2018 Pdga Majors, NTs, and Tour events

[Zanguini]

https://youtu.be/tOLoh-_s90A

 

[Lazerface]

Heinold is only bringing to the NT the strategy that is at the heart of the DGPT: the more players who can make a decent amount of money on a regular basis, the easier it is for them to stay on tour. I don't think there's any question that there has been a notable increase in the number of regular touring players in the last couple years, due in no small part to the DGPT supplementing the NT/Major schedule.

It's not a matter of "everyone deserves something". It's a matter of spreading the wealth just a bit more in hopes of sustaining more players' abilities to be full time players.

So do you honestly think these extra payout spots will lead to a single individual becoming a "regular touring player" that was not already going to be?

Also, "decent amount of money"....It's $800 for 11th place in MPO on the NT series. If you are not already in a position to tour all year this changes nothing.

Are you saying the noticeable increase in touring players is due to flattened out and deeper payouts? If so, I disagree. Does the DGPT pay deeper?

Spread the wealth when you can afford to. My point is that an extra few hundred bucks deeper in the field at an individual event or $800 at the end of the season is not going to translate to more touring players. I'm not sure how a round table at the PDGA could think otherwise if they are being honest with each other.

Again, not a big deal either way. It's just annoying to me

 

[BuiltTooLong]

In theory, the bonus money comes from the $25 additional that Pros pay in PDGA member fees versus Ams.

This change goes both ways. It's no going to kill anyone at the top either, but I don't buy the reasoning. This "everyone deserves something" mentality is so deeply entrenched in our sport. It made sense when events did not fill, but they do now, so I can't get behind it.

So do you honestly think these extra payout spots will lead to a single individual becoming a "regular touring player" that was not already going to be?

Also, "decent amount of money"....It's $800 for 11th place in MPO on the NT series. If you are not already in a position to tour all year this changes nothing.

If Chuck is correct, it would take 1400 players to register as Pro to produce the $35,000. That means they would be paying the top 1.8%. So I don't think the "everyone deserves something" mantra comes into play here.

And while $800 may not be the difference between a player choosing to tour or not, I would bet that additional $800 would mean a lot more to Nate Perkins than it would to Paul or Ricky.

 

[JC17393]

DGPT pays flatter, not deeper (they still meet the PDGA mandate of paying 40-50% of the field). And yes, doing that has given more players opportunity to survive on the road longer than they used to be able to. Taking a few hundred from the top 3-4 players at each event in order to pay more to 11-15 (or even 11-20) at each event is beneficial to everyone because it helps keeps those players solvent and on the road a few weeks longer.

As far as the bonus payout, there were 71 women who played an NT in FPO last year, 34 of which played multiple events. Paying just the top 5 a bonus was paying 7% of the total field and 15% of the field that played multiple events. Doubling the payout to 10 players doesn't strike me as all that egregious.

On the men's side, there were 131 players who played an NT in MPO, 55 who played multiple events. Top 10 = 7% of the total field and 18% of those that played multiple tournaments. Adding five more to the payout would have raised those percentages to 11% and 27%. Again, I don't see that as so egregious.

 

[DanJon]

If the private tour company can say that they have a large number of touring pros in their circuit, then that probably goes a long way in securing certain sponsors.

 

[Discette]

If the PDGA Board of Directors is truly serious about using a flatter payout to incentivize more Pros, they need to extend this policy to Pro Worlds payouts, or maybe just follow their own payout tables? For fun, put the total payout for Open Division at Pro Worlds 2017 into the PDGA large event calculator and compare with what the PDGA actually paid out. For extra fun, put the total payout for Women's division at Pro Worlds last year into regular payout calculator and compare as well.


When I questioned this apparent discrepancy between the published PDGA payout tables and the actual payout, the PDGA stated they followed the payout tables for the minimum required payout then the "extra added cash" was distributed differently to increase the top payouts.

I am unable to find the PDGA "extra added cash" calculator anywhere in the TD documents. It appears a WAG calculator was used to make the top payouts "look mahvelous"! If I was an Open player that came in from 29th to 50th, I would wonder why my payout seems to have been cut in half to double the payout for the top players while the players in 10th through 28th place did not appear to have any cuts in pay. The ladies in 4th through 11th were also shorted a ton of that "extra added cash" to increase the 1st place payout tremendously.

Link to PDGA payout tables. The second sheet of the file contains the large event calculator: https://www.pdga.com/large-event-payout-calculator
Link to Pro Worlds 2017 results: https://www.pdga.com/tour/event/30813

Total Payout Open 161 Players: $63,247
Total Payout Women 44 Players: $17,255


To recap, if the PDGA is truly serious about paying flatter and deeper, the PDGA needs to follow published PDGA tables for ALL CASH at ALL PDGA Major and NT events. There should not be a separate payout schedule for "extra added cash". Either that or the PDGA should publish the "extra added cash" payout table for Pro Worlds so we can all see how it redistributes money from select lower finishing players to boost the top payouts.

opcorn:

 

[JC17393]

If the PDGA Board of Directors is truly serious about using a flatter payout to incentivize more Pros, they need to extend this policy to Pro Worlds payouts, or maybe just follow their own payout tables? For fun, put the total payout for Open Division at Pro Worlds 2017 into the PDGA large event calculator and compare with what the PDGA actually paid out. For extra fun, put the total payout for Women's division at Pro Worlds last year into regular payout calculator and compare as well.


When I questioned this apparent discrepancy between the published PDGA payout tables and the actual payout, the PDGA stated they followed the payout tables for the minimum required payout then the "extra added cash" was distributed differently to increase the top payouts.

I am unable to find the PDGA "extra added cash" calculator anywhere in the TD documents. It appears a WAG calculator was used to make the top payouts "look mahvelous"! If I was an Open player that came in from 29th to 50th, I would wonder why my payout seems to have been cut in half to double the payout for the top players while the players in 10th through 28th place did not appear to have any cuts in pay. The ladies in 4th through 11th were also shorted a ton of that "extra added cash" to increase the 1st place payout tremendously.

Link to PDGA payout tables. The second sheet of the file contains the large event calculator: https://www.pdga.com/large-event-payout-calculator
Link to Pro Worlds 2017 results: https://www.pdga.com/tour/event/30813

Total Payout Open 161 Players: $63,247
Total Payout Women 44 Players: $17,255


To recap, if the PDGA is truly serious about paying flatter and deeper, the PDGA needs to follow published PDGA tables for ALL CASH at ALL PDGA Major and NT events. There should not be a separate payout schedule for "extra added cash". Either that or the PDGA should publish the "extra added cash" payout table for Pro Worlds so we can all see how it redistributes money from select lower finishing players to boost the top payouts.

opcorn:

I don't disagree at all with anything you posted. I would just pose one question: what if the "extra added cash" came with a directive? For example, if a sponsor said "I'll donate $2000 to the pro payout if it is distributed only to the top 10 finishers in MPO". Should the PDGA only accept unconditional sponsorships? Ignore such directives and spread it out over the whole field anyway?

Not saying that's what happened at Worlds, but I have encountered similar things over the years...added money earmarked for a certain division or as a bonus for the winner(s). Should the PDGA take away any leeway and discretion TDs have and require the tables be followed exactly (not to the penny but perhaps within $5-10 per placement)?

Interesting development that I just noticed...the minimum added cash distribution requirement that appeared on last year's tour standards document is missing from this year's. In fact, I find no mention of any requirements in how to distribute added cash to pro divisions. I wonder if this is an oversight or if they have done away with the requirement and TDs are once again free to distribute the added cash in any manner they see fit (e.g. putting it all in MPO and FPO with the age-protected divisions getting none).

 

[Zanguini]

Total Payout Open 161 Players: $63,247
Total Payout Women 44 Players: $17,255

This is shockingly so it pretty even when broken down per player it comes out to 392 per player for both. Almost seems like it is on purpose.

 

[biscoe]

TD's should be free to distribute added cash as they see fit. Good change.

 

[Cgkdisc]

TD's should be free to distribute added cash as they see fit. Good change.

Only if announced how it will be done in advance and for amounts added beyond the tier requirement. For example, when Peter Shive used to kick in $500, it was specified in advance that it was earmarked to only be added to whatever would normally be added to the Pro Sr. GM payout.

 

[biscoe]

Only if announced how it will be done in advance and for amounts added beyond the tier requirement. For example, when Peter Shive used to kick in $500, it was specified in advance that it was earmarked to only be added to whatever would normally be added to the Pro Sr. GM payout.

according to Josh above the stipulation for tier required added cash to be distributed in a particular way is not in this year's documents. i admittedly haven't looked it up.

 

[JC17393]

This is shockingly so it pretty even when broken down per player it comes out to 392 per player for both. Almost seems like it is on purpose.

It should come out the same per player in each division...each division was supposed to receive a proportional share of the added cash. That isn't the point Discette was trying to make here.

Her issue was that the payout was more top heavy than the standard payout tables published by the PDGA would indicate. She's right.

Official payout for the top 10 in MPO
$12000
$6000
$3250
$3250
$1750
$1750
$1600
$1525
$1525
$1425

Suggested payout per PDGA large field payout calculator (rounded to $5 increments)
$5865
$3885
$2815
$2815
$2140
$2140
$1845
$1650
$1650
$1415

Where the money came from to pay first and second place nearly double what the table suggests...places 21-45. 21st was paid $790, the table suggests 21st should have received $925. 30th was paid $450, the table suggests it should have been $780. 45th was paid $295, the table suggests it should have been $610.

That's just the men. The women were also a bit top heavy relative to what the pay table suggests.

Top 10 in FPO
$5500
$2500
$2000
$1250
$1000
$633
$633
$633
$450
$400

Table suggested top 10
$3785
$2540
$1910
$1535
$1250
$910
$910
$910
$715
$645
$585

Borrowing from 5-10 to pay more to 1.

There's nothing explicitly wrong with that, there are no firm requirements that tournaments follow the tables to the letter. But Discette makes a good point that if they are going to deepen/flatten the NT bonuses, it would stand to reason that the same philosophy should apply to other PDGA controlled payouts as well. It will be curious to see how payout is approached at Smugglers this year compared to IDGC last year.

 

[Discette]

...added money earmarked for a certain division or as a bonus for the winner(s). Should the PDGA take away any leeway and discretion TDs have and require the tables be followed exactly (not to the penny but perhaps within $5-10 per placement)?

I have zero problem with an independent sponsor directing donated cash to a specific division or places of finish. Especially when these sponsorships are announced publicly and players are informed that the "extra added cash" from XYZ is going to the ladies or the first place finisher or the Senior GM's. AFAIK, the PDGA added the bulk of the extra cash to Pro Worlds in 2017.

Independent sponsor adding extra cash - Sponsor should be allowed to put conditions on where the "extra added cash" goes and it is clearly announced in advance. This would include clubs and TD's that raised "extra added cash".

PDGA adding extra cash - PDGA should pay out PDGA extra added cash according to PDGA payout tables or announce in advance exactly how the extra added cash will be divided.

I am all for PDGA supporting Pro Worlds with money, staff and equipment that benefits all the players. I do not appreciate the PDGA using PDGA funds to prop up the payouts for a very small and very select group of players (that are already getting a larger slice of the payout pie).

Again, the point is: if PDGA Board of Directors are really interested in paying the Pros deeper and flatter to get more participation, the PDGA should follow the published PDGA payout tables at Pro Worlds!

 

[Discette]

...

Her issue was that the payout was more top heavy than the standard payout tables published by the PDGA would indicate. She's right.

Just wanted to highlight this statement!

 

[krupicka]

It should come out the same per player in each division...each division was supposed to receive a proportional share of the added cash.

Technically it is a proportional share of the minimum added cash. So for a B-tier. Min $500 added cash. Say you have $1000 added cash. 20 in MPO and 5 in MPO. Minimum $400 added cash then to MPO and $100 to FPO, the other $500 can go wherever the TD wants.

 

[JC17393]

Technically it is a proportional share of the minimum added cash. So for a B-tier. Min $500 added cash. Say you have $1000 added cash. 20 in MPO and 5 in MPO. Minimum $400 added cash then to MPO and $100 to FPO, the other $500 can go wherever the TD wants.

I understand the math. My point was that seeing that all the money was proportionally divided wasn't a surprise as that tends to be standard operating procedure for the vast majority of events.

However, as I pointed out before, the minimum added cash distribution you describe was just a one-year mandate. Now it appears that 100% of the added cash can go wherever the TD wants, as it always was before 2017. Unless someone can point out where the PDGA moved that language to keep it in place.

 

[krupicka]

I missed the fact that that requirement was removed from the tour standards. Thank you for pointing that out.

 

[Zanguini]

I wonder how it compares to PGA payout scheemes comparing Majors to Regular tour events.

 

[brutalbrutus]

In golf, I think its standard practice to pay everyone who makes the cut.

 

[brutalbrutus]

https://thegolfnewsnet.com/golfnews...purse-payout-percentages-distribution-102486/

The PGA Tour has a standard formula for payout percentages and distribution its purse and prize money for almost every event. If there's a cut where 70 or more players make the final round or rounds of the tournament, there's standard table of payout percentages and distribution.

The winner of a PGA Tour event gets 18 percent of the purse. Typically, the second place player gets 10.8 percent of the total purse. Then it goes on like that, all the way down to 70th place, which gets 0.2 percent of the total purse.

There are a few situations where the PGA Tour doesn't follow its standard purse payout and distribution formula:



If the field has no cut, then the winner still gets 18 percent, but the money that would typically be paid out all the way to 70th place is redistributed to the field, giving them more money

If the field has a cut and more than 70 players make the weekend -- regardless if there's a secondary cut or not -- the PGA Tour throws extra money into the purse to pay out to players who made the cut

If you want to look up the other Orgs payout go for it. The PGA is only responsible for the PGA Championship. Usga does the US Open. RnA for the British and the Masters is run by the Club I think.