i just played a pdga tournament,i found out afterwards that the winner of the adv master has played pro at one time,cashing in 2006,he has played pro in 2007 but didn't cash....my question is can he play adv master after playing pro master in 2007?

Yes, if he took amnesty going into 2007 and renewed as an amateur, he could have played Adv Master during 2007. If he renewed as a pro PDGA member in 2007, he could still play Adv Master as long as his rating was under 915. That limit is being raised to 935 for 2008 meaning he could renew as a pro but still occasionally play Adv Master in 2008 if his rating is under 935.

This is why we need an am master div for 800s rated players. :mad::) :o:D

You now have the new Novice division where you can compete fairly at your rating level if you want to dodge the "big Am boys" in your age bracket. I don't think the Competition Committee has yet seen the need to add yet another protection level based on ratings breaks within age divisions since there are already ratings break divisions available to all amateurs (and even pros) if they don't feel competitive in their age/gender bracket at an event or don't have enough players in their age bracket to have a division.

i'm not sure what he renewed at,pro or adv,but his player rating is 932 and he played pro in may of this year(didn't cash)
can i play pro anytime i want to my rating is 914
how does that work?it doesn't seem fair, to play pro then if you want to play adv

It goes by rating, not by fair.

You can play pro, cash, and play Am all you want, unless your rating is over 955 this year or 970 next year. Every pro woman can play MA1 anytime she wants. Some can play MA3.

It goes by rating.

It goes by rating, not by fair.



It goes by rating and IS fair. :)

Every pro woman can play MA1 anytime she wants


I'd like to see a top pro women play and win Bowling Green Am's!

Every pro woman can play MA1 anytime she wants. Some can play MA3.

you should check that fact

there are 4 pro women that can not play MA1 untill next year :o


[/QUOTE]

That's true. Of course they could have played in the Blue division at Mid-Nats but none took the challenge.

no need to get snippy Mr Kennedy ,just asking
i think bruce answered my question
my rating is 914 but will move up as i am playing more tournaments,and my play is getting better ,might need to know some of this stuff

Not snipping at you. I was just tweaking Bruce with a smiley.

Not snipping at you. I was just tweaking Bruce with a smiley.

Every now and then I have to do a google "site:www.pdga.com Bruce" to see what I've missed.

"Fair" means lots of things to lots of people. That's all I meant by, "It goes by ratings, not by fair." 99 times out of 100 I think our ratings system is the fairest thing imaginable. I think all the people who have worked on our ratings system over the past years have contributed to the coolest benefit the PDGA offers, and based on the new members I talk to, the benefit that sells membership more than any other.

This is all great information! "By rating, not by fair."

Excellent. So in my next PDGA event, I think I'll play am (or intermediate or whatever it is these days) since my 902 rating allows it. Nevermind that I won the Advanced Masters division in the 2006 Southern Nationals Championship by nine strokes over 16 or so players and have won cash in SN events as a pro master!

Hey, I'm working with the system! rWc****

all that means is that the Adv Master field in SN land is weak :)

I'm really glad you added that smiley Pat. rWc**** ;)

hey, that the South has a sense of humor is well known. it comes from laughing at canadiens. :)

Russ,

Just in case you do not know it, kidmills is talking about me. I beat him by 1 stroke in Chattanooga a couple of weeks ago. I did not know he was sore about it. He completely out-played me the first round on the wooded course, but gave the tournament away to me by trying to clear the water hole. He ended up taking a 5 or 6 on that hole with his OB strokes while I played it safe and went around for the safe 3 (I learned my lesson last year). I had a good time playing with him and he seemed like he has a really strong all around game. I went back to Advanced since I do not play much anymore (8 yr old son plays 3 sports) and as you saw in Bowling Green, my game has sorta gone sour. Anyway I hope it did not make anyone else mad since it is the only tournament I won all year.

Later,

Mike D

hey mike i'm not sore...just wanting to know the rules about pro/adv
and your right the water hole got me,your a good player with a good arm,please don't think that i was mad at you or anything
i'll get you next year,or sooner

No problem! It will probably be next year since I do not see anything I will be playing till then. Glad to know you are not sore, you have a really good game and will probably be whipping up on me pretty soon! I took the PDGA up on their offer when they let anyone drop back that wanted too. I had a great year in 2003 when I was playing every week at least twice a week, but now with mt eldest son playing sports I only get out maybe once a month. Usually I do not get any practice and just show up at a tournament to play and it shows mostly in my putting. Anyway hope to see you around and let you TRY to get even!!

Later,

Mike D

What about AM Worlds?
I've heard once you cash in the PRO division, you can not play AM Worlds. Is this true?
Didn't someone give up several hundred dollars in Pro winnings so they could play AM Worlds?

If you petition the Competition Director to revert to Am status, you may play in Am Worlds. Or, those who took the blanket amnesty program to go back to Am going into 2007 could play in the 2007 Am Worlds.

the latter. usual petitioners are not allowed to play in worlds, only those who petitioned during amnesty.

this is one item i would like to see made more consistant. there's no reason to restrict world's eligibility based on what year am status was given.

former pros SHOULD NOT be allowed to compete in am majors either way.

Or perhaps they shouldn't be called "am" championships?

...not everyone is as anxious as you to eliminate the differentiation between pros and ams. if you're suggesting they aren't ams because they play for merchandise prizes then i respectfully disagree as do the organizing bodies of any number of other sports.

Just saying the lines have been blurred for a long time and yet the imprecise names keep hanging on. What's that expression about quacks like a duck...

oops. wrong thread.

Didn't someone give up several hundred dollars in Pro winnings so they could play AM Worlds?

This is extremely common... most of the top AM players at Worlds have played in the pro division multiple times and have had the opportunity to take cash.

I know of a former Pro world champion that went back to Am. What do you people think about that?

I know of a former Pro world champion that went back to Am. What do you people think about that?



What's their rating, and by going back to am are they playing where their rating would indicate?

It would be one thing if Ken Climo started playing Advanced with a 1040 rating, and quite another if Pete May did so with a 920.

I know of a former Pro world champion that went back to Am. What do you people think about that?



I know one too and according to their rating, they belong in the Am division.

Suzette. and all,

should all re-classed Ams be allowed to play in Worlds and Majors as Ams, or should only those who re-classed during amnesty have that priviledge?

thanks,

pat

I don't think anyone who has ever been a Pro should be allowed to play an Am Major whether they took amnesty or petitioned for am status.

I don't think anyone who has ever been a Pro should be allowed to play an Am Major whether they took amnesty or petitioned for am status.



i agree 110%.

I don't think anyone who has ever been a Pro should be allowed to play an Am Major whether they took amnesty or petitioned for am status.



i agree 110%.


disagree 111%

I don't think anyone who has ever been a Pro should be allowed to play an Am Major whether they took amnesty or petitioned for am status.



i agree 110%.


disagree 111%



I agree 112%, triple stamp, no erasies, touch blue make it true. :D

I don't think anyone who has ever been a Pro should be allowed to play an Am Major whether they took amnesty or petitioned for am status.



I agree.

I don't think anyone who has ever been a Pro should be allowed to play an Am Major whether they took amnesty or petitioned for am status.



I disagree with this statement 200%.

Why should one person's amateur status be worth less than another person's?

I believe you are either an amateur, or you are a pro, as defined by the PDGA, and you should realize all of the benefits of membership either way. If you don't want a former pro to play in Am Worlds, don't reclassify that person as an amateur. If they otherwise qualify for amateur status, and want to reclassify, then they get all of the perks that any other amateur gets. It also less work for HQ....they don't have to keep track of that stuff, and we don't have to keep Ned Smethers out of Am Worlds in 1999, because he took $15 once in an event in 1996 that wasn't even advertised as being a sanctioned event.

Chap

I am of the same opinion. If the conditions are right for the reclassification, then they are granted full amateur status. Not 'quasi-ams' or 'restricted ams', but full am status.

If this is uncomfortable, then the process and qualifications for granting the reclassification may have to be looked at.

Oh, wasn't there once a provision that a reclassified am couldn't play in a major for the next year or two? Perhaps a qualification that you can't play in a major during the first year of reclassification would stop the temptation of bouncing between Pro and Am just to play an Am Worlds. Ideally, reclassification would be for someone who is looking for a long term change, not a one year savings in dues or 'stepping down' specifically to attend the Am Worlds that is being held in your back yard. Unfortunately, along with the good, the amnesty program resulted in a bit of this type of 'reclassification'.

i wonder if being able to plastic-cash in Pro fields will reduce some of the back and forth?

my biggest concern is inconsistency. if the members want to able to re-class, so be it. same if they dont. but if they do, ALL re-classed players should have the same rights, regardless of which year they re-classed. of course, eliminating re-classification would also make things consistent by avoiding the problem in the first place.

Possible on the new Ams playing pro rules.

We recently had the Am Worlds here, so there were cases of pros taking advantage of last year's amnesty so they would be able to participate. Also saw situations (in our area as well as on this board) where people took amnesty just to save the $20 in dues.

My friend is going pro next year after one more BG Ams, and he knows he can accept merchandise instead of cash if his winnings would be too low, but if he accepts cash anytime can he no longer accept merchandise after taking money once?

For example, can he do this...

Tournament A: Prize- $50 merchandise
Tournament B: Prize- $250 cash
Tournament C: Prize- $50 merch

Or after Tournament B would he have to take $50 cash?

My friend is going pro next year after one more BG Ams, and he knows he can accept merchandise instead of cash if his winnings would be too low, but if he accepts cash anytime can he no longer accept merchandise after taking money once?

For example, can he do this...

Tournament A: Prize- $50 merchandise
Tournament B: Prize- $250 cash
Tournament C: Prize- $50 merch

Or after Tournament B would he have to take $50 cash?



After taking cash, why would anyone want to take merch?

Well if you're winnings arent much, like placing last cash and the possibility of splitting then IMO I would rather just take a disc or two.