Originally Posted by archmage
Sure, I get it that not everyone wants to go Pro, I'm also an amateur that probably never goes Pro. But what I don't understand is why amateur disc golfers feel that they need to get something worth money when they do well in a tournament. I've competed in other sports, and got trophies and medals, never money or scrip. Why did I go to all those competitions if there was nothing to be gained out of them? Because I wanted to compete, and see if I can win. And when I did get a trophy or a medal, I felt good, and never thought that I should get money for this. That's what competition should be about - competing, not making profit. Making profit is for Pros.
I've been waiting for someone to explain why disc golf is so terrible compared to other activities that you have to bribe them to compete, but so far I've come up empty. Apparently running 13 miles is way more fun than playing disc golf because people will pay to do that by the hundreds with no chance of a positive ROI.
I think it will change if the powers that be start looking at actual data rather than catering to whiners. Of course people will say they want a positive ROI when asked. That doesn't mean that you'll definitely get more players that way, though. Nearly every other activity I've paid to compete in is evidence that's true. Yet in the very first tournament (for charity) I played in 5 months after I started playing I was called a sandbagger for getting second place in rec (it was the first tournament for the first place player as well and he got the same reception). I've never had that happen in any other competition, mostly because the structure of the event made sandbagging impossible.