A Change , Again, to the Pro Rated Added Cash Requirement

[DSmith]

"Removal of the 2012 caveat allowing the Pro Purse to be pro-rated if less than 20 Pros attended the event."

From the 2013 Tournament Standards Update.

I'm actually surprised this hasn't been brought up yet. Basically it goes back to the original added cash rule which means it doesn't matter how many pros show up you have to have X amount added cash added to the pro purse. You think this change was due to alot of top pros complaining about the lack of added cash?



(I tried to post in the old thread but it was too old.)
http://www.dgcoursereview.com/forums...mum+added+cash

[DavidSauls]

My guess is no. I doubt many "top pros" are attending B-tiers where less than 20 pros show up. It's local pros, if anyone, who might be complaining.

But that's just my guess.

I seem to recall an A-tier with a very low attendance, rumored to have had a very meager payout, that might have inspired this.

[Mabuku1]

what then is the defining factors of a "b"tier and "a" tier if the winnings can fluctuate from tournament to tournament?

[Scoot_er]

Originally Posted by Mabuku1

what then is the defining factors of a "b"tier and "a" tier if the winnings can fluctuate from tournament to tournament?

$500 will get you a B-tier

$1000 will get you an A-tier.....assuming it hasn't changed.

I actually like this new policy. Prior to the set amounts the PDGA used percentages which are hard to estimate/acquire before the event. This just gets rid of a loophole I had little knowledge of.

[DSmith]

Originally Posted by Scoot_er

$500 will get you a B-tier

$1000 will get you an A-tier.....assuming it hasn't changed.

I actually like this new policy. Prior to the set amounts the PDGA used percentages which are hard to estimate/acquire before the event. This just gets rid of a loophole I had little knowledge of.

Actually A-Tier is $1800 added cash for pros.

Last years rule meant $25 added cash per pro up to 20 pros then it goes to $500 (for a B Tier)
For an A Tier it would be $90 per pro up to 20 pros (if you have more then it goes to $1800)

The reason the PDGA did this was to help out areas where the pro turnout was notoriously low.

The other difference between the tiers is the buffer allowed between tournaments increases the higher tier you go and you also get more points twards Worlds.



From info I gathered this last summer most TD's I talked to wern't concerned either way about using the Pro-rated added cash and instead just opted to use the base minimum added cash instead. Probably why the PDGA just did away with it.

[DavidSauls]

Originally Posted by Mabuku1

what then is the defining factors of a "b"tier and "a" tier if the winnings can fluctuate from tournament to tournament?

I recall when our club at a B-tier, and about 6 pros turned up. That $500 was split among the 3 who cashed---a very sweet payout for what turned out to be a small event.

Whether the winnings fluctuated with the recent exception depends on how you look at it. For a B-tier, if 20 or more pros showed up, $500 was added to purse. If only 10 pros showed up, $250 was added to purse. But the players who cashed, received about the same amount whether there were 10 or 20 pros. So the total purse fluctuated, but the payouts to individuals didn't.

[DavidSauls]

Here we are....an Amateur-only A-tier in which only 22 players showed up.

http://www.pdga.com/tournament_results/75223

I've heard they didn't come close to the (then) $1500 in added payouts. Though, since they paid in merchandise, their exposure to loss was much less than a pro-only event would be.

For what it's worth. I rather liked the exception, but don't think it's a big deal either way. Without it TDs who aren't certain they'll get higher-tier attendance, may not try to run the higher tier at all.

[DSmith]

Originally Posted by DavidSauls

Here we are....an Amateur-only A-tier in which only 22 players showed up.

http://www.pdga.com/tournament_results/75223

I've heard they didn't come close to the (then) $1500 in added payouts. Though, since they paid in merchandise, their exposure to loss was much less than a pro-only event would be.

For what it's worth. I rather liked the exception, but don't think it's a big deal either way. Without it TDs who aren't certain they'll get higher-tier attendance, may not try to run the higher tier at all.

You can always run a few Am only A-Tiers then on Pro only A-Tier like Bowling Green used to do. (with the money generated off the AM tournaments funding the added cash for the Pro tournament)

[DavidSauls]

The point is that, Pro or Am, if you guarantee a payout and then few players show up, you can lose money---or, at least, have a payout that's wildly disproportionate to the attendance.