difference in FPO payouts on the NT

[VictorB]

https://i.redd.it/zy7nmtsx43t31.jpg

I'd love to see some actual sane discussion on this topic.

I think that while the individual event payouts are different, the payout for the points championships should be identical. They touched on this subject on the Upshot this week.

 

[biscoe]

I would be surprised if it isn't based directly on field sizes- what's wrong with that if so?

 

[_MTL_]

I would be surprised if it isn't based directly on field sizes- what's wrong with that if so?

It's 100% related to that and if entry fees are different. If anything, the rule points towards inclusion in the event filed sizes are equal.

From the tour standards:
The Required Minimum Added Cash to the Pro Purse MUST be spread across ALL Pro divisions based on the percentage of entry fees brought into
the event by each division as per the Tournament Manager payout charts. Example: if the MPO division brought 50% of all Pro entry fees into the event, the MP40
division brought 30% of all Pro entry fees into the event, and the FPO division brought 20% of all Pro entry fees into the event, then MPO would receive 50% of
the required Added Cash, MP40 would receive 30% of the required Added Cash, and FPO would receive 20% of the required Added Cash. Note: This Pro Added
Cash distribution is automatically calculated for TDs by the Tournament Manager application once they input the Added Cash for their event into the Finance
section

source:

https://www.pdga.com/files/2019_pdga_tour_standards_0.pdf

 

[biscoe]

It's 100% related to that and if entry fees are different. If anything, the rule points towards inclusion in the event filed sizes are equal.

From the tour standards:
The Required Minimum Added Cash to the Pro Purse MUST be spread across ALL Pro divisions based on the percentage of entry fees brought into
the event by each division as per the Tournament Manager payout charts. Example: if the MPO division brought 50% of all Pro entry fees into the event, the MP40
division brought 30% of all Pro entry fees into the event, and the FPO division brought 20% of all Pro entry fees into the event, then MPO would receive 50% of
the required Added Cash, MP40 would receive 30% of the required Added Cash, and FPO would receive 20% of the required Added Cash. Note: This Pro Added
Cash distribution is automatically calculated for TDs by the Tournament Manager application once they input the Added Cash for their event into the Finance
section

source:

https://www.pdga.com/files/2019_pdga_tour_standards_0.pdf

The OP is talking about the end of year bonuses for winning the points series, not individual events. From a little looking it appears they were pre-determined in 2018 and the same as that for 2019... so field sizes did not drive the numbers directly. Actually if it were driven by field sizes the ladies probably would have gotten less.

 

[esdubya]

Seems reasonable that the NT payouts are based on field size. Totally justifiable.

That said, would it be a nice gesture by the PDGA to make them (overall season NT payouts) identical for FPO and MPO? Yes! That would be really progressive and cool IMO.

 

[Cgkdisc]

The bonus ratio may be conceptually, if not actually, related to the PDGA current M/F membership ratio.

 

[Jolt]

Both Cat and Paige is in the top 10 Cash for 2019 of all players.. .not to bad to have two women in the top 10 cash, i don´t think that is TO common in sports

So you can make money in FPO. . the smaller fields makes it possible

 

[JC17393]

I would be surprised if it isn't based directly on field sizes- what's wrong with that if so?

It doesn't appear to me to be based directly on field size.

Total unique players in the NT (the number of players listed in the standings):
MPO = 57.7%
FPO = 42.3%

Total participation (division size in each event added together):
MPO = 61.4%
FPO = 38.6%

Division of the total bonus purse ($35,000)
MPO = 71.4%
FPO = 28.6%


I don't know that the disparity is extremely egregious, but there's no seeming logic to how they divvied up the purse from a mathematical standpoint. My guess is that they have a donor (or two or three) who put money in for a specific purpose, and more was donated to the MPO purse than the FPO purse. In other words, MPO may have more benefactors than FPO.

 

[biscoe]

It doesn't appear to me to be based directly on field size.

Total unique players in the NT (the number of players listed in the standings):
MPO = 57.7%
FPO = 42.3%

Total participation (division size in each event added together):
MPO = 61.4%
FPO = 38.6%

Division of the total bonus purse ($35,000)
MPO = 71.4%
FPO = 28.6%


I don't know that the disparity is extremely egregious, but there's no seeming logic to how they divvied up the purse from a mathematical standpoint. My guess is that they have a donor (or two or three) who put money in for a specific purpose, and more was donated to the MPO purse than the FPO purse. In other words, MPO may have more benefactors than FPO.

Your numbers aren't right- the list you are referencing doesn't include all participants. That list has 103 MPO players on it when Vegas alone had 156.

 

[_MTL_]

The OP is talking about the end of year bonuses for winning the points series, not individual events. From a little looking it appears they were pre-determined in 2018 and the same as that for 2019... so field sizes did not drive the numbers directly. Actually if it were driven by field sizes the ladies probably would have gotten less.

yeah, I know the context of the OP. I was just pointing out that based on the actual standard applied to all pro divisions, it's safe to assume the same logic / standard was applied to NT bonuses.

 

[VictorB]

I would like to see the NT bonuses equivalent. Same travel costs, performance required relative to field, in order to win.

Until we get more sponsors that want to put money directly into the FPO field, we're going to see lower payouts, just because we're basically gambling with entry fees

 

[biscoe]

yeah, I know the context of the OP. I was just pointing out that based on the actual standard applied to all pro divisions, it's safe to assume the same logic / standard was applied to NT bonuses.

but it is not... the bonus money was determined prior to a single disc being thrown this year. (actually for 2018 and just copied to this year)

 

[JC17393]

Your numbers aren't right- the list you are referencing doesn't include all participants. That list has 103 MPO players on it when Vegas alone had 156.

Just going on the standings. Why are there players not listed in the standings if they played an event? It's not like the standings exclude players that played a single event. Why is that data incomplete?

Okay, going to the results of the events themselves

Total participation:
MPO 79.9%
FPO 20.1%

 

[ShopTom.com]

If you want top money play Mixed Pro Open. Any division with restrictions should receive significantly less money.

 

[biscoe]

Just going on the standings. Why are there players not listed in the standings if they played an event? It's not like the standings exclude players that played a single event. Why is that data incomplete?

lord knows...

Total participation:
MPO 79.9%
FPO 20.1%

that makes more sense

 

[VictorB]

Any division with restrictions should receive significantly less money.

Why?

 

[ToddL]

 

[NOStheBOSS]

Why?

By definition, the Open field (where anyone of any age can play) is more difficult to compete and win, and should be rewarded the most.

 

[NOStheBOSS]

In the champions tour in the PGA, the money winners are significantly lower than the PGA tour. Why? Age protected divisons draw less money and less interest from the public. The same can be applied to any age protected or sex protected or any protected field, in any sport. The most competitive and skilled fields will draw the most money and be rewarded with the most significant payouts. It's capitalism. To pay a less competitive and protected field the same money is socialism.

 

[JC17393]

Why?

I agree with ShopTom if we're talking age-protected divisions. Anyone playing MP40 or MP50 that wants to play for the big bucks can step into MPO if they so desire, and a good number of them can be competitive for it if they did. IMO, the only time age-protected divisions should be getting a significant chunk of added money is if it's a Masters-only event to begin with.

Disagree with regard to FPO. They should get the exact same share, proportionally, of added money as MPO. The highest rated woman in the world will rank near the bottom of every MPO field she might enter, unless we're talking local C-tier events where there's rarely any added cash to divvy up anyway. There's no rationalization for saying "you want to make money, play MPO" to any woman.