Amateurs vs. Professionals

[RIIID]

Where to start?

There are 5 Divisions, that's about how many true Pro shooters there are right now. So if you let anybody with the cash willing and able to gamble with, sign up as Pros your still going to be around 20 to 25 spread out over 5 Div..

The Pros would have to be scored and shot seperate from the Ams, I know I wouldn't want my payout determined by some hotshot Am who was able to win a few stages and squew the the points. Or worse yet an Am who makes a mistake pasting a target before it was scored causing a reshoot that goes down the drain when the first run was a stage winning run.

For some reason money seems to bring the worst out of people, look what we have now with prize tables.... sandbagging.

Comparing Pratical shooting to other sports doesn't work. Most sports that are popular have simple scoring methods. We have hit factors that are base off of the best shooter for each stage. How many times has each of us tried to explain how PS is scored and have the person understand it on the first attempt.

I remember seeing the Pro-Am match at Rio on TV. The first day the Ams shot, the winnig Am got to shoot with the Pros the next day(I believe it was Tawn Argeris) They shot for stage wins X amount of money per stage, the Pro with the most money won the bigger prize. It was all knock down steel done under par time with 10 round mags and iron sighted guns. I think Todd J. was the big winner.

Until major sponsors are found willing to pump huge amounts of money into a small market place, I'm afraid Pro shooting events won't happen.

Rich

Edited March 18, 2008 by RIIID

[zhunter]

For some reason money seems to bring the worst out of people, look what we have now with prize tables.... sandbagging.

Rich

Golfers call penalties on themselves, it is called honor. EZPZ

No such thing as sandbagging when there are no divisions in the money category, and it is a Pros only heads up division.

[AikiDale]

Until major sponsors are found willing to pump huge amounts of money into a small market place, I'm afraid Pro shooting events won't happen.

You mean there were no pro car races until the big sponsors started putting money up?

Did big money sponsors come first in any pro sport?

There was no money in riding bulls until a handful of bull riders put up $1000 a piece 15 years ago and started the PBR. Now the winner of the PBR finals takes home a check for $1,000,000.

It has to start someplace and I believe that is with the shooters.

[AlamoShooter]

What would be gained by limiting equipment?

I haven't Sean Tiger Woods play with a club with a wood shaft

Everyone would have to play with the same equipment in each match, yes, the equipment could be different at different matches, but this would ONLY work if everyone competed in a match with the same equipment. Even I will admit there are NOT enough to make this work in multiple divisions in a given match.

Maybe I should run for president next time, get something done around here!!!

Talk about ruffled feathers!!!! And I am joking!!!! About being president that is, ruffling feathers, not so much

I don't have a dog in the hunt, I just don't like limits

That would be real interesting a string of events with different equipment. That would be Real Interesting very cool twist.

Start an entire (fantasy shoot thread event) on who would win with what kind of equipment. You add in Revolver to the mix and that changes the field.

I really Like the Idea with the Hoser Cam too thats a good one = it would be an Ego thing to who got the most camera time for the stages. = that would help the sponsors _expose - their products .

I would do what I could to help with a match like that.

[Loves2Shoot]

I don't think the pool of pros would be as big as you think. And if it's not funded by them, it's funded by no one.

That is the biggest problem I see also, as illustrated by the attempt at the whole point series thing.

Limited

Open

Production

L10

Single Stack

Revolver

Alamo, It is the simple things that cause the big problems. If you don't limit the gear how do you expect to get 20-40 Pros to fill the match? Limiting the gear consolidates the divisions, back to the 80's, and if you can't get enough highly skilled shooters to the match, your match is dead.

I was at both the Nationals last year, maybe a new shooting organization could handle it, but I don't see USPSA being up to the task. I'm not saying that the folks on the ground don't put forth a great effort, but it takes a lot of time, experience and money to do a professional level match.

I'm all up for Zhunter making a NEW action pistol shooting sport with less divisions and a heads-up format of competition that is spectator friendly. I would go play when I could.

[HoMiE]

OK, add Bob to the list of believers.

Good points as well

And, the paying 8 was just a quick example, there are a couple of more detailed/expanded versions somewhere in the last 8 pages.

The perfect world was the one where I pointed out a "full field" of 144, and paying out to 60th place, who would recoup a full entry as last paid spot

I like those odds and would shoot in a match like this. If you think you can beat almost half the people, you will be shooting for free and getting experience against the Pros right?

[AlamoShooter]

What about the "Calcutta" thing? I never completely understood the works of it, but plenty of shotgun shooters made and make big bucks "Betting" on the score / hits

The big pay-out challenge at Steel Challenge was more like a side bet challenge Steel Challenge payed out for stage wins + second place stage $$.

in Sporting Clays some event has side pots for the shooters that wanted to pay in. the $$ stayed in class. and the HOA pot had some seed money put in by the event sponsor. only 2 out of ten shooters would "Play" But if you were having a good month a shooter could win back the match fees. But they had to risk a little bit more to do it.

[Chuck Anderson]

Lawman

I threw out an idea, one that has plenty of room for tweaking, but I will say, ONCE again, the premise works. Get a group, say 5 - 10 guys, and decide what the rules of professionalism are, hell, maybe it is just enter as a pro if you want to play, it is NOT that tough, you are making too big of a deal out of being left out/not competitive.

It seems to me you are not denying my idea works, but rather saying you don't want to shoot against the pros. IF that is your only beef, get onboard and let's figure out the small print later.

Yeah, that's not what I said. I don't think the premise will work. I don't agree with the golf analogy. I shoot against the pros now. Like everyone else. Out of curiousity, are you an attorney, because you send just like the last defense attorney that questioned me. Ignore everything that doesn't fit the answer you want.

[ChuckS]

I'm all up for Zhunter making a NEW action pistol shooting sport with less divisions and a heads-up format of competition that is spectator friendly. I would go play when I could.

Sort of sounds like the Steel Challenge to me!

[AikiDale]

Oh, by the way, you guys have seen this thread Pro-Am Match ?

[zhunter]

Lawman

I threw out an idea, one that has plenty of room for tweaking, but I will say, ONCE again, the premise works. Get a group, say 5 - 10 guys, and decide what the rules of professionalism are, hell, maybe it is just enter as a pro if you want to play, it is NOT that tough, you are making too big of a deal out of being left out/not competitive.

It seems to me you are not denying my idea works, but rather saying you don't want to shoot against the pros. IF that is your only beef, get onboard and let's figure out the small print later.

Yeah, that's not what I said. I don't think the premise will work. I don't agree with the golf analogy. I shoot against the pros now. Like everyone else. Out of curiousity, are you an attorney, because you send just like the last defense attorney that questioned me. Ignore everything that doesn't fit the answer you want.

Nope, I WAS a golfer, that is how I KNOW it works.

Oh, by the way, you guys have seen this thread Pro-Am Match ?

Smitty posted that a while ago, yes, that is either a good start or a way to do it. I will be watching closely.

[Jim Norman]

Ah, so we tax the rich so we can get a free ride!

NOPE! Man you guys just like being difficult!!!!

The "rich", meaning the pros, foot their own bill/prizes, the amateurs pay a lower entry fee that enables them to shoot the same match they always have, with no prize table dangled in front of them, you know, the one that they had no chance of winning anyway, because the Manny's, Dave's, Max's, TGO's of the world are going to win.

Shred, I still don't see the downside!!!! Help me out here as Flex was saying earlier.

Why? In other words, IF the "PRO" aspect is an add-on, why would the prize table go away? Just make it available ONLY to the non-pro shooters. You opt in to the BIG GAME, you are opted out of the prize table. That would make this truely transparent.

Jim

[rgkeller]

Keep the course's of fire reactive and colorful so they looked good on TV, stay with one type of gun to keep costs down and field the playing field ( say 10 rds, iron sights, no comp's or porting, 125 pf), have a dress code to keep up appearances, and now you have something workable. Let me know if you put something like this together, I will buy in.......

Excellent.

And, of course, the pros would need an organization to run their matches because the above is NOT USPSA or IPSC.

[RIIID]

Z,

All of this is dependant on IF the current Pro's are willing to pony up the money to gamble with. I would say most of them aren't gamblers. If the current Pro's won't do it you will have to recruit new shooters and develope a new match structure. This whole thing might sound good on the surface but it's going to take time and money to make it successful. Are you willing to gamble your time and money to do this?

Rich

[rgkeller]

Until major sponsors are found willing to pump huge amounts of money into a small market place, I'm afraid Pro shooting events won't happen.

You mean there were no pro car races until the big sponsors started putting money up?

Did big money sponsors come first in any pro sport?

There was no money in riding bulls until a handful of bull riders put up $1000 a piece 15 years ago and started the PBR. Now the winner of the PBR finals takes home a check for $1,000,000.

It has to start someplace and I believe that is with the shooters.

I agree.

The shooters who want to shoot professionally for prize money should start something.

[Nemo]

THE PROS for the USSA Pro-Am.

[Flexmoney]

... the above is NOT USPSA or IPSC.

While Z has proposed this as an USPSA idea, maybe we can back away from that aspect of it (and whatever it implies) so that we can look at the idea in more isolation? See if has legs of it's own?

I beat ideas like this around pretty often. Somewhere around here I have a note book full of various match ideas. I love the format of the pro/am match that USSA is going to run. In fact, I've been wanting to run something very similar for a number of years now.

I'm beating on the branches of this tree pretty hard, because I want to see what fruit falls to the ground and what stays on the tree.

I do like the idea of the incentive (to improve), and the possibility of more money available. One could currently argue that if somebody really wanted it...then they would work just as hard under the current climate to get a spot with one of the few rides (Glock, CZ, S&W, etc). They'd do whatever it took...live in a van down by the river, cast their own bullets, sell blood etc.

What you are talking about here would be great, if it would go. It would spread the wealth a bit... IF you could get the mass.

Going 140 deep and paying out 60 sounds like a deal. One that I might take. So, lets look at 140 deep. Pull up a USPSA Limited Nationals (seems like a good comparison)...going 140 deep gets you well into B-class...into the women, seniors and super-seniors. (that includes many posting here on this thread...ante up)

Could we even do half that? Lets say we go 60 deep and pay the top 25? That might work for one match, could it work for a tour?

When I ask where the money comes from...and, right now I am just asking about the match fee for a year of a tour...we are looking at $5,000 or so (just in fees). Can you just say win or go home? Who is going to play? Where is the pool of shooters at that will support this when the losers go home and back to their day jobs. Your going to run out of Master shooters pretty quick (even if you had enough to start with).

Unless you are top-dog, to make it viable, you'd need to be a grinder. You'd need to be in lots of matches, so that you'd have more chances to finish in the money. (We aren't talking WSOPoker money here, where you can get lucky and walk with hundreds of thousands of $$.)

So, beyond the match fees...what does it take to shoot a dozen majors or more in a year? So, you get rid of your house or apartment and all the cost that go with that...buy a used VW van and hit the road. (assuming you are single...or the family wants to come along) Just travel, match fees, ammo...what are you looking at there is costs? How much "in the money" do you have to be to cover?

We do have a handful of shooter now that actually do manage to get out and travel to a number of big matches every year. I think that they are in a place in their lives where things line up for them and make that possible. How big is that number? Would they get off their wallets? Would they do so year after year?

Show me some numbers. Make it work.

[Flexmoney]

I've run a major match here and there, and been involved in a few others.

Just for some rough numbers...

I can take in $10,000, spend $7,000...and make $3,000...at a USPSA state level match. (plaque match) Other formats...I can probably improve on that a bit.

Look at those numbers though...and realize that the every shooter is supporting the match. The AMs are supporting the PROs...if you choose to look at it that way. There is no match without a bunch of shooters.

Lets say you are running an 8 stage match as a pro/am, and the pro match fee is $250. And, the match is paying out $1,000 per stage win to the pros. That is $8,000 in prize money available. You need 32 pros to cover just that prize money.

Where does the money come from to run the match?

Lets say those pros were going to shoot the match anyway and the fee was $100. So, the difference between the regular fee and the pro fee is $150. That same $8,000 takes 54 pros to cover the extra $150 in match fee (if you choose to look at it that way).

Show me the money.

I don't think we get there self-funded.

(and, the point series ought to be looked at as a bit of comparison as well)

Make it work. Show me the way?

[L9X25]

Since nobody with more knowledge would take my bait ….

The FIPT (Florida Invitational Pistol Tournament) was strictly a BIG money (non-sanctioned) match. It started in the late 70's or early 80's and continued to the late 90's. Back when State and Area matches were frequently costing $75 - $125 they were charging $200+ but offered advertised purses in the $10,000+ range. The match winner won thousands of dollars and the bulk of the cash was paid out in the order of finish, but they did recognize classes to some extent too. To make the big cash you had to finish at the top overall. It was about the 2nd biggest match in the US (after the Nationals) and it drew all of the big players of the time. I recall having Barnhart and all of the big names come down to Florida, weeks in advance, and shoot the local matches with us. The match practically filled up every year, for many years.

The Florida Open was initially created to be the FIPT "warm-up" match and was scheduled just before the FIPT. One year the applications were not coming in as fast as the FIPT promoters had hoped and they got cold feet about the guaranteed purse and canceled the match. Everyone that had planned to shoot the FIPT went to the Open and the rest is history. The Open instantly became the premier match in Florida and FIPT has never returned.

The point that I was trying to make is that calling you a pro, or an amatuer, is just giving you a label that is not necessary. If you are willing to pay an entry fee equivalent to about $400, factoring for inflation, you can call yourself a Pro and shoot the match. If you did not consider yourself a Pro, you could watch the match from the sidelines or stay home practicing for next year, it was purely your choice.

The concept is not that different than the points series that USPSA tried, pay extra for the opportunity to earn extra money. From what I have heard, the majority of the folks did not supprt the series and just wanted to shoot good (big) matches for the smallest amount of money possible. I contribute my cash and shoot the Open each year for the opportunity to shoot against Grauffel, Jarrett and the rest of the gods, but would rather pay $100 just to shoot the match with no possibility of winning anything (which I seldom do anyway).

Feel free to correct any factual errors as I never personally shot the match, although my gun did win a class there once in Kevin’s hands.

Leo

[zhunter]

Flex

Having looked at the USSA 2008 Pro-Am format, it seems pretty clear they have some sponsorship going on. Phil seems to have done his homework. I have never run a match, and have no contacts, so I have ZERO knowledge of how much is possibly out there and who to go to. Seems Phil has got it under control.

My idea was to NOT assume outside sponsorship, if it is there, great, but it is best to not base a new idea on something that might or might not exist. I have based it on something that does exist in another sport, and has been successful for decades. That said, the "mini-tours" as Robert has called it, which is correct in my mind too, are primarily a young man's game/gig. There is the occasional getting close to 50/senior player out there getting ready to play the Champions Tour.

I will agree, getting started in a "new business/endeavor" as a person with a family to support would make it MUCH more difficult, and would very possibly not be feasible for some shooters with the ability to compete. Everyone has circumstances that are individual. That said, maybe this concept is for the younger guys, with less responsibility. Everything starts somewhere, and maybe this is where it would start, mainly younger guys and a sprinkling of the old guard. I have NO idea, I just think it will work. It is not for me, and maybe it is not for you, but let's not kabash the idea for the future shooters that might be able to become financially profitable shooters. It does seem that many of the posters here are looking at it only for how it would work for them.

Now, as for looking at the 2007 Limited list, that is not quite the way to go about it. Let's think outside the box, I did post this last night, it would ONLY work if it was once division per match, otherwise there would not be enough players to make it feasible. Phil Strader has it right, his USSA 2008n Pro-Am is iron sight only, no comps. So, essentially you can take the top shooters from Open, Limited, Production, Limited 10, Single Stack, and Revolver. YES, there are some that are on multiple lists, but doing it this way certainly adds some more names to your post above. Phil also added in IDPA, there are some more, and then, as I remember during the USPSA buys Steel Challenge discussions, several shooters mentioned that they ONLY shoot steel challenge, so there are a few more. The pool just got bigger.

Let's stay open minded, I really do believe it is a workable idea, do I have it nailed down? I think not. But it is now out there and has a lot of people thinking about it.

I think Phil has the right idea, as the steel is much more spectator/TV/Media friendly.

I think he is way ahead of me, and hats off to him.

[SA Friday]

I believe the idea may have merit. The fish-hook for me is what it could do for sport shooting over the long haul if it took hold. TV coverage would be the impact. Shooting on TV has been tried to some success, and I still think something like this would be a viable TV product. Steel is going to have to be much more involved if TV is going to come on board. After the TV coverage is solid, then the shooting could branch out to other aspects (much like the TV poker world has done).

I think the key is getting the 'talk' about a venue like this strong enough to interest TV to cover it. The TV coverage will bring the sponsers on board. Then the new system would stabilize. I can see this working, but I don't see it working for long without TV. Someone with good connections in the TV world would have to step up and risk taking a venue like this on. Hmmmm, who do we know......

[Flexmoney]

Jay,

As I mentioned, I've thought of matches and formats and whatnot over the years. If the stars had aligned right, I would have been doing something similar already.

Knock down steel and fewer walls make a match more spectator friendly from many perspectives. One gun division...also a must.

I really like where Phil/USSA ended up with that match. I think they are doing it right. Outside money is part of that too, I believe. (not to mention that they have some good intenal support, it seems)

Your talking about a tour, however. I just don't know where we are going to find the people?

I can throw a rock and hit a number of golf shops. Gun shops...I can count the number of those within 50 miles on my fingers.

We'd have to grow our sport exponentially, I think. I'd get behind the idea, if I could see some numbers that would show a path.

[tightloop]

Jay,

As I mentioned, I've thought of matches and formats and whatnot over the years. If the stars had aligned right, I would have been doing something similar already.

Knock down steel and fewer walls make a match more spectator friendly from many perspectives. One gun division...also a must.

I really like where Phil/USSA ended up with that match. I think they are doing it right. Outside money is part of that too, I believe. (not to mention that they have some good intenal support, it seems)

Your talking about a tour, however. I just don't know where we are going to find the people?

I can throw a rock and hit a number of golf shops. Gun shops...I can count the number of those within 50 miles on my fingers.

We'd have to grow our sport exponentially, I think. I'd get behind the idea, if I could see some numbers that would show a path.

There are problems to be overcome with any new idea...but if it is a good idea, sometimes Flex, you just have to take a chance, and work some of them out on the fly...if the concept is solid, and this one appears to be really solid, somehow there is a way to make this at least as popular as pro bowling, curling, and the like...and as J said, timing is a factor for lots of folks...perhaps it is a young shooters game and guys with families and homes to pay for won't be up for it, but both J and I believe there is a core group of shooters who are willing to chance making some $$ doing something they like and are good at , who would be willing to lay down 500 of their own bucks for a chance at over 10 X that amount...watching the Pro-Am in Fl is a great start and Phil has lots of the bases covered...need to see how that goes over and how it might be tweeked to incorporate what J has outlined...

[boo radley]

So here is my question: I wasn't shooting then, but I've heard about the "Golden Age" of the mid-80's, or so ( not sure of specifics ) when Action pistol shooting was extremely popular, and there were factory sponsored teams, and Dillon was sponsoring our host, etc, etc.

Were there that many more shooters at matches than today? I mean, some local club matches in my area are pulling in over 100 shooters from time to time, and rarely attract fewer than 60.

IF there are approximately the same number of shooters, what has changed? Why the lack of outside interest?

Edited March 18, 2008 by boo radley

[tightloop]

So here is my question: I wasn't shooting then, but I've heard about the "Golden Age" of the mid-80's, or so ( not sure of specifics ) when Action pistol shooting was extremely popular, and there were factory sponsored teams, and Dillon was sponsoring our host, etc, etc.

Were there that many more shooters at matches than today? I mean, some local club matches in my area are pulling in over 100 shooters from time to time, and rarely attract fewer than 60.

IF there are approximately the same number of shooters, what has changed? Why the lack of outside interest?

There may be more than one answer for your question, but every new game has a growing period and then hits a plateau...IPSC was in the infancy when I started in late 78 and grew very rapidly till I got out in 86, so the period you mention was probably at the height of the initial growth spurt..I don't think the statistical number of shooters has grown very much in the last 5 or so years....after 86 till I started again in 95 there were lots of rule changes and a turnover of shooters and leveling off of numbers. I think there are still approx the same number of active shooters, but this is not a sport that everyone enjoys or wants to participate in...and as has been discussed many times B4, the lack of a TV audience or national promotion hinders the growth of this game.