Maple Hill Open

[paulw]

Paulw, did you even read my post after the first sentence? Obviously not. The two sports play the same and score the same. They should also payout in a similar fashion. I did mention the part about disc golf not having enough money and that was part of the problem. I take the time to read entire posts before I post, so maybe you should too.

Yes. Just because the rest of it doesn't matter to the point I made doesn't mean it matters or I have to quote it.

We're [disc golfers] playing for each others' entry fees. Paying out the same as ball golf makes no sense. The people "paying out" the money in ball golf are doing it FOR MONEY. The people "paying out" the money in disc golf are doing it out of the kindness of their heart. Whatever/however the tournament director "pays out" is basically up to him/her if they're within the guidelines of the pdga. Just because the lowest score wins doesn't correlate to anything to do with the payouts having to parallel ball golf.

Want more proof of my point about posts being silly and not necessarily worth mentioning? I actually read someone post this drivel:

I just don't want it happen that in 5, 10, 20, 50 years from now if a disc golf purse is like say, 1 million, the same thing happens and the last 20 spots all get the same cash just because, "that is how we always have done it because that is how disc golf business is." We need to keep in mind the problems we have even if we can't fix them due to uncontrollable reasons.

In this hypothetical world did the million dollars in prize money come from the participants or the tournament director or some other source? If it came from the participants -- wow. If it came from the TD -- wow. If it came from some other source, I'm pretty sure that other source will pass it out HOWEVER THEY DANG WELL PLEASE.

"We need to keep in mind the problems we have even if we can't fix them due to uncontrollable reasons". I'm dizzy.

 

[paulw]

Yes'ish. Additionally...I know golf pro's. Pro's in the second tier level. They can pay up to $5,000 to enter a tournament and their sponsors do not pay for their entry in many cases. It works out because everyone is so good anyone can do well but the overall money isnt just that of the players. In disc golf as players get better across the board, it makes it harder and harder to make money. Climo won 12 championships quickly. That wont happen again. Soooo.... the more you just play for you and your competitors money the less you actually make as competition increases. The sport NEEDS outside money.

I stated that a guy that takes 2nd in a 2nd tier ball golf tour (web.com) makes more prize money than the top disc golfer does in a year . . .. I haven't checked yet but I have ONE DOLLAR that says I'm right . . . just saying.

 

[1978]

I stated that a guy that takes 2nd in a 2nd tier ball golf tour (web.com) makes more prize money than the top disc golfer does in a year . . .. I haven't checked yet but I have ONE DOLLAR that says I'm right . . . just saying.

Well sure, they pay the $5000 because they know the reward is way more than just $5000 X the number of players. Aditionally the reward isn't just 5000xthe number of players...which is basically just gambling. You pay ALOT to showcase your talent...then are rewarded with decent income. We are in agreement sir...I just added color to your arguement. (hopefully)

 

[paulw]

Well sure, they pay the $5000 because they know the reward is way more than just $5000 X the number of players. Aditionally the reward isn't just 5000xthe number of players...which is basically just gambling. You pay ALOT to showcase your talent...then are rewarded with decent income. We are in agreement sir...I just added color to your arguement. (hopefully)

Gotcha -- didn't read the whole post, I rarely do!!

 

[scarpfish]

The two sports play the same

No they don't.

 

[scarpfish]

the deep payouts encourage more pros to qualify and you get a DEEPER pool of talent. Did any of you notice that every year somebody no one is familiar with makes some noise at this tourney. that is why this is the best tourney because it has a deep and talented field from 1-100
Its not the NT brats vs themselves its the NTbrats vs an actual field of talent

The fact that a lot of those guys might not show up if the payout was top heavy (meaning less "added cash" for the top pros) is kind of lost on the people who advocate a top heavy payout.

That being said, I'd see no issue in Steve changing the cut for the final round to say 60.

 

[sprintermatt]

I don't see the problem. From Day One, Steve said here's how it is going to work. Guess what, it got people to come, to try to get in, to fight tooth and nail for a spot. The flat side of the payout is about $6000, or about 12% of the purse (if it's $50000, just guessing). The girls didn't have a similar flat payout.

The amount of strokes DOESN'T MATTER. If you win by 15 (which Paul and I have - at the same event no less), does that mean less people should cash? NO. The payout was set WELL before the event, and I don't think that scores should alter that. Nate didn't even crack the top 20... not even the top 30! He shouldn't expect to make much more than his money back. For example... if he finished in a similar place at the Memorial. he'd have made $340. smaller field, MORE added cash, but they paid 40%, not 50. 50% where the last 1/3 gets their money back means there's 120 players cash still on the table, for 48 spots... comparing that to the Memorial, it's nearly identical. A 4-way tie for 29th at the Memorial got $315, which is almost exactly the same amount as 32nd at MHO. So 24 people who got in got a free ride for playing "good enough". One of the happiest tournaments I ever had was my first cash at MSDGC (the pre-MHO).

In general, I don't see anything wrong with paying half the field if that's part of what makes your tournament well attended. Maple Hill has very few negative vibes, lots more fond memories. People complaining about payouts should not attend or have probably never attended.

 

[imoser_me]

I think people are missing the big picture. I THINK THE PAYOUT FOR THE MAPLE HILL OPEN WAS GOOD. I had to put it in caps so people wouldn't miss it. What he is doing is good for getting people to the event and is having success with disc golf right now.

My complaint is that people are defending that the last 20 spots getting paid out the exact same is a good thing for disc golf as a whole, like this is the future of our sport and that is what needs to happen. Lets say, just for giggles, that Coke decided to sponsor the event next year and, to keep it simple, add one zero to each of the competitors payout but keep the same tournament fee. Now, looking to see that the last 20 spots all got $2,250, that seems unfair. If you could space out the payout so each place was $50 or $25 more than the last for those places, it would feel more accomplished finishing 53rd than 72nd.

We can't control how much money we bring in from sponsors; we can only put ourselves out there for companies to see the potential for marketing. That means we have to do what is necessary for the sport to grow, which means a flat payout so more people can enjoy the tournament. I am happy for that. I just don't want people to stay the course if we do get a few big sponsors.

Also, I said that ball golf and disc golf should have SIMILAR payouts. By similar, I mean that each place that gets paid out should be different, which would make, for example, people in 53rd place feel better about their performance by getting more money than the people in 72nd place. I understand that it isn't always feasible because of the lack of money, but it is definitely something we should aspire to.

 

[zjones9]

If you could space out the payout so each place was $50 or $25 more than the last for those places, it would feel more accomplished finishing 53rd than 72nd.

Guessing you didn't try the math on that one...
Assuming $5 payout to 72nd, and using the minimum increase that you proposed of $25, that would put the payout for 53rd at $480. More importantly, the total payout to those spots increases from $4000 to $4850, so you have to account for that $850 from somewhere...

 

[JC17393]

I think people are missing the big picture. I THINK THE PAYOUT FOR THE MAPLE HILL OPEN WAS GOOD. I had to put it in caps so people wouldn't miss it. What he is doing is good for getting people to the event and is having success with disc golf right now.

My complaint is that people are defending that the last 20 spots getting paid out the exact same is a good thing for disc golf as a whole, like this is the future of our sport and that is what needs to happen. Lets say, just for giggles, that Coke decided to sponsor the event next year and, to keep it simple, add one zero to each of the competitors payout but keep the same tournament fee. Now, looking to see that the last 20 spots all got $2,250, that seems unfair. If you could space out the payout so each place was $50 or $25 more than the last for those places, it would feel more accomplished finishing 53rd than 72nd.

We can't control how much money we bring in from sponsors; we can only put ourselves out there for companies to see the potential for marketing. That means we have to do what is necessary for the sport to grow, which means a flat payout so more people can enjoy the tournament. I am happy for that. I just don't want people to stay the course if we do get a few big sponsors.

Also, I said that ball golf and disc golf should have SIMILAR payouts. By similar, I mean that each place that gets paid out should be different, which would make, for example, people in 53rd place feel better about their performance by getting more money than the people in 72nd place. I understand that it isn't always feasible because of the lack of money, but it is definitely something we should aspire to.

Who's arguing that it isn't something to be aspired to? People are only making the argument of "that's the way it is" because that's the way it is, not because they feel it's the way it should be forever. You have to work with what you have. If there was more money to be paid out, of course it would have been paid out differently.

 

[BennettUA]

 

[imoser_me]

Guessing you didn't try the math on that one...
Assuming $5 payout to 72nd, and using the minimum increase that you proposed of $25, that would put the payout for 53rd at $480. More importantly, the total payout to those spots increases from $4000 to $4850, so you have to account for that $850 from somewhere...

My complaint is that people are defending that the last 20 spots getting paid out the exact same is a good thing for disc golf as a whole, like this is the future of our sport and that is what needs to happen. Lets say, just for giggles, that Coke decided to sponsor the event next year and, to keep it simple, add one zero to each of the competitors payout but keep the same tournament fee. Now, looking to see that the last 20 spots all got $2,250, that seems unfair. If you could space out the payout so each place was $50 or $25 more than the last for those places, it would feel more accomplished finishing 53rd than 72nd.


Do people even read full posts? Zjones9, the bolded part in the above paragraph is one whole idea. The example would be spreading out if all the last 20 spots got $2,250 with the same tournament fee. I did not do the math, but with more money you could spread out the pay outs and the lowest cash could be under $1000 and that would be fine. That is the whole idea I am getting at. For all the competitors that played well enough to cash, it would be rewarding to get more for placing better.

I think that people have a right to complain about the payout and how it looks for a competitor. Even Paul McBeth's facebook post didn't take any shots at the TD, but mainly was looking how wrong it looked for disc golf in general. He wasn't blaming the TD for the bad payout, but was noticing how "disgusting" the bottom of the payout looked. I think it looks poor too, but that doesn't mean I think the TD is bad and made bad choices. It just re-emphasizes how much more work we need to do in disc golf to make this a more legitimate sport.

I think it is great that Paul pointed that out because I didn't even notice it until he mentioned it. He definitely brought to the forefront something that is a problem with disc golf right now, even if we already knew it.

 

[BirdieMachine]

One thing I would suggest as well. Especially these bigger tourneys that fill up fast and have a high demand is raise up the entry fees a bit more. It'll give more profit for people to travel and bigger payouts.

 

[paulw]

Do people even read full posts? No.

I think that people have a right to complain about the payout and how it looks for a competitor. Not when the TD posts them prior to signing up. If you sign-up for a tournament with posted pay-outs and the TD pays-out exactly what he told you he was going to -- BE QUIET.

If the TD doesn't post the pay-outs and then doesn't come within PDGA guidelines then you can complain. If he does -- BE QUIET.

Even Paul McBeth's facebook post didn't take any shots at the TD, but mainly was looking how wrong it looked for disc golf in general. He wasn't blaming the TD for the bad payout, but was noticing how "disgusting" the bottom of the payout looked. I think it looks poor too, but that doesn't mean I think the TD is bad and made bad choices. It just re-emphasizes how much more work we need to do in disc golf to make this a more legitimate sport.

You're wrong. Dodge is so up front with what he's doing and he does so much it's embarrassing to do anything other than applaud for everything's that's he's done. I don't even play in his tournaments and I have that much common sense.

Please don't tell me about the big picture or anything else silly. If it makes you feel better I promise that every course you build I'll tell you how great it is after I play it even if it's terrible and every tournament you run that I play in I promise I'll be the guy that says thanks no matter how bad it was or how badly I played. You may not believe that disc golf is legitimate enough, but I am certain the people that are doing all the work for us do-nothings are legitimate -- either thank them or BE QUIET. If you have to complain about anything complain again how no one reads your post or if it's misinterpreted it's because the responder misread it, but please do it after the first sentence so I can ignore it!!

 

[Cgkdisc]

Out of curiosity, I randomly looked up the payouts for a PGA event, World Golf Championship - Cadillac that paid 67 from a $9MM purse. I calculated the ratio of each paid place to the 67th place cash for this event and Vibram. In both events, 24th place payout was double 67th place with essentially the same flat curve in each. From 6th place to 24th place it went from about 5.5 times down to double in both. The only deviation was a steeper curve from 1st to 5th place with 34 times down to 5.5 in the PGA and only 11 times down to 5.5 at Vibram.

 

[sidewinder22]

WSOP has a similar payout structure but typically only payout top 10%, as opposed to 40-50% in the PDGA which IMO is silly.

 

[tampora]

..... In both events, 24th place payout was double 67th place with essentially the same flat curve in each. From 6th place to 24th place it went from about 5.5 times down to double in both. The only deviation was a steeper curve from 1st to 5th place with 34 times down to 5.5 in the PGA and only 11 times down to 5.5 at Vibram.

I assume your curve is graphing 'cash paid' vs 'place number'.

I would be more interested to see 'cash paid' vs 'stroke total' and how these two graphs differ.

 

[imoser_me]

My biggest problem with people not reading all of a post is people go off and comment about something that I already mentioned in my post. I am sorry, but I don't post often. I am not used to people responding to bits and pieces of my posts. It just gets frustrating when people take one sentence and take it out of context.

My biggest complaint about the payout is the flat $225 to the last 20 spots. The people on the last card on the final day aren't really playing for more cash. If you were on that last card and was tied with another player for top of that card going into hole 18, it doesn't really matter if you go for the green or lay up because you are getting paid the same. Yeah, you could have bragging rights, but the cash incentive isn't there. I see the rest of the field above that was staggered.

I just looked at all of the big tournaments for this year and last year and they all have staggered payout all the way throughout except Vibram Open and Maple Hill Open. Even Pro Worlds last year had the last few cashes separated by at least $5. It just seems wrong that somebody who threw 14 fewer shots get the same amount of cash. I know it isn't a big deal because it is the last cash spots, but it seems off on the competitive side of things.

I understand some people don't take criticism well. People get offended when you tell them that something didn't work or isn't good and the first reaction is, "You are so ungrateful." People need to realize that by complaining or criticizing it doesn't mean people don't appreciate what they do. By standing by and saying nothing, you are just being a drone that won't foster change for the better. I do understand, however, that there are good and bad ways of going about the criticizing.

I, for one, take criticism well. I always want to know what I am doing wrong and how I can improve. I will tell you I am far from perfect and don't always have the best ideas. That is what is great about being human, you can draw upon other people for help.

If I am way off base, then please let me know, but please read my entire post to formulate your opinions.

 

[Cgkdisc]

I assume your curve is graphing 'cash paid' vs 'place number'.

I would be more interested to see 'cash paid' vs 'stroke total' and how these two graphs differ.

6th thru 24th were separated by 3 shots in BG and 8 in DG
24th thru 67th were separated by 22 shots in BG and 17 in DG. Recognize that the par was higher in the BG event so 24th thru 67th the spread is actually about the same but not for 6th thru 24th.

 

[bradharris]

My biggest problem with people not reading all of a post is people go off and comment about something that I already mentioned in my post. I am sorry, but I don't post often. I am not used to people responding to bits and pieces of my posts. It just gets frustrating when people take one sentence and take it out of context.

My biggest complaint about the payout is the flat $225 to the last 20 spots. The people on the last card on the final day aren't really playing for more cash. If you were on that last card and was tied with another player for top of that card going into hole 18, it doesn't really matter if you go for the green or lay up because you are getting paid the same. Yeah, you could have bragging rights, but the cash incentive isn't there. I see the rest of the field above that was staggered.

I just looked at all of the big tournaments for this year and last year and they all have staggered payout all the way throughout except Vibram Open and Maple Hill Open. Even Pro Worlds last year had the last few cashes separated by at least $5. It just seems wrong that somebody who threw 14 fewer shots get the same amount of cash. I know it isn't a big deal because it is the last cash spots, but it seems off on the competitive side of things.

I understand some people don't take criticism well. People get offended when you tell them that something didn't work or isn't good and the first reaction is, "You are so ungrateful." People need to realize that by complaining or criticizing it doesn't mean people don't appreciate what they do. By standing by and saying nothing, you are just being a drone that won't foster change for the better. I do understand, however, that there are good and bad ways of going about the criticizing.

I, for one, take criticism well. I always want to know what I am doing wrong and how I can improve. I will tell you I am far from perfect and don't always have the best ideas. That is what is great about being human, you can draw upon other people for help.

If I am way off base, then please let me know, but please read my entire post to formulate your opinions.

Just because people don't quote your entire post doesn't mean they're not reading it. When you write an entire paragraph, people will often cut down the quote to the specific point to which they're responding.

Earlier in this thread you said that you thought there was no problem with payouts as they are. You just want to see them changed if there's more money in the pot. Now you're saying that even with the small prize pool this year, the flat payout for the final 20 is bad...

The fact is, this was no mystery. The payout structure is advertised well ahead of the event and people choose to play knowing that if they just barely slide in under the cut line, there may not be much to play for. But what they do know is that if they do make the cut, they're going to get their entire entry fee back. How many other events can make that promise? We could argue all day about which is worse, paying out the final 20 the same, or making the cash and still losing money on the event. But there is no right answer. Which is why it's great that TDs have the opportunity to do things the way they see fit.

If there were significantly more money in the prize pool, it would be much easier to keep a sliding payout all the way to last cash and still make sure that everyone earns their entry fee back. But right now, TDs don't really have the option to do both.