were introduced into the PDGA Competitive System I would expect the PDGA to allow current members to experiment and see if this new classification is for them or not. Don't tell me that the PDGA BOD has reservations about allowing such crossovers when clearly they barely recognize any such distinction between the current Cash and Prize classes�

My definition of amateur sport is not important, having any classification be significantly and meaningfully different from the Prize/Cash classification, the only one we currently have, is what is vital to our ability to enter a new era of growth and prosperity. I have given my proposal, it will not cost the PDGA anything beyond a word, some fortitude and a willingness to explore something new (�Amateur�, �Decision� and �Support�).

I will absolutely be initiating a program for community groups and educational institutions on a local level in the coming years, I mean what else is there (to try and squeeze another dollar out of the same old revolving door demographic?!?), but as I have said again and again and again and will continue to say and do, my chances of success increase exponentially with the right amount of support. The support I am looking for has been detailed. And I will not tire of detailing it yet again if need be.

Read the paper? or read this thread

Read the paper? or read this thread

I think I'll read the paper.

The support I am looking for has been detailed. And I will not tire of detailing it yet again if need be.



Well, other than your impassioned pleas for this 'true amateur' class, I don't hear a real groundswell of the membership crying to set such into action. As noble as you think it may be, I haven't really read anyone on here or talked to anyone out in the ral world that is too tied up with the concept.

And as much as you have "detailed" such, since I've been serving, there has never been a formal request presented to the Board for consideration regarding instituting an amateur classification as you define it. From you or anyone else.

And as I (and other BoD members) have said innumberable times, this is not the place to make proposals. This is a discussion forum. and we have discussed this round and around. When you present a sound, well thought out proposal, that doesn't attack, but supplements the current system of competition, then the Board will discuss implementing such.

Details, Nick, details. Leave the passion out of it. Don't disparage others' opinions. Indicate that "in your opinion" that it needs to be done. Prove that it is needed with evidence. Show how it can be done with a plan.

The Board holds regular teleconference meetings and the next Summit will be held at the NDGC in October. I'll look forward to reading your proposal.

Jon,

I don't want to argue with you, but it is not accurate when you say that you have never had a formal proposal for my true amateur class presented to the board. I did so last year. I will gladly resubmit it.

I cannot afford to fly to summits as others can so I have to trust that my proposal was given equal billing to those that had their author present. I sent a copy to the PDGA Board of Directors contact link as well as to the individual email addresses I have. I will do so again.

On the topic of not hearing a large outcry for a true amateur class, I am not particularly surprised. Nor am I surprised that this is not a high member priority. Why would it be when most current PDGA Members were brought in under a system devoid of true amateur competition and have never experienced true amateur competition within the PDGA competitive structure.

Now I have heard strong interest from some PDGA Members in the creation of a true amateur class; this mostly from long time organizers interested in �legacy� issues. Meaning they want to see disc golf take a quantum leap, where their contributions (course installation, building of clubs, organization of event series, individual events, etc.) really bloom and become self-perpetuating and stop being a constant pushing of boulders uphill. They realize that the building blocks of any successful endeavor are people and large amounts of active and motivated people. Mostly this intention or hope is stated in the form of wanting to get organized disc golf into our school systems or community institutions. Have you ever heard that hope before? I�d imagine you have being part of the E.D.G.E. program.

That is basically what my call to define an amateur class is all about; because currently the PDGA has no official place for these competitors to compete without the underlying �gambler� element going on. Do we have an option for low entry fee no payout? Yes, but as an after thought, a catch-all option for disenfranchised or poor �for-profit� disc golfers; not as a sanctioned, endorsed and valued part of our competitive system.

Amateurs deserve their own classification. The upside potential is huge; the downside nearly non-existent. Sometimes you don�t do things to directly profit PDGA Members; sometimes you do things to indirectly profit them. The creation of a true amateur class is such an endeavor. Why? Because it is just the right thing to do, and that should be enough. The financial gains, in the end, I am sure, as evidenced in other sports, will be significant.

And don�t make it sound like I am displeased with our recent progress and initiatives, I am thrilled to see movement, any movement, after so many years of inaction. I just see the formation of a true amateur class as the natural next step in this progression towards a �complete� PDGA competitive system where the maximum number of players, with the most diverse kinds of motivations are able to gather and compete under the banner or the Professional Disc Golf Association.

At any rate I will resubmit my proposal. As far as this discussion goes, I suspect that there are many here and else where that agree with the basic gist of what I propose even though they may have difficulties with the method of communication and possibly the communicator.

In hopes of resolving this one way or another, it is crucial that we not be adversarial, perhaps it is too late for that, but if you truly believe that our current competitive structure addresses my concerns feel free for the sake of this conversation, or the actual resolution of this issue, to post here your answer or to contact me in private by shooting me an email or even a phone call. I am very accessible.

Regards,
Nick Kight

Nick, your proposal was presented alongside mine. The primary difference, which was discussed with the Board, is your insistence on separation of those playing "true Am" into separate divisions and not allowing those who play merch to play trophy only or vice versa during the season.

The Board supports the budget option and supported it with the 'trophy only' option this year. What they disagree with, is the sharp delineation you prefer between the two options.

That's the only part of your proposal that most seem to disagree with, that True Am competitors need to be separated from the Merch competitors. The only thing you need to make a better case for is the separation, not the idea that there are those who prefer a trophy only experience some or even most of the time.

Results so far show that a small percentage choose the trophy only option but it's still new. Maybe it will eventually increase to 20-30% within the merch divisions sometimes. So far, only a few TDs have tried to run trophy only style events. But the option is already available. The only thing missing from your proposal is that players who normally play Merch can play in these events and those who play in these events can play Merch. You'll need to make the case why players who switch back-and-forth between these events need to be further isolated due to some perception of philosophical purity.

Chuck,

Is there a reason we currently separate the Merch Players from the Cash Players?

Yes, one plays for Merch while the other plays for Cash.

If you accept that reasoning then here is the answer for why we should separate the Merch Players from the Amateur Players:

Because one plays for Merch while the other plays for the pure enjoyment of play.

Something to ponder is if we really do separate Prize(Merch) from Cash players anymore with PDGA Pro Members under certain Player Ratings thresholds able to play in the Prize divisions. Aren't they now "actually" the same class of players under one set of skill based divisions?

The fundamental reason for an amateur class is that without one there is no basis for a meaningful competitive structure. What reasonable argument can be made for the "protection" of one group of players over another, besides skill level, when there is no fundamental difference in their "motivation" for playing in the competitions? How can it be said that we have two different classifications of players when there is only one motivation for playing? How many other sports have an overall governing body that purposefully excludes or does not at least acknowledge amateur competition?

Prize players should be excluded from Am players divisions for the same reason as Pro players should be excluded from Prize players divisions. That the line between Pro and Prize has been recently blurred is not a justification to not consider the benefits of a more defined division between Cash/Prize and Amateur, let alone between Prize and Cash.

I suspect the blurred line and inclination to let folks not only bounce around between divisions but classifications stems from the divisional dance begun by Masters players enjoying the ability to play in 3 or 4 different divisions.

Let's consider the benefits of players declaring not only their division but for goodness sake their classifications. Similar to toddlers, diversity of choice is not always a good thing. The choice is still there, just at the beginning of the year, the difference is that when a choice is made there is a far higher degree of commitment and the process to arrive at that decision is given far more attention.

I realize that this does not fit within your "Everything based on Player Ratings Dream Competitive Structure" (having to declare a division and classification), but even there it has benefits. With players declaring their divisions and classifications at the beginning of each season, there would no longer be any systemic reason for multiple Player Ratings updates within a year. There would be no reason for TDs to need to check players ratings prior to each event. There would be no last minute switches in divisions by players seeking to take advantage of a weaker field.

There is more. But that should be enough to begin a discussion on the need for divisions and classifications other than skill based ones. (If we want to go to pure skill based, then there certainly will remain a need for amateurs to still have a separate classification.)

Regards,
Nick

I think someone deleted a post that i had on this thread :mad:

I don't see these division options as much different from the hotel or restaurant industry. There are consumers who prefer a certain level of service, quality and price but no one is prevented from crossing over into another category. I may eat at fast food places more often than others but appreciate going to fancier places (Denny's, just kidding) on special occasions. Likewise, wealthier folks may stop at McDonalds once in a while. Sometimes I might want to stay at a 5 star hotel.

I think many see placing artificial barriers for players to move between divisions based on payout structure as unnecessary and counterproductive. Up to now, we haven't prevented movement for Merchers playing Cash divisions and now some cashers can go merch. All of this has been facilitated by ratings.

I don't have a dream of every competition being ratings based. I and many, many others like playing with my age group and women will continue to have their own divisions. Ratings division play should just be a common event format option along with our standard division format.

Choices.

Off topic, but responding to previous post.

There are many reasons to change divisions during the year. The division and even classification in which you play is much more relevant to what level of event you are playing than your own skill level.

You may be top dog in your little pond in Adv Masters, but you aren't going to be that competive in a multi-state A-Tier. You might want to play up in Adv for smaller, less expensive events, but are not comfortable donating larger entry fees in larger events. The current system gives players below the current ratings requirements or above the curent age restrictions flexibility to play above their skill level without stranding them where they are not competitive.

Nick i sure hope your not planning on having CTPs at these events because those are prizes that are awarded based on skill and performance and would be considered payouts :eek:

I think someone deleted a post that i had on this thread :mad:

Maybe it was on one of five other threads devoted to the same topic?

Reasonable divisional options could still be available within classifications, but letting cross classification play go on undermines the fundamental reasoning for having the different classifications in the first place, doesn't it?

Should we base our plans on building a successful future for disc golf solely upon the quirks of tiny current divisional demographics? Or should we look at the bigger picture and prepare for a time when every region has a thriving say Grandmasters division?

We can keep divisional options open as needed, but this disregard for classification integrety is a dangerous game to start playing. Almost as dangerous as enticing "amateurs" to come out to play in our events with prizes. It could take years for folks to realize the mistake made long ago and even more years for corrective action to be taken.

And I am not advocating a cold turkey change, just that the end game be clearly defined and presented. The change I propose is nearly NOTHING for Cash/Prize players other than giving up the word "Amateur".

Nick i sure hope your not planning on having CTPs at these events because those are prizes that are awarded based on skill and performance and would be considered payouts :eek:



No rewards based on performance other than trophies.

I think that is pretty clear isn't it. If not, yes CTPs during competition would not be permitted for Amateurs, they'd remain standard in the Cash/Prize classification(s) however.

Chuck,

Would you say the PDGA is going to build this into their competitive structure or simply allow it to remain a TD choice? I think the mixed model is a good one but only if it is there. I've yet to see the option.

The observation that trophy only is the preferred choice (based on surveys) is correct but may still miss the reality; people often choose what they know and the wording of questionnaires is always... suspect. That it will take some time for a trophy only option to catch on, even if it is offered at all events, is also a likely scenario. The reality is that trophy only options are quite popular in many sports and will likely be popular here given ample time to develop.

The observation that we have had good growth (membership) with the prize model is correct but begs one to consider, was it the best growth possible? Could we have done better? Of course we will never know but a mixed model with the Trophy only option might have allowed for even greater growth attracting different players.

Would the mixed model hurt payout participation? Well if you buy the idea that the PDGA body is primarily interested in payout then obviously not; no one would sign up for the trophy only option. However, even if people did take that option I doubt it would hurt the payout participation any more than not knowing how many are going to show up for a given tournament hurts participation. Either the TD and tourney have a good rep or they don't.

As for a model on how to incorporate Trophy only, simple enough, each bracket, Pro through Recreational, offers a Trophy only option at 35% of the cost of the payout structure. Trophies for 1st place required (all others up to TD); cost of Trophy/ribbon at the discretion of the TD. This doesn�t have to be complicated or even onerous, dictatorial or controversial. Just easy!

It was never a mistake to start the Merch divisions. The only mistake may have been not retaining the budget/trophy option within them.

Choices.

Not that this will ever effect me because I plan on going Pro by the start of the 2007 season but if I could still play for cash and prizes and play all the majors and not be called a pro i see no reason why Nick cant have his AMATEUR DIVISION.

All he is proposing is that he can create his own trophy only division which in my opinion will not be profitable and will not attract enough people to make the trophy only tournaments worth running so let him waste his time and energy throwing tournaments and creating a division that not alot of people will play in.

...The observation that trophy only is the preferred choice (based on surveys) ...

what survey was that??? the market survey around here says that trophy only can take a hike!


...people often choose what they know and the wording of questionnaires is always... suspect.

ah, one of those infamously well-spun surveys? the anti-choice zealots must be up to their usual tricks. (is " zealot " a [*****] word yet?)

It was never a mistake to start the Merch divisions.



As they say, hindsight is 40/40.

If this opinion is widely held by the BOD, and it is not that they are just too timid to correct that mistake, then this sport will continue to languish (PDGA stats aside) until a major sponsor takes over and abolishes this backward mindset. The problem is that this backward mindset has thwarted growth and made major sponsors more difficult to attract. A semi-vicious cycle that hopefully will be overcome by the sheer appeal of the game itself.

we have offered trophy only options at all our pdga events in spotsylvania for 2 years. there have been a total of approximately 270 am players participating in those events. the combined total of those opting for trophy only is roughly 10 and certainly not more than 12.

It was never a mistake to start the Merch divisions. The only mistake may have been not retaining the budget/trophy option within them.

Choices.



By that logic it was a mistake not to let grade students wager in peewee football and little league then, right? And what about high school and college basketball, should we be paying them to play?

Chuck, though you may have a blind spot to Amateur Sport and what it is about does not mean that it does not exist or serve a vital purpose.

And you are the first organizer (you run events right?) I've heard that has not admitted that bribing ams way back when is what is the root cause of most discontent in our current competitive system. Publicly they may not say it, as you don't, but deep down and privately they all call it "Pandora's Box".

I don't propose to put it back in the box, professional disc golfers can continue to gamble for each others entry fees all they want in the professional classification. Those who do not should be welcomed and organized under a new class of players; Amateurs.

A semi-vicious cycle that hopefully will be overcome by the sheer appeal of the game itself.



I believe therein lies the reason for any growth we continue to enjoy. At least the primary reason. But appeal of the game need not include the PDGA as numbers of casual players at courses attest.

Low entry fee trophy only options strangly do not appeal to longtime high entry fee stacks of plastic prize players.

Go figure...

I play for plastic, I play tournaments during the season, maybe one other round during the week. 5 rounds a week (4 of them competitive) does not make me a professional player. Yes I play for other's money, but the wame thing happens at every mini I play in as well, except that in minis I sometimes play for cash instead of plastic.

I used to play poker once a month with the guys at the office. We kept the money we won from each other. Guess I'm a professional poker player too.

I'm a professional bowler as well, just not currently.

I've played ball golf for each other's money also. Guess I should call the PGA and get a card.

Being a professional player in any sport has more to do with commitment and dedication than it does what division you play. Of course most professional sports have a qualification system that prevents amateur players from establishing professional status until they can be competitive.

I play for plastic, I play tournaments during the season, maybe one other round during the week. 5 rounds a week (4 of them competitive) does not make me a professional player. Yes I play for other's money, but the wame thing happens at every mini I play in as well, except that in minis I sometimes play for cash instead of plastic.




Perhaps not a professional Gary, but DEFINATELY not an amateur.

By most sports standards amateur means not being a professional. Given, perhaps we do not have a professional class, but it is certain that we do not have an amateur class.

There are clear reasons for the establishment of an amateur class as a precurser to a professional one.

I'd best categorize you as a Prize class player and WWCC Pros as Cash class players. All I'm saying is that it is time to define Pro and Am Classes with definitions that make more sense and prepare us for the success we are planning on achieving. My opinion is that we start with the Amateur Class since it will be the foundation of our organization (eventually).

By that logic it was a mistake not to let grade students wager in peewee football and little league then, right? And what about high school and college basketball, should we be paying them to play?



Funny you say that because giving a scholarship is the exact same thing as paying someone!!! (its just not in cash its in room and board and traveling exspences and food and uniforms and shoes and championship rings if they win) I know private high school around here who give scholarships so that is payment for playing and almost ALL if not ALL colleges give scholarships for playin on their teams so thats payment. I guess they are proffesionals as well and the academic scholarships they give must make those students proffesional STUDENTS.

Once again Nick you can try to pry your foot out of your mouth.

Are you being serious? To say that a scholarship is the same thing as pay is total nonsense. If it were then the what does that make the other 90% of atheletes in amateur sport? Slaves!?!

Besides how many elementary school scholarships do you know of?

It fascinates me that some folks are so threatened by something they think there is no need for and is bound to fail.

I don't think anyone is threatened, just most of us don't think it is unusual for the current Ams to be called ams in light of what other "Am" players are doing. If Am is all that is not Pro, there is a lot of prizes and money ending up in the hands of "amateur" players. Of course non of these "amateur" players would live up to your definition, but they don't have to and neither do we.

Call you structure what you wish, but it does not require exclusive ownership of the title amateur. And yes would I consider myself an amateur even if I was playing in the Pro divisions. I may compete for prizes or cash, but never enough to cover the expenses required to compete annually. Rarely is anything I win ever converted to cash, most of what I no longer have was donated to an event or a beginner. Build your system and leave the established one alone. Your divisions are way beyond the PDGA definition of Amateur and as such have nothing to fear from being another set of amateur divisions within the PDGA system.

Are you being serious? To say that a scholarship is the same thing as pay is total nonsense. If it were then the what does that make the other 90% of atheletes in amateur sport? Slaves!?! <font color="orange"> Im not even going to answer this question. If those other 90 percent of amateurs were given a choice between what they play now and playing for prizes im willing to bet they Would switch over and play for prizes in the blink of an eye. Those other 90 percent of sports just simply DONT OFFER a prize division so therefore none of them can make the choice to play for prizes. If they want to play they play for trophys because thats the ONLY THING they can play for </font>

Besides how many elementary school scholarships do you know of? <font color="orange"> Nick you and I both know we arent talking about elementary sports here!!! How many elementary school kids do you know that play disc golf tournaments??? </font>

It fascinates me that some folks are so threatened by something they think there is no need for and is bound to fail. <font color="orange"> Im not threatened by anything because this rule wont EVER effect me because I will have gone pro LONG BEFORE this new Amateur Class is even considered for a possibility to be a division :D </font>

Build your system and leave the established one alone.



That is exactly what I have been saying all along Gary!

Fair enough though. I'll call this classification "Professional". Might as well, when words have no meaning, right?

is total nonsense. If it were then the what does that make the other 90% of atheletes in amateur sport? Slaves!?! <font color="orange"> Im not even going to answer this question. If those other 90 percent of amateurs were given a choice between what they play now and playing for prizes im willing to bet they Would switch over and play for prizes in the blink of an eye. Those other 90 percent of sports just simply DONT OFFER a prize division so therefore none of them can make the choice to play for prizes. If they want to play they play for trophys because thats the ONLY THING they can play for </font> <font color="blue"> Thus demonstrating you have absolutely no understanding of amateur sport. </font>

Besides how many elementary school scholarships do you know of? <font color="orange"> Nick you and I both know we arent talking about elementary sports here!!! How many elementary school kids do you know that play disc golf tournaments??? </font>
<font color="blue"> Yes we most certainly are! And thank you for making my point exactly. </font>

It fascinates me that some folks are so threatened by something they think there is no need for and is bound to fail. <font color="orange"> Im not threatened by anything because this rule wont EVER effect me because I will have gone pro LONG BEFORE this new Amateur Class is even considered for a possibility to be a division :D </font> <font color="blue"> Well, at least until we define what a pro really is too, which I doubt you would fit that definition either�</font>

Proffesional= Plays sport for a living and makes profit

Amateur= Plays sport as a hobby and does not make a profit.

If you look on the tour there are only a SELECT FEW PROFESSIONALS in our sport anyway.

Call your division whatever you like because you wont have alot of competition in it so it wont matter what its called anyway.

Proffesional= Plays sport for a living and makes profit

Amateur= Plays sport as a hobby and does not make a profit.

If you look on the tour there are only a SELECT FEW PROFESSIONALS in our sport anyway.

Call your division whatever you like because you wont have alot of competition in it so it wont matter what its called anyway.



Wrong again. "All" we will have is "competition". /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Just out curiousity, what are scholastic and park & rec teams called ? Do they use the term amateur in their divisional structures anywhere ?

Are "Professionals" (current or ex) excluded from participating ? Just asking because I don't know the answers.

Here is the definition of AMATEUR straight out of the webster Dictionary. Amateur = One who engages in a pursuit, study, science, or sport as a pastime rather than as a profession.

Here is the definition of Professional from Websters

Professional = A person participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs

You guys can decide from there what we have in the PDGA and I would say that we BARELY have ANY pros and we have TONS AND TONS of amatuers.

It was a Freudian slip, I meant to say that the surveys show that payout is the preferred option. This way it makes more sense since my argument is that other options might work as well.

I have never understood the argument you make here: that there are no real "professionals" in disc golf, therefore.........(I'm not sure what the conclusion is). I presume the argument is that since no one is making lots of money, then the present system must be fine. I throw my hands in the air at the logic. Does it also follow that "The present system must be fine since no one is making lots of money."

The system is fine the way it is. If Nick wants to start his own competitive Trophy only divison then let him. He will eventually get tired of running tournaments that only 10 people show up to. There is already a place for the people Nick speaks of to play for cheap. Its called club leagues and on the course with their buddies.

And there is a place for people who want to profit from their play. It's called the pro division.

and if sponsors would ever start paying the big bucks, more than 10 or 12 people could legitimately expect to make a living in the sport.

hmmm... i think that means there's lots of ams, and not many pros.

And there is a place for people who want to profit from their play. It's called the pro division.



Holy CRAP!!!!!!!!!! Are you serious??? OMG OMG HOLY CRAP!!!!!!!!! If you want to play for profit you should play OPEN!!!!!!!!! OMG I didnt know that. Thanks for telling me (note intense amount of sarcasm)

If you think that Ams make profit on what they win then you are truely out of your mind. Its not easy to sell what you have won no matter what you guys say. Trust me I HAVE TRIED it and have sold about 10 discs. Out of 200 plus that i have won. Let me tell you IM MAKING A KILLING on my plastic winnings (note intense sarcasm again)

and if sponsors would ever start paying the big bucks, more than 10 or 12 people could legitimately expect to make a living in the sport.

hmmm... i think that means there's lots of ams, and not many pros.



HOLY CRAP SOMEONE AGREES WITH ME!!!!!!!!!!! Its prolly killing him inside that we have the same point of view on this :D

I think what Nick is planning is not the same as trophy only with current divisions. What he has in mind is something that is more compatible with scholastic competition with divisions tied to grade or age levels. At least that is what I remember seeing in his postings of his division descriptions.

It is a completely different way of looking at the divisional structure. I think it could take off if it were ever established in the school or park & rec systems. What I don't see is the need to gain exclusive rights to the term amateur and the wall between that structure and the current am divisions.

If you are competing in the PDGA am divisions, you would not be allowed to compete for your school (or company) in his system.

I think most people agree with you on this. There are not very many people making a living on DG and fewer still (if any) making enough to retire after they finish with DG. They hope it really is a "lifetime" sport.

Just out curiousity, what are scholastic and park & rec teams called ? Do they use the term amateur in their divisional structures anywhere ?

Are "Professionals" (current or ex) excluded from participating ? Just asking because I don't know the answers.



I don't know if this is what you're looking for and I know this is just one example, but I used to play in my high school's jazz band. I'm not sure about the details, but I remember that any money our school's band made at gigs had to be reported in a specific way or else we'd be considered professionals and would be exempt from most local and our state championships.

There were also instances of students who waited until after the state championships to cut records and play for money so they could play with their school's band.

I hear that response alot. Are you pointing out that this sport is in it's infancy? I agree. Does it follow that we should continue with policies that "keep the numbers down" by embracing a system of inherently flawed values on one hand, and is motivated solely by greed on the other. These flaws will continue to retard our growth, but if it makes life easier for the bulk in the middle and bottom, I suspect they will not be addressed. Bad habits are easy to ignore or justify (as evidenced by this thread), but hard to break.

I'm just curious if you can even conceive of the economics as you progress through the system. It's behind your statement that you won't turn pro until 2007. Why not? Playing pro is where the profit is at. Right? Your finances would be better off if you made the jump. Right? How would your score at the Memorial stack up against the pros at the Memorial. You probably payed less, made more, and shot worse than many of the pros. It's a great gig. Is it a surprise you are defending it?

Now that sounds like a jealous pro. :cool:

I know you don't really come off like that in person. Do you promote a system where 80% of the players know going in that they will be donating to the few top pros ? It's bad enough now when 30% of the players go into the weekend pretty much knowing they will be donating. An additional 30% are hoping to cash, but quite often don't. A good 25% pretty sure they will cash, but not positive. That leaves only 15% that know they will cash and hopefully win. And that's with 6 or 7 divisions.

Now that sounds like a jealous pro.


Actually it sound like someone who made the jump to OPEN a little to soon and now wishes they could play AM
:eek:


I'm just curious if you can even conceive of the economics as you progress through the system. It's behind your statement that you won't turn pro until 2007. Why not? Playing pro is where the profit is at. Right? Your finances would be better off if you made the jump. Right? How would your score at the Memorial stack up against the pros at the Memorial. You probably payed less, made more, and shot worse than many of the pros. It's a great gig. Is it a surprise you are defending it?



Im not making the jump because my skills dont warrant it at this point and im not consistant enough to make the jump either. I would like atleast till the end of this season and maybe next season to develope and fine tune the skills that I have so that when I move up and play well I will cash some of the time. Im not stayin AM to make a profit. I have 2 sponsors and get FREE plastic and clothes why would I stay am just to get more stuff that I already get for FREE. Im staying here becase thats where my skills put me and untill I think that my skills put me in the OPEN division I will keep playing AM.

Whatever. If saying that incentives should be directed to those that perform better sounds like jealousy, than so be it. To me, it sounds like a bedrock principal. One that should be used as a basis for a healthy competitive system.

In all honesty and for the purposes of a useful debate, you may want to consider my arguments without assuming it is all self interest. I never make money and I suspect under the healthiest system in the near term, even the thousand players more deserving than I am will not make much money. The sport just is not there yet. My passion on this subject stems from almost twenty years of watching this sport fall far short of it's potential, for many understandable reasons, but not admitting and learning from our mistakes is inexcusable.

Actually it sound like someone who made the jump to OPEN a little to soon and now wishes they could play AM




This is another tired argument of the weakling system we have created. Is this an offshoot of the system or the driver? A system that encourages people to play down, a system clogged with those "competitors" that proudly proclaim "Noone should move up until they are insured of immediate success." People are pulled down by this system, both by its economics and the attitudes it embraces. The antithesis of the competitive spirit is alive and thriving in our sport.

I agree that there should be money directed toward the best players in the sport, the question is where that money would come from. I don't see a viable method of getting it all from the lesser skilled players. There is just not enough incentive for them to show up for the event. I probably would continue to travel to a few events ( I did 20+ events a year without cashing for a couple of years before I started cashing sometimes ), but I think I am the exception to the rule.

And as it relates to you James, it's a funny comment too.

My passion on this subject stems from almost twenty years of watching this sport fall far short of it's potential, for many understandable reasons, but not admitting and learning from our mistakes is inexcusable.




Maybe you should become the DOPE SMOKING AND DRINKING police at all our tournaments so that we can get BIG sponsorship rather then worry about giving people who dont want to spend money on the sport a division to ompete in. If they dont want to spend money on the sport then why should we care how they feel. The obviously arent going to sponsor events or donate prizes if they dont even want to spend 50 bucks on an entry fee.

I say we start paying out LESS of the field so that way the people who actually DO PLAY WELL will get heavily rewarded and those that played so so to bad dont get ANYTHING!!!!!

james, we prolly agree much ore deeply on this issue than might be as first apparent.

do you accept as a given that we must never force someone to become "pro"?

if so, the we also accept as a given that some really good players will always stay am. and cash. that might seem like rewarding mediocrity, but at some level it cannot be avoided.

the way to minimize it is to make turning pro something you must achieve... not something you can do by shooting well at a small event and deciding to take the cash on a whim.

but that wont happen til some compelling reason (most likely the potential for a reasonable income) makes being a pro worth the effort.

i suspect that if all of a sudden disc golf pros could make a million bucks a year playing the sport we would see a bunch of new names among the very best in our sport. some of our current best would stay, but i'd bet it would be no more than 50%. to be a true pro in a true pro sport takes a lot different approach than many of our best take. i dont mean that as a putdown - faced with a chance at big bucks, maybe our best would develop the work ethics and committment to athleticism that is required by pro sports, and they would prove equal to the challenges mounted by the newcomers.

regardless of what happens at the top level, as long as there are ams, there will be divisions. the best ams might organize in such a way that they end up getting paid in plastic coins. the newbies might organize like soccer-for-toddlers and tether-ball, in a system that makes even the weakest competitor feel like they have "won". the Democtratization of the sport will then be complete, and disc golf moms can fill their Expeditions with dozens of little conformists who confuse mediocrity with competition and who have no concept of winning or losing.

somehowthat doesnt seem like progress.

does our current system reward mediocrity? perhaps. but only in the same way most every other sport rewards it. a "true am" class defined the way nick defines it wont change that. in fact, it would take it down the road to permanent mediocrity much more quickly.

regardless of what happens at the top level, as long as there are ams, there will be divisions. the best ams might organize in such a way that they end up getting paid in plastic coins. the newbies might organize like soccer-for-toddlers and tether-ball, in a system that makes even the weakest competitor feel like they have "won". the Democtratization of the sport will then be complete, and disc golf moms can fill their Expeditions with dozens of little conformists who confuse mediocrity with competition and who have no concept of winning or losing.



Now here is a man with no inkling of what amateur means.

If competition only occurs when someone wagers money on their performance you have a gambler class not a professional class and certainly not an amateur class.

After reading James' posts I have come up with a new name for the current Amateur Class, but in light of the progress we are making here I'll refrain from sharing it.

Nick,

I think you completely miss the point that Pat is making. He is stating that if we organize our sport in the same model that is being used by schools and soccer associations around the country today, that we will praise playing, rather than praising skill. Many organized sports today hand out trophies or ribbons to all the teams that played, not just to the best teams that played. It is a move in this country today to boost the egos of all players. It is being done all over the USA and there are both plus's and minus's to this approach. I think that it can be said that the 'true amateur', as you call it, is exactly in line with this type of thinking. Participation is one of the good points of this type of organization. Mediocrity is one of the downsides.

I have looked in several dictionaries at the word Amateur. In some definitions it is simply 'one who does not make a living at the activity'. By that definition I am pretty sure that there are only one or two actual Pro players in the country and even they supplement their tournament income with disc sales, course design or sponsorship. I think, however, that we can both agree that accepting cash would at least add to your income.

Another common definition of an amateur is 'a recreational player with limited skill in a given sport' the definitions generally go on to speak of performance and capability. The PDGA has set up the performance measure by instituting player ratings.

Finally, several dictionaries refer to the amateur player as one who plays a sport as a pastime and receives no money or limited money based on structured guidelines. I believe this is the definition you refer to when you talk about an amateur. The majority of the amateurs that play for no money are those playing in schools. Outside of grade school, middle school, high school or college, almost all sports have some sort of payout.

Before you say that discs are just plastic coins waiting to be exchanged for money you should consider a few other sports. Ball Golf has detailed rules about how much money an amateur golfer can except in tournament payouts. Amateur fishing tournaments pay out in merchandise. I know one amateur fisherman that won a boat at a tournament and sold it back to the tournament organizers for 75% of its value. Amateur pool players except cash in tournaments and there is not a clear difference except in determined level of play. Amateur baseball and softball teams can take cash in tournaments they play. Amateur bowlers can win merchandise and in limited tournaments can receive cash.

The federal government allows you to call yourself an amateur up until you start to depreciate your equipment and start using tournament costs as deductions.

Now let us look at amateur players in schools. Colleges offer scholarships and work study programs to their athletes. The 'payout' for this far exceeds what most disc golfers win. High school athletic programs charge entry fees to spectators. Now while this does not go back to the athletes directly, it does go back to the schools and helps to offset the cost of equipment.

This leaves elementary and middle schools, and small recreational leagues. This brings us back full circle to the comment that Pat made, if we follow the pattern of these type of events, disc golf competition will be become nothing more than mediocre.




regardless of what happens at the top level, as long as there are ams, there will be divisions. the best ams might organize in such a way that they end up getting paid in plastic coins. the newbies might organize like soccer-for-toddlers and tether-ball, in a system that makes even the weakest competitor feel like they have "won". the Democtratization of the sport will then be complete, and disc golf moms can fill their Expeditions with dozens of little conformists who confuse mediocrity with competition and who have no concept of winning or losing.



Now here is a man with no inkling of what amateur means.

If competition only occurs when someone wagers money on their performance you have a gambler class not a professional class and certainly not an amateur class.

After reading James' posts I have come up with a new name for the current Amateur Class, but in light of the progress we are making here I'll refrain from sharing it.

Jerry,

I�ve come to the conclusion that the concept and reality of �true amateur competition and sport� is simply beyond the understanding of those who have never truly experienced it. You are not a worse person for it; you simply do not understand any motivation other than the desire to gamble for other players� money in the form of cash or prizes. That you only understand this motivation is understandable since it is the only one you have ever known in organized disc golf and apparently you have forgotten the motivation inherent in prior amateur sport.

You may say how can I know this about you, we�ve never met? I can tell, because you throw competition for competitions sake in the toilet as an experience devoid of meaningful significance; even as unworthy of inclusion as even a small part of our disc golf competitive system.

I can tell you from personal experience that amateur sport is not without significant worth; furthermore that it�s value to ones life is without question greater than that of wagering against others. That wagering actually diminishes the worth of competition and sportsmanship.

Yes, I know, that is all alien to you. Utter nonsense, right?

Well, you and Pat need not worry yourselves, because the PDGA will NEVER take your bankie away from you. They will continue to provide organized betting competitions for the gamblers and carneys that make up our current membership. Of this there is no question what so ever.

The question that IS, IS:
1) Will we ever provide competitions for amateur sportsmen based purely on competition?
And then integrally linked�
2) Will we ever provide competitions for professional sportsmen based on positive market forces generated by mainstream recognition, interest and acceptance (not just based on entry fees)?
3) Will we just continue to provide competitions for the narrowest of interests?
4) Is the Professional Disc Golf Association, the governing body of ALL organized disc golf, able to expand it�s scope and mandate to include disc golfers other than those currently populating our current competitive system?

My answer to all is I hope so.

Seriously, Jerry, can you honestly say that you think that our current exclusionary competitive system will EVER achieve our stated goals of mainstream recognition and major sponsors? Or certainly, that it isn�t tying our feet, making that success farther off?

The only costs to the PDGA will be:
The development of standards for sanctioning of PDGA activities within school systems.
An entirely new demographic of disc golfer (school aged through adult true amateur aged, possibly even WOMEN!!!!)
The price of additional membership applications and packages.
More results and player ratings to calculate.
More clubs to add to the Affiliate Club Program�s roster.
More candidates running for PDGA office.
More courses to evaluate.
A course directory that you have to buy volume by volume, like the Encyclopedia.
Working more closely with other amateur sport organizing bodies.

None of which immediately involve more action than saying:
Here is our new Amateur Classification. Come play.

And the cost to our current membership?

The word �Amateur�.

That is it.

So whether or not you understand amateur sport you should be able to understand that this proposed class is no threat to current divisions or classes and despite yourself perhaps even be able to glimpse at the gigantic potential such a NEW classification has for the growth and success of our sport in its organized form.

Regards,
Nick Kight

I guess he doesn't know you Jerry.

I vote to never give up the word "Amateur".

Let him have a new one. In high school I never competed in an amateur division, it was division 1A or 3A. It was never called "Amateur".

I guess he doesn't know you Jerry.
<font color="blue"> I know he doesn't understand amateur sport. I didn't claim to know anything else. </font>
I vote to never give up the word "Amateur".
<font color="blue"> Still won't make the carney class you play in "amateur"... </font>
Let him have a new one. In high school I never competed in an amateur division, it was division 1A or 3A. It was never called "Amateur". <font color="blue"> Following your own logic, "calling" something "amateur" doesn't matter anyway. </font>



I know one thing, you didn't gamble as an inherent part of competition in 1 Amateur or 3 Amateur divisions...

Hel! Gambling is illegal in most major professional sports!

Nick,

You are so funny. I truly laughed at your response. I hope that you find mine as humorous. Your post seems to follow the pattern on an old Saturday Night Live bit, 'Jane you ignorant sl*t.'

The problem here is that you have a definition of what an amateur is and fail to realize that there can be anything outside of your definition.

I have played 'amateur' sports, as you define amateur. One example is recreational soccer. I love it and played in leagues for years before hurting my knee. I would play it today. Hummm, no pay out, but wait winners did get t-shirts. Well crud, I guess that would mean that it doesn't qualify.

Guess what, we have recreational disc golfers today. Several private schools have disc golfing teams. I have offered to help with one. Imagine that, with my limited understanding of recreational play, but no you don't use the term recreational players, you insist on using 'true amateurs'. Could you go back and address the definitions of amateurs and could you possibly realize that there may be valid definitions that don't match yours?

Since you are the expert on this, give me one sport that offers nation wide competition, has an amateur class and does not offer incentive through pay out. Just give me on. Sorry you cannot use school sports, I have already addressed that and you failed to respond beyond expressing your disbelief at my ignorance. Did I hear you say Olympics? Sorry can't use that one. They hand out gold, silver and bronze 'coins'. American winners pick up endorsements and most countries in the world pay room and board for their Olympic athletes.

Maybe Soccer? No, recreational leagues don't compete on a national/world basis.

World's Competition maybe, sorry same problem as the Olympics.

I know, how about marathons? They are a worldwide sport, there are many runners that run just for the joy of it. Just like many disc golfers play for the fun of playing. But if you ask any runner, they will tell you they would like to win one. That would be the joy of competition. Hold it, don't marathon winners get endorsements, sponsorship, etc.

I have read your posts and responded to some in the past and have found some of your opinions insightful and some simple outrageous, but I have had problems understanding why some people block you. I think I can now understand. Instead of a lively discussion, addressing each other's points and making counterpoints you simply place people in a box and fail to attempt a meaningful discussion. I would love to debate you on your points, but as I have taught my children name calling and labeling is the result of an over bloated ego. I am not saying you fit in this category, but you certainly appear to.

If you want to start over and discuss the points and you are willing to concede some points you can't defend, I am more than willing to do the same. However, if your only response is that I already fit a predefined label then don't bother.

One point you may want to consider, is that you seem to rarely win a debate by discussion of the issue. You just seem to wear down anyone that wants to debate you in a public forum.

Now to address you points:


Jerry,

I�ve come to the conclusion that the concept and reality of �true amateur competition and sport� is simply beyond the understanding of those who have never truly experienced it. You are not a worse person for it; you simply do not understand any motivation other than the desire to gamble for other players� money in the form of cash or prizes. That you only understand this motivation is understandable since it is the only one you have ever known in organized disc golf and apparently you have forgotten the motivation inherent in prior amateur sport.



In this you are wrong and I can understand your limited view on this. You don't know me. I often play recreationally. I and several friends grab our discs and just go play for the fun of it. The challenge of playing the course and the joy in it.


You may say how can I know this about you, we�ve never met? I can tell, because you throw competition for competitions sake in the toilet as an experience devoid of meaningful significance; even as unworthy of inclusion as even a small part of our disc golf competitive system.



Once again, a bit of type casting on your part. If I don't agree with you it must be due to a lack of experience or in an inability to enjoy the game of disc golf or any other activity for itself. When I started playing disc golf there was a big movement to include accuracy, MTA, TRC, Double Disc Court and free styling in Flying Disc completion. Here we are years later and most of the disc sports, besides disc golf, have all but disappeared. A few still have some followers, but none of them are considered a serious disc sport. Why is that? I can give you my take on it, they fit the category of "true amateur" sports as you define it. Fewer players are involved in these sports than there were 10 to 15 years ago. I still have 10 fastback fliers that I keep. I loved to play these sports, but they only drew a limited number of players. Following your plan, disc golf will end up like those sports as well. Played occasionally and remembered fondly, but dieing on the vine.


I can tell you from personal experience that amateur sport is not without significant worth; furthermore that it�s value to ones life is without question greater than that of wagering against others. That wagering actually diminishes the worth of competition and sportsmanship.



And what leads you to believe that I wager on sports? Oh I see, just by promoting merchandise payout I am wagering. An interesting take, but I can see how you could say that. I don't think that the players in the bottom third of the competition would say they were wagering. I can remember playing when I was definitely not wagering. I know I would not reach a payout level. I was just playing to play, or as we use to call it paying to play. I would have to say that when I was at that level I played for the joy of competing. I had no hope of winning. I can also say that I, like many others, dropped out of the sport of disc golf. Not because we never won anything, but because we could not compete.

I note that you are an open player, what hierocracy you practice when you talk of wagering to win. I also see that you have accepted cash in the events you placed in. Tell me it isn't so. You did give up the cash or donated it didn't you? I know that part of the plastic coins I have won went back into the tournament I ran last year. Can you say the same. Whoops, probably not, because hypocrisy has its way of justifying itself.


Yes, I know, that is all alien to you. Utter nonsense, right?

Well, you and Pat need not worry yourselves, because the PDGA will NEVER take your bankie away from you. They will continue to provide organized betting competitions for the gamblers and carneys that make up our current membership. Of this there is no question what so ever.

The question that IS, IS:
1) Will we ever provide competitions for amateur sportsmen based purely on competition?



Since you failed to answer my points in defining an amateur, this point it moot. In debating a subject, you must counter and THEN express an opposing point. This is simply repeating your previous statement. I will remind you that an amateur is sometimes defined as a participant in an event that does not receive monetary or merchandise or does so under a structured set of guidelines.


And then integrally linked�
2) Will we ever provide competitions for professional sportsmen based on positive market forces generated by mainstream recognition, interest and acceptance (not just based on entry fees)?



I have some bad news for you, Disc Golf has not yet hit the major television markets. It doesn't even rate high on cable stations. Realistically, from your statement professionals should get less than the fees plus added cash. I would even state that by the strict definition of a professional, you are not one and shouldn't receive any cash what so ever. Let us follow the true definition of a professional....' an individual that makes a living at a given activity'. Maybe we should start to argue that 'professional disc golfers' should not receive cash.


3) Will we just continue to provide competitions for the narrowest of interests?
4) Is the Professional Disc Golf Association, the governing body of ALL organized disc golf, able to expand it�s scope and mandate to include disc golfers other than those currently populating our current competitive system?

My answer to all is I hope so.

Seriously, Jerry, can you honestly say that you think that our current exclusionary competitive system will EVER achieve our stated goals of mainstream recognition and major sponsors? Or certainly, that it isn�t tying our feet, making that success farther off?



And seriously, I understand the point you are trying to make, I just have my doubts that some of what you are saying will work. Tournaments that have used the �true amateur� division have had little if any interest, at least in what I have seen. I, like you, would like to see disc golf grow and I think it is our responsibility to encourage local recreational leagues, like soccer. I have offered and have helped to supply local church youth groups by loaning out discs for play and have given my name and number to other like organizations, hoping to grow our sport. But we are talking about two different things here. We are talking about growing our sport through recreational play in local schools and in local parks and growing our sport in competitive play nation and world wide. I don�t think that the PDGA will incorporate the suggestions you have below, unless individuals push for it. This means approaching the PDGA with the suggestions, providing a means to achieve those suggestions and volunteering to carry out these things. If you want I will volunteer to assist you in developing some of the items you listed below. I am doing this because I believe several of your suggestions have merit at the local level.


The only costs to the PDGA will be:
The development of standards for sanctioning of PDGA activities within school systems.
An entirely new demographic of disc golfer (school aged through adult true amateur aged, possibly even WOMEN!!!!)
The price of additional membership applications and packages.
More results and player ratings to calculate.
More clubs to add to the Affiliate Club Program�s roster.
More candidates running for PDGA office.
More courses to evaluate.
A course directory that you have to buy volume by volume, like the Encyclopedia.
Working more closely with other amateur sport organizing bodies.

None of which immediately involve more action than saying:
Here is our new Amateur Classification. Come play.

And the cost to our current membership?

The word �Amateur�.

That is it.

So whether or not you understand amateur sport you should be able to understand that this proposed class is no threat to current divisions or classes and despite yourself perhaps even be able to glimpse at the gigantic potential such a NEW classification has for the growth and success of our sport in its organized form.

Regards,
Nick Kight



And regards back,

Jerry Power

Gary,

He does not, but then again if he was an amateur, as the PDGA defines it, he might find a little more joy in life.


I guess he doesn't know you Jerry.

I vote to never give up the word "Amateur".

Let him have a new one. In high school I never competed in an amateur division, it was division 1A or 3A. It was never called "Amateur".

Thanks Chuck for starting this thread.
It's turning up some good stuff for me to think about.
Tho I have maybe only read 70% of it.
I think Chuck and Nick and everyone in between have good points.

The problem is there's so many interests to juggle when thinking about classifications.

* People who want all one division: bloodthirsty, survival-of-the-fittest, pro
* People who want all one division: socialist ams
* People who want compromizes, in all flavors
* People who want the chance to play with EVERYBODY: one big woodstock, can't we just get along?
* People who only want to play with people of the same age, gender, ability, political-golf-view, salary, religion, and penis size.
* Combinations of all the above, but handicapped by ratings.
* Plus doubles, match play, etc etc etc.
* Then there's people who are completely anti-competitive, anti-tournament.

How are we going to keep all these people happy? Well you can't.

What's best for the present and future of the sport? Who knows, really?

But classification is an important topic, one of the most important of this sport, and it's good to see this kind of interest still on the subject.

* People who want all one division: bloodthirsty, survival-of-the-fittest, pro
* People who want all one division: socialist ams
* People who want compromizes, in all flavors
* People who want the chance to play with EVERYBODY: one big woodstock, can't we just get along?
* People who only want to play with people of the same age, gender, ability, political-golf-view, salary, religion, and penis size.



People who want to play with Kurt Bayne: suckers for punishment who enjoy a good golf game, and a great time! :D

Come on back and play some NorCal Kurt, we miss you!