View Single Post
  #41  
Old 03-23-2013, 08:21 AM
DavidSauls's Avatar
DavidSauls DavidSauls is offline
* Ace Member *
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Newberry, SC
Years Playing: 19.5
Courses Played: 115
Posts: 7,957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Casual Squishy View Post
Back to the pdga payout tables:
Even if nothing else changed it still might be good to keep up with the times and implement a more sliding scale, the current formula of could just be changed to the number of players in a division instead of the tier of the event.
something like: 10 or less players 50% 11-30 40% 31-50 33% 51+ 25% etc.
Like smoothing bumps in a rug, you fix one problem and another emerges.

Assuming you're still paying out something like 100%, in prizes and players packs---and if you're not, players will scream---a steeper payout table means even bigger prizes for the winners of Am divisions. That further aggravates the people who are offended that Ams win anything, and it gives greater incentive for players to not move up.

I think it was for these issues that the PDGA flattened the payout scale, and created so many Am divisions (so they're smaller, thus a smaller payout to winner). At least in part.

When I began there were two Am divisions (not counting gender/age divisions), and payouts were about the top 33%. So the trend has been away from both.

Now, if you didn't keep the 100% payout but let the TD keep an increasing share of the entry, your sliding scale might work better. But there'd be a whole new set of screams from the gallery.
Reply With Quote