So the best player at a given course should get the highest reward at that course even if they are competing at a different event.

Therefore, since Kevin McCoy and Seth Lawhead are the course record holders at Pecan Park, no one should ever win more than they did, and they should somehow have access to moeny they were not even playing for.


This use of logic is par for the course.

Therefore, since Kevin McCoy and Seth Lawhead are the course record holders at Pecan Park, no one should ever win more than they did, and they should somehow have access to moeny they were not even playing for.



Still course record???? :) WOW :D

So the best player at a given course should get the highest reward at that course even if they are competing at a different event.

Therefore, since Kevin McCoy and Seth Lawhead are the course record holders at Pecan Park, no one should ever win more than they did, and they should somehow have access to moeny they were not even playing for.


This use of logic is par for the course.



Ok, what would make you happy ?

For the Am to get nothing for competing, or just for the Pros to get a lot more than the Ams ?

The Ams have figured out a system that seems to keep a lot of them happy and playing. It's not perfect, but it seems to work. The Pros have tried the same system, but it doesn't work as well for them, but the problem is with the Am system.



Nice conclusion, you are merely restating your conclusion over and over and over: the ams deserve more by virtue of their numbers, and of course, their protections (you actually just quietly whisper the second part in moments of honesty.)

As we continue with your system, we create a culture expecting their PDGA protected entitlements. You are like the present young workers in France going nuts over the proposal that they might be fired if they do not perform. The PDGA, and disc golf by association, is becoming like France's workforce, a bunch of people coming up with convoluted reasons on why they deserve protection and reward. Of course, none of these reasons have a **** thing to do with performance, or personal integrity. Oh, by the way, France's economy sucks, partly due to their workforce that demands a lot, for virtually little work.

Are you french?

Casuals are not ams. They are not interested in organized competition, while ams are.

Nick's ams are interested in organized competition, but they are not motivated by financial returns. They ARE clearly distinct from the what the the PDGA assumes ams are. This is pretty much irrefutable.



James, I am really tired of you calling me names. You have no idea why I enter disc golf tournaments. I am sick of you assuming that the only reason I play is "for profit". You don't know squat about me, so shut up.

I am no tinterested in financial returns. I play for competition. I have never even come close to breaking even on a tournament, even on those rare occasions where I finished first in my division.

The ams I see selling plastic in the parking lot are selling discs at what would be a loss, like $5 for DX and $10 for candy, in order to move it fast. I don't think the hyper-inflated retail calcs of $18 or $20 per disc for the am payouts translate into anything near those retail totals for the few ams that sell their winnings.

Regardless, whatever the hell a true am is or is not, or whatever the hell other sports do, you never address the nagging question in front of you. Why is our sport set up to oftentimes reward those that perform worse, when compared to those that performed better. Why? Why? Why? Answer the freaking question. Quit avoiding it.


James, you appear to be turning into Nick. i.e., you cannot imagine anything other that what you yourself is saying.

Your question has been answered over and over and over again on this thread. Open up your mind and read, man! We are competing for our own entry fees. There are fewer Open players so they compete for less. There are fewer Pro Masters players and the top spot is almost always won by a 1000+ rated player, so there is even less money for you to play for.

Less pros = less payout.

Work on that, would you? Try and figure out either a way to sell pro golf to the masses or else a way to con more donators....er, get more people to play pro. Here's a hint: try lowering your entry fees.

So I should be able to make my ADV debut at World DUBS next year.


Am World Dubs is a PDGA Major. As such, you would be ineligible to participate. You must petition to regain your am status and then, per the rules but not per past practice, wait one year to participate in Am Majors.

That is just wrong. Ams in other sports play for competition, its a motivation thing, they are not motivated by stacks of easily resellable merch. near equal to the elite of the sport.


Newsflash for some of you blind-raging posters: AMS IN THE PDGA ALSO PLAY FOR THE COMPETITION. IT'S A MOTIVATION THING. MOST OF THEM KNOW THAT THEY CANNOT EVEN COME CLOSE TO MAKING A PROFIT AT DISC GOLF TOURNAMENT, EVEN IF THEY DO SELL THEIR WINNING IN THE PARKING LOT FOR $5 A DISC.

As amazing as it might sound to you, some PDGA Ams actualy practice putting and driving so that they can beat their buddies at the next tournament. I know that a lot of you find this fact impossible to believe, but trust me...it's true.

Rhett, I have never said anything about your motivations. Your quote was me refering to "Nick's ams" who are motivated by competition. I just said, as evidenced by PDGA policies on how tourneys are run, that the PDGA assumes that ams are motivated by payouts.

If you want to argue what "Nick ams" or "PDGA assumptions" are, then do it, but quit claiming I said a **** thing about Rhett Stroh's motivations. ;)

btw, just for the record, I don't know you, but I never assumed you were a "greedy am." Actually, I suspect that the PDGA could flatten the payouts more and still attract the same ams, because most of them aren't motivated by stacks of plastics.

That is just wrong. Ams in other sports play for competition, its a motivation thing, they are not motivated by stacks of easily resellable merch. near equal to the elite of the sport.


Newsflash for some of you blind-raging posters: AMS IN THE PDGA ALSO PLAY FOR THE COMPETITION. IT'S A MOTIVATION THING. MOST OF THEM KNOW THAT THEY CANNOT EVEN COME CLOSE TO MAKING A PROFIT AT DISC GOLF TOURNAMENT, EVEN IF THEY DO SELL THEIR WINNING IN THE PARKING LOT FOR $5 A DISC.

As amazing as it might sound to you, some PDGA Ams actualy practice putting and driving so that they can beat their buddies at the next tournament. I know that a lot of you find this fact impossible to believe, but trust me...it's true.



True Rhett , seen this more than ever.

And to some , they are comfortable playing competitively , just where they are. It's not just about the plastic.

And yes , I have purchased some of their plastic in the parking lot for $ 5.00 !!!! :D Some great stuff that normally retails for $ 15.00 +

Ok, what would make you happy ?

For the Am to get nothing for competing, or just for the Pros to get a lot more than the Ams ?



Now is it you who are avoiding the question ?

Right now everyone is following the same model of playing for each other's entry fees. That's about as equal as it can get.

If there were just one pot and one division, I personally would rather stay home and play around town for fun than travel unless the event was very special.

If you see it as rewarding poor play, then that is the way you see it. I don't compare my scores and winnings to the Advanced or Intermediate or even Recreational scores and winnings and complain when lower scores in those divisions won more than I did. It is irrelevant. I was not competing against those players. I was competing against those in my division.

As it stands now, no one is really making a profit at disc golf from payouts. The Ams are doing well as they are. There is discussion about starting a new level of play with lower entry fees, bigger player packs, and little or no performance payout. I hope it takes off, but I expect the player pool it will draw from will be basically different than the one the current system draws from.

I truly hope that we come up with a way to increase funding for the Pro divisions so that we can have some true Pros.

I just don't think that trying to cut the legs out from under the Am ranks is the way to do it. I think that will just reduce the number of Ams playing in tournaments. That will reduce the money a TD takes in and the amount he can add to the Pro payouts. That will reduce the chance that a lower rated Pro can win anything worthwhile. That will reduce the number of Pros playing.

????

Then why do you keep posting that the only reason ams play PDGA events is because they are motivated by making a profit on plastic??????

the only people i know making a profit on plastic are surgeons.

since i like 'em natural, does that make me a Pro? :cool:

You continue to split hairs Gary. We found evidence of true amateur sport and now you throw out the "team" card!?! I'm really interested to know what your agenda really is? Do you see a true Amateur Class as a threat to the prize or cash class? I just don't get it. What are you so afraid of?


<font color="blue">Everything you have said is backing up my position.</font>

Gary, is this the premise upon you base the idea that there need not be one? i.e. because you yourself have never experienced it?



It should come as no surprise here or elsewhere that folks that have never experienced, or have forgotten, true amateur competition think that the only motivation for participation is to �gamble�.



I can't remember any, because I have not come across any since leaving school. The motivation in school had nothing to do with being competitive, it was a social thing. Pee Wee football had nothing to do with competing, it was where your friends were. Intramural ultimate was fun, but the reasons for being there were social more than competitive. I have never been exposed to adult individual true amateur competition.

<font color="green"> That is too bad. But it is not evidence that it doesn't exist, or that it won't serve a valuable purpose for the PDGA and our sport as a whole. </font>

Did you ever play on a winning team Gary? The fire of competition still burns within my heart based on the experiences of my amateur play in middle and high school sports, as well as college intramurals, adult softball and basketball. <font color="blue">Yes, I have played on winning teams. and for me the motivation was more toward the team than the competition itself. Of course being motivated for the team meant you had to perform at your best helped the team to win, it also meant looking out for the other players and helping them improve.</font><font color="green"> You mean you don't look out for other players and help them improve in disc golf? I'm pretty sure the PDGA allows such behavior, though I'll check my rule book. And by the sounds of your description I can't tell if you really ever "were" a competitor. Being on a team or not doesn't make you more or less of a competitor, a burning desire to compete does, and that I have found to be nearly identical in individual and team sports. </font>

I played 4 years on 3 "True Amateur" adult basketball teams, and I can report though they were some of the best times of my life, there was no lack of intense competition. These leagues were all part of local/regional/national system. <font color="blue"> Again you speak of these things called teams. I think it is what a "true AM" structure needs to truly succeed.</font>
<font color="green"> Where did you get the notion that individual sports are the exclusive domain of Professionals? Sports have long had amateur levels of individual sports as well: tennis, running, wrestling, golf, etc. Again, what advantage do you see in disc golf NOT having an amateur class of competition? </font>

I also played in essentially "True Amateur" competitions in all but the "Japan Open" disc golf competitions in Japan, and the battles were just as intense and vivid as they ever were back here with Craiger, Jim, Mela, Kady and others. <font color="blue"> When I have time in the summer, I play true amateur competitions every week. No cash, no tags (tags are prizes), just a bunch of guys playing golf. Come to think of it there is not a lot of emphasis on competition either. Yeah, you brag for a few minutes about your score, but most of the talk relates to specific shots on specific holes more than overall score. More comraderie than competition.</font>

How do I know that such True Amateur competition is "REAL"? Because I experience it on a weekly basis out at doubles, tags, and Sunday morning rounds. <font color="blue"> I haven't really seen much organized doubles competitions where money or prizes didn't come up. Ee have one, but money still keeps getting mentioned.</font>

Now I want to bring that form of competition, Officially, to the PDGA; where it ALSO rightly belongs.


<font color="green"> I see a place for team competitions as well, and have participated in 3 already, but there is nothing exclusively "amateur" about any of them. </font>

<font color="blue">Technically, why should a true amateur structure rightly belong within a professional organization ? I'm not saying it doesn't belong there at this time, but it isn't where any amateur organization should be in a perfect world.</font>



Again with the splitting hairs. Either it is "good" for organized golf, or it is not. If it is good then the PDGA should consider it seriously; and equally so if it at least does not harm (which I can't see it doing, can you?).

Your question has been answered over and over and over again on this thread. Open up your mind and read, man!


Your basically right, my mind has trouble digesting that answer for a couple of reasons:

1) It is off point, IMO, and therefore it is a very unsatisfying reply. Once again "Why should we set up a SPORT that encourages people not to improve?" "Well, because, there are many more people in those pools."

I don't know, but that just seems like a really lame answer.

2) The second reason that answer is difficult to digest is that it basically begs the question. I mean, the PDGA rules that allow this problem to exist are what I'm #$*&$! about. Your answer hardly addresses why those poliies should be as they are, it merely accepts that they exist, and regurgitates the consequences. "Why should you profit from a rule that protects you due to your skill?" Answer: "Well, there are more of us."

That's hardly a meaty answer.

Don't get me wrong. I suspect that the answer is simply the tyranny of the majority. They prefer the easy road.

No, the answer is simply one of open market systems and economics. Throw a tournament that doesn't offer value for a majority of the people (i.e. one that pays a small group of elite players while the majority go home empty handed), and the people will stop coming. Period. Force them up, make them contribute to the pros, and see how many come back.

If you really want to increse pro purses, then you need to change the economics. As opposed to gambling for each other's money, and expecting that other divisions wil let you gamble for their's as well, figure out a new added cash source. What other 'pro' out there is gambling for their competitor's entry fee? Pro football players? Pro golfers? Pro bowlers? Of course not. The only one I can think of is Pro Poker players, and they have 'feeder' tournaments that help the players raise the necessary $10K entry fee. You got $10k to 'invest' so that there is a $1,000,000 pro purse at the next Worlds?

Face it man, until you figure a way to get money in from sources other than entry fees, this problem will always exist. When the pro purses include a large chunk of change that isn't from the player's pockets, then you will see people fighting to 'go pro'.

One thing I don't want is for these folks to be forced into the same old merry-go-round ride the prize/cash divisions are in providing new "meat" (or added cash) to their protected/entitled divisions only to be spit out the other end. They must be on their OWN competitive track. Separate, protected and free to grow and expand without fear of being used as a direct cash cow for the prize/cash divisions. The reason I use the word "direct" is because though I don't want direct skimming of their resources, the truth is that they will provide 80% to 95% of sponsorship dollars for prize/cash divisions down the line as they buy the products and services that will bring our sport to mainstream attention, and that in turn will be the mechanism ingaining significant and major sponsorship for the prize/cash divisions.



You are contradicting your own arguments. Name a method that could be used to "force" these players into the "same old merry-go-round ride the prize/cash divisions are in".
<font color="blue"> #1 Trophy Only Option. </font>
<font color="brown"> That does not follow your own logic. A true amateur would not be competing in a tournament where a prize amateur was competing. They would have a completely separate competitive structure. If you are merely asking that we include more divisions within the existing structure, then there seems to be a real problem. With many events filling with existing divisions, where are the true ams going to play ?</font>
<font color="purple"> Yes, I am. I am just not following the logic you �want� me to follow. If the Trophy Only Option is the PDGAs answer to the lack of a true Amateur Classification then it is precisely forcing them to be added cash to the prize and cash classes. I am a true amateur and I am �forced� to play in divisions where I am added cash and even if I were permitted to play in the prize divisions I still would be forced to play for others entry fees and be added cash to their divisions. Yes, true amateur competitions likely would not run at the same time as prize/cash competitions. But that is nothing shocking; already more an more events are splitting even their prize and cash divisions into separate events. </font>

Explain how they are in danger from the existing amateurs that are addicted to winning prizes ? If they offer no bait, why would the big bad prize players pounce ?
<font color="blue"> For the same reason NBA players may not play college basketball. And Kenny isn't allowed to play in the Prize Worlds. </font>
<font color="brown"> I thought that one of the key reasons that NBA players could not play college basketball was because they were not students. Besides the NCAA rules on eligibility. Kenny might have some incentive to play in Am Worlds, but what incentive would he have for playing in a tournament with no financial return ? Especially if the true ams were organized as team competitions ?</font>
<font color="purple"> Professionals do not play in Amateur competition because in most sports, amateur sport is VALUED by the governing body as something �WORTH� protecting. Team sport is just as viable for pros or cash/prize players as it would ever be for true amateurs. </font>

They are in no danger of becoming no other divisions "cash cow", though they could make quite a bit of money for a savvy TD. Their competitive structure would keep them separate without any artificial boundaries.
<font color="blue"> Maybe, but I want to make sure they don't. They, unlike the prize divisions are worth the time and effort to protect. </font>
<font color="brown">I think you will find that they will need nor want your protections. Unless you percieve them as never being able to reach competitive levels with the existing players.</font>
<font color="purple"> That is flatly false. How can I know this? Because it is evidenced in all other major sports and because I know that I don�t want to compete based on gambling either. It is repugnant in some ways. It lessens the buzz of competition. The fact that we have never had any choice of this form of competition IS NOT PROOF that it is no possible, enjoyable or most importantly vital to the success of our sport as a whole. And Gary, are you seriously going to argue that if initiated and introduced to communities, amateur organizations, and scholastic institutions as a ready made ready to utilize sport that this true amateur class will not quickly surpass in total number of participants the prize/cash divisions of the PDGA? I want you to say that. </font>

And they will never pay 85%-90% of anything for anybody else. They will pay for 100% of what they want (either directly or thru the attention of sponsors) and if anyone else gets a free ride, so be it.
<font color="blue"> That is why I explained "direct". They will certainly dwarf the pro and semi pro divisions in size and product purchases. </font>
<font color="brown">My point is the same. They will pay for what they want, not what other groups want them to pay for. They will not stand being abused for someone elses benefit anymore than the current Ams will.</font>
<font color="purple"> Yes, agreed. But the end result will still be vastly larger sales of discs, baskets and apparel, as well as greater demand for courses, events, event organizers, volunteers, etc. All of which will indirectly benefit prize and cash divisions. </font>

There is nothing preventing you from proving your points in the real world right now. There is no need to prevent participation of the prize needy current ams because the prize needy won't be at your true am events.


<font color="blue"> Yes, I could reinvent the wheel all by myself, but why? When the PDGA is in a perfect position to just add it as an option and oversee its relation to the other classifications. And again, true ams need protection for better reasons than prize players need protection from cash players. Again, you seem to lack basic understanding of Amateur Sport and Sportsmanship Gary. It is not a flaw, it just simply precludes you from getting what I am saying, seemingly. </font>
<font color="brown">I'm lost with this one. Are you now saying that they should be competing side by side with the current players, and yet be segregated from them ? I envisioned inter-scholastic competitions and community sports organizations using this class. If in a PDGA type event (open to all comers) then in a separate event, not mixed with the enemy.</font>
<font color="purple"> There should not be any mixing unless the amateur (similar to ball golf) declares prior to the event that they will not accept any remuneration for their play. And prize/cash players would never be able to compete in true amateur competitions unless reinstated by the PDGA or governing body.</font>

<font color="blue">Gary, I know that you are a well thought out and reasonable guy from other discussions, but in this you simply are refusing to see some very crucial aspects of this topic. I am willing to continue discussing this with you in good faith, but we need to accept that perhaps we just have fundamental differences of opinion and fact.</font>
<font color="brown">I don't think I am refusing anything except the fact that the new class is the only class deserving of the name amateur. I am startled to discover that you intend for them to be competing at events along with other classes. They already have that option at the current events. I thought you had in mind separate competitions and a different competitive structure. As to our fundamental differences, mine allows both ideas to be used and tested without much interference with each other, yours requires fundamental changes in the current organizational and competitive structures.</font>


<font color="purple"> Perhaps that is the source of the confusion then. No, I do not want it offered at the same event as the prize cash divisions. I think that was a mistake we made way back when separating the prize and cash divisions and perpetuating the idea that everyone �DESERVES� the right to have a chance to win, rather than just a chance to �participate� in the fun and competition (where the real value of our disc golf community rests; not in the �cashing�. So long as �cashing� is the main thing, why would anyone expect us not to want more protected and entitled divisions where everyone has a chance to win regardless of skill level or commitment to the sport? </font>

<font color="brown">In my mind a true amateur class should be team oriented to promote being there every week. This would shut out most of the current AMs and prevent poaching. It would work similar to most scholastic sports, so it would not be anything new to the school atheletic departments. It would fit well within community run sports departments for the same reasons. They could run the schedule just like the softball schedules they run now.

And for those unable to dedicate the time required for team or league schedules, there would be the trophy only option at existing events and the soon to be started (when there is a demand) trophy only tournaments.

How is this in any way a danger to your vision ?</font>


<font color="purple"> It is not, but it is not what I was getting from your earlier posts either. I don�t think team sport need be limited to amateurs; I have experience team disc golf and it is an excellent format and adds value to our disc golf community. Similarly an officially recognized and planned amateur classification dedicated to the type of amateur I have been describing and personally know so well will bring additional value to our community.

The difference is that this NEW dicotemy, this first time ever significant split in competitive formats, will, I am confident bring about all of the successful attainment of our stated goals at a far greater pace. </font>

Sorry for the typos, no time to proof with such a lengthy post.

Ok, what would make you happy ?

For the Am to get nothing for competing, or just for the Pros to get a lot more than the Ams ?




I've answered many times.

First, there are two divisions, those that play to earn a profit, and those that don't.

For those that don't, I would simply flatten the payout even more than it presently is. I would have no performance-based payout for rec; a very, very shallow one for intermediates; and a very shallow one for advanced.

This scale would at most allow advanced players to get no more than 1.5X to 2X their entry fee in payout. TDs could pay deeper, or use the player pack option. I don't care, but they would still get their cut. This very flat payout assures me that:

1) People are not being encouraged to play in those divisions for profit; and

2) When I compare the advanced winner's profits to the open division loser's loss, the comparison is not so noxious and insulting. (See Chuck, I am aware that there is no perfect performance/reward system.)

PROS
As for those who play for profit, I would employ a much shallower payout table that at least pays 50% of the base pool. Accordingly, I would always require everyone desiring to be eligible for profit to enter the base pool. This would be around $30.

For people that want to play against pros, but do not want to be eligible for the cash, I would let them in for a nominal fee of around $20.

For people that want to play for more, I would offer additional, more costly pools that pay steeper, and closer to 33%.

Therefore, in sum, I am forcing nothing on anyone, but I am offering only the pro class for people that want a profit. I am also offering these people a lower-priced base bet with a higher likelihood of payoff. I am offering those that don't think they have a realistic chance of profit an avenue to enter the pro division, and I am offering the really confident, or rich players a way to gamble at a level they prefer.

In the long run, I think this would be a much healthier system.

Again with the splitting hairs. Either it is "good" for organized golf, or it is not. If it is good then the PDGA should consider it seriously; and equally so if it at least does not harm (which I can't see it doing, can you?).



I would try to pick that apart, but it's getting too long.

I say team sports because I still don't know of any large scale amateur individual competitions that do not award prizes. I looked through the ones you listed and according to their amateur web sites, all of them award prizes to their adult amateur individual competitors.

The fact that I tour as a disc golfer should be all the proof you need that I have a competitive nature, but if you want more, this prolonged conversation should suffice. If I wasn't competitive, I would have dropped this discussion long ago.

I just see team sports as easier for the targeted organizations to manage, and they automatically build in some safeguards from the current PDGA Ams.

I never said that anything about team compititions being exclusively amateur, most pro sports are tema sports, but I have said that adult individual competitions are pretty much universally prize related.

I agree that the PDGA should aggressively pursue getting this level of play started in schools and community sports organizations as well as encouraging TD around the world to run trophy only type events that provide enough in amenties to satisfy the players that they got real value for their money. I only disagree with you on the level of protection you think is required and the title you want to grant exclusively to the new class.

I would sooner argue that the PDGA has no Pro players than they have no Ams.

Is it more harmful to keep players in the system by alowing them to feel competitve (that they could win) or putting them where they will lose interest and leave the sport ?



Why not offer them a completely new option, to play for the pure enjoyment of the sport and competition without concern for "cashing"?

If a player is dead set in his motivation to play for profit, then they should understand that our competitive structure can only provide "just so much" protection from better players or entitlement for worse players. Stretching those priveleges any thinner than we already have will just create even greater animosity and disfunction between our competitive divisions.

The only solution is major sponsorship, until that happens there will be the haves, and the have nots, and the haves would rather risk total and complete distruction tha relinquish any part of their entitlement.

Believe that!

A true amateur division will ease the stress that exists betweent he prize/cash divisions and lead to the securing of meaningful mainsteam recognition and sponsorship.

Once again, who is forcing anyone to play against the pros. Also, it is a no-brainer that once the sport gets millions of added cash, this problem will disappear. The issue is what to do for the next 20 years or more.

The longer we perpetuate a system that punishes a majority of those that actually improve their talents, the less we are actually a sport, the less we attract true sport men and women, and the less we will grow at the levels people will eventually pay to see.

the only people i know making a profit on plastic are surgeons.

since i like 'em natural, does that make me a Pro? :cool:



:D I was going to say something a little more explicit along those same lines...........but didn't want to get edited /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

1) It is off point, IMO, and therefore it is a very unsatisfying reply. Once again "Why should we set up a SPORT that encourages people not to improve?" "Well, because, there are many more people in those pools."


I'm glad you posted that statement yet again, because I've been wanting to whine about you saying it so much. :)

I don't know what planet you are playing on, James, but I don't know of any players that don't want to improve. I know of no one who actively tries not to improve.

I also do not see how the PDGA tournament format encourages people to not improve. If you aren't improving, you're declining. Unless you have hit your potential. Not everyone has a 1000 rating in them, but we all want to win. Some of us never will, at any level. But I'm pretty sure that everyone who enters tournaments wants to win.

I can't recall ever hearing anyone say "let's go to the park and work on rolling our wrists at release so that we don't improve".

In any event, "not moving up to the pro divisions" does not equal "not trying to improve".

Because disc golf started doing organized tournaments with the emphasis on prizes, not the events themselves, current tournaments are structured to maintain the status quo.



You were making some good points Gary, but this is not correct. The stacks of plastic came later, not right at the beginning. Perhaps a minor point, but I thought it needed making. For the first 10 to 15 years of our sport, "participation" in our events WAS the main thing. Ask anyone who played back then. We'd travel vast distances and pay whatever just for the chance to play.

Really.

Where is someone being punished? You choose your pool or event to play, you compete with these people on an even basis, and you compete for each other's cash. I don't see the punishment.

If two hacks want to make a $50,000 side bet, what business is it of mine that I shot better than them yet one of them made more than I did? Jealosy aside, it really is none of my business. Just like what another divsiion makes outside of yours is really none of your business unless it was your money they took.

Based on playing for entry fees, this current system is not very far removed from being just organized side bets.

I don't think either formula (prize value versus event value) is better, just that the existing player base has shown a preference for the prize value system (except in Maine where the event value system rules). I think that with some effort a signifcant player base for both can be built up in most areas, and they will draw from distinctly different pools of players with very few players choosing to play in both.



Hallelujah!
Hallelujah!
Hallelujah! Hallelujah! Hallelujah!
Hal�.le��.lu���.jah!

Really, I see it all the time. I see plenty of advanced players that have way more basic skills then me, or certainly similar skills that are faced with the decision: should I play here where a positive return is more likely, or should I play pro, where I will eventually learn more and ultimately improve myself, but the likelihood of payout is lower.

That in sum embodies my statement that "the system is set up to encourage people not to improve." People improve by playing against better competition, but they are discouraged by the system to play up, so they choose to stay in advance and their game doesn't improve that much. Not all are like this for sure, but many.

Then the only thing we are arguing about is the price.
I don't think a $30 value is worth $100 in travel expenses.
I might go for a $50 value. Whether the value is in the players pack/event, or a chance for a performance payout makes no difference to me.


Ok, what would make you happy ?

For the Am to get nothing for competing, or just for the Pros to get a lot more than the Ams ?




I've answered many times.

First, there are two divisions, those that play to earn a profit, and those that don't.

For those that don't, I would simply flatten the payout even more than it presently is. I would have no performance-based payout for rec; a very, very shallow one for intermediates; and a very shallow one for advanced.

This scale would at most allow advanced players to get no more than 1.5X to 2X their entry fee in payout. TDs could pay deeper, or use the player pack option. I don't care, but they would still get their cut. This very flat payout assures me that:

1) People are not being encouraged to play in those divisions for profit; and

2) When I compare the advanced winner's profits to the open division loser's loss, the comparison is not so noxious and insulting. (See Chuck, I am aware that there is no perfect performance/reward system.)

<font color="blue">After you include the Player's pack and value of other amenties, it still could reach 3x entries.</font>

PROS
As for those who play for profit, I would employ a much shallower payout table that at least pays 50% of the base pool. Accordingly, I would always require everyone desiring to be eligible for profit to enter the base pool. This would be around $30.

For people that want to play against pros, but do not want to be eligible for the cash, I would let them in for a nominal fee of around $20.

For people that want to play for more, I would offer additional, more costly pools that pay steeper, and closer to 33%.
<font color="blue">This sounds a little like Chuck's idea, but is implemented in a rather interesting fashion. You are playing for multiple pots that are paid out on different scales, and entry into each (including the base one) are voluntary. It sounds like a workable option, and with a little spreadhseet work, very little trouble for the TD. I've already developed a similar payout sheet for the TX 10 finals where all of the field is in one purse, and only selected players are eligible for the second purse. No extra effort on the part of the TD.</font>

Therefore, in sum, I am forcing nothing on anyone, but I am offering only the pro class for people that want a profit. I am also offering these people a lower-priced base bet with a higher likelihood of payoff. I am offering those that don't think they have a realistic chance of profit an avenue to enter the pro division, and I am offering the really confident, or rich players a way to gamble at a level they prefer.

<font color="blue">It really does sound like a workable system. With only my above mentioned caviat. I think the Adv divs are going to want a higher buy in/value out to make it worth traveling to</font>
In the long run, I think this would be a much healthier system. <font color="blue"> It is what the Ams are moving more toward each year. There has not any major screaming about the flatter payouts yet this year. The next few months when the season picks up around the rest of the country will be interesting. Especially if attendance continues to pick up and no one really complains. It will help to prove your theory. It's mine as well, that all a player needs is an adequate return on investment to enjoy an event. If I pay $50 and get a voucher for $30, and $20 into the payout, I feel that I am getting my money's worth. If the TD kicks in even more, I will feel that I made a profit on the trip. The perceived value is what it's all about.</font>

I hate to tell you, but there are no ams making trendy little ankle warmers. While there is little public demand to see pros, there is absolutely no public demand to see ams.
<font color="brown">Yes they are, and the demand for them is from other similarly skilled players.

It's really like this, The Ams have figured out a system that seems to keep a lot of them happy and playing. It's not perfect, but it seems to work. The Pros have tried the same system, but it doesn't work as well for them, but the problem is with the Am system.</font>

Face it, you've engineered a system that benefits you and people with similar motivations, and you are not about to drop it over any concern over justice, or health of the sport. You've earned it with all those hard hours you put into perfecting your craft.

<font color="brown">We earned it by making the money and choosing to gamble for it amonst ourselves. No one is giving us anything, and we are the ones providing the TD with a chance of breaking even and maybe giving a little cash to the Pros. Just because the Pros can't come up with a system that adequately rewards them for their skills, there's no reason to be jealous of the Ams that are playing for each other's lunch money.</font>





I don't think there is a problem with the am system, only that it is no different than the pro system and therefore doesn't exist as a separate entity other than as some protective/entitled entity watching over its own.

Personally I don't care if it stays separate or not, it does seem that the PDGA has some interest in integrating it with the cash divisions, and has nearly succeeded in accomplishing this goal.

Again, the market forces will have the final say, but let us not forget that we are the ones that set this whole structure up, so we are not complete innocents in any of this. We made it what it is, we do, though some think it is like the ten commandments, have the ability (obligation) to change it if we want or need to.

I know some players , who will not play Pro for the reason of entry fees are too much. They are looking to get value for their dollar. It's not that they are good enough.

What needs to happen is to have corporate sponsors supplement our tournaments.

I play Pro.
Heck , I'd play for the sole reason if my Hotel , Rental Car , Entry Fees and Airline tickets would be comped !!!!!! :eek: :D

If I break even or have enough money to get home from traveling , I feel like I have won !!!!!! :D

Playing tournaments is so much fun if you don't have to worry about money. /msgboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

If a player is dead set in his motivation to play for profit...


I sure wish you all would stop using that erroneous language. The only players who are motivated to play disc golf for profit are maybe the 1000+ rated players, and then only realistically if there won't be very many of them at the motivated event they are heading to.

Everyone else plays for a loss. And it is well known before even heading out to the tournament that it will be a loss. That is the vast majority or all tournament disc golfers, am and "pro" alike.

So quit acting like anybody except the top 10 rated players are playing for profit.

Because disc golf started doing organized tournaments with the emphasis on prizes, not the events themselves, current tournaments are structured to maintain the status quo.



You were making some good points Gary, but this is not correct. The stacks of plastic came later, not right at the beginning. Perhaps a minor point, but I thought it needed making. For the first 10 to 15 years of our sport, "participation" in our events WAS the main thing. Ask anyone who played back then. We'd travel vast distances and pay whatever just for the chance to play.

Really.



Read carefully.

I didn't say the PDGA started with high payout tournaments, but that the PDGA started high payout tournaments. Now we are stuck with that momentum and the players attracted to that system.

I assume there was a reason behind the payout change.
I assume there was a reason behind making more divisions.

There are still a few out there that are more about being there than how much you can win, and they generally have very loyal followings.

As I have said before, I agree with all of your reasons for a true am class, and only differ on two or three specific points.

You continue to split hairs Gary. We found evidence of true amateur sport and now you throw out the "team" card!?!




Nick,

Okay, how about Ball golf, fishing, bowling. Those all pay amateurs in merchandise. The point Gary made is that it is an apples to oranges comparison. Please list a single adult competition that competes nationally beyond college that does not pay out in merchandise. I asked you this sometime back and you refused to discuss it. Now you think you have an example and you wave it wildly. I felt your line made since, you did not want to impose your definition of amateur on the prize winning ranks, you wanted a new division. This is a fine and noble cause, but you must have realized that there are others here who think you want to do away with the prize winning divisions. You jump right on their bandwagon when it promotes your view. You need to correct them, you don't want to do away with the prize winning divisions, you just want to use the term amateur exclusively for a non-prize winning division.

I would sooner argue that the PDGA has no Pro players than they have no Ams.



I know, that is why I avoid that meaningless nomenclature and use cash/prize and true amateur to keep things straight; though to be fair to you I should start using �non-prize� class rather than true am class. The important thing is not the names we use but that we get what each other are saying and recognize what, if anything, of value we are communicating.

I feel that we are starting to communicate and am thankful of that.

Really, I see it all the time. I see plenty of advanced players that have way more basic skills then me, or certainly similar skills that are faced with the decision: should I play here where a positive return is more likely, or should I play pro, where I will eventually learn more and ultimately improve myself, but the likelihood of payout is lower.

That in sum embodies my statement that "the system is set up to encourage people not to improve." People improve by playing against better competition, but they are discouraged by the system to play up, so they choose to stay in advance and their game doesn't improve that much. Not all are like this for sure, but many.


"If you don't play in the pro division you don't want to improve."

Sorry, James. That is hogwash.

Once again, who is forcing anyone to play against the pros. Also, it is a no-brainer that once the sport gets millions of added cash, this problem will disappear. The issue is what to do for the next 20 years or more.

The longer we perpetuate a system that punishes a majority of those that actually improve their talents, the less we are actually a sport, the less we attract true sport men and women, and the less we will grow at the levels people will eventually pay to see.



There is undeniable truth in much of this.

That in sum embodies my statement that "the system is set up to encourage people not to improve." People improve by playing against better competition, but they are discouraged by the system to play up, so they choose to stay in advance and their game doesn't improve that much. Not all are like this for sure, but many.



I was ready to argue this point, but you are correct. I think you are correct for a different reason than you do, but I still feel you are correct.

I played in a small group for a long time before I started playing tournaments. I was satisfied with my abilities before I started playing tournaments. I didn't work hard to improve, and I didn't. When I started playing tournaments, I was getting my butt handed to me every event. The other players were out distancing every drive and playing with a better short game. I was really bad compared to the players I then found myself playing against.

Here is the difference of opinion. I don't think it was playing with better players that improved my game, it was the many hours I put in away from the course, and in practice rounds so that I would be competitive that improved my game. When I improved to the point that I was competitive in my division, I quit all the extra practice and work. So. it's not being around better players that makes you better, it's a desire to not be embarassed by better competitors that makes you better.

There is one thing that being around better players does do to improve your game if you pay attention. They show you different ways to look at the game/hole/shot than you may have thought of yourself. You don't really have to play against them to see this, but it may help.

The difference is that one is a side bet between buds the other is our institutionalized PDGA Competitive System.

My agenda is not to take more than the name "Amateur" away from the prize players. My guess is that the skill level breaks (having been a part of setting them) are not some sacred standard, nor are event the age breaks and that we must continue to monitor and adjust as needed.

Still, all the fine tinkering in the world with entry fees, payouts, division breaks aren't going to fix our system. I once thought they could, but I am nearly 100% sure that the only way to straighten out this mess is through MAJOR SPONSORSHIP.

And the only way to secure major sponsorship is if we broaden and expand our player base and thereby all the levels of organization and resources that must follow such and expansion.

It is my belief that we have nearly tapped out the "gambler" player base market and it is high time we explore the "sportsman/woman" side of the equation. Other sports have done so with fantastic results. Why should be we any different?

Because disc golf started doing organized tournaments with the emphasis on prizes, not the events themselves, current tournaments are structured to maintain the status quo.



You were making some good points Gary, but this is not correct. The stacks of plastic came later, not right at the beginning. Perhaps a minor point, but I thought it needed making. For the first 10 to 15 years of our sport, "participation" in our events WAS the main thing. Ask anyone who played back then. We'd travel vast distances and pay whatever just for the chance to play.

Really.



Read carefully.

I didn't say the PDGA started with high payout tournaments, but that the PDGA started high payout tournaments. Now we are stuck with that momentum and the players attracted to that system.

I assume there was a reason behind the payout change.
I assume there was a reason behind making more divisions.

There are still a few out there that are more about being there than how much you can win, and they generally have very loyal followings.

As I have said before, I agree with all of your reasons for a true am class, and only differ on two or three specific points.



My bad. I can answer your questions about why they introduced it, but I'm guessing you could just as easily.

This is it, I am done with this thread. At this point we have a bunch of people arguing for no payout to ams.

A bunch of people arguing for/against limited payment of ams

And one person arguing for use of the term am exclusively and jumps on the back of others argument even when they appear to contradict his stated opinion that prize winning divisions should exist.

The problem is not in the amateur ranks. It is in the perception of some players of the amateur ranks. I realize this is an opinion and being an opinion it could be wrong. I have offered several suggestions and either the feedback is derogatory or is non-existent. I would like to see the open players make more money and pull huge viewing audiences, every one would, but we simply are not there.

If you wish to discuss this issue, pm me. I am willing to discuss it and to use what limited resources I have to assist.

If we can both have access to the name, then I agree with everything in that post.

One point in defence of the gamblers being considered Ams. In other Pro sports, the players are not playing for each other's entry fees. The fact that our "Pro" division still doing the same is not an indication that our current "Ams" should not be considered amateur players.

Good stuff !!!!!

"And the only way to secure major sponsorship is if we broaden and expand our player base and thereby all the levels of organization and resources that must follow such and expansion.

It is my belief that we have nearly tapped out the "gambler" player base market and it is high time we explore the "sportsman/woman" side of the equation. Other sports have done so with fantastic results. Why should be we any different?

:DMake's logical sense.

Once again, who is forcing anyone to play against the pros. Also, it is a no-brainer that once the sport gets millions of added cash, this problem will disappear. The issue is what to do for the next 20 years or more.


James, since you just admitted that there is nothing at all wrong with the current am competitve structure, maybe we can redirect this discussion towards something more productive, like making the pro divisions more appealing to players.

I suggest a drastic reduction in entry fees across the board for the pro divisions.

Pro Worlds attendance declining? Maybe those $200+ entry fees have something to do with it.

A-tiers? $100+

B-tiers are over $75 in a lot of places.

The pros that always cash want bigger and bigger entry fees. Well, they got their wish and it's kinda like that game on the Misc thread, now the fields are smaller so the payout seems to have gone down.

Here's a case that I can speak authoritatively about: me. I won the MM1 series in SoCal last year so I moved up this year. (Victoria I played MM1 to hang out with Gary and supposedly Atwood. The Memorial I played MM1 so my wife and I could start driving home earlier on Sunday.) I was going to split time between MA1 and MPM, but the MPM entry fees are $75 or $100+. The MA1 entry fees are between $25 to $45.

You do the math.

If MPO was $50 max and MPM was $40 max, I might be playing MPM even with no expectations of cashing. (Even if I could hit the cash line there is no way I could earn a profit.) But at $75 to $100+....no thank you.

You continue to split hairs Gary. We found evidence of true amateur sport and now you throw out the "team" card!?!




Nick,

Okay, how about Ball golf, fishing, bowling. Those all pay amateurs in merchandise. The point Gary made is that it is an apples to oranges comparison. Please list a single adult competition that competes nationally beyond college that does not pay out in merchandise. I asked you this sometime back and you refused to discuss it. Now you think you have an example and you wave it wildly. I felt your line made since, you did not want to impose your definition of amateur on the prize winning ranks, you wanted a new division. This is a fine and noble cause, but you must have realized that there are others here who think you want to do away with the prize winning divisions. You jump right on their bandwagon when it promotes your view. You need to correct them, you don't want to do away with the prize winning divisions, you just want to use the term amateur exclusively for a non-prize winning division.



I've done my best to be 100% clear about this. Again, I don't want to change a thing about the current Am divisions, I want an entirely new class of "Non-prize" competition to be included in our Official PDGA Competitive Structure; separate from the prize cash track of competition for the reasons others and I have stated, but primarily to benefit the sport as a whole and alleviate some of the pressure building up in the prize/cash divisions.

We need to get back to the garden! All of us, even the gamblers... and make the main thing, once again, the main thing. The benefits of such a reemergence of good sportsmanship and highest valuation of community will make us wonder what we ever fought over in the first place.

No one with the exception of Bruce or Chuck has given as much attention to our competitive structure as I have and I am telling you we need to be �EXPANDING� the appeal of our events and association (community) not �CONTRACTING� it in a protective wagon circle to fight off inevitable and much needed changes.

You know those events Gary said folks don�t really care about cashing or not, they just love the course and people; it was just a few posts ago, well, who is to say that ALL OF OUR EVENTS shouldn�t be that special?

Though the new Non-prize class competitions would likely be separate from our Prize class events, the influence of pride in sportsmanship and love of competition should always be there to remind us of where we came from and why "really" we all, even prize players, compete. Cashing is sweet, but if you ask Craig, Kenny and Mela why they compete I am nearly 100% sure they would say for the love of the sport.

Sure, just saying it doesn't make it so, but if it can start to creep into all of our events and permiate our association and all we do and think about ourselves then we all truly WILL be winners.

Groovy!

you didn't answer the question, Nick.

This is it, I am done with this thread. At this point we have a bunch of people arguing for no payout to ams.

A bunch of people arguing for/against limited payment of ams

And one person arguing for use of the term am exclusively and jumps on the back of others argument even when they appear to contradict his stated opinion that prize winning divisions should exist.

The problem is not in the amateur ranks. It is in the perception of some players of the amateur ranks. I realize this is an opinion and being an opinion it could be wrong. I have offered several suggestions and either the feedback is derogatory or is non-existent. I would like to see the open players make more money and pull huge viewing audiences, every one would, but we simply are not there.

If you wish to discuss this issue, pm me. I am willing to discuss it and to use what limited resources I have to assist.



Sorry to hear that. I thought we were doing pretty well here, all things considered...

If we can both have access to the name, then I agree with everything in that post.

One point in defence of the gamblers being considered Ams. In other Pro sports, the players are not playing for each other's entry fees. The fact that our "Pro" division still doing the same is not an indication that our current "Ams" should not be considered amateur players.



That's why I call them, appropriately enough, "Prize" and "Cash" divisions. I'd love for them both to evolve into Professional Prize and Cash divisions where sponsorship provides more than a 200% return beyond entry fee total and the day is coming. Then the name "Amateur" will more naturally fit those who compete reecieving 100% value of entry fee total just being able to participate in the event.

I accept that it may not be a perfect fit now (the name), but I am looking down the road a bit to a time when Prize players do win cars, all paid trips to the Mid-America Championships and possibly a spot in the very exclusive Pro Tour. Where prizes are only limited by the sponsors providing the merchandise. None of which will happen, in my opinion, without a major and coordinated push to build and promote a new "Non-prize" classificiation within organized disc golf. The PDGA would be a seemingly perfect fit for such a task, but if they won't or can't do it, then someone does need to step up and do it.

Nick,

Could you please answer that question and name one adult individual sport, like you were asked about a hundered times already?

Not sure if reading all these "ignored" users would add much to the discussion or not, but 2 of them need to PM me an apology before I take them off of it. If not, not a great loss...

Classic, and standard, "School of Nick Debating Technique": ignore that which you cannot answer or might prove you wrong.

PROS
As for those who play for profit, I would employ a much shallower payout table that at least pays 50% of the base pool. Accordingly, I would always require everyone desiring to be eligible for profit to enter the base pool. This would be around $30.

For people that want to play against pros, but do not want to be eligible for the cash, I would let them in for a nominal fee of around $20.

For people that want to play for more, I would offer additional, more costly pools that pay steeper, and closer to 33%.

i like this overall idea for the Pros. if it paid to 50%, people who were just reaching the middle of the Pro pack would be encouraged to give it a shot. i'm the poster child for this - not good enough to have a decent chance at lower place cash in a 33% payout, but good enough to do real well in a lower level division. in truth, it is not so much that the system encourages me to play MM1, it is more so that it discourages me from playin MPO. the idea of a deeper (not steeper) payout for what is now called Open has a lot of sense in it.

i am not sure about the idea of lowering the entry rating to 900. although at a certain level i like the idea of establishing a lower threshold for gaining entrance to the Open field this technique might work for a higher entry, or sponsored division, in the same way it works for some of the big "invitationals". i am not sure it could be done at every event today, because until sponsor dollars greatly augment the purse, there's no real reason to play in it.

as a winning MM1 who simply cant crack the top third in a decent sized MPO field, i would rather pay $50-60 for a good MM1 experience. but i just might psy $100 if had a legitimate chance at taking home one of the bottom cashing spots of a 50% Pro payout.

yes, i would "make" "less", even by taking last place MPO cash. but with a rating threshold i would be gauranteed of playing equal or better players in more than just the first random round, and that would be a good thing compared to today.

Not sure if reading all these "ignored" users would add much to the discussion or not, but 2 of them need to PM me an apology before I take them off of it. If not, not a great loss...


just wanted to get that somewhere where it wouldnt be edited or denied one day when/if it dawns on the author just exactly what perception of himself he just reinforced.

for his sake, someone can quote me on that! :cool:

Not sure if reading all these "ignored" users would add much to the discussion or not, but 2 of them need to PM me an apology before I take them off of it. If not, not a great loss...


just wanted to get that somewhere where it wouldnt be edited or denied one day when/if it dawns on the author just exactly what perception of himself he just reinforced.

for his sake, someone can quote me on that! :cool:


Think that'll help? :)

I bet he reads these posts anyway.

Not sure if reading all these "ignored" users would add much to the discussion or not, but 2 of them need to PM me an apology before I take them off of it. If not, not a great loss...



I can see you posting, but I can't read what you're saying, and my PM notification isn't blinking.

hey DUDE, when you have someone on ignore, they cant send you a PM. there used to be a banned that would fit here.

yo RheTTTT, try to send him a PM. maybe you are one of the two chosen ones? or maybe not. i'd bet there are at least a dozen others who are solid candidates.

sorry, we're gonna need someone else to copy your posts also!

<font color="white">Randy Wimm, dont bother either. can you believe that??? the guy hasnt posted in years. i guess grudges CAN be held that long </font>

Not sure if reading all these "ignored" users would add much to the discussion or not, but 2 of them need to PM me an apology before I take them off of it. If not, not a great loss...


just wanted to get that somewhere where it wouldnt be edited or denied one day when/if it dawns on the author just exactly what perception of himself he just reinforced.

for his sake, someone can quote me on that! :cool:


Think that'll help? :)

I bet he reads these posts anyway.



Could a person be more conceited? To put all those who disagree with him on Ignore?

This is something the PDGA could do to encourage ams to play pro more often without imposing some haffast format on its TDs:

Give ams am points for playing pro AND make last place points in any pro division equal to first place points in the equivalent age or gender restricted [or unrestricted] am division.

This is my story: I played up three times last year, twice at sanctioned tournaments. I missed an Am Worlds invite by eight points. I would like to get an invite for next year, so I'm not going to be playing pro at any tournaments this year. I'd play pro master at every one of our tournaments this year if I did not care about an Am Worlds invite or if I could get an Am Worlds invite from playing Pro Master.

We have the cheapest trophy-only pro option on the planet at our tournaments this year. I bet no one takes advantage of it. All of our amateurs want their points for Am Worlds because it is only an hour away. But imagine if they were guaranteed to get more points playing Open.

I would agree that an AM's points should at least doubled by playing with the OPEN field. Thats a good IDEA!

Give ams am points for playing pro AND make last place points in any pro division equal to first place points in the equivalent age or gender restricted [or unrestricted] am division.



That's a good idea. Do the same Masters to Open, etc.

Are you going to be running any stand alone Trophy Only events this year? And do you have any reasons to believe that Prize and Cash players would be interested in opting for the Trophy Only option at Prize/Cash events other than poverty or lack of confidence? Or in other words what reasons do you have for offering the option at your events?

Give ams am points for playing pro AND make last place points in any pro division equal to first place points in the equivalent age or gender restricted [or unrestricted] am division.


I don't know. I could get the same number of points as the MA1 winner at the Memorial by ponying up the dough and getting slaughtered in MPO, and not even have to beat a single 960 rated player to do it? I'm not sure that's a great thing as it allows people with more disposable income to trump the po' folks.

But I guess the system is already set up that way because if you can't afford to travel to Bowling Green Ams you have no chance at being a points leader either.

This post kinda got lost.



Once again, who is forcing anyone to play against the pros. Also, it is a no-brainer that once the sport gets millions of added cash, this problem will disappear. The issue is what to do for the next 20 years or more.


James, since you just admitted that there is nothing at all wrong with the current am competitve structure, maybe we can redirect this discussion towards something more productive, like making the pro divisions more appealing to players.

I suggest a drastic reduction in entry fees across the board for the pro divisions.

Pro Worlds attendance declining? Maybe those $200+ entry fees have something to do with it.

A-tiers? $100+

B-tiers are over $75 in a lot of places.

The pros that always cash want bigger and bigger entry fees. Well, they got their wish and it's kinda like that game on the Misc thread, now the fields are smaller so the payout seems to have gone down.

Here's a case that I can speak authoritatively about: me. I won the MM1 series in SoCal last year so I moved up this year. (Victoria I played MM1 to hang out with Gary and supposedly Atwood. The Memorial I played MM1 so my wife and I could start driving home earlier on Sunday.) I was going to split time between MA1 and MPM, but the MPM entry fees are $75 or $100+. The MA1 entry fees are between $25 to $45.

You do the math.

If MPO was $50 max and MPM was $40 max, I might be playing MPM even with no expectations of cashing. (Even if I could hit the cash line there is no way I could earn a profit.) But at $75 to $100+....no thank you.

Not sure if reading all these "ignored" users would add much to the discussion or not, but 2 of them need to PM me an apology before I take them off of it. If not, not a great loss...


just wanted to get that somewhere where it wouldnt be edited or denied one day when/if it dawns on the author just exactly what perception of himself he just reinforced.

for his sake, someone can quote me on that! :cool:


Think that'll help? :)

I bet he reads these posts anyway.



Could a person be more conceited? To put all those who disagree with him on Ignore?



As much as I think Nick oversteps the bounds, I think he was referring to Pat and Rhett who he feels wrongly barred him for calling Pat an idiot, not because they disagreed with him.

Back to your regularly scheduled how do we got more Pros discussion.

p.s. Bruce's idea is a good one but I don't think powerful enough. Not enough people are motivated by this issue.

...I think he was referring to Pat and Rhett who he feels wrongly barred him for calling Pat an idiot...


Just to clarify once again, I did not have anything to do with banning Nick. I know I am biased, and in the past when I felt Nick was totally out of control here I have referred it to others to look at and handle, just in case I'm over-reacting based on past encounters.

idiotic, not idiot.

I don't think am points are that big of a deal because most of the guys at the brink of playing pro are usually doing quite well in advanced and therefore play a lot and get lots of points. I do think it is a good idea though, but won't motivate many folks.

It could motivate a me at the right event.

I missed the MM1 points title by a handfull of points before they changed the rules for points a few years ago. Now it's basically impossible for a MM1 that plays in the MM1 division all year to win the points race for MM1.

Now it's basically impossible for a MM1 that plays in the MM1 division all year to win the points race for MM1.


You have to play MA1 at Bowling Green and get your 4367 points for finishing 117th to even get in the race. :)

Terry was talking about figuring out a way to give BG PDGA Major status. That would take care of the points disparity quite nicely. :eek:

The pros that always cash want bigger and bigger entry fees. Well, they got their wish and it's kinda like that game on the Misc thread, now the fields are smaller so the payout seems to have gone down.




no doubt this has been a huge factor, and if we ever fixed the lower side of the structure, I would argue more heavily for cheaper alternatives, and deeper payouts. I'm sure that a lot a pros would hate this idea, just as a lot of ams hate the idea of flatter payouts.

Btw, I never admitted that there was nothing wrong with our current am competitive structure. I would still flatten it way more than it presently is. I'm not a trophy only guy, but am not opposed to it. I also think ams should always be allowed to pay a small fee to enter a tourney with no eligibility for payout, just as I would require that option for the pros.

Someone mentioned something about these ideas being hairbrained or halfassed, because they are tough on the TD. They ain't that tough to account for. However, I do think that based on my experience with many disc golfers, there will be a few that will never understand the idea of separate pools, or entering the non-payout pool.

Like National Doubles ?

The only thing that points are good for is Worlds qualifications.

The AMs points comes down to if you attend BG or not.

Honestly, I couldn't tell you if I had 30 or 30000 points in any year that I have played. Not speaking for all open players, but I only look at the cash page, and occasionally the ratings page even though they are skewed depending on where you live.

Someone mentioned something about these ideas being hairbrained or halfassed, because they are tough on the TD. They ain't that tough to account for. However, I do think that based on my experience with many disc golfers, there will be a few that will never understand the idea of separate pools, or entering the non-payout pool.



If there is much interest in this, I can probably add this in to my scoring program fairly easily. I need to make some other adjustments to it anyway. If any TDs that use my program would like the ability to handle trophy only automatically, PM me.

Are you going to be running any stand alone Trophy Only events this year? And do you have any reasons to believe that Prize and Cash players would be interested in opting for the Trophy Only option at Prize/Cash events other than poverty or lack of confidence? Or in other words what reasons do you have for offering the option at your events?



He is offering trophy at his events because people like me will play more tournaments via the trophy only option. At his tourneys my $14 TO fee gets me $15 at the merch table, shot at a couple of CTPs, and a competitive setting with others to shoot a couple of rounds. To me that's a good value. Why should I wager additional real cash ($9-$21) for a chance at some funny money good for more plastic? Occasionally I might do it, but generally I'll keep the money in my pocket. I might even shoot Trophy Only in Advanced (ccobb, yes I'm a rec player) just to learn a few things. There's no way I would do that at full price.

Do I play trophy only due to poverty? No.
Do I play trophy only for lack of confidence? No.
Did I play trophy only because it was a better perceived value? Yes.

The only reason I didn't play his trophy only experiment last fall was because it was on a lousy weekend for me.

The pros that always cash want bigger and bigger entry fees. Well, they got their wish and it's kinda like that game on the Misc thread, now the fields are smaller so the payout seems to have gone down.




no doubt this has been a huge factor, and if we ever fixed the lower side of the structure, I would argue more heavily for cheaper alternatives, and deeper payouts.


Why can't we just fix the pro side and see what happens? There is no structure that you can create that will get all the players that should be in MPO playing in MPO. (Just look at the MPM division.) But if we can make the pro divisions more appealing to people, then the old pros that don't play might come back and more of the current ams will check it out and and try the pro division here and there, and more of them will make the move to pro and stay there.

Some guys will always stay where it best suits them regardless of the spirit of competition. (top rated Pro Masters players and a couple of MA1s.) If/when more money comes into the Open purse those guys will knock you over jumping to it. Until then, we need to make it more appealing to the much bigger base of good and improving players who don't make the jump for a number of other reasons.

Please don't forget that the vast majority of the top rated MA1 players eventually, and fairly quickly, win so much plastic they are embarrased and then they are ready to move up. Let's not scare them away with humongous entry fees or anything else.

Now it's basically impossible for a MM1 that plays in the MM1 division all year to win the points race for MM1.


You have to play MA1 at Bowling Green and get your 4367 points for finishing 117th to even get in the race. :)

Terry was talking about figuring out a way to give BG PDGA Major status. That would take care of the points disparity quite nicely. :eek:



We could call it something like Mid-Nationals! (Oh, wait....) :)

Why can't we just fix the pro side and see what happens?



IMO, I think they have to be addressed simultaneously, but I also suspect that the more difficult battle is addressing the am issue first. It's simple actually, you reduce the incentive to play down, and since there is not presently enough money to provide incentives to play up, you do your best to ease their option of playing up.

However, I don't expect either of them ever to be addressed. The PDGA (in it's dealing with the competitive structure) has never looked holistically at the problem. They only look where its bleeding and then merely suggest that one apply a band aid. The band aid is never fully applied, the bleeding continues, the band aid is assumed to be a failure, then when criticized for not stopping the bleeding, they either say "don't worry, you're not really bleeding. It's just your imagination." or "who needs you, you are insignificant anyway."

Though I certainly disagree with the path the PDGA has taken with their competitive system, I'm not sure it is fair to say that they only focus attention on the hemeraging areas.

The sad thing about it all is that the scope, even when considering the 40 million divisions we currently offer is only a FRACTION of the potential. That is where we fail in my opinion. We do pretty well at keeping our miniscule demographic happy, it's the thinking outside this tight little box that we faulter with.

Instead of focussing solely on how to make the same "gambler" motivated players happy, we need to be looking at where sports have traditionally made great organizational strides and been brought into the light of mainstream attention: Educational and Community institutions.

So long as we solely apply ourselves to the recreational gambler players why should we expect to appeal to anyone else?

zzzzz zzzzz zzzzzz zzzzz!

zzzzz zzzzz zzzzzz zzzzz!



if you added a bu to that you could go back and work for discraft...

Why can't we just fix the pro side and see what happens?



IMO, I think they have to be addressed simultaneously, but I also suspect that the more difficult battle is addressing the am issue first. It's simple actually, you reduce the incentive to play down, and since there is not presently enough money to provide incentives to play up, you do your best to ease their option of playing up.


Hold on now, James. You state that if only there was enough money in the pro purse, then everything would be fine. That means that the am side of the equation is fine the way it is.

But since the pro side is not okay, now suddenly the am side isn't okay either.

Getting ams to play pro is not the answer to the pro purse "problem". Getting more money into the pro purse is the problem. And it's not more entry fees that the "pro" purse needs, it's more outside money.

The problem that needs addressing is not "How do we get the ams to play pro?"

The problem that needs addressing is this: "How do we provide a product that people will pay to see?"

Maybe we can't. Disc golf is what it is, and if nobody wants to pay to see Climo make 40-foot putts or see Avery throw 500 feet, then so be it. Getting more ams to play pro certainly won't help that cause.

But if there is a way to market pro disc golf to the masses, then all y'all that want to play for more moolah should be looking hard at ways to get it done. I'd hate for the boat to be missed because you were too busy being jealous of the paltry am plastic payouts instead of looking at ways to market the pro game.

Since I have no confidence in my ability to ever cash in on that future pay day, I am far less motivated to make it happen than anybody who thinks they can win at the MPO level should be motivated. If I could see a path to riches along the tournament promotion line then I would get excited about it, but I don't see that out there for me with what I have to offer, either. So I'll continue to happily play for less retail value in plastic coins that it costs me to get to and play in tournaments, and I'll continue to run one tourney per year at a net financial loss so that I feel like I'm helping to keep tournaments going, and I'll be fine with that.

Good luck to you pros, though. I hope find someone like Paul Brown to take you to the promised land. Because focusing on the ams ain't gonna get you there.

idiotic, not idiot.

I don't think am points are that big of a deal because most of the guys at the brink of playing pro are usually doing quite well in advanced and therefore play a lot and get lots of points. I do think it is a good idea though, but won't motivate many folks.



I believe a retraction is in order.

I think Nick has Pat and Rhett on ignore because he is possibly offended that he was banned, for possibly inferring that something Pat might have said might have been idiotic in certain settings amoungst civilized beings and in certain situations, like on the PDGA message board or similar. Of course I could be wrong about this possible assumption of the situation, being as I don't know exactly what Nick meant when he wrote what he wrote about what he wrote about when he wrote it... I think.

You state that if only there was enough money in the pro purse, then everything would be fine. That means that the am side of the equation is fine the way it is.



What kind of logic is that? I said, "the system needs to take incentives away to play down, and since there is not presently enough money to provide incentives to play up, you do your best to ease their option of playing up."

You conveniently forgot the first part and then go on to offer multiple statements that the am side is OK. Once again, read the bold portion: "take away incentives to play down." Until that is done, we will always have a screwed up system.

Also, for the hundreth time, it is pointed out that if boatloads of money was added, the system would fix itself. Well, of course it would. It would immediately end the inequity and perverted incentives that exist in our SPORT. However, since we do not have boatloads of money, we must find other ways to correct the problems.

That's where we disagree then.

I think the only problem is that there aren't boatloads of money for the pros to play for.

I think it far easier for the pros to be jealous of the paltry am payouts and try to devise ways to take the am entry fees, than it is for the pros to go out and actually market their chosen profession.

The little pond is fine. The big fish in this little pond of am players are not getting rich off of disc golf. The Big Pond needs some more cash, though.

Well, it it makes you happy, you are going to win. The bulk of the people benefit from the system. It's their corner of the neighborhood, where they control the action and you'll have to pry that plastic from their cold dead hands.

Disc golf will remain less of a sport than it should be as many people who actually work hard to improve are shown the door and people who will not improve or cannot improve thrive, but they will always be the majority and if the majority is happy, well then, all is well.

James whoever steps up and finally does cut the AMS off from winning their stacks of discs will be lynched.

I'm not sure there is anyone out there ready to accept that responsibility off telling the AMS things are gonna change.

We have a non-sanctioned event coming up in 2 weeks where we have 1 AM division and we are going to pay out in the flight system to eliminate the sandbagging element, let me tell you that the AMS were not very excited about the change of format even though they knew NOTHING about how it was going to be. Just the word "change" was ridiculed.

...let me tell you that the AMS were not very excited about the change of format even though they knew NOTHING about how it was going to be. Just the word "change" was ridiculed.


Try using that word around our "pros" if you really want to see whining!

James,

I think the PDGA has taken major steps to address that issue in the last few years. If you look at the AM payouts for this year where the TDs have used the current pay tables, and provided the required player packs. By lowering the recommended entry fees, requiring player packs at B-Tiers and above, flattening the am payouts, and paying deeper into the fields, the PDGA has reduced the stacks of plastic the top Ams are taking away from tournaments. As more TDs move toward more impressive player packs and auxilary prizes (CTPs and ACE Pots) to attract more players, the prizes awarded to the winners will drop even more.

Take a close look at what is happening and the direction things are already moving in, and you may see that part of the change you are asking for is taking place now.

How many time do I have to tell you Rhett, we know that CALI is much cooler than the rest of us ;)

The flight system for a payout would do wonders in getting ADV players to want to move up. The flight payout promotes going out there and giving your best. It doesn't reward just the people that can shoot the best golf. Other than the top 3-5 scores then the flight system payout will put the sandbagger out of business.

What the flight system does is make the prizes a lottery so there's no reason to play well if you're not on the top card. On the last hole, making the putt might put you out of the prizes and missing it puts you at the top of the next section.

Give ams am points for playing pro AND make last place points in any pro division equal to first place points in the equivalent age or gender restricted [or unrestricted] am division.

That's a good idea. Do the same Masters to Open, etc.

<font color="blue"> [1]</font> Are you going to be running any stand alone Trophy Only events this year? <font color="blue">[2]</font> And do you have any reasons to believe that Prize and Cash players would be interested in opting for the Trophy Only option at Prize/Cash events other than poverty or lack of confidence? <font color="blue"> [3]</font> Or in other words what reasons do you have for offering the option at your events?

1. Diana and I are running at least one. If we get 12 players and 5 'gators we'll do two more.

2. Every trophy-only player has their own reasons. I think their price/value calculation is a always a factor. At our B-tiers you can lock in on a personal 107% payout by playing trophy-only amateur. I think most players who pay it are looking for an opportunity to play against better competition without having to pay a big [$23, $35 or $45] entry fee. 3. My reason for offering it is because I like to pay it. I pay it when Kelsey plays pro or when I'm playing mostly left handed.

Oh, Jon and Brett are probably running a trophy-only or two in the Chicago area. The Discontinuum Club Championship went fine last year as a free trophy-only for club members only. The Chicago City Championship is trophy-only I think, and the winner gets a USDGC invitation.

Anyway, the nice thing about my idea is that it costs the PDGA almost nothing, just the time to change way the spreadsheet calculates points, it costs pros nothing since they don't care about points, it would prompt some players to play up some of the time [me for starters, at all of our IOS events] and it avoids any scary changes.

The real problem, as has been noted repeatedly, is that we don't have the player base to provide a mass media audience. Think about this: The price to watch the Cubs play ball from a decent seat at Wrigley Field is about $40 - $50. All those seats will sell out. The price to play in the same foursome as the top pro disc golfers in your region is going to be pretty close to the same at a lot of C-tiers. How many of our most ardent fans are ponying up $40 or $50 to play with the pros at their local C-tier? Disc golfers place no value on this opportunity that literally sells for thousands of dollars when the pro is a pro golfer.

...let me tell you that the AMS were not very excited about the change of format even though they knew NOTHING about how it was going to be. Just the word "change" was ridiculed.


Try using that word around our "pros" if you really want to see whining!



Change can be scary.

Let's look at a couple of ideas and definitions...

I am a professional Plant Pathologist because knowing and doing plant disease things is what earns me the paycheck I depend on to pay my bills.

I am a disc golfer because I play disc golf.

Definition one - Professional (insert occupation, let's say - hmmmm - Disc Golfer) = a person who does the "insert occupation" thing, whatever it is, to make the money they use to pay their bills

Definition two - amateur (insert activity, lt's say - hmmmmm - disc golfer) = a person who does whatever the "insert activity" thing is for some other reason than to pay their bills because they do something else to dependably take care of the money-for-paying-bills part.

So, I would still be a professional plant pathologist even if I bet my buddy Dumbo $150,000 dollars a stroke, beat him by 3 stokes and he was honest enough to pay off and smart enough to never do that again.

Just to let all the regulars know, I have read this thread (and many others) from the first post to the last, ergo, I am knowledgable of what has been said so far, even if this is my first posting.

Kevin and James - I am a 900 or so rated player and feel absolutely NO OBLIGATION WHATSOEVER to help you or anyone else make a living playing disc golf. I would like to see you be able to do so, but frankly speaking, that ain't my problem. It's yours. I am a professional plant pathologist, remember? Gave up a good paying job with a future and lived like a poor college student all through my thirties to get my degrees to make that happen. Now I make way more money than I did before and like it more too. In short, it was worth the sacrifice. That was what I needed to do for myself. You??

To that end let me ask you what, besides playing tournaments, you have done to earn yourself money from disc golf? You wanna be a Pro Disc Golfer, right? To help you see the thrust of my question, I want to point out that Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan make/made far more money from their endorsements than they ever did from the winnings or salaries they directly earned by doing what they do/did. No sarcasm intended, but maybe you should be talking to their agent(s).

Well maybe a bit of sarcasm :D:D

But the "system" they each developed benefited both themselves and their sport.

I am not your enemy - far from it. I productively devote a good bit of time and energy to growing the sport in my area. Pro or am, you can't have problem with that, can you?

Nick, Gary and others who have chosen to debate the amateur thing - I don't care if you call me an amateur or not because I won a few bucks worth of plastic at the last sanctioned outing I attended. I do plant disease things to pay my bills (my profession) and play disc golf for my own reasons (some days it's love :) some days it's hate :mad:) Either way, it's golf, and I am an amateur disc golfer (see definition two above) having fun! :)

Lighten up everyone! Yeesh! Play disc golf. Get others to do so too, by whatever legal, ethical and moral means available. Get what YOU want from the sport and the PDGA and stop telling me that I should either derive or support the same benefits you enjoy.

The topic of this thread is PDGA Reformation. To me, that suggests a discussion of fundamental institutional policy shifts (I am a federal employee and those sorts of terms do make sense to me). I believe that the essential issue being discussed here is really whether the PDGA should be more (not exclusively) involved and focused on developing the amateur or professional aspects of the sport. And if the decision is that it is the professional side of things the PDGA needs to focus on, does there need to be an affliated organization for the amateur side of things? Am I right?

Comments?

Yes.

My white pines have been dropping a lot of needles...

Are you going to actively invite non-standard prize/cash players to them? I.e. students and community groups that don't normally play tournaments or disc golf per se. I mean if you got one gym class out there you'd have around 30 players right there...

That's my plan.

If things go as planned I might be able to make one of Jon's events, what are the dates for those?

Too funny, as my three year old likes to say. Let's hear it. I have a PhD in molecular genetics and an MBA from Rice. [whine on]For 15 years before I got out, I worked 80 to 90 hours a week in academic science.[whine off] I bet I worked a whole lot harder at that than Kevin and James have worked at their disc golf... combined. If I could have had 1/2 that to practice disc golf I could probably whine as well as any Pro player. Why should I give my money over to them? Money by the way that I worked very hard to earn? :D

Then you know what I'm saying Lyle.

Gave up a good paying job with a future and lived like a poor college student all through my thirties to get my degrees to make that happen. Now I make way more money than I did before and like it more too. In short, it was worth the sacrifice. That was what I needed to do for myself. You??



Wow, you should see the parallel. Maybe if those in plant pathology who didn't get a degree, didn't spend the effort to learn more, didn't spend the time to gain experience earned more than you because society tended to value lousy plant pathologists, then you would understand the parallel.

By the way, for the freaking thousandth time, who is asking for your financial support? And by the way, I am not any good at disc golf. I don't expect to make #$*&$! because frankly, I don't deserve #$*&$!. However, I am just sick and tired of a system that enables people that deserve less than #$*&$! to thrive, while people that strive to improve are faced with extra burdens. And it frankly pisses me off how often I read from people that don't serve #$*&$!, how the pros (players way better than me) don't deserve #$*&$!.

Like Rhett, just be content in the fact that the masses rule, and they shoot around 900. When, and if you improve to 955 and want to play pro, come back to this thread.

[/QUOTE]
Wow, you should see the parallel. Maybe if those in plant pathology who didn't get a degree, didn't spend the effort to learn more, didn't spend the time to gain experience earned more than you because society tended to value lousy plant pathologists, then you would understand the parallel.

By the way, for the freaking thousandth time, who is asking for your financial support? And by the way, I am not any good at disc golf. I don't expect to make #$*&$! because frankly, I don't deserve #$*&$!. However, I am just sick and tired of a system that enables people that deserve less than #$*&$! to thrive, while people that strive to improve are faced with extra burdens. And it frankly pisses me off how often I read from people that don't serve #$*&$!, how the pros (players way better than me) don't deserve #$*&$!.

Like Rhett, just be content in the fact that the masses rule, and they shoot around 900. When, and if you improve to 955 and want to play pro, come back to this thread.

[/QUOTE]

You should really try to be a bit more vitriolic when you make a point. I always feel so much more certain that someone is carefully considering my position when they essentially tell me to bugger off. Nice touch!

Plenty of folks worked less hard to get where they are than I did, and make tons more money than I do. What's your point? Life ain't fair pardner. Each of us should seek our own contentment.

My point was that playing in tourneys is not the only way a professional disc golfer can get the "sport" to provide real and lucrative income for themselves. Some pros do those "additional things", and my hat is off to them. I suspect that they have not chimed in here because they are elsewhere doing those things in addition to their tournament schedule. And I also suspect that the things they are doing are helping to grow the sport in very real ways, just like Michael Jordan's and Tiger's Nike endorsements (and attendant responsibilities) helped propel their respective sports forward.

Back in the days when it was safe(r) to pick up hitch hikers and I would do so from time to time, I used to have a rule that I would not pick up anyone who was not walking (actively putting one foot in front of another) as I came up on them. The idea was that if they weren't willing to do at least that much to get themselves where they needed to be, I felt no need to help them. I believe the same basic principle applies here. Perhaps you couldn't see that around the pound signs, dollar signs and ampersands you were throwing up on the screen.

You have no idea what my objectives are in disc golf, and you have, less rather than more obliquely, asked me to financially support the earnings of professional disc golfers if I want to continue to play organized disc golf. The pros deserve whatever they earn. I never said otherwise. What I did say was that I was not OBLIGATED to contribute.

So let's get back to the question I closed with in my original post- should the PDGA (or WFDF or someone) consider creating a sister organization for ams at this point in time? Putting it differently - is this house still big enough for all of us? Or do we need to build on that vacant lot we own next door? That seems to me to be the real issue.

Life ain't fair pardner.



Sometimes, when you see things that aren't fair, you strive to change it. Afterall, that is what this thread is about.

By the way, for the thousandth and one time, pros are not hitchhikers asking for a ride, but you are awfully gracious to offer.

I knew we understood each other! :D :D :D

And I picked up lots of those hitch hikers who were walking :cool::)