lyleoross
* Ace Member *
How does donating to vastly more skilled players "grow the sport"? IMO the sport would be better positioned to be taken seriously if players such as myself were never thought of as "professionals". (The reason we are is because dg screwed the pooch on it from the get go- "pros" existed before "amateurs" did thus creating a class of mediocre "pros" which allowed for guilting any "amateurs" with any level of skill into moving up.)
Because donating isn't my term. It's the term of ams who think they're being taken advantage of. I'm a donor because I'm not good enough to beat the guys at the top of my pool. If I won my pool, I wouldn't consider myself a donor. You interpreted what I said to fit what you wanted - that I'm donating to pros.
Business is the process of charging someone more than the cost of production to make a profit. If TDs didn't pass that money to the pros, that is, they pocketed it to make a living, no one would argue. Well except the guys who are arguing now. Instead of kavitching that the pros are getting their money through the food chain, they'd be kavitching that the pros, who would be now playing am, were kicking their backsides and that they should be in a protected pool.
You can argue that cash shouldn't be pushed up to the pro level, but then you'd simply be gambling and playing for each other's money, and no one would ever move up. Yep, the system isn't ideal, but it does work, and the PDGA pushes rules to make sure that the food chain is rewarded.
Until someone makes a magic money machine, some of us are happy that our efforts are helping to grow the sport. Sorry that bothers you.