Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members

"Masters vs. Open Grudge Match" Options
bobherb
Posted: Friday, June 08, 2007 2:53:56 PM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 8/10/2004
Posts: 449

Who does not want to be rewarded?

Matt, you were in diapers when Climo was whoopin' up on me in the Open division.

What is your point - do you want to be rewarded?

BTW, how is it going in Michigan?

Note the 3 questions...

matthew_blakely
Posted: Friday, June 08, 2007 3:36:38 PM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 2/27/2003
Posts: 498
There is a difference between want and should. Not saying that I peticular deserve, The best players on that day deserve it. Not those who play at a lower entry fee in a protected division where they are more comfortable. It's not about comfort it's about competition and whats probably best for our sport. If a protected division can play for nearly the same amount as open and win nearly as much why would an older player who as just as good play in the open division? To compete and play with the best. To bad it doesn't happen nearly as much as I would like. I would love to play and compete against dean tannock but have had very few chances and not had the pleasure yet.

When I was in dipers don't matter, good is good.

I am not upset with what I win usually, I just want to see the best competition play against the best. I do get upset sometimes when I see good players play open, play better than masters players and not get nearly the same. Me, Pete, & Mcgue played better than bob @ KY states but got rewarded less. Oh well I am happy to compete and happy to come out of the fall in good health.

I just played a very mediocore round. Played poor, but stayed out of big trouble. Foured first hole which can be birdied, than just threw some bad shots, survived. Started to get it together at the end. Missed three easy shots in a row which cost me three strokes, than made a long birdie on 18 to end. I survived and still got a good chance to finish well. Wind was rough and messed with me almost the whole round. I would play it than it wouldn't affect my shots, probably 6-8 times this happened.


Znash
Posted: Friday, June 08, 2007 4:57:59 PM

Rank: Regular

Joined: 3/13/2003
Posts: 19
My money is on the masters since where all getting older so watch out I'm coming in 14 years old man! I want my esay money?

I think that we should call the advanced div. open advanced so they can get some of that protected cash.

Ithink we should go back to open or go home that worked in the 80's, RIGHT!!!! back when all the now masters aged players where suppossedly (SP) running all the events.

there are masters aged players that should play masters and then there are some that just take advanage of these players. I could just see what would have happened if i was still playing the adv. div.

bagging is bagging no matter if you meet the requirment of that division.
2Timer
Posted: Friday, June 08, 2007 7:53:53 PM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 3/30/2006
Posts: 372
Location: Ameila, Oh
Hey Bob,

When a guy walks up to the sign up table and is asked what division he is playing and the reply is "is climo here" and the answer is "no" and the guy says "then I'm playing open" then I don't have to read any minds now do I? This was Roger Bunting's conversation with the T.D. at every tourney he played in after he turned MASTER.
STEVO
Posted: Saturday, June 09, 2007 9:04:43 AM
Rank: Veteran

Joined: 3/10/2003
Posts: 228
Dave, the example you bring up about your experience in Florida is an unfortunate aspect of the current multi-division format, and I agree, things shouldn't happen that way. I see enough TD warnings about not changing divisions the day of the tournament to know that this is a problem. But I also believe that there are more sensible and fair ways to modify the system and give everyone most of what they want. The ideas that people bring up on this message board (and the PDGA, for that matter) either don't work, are short-sighted, or are simply punitive and unfair.

--Pro 1, Pro 2 has been tried and doesn't seem to be around much anymore. Isn't that just a different kind of protected division?

--Pro and Go Home; I think Zach was just kidding about really doing that, start reducing divisions and you'll reduce participation, that's a proven fact, look up old attendance records at tourneys.

--Taking all or a vast majority of added money and giving it to the Open division is, in my opinion, patently unfair at this point in the sport's development. At every tournament, when the TD stands up and asks everyone to support the sponsors, who's he talking to? The players themselves. All of us. Open, Masters, Women, and all Amatuer players are expected to help support the sponsors so that they can recoup their investment. How many non-playing spectators and TV viewers are expected to support these sponsors? Few to none at most events. Ball Golf and other major sports' sponsors recoup their investment from television and radio audiences, and from people who watch the games and events live. Those sports are naturally going to pit the best against the best for the entertainment of their audiences. Not so in Disc Golf. Not yet. Until our sport has NON-PLAYING spectators and viewers supporting our sponsors, the Open division is not entitled to anything more than a proportionate share of any added money. I know that the PDGA's philosophy is to funnel added money toward the Open players, well, in my opinion again, they're wrong (although I understand their motives). It can't be working too well if Tannock, Hammock, and others keep playing Masters at the sport's biggest events....Plus, why give all the added money to the Open when Pete and others claim over and over that the two divisions are "comparable"?

My solutions?

--For about the fifth time, INCREASE THE DISPARITY BETWEEN OPEN AND MASTERS ENTRY FEES. See my above post(#9959, pg. 1 of this thread) for all the good things that will come of this. If there is ANY downside, now would be the time to express yourself....

--An idea that has been bandied about on the PDGA message board seems like it would help also: Make players declare their division at the beginning of the year, and compel them to play all year in that division. I'm sure Dean Tannock would think twice about declaring Masters if it meant he had to play in that division for every tourney, even C-Tiers and local events. Exceptions to this could be upward movement, such as AM2 to AM1, AM1 to Pro, even Masters to Open.

--At some point, as exceptional players become older and older, move the Masters age to 50. You could start doing that right away if you "grandfathered" the rule in.

I don't think any of these ideas go against the current PDGA mission statement, and they could be reasonably implemented once voted on.

Feedback???
frizgolf
Posted: Saturday, June 09, 2007 9:15:33 AM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 5/17/2003
Posts: 221
Before I started playing Am last year, when I saw Greenwell, Herbert, or Salaz (or any host of other good players) signed up in Masters, it often meant the difference whether I even played. Knowing there were the higher caliber of players in my division made the decision for me as to whether I wanted to play for third or fourth place money at all.
Straight up ratings-based divisions may alleviate this wavering in divisions. Our sport has grown in leaps and bounds within the last 15 years, from my experience. I can putt. It's the thing that keeps me competitive. It's distance that I'm lacking. (Sure, if I devoted more time to what has been, up to now, merely a pastime on weekends, I could improve that distance by working on technique. As long as I've been playing, I'm still not sure I'd want to make that commitment. It is, after all, still just a pastime with a chance of an elusive cash for me once in a while even in protected pro divisions.) The game has progressed faster than my personal capability to keep up, and that, to me, is the biggest difference between the casual player making tournament-time decisions and the devoted player who is always working on his game.
Until the PDGA requires, say C-tier on up divisions to announce a payout range beforehand, with standards for differing entry fees and which divisions can accept what percentage of added sponsor cash, this type of last minute decision making will continue.
Of course, a ratings-based system would virtually eliminate those requirements. Then we'd have to contend with the shortcomings of determining ratings.
There's no easy answer. Establishing a rating takes many rounds to determine. For the talented newer player, a high rating from fewer rounds may place him higher than his game may actually shake out over repeated play, depending on conditions and type of courses he'll face. Conversely, lower rated rounds early on may mean dominance for the same player when he start seeing courses that favor his game.
I like the suggestion of decidedly higher entry fees for the game's elite. IMO, the PDGA should require a fee structure that adheres to a percentage range. Open should always play for more money. TDs are left to make the decisions in most, if not all cases. It sounds like the issues expressed here are mainly with individual tournaments, and not with the overall disparities or similarities between Open and Masters players.

ETA: As I was typing, I see Steve has hit on similar points.
Rob J
Posted: Sunday, June 10, 2007 8:40:17 AM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 3/1/2003
Posts: 461
Location: Indianapolis
Quote:
STEVO - 6/9/2007 12:04 PM

My solutions?

--For about the fifth time, INCREASE THE DISPARITY BETWEEN OPEN AND MASTERS ENTRY FEES. See my above post(#9959, pg. 1 of this thread) for all the good things that will come of this. If there is ANY downside, now would be the time to express yourself....

Feedback???


Steve, i agree that this is *the* solution, and i don't understand why TD's are not implementing it.
It a simple and effective solution if the goal is to move the best Masters into Open and to prevent Open players
from being discouraged by large payouts for a division that typically does not play at as high a level as Open.

can anyone explain why this hasn't happened? What is so hard about making Masters entry fees (and therefore payouts) 1/2 or less of the cost of Open?
2Timer
Posted: Sunday, June 10, 2007 8:59:54 AM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 3/30/2006
Posts: 372
Location: Ameila, Oh
We have proven just by our CCs that this works when there is more money in the open division. This and ratings I think are the best solutions.
finnhawc
Posted: Sunday, June 10, 2007 10:31:38 AM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 1/16/2007
Posts: 923
Location: Wyoming
For local PDGA events when the entry fee(for Masters) is less any added cash can also be deminished accordingly. My response to Bob's earlier post is set the example for the young ams. If your rating is high enough; move up, to a division that gives the folks in your former division a chance to cash more often. It is knida funny that winning is so important to some that they can accept beating their group by ridiculous amounts; while, they would've come in less than a handful of shots behind a "superior division". Not to be taken personally by any player-it just confounds me, that's all. Blakely is tied for second trailing by 4 after 3 on a course slightly easier than Idlewild
Ben Shooner
Posted: Monday, June 11, 2007 11:08:11 AM

Rank: Veteran

Joined: 9/16/2003
Posts: 248
I don't think this 'problem' will ever go away. The crux of it seems to be that different players have different motivations/priorities when they play. My main motivations for playing in tournaments are the chance to play with people better than me, and to hopefully get better in the process. I'm also paying for the chance to see how I stack up against others. Myself and the other 'Nati Lites moved to Open for the CCS this year for those same reasons...that brings up another point (often cited to defend the Masters) that it's fun to play in a division with players you know and/or are competitive with. The last few PDGAs I've played in, I noticed several masters-eligible guys playing Advanced. I'd imagine that this is due to: a)They realize that they are just as good as the younger guys, b)They may not be competitive in Open Masters, c)They prefer the much larger Adv field to the much smaller Adv Masters. These are all valid points, and I'd imagine everyone takes things like this into consideration when deciding where to play. The great thing is that it doesn't matter-it's a free country and you can play in whatever division, or run your own tournament with your own divisions/payout.
bobherb
Posted: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 2:09:59 PM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 8/10/2004
Posts: 449
It is a PDGA rule.
If you do not like it, try to get it changed.
It was changed in 2000.

It is only a "problem" for a few, vocal, Open players, most if not ALL of who stand to benefit monetarily from older players playing and not winning in the Open division.

When I was playing Open (I won the Open City Championship 4 consecutive years - many years ago) I did not worry about (or question) who played in which division. I would have considered this disrespectful - I guess times have changed for the respectfully worse.
In the same vein, I would never try to dog someone about their decision to play Grandmasters. In fact, I have done just the opposite, on occasion, and tried to talk some 50+ year olds into playing Grandmasters when they were considering playing Masters.

Do we see a so called Grudge match between the Masters and the Grandmasters?
finnhawc
Posted: Tuesday, June 12, 2007 2:36:25 PM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 1/16/2007
Posts: 923
Location: Wyoming
LOL the grudge for me is simply between me and anyone with a rating seventy points higher then mine who is unwilling to play "up" in my division. That vocal enough for ya mate! Seriously though, one of the best disc experience ever for me was playing against the Tasmanian "legend" Leigh Bird who at 50-something can drive and putts like Feldberg. He won the tournament for the umpteenth time in Open. If he played Masters it would've been a twenty+ shot victory. I guess it simply depends on why you play the game love or money or... both.
pcaldwell
Posted: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 7:10:01 PM

Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 2/28/2003
Posts: 288
It's not disrespectful to care about what is best for the sport as a whole.
It's disrespectful to the sport to pretend that your motivation is something other than "what fattens Bob's wallet".
Step outside the greed box, Bob, and try to see how thin your arguments are when the only Fact that matters is your rating. Your rating says you are one of the top players in the region, yet you make excuses to hide in a protected division where you can beat up on your chronologic-compadres and 'respectfully' take their money (usually less, but more guaranteed). Just be honest - it's the money.

There are masters players for whom a separate division could be reasonable justified - certainly NOT PLAYERS WITH 990+ ratings !!!!
2Timer
Posted: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 7:39:12 PM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 3/30/2006
Posts: 372
Location: Ameila, Oh
I couldn't have said it better myself!
2Timer
Posted: Wednesday, June 13, 2007 7:53:58 PM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 3/30/2006
Posts: 372
Location: Ameila, Oh
I copied this from the PDGA website. Craig Gangloff is speaking about the new rule the PDGA has created whereas the older division will be split up in increments of five years at the worlds, but his argument holds true overall!!

The problem (and what has been echoed here by several) is that we feel the need to reward..........EVERYBODY!! This sentiment is prevalent in our divisional structure - if someone feels they can't win (i.e. couched as saying they "can't compete") no worries - the PDGA will create a division so it's easier for you to do so. This is why we have the HUGE amount of overlap between divisions now. Doing this for the senior divisions just highlights the absurdity of our larger scale drubbing of competing for the sake of competing. Organized DG has become a game of how few people can I play against and still be called THE WINNER. what a joke

Craig
Posted: Thursday, June 14, 2007 4:54:10 AM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 10/3/2005
Posts: 240
I don't think it's a problem at the bigger events, with the touring guys there. But the little tourneys maybe shouldn't offer any protective divisions until you get maybe 20+ open participates. I would rather play a NT with 100 guys that are supposed to woop my *ss (Ratings), then win a C-tier with 5 or 6 people in my division. The bigger fields are always fun cause your scores will be competing with someone. Plus if you win it's all the sweeter.

I'm still pushing for the 50 lbs. overweight division.
finnhawc
Posted: Thursday, June 14, 2007 6:34:50 AM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 1/16/2007
Posts: 923
Location: Wyoming
Craig hit the other nail on the head, yes there are these NT and A tier opportunities. What do you see looking at other areas C tiers? Columbus for example: golfers play in tougher divisions(and often cash) giving other locals a chance to taste victory as well. Try thinking of others a little more and see how much THE GAME improves.
Fred Salaz
Posted: Thursday, June 14, 2007 8:46:45 AM
Rank: Expert

Joined: 2/27/2003
Posts: 1,234
This thread is ridiculus, we're playing for peanuts out there and all we want to do is cover expenses and have a good time. Playing with a holes in the open division is not fun. Whiners
finnhawc
Posted: Thursday, June 14, 2007 9:45:13 AM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 1/16/2007
Posts: 923
Location: Wyoming
Actually, this is a discusion board to air diferences of opinion and say things that you don't have the chance to at a tournament because it isn't the place or time. Name calling is silly. Good ideas can come from this forum. Stevo's cut the entry fee idea-as well as moving to a more competitive division at local tourneys. Any other good ideas out there(in a non-whinning voice).
M_Boland
Posted: Thursday, June 14, 2007 10:44:58 AM
Rank: Guest

Joined: 11/19/2007
Posts: -247
When your over 40, you have the option to chose: Masters or Open. The PDGA won't change that so get over it...
NEngle
Posted: Thursday, June 14, 2007 10:59:13 AM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 11/18/2003
Posts: 944
Location: Fairfield, OH
what fred said
bobherb
Posted: Thursday, June 14, 2007 1:25:27 PM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 8/10/2004
Posts: 449

Instead of being so negative by "dogging" players to move "up" (if you want to call it "up"), and saying that they are bad for the game by "participating" in a PDGA endorsed division, try seeing something positive! Is participation good for the game?

Can someone name who has done something good for not only the game but for Open players who are winning more $ in the Course Challenge Series than ever before? Any answers out there from the negative peanut gallery?

I and some other oldsters are trying (without success so far this year) to compete in the Open division in the CCS. Are the top local pros happy and satisfied to see a larger division with greater payout. Apparently not. Many so called nati-lites (I guess I am one of them now) are donating to the CCS Open division this year. 

Ten years or more, from now, maybe some youngsters (who are 12 years old now) will be dogging you to compete and donate to them when you are 50 years old.

 Winning and whining do not go well together.

PLAY AND LET PLAY!!! Try to be happy and have fun watching "your" discs fly.

Thanks Nick!!! I hope you cash this Saturday...

2Timer
Posted: Thursday, June 14, 2007 1:29:26 PM
Rank: Extreme Veteran

Joined: 3/30/2006
Posts: 372
Location: Ameila, Oh
No 50 year olds were dogged or harmed during this discussion. Please someone, let Bob know that this has been about masters aged players who are good enough to play open. Not Grandmasters aged players!!!!!
bobherb
Posted: Thursday, June 14, 2007 2:04:25 PM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 8/10/2004
Posts: 449
Why stop with the masters???

I still have not heard/read answers to the questions asked above...

Fred is right, we are playing for peanuts.
Here is some real cash paid to golfers at a recent, less than "NT" type golf tourney:

http://sports.yahoo.com/golf/pga/leaderboard/2007/25

Still, I appreciate the efforts made to make a difference in our local series.
Thanks (someone?).
finnhawc
Posted: Friday, June 15, 2007 6:58:25 AM

Rank: Elite Veteran

Joined: 1/16/2007
Posts: 923
Location: Wyoming
Is participation good for the game? Yes, and it helps encourage more players to play if their chances of actually winning something is greater. Facilitating this are people with enough gumption move to more competitive divisions, allowing newbies a chance.(As already stated about four times!)Maybe, just maybe, if you look at the KY states results you might notice that if Open and Master were one division that the same players would have cashed from each division and that from 1ST to 6TH the scores are within 4 strokes of each other. ...Remember the Wham-O 119g. that we threw at trees and tone-poles; ah, yes fun can still happen-while growing the sport!
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Main Forum RSS : RSS

YAFPro Theme Created by Jaben Cargman (Tiny Gecko)
Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.1.7 running under DotNetNuke.
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.