So many divisions!!!!!!!!W

[BraveThrower43]

"Everything was fine 15 years ago." - You mean the tail end of the 15 year period during which PDGA membership was a mere fraction of what it is now, right?

A lot of people wonder: what is the reason to move up if you're paying out every division. If you have players wondering this, you're doing your payouts wrong. You need to stagger how deep you pay out divisions. In the Novice and Recreational divisions - pay out upwards of 60%, if not more, of the division. A little something on top of the player packs. A difference, but minimal, between last cash and the winners - or at least a slow slope.

Intermediate you start to compress things - paying out maybe 45%. Then 40% in Advanced - with a steeper jump up to the top guys in the division.

Additionally you encourage players to play within their PDGA Divisions. It sounds like its difficult to cash if you're making the higher divisions pay out a smaller portion of the field, but in reality - if you're at a proper rating level for your division you're going to cash within your field enough to make tournament play at that level worth it. A 935+ rated guy is going to cash regularly in Advanced. Maybe even win some events if his field isn't filled with supposed-to-be-pros bagging until Nationals or Worlds.

Like you, Chris, I come from sports that don't pay out much. I ran for a long time, played Ultimate for a long time - and in neither sport was there anything in the way of payouts. But guess what? There also wasn't nearly as much money going into the game. Disc golfers put more money into the game than anybody in those other sports, and as a result - expect something back and I see no reason that players shouldn't get it.

Most of these "amateurs" in the lower divisions don't have it in them either athletically, mentally, or in terms of time to devote outside of their real world careers to move up to the open division. Playing for some plastic is their chance to win something playing this game - that is important to many people. They don't care about their amateur vs professional status, or the legitimacy of amateurism in disc golf. Winning some discs and being able to say their supplemented their bags by playing tournament X or Y.. that does matter.

:thmbup:

 

[Future_Primitive]

Oh. And I have no problem with no payouts for the ams. Drop my entry fee to $10 with no player pack or maybe $20 with one and I am fine. No way I am paying $40 if I am not really competing for anything. I can practice to become pro for free~

:thmbup::hfive:

If it is all about the spirit of competition, then the above model would seem to fit better. Lower entry fees for "ams" to $10-$15, do away with player packs and lets go play golf for the competition and some measly trophy.

It doesnt take a math major to figure out 40 "ams" paying $30.00 each to play in a tourney for a $100 trophy is a rip-off. :thmbdown:

Also, it is not the "ams" responsibility to up the stakes for the open players, leave that to the open players to figure out. If they want to play for big money, then risk big money, make it $100.00 or $200.00 each to play Open with payouts. I mean, you are the "pros" right?

 

[Pwingles]

It does help the vendors, but I don't think tournaments have an obligation to do payouts in order to support vendors. If a vendor is relying on that to keep their business afloat, they maybe should consider shutting their doors for good.

If a vendor puts on a tournament for the purpose of promoting their brand and boosting sales, that's one thing. But if I'm running a tournament myself, don't tell me I need to pay out the ams so that some disc shop can stay in business.

Thats fair. And im not telling you what you have to do. Just sayin that, these relationships in this sport are often mutually benefitial in situations like this. To say, across the board, "these divisions and pay structure need to go" is silly. If Chris wants to run an event like that, it prolly would t stop me from going personally, but others it would, and im only trying to point out that there are other perspectives out there.

 

[gdub58]

I understand your frustation, but it is not all about you. First when you hit 50 or better, you will realize the limitations that come with age. Second, have you ever thought that as a 50 year old player, I have no interest in playing with 18-35 year olds. Playing a competative round with players of my general generation is far more interesting, entertaining, competative and enjoyable. I don't personally care what the tournament gives out, but keeping AM's and below happy is what grows the sport.

I agree with you to an extent - I'm over 50 too and like playing with others in my age group. That said, I don't necessarily enjoy playing with the same 5 guys in every tournament, which is often the case if I play grandmasters

I get similar enjoyment playing with people around my same rating, and in a competitive tournament situation, I'd rather play with a 25 year old rated 950 than a 50 year old rated 800.

 

[DavidSauls]

Why do we have so many PDGA divisions?

Why can't we just have a Pro mens division, a Pro Womens division, and then an Amateur division and an AM womens division?

Eliminate all merch payouts to ams. Trophies only.

This will grow the fields, so now you will be playing in larger fields.

And more people will move into the pro division that are top ams because they want to try and win something.

I think I am going to start doing this for all of my PDGA events.
So sick of playing events with 14 pro men and 12 pro masters. Would be a lot more fun to play against 26 players. If you are a Pro master that feels he can't compete in the pro division, guess what, you are probably really just an advanced player.

The best post in this thread was the first one. It's great to see someone who dislikes what he sees---and is willing to try something different. So many just like to complain and tell other people what they should do.

I've run or helped run events with no age divisions (just Pro & Am), and events with no skill divisions (Pro & Advanced, with their age-protected segments). I've been to a pro-only NT event. I've played in trophy-only Am events. There are lots of possibilities, for those willing to step up and try and, who knows, demonstrate a better way.

 

[tistoude]

My question would be what exactly is gained by changing the current tournament structure? What are the exact benefits gained by not paying out AM's?

The only thing I see happening if we start eliminating alot of the divisions is we end up losing most of our rec, intermediate and upper age protected division players. Outside of uber competitive people that will try really hard to improve most of them will just drift away. They are not going to move up to Open to get killed every tournament. I think some pro's just want to fluff the field with "donater's" and that will not last very long.

 

[lohizz]

Finland

Here in Finland, we have "Open" "Ladies" "Juniors-16" "Juniors-19" "Seniors-40" "Seniors-50" "Seniors-60" and "Lady Seniors-40" in our championship every year...

In normal competitions, we have "Open" (or "Advanced-" and "Intermediate amateur"), "Ladies" and "Juniors-19".

For licences for disc golf we have A-license (championship competition, Euro-tour etc.) and B-license (every other competition).

:hfive:

 

[chris deitzel]

What would be gained is larger PRO fields where more people cash, and those trying to make a living might actually be able to do so.

Sure we'd lose a lot of the ams who bitch about not winning any plastic, but really I'm not so sure that that is a bad thing.

Up until a few years ago, the advanced division was the largest division at events. Now it's the INT field that dominates. Why? Probably because these players think they can win more prizes playing in INT instead of ADV.

 

[chris deitzel]

Winning discs is expected these days. Soon it will be different. the PDGA is trying to get away from this format. And I believe within 5 years, there will be no more merch payouts for ams.


Then again, I'm also the person who moved up to pro at 921. And spent 5 years donating money before I won my first $50.

 

[SomeChump]

An intermediate perspective:

I've only played tournaments in intermediate and advanced. I keep getting spanked in advance, where I'm competitive in intermediate, occasionally winning and often getting on the top card by the end. (916) I didn't play much this winter so I'm going to do my first tourney this year in intermediate. But I've realized a few things.

1) I'm not really getting any better. Even when I play advanced or play the top division in weekly doubles or when I practice more. I'm already 38. I've been playing for 6 or 7 years. I'll probably NEVER play open, and certainly will never be competitive in it. I'll probably NEVER win an advanced PDGA event. This assumption that every one is getting better and will eventually move to open and compete for the big money just isn't true. There are lots of us that'll never get there. Sorry, we're just not that talented and/or don't have the time to put in.

2) It would be a lot more fun if people would play their ranking. If all the 910-935 guys would play intermediate it would be a lot better. Instead, we get 4 or 5 guys who are 910-935 and the rest are < 900 and trying to "play up so they can get better." If we go try to the do the same thing in advanced, the division is mostly 920-940 guys with 4-5 guys who are 950+ and after 4 rounds are 15+ strokes ahead of the pack. Just play your rating and all divisions will be more fun. The social pressure to "play up" actually destroys the competitiveness of a lot of the AM divisions. There's also the factor that intermediate often becomes the default starter division and there's tons of yeahoos who don't even know (or worse, care about) the rules, and I'm not talking little things like foot faults or moving branches. I'm talking about holing out on each hole or not lighting up a bowl halfway through the hole.

3) I agree it's stupid to pay out 40%-50% of a field (or the equally silly practice of paying out every female who shows up and throws 650 rated rounds). I do like the merch payout though. So what's the solution? Make huge merch payouts for the top 3-5 players in a division of 20-30. If you're on the top card going into the last round and you know 3 of you are going to score big and one of you is going home empty-handed, the competition factor is a lot better, and that's why we're playing tourneys anyway, no? Paying out less of a field will also help people to play in the division they're rated for, since they won't get a thing if they're playing up.

As far as subsidizing the open payout, I'm indifferent. As long as it is reasonable I think it's okay. For $40-50 I expect a player's pack with a disc and a T-shirt. As far as I'm concerned, the rest of that entry fee doesn't buy me anything but a weekend of competition. How the TD uses the money is up to him.

 

[BraveThrower43]

What would be gained is larger PRO fields where more people cash, and those trying to make a living might actually be able to do so.

Yea we should encourage players to pay $ to compete against top pros and donate to the cause to make sure they can have a comfortable living.

 

[chris deitzel]

I don't think that is at all what I said. You can always play amateur. I'm not forcing you to play anything.

I just think these age divisions are restricting the growth of the pro field. Maybe keep the Grand Masters? But eliminate the masters? something that will grow the field of the pro division in events.

 

[grodney]

Here in Finland, we have "Open" "Ladies" "Juniors-16" "Juniors-19" "Seniors-40" "Seniors-50" "Seniors-60" and "Lady Seniors-40" in our championship every year...

In normal competitions, we have "Open" (or "Advanced-" and "Intermediate amateur"), "Ladies" and "Juniors-19".

For licences for disc golf we have A-license (championship competition, Euro-tour etc.) and B-license (every other competition).

:hfive:

I'll high-five that. Yay Finland!

 

[DavidSauls]

3) I agree it's stupid to pay out 40%-50% of a field (or the equally silly practice of paying out every female who shows up and throws 650 rated rounds). I do like the merch payout though. So what's the solution? Make huge merch payouts for the top 3-5 players in a division of 20-30. If you're on the top card going into the last round and you know 3 of you are going to score big and one of you is going home empty-handed, the competition factor is a lot better, and that's why we're playing tourneys anyway, no? Paying out less of a field will also help people to play in the division they're rated for, since they won't get a thing if they're playing up.

Possible drawbacks are that the top players in a division will be so richly rewarded tht they're encouraged to not move up. Particularly the top of the Advanced division.

Not paying the people who might finish in the middle, but are unlikely to win, might make them reluctant to play in the first place. Fewer players means less payouts.

 

[mashnut]

I would love to see the results of running some tournaments like that, and it sounds like you're planning on doing that Chris. There's a lot of speculation in this thread, and I have my own opinion too on how successful that model would be, but either way there's nothing stopping you from doing it to prove everybody wrong. If your tournaments are a huge success in that format, other people will emulate that, same way we got the current structure.

Personally I think it's a mistake to push out the people who are never going to improve above the rec or intermediate level. I would love to see more split between am and pro tournaments, let the pros play for each others' money and whatever sponsorship they can drum up, and let the ams fill the course with all the age and rating protected divisions.

 

[chris deitzel]

Pretty sure Craig Gangloff has been running some successful events with this kind of thing. he also charges entry fees based on your rating. 950 pays less for Pro than a 1000 rated player.


I like that idea Mashnut. Only problem is then you got to get people to run 2 events, pay 2 sanctioning fees, fine2 open weekends....blah blah.

But yeah, that would work.

And to everyone, I'm not really that upset about this. I just like hearing what others have to say.

 

[Cgkdisc]

36% of all PDGA players are in the 880-930 ratings range. Thus, a very large Intermediate division, especially when Rec rated players play up.

 

[bradharris]

I don't think that is at all what I said. You can always play amateur. I'm not forcing you to play anything.

I just think these age divisions are restricting the growth of the pro field. Maybe keep the Grand Masters? But eliminate the masters? something that will grow the field of the pro division in events.

Age divisions are important.

I do think the idea of splitting ams and pros into separate divisions is silly though, particularly at small local events. I would love to see a large "Open" field that includes Pro Open and all of the non age restricted am divisions. If you feel the need to give prizes to lower level players, do a second round win-your-card prize. If you need a pro payout, just have a separate buy-in for those that want to play for money. At the end of the day, the best score is crowned champion and gets some sort of cool/unique trophy. If that person is rated 910 and would normally play in Int, who cares? He was the best on that course on that day.

 

[tistoude]

I don't think that is at all what I said. You can always play amateur. I'm not forcing you to play anything.

I just think these age divisions are restricting the growth of the pro field. Maybe keep the Grand Masters? But eliminate the masters? something that will grow the field of the pro division in events.

Chris I think this is where we will just have to differ in our opinions because growing the Pro field in my opinion is the lowest priority in all of disc golf. I personally believe growing the AM side (not talking about divisions or payouts here) is the only way to ever create a sustainable PRO tour/actual professionals.

 

[tistoude]

I do think the idea of splitting ams and pros into separate divisions is silly though, particularly at small local events. I would love to see a large "Open" field that includes Pro Open and all of the non age restricted am divisions. If you feel the need to give prizes to lower level players, do a second round win-your-card prize. If you need a pro payout, just have a separate buy-in for those that want to play for money. At the end of the day, the best score is crowned champion and gets some sort of cool/unique trophy. If that person is rated 910 and would normally play in Int, who cares? He was the best on that course on that day.

You sir sound like you are making sense and should be banned from the forums!

I don't necessarily completely agree but there is some good logic involved here, especially the side buy in for Pro payouts.