zhunter Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Amateurs vs. Professions Or should it be Amateurs and Professionals? First let’s define the two: Professional: 1) of, relating to, or connected with a profession 2) (of a person) engaged in a specified activity as one's main paid occupation rather than as a pastime Amateur: 1) noun a person who engages in a pursuit, esp. a sport, on an unpaid basis. 2) adjective engaging or engaged in without payment; nonprofessional OK, so now we had defined the two, so how does this relate to USPSA? Well, essentially, USPSA, and IPSC for that matter, have MANY professionals competing against amateurs. Yes, it happens in other sports, golf for instance, where anyone with a 2 handicap or less can attempt to qualify for the US Open Championship, but IF they qualify, they are designated as an amateur. The amateurs are not allowed to win prize money, but they are also competing amongst themselves for a low amateur medal, and the prestige of being that year’s low amateur, the same holds true for The Masters, of course, the qualifying for The Masters is much different. In truth, it is HIGHLY unlikely an amateur golfer can win a tournament against a field of mainly professionals. And the same is true for shooting at the highest level. So why are our level 2 and 3 matches not set-up to designate professionals and amateurs? NO, I am not trying to water down the trophies, I am trying to create some meaning to a guy/gal who has a regular job, who dry-fires after he has helped his kids with their homework and put them to bed. I am trying to create meaning for the student who is studying to a blurry-eyed state to achieve his or her degree, barely scraping by financially to be able to afford bullets to shoot a match once or twice a month. Yes, I am talking about the 99% of us who make-up and foot the bill for the shooting sports. The shooters who buy the products that are endorsed by the professionals. As a former professional in a different sport, I know the difference, and hence can see the need for an amateur and professional designation in the USPSA shooting sports. Did I just say “sports”? Of course I did, you see, USPSA is now the proud owner of the Steel Challenge match, and what better example than steel challenge? Heads up, NO classifications, just put up and shoot, prizes awarded accordingly. Yeah, Mr. or Mrs. Joe Average has a big chance of winning that one don’t they? NOT!!! I am not taking anything away from the professional/endorsed/sponsored shooters, but the time has come for them to compete against themselves within the their own class in the matches. I think the time has come for there to be a proper designation in the classifications. U, D, C, B, A, M, GM, and yes, Professional Just using golf as an example, anyone who accepts product/equipment valued over $400 in an event is considered a professional. Anyone who takes money, i.e. cash, is a professional. Anyone who endorses a product for money or is reimbursed for that endorsement by receiving product in return, is a professional. Anyone who is paid to teach or give instruction in that particular sport, is a professional. Also, in golf, outside of the major tours of the world where there are tournament sponsors who put up vast sums of money for the event, professionals pay entry fees of anywhere from $500 to $1500 per tournament to essentially create a prize fund/purse to play for that week. Yes, the strong prosper and the weak quickly disappear, either to hone their skills and return later, or get a real job. OK, you get the idea. And, from the professional’s perspective, it gives them a chance to actually make some money at these events. I see this idea as an upside for both groups, amateurs and professionals alike. Is it time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Nesbitt Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Didn't USPSA do something similar to this back around the mid 1990's? Does anybody remember what happened? (zhunter, notice I didn't say anything about those guns) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 (edited) (zhunter, notice I didn't say anything about those guns) Noted Edited March 17, 2008 by zhunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JThompson Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 (edited) Hmmm.... Edited March 17, 2008 by JThompson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmittyFL Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Would you like some cheese with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Stoeger Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 In truth, it is HIGHLY unlikely an amateur golfer can win a tournament against a field of mainly professionals. And the same is true for shooting at the highest level. So why are our level 2 and 3 matches not set-up to designate professionals and amateurs? Is it time? I don't think this is a serious problem. Pros had to win as amateurs to become pros. Regular guys CAN win in this sport, thats what makes it so freakin cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 Would you like some cheese with that? Actually, no, it is not a whining at all, or not meant to be, merely I think it is time for proper designation of professionals and amateurs. Actually, it is meant to help both groups, amateurs and pros alike. You, as a regular winner of large matches should be more than happy to be making money from the sport, what would you have to loose? Sorry, but what is the downside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Stoeger Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Would you like some cheese with that? Sorry, but what is the downside? Some people will get kicked into "Pro" class, then be forced to pay higher entry fees for matches, even though they are still amateurs. Some people will milk the system to stay amateurs to kick ass on all the amateur guys. Trying to "do something" about the 30-40 (maybe that is high) Pro shooters in the sport seems like a waste of time. There just isn't enough of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmittyFL Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Ok, I'll bite. I don't care about any designation; but how is it exactly that I'm going to make all this money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dunn Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 My vote is to leave it alone. If your sole motivation is for a Kewpie Doll, you are going to get frustrated with shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 Ben A good point about the higher entry fees. Maybe not all of them want to compete as a professional, never thought of that. I suppose it could be done as a professional not competing for the prize fund, marked with an (*) in the listings or something like that. Are there really only 30-40? And if there are, only 30-40 as you say, at Steel Challenge, they would account for the vast majority of the winnings, wouldn't they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 Ok, I'll bite. I don't care about any designation; but how is it exactly that I'm going to make all this money? Ok, by Ben's calculations, there would be 30 - 40 shooters, let's say 35. At $500 per shooter, that is $17,000 With a breakdown paying the top 8, like this: $6000 $3500 $2000 $1500 $1300 $1200 $1000 $1000 Or something along those lines. It would make the Super Squads a lot more interesting to watch, and would allow the guys who put the time in the sport to finally reap some financial rewards. Break down the prize fund as you see fit, as the above is just an example. And that was with a $500 entry, like I said, plenty of professional golf tournaments have entries of $1500, do the math, it would make for some interesting winnings. The spectator side of things would be much more appealing. And, maybe, the money would bring out more then Ben's prediction of 30-40 shooters. Like I said, I don't see the downside, especially for a proven winner like yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JThompson Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChuckS Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Hey, I had Taran Butler taping my targets last Saturday. I don't want to loose that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 Hey,I had Taran Butler taping my targets last Saturday. I don't want to loose that! Keep practicing then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SmittyFL Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 (edited) Below are the top 50 in Limited of the most hotly contested Nationals I've ever shot. How many do you think are professionals? I'll go up against anybody at any cost I can afford. Lets have all 300 shooters put up $500 if you want pay out some cash. That's $150,000....now we're talking about some prize money. All you're doing by adding a 'designation' is watering down the competition more that the 5 divisions already do. Why, so some dude that finished 51st overall can say he won. Wupf*#kingeee! Nothing against you Z, we are friends. I just don't like anything that (in my opinion) dilutes the competition. If you figure out a way I don't have to go to work every day and can just shoot for a living I'll sign on, I promise! But as it stands now, yeah I get a few things that I'm grateful for but sometimes still have to choose between paying the electirc bill on time or buying bullets to practice. 2007 USPSA_Limited_Production_Revolver_Nationals - Final results for Limited Place Name No. USPSA Class Division PF Lady For Age Match Pts Match % 1 Robert Leatham 241 L684 GM Limited Major No No 1728.1370 100.00% 2 Travis Tomasie 12 L1973 GM Limited Major No No 1717.1018 99.36% 3 Chris Tilley 37 TY38861 GM Limited Major No No 1681.4843 97.30% 4 Phil Strader Jr. 25 FY31992 GM Limited Major No No 1674.4455 96.89% 5 Ted Puente 108 TY42094 GM Limited Major No No 1658.3954 95.96% 6 Blake Miguez 196 FY29399 GM Limited Major No No 1638.8501 94.83% 7 Emanuel Bragg 75 L2476 GM Limited Major No No 1637.6789 94.77% 8 Michael Seeklander 29 A30288 GM Limited Major No No 1634.4055 94.58% 9 Michael Voigt 21 RD4 GM Limited Major No No 1633.1739 94.50% 10 Todd Jarrett 221 L2458 GM Limited Major No No 1614.3153 93.41% 11 Henning Wallgren 111 TY25335 GM Limited Major No No 1604.7615 92.86% 12 Taran Butler 9 L2354 GM Limited Major No No 1602.5874 92.73% 13 Ron Avery 326 l2747 GM Limited Major No No Senior 1596.2036 92.37% 14 Shannon Smith 212 TY38969 GM Limited Major No No 1586.5232 91.81% 15 Paul Clark Jr. 280 A28779 GM Limited Major No No 1582.9247 91.60% 16 Matt Trout 205 TY40855 GM Limited Major No No 1564.2490 90.52% 17 Lee Dimaculangan 284 A45511 M Limited Major No No 1554.3124 89.94% 18 Jason Koon 410 A43225 GM Limited Major No No 1471.3402 85.14% 19 Alan Tag 155 TY51215 GM Limited Major No No 1467.6106 84.92% 20 Brown Ronald 389 A48295 M Limited Major No Yes 1460.6200 84.52% 21 Chad Folger 400 A45471 M Limited Major No No 1454.4821 84.16% 22 Robert Evans 194 A23429 M Limited Major No No 1453.2212 84.09% 23 Eric Satnley 401 L2443 GM Limited Major No No 1445.8306 83.66% 24 Kert Gaskill 210 TY33364 GM Limited Major No No Senior 1445.3877 83.64% 25 Glenn Higdon 331 L2885 GM Limited Major No No 1440.2265 83.34% 26 Chad Lofton 261 TY39243 M Limited Major No No 1424.8132 82.45% 27 John Rasmussen 7 A29708 M Limited Major No No 1421.1988 82.24% 28 James Ong 287 TY36874 M Limited Major No No 1418.1281 82.06% 29 Antoine Lane 304 A50592 M Limited Major No No 1409.1216 81.54% 30 Steven Zerwas 17 L2504 M Limited Major No No 1405.0657 81.31% 31 Ara Maljian 187 A23079 GM Limited Major No No 1403.9630 81.24% 32 Rick Watkins 188 A44292 M Limited Major No No 1395.7791 80.77% 33 James McGinty 390 A57062 U Limited Major No No Junior 1384.6051 80.12% 34 Jay Mackey Sr. 219 TY54207 M Limited Major No No 1382.8319 80.02% 35 Chad Rutherford 45 L2584 M Limited Major No No 1381.6512 79.95% 36 Jerry Brown 239 A36258 GM Limited Major No No 1381.1903 79.92% 37 David Elderton 342 L1581 GM Limited Major No No 1374.0967 79.51% 38 Bryant Chaffin 115 L2532 GM Limited Major No No 1355.7488 78.45% 39 Joselito Isidro 165 A44440 B Limited Major No No 1354.9500 78.41% 40 Brett Johnson 309 L2819 A Limited Major No No 1354.7756 78.40% 41 Bradley Holt 160 A52971 U Limited Minor No No 1354.6696 78.39% 42 Tim Calhoun 167 TY51763 M Limited Major No No 1353.0376 78.29% 43 Lesgar Murdock 405 TYF45606 A Limited Major No Yes 1352.5731 78.27% 44 Keith Dilworth 199 FY46110 M Limited Major No No 1352.0983 78.24% 45 Ryan Snyder 193 TY43465 M Limited Major No No 1350.5938 78.15% 46 Sam Conway 64 L2629 GM Limited Major No No 1338.5095 77.45% 47 Theo Carter 327 L2916 A Limited Major No No 1336.7878 77.35% 48 Chris Keen 176 TY46956 A Limited Major No No 1333.4142 77.16% 49 Sean Gaines 179 TY53481 A Limited Major No No 1333.3013 77.15% 50 Kevin Toothman 409 TY747 A Limited Major No No 1327.8484 76.84% Edited March 17, 2008 by SmittyFL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Regular guys CAN win in this sport, thats what makes it so freakin cool. This is exactly what I wanted to say when I clicked on "Reply" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
titandriver Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Z-man -- I think a similar thing was tried in the early '90's by a guy from SoCal or AZ. They used only steel and various shapes & colors as I recall. Entry fees were pretty steep but so were the winnings if you actually won the thing. It died pretty quickly, guessin' cuz there were far too few "pros" willing to put up the cash for the entry fee. Unless industry sponsors put up the cash prizes, I'm thinkin' there aren't very many folks that could afford to pay all the associated expenses to win such a pittance. Get those pots up to $100,000 or more and a lot more could concentrate solely on shooting instead of working full time & shooting part time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 All you're doing by adding a 'designation' is watering down the competition more that the 5 divisions already do. There is not a watering down of the overall standings, just a designation of pro's and am's, and the pro's being paid accordingly. The low amateur still finishes in say 27th place. And is credited with being low amateur. The pro wins his money. Smitty, I thought you might see my point when put in money terms. And I am sure you are not alone. IF this could happen, I bet a few guys from across the big ponds might start to show up and lo and behold, there would be a lot more than "30-40" As for entry fees, in golf, it came down to what the field would bare relative to how high the entry fees could go. Some guys certainly got to eat some big pieces of humble pie, and the guys that could really do it prospered. It certainly changed the way you reacted to a 10 for par putt. The adrenaline is second to none, but then again I have never been shot at, and don't care to test that one out!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Will Abrahams Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Z, i just want to make sure i understand the issue... i am assuming the professional shooter does not apply to D,C,B,A and M class shooters b/c there are few to none in these classes. so is your proposal to distinguish the amateur (non sponsored) GM from the professional (sponsored) GM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 Z,i just want to make sure i understand the issue... i am assuming the professional shooter does not apply to D,C,B,A and M class shooters b/c there are few to none in these classes. Correct so is your proposal to distinguish the amateur (non sponsored) GM from the professional (sponsored) GM? Yes My replies are in red Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Never happen. If a Pro Division was in place the top tier shooters would not have the hordes of lower "class" shooters to subsidize them with the (cash or goods) prize table. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SA Friday Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 (edited) 2007 USPSA_Limited_Production_Revolver_Nationals - Final results for Limited Place Name No. USPSA Class Division PF Lady For Age Match Pts Match % Sponsered 1 Robert Leatham 241 L684 GM Limited Major No No 1728.1370 100.00% Sponsered 2 Travis Tomasie 12 L1973 GM Limited Major No No 1717.1018 99.36% Sponsered 3 Chris Tilley 37 TY38861 GM Limited Major No No 1681.4843 97.30% Sponsered 4 Phil Strader Jr. 25 FY31992 GM Limited Major No No 1674.4455 96.89% Unsure 5 Ted Puente 108 TY42094 GM Limited Major No No 1658.3954 95.96% Unsure 6 Blake Miguez 196 FY29399 GM Limited Major No No 1638.8501 94.83% Unsure 7 Emanuel Bragg 75 L2476 GM Limited Major No No 1637.6789 94.77% Unsure 8 Michael Seeklander 29 A30288 GM Limited Major No No 1634.4055 94.58% Sponsered 9 Michael Voigt 21 RD4 GM Limited Major No No 1633.1739 94.50% Sponsered 10 Todd Jarrett 221 L2458 GM Limited Major No No 1614.3153 93.41% Sponsered 11 Henning Wallgren 111 TY25335 GM Limited Major No No 1604.7615 92.86% Sponsered 12 Taran Butler 9 L2354 GM Limited Major No No 1602.5874 92.73% Sponsered 13 Ron Avery 326 l2747 GM Limited Major No No Senior 1596.2036 92.37% Sponsered 14 Shannon Smith 212 TY38969 GM Limited Major No No 1586.5232 91.81% Unsure 15 Paul Clark Jr. 280 A28779 GM Limited Major No No 1582.9247 91.60% Semi-Sponsered (barely) 16 Matt Trout 205 TY40855 GM Limited Major No No 1564.2490 90.52% Unsure 17 Lee Dimaculangan 284 A45511 M Limited Major No No 1554.3124 89.94% Sponsered My point is, there may be stock in Z's idea but I cannot tell based on the results posted above. Many of us do not know every person sponsered as a shooter. Also, we do not know how much the sponser(s) may be supporting the shooter. AMU is the best gig in town, IMO, and there are a few others that have very good backing, but I know for a fact the #15 on that list basically gets bullets and little else from sponsership. He hangs drywall for a living. That isn't a free ride, but might be enough for force him to shoot as a pro and put him in a disadvantaged position; can't shoot amateur, can't practice like a pro. Food for thought. Edited March 17, 2008 by SA Friday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Are there really only 30-40? Probably half that many. Depending on how you look at it. How many come out with a $ gain in any 2...3...5 year time period? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now