Order of Finish vs. Random Drawing Prize Tables

[PhilTerry]

The prize table issue is very much a USPSA "thing".

I have been shooting IPSC across Europe for the past eight years or so. Any product donations, of which there are few, are by random drawing. I still see Eric and other major shooters at all the matches.

[Tanders]

18 minutes ago, PhilTerry said:

The prize table issue is very much a USPSA "thing".

I have been shooting IPSC across Europe for the past eight years or so. Any product donations, of which there are few, are by random drawing. I still see Eric and other major shooters at all the matches.

How do the top IPSC guys make money?  It seems like they are full-time athletes.  Is it industry sponsorships?

[TonytheTiger]

12 hours ago, RJH said:

 

Another serious question, do you think it is ok in other sports to recognize different levels of talent?  Take baseball for example, there are several different farm leagues, aaa, major, etc., where like talent levels play against each other.  Does saying classes are dumb mean the same as saying if you can't make it in the majors, stay at home?  

 

On the 3 gun prize table, I have seen them where everyone who shot ended up with at least 75-100 dollars of stuff, but it seems that has gone the way of the dodo a little bit, and there are just not as many big 3 gun matches in this area and i think the lack of prize table correlates with it

The shooting sports we're talking about don't have different leagues, the sport isn't big enough to support it. There aren't little leagues, high school teams, college teams or scholarships, or professional paid athletes making bank on TV. There is literally only one stage that we all play on, and the bar of entry is the same for everyone. Pay the match fee, show up, and execute to the best of your ability. 

 

If you aren't any good but still want to go to a major, go for it. The more the merrier and I have a great time squadding with people of all different skill levels. But don't expect to get something in return for being the best of the worst shooters.

 

Again, I have no idea how far back prize tables go, but if they went back 150 places and I got 149th I would feel guilty about getting a prize.

[RJH]

30 minutes ago, Tanders said:

 

In every sport or game there are people who will obsess about it and train constantly in order to be the best if it is financially feasible for them to do so (to be clear, I am not one of these people).  Right now that group only consists of competitors with a full-time job at some sort of firearms brand (Glock, Sig, etc.).  It would be cool if the culture in USPSA started to shift toward providing more material reward to those who are training a lot, thereby enabling them to free up more time and resources for skill development.  I would love to see USPSA evolve into an actual sport with more full-time athletes who don't need day jobs for support; this increases the exposure of practical shooting and encourages growth.  Giving away sponsor-donated prizes to top finishers won't accomplish this, but it would be a step in the right direction.  Am I making sense?

 

 

The problem is that this actually doesn't make sense, basically ALL other sports/competitions have pro and amature divisions. Pros pay more and win more. In doing so they take nothing from the amature divisions. This goes for golf, chess, trap, football, archery, etc.

 

 

If you notice in this thread, i have mentioned going winner take all or having  a pro/am format. The same guys wanting prize tables in order if finish, don't seem to like either of these ideas. Truly order of finish is, "if you ain't first you are last."  But the same guys that harp about "participation awards" dang sure seem to want their award for  not winning,  i.e. a participation award, seems a little hypocritical to me.

 

Oh yeah, and anyone who thinks that everyone has tha same oppurtunity to win is pretty full of it. It is about the same as grabbing some guys from a local basketball team and expecting them to beat an nba team, cause we all have the same ball and are on the same court, right?

[PhilTerry]

18 minutes ago, Tanders said:

How do the top IPSC guys make money?  It seems like they are full-time athletes.  Is it industry sponsorships?

Eric runs classes and has just picked-up a major deal from CZ to finance his facility in Normandy.

[RJH]

12 minutes ago, TonytheTiger said:

The shooting sports we're talking about don't have different leagues, the sport isn't big enough to support it. There aren't little leagues, high school teams, college teams or scholarships, or professional paid athletes making bank on TV. There is literally only one stage that we all play on, and the bar of entry is the same for everyone. Pay the match fee, show up, and execute to the best of your ability. 

 

If you aren't any good but still want to go to a major, go for it. The more the merrier and I have a great time squadding with people of all different skill levels. But don't expect to get something in return for being the best of the worst shooters.

 

Again, I have no idea how far back prize tables go, but if they went back 150 places and I got 149th I would feel guilty about getting a prize.

 

Actually trap, high power rifle, archery,  all have classes or pro am type events, probably some others too. I personally think a pro am style would be the way to go. 

 

Pros would pay more to shoot and win more,  amatures would do the amature thing. But it seem some shooters would rather scalp off the lower classes, rather than have a true oppurtunity to make more money and and compete only at the highest levels.  

 

What do you think about winner take  all? Isn't anything other than first a participation trophy?

[IHAVEGAS]

39 minutes ago, PhilTerry said:

The prize table issue is very much a USPSA "thing".

I have been shooting IPSC across Europe for the past eight years or so. Any product donations, of which there are few, are by random drawing. I still see Eric and other major shooters at all the matches.

 

No fiscal rewards for shooting is also the one rule that I think IDPA got right. Keep it fun and friendly. 

 

Not sure how the trap and skeet shooters do things, some of that is pretty big time, not to mention the olympics. 

 

[louu]

11 hours ago, Tanders said:

 

The people who place well have almost always sunk more time and resources into developing skill compared to those who don't practice and are just there to hang out with their friends and have fun (nothing wrong with that).  It would be nice for the people who have invested more into mastering this sport (activity?) to get something that offsets their considerable expenses.  Sure, everyone pays the same match fee, but there is a LOT more expense besides match fees that is necessary to win a major.  If someone isn't willing or able to prioritize shooting enough to meet these time and financial commitments (I fall into this category), that is COMPLETELY understandable; however, they have no business feeling entitled to a shot at winning something valuable that would recoup investments which they have not made.  To be honest, I really like Sanders' idea of writing checks to division winners.

 

I have heard many people say that the sport is built on the intermediate-classed guys who make up the vast majority of the membership.  I'm not sure how true that is and here's why: the reason why this sport grows is because people see some super-GM burning down a stage on YouTube and they think, "I wanna do THAT!"  It doesn't grow because someone stumbled upon a B- or C-class shooter's hatcam footage on Instagram (not knocking B- and C-class, everyone who's any good started out there).  Skill looks really freakin' cool.  If we tangibly reward skill, it draws even more skill (or encourages people to develop skill).  This in turn raises the profile of the sport and attracts new members.  If we continue to randomly distribute anything of value in the majority of major matches, I don't see how practical shooting is ever going to be anything more than a hobby for the vast majority of its participants since there's no financial incentive to invest the considerable time and money necessary to excel.  Creating an enviroment in which skill is rewarded would go a lot further toward growing the sport than raffling off a few guns before the awards ceremony.

 

Holy crap, that was longer than I planned!  I don't think I'm going to change anybody's mind, but I enjoyed having the opportunity to hear other people's thoughts and express my own.  Really glad I started the thread.

Quoted for truth! 

 

Entitled is a key word in this post, oh how I hate that word/mentality. 

 

I'm not to sure how true the part about what class of shooter people see on YouTube to get them to want to try it but either way the come and goers will be just that no matter if they win a custom gun through random draw or a pack of stickers. Nothing sucks more that when the guy that it's his first match wins the best prize through random draw and never comes to a match again. 

[RJH]

4 minutes ago, louu said:

Quoted for truth! 

 

Entitled is a key word in this post, oh how I hate that word/mentality. 

 

I'm not to sure how true the part about what class of shooter people see on YouTube to get them to want to try it but either way the come and goers will be just that no matter if they win a custom gun through random draw or a pack of stickers. Nothing sucks more that when the guy that it's his first match wins the best prize through random draw and never comes to a match again. 

 

So are you ok with winner take all, or a pro am format?

Edited July 5, 2019 by RJH

[CHA-LEE]

WOW!!!! This thread has gone on for a while and spun off in several different directions.

 

Here is how I see it as a Match Director. I need to produce a "Product" that caters to the masses while also rewarding competitors performance. Every "Product" has its own unique signature in how they do things to differentiate it from other products. There is not a perfect answer or one size fits all solution for how a Prize Table should be deployed. How that should be handled is 100% up to what customer base the match is targeting to attract. As with any free marketplace its up to the match staff to make the best decisions given the resources made available to them. Its very easy for someone who is completely disengaged from all of the finite details associated with running a match to make generalized recommendations that wouldn't make much sense if they actually knew all of the details.

 

When I have match customers ask me why my match was run in a certain way vs another I do my best to explain all of the pro's and con's of the situation so they can fully understand why I made the decisions I did. I also do my best to get my customers involved in major decisions that affect everyone as a whole. A good example of this is something as simple as the base color of the match shirts that all competitors get with their entry. Instead of me picking a color, I poll the registered competitors to vote for their preferred shirt color, show them the voting results, then go with whatever color the masses picked regardless of my preference. This may seem like a very basic decision to make when hosting a major match, but allowing the competitors to be involved in that decision process gives them more value, understanding and accountability once its all said and done. Doing this completely eliminates the questions of "What is the shirt color going to be?" or "Why was that color chosen?". It also gives the match director additional opportunities to pitch the sponsors who chose to take on the expense of the shirts. Win, Win for everyone.

 

From a recognition perspective I firmly believe that match performance should be recognized when it is due. Recognition can come in many forms or levels such as prizes, trophies or payouts. Once again, the specific recognition used comes down to the customer base you are catering to and the budget you have to work with. The easiest recognition that everyone agrees on is to recognize the winners (Overall Division, Classification, Category, etc). How much depth of recognition after the winners is where the waters get really muddy and vary quite a bit from match to match. This is where peoples opinions come into play based on their preferences, skill set, or purpose while attending. The USPSA rules define the minimum recognition level required for different match levels. I am yet to see any major match not adhere to these minimum recognition rules which is a good thing. But I also believe that a lot of Match Directors don't put much thought into the recognition depth beyond those minimum requirements, which isn't sufficient once a match gets to a certain level of attendance. I will use myself as an example, I exclusively shoot Limited Division and have a GM classification. I have lost count of how many times I have finished 2nd or 3rd overall in Limited at a level 2 or 3 match, with 100+ competitors in the division, and gotten ZERO recognition. To me, finishing in the top 3 overall, regardless of classification, in a highly attended division is a significant achievement that should be recognized. The more attended the division the deeper that recognition should go simply because the overall finish performance becomes that much more of an achievement. Here is another example of inadequate depth of recognition that I experienced. In 2017 I finished 10th overall in Limited division at the USPSA Nationals. The Limited Division at that Nationals that year had 254 competitors. USPSA chose to use their own "Minimum Recognition Requirements" and got ZERO recognition. In prior years they used to recognize the Top 16 overall finishers. Why they chose to abandon the "Top 16" overall recognition is beyond my comprehension. Especially when you consider the the product vs value perspective. When I finished 10th overall in Limited that was a significant achievement that many people besides myself recognized. I lost count of how many times people would say "You finished 10th in the Nation!!! That is awesome!!! What did you win for that achievement?" then reality is exposed and my truthful answer is "NOTHING. Not a trophy or even a finish position mention during the awards ceremony". The puzzled and confused looks or comments from people after saying that says it all. Why would the "Biggest" match of the year have the poorest depth of recognition? Only USPSA knows the answer to that as we could start a whole new multi page thread on that topic. 

 

For the major matches I run, I ensure that the appropriate level of overall performance finish within each division is recognized because I feel that it IS an important achievement to recognize. Does it cost me a few extra bucks in trophies? Sure. But that extra expense is nothing vs the whole budget of the match. The whole purpose to a Match is to determine the finishing order based on competitors performance. Yes we obviously need to recognize the winners, but we also need to make sure that an appropriate depth in recognition is accounted for to recognize the rest of the field that produced a solid performance. The USPSA Rules define the MINIMUM awards recognition, there is nothing stopping match directors from increasing those minimums as needed to reward match performance appropriately.   

 

 

[motosapiens]

2 hours ago, Tanders said:

 

In every sport or game there are people who will obsess about it and train constantly in order to be the best if it is financially feasible for them to do so (to be clear, I am not one of these people).  Right now that group only consists of competitors with a full-time job at some sort of firearms brand (Glock, Sig, etc.).  It would be cool if the culture in USPSA started to shift toward providing more material reward to those who are training a lot, thereby enabling them to free up more time and resources for skill development.  I would love to see USPSA evolve into an actual sport with more full-time athletes who don't need day jobs for support; this increases the exposure of practical shooting and encourages growth.  Giving away sponsor-donated prizes to top finishers won't accomplish this, but it would be a step in the right direction.  Am I making sense?

 

I understand what you are saying, and I appreciate the effort you have taken to elaborate and clarify, I just don't really agree. I don't think donated merchandise has anything to do with how many people can make a living at shooting. And I'm not ready to endorse your argument that having more professionals in the sport would be cool, or better for me in any way.

 

fwiw, this same sort of discussion has takes place in dirtbike racing and mountain bike racing. Both of those sports support legions of full-time professionals even tho they most often do a random draw for donated merchandise. I strongly suspect the number of professionals a sport can support has more to do with the number of amateurs that are buying products, entering matches, watching on TV and otherwise paying the bills than it does with giving yet another range bag to the guy that wins his division at a section match.

 

Echoing cha-lee's post above, I agree that it is important to recognize (not with donated merchandise, but with trophies and/or ceremony) top finishers beyond the overall winner. Top 5 or 10 in a major division at an area match is a big deal. Top 16 at nationals is a YUUUUGE deal.  

Edited July 5, 2019 by motosapiens

[Tanders]

21 minutes ago, CHA-LEE said:

WOW!!!! This thread has gone on for a while and spun off in several different directions.

 

Here is how I see it as a Match Director. I need to produce a "Product" that caters to the masses while also rewarding competitors performance. Every "Product" has its own unique signature in how they do things to differentiate it from other products. There is not a perfect answer or one size fits all solution for how a Prize Table should be deployed. How that should be handled is 100% up to what customer base the match is targeting to attract. As with any free marketplace its up to the match staff to make the best decisions given the resources made available to them. Its very easy for someone who is completely disengaged from all of the finite details associated with running a match to make generalized recommendations that wouldn't make much sense if they actually knew all of the details.

 

When I have match customers ask me why my match was run in a certain way vs another I do my best to explain all of the pro's and con's of the situation so they can fully understand why I made the decisions I did. I also do my best to get my customers involved in major decisions that affect everyone as a whole. A good example of this is something as simple as the base color of the match shirts that all competitors get with their entry. Instead of me picking a color, I poll the registered competitors to vote for their preferred shirt color, show them the voting results, then go with whatever color the masses picked regardless of my preference. This may seem like a very basic decision to make when hosting a major match, but allowing the competitors to be involved in that decision process gives them more value, understanding and accountability once its all said and done. Doing this completely eliminates the questions of "What is the shirt color going to be?" or "Why was that color chosen?". It also gives the match director additional opportunities to pitch the sponsors who chose to take on the expense of the shirts. Win, Win for everyone.

 

From a recognition perspective I firmly believe that match performance should be recognized when it is due. Recognition can come in many forms or levels such as prizes, trophies or payouts. Once again, the specific recognition used comes down to the customer base you are catering to and the budget you have to work with. The easiest recognition that everyone agrees on is to recognize the winners (Overall Division, Classification, Category, etc). How much depth of recognition after the winners is where the waters get really muddy and vary quite a bit from match to match. This is where peoples opinions come into play based on their preferences, skill set, or purpose while attending. The USPSA rules define the minimum recognition level required for different match levels. I am yet to see any major match not adhere to these minimum recognition rules which is a good thing. But I also believe that a lot of Match Directors don't put much thought into the recognition depth beyond those minimum requirements, which isn't sufficient once a match gets to a certain level of attendance. I will use myself as an example, I exclusively shoot Limited Division and have a GM classification. I have lost count of how many times I have finished 2nd or 3rd overall in Limited at a level 2 or 3 match, with 100+ competitors in the division, and gotten ZERO recognition. To me, finishing in the top 3 overall, regardless of classification, in a highly attended division is a significant achievement that should be recognized. The more attended the division the deeper that recognition should go simply because the overall finish performance becomes that much more of an achievement. Here is another example of inadequate depth of recognition that I experienced. In 2017 I finished 10th overall in Limited division at the USPSA Nationals. The Limited Division at that Nationals that year had 254 competitors. USPSA chose to use their own "Minimum Recognition Requirements" and got ZERO recognition. In prior years they used to recognize the Top 16 overall finishers. Why they chose to abandon the "Top 16" overall recognition is beyond my comprehension. Especially when you consider the the product vs value perspective. When I finished 10th overall in Limited that was a significant achievement that many people besides myself recognized. I lost count of how many times people would say "You finished 10th in the Nation!!! That is awesome!!! What did you win for that achievement?" then reality is exposed and my truthful answer is "NOTHING. Not a trophy or even a finish position mention during the awards ceremony". The puzzled and confused looks or comments from people after saying that says it all. Why would the "Biggest" match of the year have the poorest depth of recognition? Only USPSA knows the answer to that as we could start a whole new multi page thread on that topic. 

 

For the major matches I run, I ensure that the appropriate level of overall performance finish within each division is recognized because I feel that it IS an important achievement to recognize. Does it cost me a few extra bucks in trophies? Sure. But that extra expense is nothing vs the whole budget of the match. The whole purpose to a Match is to determine the finishing order based on competitors performance. Yes we obviously need to recognize the winners, but we also need to make sure that an appropriate depth in recognition is accounted for to recognize the rest of the field that produced a solid performance. The USPSA Rules define the MINIMUM awards recognition, there is nothing stopping match directors from increasing those minimums as needed to reward match performance appropriately.   

 

 

This was an extremely articulate post.  What match is it that you direct?  I definitely sounds like it would be worth a fair bit of travel given the amount of consideration you seem to put into it.

[CHA-LEE]

I have hosted several different ones in the past. Next year I will be hosting the Mile High Showdown in Colorado. Haven't gotten to the official announcement of that match yet, but I am already thinking about it and getting stuff wrangled.

[Tanders]

1 hour ago, RJH said:

The problem is that this actually doesn't make sense, basically ALL other sports/competitions have pro and amature divisions. Pros pay more and win more. In doing so they take nothing from the amature divisions. This goes for golf, chess, trap, football, archery, etc.

 

 

If you notice in this thread, i have mentioned going winner take all or having  a pro/am format. The same guys wanting prize tables in order if finish, don't seem to like either of these ideas. Truly order of finish is, "if you ain't first you are last."  But the same guys that harp about "participation awards" dang sure seem to want their award for  not winning,  i.e. a participation award, seems a little hypocritical to me.

 

Oh yeah, and anyone who thinks that everyone has tha same oppurtunity to win is pretty full of it. It is about the same as grabbing some guys from a local basketball team and expecting them to beat an nba team, cause we all have the same ball and are on the same court, right?

 

I finally see the point that you've been trying to get across.  Sorry I've been a little slow on the uptake.  You are saying that it is unfair to group the weekenders who take part in USPSA for fun with the true professionals who make a living either teaching shooting classes or working for a factory team.  That is absolutely true and I 100% agree with you; lower-classed shooters should not be fed to super-GMs at major matches so that the latter can make a living off of the former's entry fees.

 

You also mentioned the introduction of a pro/am format with a winner-take-all prize structure for the pro divisions.  I would be fine with this and would have no problem at all paying an elevated match fee to get spanked by the big boys just so I can see how I measure up (in fact, I would love that).  However, USPSA already has something of a pro/am format in place: we have club matches and major matches.  Club matches provide an excellent environment for people to experience shooting competitions without a major time or financial commitment.  No one is forcing lower-classed shooters to shoot major matches.  If an amateur is entering a major match, it should be because the match quality is better and because they want to see how they stack up shooting against a deeper talent pool; they should not be entering because they think they will have a chance to walk away with a gun out of a random drawing.  If I entered the PGA US Open, I wouldn't be expecting to win anything.  I would be expecting to get my teeth kicked in, but have a blast knowing that I was competing with the pros.  By contrast, the winner of the US Open should be expecting to get something for the time and effort that he put in which enabled him to have his way with everyone else who entered the match.  Level III matches should be the pro division of our sport, but too often they seem a bit like glorified club matches or sectionals with steep entry fees.  I would like Level IIIs to be a bigger deal and the easiest way I can think of to accomplish this would be to incentivize more entries from talented shooters even if it comes at the cost of lower overall match attendance.  Based on the responses I have gotten in this thread, this view isn't likely to get me elected USPSA President.    Oh, well.

[TonytheTiger]

3 hours ago, RJH said:

 

Actually trap, high power rifle, archery,  all have classes or pro am type events, probably some others too. I personally think a pro am style would be the way to go. 

 

Pros would pay more to shoot and win more,  amatures would do the amature thing. But it seem some shooters would rather scalp off the lower classes, rather than have a true oppurtunity to make more money and and compete only at the highest levels.  

 

What do you think about winner take  all? Isn't anything other than first a participation trophy?

Trap, High Power and Archery aren't what we are discussing. I'd be willing to bet they have considerably higher participation numbers than our action shooting sports too. But most importantly I couldn't possibly care less what they do because those sports are akin to listening to paint dry on the radio. I've tried trap and all I can remember about it was how stupid the handicap system was. Whats the point in being good if the worst shooter ever has a better day than average and beats you?

 

I still can't wrap my head around how a skilled shooter is being subsidized by the other 90% if all the prizes are donated. Everyone pays the same and everyone shoots the same match. The staff puts in the same effort for every shooter regardless of skill. As much time and money as it takes to become a skilled shooter its not like they're coming close to breaking even when they get the best prize on the table and sell it on monday.

 

I'm fine with the traditional top 3 guys in a division getting podium recognition, everyone else can go home and practice more if they actually want it bad enough. It gets a bit silly with a division like Heavy Irons were there's 9 people and the division winner got 180th overall but whatever...

 

Edit: having read CHA-LEE's post above and given it some thought, I'm fine with recognition going a bit further down than top 3 if the division is stacked deep with the best of the best. Still think class recognition is stupid.

Edited July 5, 2019 by TonytheTiger

[RJH]

1 hour ago, TonytheTiger said:

Trap, High Power and Archery aren't what we are discussing. I'd be willing to bet they have considerably higher participation numbers than our action shooting sports too. But most importantly I couldn't possibly care less what they do because those sports are akin to listening to paint dry on the radio. I've tried trap and all I can remember about it was how stupid the handicap system was. Whats the point in being good if the worst shooter ever has a better day than average and beats you?

 

I still can't wrap my head around how a skilled shooter is being subsidized by the other 90% if all the prizes are donated. Everyone pays the same and everyone shoots the same match. The staff puts in the same effort for every shooter regardless of skill. As much time and money as it takes to become a skilled shooter its not like they're coming close to breaking even when they get the best prize on the table and sell it on monday.

 

I'm fine with the traditional top 3 guys in a division getting podium recognition, everyone else can go home and practice more if they actually want it bad enough. It gets a bit silly with a division like Heavy Irons were there's 9 people and the division winner got 180th overall but whatever...

 

Edit: having read CHA-LEE's post above and given it some thought, I'm fine with recognition going a bit further down than top 3 if the division is stacked deep with the best of the best. Still think class recognition is stupid.

 

 

Trap archery, etc, is worth discussing because those sports have huge payouts and maybe USPSA could learn something from them.  Or we could sit around an argue over a donated prize, because we are too stupid to look around and use ideas from other places to better our sport.

 

Since when is it the other %90 of shooters responsibility to subsidize the top 3 or 5 shooters?  Everyone who is a GM knows how prizes are awarded at most majors when they started on the path to GMness.  Everyone does pay the same, and since USPSA doesn't do something like a pro am then random draw for the %90 of participants who have no chance of winning helps to keep them coming back.  If A-D shooters didn't show at majors, no one would put on majors....

 

Why didn't you answer the winner take all question?  2nd place getting a prize is still a participation trophy, cause 2nd place really didn't win anything.  

 

Also have you ever gotten a prize at a match for any place other than 1st,?  If so did you give it to the guy who finished ahead of you because he deserved it more, or did you keep that participation prize?

[TonytheTiger]

16 minutes ago, RJH said:

Since when is it the other %90 of shooters responsibility to subsidize the top 3 or 5 shooters? 

I still don't understand this. The top 3 guys pay $200 and shoot 12 stages. The bottom 180 guys pay $200 and shoot 12 stages. Match staff works to get 183 shooters through and thats all there is to it.

[TonytheTiger]

24 minutes ago, RJH said:

Why didn't you answer the winner take all question?  2nd place getting a prize is still a participation trophy, cause 2nd place really didn't win anything.  

 

Also have you ever gotten a prize at a match for any place other than 1st,?  If so did you give it to the guy who finished ahead of you because he deserved it more, or did you keep that participation prize?

If there is only one prize on the table then yes, it goes to HOA. If there's 10 then it goes down a little further.  If there's 15 prizes and I place 16th then I get exactly what I earned and thats fine. The guy in 15th deserved it more than I. Why are you working so hard to get me to say I think everyone needs a prize?

Edited July 5, 2019 by TonytheTiger

[Joe4d]

Actually no,, the match expenses were about $100,,, 80% were taxed the second hundred, so a handful of sweety pies could get bigger prizes... 
Um yep no thanks.

[RJH]

10 minutes ago, TonytheTiger said:

I still don't understand this. The top 3 guys pay $200 and shoot 12 stages. The bottom 180 guys pay $200 and shoot 12 stages. Match staff works to get 183 shooters through and thats all there is to it.

 

2 minutes ago, Joe4d said:

Actually no,, the match expenses were about $100,,, 80% were taxed the second hundred, so a handful of sweety pies could get bigger prizes... 
Um yep no thanks.

 

This 

 

And don't think just cause Dillon gifted a 550 that it is not worth anything, if it wasn't we wouldn't be having this conversation

[RJH]

8 minutes ago, TonytheTiger said:

If there is only one prize on the table then yes, it goes to HOA. If there's 10 then it goes down a little further.  If there's 15 prizes and I place 16th then I get exactly what I earned and thats fine. The guy in 15th deserved it more than I. Why are you working so hard to get me to say I think everyone needs a prize?

 

So, you are OK with participation awards, glad you finally admitted it

[IHAVEGAS]

2 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

So, you are OK with participation awards, glad you finally admitted it

 

Winner take all or else you are saying you can be a little bit pregnant? It is an interesting philosophical question. 

[TonytheTiger]

If there are no prizes I'm fine with it too. What are you fishing for? 

[TonytheTiger]

12 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

So, you are OK with participation awards, glad you finally admitted it

Im okay with performance awards, and only to a certain point. Not the same as participation awards. 

Are you perhaps not a very good shooter and you're very bitter about it? Because thats how you're coming across.

[motosapiens]

2 hours ago, Tanders said:

If I entered the PGA US Open, I wouldn't be expecting to win anything.  I would be expecting to get my teeth kicked in, but have a blast knowing that I was competing with the pros.  

 

I don't think getting beat in a large event is the same as getting my teeth kicked in. It's not like I'm boxing against the world champ. There's no defense in shooting, I just go out and shoot my best. Unlike boxing, or tennis, or chess, who else is shooting has no effect whatsoever on my shooting. Only a handful of people can realistically hope to win a real division at an Area match or bigger, but everyone can hope to improve their percentage of the winner from the previous year.