Everyone:

I am the PDGA Board Liaison to the Womens Committee. Although I have been reading this thread regularly and would like to represent womens' concerns to the Board, I don't feel generally well qualified to speak for the women. I feel that they should develop their own agenda, preferably through the Womens Committee. As Liaison, I am a sort of facilitator, helping the Committee (in any way I can), and being involved in the process by which their concerns are presented to the Board.

There is, however, one proposal that I would like to make to the women. It bothers me that there are no women currently on the Board of Directors. I would like the women to identify an appropriate candidate and encourage her to run for the Board in this year's election.

Okay, so gas prices are going to go sky-high this summer and disc golfers are probably going to begin staying more local as a result. Over the past 4 years I've been playing PDGA tournies, the women's field has not grown unless we either A) have an all-women's event B) travel to Peoria, Massachussets, Texas or somewhere else far away to gather together, or C) Let Am's play up for Trophy-only at certain events, charging them half price and producing a slightly bigger field, but still small payouts. All of those have been fairly successful, but there are A) very few women-only events B) gas prices are going to diminish travelling, and C) few TD's embracing Trophy-only.

So. In four years in Michigan the Pro Women's field has not grown. The PDGA has told us to talk to women and encourage them to play. We have. We have increased the Am Field, but only one has made the move to open women. Michigan has a wealth of local C tiers at great courses with tons of men showing up to play every weekend. The social scene is great. The organization by our TD's is great. The women's field is abysmal. When you have one or no competitors tourney after tourney, it becomes a drag both mentally and on the finances. Nearly all the women who have every played pro here have dropped out or significantly decreased their tourney play. I am about to do so as well, after playing 43 tournies last year and playing well. But if a weekend's gas and food costs more than I am able to win - even if I do win - then its logical to discontinue play.

When I brought this subject up last year and tried to brainstorm a solution, I was met with the same ultimatum over and over again: "If you don't like it or can't afford it, don't play." I will say this very clearly: I do not like 2 person fields. I cannot afford to play DG tournies as the structure currently stands. I tried different suggestions and they were rejected. The PDGA talks endlessly about supporting women, yet there is no other gameplan in place to grow the field or provide more money. So despite my love for the game and for tourney play, I feel my only gameplan left is the only other suggestion you all have given me: Don't play.

And this is how you lose women from the sport, women who love to compete more than anything in the world.

So I'll provide yet another suggestion that I assume will be unanimously rejected. I've said all along that what we want are big fields and the ability to earn money. We are pro women and we do not need nor want to play for plastic; it's too hard to sell and even if we spend time hanging at the course trying, a park official is able to bust us and tell us it's not allowed.

<font color="red"> Let us play the Am Men for money. Let us into the gigantic Am 2 or Am 3 fields where 3rd place is an accomplishment, where even though one person is beating you, you still have the chance to beat 15 other people. If the PDGA or local TD's can't produce the women, keep the ones you got by giving us SOMETHING to play for.
</font>
Or, you can blow off yet another suggestion, let things go the way they are, and let the men have all the fun while the unique women who are involved in this sport continue to drop like flies. Your choice. My choice - as proposed by all of you - is either deal with it or quit.

Or, you can blow off yet another suggestion, let things go the way they are, and let the men have all the fun while the unique women who are involved in this sport continue to drop like flies. Your choice. My choice - as proposed by all of you - is either deal with it or quit.




Maybe if you had a more positive manner of presenting your suggestions, they might have more success. What I read was not positive.

We had a great event in Texas this past weekend with 68 ladies in attendance! Believe it or not, the Open division has the same problems down here as you mention. As I have said in the past, the real world isn't concerned about this and being that competitive, you might just need to quit and accomplish your goal.

Many people play a variety of sports without any expectation of a financial return, spending lots of money for the ENJOYMENT and FUN, not to "cash"

Good luck in your next venture.

You know what, Sue, please keep your eyes shut and never respond to anything I write ever again. People like you are not the people I'm trying to communicate with.

This is a free forum, and given the nature of your comments, I think that open discussion should be allowed.

Once again, I am sorry that you seem to have such a half empty attitude. I don't think that is positive for the sport either

Should pro level women get "special consideration" when playing in an am division with a cash payout? I bet that would be really popular with the am men. :eek: I don't think the men in this neck of the woods would think that fair. Have you found any local support for your idea?

The suggestion is not radical. I've already done it at the Mid-Nats and Dave Gentry supports it as a future step that builds on the changes made recently allowing ams to enter pro divisions and pros to enter am divisions. However, the payout would likely be half the retail value of the prizes. At Mid-Nats, pros were allowed to convert any portion of the merch certificate they won into cash at 50%. Brakel already does this indirectly at his events because he'll buy back your merch at 50%.

This is a dead horse of sorts.
Playing at the Pro level takes a lot of time. Women just don't usually have it. Not many men have it either, to tell the truth ... Sarah, you're talking about women bringing their game to the level where they're playing 900+ golf on average ... roughly equivalent to men taking it to the 1000+ level. There's just not that many players of either gender who are at that level. (On the bright side, it appears that once they get there, they pretty much stay there!)

But look at this: for a woman who is playing a lot and really working on competing, maybe ready to take it up a notch from the Advanced Women's division, there's plenty of competition out there. LOVE playing with those men! Actually, I think we've got it better than the guys, because we can ALWAYS find good strong competition ... whereas there's a point where the men (maybe in the 950-1000 level) sort of have to choose "up" or "down".

Let us play the Am Men for money.



I wish I had an answer to the question how to get more Pro Women to play and stay in the sport. I will say I do not agree with the above statement. You can already play with the Am Men for money right now. Just tell the TD you want to sell him back the plastic or announce that you want cash for your prizes at the awards. You won't get top dollar, but then you don't have to hang around parking lots selling your winnings.


I have been playing pro for 10 years and I have seen many women players come and go. Some continue to get better and move out on tour. Others realize they will never get to that next level. Those are the players that are hard to keep. There comes a point when they have to decide if they are playing for fun or money. They have to decide if they want to spend money on entry fees and travel or choose another activity that brings enjoyment and is worthy of spending that extra cash.

Now you have come to this point and it appears you want more options. It is not someone else's fault there are not many Pro women playing. It is not the PDGA's fault, it is not TD's that are at fault. It is not up to them to find a solution. It is up to you to make a decision and you apparently don't like your limited choices.

If you want to play for money, do what it takes to get out on the road. Either take your game up a notch or simply gamble you can earn enough with your current skills. If you cannot go on tour because of a job or your life situation, you have already made a decision. It is not the PDGA's fault you want a steady job or you have financial obligations.

I think many men players arrive at this decision as well. We can't all be Ken Climo's or road warriors that can travel around the country to events. Players eventually need to decide if they are still going to be happy even if they are donating. Many pros I know just want to break even if they are traveling to an event. They are not out to make money.

Of course not all women (or men) drop out of the sport for the same reasons. The most common reasons I have seen for women leaving are: getting married, having kids, buying new home, getting a new job, going back to school, not enough money, etc. etc. Nothing you have proposed will ever prevent the loss of these players. Most all the women (and men) I know that have dropped out thought they would still play after having a baby. They thought they could find the time even with the new job schedule. They thought after the move-in and fixing up of the new house, they would have more time. Maybe while they were taking time off from disc golf to do these activities, they decided that maybe family, work, home and friends were more of a priority than disc golf.

Again, I wish there was a solution to getting and keeping more Pro Women in the sport. Right now it appears you have at least five options:
1. Play for money. Take the leap and go on tour. This seems like a natural for someone who enjoys competition.
2. Move to an area where there are more Pro Women (so you don't have to travel to find a field).
3. Be happy living where you are and playing with only 1 or 2 women every week and/or bring more ladies to play with.
4. Volunteer. It keeps you active in the sport and you can still enjoy the company of other disc golfers.
5. Quit and blame everyone else for not finding a solution that you like.

<font color="red"> Let us play the Am Men for money.
</font>



Sarah,

I really like this idea, and I hope it gets implemented someday. I also think it is great that you are trying to come up with ideas that will give pro women more options. I think it is important to keep women playing the sport, and I hate to see talented women player (or any women players for that matter) leaving the game.

I have a 12 year old daughter that plays disc golf. She loves the game! Right now she has plenty of competition. Her rating is under 800, so she can play intermediate women or advanced women (depending on the field size and level of competition). We live in Texas, so there are usually enough women playing to field one of these divisions.

However, if she ever reaches the pro level, the field sizes will probably decease. So I appreciate you trying to come up with options for yourself, for other pro women, and indirectly for those that might one day be in your position. My daughter already knows that she will have to play against the guys more often if she ever gets a rating near the 900 level.

I hope you keep playing and trying to push for new ideas. Most people are afraid to push for new ideas, because they often won't get the response they where hoping for.

Thanks..............Rick

My daughter has reached the pro level. She was ranked 34th in the last rankings. She reads posts like Sarah's and says, "See, this is why its dumb to go pro. If Sarah had stayed amateur she could be happily playing in fields of 30 or 40 Intermediates."

We're driving to Pennsylvania tomorrow if we got in the tournament. 24 Intermediates and every one of them is about as good as Kelsey, depending on whether they bring their game. You're only going to find that many pro women at two tournaments a year.

The next time Des Reading stays at my house I'll play her from the reds for $100.

MORE SUGGESTIONS AND IDEAS!!!!

After playing in a B-tier this weekend with yet again only one other pro woman and 7 Am Women, I'm back to the drawing board for ways to make disc golf more fun for women. Here's what happened:

WPO had $20 added cash per woman. Like I said, there were two of us, so our division got forty bucks.

There were 7 Am Women who paid $30 to enter and received ZERO PAYOUT because they also received a players pack valued at the same (t-shirt, disc, mini, pint glass).

If they had played in the Pro division, they would still have received the t-shirt, disc and mini, and there would have been 9 women playing with probably 5 cashing spots and - if you assume that the two actual pros cash - that leaves 3 cashing spots for the 7 women with $180 added cash into the division.

Sounds GREAT, right? Well, ALL the Am Women opted to play in their own division for apparantly no other reward than a pint glass. Why? Let's speculate: 1. $20 more entry fee. $30 is doable to them, $50 might be too much for women. SOLUTION: I would have paid only $30 to get them in our division. 2. Didn't want to play the long pads. I can understand that - long pads were intimidating when I first started out. SOLUTION: I would have played short pads to get them in our division. 3. The three that would have cashed couldn't take the cash b/c of Worlds coming up and didn't want to lose Am status. Is this correct? Even with ratings of less than 900? Don't know the answer to this. SOLUTION: Ask Chuck or other informed PDGA official.

Let's face it: Am Women don't want to play Pro Women. They just don't. We can't make them and we can't make them feel bad for not doing so. We also can't snap our fingers and expect a casual girl to pop out of the woodwork and play pro and with the level of play of most pro women - especially in Michigan, we can't expect Ams to make the jump for ZERO expected reward. And you in the PDGA cannot possibly expect us to continue on in this manner with a borderline non-existent field and not enough money to even pay for a tank of gas.
<font color="red">
SOLUTION: IF there is less than 4 pro women in attendence, we expand the PWO division to include any player of any age who is rated less than or equal to the highest rated female at any given event to pay the full PWO entry, play the longs and play for cash.
</font>
Take Loco at the Mills this past weekend: Without including the unrated players, we would have had 34 eligable players for the PWO2 division, for a total of $1700 in entry and +$40 added cash. Probably cash out to 15th or 16th place and the payouts would have been very respectable.

The BENEFITS: Women get what the men get and what we want more than anything: the opportunity to cash and big fields. Low-rated men don't face endless years of fruitless play for shameful funny-money and short pads.

Okay, people, what's wrong with this solution? It doesn't involve me moving, giving up, travelling 500 miles to find a field or hassling am women.

I think this is a great idea. Can it be implemented and how soon?

Also, if you trash my idea, I would expect you to present an alternate solution of your own. Chuck, I hope especially to hear from you.

I'll have more later when I get some time on my trip. Coming thru Ann Arbor next week.

If you are talking about taking the entire Men's Rec division and maybe most of the Men's Intermediate division out of the prize system and instead putting them in a cash paying system, you'll be sucking a lot of cash out of the process that is needed for expenses, "added cash for the pros," added cash at the next tournament, overalls or finals for the series, etc.

Des, Valerie and Burl would get appearance fees [paid for by the Advanced players, but they'd have to go to different tournaments every weekend] and you could collect non-appearance fees [because we have to keep the number of pro women below four if us advanced players want to play for cash!]

After two or three years of this, every player would be a "pro", and to cover expenses every local tournament would be paying out 70% of the cash received. Disc sales would be mainly for cash and the price would fall to the true level.

The system would probably be popular with the players. It would be harder to find TDs! :D

Alright, in order to play in the PWO2 division, non-female players pay an extra $5 TD/club fee: With 32 of these players at Loco, the club makes $160 off the division. is this so far off what they make in extortion under the current system?

Meanwhile, it simply is not true that amateur women will not pay to play with the pro women. Our field of four to eight pro women at every IOS generally consists of Barrett and three to six amateur women. Our tournaments offer a reduced entry fee option in the pro divisions and that helps. But Barrett herself helps even more.

Then why didn't any of them play open at Loco? Even at IOS events, Ams can't cash. Bottom line is, stop making the pro women dependent on the am women b/c it's too much sacrifice for them to handle.

Barrett herself helps even more? How? By being nice to them? So the ams are paying Barrett for her kindness? Huh? How is that competition? How much fun is it really for Barrett to beat up on a bunch of half-paying ams for a half-paying payout? She will tell you she has a blast no matter what b/c that's just who she is. Some of us have higher expectations for an organized sport. Should we be condemned for not accepting substandard conditions?

Should I be constantly condemned for being the only one to offer new ideas?

not sure i understand the appearance fees.....?

How about, if less than 4 WPO, or any division, then those players get mixed in with available fields based on ratings. Should the Pro player earn awards, they recieve cash equal to the costs of the prizes.

This would only be an option if less than 4 players in the division showed up.

Just a thought...

Bob

Bob, please refer to page one of this thread. Already suggested it.

Reading back, you did suggest it.
I doubt any TD would have an issue with this.
You're a Pro, so accepting cash is no big deal.
You're not getting any extra for it, just what you earned as a competitor.
Points might be an issue. Is it?
You think it's enough to earn you a tank of gas?
Bob

Yeah, those are all good points and questions. I noticed that the am divisions tend to pay really flat, like if entry is $30, first will pay out $38, 2nd $34, 3rd $32 and they'll pay out like 65% of the field all the way down to seven bucks.

As for the points, I'm not even sure what they are really used for. I think the person who accumulates the most over the year (usually the guy or gal who plays the most European events = 1000+ per event), usually gets an obelisk or something.

The Michi-pro women would be in Intermediate division. Lots of those guys are rated in the 920s and low 930s but on the up and up shooting golf well into the 950s and 960s, so it would be tough. However, there would be lower entries. I would much prefer that over the one-on-one we've got going right now, though.

As for the TD's allowing it, I don't know. Would they? Does the PDGA have some sort of ruling against it? I know Barrett tried to play in Masters last year for some decent competition and got into some trouble for it.

I can't imagine that Barrett would get in trouble for playing Masters ... I play all kinds of divisions - Pro Women, Pro Masters Women, Pro Masters, as well as Advanced, Advanced Masters, and Intermediate ... according to what kind of event it is, who's at the event, and what I feel like playing. Sometimes I've joined other divisions because they needed a competitor to help that division make. This year, I'm eligible in Grandmasters too -- opening up two more divisions I can explore! I find that I'm really competitive in Advanced Masters; they usually get a pretty good-sized division around here, and that's my division of choice if there's no Pro Women.

Points might matter, if you are concerned about getting enough to earn an invite to Worlds. The PDGA does total Pro points separately from Am points, but I'm not sure what happens after that.

When you've played in the Am divisions, did you earn prizes as a player in the division? Or did the TD make some concession for you?
Bob

Barrett was too young at the time. She had the unanimous consent of the Pro Masters but still got an official warning from the Competition Director. I saw her signed up for Pro Masters this year so I don't think it would be a courtesy violation to mention that she can now play Men's Pro Masters if she chooses.

Timing is everything. I thought Barrett told me last year that she was already Masters age at that time ... but I probably remember it wrong.

Yep, if you aren't old enough, you aren't old enough. Can't let those young enthusiasts in with the mellow older crowd !!

If I play well enough, I do earn prizes in the am divisions in which I compete. There's no concession necessary - a woman can play as a "pro playing am" in a wide variety of divisions, and as a woman of a certain age, my options are even broader. For me, its great to be able to play competitively with a wider range of people, even at tournaments that draw few or no pro-level women. (Which is what Sarah wants too ... although what differentiates my goal from Sarah's is that I'm not trying to make enough $$ to cover my gas at every event.)

The flip side of this relative breadth of competitive options is that when there are a good number of women there, I'll play with the open female pros -- most of whom are approximately half my age, have twice my energy, and can throw twice as far!! Course, that's fun, too.

Barrett played Open Masters at Lemon Lake last week-end even tho the results have her listed as the only Open Woman. She took 4th place cash in a 12 man field. She managed to birdie holes 15-18 of the blue course. I shot with her the first round on the new (3rd) course and duked it out with Rob Strasser in the second round and ended up in 2nd....Bart

Yeeeaaahhhh! Go Barrett! That rocks.

Vanessa, when you play into the am divisions, how do you move your plastic for $$ after you win it? The cops will bust you in the metroparks here for trying to sell it, TD's won't buy it back unless it's half value and ebay's fees also decrease the value and is time-cosuming with pics, descriptions and trips to the post office.

I did manage to sell my entire Discraft allotment to Alaska last year, but b/c he bought 80 discs, he got them for a steal.

How do you move discs for full value?

Sarah, you have exactly one problem: you think throwing frisbees is a for-profit activity. For the vast majority of players it is not. This is especially true for, click-click-back-back, 911 rated players. So long as you refuse to accept this game for what it is, you'll be frustrated by the whole deal. There's no other solution for your issues than for you to deal with reality. Frisbee golf is an enjoyable past-time, or it is nothing. It is not a lucrative professional endeavor except for a very few players much higher rated than you, and some manufacturers and large scale retailers.

You really should decide if the game is any fun for you, and if not, find some other recreational past-time.

Father Dave Tayloe always preached the idea that if you're not having fun, go do something else. Hmmmmmmm.

It is very disappointing that someone with good skills can't see the forest for the trees.


Good luck in life.

Ummm ... well, I'll answer the question on behalf of my family (I personally don't win too much in the way of plastic - just a few discs each year). This applies more to my two Am sons, who do collect a fair amount of plastic from time to time.

We do three things with our winnings:
- use them (after all, with 4 of us in the family there's always someone who wants something!)
- give them away to other events. We gave a big stack of stuff to a local Deaf Disc Golf event a couple of months ago. (We meant to give a stack to Sayde's too, but somehow they never got out of the garage in time .. no worries, they'll go to that event next year, or to some other fundraiser kind of event or to an event oriented toward newer players.)
- given them directly to other players ... we don't usually sell them, but if someone we know needs something we have but don't use, we're glad to give them away.

Did I mention that disc golf is a hobby for us? It is kind of a bonus that we can win some plastic that we can use ourselves or make useful in someone else's hands. Giving away discs is an easy thing that we can do to help others learn to love disc golf the way that we do.

Also, locally a lot of Am winnings are given in the form of merch bucks (not specifically plastic), which are more practical than just plastic because they can be cashed for clothing, towels, etc. as well.

First of all, let's define a few of the terms we're all throwing around so easily:

Profit: the earned reward for effort and success. If I should not play for profit, then what should I play for?

Fun: the expenditure of time in a manner designed for therapeutic refreshment of one's body or mind. Is it therapeutic or refreshing to work for something and never expect reward? To exalt oneself by saying: "I only play for fun, never for profit". This is saying that you expend your money and time in order to gain nothing. This is sacrifice.

Sacrifice: To give something of value up for something of lesser value. I have never understood this concept. Is it good that Vanessa pays her money to play tournies, utilizes her time and then turns around and gives her reward away to people who have not earned it? This does not make sense ot me.

When a player wants organized competition, pays $40 for intermediate, cashes in funny money for $80, "buys" 4 discs and resells them for ten bucks each, he has just converted his $40 back to $40 for no profit. How is this time well-spent?

Reality: Living in the real world with existing values and procedures. Funny money does not belong in reality. The United States does not allow you to pay your taxes with Monopoly money.

It is I who does not live in reality? Why can't TD's make the decision to openly and honestly earn their profit? TDs put effort into creating tournaments. They deserve profit. Why, then, do they utilize funny money to sneak it? Why not do it in the open?

If you are a TD who puts minimal effort into an event, uses a public course, no trophies, poor organization, no added cash, nothing much of value, then that TD could charge $5 extra on top of entries for his effort. If people know what to expect and you get 25 players, you receive $125.

If you are a TD who produces a superior product - if your name is Steve Dodge or Jason Southwick or Todd White - and people come from all over for your product, you could charge $25 extra for your profit. Your event could fill at 100 players and you will earn $2500. People will come, they will gladly pay and they will praise your efforts and your product.

If a system does not allow its successful members to profit, or even expect profit, it is a flawed system. It requires change or competition. If there was another association who didn't splinter everyone at my ratings level into pro women, am masters, intermediate, grandmasters and recreational, then profit would be available. Instead of 30 people rated similarly in 5 different divisions, there would be one division, playing for money and let the person who plays the best on any given day profit. But the current PDGA guidelines do not allow for this.

Only at Worlds and big events does it make sense to splinter divisions. At B and C tiers, I believe we should be able to have larger divisions based on ratings and play for money. I think that being a conscious human with the ability to THINK and problem-solve indicates I live in reality more than lemmings who swallow whatever comes in the current.

It is therapeutic and refreshing to my spirit to play good disc golf and profit from it. Sacrifice is a vile, helpless feeling that does not fit within my value system.

Go on throwing thoughtless demands at me and telling me to get out of the sport. I can do so only after fighting a battle I think is worth fighting for a sport I love. Is it love you feel when you sacrifice all your effort for no reward? How cheap your love must be then.

I don't need luck in my life, only access to intelligent minds with the ability to listen and act on rational beliefs.

so fun, personal accomplishment,etc. does not equal a form of reward?

i'm not trying to get on either side of the fence here- i appreciate the difficulties inherent in being a female player in this game/sport (as i think you know), but if fun/personal accomplishment don't amount to reward of a sort i don't see how/why anyone competes at anything.

Listen and act according to Sarah. j/k

Sarah I did not receive my pancakes in the mail, your system is flawed

Reality: Living in the real world with existing values and procedures. Funny money does not belong in reality. The United States does not allow you to pay your taxes with Monopoly money.




Seriously, bee for reality!

First of all, let's define a few of the terms we're all throwing around so easily:


Profit: the earned reward for effort and success. If I should not play for profit, then what should I play for?


Fun: the expenditure of time in a manner designed for therapeutic refreshment of one's body or mind. Is it therapeutic or refreshing to work for something and never expect reward? To exalt oneself by saying: "I only play for fun, never for profit". This is saying that you expend your money and time in order to gain nothing. This is sacrifice.


Sacrifice: To give something of value up for something of lesser value. I have never understood this concept. Is it good that Vanessa pays her money to play tournies, utilizes her time and then turns around and gives her reward away to people who have not earned it? This does not make sense ot me.


...It is therapeutic and refreshing to my spirit to play good disc golf and profit from it. Sacrifice is a vile, helpless feeling that does not fit within my value system.


...Is it love you feel when you sacrifice all your effort for no reward? How cheap your love must be then.



After reading this, a couple of thoughts come to mind.


1 I am sorry that you cannot feel the pure happiness that comes from a job well done or from giving to others.

2 True love can only be given away, it cannot be bought for any price.

3 The PDGA will not be able to solve your problems.

Alrighty, I've already defined fun, let's define accomplishment:

1. an act or instance of carrying into effect; fulfillment: the accomplishment of our desires.
2. something done admirably or creditably: Space exploration is a major accomplishment of science.
3. anything accomplished; deed; achievement: a career measured in a series of small accomplishments.

So, my personal accomplishment for playing a disc golf tournament would be.....what?

Def 1: What is my desire in a tourney? To win. To beat other people. Because I pay money for these opportunities, I should be able to expect a reward. The current system limits my ability to accomplish. Sue would say it's to bond with other girls, to enjoy their company. This does not presuppose a reward so tournies should cost no money.

Def 2: What is it to be done admirably? To play good golf. How am I to know whether it is good unless I have someone else's game to compare it to? Again, competition = rewards in a physical form.

Def 3: How are accomplishments to be measured? By scores. Lower scores are better than higher ones. Lower scores garner rewards.

To say that personal accomplishment is a reward of the spirit negates the fact that disc golf is a physical game and tournaments offer physical rewards for physical payment. If personal accomplishment of the spirit is what I'm aiming for, then I should be required to pay no entry fees and no PDGA membership fees, but still be allowed to compete in tournaments, expecting no physical reward since accomplishment of the spirit is all I can gain.

The only accomplishment to playing a tourney with no rewards is to finish it, which implies an inability to finish. Since I have no deformities to prevent me from finishing a tourney, what would the personal accomplishment be?

John, I ask you b/c I already know you're a man of intelligence and can back up your statements.

Ignce, the 100% pure maple syrup saturated the envelope and it was returned to me yesterday even though I put like 7 stamps on it.

Def 2: Again, competition = rewards in a physical form.





The only accomplishment to playing a tourney with no rewards is to finish it, which implies an inability to finish. Since I have no deformities to prevent me from finishing a tourney, what would the personal accomplishment be?





Sarah, I would like to suggest using some different terms.

Rewards in physical form = tangible

Deformities = disability?

Just constructive criticism :D

If money is the object, then you will have to play where the money is, the open division or men's masters division. You can travel to the majors where enough women will enter to offer the possibility of profit if you play well enough to cash.

I've been playing for a long time and have come to the realization that you can't MAKE anyone man or woman play competative disc golf just because you think it's great. The best you can do is to turn as many folks on to disc golf as you can. Hopefully some of them will be bitten by the same bug as you and turn into tournament players. Don't mistake this for a defeatist attitude because it really isn't. It's just a realistic attitude given the current state of things out here where the disc golfing population is not that great.

No, it's really a lot more simple than all of this: It's called the Sanction of the Victim and more people should understand it.

When you play a tourney, you pay real money for the opportunity to play in an organized event. The tourney is the product. Pros buy the tourney-product and are paid in real money for their success. Ams buy the product and are paid in funny money and forced to accept plastic. Discs are not the product TD's sell. They count on your permission and your participation for the tourney that you will accept this fraud.

Free enterprise dictates that you do not accept a product for which you have not paid. If you want to purchase discs, you should be able to pay real money for them. What I'm really after here is for all the Ams to stand up and say NO, that they want free enterprise and not a trip into economic fantasy-land.

Then I'll be able to have a big field and play for money. That's all I've ever wanted, but if the PDGA isn't going to make it happen, then its victims must be the ones to do so.

There's only 2 solutions to my dilemma: Under the current system I have to choose: play in pro women and have no competition and no hope for profit OR play in Intermediate and have lots of competition, but accept a fake payout and no profit.

Solution 1: Quit. I have never been a coward nor afraid of a fight when I believe my ideals are correct. Hence, my vehemence. I love competitive disc golf and it's hard to believe its come to this and harder to believe that everyone is so flippant about it.

Solution 2: Change the system. This is more in-line with my ideals. I suppose it starts with finding TD's who will work with me, then rallying support from rational ams and finally making something happen in the PDGA that will allow me big fields and real money.

So to any TD's reading out there, THANKS for any willingness to work with me and think about what I said about paying yourselves out of entry fees.

To everyone else: stop submitting to the current unreality. Reality is what you accept, what you make it. You can change it. Don't be afraid to try.

Run invitational unsanctioned gambling events for cash where you invite only the players in your ratings range. Probably a lot of Intermediates in your area would play.

There is absolutely nothing stopping ams and lower rated pros from running tournaments where they play for cash in ratings defined and protected divisions. Through the discrete and clever use of sidebets, or repurchase agreements, they can even run PDGA sanctioned tournaments where they play for cash. There are no PDGA restrictions on how much a TD pays for the merch he buys, or from whom he buys it. Is Jamie Mosier a pro yet? I've bought plenty of discs from him!

Every time I have offered to run a cash sidebet payout option for ams rated less than X at a tournament I was planning on playing, there has been zero interest.

Anybody interested in a 940 and under $10 cash sidebet payout at Holly? I'll run it. I'm 935. It would be fun for the Advanced players who have to play Advanced by rating and for the Intermediates who are just below the line.

Describe it any way you like. The TDs largely take their profit on the margin on wholesale to retail disc prices.

Now you can call that taking the cash up front and buying as much plastic as they can with what is left over, or you can call it using the margin to make the event (or their bankroll) better.

Your 'take the money up front' proposal amounts to the same thing for the ams, and takes money away from the pros.

Your mindset about the rest of the game is just too foreign to me to discuss rationally. My goals are all about enjoying the game, playing well against my own expectations (not other players), and helping the sport grow. I'd much rather spend the afternoon working with a new player than with a bunch of people just out for money. I guess it is just the way I was raised, you are expected to do for others when you can, and there is a certain pleasure that comes from helping others with no expectation of reimbursement.

I hope you are able to find something that allows you to calculate that competing is rewarding enough to continue. It always is for me, even when I don't play well. It's just a lot more rewarding when I do.

Sarah,
I am a TD and for a lomg time now. I understand your fustrations.
TWC was created to bring competion to all divisions. Womens sports is growing with the concept of TD running women only events. This is historical to all sports. All ladies need to take on the resposibility to bring more ladies into the sport. T.D 's are moving in that direction.....more and more women events are popping up everwhere. Come on down to the TWC 2009 and help me make a statement to the world of our sport.

Sarah would like to thank her sponsor, the Waterford Junior Girls Club, who made it possible for her to compete for cash in a 15 player field this weekend.

Run invitational unsanctioned gambling events for cash where you invite only the players in your ratings range. Probably a lot of Intermediates in your area would play.



Excellent idea. Or run some cash doubles events instead of playing tournaments. After all, playing cash doubles is much less entry fee and more profit.

This weekend playing the Hollywoods tournament was by far my best in-state experience this year! In my own words, THANK YOU to the Waterford Junior Girls Club and Bruce Brakel for understanding the frustrations of a pro woman and acting on it.

I played in the Intermediate division with a field of 16 competitors and it felt like Women's Nationals, but with dudes. It was such a different feeling to see 4 cards of competition, knowing that it was a tight race for the cashing spots - PLURAL!!!!

A friend of mine once said, "Whoever has the most fun, wins." and if it wasn't for a few duffed putts, I could have taken that division down, using the power of the bouyant happiness I felt that I finally had what I want: big field and opportunity to cash.

I hope that the participation of women is important enough to other great people like Bruce to offer us the same sort of solutions and experiences. THANKS AGAIN to all involved in the tourney: what a great event and great group of people.

so how did that work? ... you played in an am only event (in intermediate) and you got $30 in cash instead of merch or more $?

you should've come down for the Clash this weekend... w/ your rating and ability you could've won Pro women and taken home ~$370 or ~$220 for 2nd!!! (avg for winning round was sub 900)

Well, gas is going to run around $100. Accomodations &amp; food is going to be at least that much more...

Someone bought her merchandise from her at a rate of benefitting her.

She also got to play in a fun and what I would like to think was well run tournament where she got $30 cash, a free ESP Force, free beer, &amp; a tournament that was over by 5pm. EDIT: And a free sandwich! LOL

It is hard to travel with gas prices as they are at the moment...

Actually, gas in my car would have been $240 for the 10 hour trip. All spring I was planning on hitting the Carolina Clash, but the women's field went flakey in the homestretch. It began with 5 women pre-regged, then 2 dropped out when a 925 girl regged, then she and another one dropped out and when I saw only 2 competitors left, I didn't think I wanted to drive 10 hours for a field of 3. The payouts were outstanding despite the lack of numbers, though, and that's commendable.

Yes, l was paid dollar for dollar for any funny money I won at Hollywoods, which was wonderful! It was a great tournament experience with all the perks Mark mentioned. I plan on communicating with other Michigan TD's and seeing if they will offer the same deal to me.

Because now that I have a taste for big fields, I'm done with the one-on-one disappointment. So watch out, Intermediates, I'm gunning for you!

I'm also very excited for Disc Girls Gone Wild. I'm sure there will be at least a half a dozen pro girls playing in that one plus there's added cash.

Probably best not to imply that competitors at the Carolina Clash "dropped out when a 925 girl registered." Sorry that the list "went flakey" and all that, but I don't accept the implication that I withdrew because the competition got too strong for my blood!

You don't see the men's division have a 65% dropout rate a week before the tournament. It just makes it hard for out-of-state women to make travel committments. But thanks for your suggestion on what is best for me to write and what is not.

Hows about this for another idea to potentially boost female turnout at events: Smaller to medium-sized tournies generally don't fill ahead of time so it's usually an option to register day-of. Preregistration isn't necessarily required so players - especially women - don't know if the 3+ hour drive will result in a field of yourself or a decent field of 4.

So why not let women pre-reg before the event without paying online?

The benefits:
1. We get to support our hobby with cash, as many of us much, much prefer to do
2. We'd get to see if an event will produce any other competition or no
3. If an event shows six women already attending, it would be much more likely to draw women who are on the fence about going or not
4. It shows that you, as a TD, have a vested interest in your female turnout by allowing us to pre-reg without paying (trust). Obviously, once a woman screws up and says she's going to be there and bails without notification, she's out of the circle of trust.

What say?

Here is something posted on another thread. Make plans for next year.


Greetings Female golfers..........

Please check out the payouts for the FPO division at the 2008 Green Mountain Open held this past weekend.

Although we only had 3 women play Open (Des Reading, Lesli Brinster, Sarah Moss), we paid out $1260 to FPO. Given that the entry fee was $65 and every entrant in the tourney received a long-sleeved dri-fit shirt; a custom-stamped Champion Monarch; gourmet lunch one day; Players Party with band and free dinner one nite; and CTP prizes and an ace fund worth almost $500, some basic arithmetic will lead you to conclude that there are some events that do whatever they can to make sure we make the event as awesome as possible for our Women.

I have been questioned as to why the FPO division paid out $1260 in prize money when the gross entry fees were only $195 and the expenses for that division amounted to approx $360. That means we actually added approx $1425 to the 3-person Women's division.

I think TD Chris Mayone and I did that because we believe it is vital for the long-term success of the sport to treat the Women extra wonderfully. Well, we happen to like Women too. That helps. But I also hate to see the top touring women "penalized" from a payout standpoint because of low female attendance at events. Keeping the Burlogars and Jenkins and Readings and Tschiggfrie's and the other top Women players happy and able to afford to tour helps not only them, but ALL players in general (male and female) and the professional arm of the sport as well.

i guess i see treating the women well as a super smart investment in the future of our sport.

dan doyle
warwick, NY
assistant TD, 2008 Green Mountain Open

This was posted before the Green Mountain Event. Now it appears there are two great women's events back to back in the NE. FYI, the Vibram Event had 20 registered women.


If a woman player's number one concern is winning money, registering early for this event should be a top priority. This looks to be the best women's payout this year with added cash and 60% of the field paid. Also, from what I understand, this event offers the whole package: a super fun weekend complete with camping and extracurricular activities.


Vibram Open at Maple Hill (http://www.pdga.com/tournament/tournament_results.php?TournID=7290)

Has anyone ever done the math to figure out if women members play less than men members?

I am all about treating the womens divisions with a little extra TLC, payout, considerations, or amenities but here is my concern with it ... it doesn't appear to be working (the way it's intended to anyway).

I think the term that comes to mind is, "helping the rich get richer". What I mean is that paying out insanely deep and heavy to the women's division doesn't really seem to help bring more women into the tournament setting. What it does is reward a handful of women that are warriors and travel from event to event but that doesn't appear to foster new competitors.

I am friends with Val, Des, Burl, and lots of the other women that play this game and I love to support them in every way I can. Like them, I would also love to see field sizes that reach 10, 20, or 50 on any given weekend. I've personally offered dozens of incentives throughout the years as a TD to try and attract more women to events. However, at the end of the day the same thing continued to happen at my events just like the ones all over the country - we aren't seeing that many more women come out but instead we're just paying the existing women more stuff (which is fine but isn't my main objective).

Do I mind giving out stuff to the women or think we shouldn't support them? Of course not. I guess the point of my post was that I think we should always put into perspective the two main points I see regarding women's participation. Should we be concerned with:

1) Getting MORE women to come out and compete in tournaments or

2) Keeping the few women that are playing happy but trying to accommodate them as best as possible.

I think many people do number 2 very well but I'm worried that number 1 is really the major issue at hand.

Ter

PS - Major props to Dan and Steve and every other TD out there that does a great job of that daunting task which is sponsorship and fund raising. We all know that a little money can go a long way in our sport and I applaud those that go out and get. I'm certainly jealous.


Here is something posted on another thread. Make plans for next year.


Greetings Female golfers..........

Please check out the payouts for the FPO division at the 2008 Green Mountain Open held this past weekend.

Although we only had 3 women play Open (Des Reading, Lesli Brinster, Sarah Moss), we paid out $1260 to FPO. Given that the entry fee was $65 and every entrant in the tourney received a long-sleeved dri-fit shirt; a custom-stamped Champion Monarch; gourmet lunch one day; Players Party with band and free dinner one nite; and CTP prizes and an ace fund worth almost $500, some basic arithmetic will lead you to conclude that there are some events that do whatever they can to make sure we make the event as awesome as possible for our Women.

I have been questioned as to why the FPO division paid out $1260 in prize money when the gross entry fees were only $195 and the expenses for that division amounted to approx $360. That means we actually added approx $1425 to the 3-person Women's division.

I think TD Chris Mayone and I did that because we believe it is vital for the long-term success of the sport to treat the Women extra wonderfully. Well, we happen to like Women too. That helps. But I also hate to see the top touring women "penalized" from a payout standpoint because of low female attendance at events. Keeping the Burlogars and Jenkins and Readings and Tschiggfrie's and the other top Women players happy and able to afford to tour helps not only them, but ALL players in general (male and female) and the professional arm of the sport as well.

i guess i see treating the women well as a super smart investment in the future of our sport.

dan doyle
warwick, NY
assistant TD, 2008 Green Mountain Open

I'm not necessarily sure if lucrative payouts directly bring more women to our sport. However, if by paying women better than the number of players in an event would otherwise warrant, I believe it makes it that much easier for the top 5 to 10 female players to realize the dream of playing as full-time or semi-full-time touring pros.

If Des and Burl and Angela and Val (for example) are able to tour more, that hopefully allows them to do clinics or appearances that reaches out to the grassroots level.

Des (and Jay) did a clinic at Sugarbush this past weekend. Every beginner that comes to the clinic, especially the girls and young women, get exposed to the sport from one of the best female players on the planet. Maybe Des would have been less willing or able to make the commitment to attend our event if the purse for the women had been negligible.

So I think that certainly indirectly paying the top women as best we can absolutely can help attract new women to the sport.

Okaaaayyyy, good suggestions, definitely. But all this is being done already and like Terry said, not working terribly well.

Let's take a look at smaller events rather than ones that draw the top women:

When I started playing, Michiana was an A-tier that drew a ton of women. Last year it became a B-tier, but was still held on a very attractive weekend. Good courses, good organization, not a very far drive.

The pre-reg was obviously not going to fill so registering day-of was viable, so I went based on the assumption of other women coming as well. I was the only competitor in FPO. After a number of times of this happening, as a woman you start to lose travel momentum and the trust that the long drive will reward you with a competitor or two or even 10. So you stop traveling as much and B-tier attendences become lower and lower.

What I have been trying to do for the past year is to come up with ideas to HELP women plan their tournament play better. Yes, the Vibram had OUTSTANDING female turnout, but it is also on one of the coasts and within two weeks of Worlds. Many women had to choose one or the other.

If an event is going to fill, I do not necessarily advocate non-paying pre-reg for women. But at smaller events when the pre-reg shows 13 players the Friday before, we SHOULD be able to throw our names down to show other women the trip is going to be worth the travel gamble.

Please, I'm open to critisism, but I'm also a catalyst for change and improvement. What would be the negative of this idea?

Why don't you set an example and pre-reg (with your money) ahead of time so others see that you are planning to play an event?

Okaaaayyyy, good suggestions, definitely. But all this is being done already and like Terry said, not working terribly well.

Let's take a look at smaller events rather than ones that draw the top women:

When I started playing, Michiana was an A-tier that drew a ton of women. Last year it became a B-tier, but was still held on a very attractive weekend. Good courses, good organization, not a very far drive.

The pre-reg was obviously not going to fill so registering day-of was viable, so I went based on the assumption of other women coming as well. I was the only competitor in FPO. After a number of times of this happening, as a woman you start to lose travel momentum and the trust that the long drive will reward you with a competitor or two or even 10. So you stop traveling as much and B-tier attendences become lower and lower.

What I have been trying to do for the past year is to come up with ideas to HELP women plan their tournament play better. Yes, the Vibram had OUTSTANDING female turnout, but it is also on one of the coasts and within two weeks of Worlds. Many women had to choose one or the other.

If an event is going to fill, I do not necessarily advocate non-paying pre-reg for women. But at smaller events when the pre-reg shows 13 players the Friday before, we SHOULD be able to throw our names down to show other women the trip is going to be worth the travel gamble.

Please, I'm open to critisism, but I'm also a catalyst for change and improvement. What would be the negative of this idea?



As a TD I would make a counter-proposal. I would be fine with your idea but, the amount of pre-registering would not be free. Perhaps a low amount like $5. Then if you no show, the money goes into the purse.

why would you have to pay to make your job easier?

Why don't you just tag the "I'm gonna attend" button on Terry's website? That way everyone knows you'll bee there....

why would you have to pay to make your job easier?



When they showed up, they would owe the registration fee minus the $5. It is like a down payment &amp; I don't see how that makes my job any easier at all.

I do run online pre-registration and it is the same amount of work for me as if people do it in person.

I'm not necessarily sure if lucrative payouts directly bring more women to our sport. However, if by paying women better than the number of players in an event would otherwise warrant, I believe it makes it that much easier for the top 5 to 10 female players to realize the dream of playing as full-time or semi-full-time touring pros.

If Des and Burl and Angela and Val (for example) are able to tour more, that hopefully allows them to do clinics or appearances that reaches out to the grassroots level.

Des (and Jay) did a clinic at Sugarbush this past weekend. Every beginner that comes to the clinic, especially the girls and young women, get exposed to the sport from one of the best female players on the planet. Maybe Des would have been less willing or able to make the commitment to attend our event if the purse for the women had been negligible.

So I think that certainly indirectly paying the top women as best we can absolutely can help attract new women to the sport.

I agree with your first sentence. I don't even see any reason to try to attract more women to the sport. Women will play if they enjoy the game and enjoy the tournament atmosphere. If not, they won't. I don't see any reason why we can't just accept things for what they are.

If we want to bust our butts attracting more of a particular demographic, how about we work on attracting more rich local businessmen. From them, at least, we get sponsorship sometimes, and more than we deserve.

why would you have to pay to make your job easier?



When they showed up, they would owe the registration fee minus the $5. It is like a down payment &amp; I don't see how that makes my job any easier at all.

I do run online pre-registration and it is the same amount of work for me as if people do it in person.



there is your problem. make people mail a check or paypal or something. then you can have a policy like on week notice get yo $ back. less than that its in the pot. not your pocket though. in the pot.

I'm not necessarily sure if lucrative payouts directly bring more women to our sport. However, if by paying women better than the number of players in an event would otherwise warrant, I believe it makes it that much easier for the top 5 to 10 female players to realize the dream of playing as full-time or semi-full-time touring pros.

If Des and Burl and Angela and Val (for example) are able to tour more, that hopefully allows them to do clinics or appearances that reaches out to the grassroots level.

Des (and Jay) did a clinic at Sugarbush this past weekend. Every beginner that comes to the clinic, especially the girls and young women, get exposed to the sport from one of the best female players on the planet. Maybe Des would have been less willing or able to make the commitment to attend our event if the purse for the women had been negligible.

So I think that certainly indirectly paying the top women as best we can absolutely can help attract new women to the sport.

I agree with your first sentence. I don't even see any reason to try to attract more women to the sport. Women will play if they enjoy the game and enjoy the tournament atmosphere. If not, they won't. I don't see any reason why we can't just accept things for what they are.

If we want to bust our butts attracting more of a particular demographic, how about we work on attracting more rich local businessmen. From them, at least, we get sponsorship sometimes, and more than we deserve.



HUH?????

You see NO reason to attempt to draw more participants to the sport from half of the population? Isn't that putting significant limitations on our growth?

"Women will play if they enjoy the game".

How can they enjoy the game if they don't know it exists or have never tried it? That's the purpose of reaching out to women (or any demographic). If growing our sport is deemed to be desirable, we need to expose folks to it. We have to lead the horse to water - but I agree we can't force it to drink (pardon the analogy - i'm not comparing women to horses).

"I don't see any reason why we can't just accept things for what they are".

HUH ?????

i don't believe you limit yourself to the way things currently are. how about the notion of saying "i am willing to accept the way things are if this is all there is, but until i've exhausted my opportunities to better a situation i'm not willing to settle for the way things are"?

i've got to run. i need to start working harder on luring rich local businessWOMEN to our sport so they can play, get other women involved, and also sponsor events, for both men and women.

why would you have to pay to make your job easier?



When they showed up, they would owe the registration fee minus the $5. It is like a down payment &amp; I don't see how that makes my job any easier at all.

I do run online pre-registration and it is the same amount of work for me as if people do it in person.



there is your problem. make people mail a check or paypal or something. then you can have a policy like on week notice get yo $ back. less than that its in the pot. not your pocket though. in the pot.



Not talking about MY pocket. I am pretty certain that I never indicated that I would be taking people's money. I was talking losing your money if you did not show up into the Women's Pro purse. It is AWESOME that you would accuse me of stealing tournament money by the way. Best thing that I have read all day! :p

naw not accusing
i just know there may bee some unscrupulous td'd reading this thread getting ideas...........

Why are you guys bringing up pot in this thread? I thought there was a baby jesus thread dedicated to that? Or is it the other way around......

If a woman player wants to know what events to go to next year to get a guaranteed REC, here is a list of the biggest/deepest payouts in the US from this year. Of course next year they may or may not have the same amount of added cash, but they already have a track record.

USWDGC - $9,415 Open purse paid to 11 of 23 players. All but one 900+ player cashed.

Vibram Open - $6,502 Open purse paid to 12 of 20 competitors. All but one 900+ rated player cashed.

Pro Worlds - $5,700 Open purse paid 9 of 21 players. Had to be rated over 930 to cash. Probably not a good example of REC, but it had a large field.

Green Mountain Open - Paid 100% of the Open Women players. They also paid 100% of the women in 2007 as well. Looks like a guaranteed REC to me!


When I started playing 12 years ago, 20+ women players (in any division) was very uncommon. This year there were 3 events with over 60 total women players!!!!! If you want to hang out with lots of other women golfers, don't miss these events:

USWDGC - 77 players
Texas Women's Championships - 68 players
PDGA Pro/Am Worlds - 61 players.
Disc Girls Gone Wild - 23 players

Next year, there will be new Women's only event to be held in Florida on February 14 &amp; 15. La Vie En Rose is being supported by 5X World Champion Juliana Korver. Those of you from the Northern climates should really appreciate the chance to play in shorts as the average high is 70!! Players can play and stay on site! They are already offering $1,500 added cash.

Start making your plans now!

My daughter Kelsey played in nine tournaments this year. At six of them there were over 20 players in her division. At the average [mean] there were 35 players in her division. At the average [median] there were 29 players in her division. She finished in the prizes half the time.

At Worlds she told me that she doesn't expect to play in the micro divisions again, except maybe at Worlds or USWDGC sometime. She thinks disc golf is much more fun competing against 25 or 30 players.

Pretty much every weekend in the midwest an advanced or pro woman can compete at a sanctioned tournament in a field of 10 to 30 players if she wants to.

I understand the whole thing of preferring larger divisions. If you look at my stats I often choose to play in the larger of the four or five divisions I'm eligible to play in. For top women and old men, it really comes down to what you want out of your tournament experience.

There is also a womens only tourney in Scottsdale this weekend. Was alot of fun last year. The players packages alone were worth 4X what you pay for Entry. Plus every entrant has a male caddy for the round. Plus you can play on one of the nicest courses in the Southwest, Vista Del Camino. I'll be there caddying for my wifey!
http://www.pdga.com/schedule/event.php?TournID=8266

The Texas Women's Championship has grown from the ground up - out there beating the pavement. I think if you want Women to play in ladies fields rather than the larger men�s fields they qualify for you really have to do it grass roots. It's hard work, but keeping it public, posting dates early so we can plan ahead, &amp; keeping it in the front of our minds with flyers in hand all the time seems to be one way to make it happen. Take flyers every where you go, get them out to the men in your clubs - tournaments, minin�s, casual rounds - talk with every women you see on a course, put a flyer in her hand (even if she's not golfing, many of us started golfing after riding the cooler watching our men). May not get her to your event, but maybe she'll pass the info on. Make sure they know you have all ladies divisions - Rec to Open. When you do get a strong women's field, talk up the other ladies events in you area (ladies minis, tournaments anything to get them together). @ TWC, we've put invites in the players packs to USWGDC every year &amp; every year we've sent more women to USWDGC. MSDGC &amp; Vibram have been great supporters providing TWC with 3 invites each of the last 2 years (we've sent 5 ladies to Mass from TWC in the last 2 years). Grow the sport from the ground up - seems to be working in Texas.

That was a really great post, Discette! Some good, concrete numbers, stats, observations and summaries. I hope that women and TD's everywhere appreciate this list and start attending events with lots of opportunites for all women, not just the top ones.

I only made it to Worlds this year. Being in my homestate, how could I miss it? However, I finished in the Top 10 and was denied the opportunity to compete in the semis as well as cash. IT'S WORLDS! How can you not recognize the Top 10? Oh, the irony.

So when you know you're going to be around the bubble, it's difficult to committ to a 10 hour drive to tournaments. It's next to impossible to purchase plane tix for tournies outside of driving distance. Both of these make planning very difficult. 10-hour drives with the current price of gas really cut into projected profit margins.

Yes, USWDGC had HUGE, impressive payouts. This was discovered after the event was over. Looking at the pre-reg before the event, a low-900 girl can see where she can expect to finish and it was around the bubble. Will the last cashing spots be for $80? $400? Who knows? WDGC had a $350 expense projection. With TD's unwilling to post projected payouts, how can we be expected to plan?

Whether I renew my membership next year depends on a few things:

1. Women need a division to retreat to when the field is non-existent, too small, or the REC is non-existent. We should be able to retreat into a big division where our rating puts us (Am2 for me) and compete ..... but I still refuse to turn my US currency into funny money. Solution?

2. Cashless pre-reg or pre-reg with $5 downpayment (excellent idea). Keep DG off the bank account/credit card and keep the hobby cash-based.

3. Projected payouts before an event = Planning, planning.

#1 is the most important to me. In order for competitive disc golf to remain one of the primary ways to spend my money and my weekend, I have to know that it actually is competitive and not just a huge waste of time and money.

(Disclaimer: Disc golf is fun. I have fun playing it. I like tournies. They are fun. I have the right attitude. But if nothing changes, I'll just have fun locally and not compete.)

Yes, USWDGC had HUGE, impressive payouts. This was discovered after the event was over. Looking at the pre-reg before the event, a low-900 girl can see where she can expect to finish and it was around the bubble. Will the last cashing spots be for $80? $400? Who knows? WDGC had a $350 expense projection. With TD's unwilling to post projected payouts, how can we be expected to plan?




Actually, we've been posting for months that the players pack/meals would be equivilant in value to the entry fee and that we were adding at least $4000 to the pro/pro masters payout. A couple of weeks before the event we raised that projection to $5000.

It's impossible to post payout in advance for any event. First of all, you don't know who's going to show up. We actually added local entries the day before the event (they had Redstone access already). There were major sponsors (over $1000) added the week before the event. People also dropped out at the last minute. What would happen if you posted the payout and then had 3-4 pro women dropping out? You'ld have to eat the loss of cash!

No worries though. I get what you're saying.

Josh

Two major sponsors gave us a thousand dollars each very close to the beginning of the tournament. We were quite happy!

I agree with Josh. You can the post the payout after you find out the number of people who is actually playing. The numbers have to come together before you post it.

Karen J.

Yeesss....couple things: Wouldn't an approximation be better than nothing? I don't think your word would be stone if you phrased it as an approximation.

The two years leading up to Worlds I kept hearing rumors that Bell's was the premier sponsor at $25Gs in cash donation. That would be just one of the sponsors, so you can easily assume that another couple grand would be added through other clubs and sponsors. I figured the pro women's field would get a healthy chunk of a potential $30K. We got $1K, with the last few cashes coming out at a bit over entry. You can deduce that although it seemed like there was a lot of added cash, it had other places to go. It would have been nice to know that beforehand and not get one's hopes and expectations up for big cashes past 5th place.

What I'd like to get a sense of is where the bulk of the added cash is going...if it's going to be a tourney with high payouts at the top and entry plus 10% to the last 4 - 5 spots, or if it's going to look more like the Vibram where even lower cashing spots are impressive.

...similar to USDGC this year. Last year 7th was $275 while this year it was $500. There were 3 more players last year as well, but I don't think the outside sponsors were quite as forthcoming as they were in Alabama. I'm sorry to have underestimated the generosity toward the lower cashing spots at USWDGC this year. Perhaps I would've come if I knew that I could finish as well as last year and make nearly twice as much. Not paying top-heavy is unusual with most of the tournies I've played.... and also having $5K added cash go directly into the purse rather than put into a bunch of little extras. So I guess that's what I'm getting at......good stats by Discette on number of spots cashing, but I'd also like to see which tournies are top-heavy and which distribute lower. That would be more motivational for me anyway.

That's all I meant by posting projected payouts. Giving or taking 3 girls before the event shouldn't much change payout structures.

To be accurate at the USWDGC, several thousand of the added cash came after the deadline to register so not much point in posting it though we did raise it from 4k to 5k when we knew we had that much. We did the best we could to estimate. However there is no need to post estimated payouts if clubs payout according to the PDGA guidelines. Maybe it was wrong for us to assume that people knew we would use the PDGA guidelines, but then we have always done so. The only thing that woudl be questionable is that we decided to pay 50% of the field instead of 40 or 45% which we could have done by the payout guidelines.

Our goal in this event like any other event the RCCG has run in the past 3-4 years has been to raise the bar. Especially on a major event like this. The more you add to it to inspire other clubs to want to beat it the better the events become for all. I only wish that more clubs would take this approach. I can only say that any event that I am involved with will always take this approach. Give them a reason to come back!

-Dave Hunt
Asst TD USWDGC and many other in Huntsville :)

Agreed on most points, Dave, but then the PDGA guidelines don't mandate the top-heaviness or bottom-heaviness of the payout structure, do they? That's more along the lines of what I'd like to know before registration.

I am guessing you have never been a TD? They are guidelines so no they don't mandate anything. The only mandates are the tier level requirements and honestly other then well established events those often dont meet the requirements.

Payouts are largely dictated by the attendence. Most players even on a major, sign up at the last minute. So it just isn't feasible to give more then the added cash guess. There isn't a way to know how deep the field will be paid and most TDs wont know the final added cash,expenses and such till day of at best. I'd say most TDs determine the payout sometime midevent and its then whether they decide to be top heavy or not. In my experience most arent top heavy they look that way based on attendence and where the TD puts the added cash. But that decision as well is based on attendence or in some cases the sponsors wishes. We've had sponsors request that all their money go to a certain division.

A lot of events just rely on the tier to dictate the minimums and leave it at that so getting the added cash in advance is not common. Most will promise a certain amount at best and leave it at that. Thats where finding out about the quality of events a hosts puts on is important. Trust me though, no matter what you do, how well you payout,how great the event was, someone is going to be unhappy.

-Dave

I am guessing you have never been a TD?

<font color="blue"> Not yet, but now that my leg is broken and i'm out disc golf for the rest of the year, I will be very soon......not sanctioned, though; I'm going to run it my way </font>

Payouts are largely dictated by the attendence. Most players even on a major, sign up at the last minute. So it just isn't feasible to give more then the added cash guess.

<font color="blue"> Doesn't this statement go right back to my proposition of preregistration without money? It's a good idea and easily implemented and solves the issue that you mention. I hope to see more changes in the PDGA other than the look of the website for 2009. </font>

I think you are missing the part about not knowing all of your expenses and donations until the day off the event. So even though you get preregistration, you will still have people not show, people who show up extra, and then you will have a number of the usual suspects that donate to your event the day of. The best you can do even with prereg is guess. Now...if you are in it as a business and want to keep the money rather then pass it on to the players then things get alot easier, you can easily post what payouts are based on attendence estiemates and it is what it is. If you want to run a quality event, I don't suggest you follow that path as it tends to **** players off.

Sorry to hear about the leg :( Tried standing flatfooted and throwing yet? I know a number of people that actually resorted to that because they were dying to play.

It's a good thing to get out and run an event, most players end up realizing just how much a TD really does from start to finsih and usually how little help they have in doing it. It's an eye opener. Feel free to send me questions though, always looking to promote more TDs so that us burnouts can play in events instead of running them :)