2015 Pro Worlds full- Another registration fiasco?

[sjberry2017]

I guess the reason why I was asking the question was that it makes sense to go to an MPO/FPO only worlds. Then you can increase the field size, allow all the 1000+ guys to get in and potentially have payouts that someone can make some money off of instead of having an expensive vacation.

That does seem to be the format which makes the most sense. The only question then is would an MPO/FPO worlds be able to stand on its own yet, or do we need the age based divisions to have enough players overall to run the event? Obviously we do have more players than there are spots, but do those players outnumber the available spots sufficiently that an MPO/FPO only Worlds would be a viable event? I don't know, and that's a question that it would probably take a couple months to answer. I do agree that the 940+ guys deserve to be there if they get enough points, but right now, with how the event is, I think we need to do something to give priority to the better players since spots are limited. Yes it sucks for some guys, but with the current situation, it is, to me, the best way forward.

And I do think taking the Selinske event and making it the Tim Selinske Masters Worlds would be a perfectly fine thing to do.

 

[Lewis]

I guess the reason why I was asking the question was that it makes sense to go to an MPO/FPO only worlds. Then you can increase the field size, allow all the 1000+ guys to get in and potentially have payouts that someone can make some money off of instead of having an expensive vacation.

I still think the payout model is a problem, maybe even more of a problem, if only the best of the best are allowed to play. Imagine a field where players rated over 1000 become the "donators with very little chance to cash". Will they have the motivation to come out and play that the 940-rated players who mainly want to share the experience have?

 

[bwgort]

I still think the payout model is a problem, maybe even more of a problem, if only the best of the best are allowed to play. Imagine a field where players rated 1000 become the "donators without a chance to cash". Will they have the motivation to come out and play that the 940-rated players who mainly want to share the experience have?

Exactly! I don't believe that those players loved the bloodbath format of the USDGC two years ago where was 1 stroke out of the cash and got $0. Wysocki got last cash and got over $1000....

 

[bwgort]

That does seem to be the format which makes the most sense. The only question then is would an MPO/FPO worlds be able to stand on its own yet, or do we need the age based divisions to have enough players overall to run the event? Obviously we do have more players than there are spots, but do those players outnumber the available spots sufficiently that an MPO/FPO only Worlds would be a viable event? I don't know, and that's a question that it would probably take a couple months to answer. I do agree that the 940+ guys deserve to be there if they get enough points, but right now, with how the event is, I think we need to do something to give priority to the better players since spots are limited. Yes it sucks for some guys, but with the current situation, it is, to me, the best way forward.

And I do think taking the Selinske event and making it the Tim Selinske Masters Worlds would be a perfectly fine thing to do.

We agree!

 

[sjberry2017]

I still think the payout model is a problem, maybe even more of a problem, if only the best of the best are playing. Imagine a field where players rated 1000 become the "donators without a chance to cash". Will they have the motivation to come out and play that the 940-rated players who mainly want to share the experience have?

But if everyone is closer in competition, someone could put several amazing rounds together and cash well. But yes, the payout does need to get raised to where most, if not all, of these guys can cash well. And how would we do that? Sponsorship dollars. And if we want to attract sponsors, then it would be better to have the competition be as fierce and as consistent, top to bottom, as it can be.

Think of it like a NASCAR race. Excluding Talladega and Daytona, on any given weekend, there's probably 15 to 18 cars who have a reasonable hope of winning, out of around 45 cars there for the race. But you then have the middle of the pack drivers who can occasionally pull out a win (Paul Menard at the Brickyard a couple years ago for example), and finally the lesser funded teams who still make money racing, and can race each other because they're all on the same level.

If we could the competition in Worlds to that level, then the purse should follow. Hopefully. Maybe not. But we should at least try.

 

[sjberry2017]

We agree!

Then we actually had a good debate! Huzzah

 

[optidiscic]

so who wants to wager the powers that be do nothing lol

 

[JC17393]

so who wants to wager the powers that be do nothing lol

What kind of time frame are we talking here? Because I'd wager something is going to change, but I think significant change is at least two years away.

 

[optidiscic]

I am wagering no change by 2016 Worlds

 

[DavidSauls]

I think you're both right.

 

[sprintermatt]

I wager it won't matter as much next year... although, we are filling a 144 person field, how many do you think would sign up if the field was expanded to 180? 216? It is possible to get that amount of open players, but I think there's a saturation point if you have A, B, and C pools. Back in the day you might get stuck in the B pool with hopes of jumping into the A Pool. Adding a C Pool (especially one where all players are not equally distributed by pool (for fairness to ALL, not just the top pros) could work backwards with the top guys. I think Arizona, when there were storms that stopped play for some divisions is where they realized it's a big headache. But I could be wrong.

In general, I believe it should be totally random or at least equally distributed (randomly) so the top pros are distributed among all pools to start. Let the cream rise. "A" pool is then no different from "B" or "C", they are all equal distributions of players to start the week. No supergroups, no stacked pools, just random distribution for fairness to ALL competitors. They all pay the same to play, TREAT THEM AS EQUALS.
If your pool gets stuck in a hailstorm one round but another pool doesn't, and you can't fight back from that, it wasn't your year.

 

[Darkgreen]

If your pool gets stuck in a hailstorm one round but another pool doesn't, and you can't fight back from that, it wasn't your year.

What about making it so only a percentage from each pool moves on (the same amount from each) and then scores are wiped? Make the first 2-3 days a qualifying event for the last few days where all the cream that has risen starts out fresh.

 

[sidewinder22]

What about making it so only a percentage from each pool moves on (the same amount from each) and then scores are wiped? Make the first 2-3 days a qualifying event for the last few days where all the cream that has risen starts out fresh.

I kind of like that, it's like circle seeding.

 

[Aim For The Chains]

What about making it so only a percentage from each pool moves on (the same amount from each) and then scores are wiped? Make the first 2-3 days a qualifying event for the last few days where all the cream that has risen starts out fresh.

Duluth X tier time!! :hfive:

 

[filobedo]

Having Worlds one year in Europe or Asia would also be an option to ensure the best Open players have a chance to get in.

 

[scarpfish]

Having Worlds one year in Europe or Asia would also be an option to ensure the best Open players have a chance to get in.

I see Worlds going MPO/FPO only before I see it going overseas.

 

[art_vandelay]

Man, I see in disc golf the strongest and smartest men who've ever lived. I see all this potential, and I see squandering. God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables; slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing discs, cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy **** and discs we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression, no great DG tournament. Our Great War's a spiritual war... our Great Depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, Glass Blown Open Champs, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off.

Tyler Durden

 

[biscoe]

In general, I believe it should be totally random or at least equally distributed (randomly) so the top pros are distributed among all pools to start. Let the cream rise. "A" pool is then no different from "B" or "C", they are all equal distributions of players to start the week. No supergroups, no stacked pools, just random distribution for fairness to ALL competitors. They all pay the same to play, TREAT THEM AS EQUALS.

yep...this. for sure.

 

[Big Nasty]

Man, I see in disc golf the strongest and smartest men who've ever lived. I see all this potential, and I see squandering. God damn it, an entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables; slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing discs, cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy **** and discs we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression, no great DG tournament. Our Great War's a spiritual war... our Great Depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, Glass Blown Open Champs, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off.

Tyler Durden

Thank you for this!!! :thmbup::clap::hfive:

 

[threej21]

I generally agree with the tiered registration in A Tier and above tournaments. But at the same time, if Open spots were really still available 10 hours after registration opened, HOW IS THIS EVEN A DISCUSSION FOR THIS EVENT???