#21  
Old 11-12-2013, 02:05 PM
_MTL_ _MTL_ is offline
I think I'm important
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Raleigh, NC
Years Playing: 21.1
Courses Played: 105
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 1,948
Send a message via AIM to _MTL_ Send a message via Yahoo to _MTL_
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
Otherwise, if every pro is paying the same entry fee in most events without spectators
This also shouldn't happen.

This link shows the recomended tour standards and you can see at the very bottom, the PDGA does not recommend charging pro open and other divisons the same thing.

http://www.pdga.com/tour/standards

Yes, it's optional. But thought it should be pointed out.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-12-2013, 04:05 PM
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is online now
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 25.3
Courses Played: 572
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,560
I agree that Open entry fee is usually and should be higher than other pro divisions. That naturally would boost any "default" added cash allocations. Where all pro entry fees may be the same is smaller C-tiers where maybe all pro entry fees are say $25. An interesting angle in all this is why you don't see non-Open entry fees set higher than Open when there's a decent amount of added cash to potentially lure some of the Masters to play Open if that's a "problem" in some areas. It's a little like Gangloff's experiment where the lower your rating, the lower your entry fee in the Open division.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-13-2013, 11:16 AM
zrxchris's Avatar
zrxchris zrxchris is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Tuscaloosa, AL
Years Playing: 1.1
Courses Played: 13
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 126
Thanks for all the input.

My goals are to reward pros who entered no matter their division. It's #'s I'm lolling for.

Larry Tourney I had $1500 and had
20 MPO , 1 MGM & 2 FPO
I awarded all players and waived the 2 person minimum for MGM and averaged a 172% payout for all pro divisions and gave extra to FPO to draw more females.

I think that of total field, proportionally the division with the most players should get a slightly larger share if the pie. But I also want to give the divisions who show a good turnout a boost as well.

I do agree that if MPO is $100 and MGM is $75 then that fields share of the pie should be proportional to their entry fee.

I tried many angles with FPO but got no takers.
One leading women's player says she would attend if I did $700 cash added specifically to FPO but she chose another tourney that historically had a better payout, fine by me I know these guys have to make a living.
I updates the terms of my purse allocation and hopefully will get a few ladies to attend.

I plan to stick with my tourney statement and if the turnout is not good reward the field. Y maybe upping the field payout to 50 or 55 percent.

So if I take total field and establish a share (percentile of the total field) I'll add cash on multiple of entry fees

First add by entry fee multiple per player

20 players = 2,000 added

14 MPO - $1400
2 MGM - $150
4 FPO - $400 ($100 per player as I stated of I get that many women pros, none so far )
$1950 Total

Then disburse remainder by strength of division
Remainder - $50/20 (round up to $3) I'll bump in a few more bucks and give $3 a head to clear the purse

MPO- $42
MGM- $6
FPO - $12

Fair No?
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 11-27-2013, 05:28 AM
zrxchris's Avatar
zrxchris zrxchris is offline
Par Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Tuscaloosa, AL
Years Playing: 1.1
Courses Played: 13
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 126
I updated my FPO requirements for cash added before anyone registered and only got 1
The southern FPO's I lost to the Fly Ink Open I don't think did as well as they could have at my event.
Hopefully they will notice that when they review payouts in considering future events.

Well only ended up with only 11 pro's total, 10 MPO & 1 FPO
I gave everyone an equal share and bumped the field payout to 50%

One pro had some good feedback for me

"The tournament seemed to have ran very smooth. The payout, on another hand, was one of the best all year based on the Tier of tournament and people attending. It really gives me hope for Disc Golf tournaments when I see $2000 added and it pays out like it actually had money added. Most the time, TDs claim to have money added but then end up paying for a crazy amount of other things before its all set and done. The lunch and breakfast were spectacular. I think it was really obvious that "true" ams enjoyed playing Disc Golf at a cheaply rate, getting experience and a rating, lunch, and then not have to deal with the payout. I hope you do this more often! Some players will try to convince you that people won't play unless they get something, but don't let it happen. If the winner of a division got anything more then a trophy, you might be able to squeeze a basket or bag in for the intermediate or Rec. "

Everything went really well

Thanks for everyone's input
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 11-27-2013, 12:44 PM
ScottyLove ScottyLove is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Years Playing: 2.9
Courses Played: 81
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 806
More Fuel on the fire...

Here's my recent dilemma...

C-Tier with no requirements on what to with added cash... This is not uncommon in some of our C-Tier tournament, so we simply add amounts to the cash payout for pros and vouchers to ams just like your would normally... based on the # of folks in each division.

Problem is, the pros "asssumed" the added cash was for them only. I guess not everyone knows there are no rules for C-Tier distribution. Some said the word "cash" on the flyer gave them the right to assume since only pros play for cash... so I see the issue, sort of. It's not my job to educate everyone on the PDGA guidelines.

Next year, we will be VERY VERY clear on any distribution... It'll take care of itself since it's a B-Tier anyhow.

Ams got the best payout ever though and were very pleased since we had $1000.00 extra to spread across all the divisions.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 11-30-2013, 02:08 PM
Discette's Avatar
Discette Discette is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Rancho Cucamonga
Years Playing: 17.9
Courses Played: 241
Posts: 640
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyLove View Post
Here's my recent dilemma...

C-Tier with no requirements on what to with added cash... This is not uncommon in some of our C-Tier tournament, so we simply add amounts to the cash payout for pros and vouchers to ams just like your would normally... based on the # of folks in each division.

Problem is, the pros "asssumed" the added cash was for them only. I guess not everyone knows there are no rules for C-Tier distribution. Some said the word "cash" on the flyer gave them the right to assume since only pros play for cash... so I see the issue, sort of. It's not my job to educate everyone on the PDGA guidelines.

Next year, we will be VERY VERY clear on any distribution... It'll take care of itself since it's a B-Tier anyhow.

Ams got the best payout ever though and were very pleased since we had $1000.00 extra to spread across all the divisions.
You are correct in that there are no requirements for distribution of "minimum added cash" at a C-Tier. According to the 2013 PDGA Tour Standards agreement, "Minimum Added Cash" specifically means to the Pro Purse. With the change in PDGA standards, players now understand that minimum added cash is for pro divisions unless stated otherwise in event information.

The PDGA is clear on how to distribute "minimum added cash", but not on how to distribute "total cash", "extra cash" or "non-required" cash.



You state that "minimum added cash" is different from " added cash". And while this is technically correct, I don't think many players expect there is a difference between the two terms.



Ams are never allowed to be paid in cash at PDGA events, so referring to extra Am payout as "added cash" can create more confusion. Suggested terms for additional payout for Ams are: added value, added prizes, added merchandise, etc.

So while technically you did not have PDGA standards to follow for "Minimum added cash" at your C-Tier and could distribute extra cash any way you wanted, many players have come to understand (whether right or wrong) the words "Added Cash" mean: cash added to the pro payout.


From the 2013 Tour Standards:

Clarification that Minimum Added Cash means “Minimum Added Cash to the Pro Purse.”

Also listed in Table 1.

http://www.pdga.com/documents/pdga-tour-standards
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-30-2013, 03:44 PM
Cgkdisc Cgkdisc is online now
.:Hall of Fame Member:.
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Twin Cities
Years Playing: 25.3
Courses Played: 572
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 7,560
Ams are allowed to win cash as Ace Pool, cash CTPs and Skins which are not considered part of the competition using scores.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-30-2013, 04:05 PM
teemkey's Avatar
teemkey teemkey is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Tigard, OR
Courses Played: 30
Posts: 808
Let the TD decide the type of tournament, fees, and cash distribution. As alluded to above, a TD might want to try new payout schemes to attract/repel certain player demographics.

For a tournament to benefit breast cancer, more $$$ to the female divisions might attract big names and mean more to the local community and benefactors & by the same reasoning the TD might favor older male divisions if the benefit is to support prostate cancer research.

TDs do an awful lot for very little. Why? Because they want to run a tournament they way they think it should be run. Payout is an important part of a given tournament's drawing power. Give the TDs some respect and let them define the payout scheme. Your job is to decide whether to play or not.
Reply With Quote
 

  #29  
Old 12-01-2013, 09:46 AM
ScottyLove ScottyLove is offline
Eagle Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Years Playing: 2.9
Courses Played: 81
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Discette View Post
You are correct in that there are no requirements for distribution of "minimum added cash" at a C-Tier. According to the 2013 PDGA Tour Standards agreement, "Minimum Added Cash" specifically means to the Pro Purse. With the change in PDGA standards, players now understand that minimum added cash is for pro divisions unless stated otherwise in event information.

The PDGA is clear on how to distribute "minimum added cash", but not on how to distribute "total cash", "extra cash" or "non-required" cash.



You state that "minimum added cash" is different from " added cash". And while this is technically correct, I don't think many players expect there is a difference between the two terms.



Ams are never allowed to be paid in cash at PDGA events, so referring to extra Am payout as "added cash" can create more confusion. Suggested terms for additional payout for Ams are: added value, added prizes, added merchandise, etc.

So while technically you did not have PDGA standards to follow for "Minimum added cash" at your C-Tier and could distribute extra cash any way you wanted, many players have come to understand (whether right or wrong) the words "Added Cash" mean: cash added to the pro payout.


From the 2013 Tour Standards:

Clarification that Minimum Added Cash means “Minimum Added Cash to the Pro Purse.”

Also listed in Table 1.

http://www.pdga.com/documents/pdga-tour-standards
Very good explanation. We had an AWESOME turnout and great reviews for the whole weekend like "Best ever in 6 years" type of comments. Only negative as the pro payout and that was only by a vocal few. Lesson learned.

And like I said, next year being a B-Tier will take care of this. I just wanted to help others out if they raise the kind of extra monies we were able to.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.