Alabama   •   Arkansas   •   Florida   •   Georgia   •   Kentucky   •   Louisiana   •   Mississippi   •   Oklahoma   •   Tennessee   •   Texas
Welcome! » Log In » Create A New Profile

Serious Question on Eligibility

Posted by ww 
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 06:51PM
Quote
Gilligan
Why was it changed?

to allow more players into the event since it was/has not ever been full that I know of. it seems like that most of the ams/pros that are attending this year have a point in both open and advanced but, that is not where I have the problem as much as I do with the masters players that have not got a masters point and have played in several events and now want to play masters.

John, I now how you feel but could this be tabeled for a BOD/new meeting? I know it will not be voted/changed before the snpc but, it is one worth discussing since it is a lot of money in various divisons in which a player is not playing.

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 07:56PM
Bob,
JK will not be on the BOD after Sunday. My vote will remain the same as JK's, but I will bring it up when the new BOD meets for the first time.

Josh
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 07:58PM
Quote
Gilligan
I don't see what is wrong with requiring am players to have PRO points to play the snPc?

I think most pros would disagree with you. Those am players are more popularly known as "donaters."

Josh
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 25, 2008 08:39PM
Quote
Hilltopper
Bob,
JK will not be on the BOD after Sunday. My vote will remain the same as JK's, but I will bring it up when the new BOD meets for the first time.

Josh

um, I do not think there was a vote. May I ask why you would not be in favor of adding the money a player has put in during the year to the correct divison? Or enforce they play where they have points.

Thanks for your response.

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 12:03AM
Quote
Hilltopper
I think most pros would disagree with you. Those am players are more popularly known as "donaters."

Josh

I can understand by a pro's perspective but from an objective perspective it allows an Am to play down all year and then for the SNPC step up and compete... I think that if they feel they have a chance at SNPC then they are way past due to step up and play for pro's in regular tournaments. That is only common sense!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SN Top25 Bag Tag database
BRDGA Top10 Bag Tag database
MADGA Top10 Bag Tag database
SFC Top10 Bag Tag database
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 02:10AM
Quote
Hilltopper
Quote
Gilligan
I don't see what is wrong with requiring am players to have PRO points to play the snPc?

I think most pros would disagree with you. Those am players are more popularly known as "donaters."

Josh


or some like Mr.Vo win cash last year the play the SNAC and win and now he is back at the SNPC. No donating there!

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 07:52AM
Quote
Tax Man
um, I do not think there was a vote. May I ask why you would not be in favor of adding the money a player has put in during the year to the correct divison? Or enforce they play where they have points.

Thanks for your response.

Sure.

1. I don't care what division a player plays in as long as they meet the qualifications for that division. I don't care if you have only pro points and want to play ADV, as long as you haven't cashed in 6 months. I don't care if you have am points and want to play in the SNPC, as long as the pros are given enough time to sign up before you get a chance. If there are open slots at the SNPC, why not? It raises the payout.

2. Having the money follow the player would be a logistical nightmare for an already overburdoned SN Treasurer (who works for free) and/or the championship TD (who can skim $500 off the top if he is so inclined).

Josh
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 08:08AM
Great Josh! I agree with the pro points being able to play advanced.


As for being a nightmare, it has been suggested that JK get paid a little something for his efforts. I still think there is a program out there to assit with this. It took me only about 20 minutes to figure out the masters and where there money should go. Otherwise certain divisons are getting more then they deserve based on what a player has paid into but, not playing in the championship.

Thanks for considering it!!!!

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 08:48AM
I would like to see free entry for the SN Treasurer in any SN event that person wishes to play in(except the Championships). NO ENTRY FEES WHATSOEVER. For someone who does the buttload of the work for NADA, JK for now, should recieve something for his efforts. I propose that he/she, the SN treasurer, get to play for free wherever he goes whenever he gets there. No salary per say but an open invite to play anywhere anytime...an automatic incentive. Just a thought.

JABBA


it MUST be the plastic
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 12:34PM
JK has been offered a stipend by the BOD in the past and has turned it down.

Josh
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 05:12PM
Quote
Hilltopper
Quote
Tax Man
um, I do not think there was a vote. May I ask why you would not be in favor of adding the money a player has put in during the year to the correct divison? Or enforce they play where they have points.

Thanks for your response.

Sure.

1. I don't care what division a player plays in as long as they meet the qualifications for that division. I don't care if you have only pro points and want to play ADV, as long as you haven't cashed in 6 months. I don't care if you have am points and want to play in the SNPC, as long as the pros are given enough time to sign up before you get a chance. If there are open slots at the SNPC, why not? It raises the payout.

2. Having the money follow the player would be a logistical nightmare for an already overburdoned SN Treasurer (who works for free) and/or the championship TD (who can skim $500 off the top if he is so inclined).

Josh

The Am and Pro money should be given lump sum to their respective championship tournaments and allocated to the purses either per head or pro rata based on the respective entry fee. The more burden you put on the SNDG Treasurer and potential Championship TD's the less likely someone is going to step up to an unpaid second job.

At our big tournaments in Memphis we have 12 divisions. If you are computer literate and can develop your own spreadsheet programs it would just be an aggravation trying to keep the SNDG divisional funds allocated correctly. If not, then it would truly be a nightmare, prone to mistakes and open the floodgates of forum criticism from those who thought they were slighted.

Keep it simple.

Gary Wagoner
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 05:48PM
I just don't get what is so hard.

Example Will Timmons signs up for masters in the SNPC he has played 19 masters events and 13 open events so he should have 64 added to the masters purse.

now there are some masters players that have played 4 divisons. But if they sign up for masters in the SNPC then add up there total events and apply it where they play.

I am sure there is some one out there that could make a program for this or at the end of the season there is time to figure this out before the snac and snpc.
Or it can stay the same way and the BOD will allow players to play in divisons in which they have not contributed and allow there money to end up elsewhere.

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 06:21PM
Bob,, what if a player has played 10 tournaments in ADV and attends the SNAC(two weeks prior to the SNPC). But this same person has played OPEN 2 times without cashing,, he then goes to the SNPC. Where does HIS money go?

Terry Zeringue
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 06:40PM
Here's the other thing Bob, let's face it, disc golfers have a tendency to procrastinate. How many players signed up on Friday before the SNAC? As a TD you need to be prepared ahead of time with a payout plan. I wouldn't want to stay up all night crunching the numbers on a hundred some odd players.

Josh
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 06:45PM
Quote
Gary Wagoner
At our big tournaments in Memphis we have 12 divisions. If you are computer literate and can develop your own spreadsheet programs it would just be an aggravation trying to keep the SNDG divisional funds allocated correctly. If not, then it would truly be a nightmare, prone to mistakes and open the floodgates of forum criticism from those who thought they were slighted.

Keep it simple.

Gary Wagoner

I agree. There should be only 4 SNAC divisions, 5 SNPC, and 8 SNDC divisions. Maybe one more SNAC and SNDC for the juniors. We had 3 SNAC divisions with 3 players or less.

Josh
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 06:46PM
20 to advanced and 4 to open as that is what already is in place. The more you put it like that the more it makes more sense.

I suppose I was thinking of the masters players that have not put in but are now signed up for masters. If it is known ahead of time it is not that hard but if they are waiting till friday then they should have to pay and extra 20;o]~

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 07:02PM
but i will not argue with you about needing points to play in the division you want to play in.

Terry Zeringue
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
August 26, 2008 07:57PM
Quote
TheZinger
but i will not argue with you about needing points to play in the division you want to play in.

That is something that may need a bit of tweaking.

I will start with if an am plays the SNPC and cashes they must stay there for a year and not have the priviledge that Mr Vo is getting.{sorry CV}


An am playing in the snpc must make the choice wether to take the cash and sit out an entire year or take prizes.

A Master or GM must have a point in that divison as well. Not playing open and then asking for some pizza when you did not chip in.

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
September 04, 2008 12:46PM
Eligibility issues were not discussed at yesterday's meeting due to there being only 3 members present. I will bring these issues up at the next meeting.

Josh
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
September 04, 2008 02:17PM
You will notice that anothe player brought up the issue after the SNPC on that thread! Thanks for the consideration.

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
September 05, 2008 10:24PM
Here are some thoughts on the Professional Age Protected Divisions:
I know sometimes there are not enough players to create an age protected division and in most cases the player moves "up". At the last Mississippi States I wanted to play GrandMaster (my regular division for years) there were none; there were also no Masters, so I ended up playing Open. I ended up in last place in the Open Division (gee I thought I would do better).

So my money went to the open division and my points were listed in the open division.

There have also been times when a Masters Division is fielded but not a Grandmaster and then I play "up" in Masters.

The rest of the year I play where I belong and have played for a very long time: the GrandMaster Division.

When you look at my player stats I have very few points (2 for showing up) in Open, I have a few more in Masters because I may not have come in last, and I have many points in GrandMasters.

I only played in the other divisions because GrandMasters and/or Masters did not have enough players to field a division, so in a sense, if I wanted to play, I had to play "up".

The Open division is offered at every tournament. There are numerous players who play all year in the Open division (because they can compete, no matter what their age); then play "down" in one of the age protected divisions at the SNPC. Or they play "down" a division at a local tournament based on who shows up and how big the pot is.

This should not be allowed.

An easy fix would be to look at the accumulated points in each division at the end of the year and not allow a player to play "down". Of course if they want to challenge themselves and play "up" ( a GrandMaster to Master/Open, or a Master to Open) I say "go for it Kemo Sabe".

So no matter how many divisions you played in for whatever reason, you should play in the division you had the most points in and not be allowed to play "down".

Now for the Ams: I definitely agree with Tax Man about his statement concering a player who cashed in the SNPC, then did not cash or did not accept cash for the required six months and then was allowed to play in the SNAC. This is ridiculus, espcially if the player is not of age to play in an age protected divsion, where there may be an expectation of decline due to advanced age.

No one should ever be allowd to play "down". If you cash in Pro, then guess what Einstien, you are a Pro.

I believe the six month rule is more effective for those who think they are Pro, move "up" too soon and quickly realize they are only a legend in their own mind. Then they move back "down" to Ams and try again at a later date. It is not there for people to take advantage of.

The SN BOD needs to seriously address this matter.

Dangerous Don
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
September 07, 2008 06:50AM
not only that the no good won the snac and then got a free entry into the SNPC and then finished 20th and won more cash. I think his new name should be farmer VO as he milked the system to its fullest!

Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
September 07, 2008 08:11PM
only problem with that don, is your now encouraging them to play "down" all year, when they could be playing open where they belong

sure, they may be playing "down" at the championships, but doesn't that beat playing "down" at the other 10 or so tournaments they might have played open at?

others may view it differently, but it just looks to me like they are doing everybody a favor for playing "up" all year, then playing where they belong come championship time
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
September 07, 2008 08:41PM
Yes unfortunately it goes both ways, the only thing to do is go out and do your best. Play the course and not the other players.

Dangerous Don
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
September 07, 2008 11:48PM
They play up because they think they have a chance at the bigger cash at smaller events... they won't play down just for the championships.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


SN Top25 Bag Tag database
BRDGA Top10 Bag Tag database
MADGA Top10 Bag Tag database
SFC Top10 Bag Tag database
Re: Serious Question on Eligibility
September 08, 2008 08:26AM
Quote
Gilligan
They play up because they think they have a chance at the bigger cash at smaller events... they won't play down just for the championships.

Bingo!!!! and to have not contributed to the purse in the masters field all year!!!

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 20
Record Number of Users: 19 on January 14, 2013
Record Number of Guests: 244 on February 20, 2013