Played in a B tier this weekend and won the Intermediate division and got very low payout. Here is the breakdown of entries and payout.

Entry Fee: $30
Player pack: $10 disc coupon plus lunch (sand, chip and soda)
42 players in my division

My payout was $47 for first place. Does this sound even close to what it should be? I appreciate the people who ran the tourney and am not trying to complain but this seemed almost ridiculous. Last weekend I place 2nd in a B tier event with a field of 21 and got $45 and I thought this amount was pretty low. Im not out trying to make a killing play am tourneys but it would be nice to be rewarded for good play.

Would love to hear some feedback. Thanks

Played in a B tier this weekend and won the Intermediate division and got very low payout. Here is the breakdown of entries and payout.

Entry Fee: $30
Player pack: $10 disc coupon plus lunch (sand, chip and soda)
42 players in my division

My payout was $47 for first place. Does this sound even close to what it should be? I appreciate the people who ran the tourney and am not trying to complain but this seemed almost ridiculous. Last weekend I place 2nd in a B tier event with a field of 21 and got $45 and I thought this amount was pretty low. Im not out trying to make a killing play am tourneys but it would be nice to be rewarded for good play.

Would love to hear some feedback. Thanks
Right off the top, yes, that's sounds exactly right to me assuming there's no added sponsorship to the purse. Congrats on your win. You walked away from a full tournament with twice your money back in merchandise value ($10 coupon + $47 merch payout + lunch).

$30 entry - $10 disc coupon - $5 lunch = $15 into the payout per player
$15 X 42 players = $630 payout purse

PDGA payout table paying 50% of the field:
1 $45
2 $43
3 $41
4 $41
5 $38
6 $38
7 $35
8 $35
9 $32
10 $32
11 $32
12 $28
13 $28
14 $25
15 $25
16 $22
17 $22
18 $19
19 $19
20 $16
21 $16

Same entry/breakdown with 21 players:
1 $44
2 $41
3 $38
4 $35
5 $32
6 $28
7 $25
8 $22
9 $19
10 $16
11 $16

Fact is the PDGA payout tables for amateur divisions flatten the payout AND they keep the winners payout roughly the same regardless of how many players there are. Once the total field gets to a certain point, 1st place money stays about the same and the money added by new players goes directly to the extra spots that get paid out as a result.

You don't mention entry for that B-tier where you took 2nd, but I assume it wasn't much more than the one you won, so over two tournaments you got a 200% return on the money you spent. What more do you want while not being "out to make a killing" playing am tourneys?

Heck, I just played in a B-tier that filled, and I think the payout was just a few trophies. (I played poorly enough to depart before the awards).

But the players pack, amenities, lunches, course, hosts, and entire experience were fabulous.

Played in a B tier this weekend and won the Intermediate division and got very low payout. Here is the breakdown of entries and payout.

Entry Fee: $30
Player pack: $10 disc coupon plus lunch (sand, chip and soda)
42 players in my division

My payout was $47 for first place. Does this sound even close to what it should be? I appreciate the people who ran the tourney and am not trying to complain but this seemed almost ridiculous. Last weekend I place 2nd in a B tier event with a field of 21 and got $45 and I thought this amount was pretty low. Im not out trying to make a killing play am tourneys but it would be nice to be rewarded for good play.

Would love to hear some feedback. Thanks

This is the way the PDGA has it set up, I don't like it either. My mentality is pay the top few players who performed the best, pay them well, and the rest shouldn't get anything if they didn't play well that day

MA2 Income:
$1260 = $30 Entry Fee X 42 players

MA2 Expenses:

$126 = $3 PDGA player fees
$210 = $5 lunch X 42 players
$210 = $10 coupons X 42 players / 2 (actual cost of discs at wholesale)
$315 = $15 per player payout X 42 players / 2
$_62 = 1/2 sanctioning and PDGA insurance, assuming MA2 was about 1/2 the amateur field
____
$913

$1260 - $913 = $347 Sponsor added cash. Thank you for sponsoring this tournament. No doubt the TD forgot to thank you when he was thanking the sponsors.

So long as you are going to play in the sponsoring divisions, you will be a sponsor of the sponsored divisions. If the cashing pros are a reasonably decent group of guys, you could sponsor them more directly by playing in their division, like I do from time to time. If they are not, you could run tournaments where the amateur entry fees are not used to sponsor the pros, like I used to do from time to time. Then you can figure out how to pay the expenses.

This is how PDGA tournaments have worked for the past 20 years and are going to continue to work for the foreseeable future. The amateurs are the real sponsors. Don't expect the TDs to thank you.

MA2 Income:
$1260 = $30 Entry Fee X 42 players

MA2 Expenses:

$126 = $3 PDGA player fees
$210 = $5 lunch X 42 players
$210 = $10 coupons X 42 players / 2 (actual cost of discs at wholesale)
$315 = $15 per player payout X 42 players / 2
$_62 = 1/2 sanctioning and PDGA insurance, assuming MA2 was about 1/2 the amateur field
____
$913

$1260 - $913 = $347 Sponsor added cash. Thank you for sponsoring this tournament. No doubt the TD forgot to thank you when he was thanking the sponsors.

So long as you are going to play in the sponsoring divisions, you will be a sponsor of the sponsored divisions. If the cashing pros are a reasonably decent group of guys, you could sponsor them more directly by playing in their division, like I do from time to time. If they are not, you could run tournaments where the amateur entry fees are not used to sponsor the pros, like I used to do from time to time. Then you can figure out how to pay the expenses.

This is how PDGA tournaments have worked for the past 20 years and are going to continue to work for the foreseeable future. The amateurs are the real sponsors. Don't expect the TDs to thank you.


All I can say to this is... WOW. I didn't know that TD's still took the players packs out of the entries and then pay (sponsor) for the PROS.

Our club just ran a "B" tier and payout of MA2 was 100% of the entries, 1st place was $191, 24 total MA2 entries. Sponsorship of the PRO divisions came from real sponsors.

Yes our entry fees were more than the one listed above, but according to your math, you would have to almost quadruple your entry fees, and ours are not even doubled your entry fee.

I don't mind that players packs were taken out of the entry fees, I DO mind that AMs HAD TO 'sponsor' the PRO's.

Our club does not take away from the AMs to cater to the PROs. We cater to the PROs by working our back-ends off to get that extra money and more. We also had more PROs this year than AMs.

All I can say to this is... WOW. I didn't know that TD's still took the players packs out of the entries and then pay (sponsor) for the PROS...
...I DO mind that AMs HAD TO 'sponsor' the PRO's.
I have to say, I hate this attitude. The attitude that when a TD takes the profit margin on discs/merchandise (be they player pack or payout) and puts it back into the tournament, he's somehow "stealing" from the ams to pay the pros. It's bull ****.

In every case I've seen where the am disc profits are put into the pro purse (or used to pay tournament expenses), the ams are still getting 100% (or more) of their money's worth out of the deal. They can't walk into a brick and mortar store, or go online to a disc retailer, and buy the same disc at wholesale price, why should the discs in the payout or player pack at a tournament be viewed any differently? And with that in mind, where else should the profit on these discs go?

I'd say first and foremost, they go right into the pocket or checking account of the club or TD running the event, or the retailer providing the discs. From there, it's up to that person(s) to do with it what they want. If they want to add it to the pro purse, so be it. If they want to invest it in the course for new baskets/tees/signs/etc, so be it. If they want to take the family out for dinner, so be it. If they want to add it all to the Rec Women's division, so be it. It's entirely their prerogative.

You can buy discs at wholesale all the time if you look. I see many, many amateurs reselling their prizes at wholesale or wholesale + 10% on the various message boards. I used to buy discs at wholesale from amateurs when I ran tournaments. I'd also buy back their funny money at wholesale. Somehow i doubt that I'm the only TD who would rather pay an am wholesale than pay Innova wholesale plus shipping and then pay sales tax to the state. As far as I'm concerned if anyone who is financially solvent can buy a big box of Z plastic for $6.50 each, it is just a fraudulent little game to tell an amateur he just got a $16 prize. Yeah, if he's dumb enough to shop at gas stations. If any amateur doubts this, e-mail me for my inventory. Diana says we sold $5,000 worth of discs at wholesale +$1 when we were balancing the budget book. I've got more I'd be happy to sell.

I'm not opposed to tournament directors making a profit. I'm not opposed to them throwing thier profits at the sponsored divisions. I'm just not keeping their secrets either. If you play amateur in the PDGA you are the chief sponsor of the sponsored divisions. More TDs ought to acknowledge this.

At the tournament that Paul Taylor mentions, if they paid the ams 100% at retail, then someone kept 50% at wholesale. You pretty much have to pay the ams 180% at retail to pay them 100% at wholesale, after you pay the PDGA $3 or $4 per amateur for santioning and insurance, unless there are expensive retail trophies or retail food eating up the payout.

I'm on both sides of this issue---a lifetime Am player, and a TD.

Ams are not entitled to wholesale costs of discs. It's silly enough that we're paid out 100% at retail value (combined payout & players pack). As a group, we're essentially playing tournaments for free.

The retail/wholesale margin is the TD's, used at his (or the club's) discretion, for doing all the work handling the merchandise.

And it's hardly a secret, except to newcomers, that the funds from this margin on Am entries supports the tournament structure. As do direct sales to Ams and Pros.

Thaks for all the feedback guys. In response to jconnell stating that I got double my money spent when all cost were considered I would have to disagree. I paid 30 to get in tourney, 4 just to get into park, 15 in gas to get there, plu 5 ace and 5 CTP (which I realize are optional) along with other minor expenses. That comes to about 60. You asked what do I expect. I would think for winning in a field of 42 that at least a hundred would be expected. I have ran a couple tournaments myself and through good sposorship the payouts were much better than this including one that was a 50/50 fundraiser event.

The calcualtions only show the payouts with respect to entry fees. Isn't a B Tier suppose to have a certain amount of added money or merchandise? Pros did not play this day and the tournaments were listed as two seperate tournaments; shouldn't each have added sposorship?

I appreciate all the feedback and will try to take all these things in consideration for my own upcoming tournaments.

No, no additional payout required for Ams in B-Tier.

100% payout (100% of entries, less fees & expense, paid out in some combination of players pack & prizes), and minimum $10 players pack. Roughly speaking.

I don't think it's fair to throw your gas costs in, as they're hardly the TD's reponsbility, nor the optional sidebets (ace pool, etc.). The double-your-money was $45 prize and $15 players pack, for $30 entry fee. (You could also view it as everyone paying a $30 entry but getting $15 back as a players pack, so everyone really paid a $15 entry....and you tripled your money).

It's fine when TDs spend hours rounding up sponsorships so they can give the players more stuff, but I don't feel that it's our obligation to do so.

I think TDs giving back 100% of entries (at retail value) should be enough.

I do see arguments for a steeper payout, though some feel this encourages sandbagging.

You asked what do I expect. I would think for winning in a field of 42 that at least a hundred would be expected.

And now a philosophical question:

Why?

In most sports, "amateurs" don't expect to get paid. In most recreational sports I'm familiar with---adult softball and basketball, tennis, running, etc.---players pay a fee to enter an organized competition, and don't expect any payback. Just trophies, maybe a t-shirt for entering.

Don't get me wrong---I pay out Ams in tournaments I run, and I enjoy accepting prizes as an Am in tournaments I play in.

But why the expectation? Why should an Am who wins be entitled to $100 or more?

Thaks for all the feedback guys. In response to jconnell stating that I got double my money spent when all cost were considered I would have to disagree. I paid 30 to get in tourney, 4 just to get into park, 15 in gas to get there, plu 5 ace and 5 CTP (which I realize are optional) along with other minor expenses. That comes to about 60. You asked what do I expect. I would think for winning in a field of 42 that at least a hundred would be expected. I have ran a couple tournaments myself and through good sposorship the payouts were much better than this including one that was a 50/50 fundraiser event.

The calcualtions only show the payouts with respect to entry fees. Isn't a B Tier suppose to have a certain amount of added money or merchandise? Pros did not play this day and the tournaments were listed as two seperate tournaments; shouldn't each have added sposorship?

I appreciate all the feedback and will try to take all these things in consideration for my own upcoming tournaments.
David answered the questions about B-tier requirements, so I won't repeat.

And I agree with David that it is unfair to factor in gas and other "minor expenses" when determining whether what you received from the tournament was ample return. You put $30 into the tournament coffers, and the tournament gave you $60 worth of value/merch. Any other expenses are optional (you didn't have to buy in) or incidental (you'd have had to buy the gas for your car eventually anyway).

Why do you expect to win $100 worth of stuff on top of the $15 player pack in an amateur tournament? The definition of amateur is to play without compensation. That you got a 200% return on your entry and then try to claim you're not "out to make a killing" when expressing disappointment that it wasn't more rings quite hollow to me.

Why the high expectation. Probably because most of the tournaments that I have played in the past have had much better payouts. I played in a non-sanctioned event locally and recieved $85 for 1st in a much smaller field and it included a free disc worth over $10 for players pack. The Entry fee was only $20.I realize that they did not have to incur the sanctioning fees, insurance etc.

As far as other AM sports and no return, the entry fees are generally much lower.

Really as ams what we are are consumers. With the growth of the sport and options for tournaments, I think we have a right to express our opinions about the product. I dont think ive ever heard someone say "the payouts were low I cant wait to go back." But I have heard it the other way around. Along with many others, I prefer a more top heavy payout scale. If I play in a torunament and I just barely make the payouts I wouldnt expect much, but for winning or maybe even top 5, I think there should be more of a reward. Just my opinion but it is shared by many.

Not trying to disrespect any tournament directors because I know from firsthand experience that it can be a lot of work. But I also know that the payouts can be better through sponsorship which is one thing our sport needs more of.

Soon I hope to start plying MA1 where maybe with the higher fees the payouts might be better.

I understand and hope I don't come off as criticizing. I lament our financial structure, but understand that we've grown accustomed to it and been a bit spoiled. And I mean "we".

I asked as a "philosophical question" because it's just that. Why don't we operate like other sports in this regard? Why do we pay Ams? Why aren't we willing to pay for a tournament experience?

There's a huge different in the resulting payout between a $30 entry and a $40 entry. With $30, more than half of it may go to players pack and fees. With $40, the payout might double. Yet when I've held a tournament and kept the entry fee low, I got complaints about the payout.

The non-sanctioned may have a much higher payout to top finishers, not only because they don't deduct the fees, but it may have a much steeper payout structure (paying few players). Or maybe they just had lots of extra money.

MA2 Expenses:

$126 = $3 PDGA player fees
$210 = $5 lunch X 42 players
$210 = $10 coupons X 42 players / 2 (actual cost of discs at wholesale)
$315 = $15 per player payout X 42 players / 2
$_62 = 1/2 sanctioning and PDGA insurance, assuming MA2 was about 1/2 the amateur field
____
$913



Bruce, can you explain the $315 = $15 per player payout x 42 / 2.

Why are you dividing this line item by 2?

No, no additional payout required for Ams in B-Tier.

WRONG.

Per 06. TourStandards.pdf, Table 1: PDGA Tier Standards Chart (pg3/5) B Tier events are to have $500 added cash. If no pros were playing this event, then that $500 should be going back to the AM player payout.

WRONG.

Per 06. TourStandards.pdf, Table 1: PDGA Tier Standards Chart (pg3/5) B Tier events are to have $500 added cash. If no pros were playing this event, then that $500 should be going back to the AM player payout.

I stand corrected. I haven't been to an Am-only event other than AmWorlds, so that didn't occur to me.

If you're in it for the money, it's the wrong sport to be in. Fun and competition are the reasons to play AM tourneys until you step up with the big boys. Then you can expect to get paid bigger money. Seriously, $30 and you're wondering why the low payout in AM2!?! That's barely the cost of two discs not to mention you got lunch and a players pack.

Played in a B tier this weekend and won the Intermediate division and got very low payout. Here is the breakdown of entries and payout.

Entry Fee: $30
Player pack: $10 disc coupon plus lunch (sand, chip and soda)
42 players in my division

My payout was $47 for first place. Does this sound even close to what it should be? I appreciate the people who ran the tourney and am not trying to complain but this seemed almost ridiculous. Last weekend I place 2nd in a B tier event with a field of 21 and got $45 and I thought this amount was pretty low. Im not out trying to make a killing play am tourneys but it would be nice to be rewarded for good play.

Would love to hear some feedback. Thanks jflick, you have ever right to be dissapointed in the payout. It sounds like after fees, lunch, player pack, etc. there was $416 allocated to the MA2 pool, and the TD selected to pay the top 50%. Using the 09PayTables.pdf guideline with 42 entrants and 50% payout, you were to receive a whopping 11.3% for first place ($416 * 11.3%) = $47.00.

Now, is this correct according to the payout table? Yes. However, where is the additional $500 that is required to be added to the B tier allocated towards the added payout? Maybe there were additional expenses involved? Anyway, I'm not wasting my time figuring this out.

Instead, I believe you mentioned that you received higher payouts at previous events. Here is an example of my own previous experience at a B tier event I won this year:

17 players in MA2 at $45 entry fee, with only 40% top payout. I received equivalent of $195 (probably at wholesale price). I won an innova skill shot catcher, handmade trophy, 3 discs, t-shirt, & innova towel. Much better than your measly $47.

MA1 won a Mach III portable basket & trophy.

So, your conclusion is that you got duped. Yes(maybe) & No. According to PDGA guidelines (minus the $500 required added cash) you got the correct amount per the Paytable. But from prior experiences in other events, yeah, you got shorted. We have a few events in our league this has happened at, and guess what their entry numbers are dwindling after numerous complaints and word of mouth of the low payout. Events with better payouts tend to fill up faster, and players seem to not mind paying the higher entry fee.

Bruce, can you explain the $315 = $15 per player payout x 42 / 2.

Why are you dividing this line item by 2?

Wholesale cost, I'll bet.

A few have mentioned this is Amatuer league, why do you expect payout/prizes. Just be happy that you played in an organized event, you got some shwag for participating, and if you really are concerned about prizes/cash, then play in the big league. What other sport pays out in prizes to amateurs?

I agree with this 100%. I've played in PDGA now for about 2 years, and it is unique in our sport to receive shwag for playing in an amatuer league. No other sport that I have played gives prizes of such, except for trophies. And truthfully, that's what I think it should be as well. I would be fine with lower entry fees, players pack provided by sponsors, and trophies for say top 20%. Why our sport provides these AM payouts, well that's something that maybe the people who put this sport together in the first place can help explain.

But if that's the way it is, then players are going to have expectations. If you go to event 01 and they give out baskets, a handful discs, and other shwag, then there is that expectation when you go to event 02 of equal standard (tier), then a player has reasonable expectation of the payout.

I think after playing the same events year after year, players will know going in that there is some expectation of shwag payout, and then other events they know only a small payout will be provided. Then they could choose what events to play, and maybe invest in some events just to have fun and play competively, and go for a trophy. While other events, shwag is on the line.

I blame the creators of these guidelines for this frenzy. I say we format the system, start from scratch, lower entry fees, your shwag is your players pack, and trophys for top 20%. (At least that's how I would of kicked off this organized amatuer sport, IMHO).

Wholesale cost, I'll bet. That's what I was thinking. I've played some events where they give out gift certificates for shop credit. I'm sure there's reduced fees provided by the shop that come in to effect to cut out some event fees to provide player payouts at a wholesale price than what is really given out. Makes sense.

And I'm cool with offering the wholesale merchandise at retail payout to AMS to boost up PRO payout. I want to see PRO purses increase. I think that will motivate more people to move up, and take the sport seriously, and play at a higher competitive level. That drive will also attract sponsorship dollars to increase PRO purse, and hopefully that will draw in national support to make this a broadcasted sport. Then can you say sponsor dollars and larger PRO purses!

Really as ams what we are are consumers. With the growth of the sport and options for tournaments, I think we have a right to express our opinions about the product. I dont think ive ever heard someone say "the payouts were low I cant wait to go back." But I have heard it the other way around. Along with many others, I prefer a more top heavy payout scale. If I play in a torunament and I just barely make the payouts I wouldnt expect much, but for winning or maybe even top 5, I think there should be more of a reward. Just my opinion but it is shared by many.



This is part of the problem. It's true that players have more choices than ever, and better tournaments will attract more. But we're not really consumers---unless the TDs are making money, real money, off us.

Oh, I can name a couple of tournaments with basic payouts, or even no payouts, that players are eager to return to.....that fill, and one that's so popular it's hard to get in.

Perhaps another way to view it is, when listing what you received, consider:

Did you get to play in a tournament?
Did someone organize it for you?
Did someone handle all the merchandise that went into the players packs and prizes?
Did someone groom the course for you?
Did someone devote several days of their life so you could play?

What's all that worth?

The "making a killing" is the culture most amateurs around the country are weaned on though, simply because of our competition system & payout scale. Unless you live in a region where tournaments are of a low-entry-fee-trophy-only-player-pack nature, this is the status quo. Not that I condone it, but I still find it hard to fault jflick for anything when I hear the exact same things being said by amateur golfers all the time whenever there's a tourny with a "suspect" payout.

Why the high expectation. Probably because most of the tournaments that I have played in the past have had much better payouts.

Bingo.

But if that's the way it is, then players are going to have expectations. If you go to event 01 and they give out baskets, a handful discs, and other shwag, then there is that expectation when you go to event 02 of equal standard (tier), then a player has reasonable expectation of the payout.

Bingo!

I blame the creators of these guidelines for this frenzy. I say we format the system, start from scratch, lower entry fees, your shwag is your players pack, and trophys for top 20%. (At least that's how I would of kicked off this organized amatuer sport, IMHO).

It's a great idea but in most areas of the country I think we're already long past the point of no return.

WRONG.

Per 06. TourStandards.pdf, Table 1: PDGA Tier Standards Chart (pg3/5) B Tier events are to have $500 added cash. If no pros were playing this event, then that $500 should be going back to the AM player payout.

Could you provide additional proof that the added cash is required for amateur-only B-tiers? There's nothing explicitly stated in that form regarding such a thing. I know it says "added cash", but I always thought the implication is that added cash refers to professional divisions since ams can not accept cash. If it said something like "added prize value" or something to that effect, I'd agree that it clearly includes the amateur divisions.


But assuming for a moment that you are correct, that still doesn't mean this tournament in question didn't comply with that requirement. Jflick played and won MA2. How do we know the $500 added cash didn't get put all in MA1 at that event? I know I've played (and run) events where the added cash went exclusively to the MPO and FPO divisions, and nothing was added to any age-protected (MPM, MPG, etc) or amateur divisions. The argument being that anyone can enter to the Open division to play for the big money so that's the only place to add it. That same argument clearly can apply to MA1 at an am-only tournament.


I do think that the biggest part of this discussion and where the problem lies (IMO) is the use of the word "should" when talking about amateur "payout". There really is no "should" when it comes to how much amateur "payout" is and how it should be distributed beyond 100% of the entry fees should returned to the players in some fashion or another.

If everyone adopts the expectation that so long as they got at least 100% of their entry back in value (be it retail or intrinsic), they've been treated fairly, I really believe there'd be far less bellyaching and whining about payout. Just because a tournament here or there goes above and beyond, players shouldn't be swayed into thinking that every other event should be like that or they're doing it "wrong" somehow.

This is part of the problem. It's true that players have more choices than ever, and better tournaments will attract more. But we're not really consumers---unless the TDs are making money, real money, off us.

Oh, I can name a couple of tournaments with basic payouts, or even no payouts, that players are eager to return to.....that fill, and one that's so popular it's hard to get in.

Perhaps another way to view it is, when listing what you received, consider:

Did you get to play in a tournament?
Did someone organize it for you?
Did someone handle all the merchandise that went into the players packs and prizes?
Did someone groom the course for you?
Did someone devote several days of their life so you could play?

What's all that worth? Probably one of my favorite events was this past March. It was a C-tier with 146 players, 2 day event, PRO/AM, with camping on site, two courses, and lunch. Most players knew going in that because we had a reserved camping site at a park, that player packs/payouts were going to be somewhat minimal. I had a blast camping with friends, BBQ, and playing two fun courses. It was a memorable event, and I can't wait for next year, by far the best C-tier event I've played. Baskets were given out to 1st in top divisions, trophies were handed out, and players did get plastic for I think 40% or 45% payout. Now these are my kind of events!

Most players knew going in that because we had a reserved camping site at a park, that player packs/payouts were going to be somewhat minimal...

Baskets were given out to 1st in top divisions, trophies were handed out, and players did get plastic for I think 40% or 45% payout. Now these are my kind of events!
These two sentences don't really compute to me. Are you saying that your expectations for payout was that they'd be minimal and then they exceeded expectations? Or are you saying that baskets to first place, plastic paid out to 40-45% of the field, and trophies is "minimal"?

Sounds like a great event, but nothing about it sounds minimal to me.

In most sports, "amateurs" don't expect to get paid. In most recreational sports I'm familiar with---adult softball and basketball, tennis, running, etc.---players pay a fee to enter an organized competition, and don't expect any payback. Just trophies, maybe a t-shirt for entering.

Don't get me wrong---I pay out Ams in tournaments I run, and I enjoy accepting prizes as an Am in tournaments I play in.


In the American Pool Association they do give prizes out for there leagues and tournaments. On several occasions I have had an all expence paid trip to Vegas. While there I placed and won several hundred dollars. We are not that unique in paying ams.

In the American Pool Association they do give prizes out for there leagues and tournaments. On several occasions I have had an all expence paid trip to Vegas. While there I placed and won several hundred dollars. We are not that unique in paying ams.
Have to question how truly amateur an organization is that promises $1.5 million in "guaranteed cash and prizes" at its various events, but hooray, and "amateur" organization that pays its participants. I think that's a bit mitigated by the fact that they run all their events using a handicap system rather than straight up play. Without that, I'm sure there would be plenty of cases of "professional" amateurs soaking up tons of cash and prizes and eventually chasing off players that grow tired of "donating" to their cause.

Could you provide additional proof that the added cash is required for amateur-only B-tiers? There's nothing explicitly stated in that form regarding such a thing. I know it says "added cash", but I always thought the implication is that added cash refers to professional divisions since ams can not accept cash. If it said something like "added prize value" or something to that effect, I'd agree that it clearly includes the amateur divisions. Sure, I'd be happy to. If you review the TD Report under the 'Instructions' tab, line 57&58, it states "For Am divisions, the dollar amounts and "added cash" for the payouts are based on retail merchandise values." Further, you can review the 'Am.Jr. Payout' tab and in bold red letters at the top of each Division it states "Enter Added Cash (or deduction) here* >". (And yes, they did put "added cash" in quotations.)

I understand the argument that on the PDGA Tier Standards Chart, it says Added Cash, and logically one would surmise that AMS don't get cash, so therefore the Added Cash must be for the PROs. However, if it were to say Added Pro Cash, and the two items I mentioned above were not on the TD report, then I would agree the Added Cash is strictly for PRO.


But assuming for a moment that you are correct, that still doesn't mean this tournament in question didn't comply with that requirement. Jflick played and won MA2. How do we know the $500 added cash didn't get put all in MA1 at that event? You're right, we don't know. That's why I said: However, where is the additional $500 that is required to be added to the B tier allocated towards the added payout? Maybe there were additional expenses involved? Anyway, I'm not wasting my time figuring this out. The additional money could of gone directly to the women or junior division, just no way of knowing where the TD allocated this Added Cash, and if the TD used these funds to cover additional costs involved in running the event, such as say a park fee.

The problem with the TD instructions is that it doesn't spell out what to do with the Added Cash or how to distribute it. Should it go to payout or cover event expenses? But a logical conclusion, upon reviewing the TD Report, this nomenclature of Added Cash, should go towards payout. If that means strictly only to PRO, in a PRO/AM event, again it's not defined.

There are no added cash requirements for amateurs, only for pros. It is covered in the sanctioning agreement and the tour standards document. For amatuers, the tier value requirement is stated as a percentage of entry fees.

"Amateur Payout % Not applicable 110+% 100+% 85+%"

Divide by 2 because a $16 Z disc costs $8 to $6.50, depending on whether you did tournament stamping whereas a $16 Champion disc might cost $8.50 or so, depending on the quantity ordered, but with either order you might also get free stuff worth about 10% of your order. So pricing is complicated, but it is about half the suggested wholesale prices on the average, or better if you train your players to throw the less expensive brand and follow their pricing structure.

A lot of TDs seem to use the sucky PDGA payout standards and the bug-a-boo of sanctioning and insurance as cover to run crappy events for amateurs. Sanctioning, insurance and B-tier fees are $4 an amateur if you run good events that attract a lot of amateurs, but it can be $6 or $7 per amateur if you only get 30 or 40 amateurs to show up for your crappy-by-reputation tournaments.

I used to underwrite and produce one of the most popular amateur-oriented tournament serieses in the country, so I know what I'm talking about here. We paid our ams around 150%, averaged about 150 ams per tournament, and made a small profit. Some of us made a smaller profit than others. Sometimes Jon made a small profit and I broke even. Brett always did fine. Gas got expensive at the end and started consuming all my profits. If a TD pays out PDGA 100% to the ams, he is sweeping a lot of their money off the table for some other purpose. If he is paying the pros added cash, there's your other purpose. If he is using one of these travelling merch dudes, maybe that guy is just making a living, barely. If he is travelling 300 one way miles to run the thing, some sheik is taking home most of the profit.

If your TD lives 10 miles from the tournament, and is C-tiering the pros and stiffing the ams, it is time to step up and be the new TD.

These two sentences don't really compute to me. Are you saying that your expectations for payout was that they'd be minimal and then they exceeded expectations? Or are you saying that baskets to first place, plastic paid out to 40-45% of the field, and trophies is "minimal"?

Sounds like a great event, but nothing about it sounds minimal to me.

There was an additional park fee to reserve a camping area to be used for the second course. With 146 players, you would think this would easily be a B-tier, however it was a C-tier to save some additional event costs (at least that is my understanding). It drew more players than a recent A/B tier at Sylmar, CA. You probably already know, as you move from B tier to C tier, less payout % and added cash is involved as well the requirement for minimum retail value of amatuer player's package.

Event / B tier / C tier
Added Cash / $500 / $0.00
Payout / 100% / 85%
AM player pack./ min $10 / $0.00

So, to answer your question, yes to #1, no to #2.

There are no added cash requirements for amateurs, only for pros. It is covered in the sanctioning agreement and the tour standards document. For amatuers, the tier value requirement is stated as a percentage of entry fees.

Can you please enlighten me and provide the exact page/reference as I have read these two documents in their entirety and found nothing of the sort to support your statement.

There was an additional park fee to reserve a camping area to be used for the second course. With 146 players, you would think this would easily be a B-tier, however it was a C-tier to save some additional event costs (at least that is my understanding). It drew more players than a recent A/B tier at Sylmar, CA. You probably already know, as you move from B tier to C tier, less payout % and added cash is involved as well the requirement for minimum retail value of amatuer player's package.

Event / B tier / C tier
Added Cash / $500 / $0.00
Payout / 100% / 85%
AM player pack./ min $10 / $0.00

So, to answer your question, yes to #1, no to #2.
Thanks for the clarification. Makes a ton of sense. And I can't say I blame the TDs for sanctioning as a C-tier and then running it like a B (or simply paying out well above and beyond the minimum C-tier requirements). I've done it myself. The $500 minimum added plus a higher sanctioning fee is usually the kicker. If I can't be assured of raising the $500, better to sanction it lower and payout as much as I can scrape up sponsorship-wise.

Seems like more players have your positive reaction to a C-tier that greatly exceeds the minimums required than they would to a B-tier that just covers the minimums. That's the point I was trying to make in a previous post, it's all about perspective. With the right frame of mind and reasonable expectations, everything just takes on a much more positive appearance.

In the American Pool Association they do give prizes out for there leagues and tournaments. On several occasions I have had an all expence paid trip to Vegas. While there I placed and won several hundred dollars. We are not that unique in paying ams.

Interesting. There may be other examples of "paying amateurs". That's why I used the qualifier, "In most recreational sports I'm familiar with....".

It would be nice (but it's tough to ask the TDs to do more than they already do...and they DO do a lot...and provide us with a tournament setting to play in - thank you all TDs) to have all information, including projected "usage of funds taken in", prior to people signing up. In that way one could "vote with their feet". As it is right now, one can only "try, assess, and come next year / boycott it next year" depending if the tournament meet expectations.

I'm not saying that task would be easy but 'full disclosure' up front is the only way to go.

Karl

What does everyone think would happen if the pdga gets rid of the players packs for tournies, and go to a trophy payout for all AM's?

If you mean get rid of players packs AND prize payouts, I think a lot of events would go non-sanctioned, and a lot of players would attend those events.

It would be nice (but it's tough to ask the TDs to do more than they already do...and they DO do a lot...and provide us with a tournament setting to play in - thank you all TDs) to have all information, including projected "usage of funds taken in", prior to people signing up. In that way one could "vote with their feet". As it is right now, one can only "try, assess, and come next year / boycott it next year" depending if the tournament meet expectations.

I'm not saying that task would be easy but 'full disclosure' up front is the only way to go.

Karl

I don't think it would matter much. Our own pre-tournament projections aren't that accurate, since we don't know who merchandise sales we'll have, or even the attendance.

People make attendance decisions based on many factors, including payout they receive (in prize or players pack), but I think that falls below the course, the spot on the calendar, and the tournament history in priorities. What the TD or club does with the money probaby falls far below in importance.

No one's ever asked me about events I've TD'd, but I'd be happy to answer if they did.

If you mean get rid of players packs AND prize payouts, I think a lot of events would go non-sanctioned, and a lot of players would attend those events.

Yes that is what I mean. What do you think would happen to disc golf companies if this came to fruition?

They would be slightly more profitable.

They would be slightly more profitable.

Can you explain this to me Chuck?

PDGA Tournament sales are a relatively small portion of disc sales for the manufacturers. They have to deal with relatively small orders and usually provide better pricing than they have to for regular wholesale sales of the same size. Plus, going back and forth on custom artwork and hotstamping is added labor time not always recouped even with fees for those services. They won't phrase it this way but supporting tournaments is more of a necessary "evil" of doing business in the disc golf world than a big moneymaker. They aren't 'thanked' enough for what they do to help with tournament finances. If you talk to the disc retailers, PDGA members only comprise around 1%-3% of all sales.

PDGA Tournament sales are a relatively small portion of disc sales for the manufacturers. They have to deal with relatively small orders and usually provide better pricing than they have to for regular wholesale sales of the same size. Plus, going back and forth on custom artwork and hotstamping is added labor time not always recouped even with fees for those services. They won't phrase it this way but supporting tournaments is more of a necessary "evil" of doing business in the disc golf world than a big moneymaker. They aren't 'thanked' enough for what they do to help with tournament finances. If you talk to the disc retailers, PDGA members only comprise around 1%-3% of all sales. I agree 90% with this. Manufacturers at events are alot of times overlooked at PDGA events, and their margin is net to cost if not lower. However, I think if they felt that it wasn't a benefit they would discontinue this service. Sometimes it's not directly always about the bottom line. Maybe it's about being involved in supporting PDGA events, or marketing their equipment to players who bring attention back to their local courses. In turn, these players provide a free marketing service to locals, recreational players and new potential players. Sponsoring PDGA events can also help market a new product as well. So yeah, it's not a direct sales profit scheme, but a marketing tool to potentially increase future and ongoing sales.

Since we are taking about payouts, I would like to hear from TDs or people directly involved in running events about raffle revenue. Does this revenue contribute to higher PRO payouts, or just to cover event costs?

I have always been curious what TDs do with this money, not that I'm overly concerned. I'm just trying to take into account that without knowing how many raffle tickets they will sale, if this is the final revenue stream that may push them into the black or help add to a guaranteed PRO payout.

I do not run raffles as it would be illegal without a permit in my state.

It would be nice (but it's tough to ask the TDs to do more than they already do...and they DO do a lot...and provide us with a tournament setting to play in - thank you all TDs) to have all information, including projected "usage of funds taken in", prior to people signing up. In that way one could "vote with their feet". As it is right now, one can only "try, assess, and come next year / boycott it next year" depending if the tournament meet expectations.

I'm not saying that task would be easy but 'full disclosure' up front is the only way to go.

Karl
I can't say I disagree with you, Karl. In fact, for a few years, we were breaking down our entry fees in great detail on our tournament flyers (tables with each fee and expense laid out for each division). What I found is that while doing that more or less eliminates the "where did my money go?" questions, it brought out myriad busy-bodies that wanted to ask "why" about every detail and fee, then tell us we shouldn't do this and we should do that instead. I think some people even interpreted it as an "a la carte" entry and thought they wouldn't have to pay, say, the $2 PDGA player fee if they didn't care about the PDGA sanctioning.

It got to be such a headache dealing with the people who wanted to dictate how the event ran without lifting a finger to actually help run the event (or any other for that matter). It really sucks when you get to a week or two before the tournament and you just want to get it the hell over with so you never have to do it again (of course like fools, we end up continuing to run head-first into that wall). Surprisingly, it is much easier to simply layout the financials after the fact to quell the questions than to try to stay out in front of it and simply invite more nitpicking.

Try going to McDonalds and ask them to break down the costs to produce the items you've ordered...

Why the high expectation. Probably because most of the tournaments that I have played in the past have had much better payouts. I played in a non-sanctioned event locally and recieved $85 for 1st in a much smaller field and it included a free disc worth over $10 for players pack. The Entry fee was only $20.I realize that they did not have to incur the sanctioning fees, insurance etc.

As far as other AM sports and no return, the entry fees are generally much lower.

Really as ams what we are are consumers. With the growth of the sport and options for tournaments, I think we have a right to express our opinions about the product. I dont think ive ever heard someone say "the payouts were low I cant wait to go back." But I have heard it the other way around. Along with many others, I prefer a more top heavy payout scale. If I play in a torunament and I just barely make the payouts I wouldnt expect much, but for winning or maybe even top 5, I think there should be more of a reward. Just my opinion but it is shared by many.

Not trying to disrespect any tournament directors because I know from firsthand experience that it can be a lot of work. But I also know that the payouts can be better through sponsorship which is one thing our sport needs more of.

Soon I hope to start plying MA1 where maybe with the higher fees the payouts might be better.

jflick, you have to keep in mind the flatter payouts will often prevent sandbagging. If you pay out that $85-100 total that you want, people have a hard time moving up to that next level. If you finish at the top of the Intermediate field every tourney and then once you move to the Advanced and finish toward the middle, you may rethink your payout suggestion. You are certainly right, some tournaments pay better than others and you certainly have the right to pick and choose. Just keep in mind when you play with guys who win over and over again and have no intention to move up, that may eventually **** you off.

IMO, Ams need incentive to move up and a big payday in lower AM fields is not the answer. As it is now, we have 200 Am divisions and most of the ratings overlap when you look at the registration pages. Alright, I am done...that will just stir up a brand new discussion! :-)

How does this look for a B-tier with a $45 entry? I'd guess $40 goes to purse...

1 Tanner Duncan 140 $300
2 Rob Kauffman 148 $200
3 Jordan Castro 149 $107
3 Dustin Honold 149 $107
5 Joe Hegge 152 $75
6 Brandon Day 154 $50
6 Bob Hoy 154 $50
6 Adrian Heil 154 $50
9 Riley Brenner 155
10 Chris Claring 157
10 Joey Miller 157
12 Daniel Kirby 158
12 Michael Kurzhals 158
12 Mike Misakian 158
15 Dave Bednar 161
16 Adam May 166
17 Shan Vierus 168
18 Ryan Schmidt 172
19 Adam Wilson 173
20 Cannin Mecklenburg 174

How does this look for a B-tier with a $45 entry? I'd guess $40 goes to purse...

1 Tanner Duncan 140 $300
2 Rob Kauffman 148 $200
3 Jordan Castro 149 $107
3 Dustin Honold 149 $107
5 Joe Hegge 152 $75
6 Brandon Day 154 $50
6 Bob Hoy 154 $50
6 Adrian Heil 154 $50
9 Riley Brenner 155
10 Chris Claring 157
10 Joey Miller 157
12 Daniel Kirby 158
12 Michael Kurzhals 158
12 Mike Misakian 158
15 Dave Bednar 161
16 Adam May 166
17 Shan Vierus 168
18 Ryan Schmidt 172
19 Adam Wilson 173
20 Cannin Mecklenburg 174

Sandbagger! :-)

How does this look for a B-tier with a $45 entry? I'd guess $40 goes to purse...

1 Tanner Duncan 140 $300
2 Rob Kauffman 148 $200
3 Jordan Castro 149 $107
3 Dustin Honold 149 $107
5 Joe Hegge 152 $75
6 Brandon Day 154 $50
6 Bob Hoy 154 $50
6 Adrian Heil 154 $50
...
Based on the whole spirit of the thread, I'm assuming this is an amateur division. With that the case, the TD...

...used the Pro payout scale rather than the Am scale.
...used the 40% scale when, according to the sanctioning agreement, he is supposed to use pay a minimum of 45%.
...appears to have shuffled some of the prize value from places 3-5 up into first and second (pro scale says 263/178/136/108/85).

Other than that, nothing major to quibble about.

With the same amount of money ($939) but the minimum required percentage of the field (45%), the am scale would have set the payout like this:
1 $160
2 $141
3 $122
3 $122
5 $103
6 $78.33
6 $78.33
6 $78.33
9 $56

Still pretty solid return for the top players, but it's spread out a bit more evenly down the line and follows the requirements set out in the sanctioning agreement.

...used the Pro payout scale rather than the Am scale.
...used the 40% scale when, according to the sanctioning agreement, he is supposed to use pay a minimum of 45%.

I like this pay scale of distributing more to the top finishers, than the PDGA Paytables flat scale. This is more realistic, maybe giving a basket (or pro bag+shwag) to 1st place in a division.


1 Tanner Duncan 140 $300
2 Rob Kauffman 148 $200
3 Jordan Castro 149 $107
3 Dustin Honold 149 $107
5 Joe Hegge 152 $75
6 Brandon Day 154 $50
6 Bob Hoy 154 $50
6 Adrian Heil 154 $50

Uh, that was the Open Pro division cash payout you're analyzing...

I like this pay scale of distributing more to the top finishers, than the PDGA Paytables flat scale. This is more realistic, maybe giving a basket (or pro bag+shwag) to 1st place in a division.

Doing so may violate the sanctioning agreement. One benefit of sanctioning is that players know what to expect (more or less). While this no doubt makes the winning players much happier, those who finished just above the middle and expect to win prizes---by rule---may be upset.

As long as we must pay Ams, I prefer the steeper payout too.....but a $300 prize does boost the opponents' argument that high Am payouts discourage moving up, and perhaps encourage sandbagging. Paying out fewer people may reduce attendance, and ultimately payouts at the top, as well. Just food for thought.

As long as you payout the minimum shown by the table, added cash can be distributed in any manner the TD wishes. It can all be lumped on first place, or sown down to pay deeper.

Uh, that was the Open Pro division cash payout you're analyzing...

Based on the whole spirit of the thread, I'm assuming this is an amateur division. With that the case, the TD...

I stand corrected. If that's a pro open payout, there's nothing wrong with it, except maybe point three in my post...
...appears to have shuffled some of the prize value from places 3-5 up into first and second
But as krupicka points out, there's nothing technically wrong with shuffling the added money around to boost the top spots. I've been guilty of it myself in the past.

Doing so may violate the sanctioning agreement.

A lot of this discussion has been presented in a previous thread a couple months ago. In the majority of PDGA events I have participated in the sanctioning agreement has NOT been followed as per the Paytables. Almost every event I have been apart of, top AM finishers receive a basket, more than the value of 1st place in the paytable. No one has yet provided an explanation as to how this is permittable as it clearly violates the sanctioning agreement (by not following the Paytables).

One benefit of sanctioning is that players know what to expect (more or less). While this no doubt makes the winning players much happier, those who finished just above the middle and expect to win prizes---by rule---may be upset.

As long as we must pay Ams, I prefer the steeper payout too.....but a $300 prize does boost the opponents' argument that high Am payouts discourage moving up, and perhaps encourage sandbagging. Paying out fewer people may reduce attendance, and ultimately payouts at the top, as well. Just food for thought.

1. Don't give out handouts, make players compete for their winnings.
2. Paying out 25 of the top 50 players at an A-tier, is LAME. Refer to 1 above.
3. If I finished middle in the pack, I don't expect to win anything. It will only motivate me to work harder.
4. reward those who practice, and put in the time and effort to compete, and perform.
5. I don't think players are thinking, hmm, if they pay out only the top 1/3 in each division rather than the top 1/2, then I'm not going to play in an event.

So that means at an A-tier with 50 players in a division, 25 are to be paid at 50% payout. However if you reduce payout to 33%, only 17 players are going to get paid, and guess what, those 17 players will get more payout! So do you really think 8 players that didn't get an extra peice of plastic beyond their player pack shwag are going to be that bummed that their going to stop playing in an events? There's a lot more that motivates players to play events than worrying about if you have a lousy performance and finish 20th out 50, that your not going to get one more peice of plastic.

I suggest at smaller events (c-tiers), spread out of the payouts more in lower divisions. But as players move up in division, and play at larger events, the payout should not be as flat as the Paytable advises. You compete in MA1 at an A-tier, payout at the most should be top 1/3.

I'm not making the argument, just passing it along. As I posted, I prefer steeper payouts (I'd pay to the Top 3rd, myself).

The attendance argument isn't that those who finish 18-25 will be discouraged from coming back. It's the guy who routinely finishes 40th, who occasionally puts together a good round, finishes 25th, & gets a reward. It'll be much rarer for him to finish 17th.

I kinda' like the notion of flatter payouts at C-tiers, steeper at A-tiers.

There's nothing stopping your proposed format from being offered at an event. It might have to be classed as an X-tier but that's even better so players know about your proposed "improved" format. There's also nothing out of line with first place getting a basket as long as the other places still get what they would have gotten if the extra sponsorship added to provide the basket wasn't there. In other words, if the payout table said 2nd gets $75 value at 100% payout and 2nd still gets $75 even though 1st gets a basket because the payout percentage is say 110%, then no problem.

In the majority of PDGA events I have participated in the sanctioning agreement has NOT been followed as per the Paytables. Almost every event I have been apart of, top AM finishers receive a basket, more than the value of 1st place in the paytable. No one has yet provided an explanation as to how this is permittable as it clearly violates the sanctioning agreement (by not following the Paytables).



Patrick -

When a TD signs the sanctioning agreement they agree to pay out a MINIMUM percentage of the field as per the PDGA Payout tables. No where in the agreement does it say you must pay only the amounts listed. TD's are always welcome to pay more people or increase the amount paid. Paying more is permittable and is NOT a "clear violation" of the Sanctioning Agreement nor of the PDGA Tour Standards document - Table 1.


From PDGA Sanctioning Agreement line 178


Agree to pay a minimum of 40% of the Pro Field and a minimum of 45% of the Am Field as per the pay tables. To explain further, here is what most likely happens at events in our area. Some sponsors donate merchandise to events. How exactly should the value of a $60.00 bag or $125.00 portable target be divided or reduced? In my case, I award the bag to first place, even if the PDGA tables say to pay only $45.00. Then I go ahead and follow tables for 2nd place at $40.00, etc. That is, unless there is another large, non-divisible prize like a bag to award.


Again, TD's agree to pay MINIMUM amounts. They are not "clearly violating" anything by awarding more. In fact, they should be congratulated!

I suppose the TD could do even more work (and probably insult the sponsor) by selling the donated target or bag in advance of the event and then using the money raised to buy prizes of the "proper value" from another vendor or sponsor.

RE: Chuck & Discette's posts

I'll have to backtrack and say I've never interpreted it that way (though the issue hasn't come up, as I haven't had extra to put into Am payout). I read it as

(1) TD must pay a mimimum of 40% / 45% of players.

(2) Must pay out per the payout tables---that is, each spot the correct percentage of the total payout, subject to rounding.

If I'm ever running an event with added value to the Ams, I'll have to keep that in mind and consider adding extra to the top finishers.

Nor did it occur to me to run an event as an X-tier based on a steeper payout.....even though, a few years ago, we were running an X-tier (single elimination bracket, match play), which had only a 25% or so payout because of the brackets. It's good to know.

Patrick -

When a TD signs the sanctioning agreement they agree to pay out a MINIMUM percentage of the field as per the PDGA Payout tables. No where in the agreement does it say you must pay only the amounts listed. TD's are always welcome to pay more people or increase the amount paid. Paying more is permittable and is NOT a "clear violation" of the Sanctioning Agreement nor of the PDGA Tour Standards document - Table 1.


From PDGA Sanctioning Agreement line 178

To explain further, here is what most likely happens at events in our area. Some sponsors donate merchandise to events. How exactly should the value of a $60.00 bag or $125.00 portable target be divided or reduced? In my case, I award the target to first place, even if the PDGA tables say to pay only $45.00. Then I go ahead and follow tables for 2nd place at $40.00, etc. That is, unless there is another large, non-divisible prize like a bag to award.


Again, TD's agree to pay MINIMUM amounts. They are not "clearly violating" anything by awarding more. In fact, they should be congratulated!

I was thinking total amount to be distributed would be per the pay tables. But your explanation makes perfect sense. Thank you for the clarification. That is the one last thing I couldn't figure out when reading all the TD resources. I can sleep better at night now.

I think the takeaway from this thread should be that even though the PDGA provides some structure for a default event format, there's a lot of flexibility for TDs to determine an alternative formula that may work better in their area or for a certain type of event. The PDGA formats have been developed over the years based on perceived popularity with members as it is a member based organization. Those who feel the default or typical format could be better are reasonably free to test out new ideas with PDGA sanctioning to see if they actually work better and even go unsanctioned if it's too radical even for an X-tier.

Been away working for a few days...

Josh,
I hear your...
"I can't say I disagree with you, Karl. In fact, for a few years, we were breaking down our entry fees in great detail on our tournament flyers (tables with each fee and expense laid out for each division). What I found is that while doing that more or less eliminates the "where did my money go?" questions, it brought out myriad busy-bodies that wanted to ask "why" about every detail and fee, then tell us we shouldn't do this and we should do that instead."
...but in your case you DID provide info up-front. They then could decide with their feet. They chose to come. Then grump. At that time - after being WAY more transparent than most situations - I'd have to start getting testy (knowing that I'd done better than most) and say what Bob always says...
"Everybody has an opinion; your's just happens to be wrong".

Karl