Alabama •
Arkansas •
Florida •
Georgia •
Kentucky •
Louisiana •
Mississippi •
Oklahoma •
Tennessee •
Texas
Welcome!
» Log In
» Create A New Profile
Need Feedback - Possible Handbook Additions
Posted by jtolbert
|
Re: Need Feedback - Possible Handbook Additions February 21, 2011 07:14PM |
this is not NEW as many players have done it in the past( even last year)! I have suggested in the past that players fees follow them to the championships. If they have played open 10 times and play in an age protected divison in the SNPC then there money should go with them.
If you need the names feel free to PM me, but again this is NOT new. Maybe new to the new BOD .............
here is an example
Tim Keith
Division(s): Pro Master (0 pts), Pro Open (11 pts)
he finished 4th in masters in the snpc and won 400.................................
plenty more if you need them :)
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2011 07:20PM by Tax Man.
If you need the names feel free to PM me, but again this is NOT new. Maybe new to the new BOD .............
here is an example
Tim Keith
Division(s): Pro Master (0 pts), Pro Open (11 pts)
he finished 4th in masters in the snpc and won 400.................................
plenty more if you need them :)
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/21/2011 07:20PM by Tax Man.
|
Re: Need Feedback - Possible Handbook Additions February 21, 2011 09:00PM |
Side stepping? Not sure why u want to call it that as it is an option afforded to older players. Various reasons as to why they may play different divisons but it is very seldom used as an advantage. And in most cases it is based on attendence . As for tracking the money it is not that difficult to track as only a few players do it. If you are going to allow it then it only makes sense to move there fees with them. Otherwise they take from a divison in which they did not contribute which is not fair to the others.
|
Re: Need Feedback - Possible Handbook Additions February 22, 2011 06:14AM |
Gilligan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It would be asking a lot of the SNC TD's to check
> on every Master/GM/Legends participant to make
> sure all their money went into the proper
> division. You can say it's only a few players but
> again, you are just assuming the TD's will be able
> to be on top of all of that when they have plenty
> of other bigger issues to take care of vs 44 bucks
> not making it to a division over another division.
That is just a lazy mans answer! How about this then, if a player wants to side step he must inform the BOD a month in advance of the SNPC. Then the treasurer will have time to move said funds to the correct divison. It only makes sense otherwise you are allowing players to take from funds they put nothing into and also increasing another. Again it has only happened a few times in the CHAMPIONSHIP$ so it may take all of five minutes.
And if your going to do something, why not do it right?????
-------------------------------------------------------
> It would be asking a lot of the SNC TD's to check
> on every Master/GM/Legends participant to make
> sure all their money went into the proper
> division. You can say it's only a few players but
> again, you are just assuming the TD's will be able
> to be on top of all of that when they have plenty
> of other bigger issues to take care of vs 44 bucks
> not making it to a division over another division.
That is just a lazy mans answer! How about this then, if a player wants to side step he must inform the BOD a month in advance of the SNPC. Then the treasurer will have time to move said funds to the correct divison. It only makes sense otherwise you are allowing players to take from funds they put nothing into and also increasing another. Again it has only happened a few times in the CHAMPIONSHIP$ so it may take all of five minutes.
And if your going to do something, why not do it right?????
|
Re: Need Feedback - Possible Handbook Additions February 22, 2011 08:56AM |
jtolbert Wrote:
------------------------------------------------------
>
> If a player has played in Pro Open and Pro Master,
> but he gets all of his funds transferred to Pro
> Master for the championship, couldn't the Pro Open
> players argue that their money is being taken?
> the money follows the player as is the case in most situations and in this case it should follow the player otherwise he is taking from a divison he put nothing into. As for taking away from open, the said players increased the purse at the local level and that should be enough.
> I think the easiest way to do it would be to just
> require those points in the division. However, in
> all fairness, a few players don't have the luxury
> of playing in their respected division at every
> tournament they attend.
agreed but again money should follow said player to keep it fair for those that did put into the divison.
Like i said earlier it would not be that hard for these players to contact the bod ahead of the event. If not then they should stay put.
------------------------------------------------------
>
> If a player has played in Pro Open and Pro Master,
> but he gets all of his funds transferred to Pro
> Master for the championship, couldn't the Pro Open
> players argue that their money is being taken?
> the money follows the player as is the case in most situations and in this case it should follow the player otherwise he is taking from a divison he put nothing into. As for taking away from open, the said players increased the purse at the local level and that should be enough.
> I think the easiest way to do it would be to just
> require those points in the division. However, in
> all fairness, a few players don't have the luxury
> of playing in their respected division at every
> tournament they attend.
agreed but again money should follow said player to keep it fair for those that did put into the divison.
Like i said earlier it would not be that hard for these players to contact the bod ahead of the event. If not then they should stay put.
|
Re: Need Feedback - Possible Handbook Additions February 22, 2011 09:53AM |
Gilligan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I disagree. Almost every master/GM has played in
> a "higher/younger" division at some point. So
> just about EVERY player will have to have this
> calculation done. At LA Dubs, the GM's played
> with the PM's. At City Park I believe Kernan
> played Open. This happens very frequently and to
> lots of players and not with enough consistency
> for the players to even be assumed responsible for
> moving their money when it comes time.
> I said if they play in the championships there money should follow them.
> If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Isn't that what
> you all cry so often when we make ANY change?
> I aint the one coming on here asking for feedback. so if that is the way of thinking then why are we having this discussion. I agree it is not a problem worth noting in the handbook. I only mention the fees as it is THE players money and should follow them. Especialy if they have no option at the local level. Chris Lasonde always asked the TD of the event to add his money and points to masters. Maybe that is what should be added. If player wants his points in the said divison they must ask at the local level.
> If a person has points they can play, if they play
> Open all year and then play PM or GM at the
> championships it may suck but as Don said... it's
> legal. Ethical? well, that is it's own question
> and I don't like to see it myself but people often
> take whatever deductions they can on their taxes
> as long as it's legal... regardless if they are
> ethical about it or not. Same thing for the most
> part.
>
> I guess the flip side is that guy COULD just play
> PM or GM every tournament and crush the
> competition every time. At least here they are
> only doing it at the SNCs.
-------------------------------------------------------
> I disagree. Almost every master/GM has played in
> a "higher/younger" division at some point. So
> just about EVERY player will have to have this
> calculation done. At LA Dubs, the GM's played
> with the PM's. At City Park I believe Kernan
> played Open. This happens very frequently and to
> lots of players and not with enough consistency
> for the players to even be assumed responsible for
> moving their money when it comes time.
> I said if they play in the championships there money should follow them.
> If it ain't broke, don't fix it. Isn't that what
> you all cry so often when we make ANY change?
> I aint the one coming on here asking for feedback. so if that is the way of thinking then why are we having this discussion. I agree it is not a problem worth noting in the handbook. I only mention the fees as it is THE players money and should follow them. Especialy if they have no option at the local level. Chris Lasonde always asked the TD of the event to add his money and points to masters. Maybe that is what should be added. If player wants his points in the said divison they must ask at the local level.
> If a person has points they can play, if they play
> Open all year and then play PM or GM at the
> championships it may suck but as Don said... it's
> legal. Ethical? well, that is it's own question
> and I don't like to see it myself but people often
> take whatever deductions they can on their taxes
> as long as it's legal... regardless if they are
> ethical about it or not. Same thing for the most
> part.
>
> I guess the flip side is that guy COULD just play
> PM or GM every tournament and crush the
> competition every time. At least here they are
> only doing it at the SNCs.
|
Re: Need Feedback - Possible Handbook Additions February 22, 2011 10:52AM |
I also agree with John on using that option and if all protected age players are made aware of the ability to have points and fees in there desired divison. I am sure they would use this option everytime.
Again Gilly, you will not be changing anything just writing it down. Which it already is in the pDGA manual which is what the series follows :)
Again Gilly, you will not be changing anything just writing it down. Which it already is in the pDGA manual which is what the series follows :)
|
Re: Need Feedback - Possible Handbook Additions February 22, 2011 07:42PM |
Russ3523 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree with Gilligan and John. Don't heap even
> more work on the TDs. If a player changes
> divisions, too bad. Deal with it.
>
> rWc3523
Russ this is not anything new here. Like I said lasonde did it for years. He always asked the td to move his points and fees to the protected divison. And gilly if you have been asked by a lot of people then all you have to say is that it is well with in the rules. Not calling anyone an idiot just stating it is not anything new to dg. But am still curious what sort of actual feedback you all are looking for.
-------------------------------------------------------
> I agree with Gilligan and John. Don't heap even
> more work on the TDs. If a player changes
> divisions, too bad. Deal with it.
>
> rWc3523
Russ this is not anything new here. Like I said lasonde did it for years. He always asked the td to move his points and fees to the protected divison. And gilly if you have been asked by a lot of people then all you have to say is that it is well with in the rules. Not calling anyone an idiot just stating it is not anything new to dg. But am still curious what sort of actual feedback you all are looking for.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
14
Record Number of Users:
19
on January 14, 2013
Record Number of Guests:
244
on February 20, 2013