• Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
    It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)

2020 Las Vegas Challenge Feb 20-23

No McBeth, no McMahon? Interesting.

McBeth I can understand - you don't want to be playing a course where you're ripping full power drives at least 18 times four days in a row on a bum ankle.

McMahon is a little more interesting, he does well at this course. 2nd last year, 1st the year before. So a good place for him to grab some cash for sure.
I would then say it's because the course is boring, and he's been vocal about battling burnout. But he's still playing the Memorial, which seems like it would be just as boring.
 
McBeth I can understand - you don't want to be playing a course where you're ripping full power drives at least 18 times four days in a row on a bum ankle.

McMahon is a little more interesting, he does well at this course. 2nd last year, 1st the year before. So a good place for him to grab some cash for sure.
I would then say it's because the course is boring, and he's been vocal about battling burnout. But he's still playing the Memorial, which seems like it would be just as boring.

McMahon probably is going to stick to the 2 main tours and not so many in between.
 
With some top players receiving more compensation from sponsors than what they can earn from a top finish in some events, I think we'll see these players (other than medical factors or other obligations) occasionally cherry picking which events they attend, even if the event is part of a tour, sometimes based on which manufacturer is lead sponsor and the type of course(s) being played that might negatively impact their rating (if their rating is tied to bonuses).

Perhaps some sponsors offer higher bonuses for finishes in their events and smaller or even no bonuses for finishes in competitors' events to discourage their popular players from showing up in the tournament videos partly or mainly underwritten by competitors? Conspiracy theory or just good business???
 
Ratings based bonuses would be whack...
Not that surprising. From what I understand, reaching 1000 rating has historically been one of the milestones a male player had to reach before a manufacturer would consider sponsorship. I suspect there are other ratings based incentives such as shooting an 1100+ rated round for example.
 
Perhaps some sponsors offer higher bonuses for finishes in their events and smaller or even no bonuses for finishes in competitors' events to discourage their popular players from showing up in the tournament videos partly or mainly underwritten by competitors? Conspiracy theory or just good business???

Woah, never thought of this. I would almost argue it in the other direction: you WANT your big guns to show up and do well. Wear your logos and throw your discs on the lead card. Get some of that added cash that a competing brand threw in the purse. Keep it from being a total show of force for your competition.

More importantly, I hope there's not incentive for players to self-segregate by brand into tournament rosters. Part of the fun of following the touring side of the game is that you see a lot of the same folks compete weekend after weekend. Narratives develop. Rivalries build. You lose so many of those interactions if pros are encouraged to play only their sponsor's tourneys.
 
UDiscs scores for FPO has changes SO many times. . Kona and Henna got their score changed more times than i could count
 
Jennifer Allen playing FPO 40+. I had no idea she was master's age now. Based on her field, I'm going to say she easily walks away with the w.
 
Jennifer Allen playing FPO 40+. I had no idea she was master's age now. Based on her field, I'm going to say she easily walks away with the w.

Odd, wonder if that pays better that top 10 in FPO. . .but Jen will play open at the Memorial, guess she don´t want to play against Juliana in FPO 40+ ;)
 
Has anybody heard anything about Eagle's shoulder? Its possible he's still recovering from that and playing courses with so many bomber drives could be a bad idea...
 
With some top players receiving more compensation from sponsors than what they can earn from a top finish in some events, I think we'll see these players (other than medical factors or other obligations) occasionally cherry picking which events they attend, even if the event is part of a tour, sometimes based on which manufacturer is lead sponsor and the type of course(s) being played that might negatively impact their rating (if their rating is tied to bonuses).

Perhaps some sponsors offer higher bonuses for finishes in their events and smaller or even no bonuses for finishes in competitors' events to discourage their popular players from showing up in the tournament videos partly or mainly underwritten by competitors? Conspiracy theory or just good business???

I think the landscape of the game is changing.
Now that some players make a salary, they will be more selective in ways that Chuck has said: sponsors, ratings (favorable courses), travel and rest.
Probably why most pros play the Memorial, it's a ratings boost.
Also, I think why many pros are skipping smaller pro-ams, because easier local courses are a ratings hit.
 
Last edited:
Sarah Hokom posted a comment on FB today indicating she doesn't prefer the "bomber" courses at Vegas and Memorial so she's starting her tour in Waco.
 
i suppose its difficult playing bomber courses when youre not a bomber yourself
 

Latest posts

Top