Do you play to be on the same course with the Pro's , or would you like to see more Am only events ???
gnduke
Feb 19 2007, 07:17 PM
I think one of the major advantages to an am only event is to have local Pros giving clinics, advice, and assistance at the event. How many players remember meeting Jay and Des Reading spotting hole 18 on the hill at Am World Doubles.
It does mean something to the Ams when the Pros show up to support them, and it means just as much when the pros don't show up.
jrsnapp
Feb 19 2007, 07:17 PM
I enjoy both. When I play in a tourney, I'm there to do the best I can and try to win. Playing in tournaments with the pros is always fun. You get to learn a lot about the game and then implement those techniques to strengthen your game so you can hopefully do well in the AM events! :D
gnduke
Feb 19 2007, 07:23 PM
The other side of this question is:
(As an AM) If there were more Pro only events, would you attend as a spectator and support the Pro only events or play your local mini instead ?
jrsnapp
Feb 19 2007, 07:33 PM
Absolutely. When I played Ball Golf I went to some PGA events and had a blast! Went to U.S. Open at Pinehurst and followed Tiger for 8 holes. Was even on the rope behind him to watch him tee off a few times. It was an experience I'll never forget!! Would do the same for Disc Golf!! If I wasn't going to Bowling Green, I would go watch the Pro Crosstown in a heartbeat.
citysmasher
Feb 19 2007, 07:57 PM
I want mixed Pro/Am doubles.
Playing with a pro is cool.
the_beastmaster
Feb 19 2007, 10:12 PM
I want more choices. I like Am only events, because I like all events. I don't like Am events any better than I like Pro/Am events. As for Pro events, I will usually try and play, but if it fills or I don't qualify, I will volunteer and/or spectate.
MikeMC
Feb 20 2007, 11:05 AM
If it means there are less delays between shots, yes. I doesn't make any difference to me if "PROs" are playing or not.
esalazar
Feb 20 2007, 06:49 PM
i think there should be more pro only events, many more!!
MARKB
Feb 20 2007, 07:29 PM
Ams and Pros should be seperated I agree with that....
Am only and Pro only events... this will hopefully allow for ams to come out as spectators (hard to do I know but it can be done with EFFORT)... like raffles for spectators etc maybe?
robertsummers
Feb 20 2007, 08:06 PM
I just enjoy playing so saying do I enjoy one more than the other is like saying had you rather have a black or red Corvette.
Pogis
Feb 21 2007, 01:44 AM
If the higher rated ams would suck it up and move up, that would make the pro field big enough to have more pro only events. Its not worth it to run an event for only 25 people.
MARKB
Feb 21 2007, 02:56 AM
If the higher rated ams would suck it up and move up, that would make the pro field big enough to have more pro only events. Its not worth it to run an event for only 25 people.
I agree but at the same time you can't force them to move up and there is no real incentive to move up. Most of these players don't want to put in the extra practice time and sacrifice involved in making that next step...
robertsummers
Feb 21 2007, 10:19 AM
If the higher rated ams would suck it up and move up, that would make the pro field big enough to have more pro only events. Its not worth it to run an event for only 25 people.
I agree but at the same time you can't force them to move up and there is no real incentive to move up. Most of these players don't want to put in the extra practice time and sacrifice involved in making that next step...
My question to anyone that thinks it only takes practice to be a pro is why aren't you playing in Major League Baseball, making a couple of million a year? After all it only takes practice right?
Pogis
Feb 21 2007, 10:30 AM
There is an amount of skill involved. But when your finishing at the top of the tourneys your playing in and your rating is high, practice makes the difference.
Here is what I propose for Lewisville next year.
Am only event, where the winner of each division is forced to move up to the next division.... Similar to Brian's Last Am event..
Real simple : MA1 winner will be paid cash for the win...
Thus promoting the jump to play Open.... This could work well in a series.... Imagine 5-10 events a year, where the end result is new open player's per event.
Something to think about
rhett
Feb 21 2007, 01:43 PM
Here is what I propose for Lewisville next year.
Am only event, where the winner of each division is forced to move up to the next division.... Similar to Brian's Last Am event..
Real simple : MA1 winner will be paid cash for the win...
Thus promoting the jump to play Open.... This could work well in a series.... Imagine 5-10 events a year, where the end result is new open player's per event.
Something to think about
What a great way to thin the am ranks so that the pro players won't be so mad that there are so many more ams than pros.
Of course there won't be any more pros than there are now, but who cares about details like that anyway?
Pogis
Feb 21 2007, 01:44 PM
Interesting idea Lee. not sure what to think about that one.
esalazar
Feb 21 2007, 02:41 PM
If the higher rated ams would suck it up and move up, that would make the pro field big enough to have more pro only events. Its not worth it to run an event for only 25 people.
I agree but at the same time you can't force them to move up and there is no real incentive to move up. Most of these players don't want to put in the extra practice time and sacrifice involved in making that next step...
It seems to me that at the pro only events , many ams generally play up.. However when given the option of playing am or pro the ams will generally play down where the fees are much lower and the ROI is much more favorable..
Interesting idea Lee. not sure what to think about that one.
When did people become so darn scared of a challenge?????
I must ask myself, what are these Am For Life players going to think about themselves when they actually do cash in the Open division... I would spend quite some time kicking myself in the rear if I had spent years in MA1 , to find out I could actually be making money in MPO...
Funny story, last year @ the Dolese Open ( JDGF event # 3 ) , the MA1 winner actually shot a couple of strokes better than the MPO winner... Hell , I feel stupid myself, I would have taken 4th place cash ( if memory serves ) in that event , but I was down in MA1, picking out my plastic..... MAN UP MA1 PLAYERS !!!!!!
ROI- that is hilarious...........
How about a return on the time you have invested in disc golf ..... Is a stack of plastic a good return on that time ?
Or would looking yourself dead square in the eye, and knowing that you compete on a professional level a good return on your time invested ....
I myself would rather know that I can compete with the elite........
But some people are satisfied with being " DOMINANT in a sea of mediocrity "
Which are you ????
Without struggle, what good is reward ?
gnduke
Feb 21 2007, 05:52 PM
You can't pay ams out in cash in a sanctioned event without a waiver from the comp director. But as Rhett pointed out, making a player stop playing in MA1 does not mean they will then start playing in MPO.
Well, there is much truth in that .
But, I would imagine that getting authorization to do so would not be too difficult. Think about it , essentially you are helping the TRUE number of professional disc golfers grow. That is what the PDGA and NT are all about right ? How do we sell ourselves to major corporate sponsors with a vast number of AM's, and a minimum # of pro's .
If the players had an issue with it , dont sign up.....
Very simple ...
It is frustrating .........
All I read and hear, is people screaming @ the top of their lungs " Put us on ESPN " , "when is Ken Climo getting his Weaties box " , " dude, you have never heard of disc golf ? " etc......... With the current state of AM -vs- PRO we will never see such a thing ..... If that is the case, what exactly are we promoting ? Why are we promoting ? For whom are we promoting this for ?
BUMP- Happy b-day Rhett, you share this day with the most evil person I know, my wife ! :D
gnduke
Feb 21 2007, 09:35 PM
How do we sell ourselves to major corporate sponsors with a vast number of AM's, and a minimum # of pro's .
I don't get it. That's exactly how you sell yourself to sponsors. Name a sport where the sponsors are trying to sell things to the pro players. Sponsors normally give the pros the ir equipment to use so the amateurs in the sport will go out and buy it. The way to attract sponsors is to organize the recreational players and get an accurate headcount of how many people play the sport. Get flyers up at the local courses and have your top players give clinics one day a week. Count it as advertising to introduce the casual players to what the local club and the PDGA are doing for the sport.
When we have a few hundred thousand heads counted, then the 200 pro players might start finding a little serious sponsorship. Getting more pros that really aren't into being pros won't help anyone except the MA1 players that didn't win.
We need a supporting membership (magazine, PDGA number, $2 fee to play in B-Tiers and below, can not play in A-Tiers and above) and a playing membership (magazine, PDGA number, rating, no fee for B-Teirs and below, can not play A-Tiers and above), and a touring membership (what we have now).
I also think that once the Magazine gets that level of readership, advertising should help reduce the fulfillment costs.
MARKB
Feb 22 2007, 11:57 PM
My question to anyone that thinks it only takes practice to be a pro is why aren't you playing in Major League Baseball, making a couple of million a year? After all it only takes practice right?
I think this was covered but just to reiterate... once you get to a certain "player rating" in this sport... I am not sure what that player rating is maybe 970ish? Usually it is a matter of consistency to be able to compete at a top level week in and week out this is where practice and dedication comes in. Sure some natural talent is required.
As far as baseball goes or any sport for that matter natural talent helps, DEDICATION is huge, and also Practicing the RIGHT way is necessary. You also need a solid base to start off on. If your technique or what not is holding you back all the practice in the world might not help if you don't have a solid base to grow from.
MARKB
Feb 23 2007, 12:01 AM
How do we sell ourselves to major corporate sponsors with a vast number of AM's, and a minimum # of pro's .
I don't get it. That's exactly how you sell yourself to sponsors. Name a sport where the sponsors are trying to sell things to the pro players. Sponsors normally give the pros the ir equipment to use so the amateurs in the sport will go out and buy it. The way to attract sponsors is to organize the recreational players and get an accurate headcount of how many people play the sport. Get flyers up at the local courses and have your top players give clinics one day a week. Count it as advertising to introduce the casual players to what the local club and the PDGA are doing for the sport.
When we have a few hundred thousand heads counted, then the 200 pro players might start finding a little serious sponsorship. Getting more pros that really aren't into being pros won't help anyone except the MA1 players that didn't win.
We need a supporting membership (magazine, PDGA number, $2 fee to play in B-Tiers and below, can not play in A-Tiers and above) and a playing membership (magazine, PDGA number, rating, no fee for B-Teirs and below, can not play A-Tiers and above), and a touring membership (what we have now).
I also think that once the Magazine gets that level of readership, advertising should help reduce the fulfillment costs.
I agree with most of this, well said.
Everyone wants more pros, sure more pros is a great thing! But we want more TOP rated pros. There needs to be fields of 25 or more 1000 rated players at each event. The competition at the top level needs to be more attractive in that sense.
I think local pros should definately put on as many clinics as they can in their free time. I myself have always wanted to do something like that but it does take a time committment and some planning.
Pogis
Feb 23 2007, 01:08 AM
Sure some natural talent is required.
:D
BUMP- Happy b-day Rhett, you share this day with the most evil person I know, my wife ! :D
:D
evil is an understatement
angry, atrocious, bad, baneful, base, beastly, bitchy, calamitous, corrupt, damnable, depraved, destructive, disastrous, execrable, flagitious, foul, harmful, hateful, heinous, hideous, iniquitous, injurious, loathsome, low, maleficent, malevolent, malicious, malignant, nefarious, no good, obscene, offensive, pernicious, poison, rancorous, reprobate, repugnant, repulsive, revolting, sinful, spiteful, stinking, ugly, unpleasant, unpropitious, vicious, vile, villainous, wicked, wrathful, wrong
pick one......
hope she's not reading ;)