AlamoShooter Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 As long as you can opt-out of Pro class, I'm all for it. Why? Didn't you beat TJ? That is UNFAIR! Beating a Pro should make you a Pro, and besides you make money cutting up perfectly good guns. Why sandbag and not go for a bigger prize, that is UNFAIR? The average shooter shouldn't have to spend money on ammo, and make the time sacrifices so they finish better that is UNFAIR. You should move into another class, because you are just after the prizes and the lesser skilled shooters are paying the way so you can win, that is UNFAIR. You are the problem with IPSC, you just have too much skill, time, and money, that is UNFAIR. You are too good and people shouldn't come to matches that you are at, because you will just steal the good prizes if they award them by skill. It is a waste of their money, because they are just subsidizing the awesome prizes you get. They should get the same prize as you, even if you kick their butts. Who cares if you've spent 10 times as much to perform 10-20% better than they do. IT JUST ISN'T FAIR!!! I can do math, that is why I wouldn't want to try to be a pro, spend $100 to win $10, not good odds. Like Lawman said, poll the better shooters and see if they would chase the Area Match wins for even $2k. I'm not that good of a shooter, but it wouldn't be worth the net $ gain for the work and time it would take from a financial standpoint. There are other reasons to do it, but not the money for me. I shoot for the love of it, and I think that is what keeps this sport going, the love of it. Wow! someone needs a "Time Out" Jamie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chills1994 Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 TRNinTX wrote: For everyone that has been complaining about USPSA purchasing Steel Challenge, steel shooting has the capability of bringing outside money into the shooting sports. It's easy to watch and easy to keep up with whose ahead at all times. A guy ripping off shots at paper targets you can't see and disappearing behind walls doesn't bring much to the viewers, much less trying to explain hit factor scoring. There were several spectators at this weekends SC Nationals. They may not have understood the order things were shot, but it was pretty easy to hear the steel ring and see a mark appear. They figured out real fast that if you hit all of plates in five shots that was good, if you fired a bunch of extra rounds that was bad. Hence, my comments on page 6 about equipping the pro's with a hosercam or posercam type set up. The technology is already here, unlike say just 5 years ago. I do run into people at matches from time to time who say my posercam videos are the coolest thing since sliced bread. Such a set up on several pro shooters at a match and then televised would do a lot to bring in a new generation of shooters: the ones who are glued to their Xbox or Wii playing first person point of view shooting video games. Not to mention the air softers and the paint ballers. Did you know some places actually give out scholarships for paint ball? I mean, seriously, if USPSA HQ wants to break 20,000 active memberships this year it wouldn't hurt to take a few notes out of the tobacco and alcohol industry's playbook: HOOK 'EM EARLY, and get a customer for life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Cheely Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 As long as you can opt-out of Pro class, I'm all for it. Why? Didn't you beat TJ? That is UNFAIR! Beating a Pro should make you a Pro, and besides you make money cutting up perfectly good guns. Why sandbag and not go for a bigger prize, that is UNFAIR? The average shooter shouldn't have to spend money on ammo, and make the time sacrifices so they finish better that is UNFAIR. You should move into another class, because you are just after the prizes and the lesser skilled shooters are paying the way so you can win, that is UNFAIR. You are the problem with IPSC, you just have too much skill, time, and money, that is UNFAIR. You are too good and people shouldn't come to matches that you are at, because you will just steal the good prizes if they award them by skill. It is a waste of their money, because they are just subsidizing the awesome prizes you get. They should get the same prize as you, even if you kick their butts. Who cares if you've spent 10 times as much to perform 10-20% better than they do. IT JUST ISN'T FAIR!!! I can do math, that is why I wouldn't want to try to be a pro, spend $100 to win $10, not good odds. Like Lawman said, poll the better shooters and see if they would chase the Area Match wins for even $2k. I'm not that good of a shooter, but it wouldn't be worth the net $ gain for the work and time it would take from a financial standpoint. There are other reasons to do it, but not the money for me. I shoot for the love of it, and I think that is what keeps this sport going, the love of it. Wow! someone needs a "Time Out" Jamie All in jest my good friends. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loves2Shoot Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 That is what many people are saying, but won't say it, just read a few of the threads on prize tables. It is a fairly common point of view, not mine by any means. There are a lot of folks out there that think the better shooters are just out their to raid the prize tables. I don't know how many people I've heard who are afraid of moving up in their classification because they want to do well in their class, and my "sarcastic rant" reflected that attitude. It would take a huge effort to get 10-12 PRO-AM matches out there, and it would be a huge expense for the few "Pro's" that there are to hit a good number of them, not to mention to get the sponsorship support. We just don't have the numbers, not that I wish it wasn't so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Cheely Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 It would take a huge effort to get 10-12 PRO-AM matches out there, and it would be a huge expense for the few "Pro's" that there are to hit a good number of them, not to mention to get the sponsorship support. We just don't have the numbers, not that I wish it wasn't so. Yep. That's my thinking. It's a good concept, but we have far too few true "pro" shooters to keep it going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoMiE Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Bring It, I am not afraid. I'm your huckleberry! Dundee, be there...with the cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDRODA396 Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 (edited) This thread ROCKS whether you agree with the premise or not...someone throws out an idea that they feel would have an impact on our sport and then over a matter of hours you have a very interesting dicussion, albiet at times somewhat emotional, from both proponents and opponents to the concept by a whole host of shooters of various experience and skill levels. Its what makes forums like this, that just five years ago were unheard of by the masses and this discussion would have taken years to occur as it started in a squad at some match and spread slowly across the country...truly awesome! Not to be total thread drift, there are about 1300 Limited GM, M, and A, and about 14000 Limited B, C, D, and U (IAW the figures quoted in a thread back in July 07). Most of the discussion has been centered on those in the upper echelon of the sport, but for the average Joe, buried in the 14000, unlikey to rise to the cream on top for whatever reason, the big question is how would this affect us? Does it over time raise our match fees for the few bigger than local matches we get up the time, money and/or nerve to shoot? Could it over time lower our fees? Does it create the "caste" that someone mentioned so that as a B with not a chance in heck of taking the money feel like a second class citizen when I sign up for Amature class? I dont know, but I'd like to see as much time and thought put into discussing the impact on the group who will never compete at that level but keep this sport going by populating the local matches weekend after weekend...So, I throw this out there for your consideration....thoughts anyone? Edited for the spelling errors I could find, I'm sure there are more! Edited March 17, 2008 by CDRODA396 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgkeller Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Without paid spectators, there is not enough money in practical shooting to sustain a robust roster of professionals. And USPSA matches are not amenable to spectators. So USPSA is not the venue and not the organization to accomodate professional tournaments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 (edited) Without paid spectators, there is not enough money in practical shooting to sustain a robust roster of professionals.And USPSA matches are not amenable to spectators. So USPSA is not the venue and not the organization to accomodate professional tournaments. I beg to differ, as I already pointed out, golf tours have a waiting list to pay $1200 for entry fees. 60 out of 144 guys get paid to a minimum of $1000, the winner gets $20,000., second place is about $13,000 or there about. There are NO spectators or TV at these tournaments. It works, I can't believe you guys are so unable to see it. Will everyone be successful? Hell no. What line of business is there that every competitor in a market is successful? There is NOT one!!! Everyone always wants to be the best they can be, well, competition is how you get good, and this form is the top of the food chain. Is it for everyone, nope. Are there enough out there to sustain a "tour" of say 15 to 20 events a year, yes there are. There are no guarantees in in life. Not everyone who tries is gonna make it. Edited March 17, 2008 by zhunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgkeller Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Play for your own money Golf Tours come and go, mostly go after a few years. And their limited success is due entirely as a venue for those trying to move up to the big tour where spectators and big money await. Golf "Mini Tours" are exactly that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 18, 2008 Author Share Posted March 18, 2008 Play for your own money Golf Tours come and go, mostly go after a few years.And their limited success is due entirely as a venue for those trying to move up to the big tour where spectators and big money await. Golf "Mini Tours" are exactly that. The PGA Tour started out at about the same "mini-tour" level you are talking about. Don't be so judgmental. There was a day in the not so distant past that the tour players were not allowed in club-houses or locker-rooms at the very clubs they were competing. Yes, today they are a stepping stone, as they were to the golfers of yester-year to what is now known as the PGA Tour. And, for your info, maybe the names have changed, but the golf "mini-tours" have been around for a long time, dating back to the early 1970's, so they must not be that fly-by-night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coolduckboy Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Bring It, I am not afraid. I'm your huckleberry! Dundee, be there...with the cash. Alright then, Bring your single stack and some 10 round mags. Hopefully you can handle to .45 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimberkid Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Either I am confused, or a number of other people are. If i get this right this idea is effectivly little more than a structure to deal with side bets. Pro is an optional class, not required. Pros shoot for a cash payout and have a corresponding higher entry fee. Amatuers shoot for handshakes and pay a lower match fee. It sounds like if you wanna be in the money one week, try entering as a Pro and if you wanna just shoot for fun, enter as an amatuer. With no amatuer prizes to be won, it wouldnt hurt anything. I think this idea would allow more people the oppertunity to become true pros, provided they could continue to be successful. Again, it would be a personal gamble, just like pros in all other sports. Am I even close Jay? I find it funny that Flex mentioned some guys not having to compare the size of their nutsacks. If that were the case their wouldnt be the arrogant line drawn between the regular guys, the Pros, and the guys right there on the edge. Again, Im all about the trophy only matches just so I can stop listening to people drone on and on about how they should be paid because they are a better shooter than someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 18, 2008 Author Share Posted March 18, 2008 Am I even close Jay? Center of the "A" Zone!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Boudrie Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 I can stop listening to people drone on and on about how they should be paid because they are a better shooter than someone else. Well said. The real question is "should people with no chance of winning, and who know that going in, be forced to pay a fee to make sure the more highly skilled competitors are paid to attend the match?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 18, 2008 Author Share Posted March 18, 2008 I can stop listening to people drone on and on about how they should be paid because they are a better shooter than someone else. Well said. The real question is "should people with no chance of winning, and who know that going in, be forced to pay a fee to make sure the more highly skilled competitors are paid to attend the match?" Rob The answer to that is a big fat NO!!!!! And having a PRO division would go a long way to making for lower entry fees for non-professionals, as the professionals would be subsidizing themselves, rather that the masses subsidizing the prize tables for the GM's. You just made a nice point for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgkeller Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 I've seen several mini tours in our neck of the woods fold up in the past ten years. One with a missing ED and the bank account. Unless there is outside money coming into a sport there will be few professionals in that sport. Never has been. Never will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 18, 2008 Author Share Posted March 18, 2008 I've seen several mini tours in our neck of the woods fold up in the past ten years.One with a missing ED and the bank account. Unless there is outside money coming into a sport there will be few professionals in that sport. Never has been. Never will be. Robert I invite you to check out This Site, it will show you that it works. Not your run of the mill fly by night, close up and run off with the cash group. I am NOT talking about a theory, it is a proven concept, just never applied to shooting before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 I can stop listening to people drone on and on about how they should be paid because they are a better shooter than someone else. Well said. The real question is "should people with no chance of winning, and who know that going in, be forced to pay a fee to make sure the more highly skilled competitors are paid to attend the match?" Rob The answer to that is a big fat NO!!!!! And having a PRO division would go a long way to making for lower entry fees for non-professionals, as the professionals would be subsidizing themselves, rather that the masses subsidizing the prize tables for the GM's. You just made a nice point for me. I believe I said it about 150 posts ago - #23 of this thread... And by just looking at the wailing and gnashing of teeth it is quite apparent that the mere thought of the "big dogs subsidizing themselves" is causing widespread panic in the ranks.... of the big dogs. Should I laugh or cry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgkeller Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 Gateway Tour is sponsored by ..... Gateway. Used to be the Grey Goose which merged with Golden Bear. It is the best prep tour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbrowndog Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 you seem to be forgetting the other lower ranked professionals.(some sponsored shooters that hold C,B,A,M ranks, they are out there). when I shoot and BEAT the Pro's I want to be in the running for the same prize!!! not some lesser prize simply because I'm not sponsored. Trapr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zhunter Posted March 18, 2008 Author Share Posted March 18, 2008 Gateway Tour is sponsored by .....Gateway. Used to be the Grey Goose which merged with Golden Bear. Gateway guarantees purses when then fields are full, not much else.. NOt much sponsoring going on there. And they did not merge, the Golden Bear Tour was taken over, don't believe everything you read in the paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 I can stop listening to people drone on and on about how they should be paid because they are a better shooter than someone else. Well said. The real question is "should people with no chance of winning, and who know that going in, be forced to pay a fee to make sure the more highly skilled competitors are paid to attend the match?" Rob The answer to that is a big fat NO!!!!! And having a PRO division would go a long way to making for lower entry fees for non-professionals, as the professionals would be subsidizing themselves, rather that the masses subsidizing the prize tables for the GM's. You just made a nice point for me. I believe I said it about 150 posts ago - #23 of this thread... And by just looking at the wailing and gnashing of teeth it is quite apparent that the mere thought of the "big dogs subsidizing themselves" is causing widespread panic in the ranks.... of the big dogs. Should I laugh or cry? The real question is this Merlin...if there is widespread panic in the ranks of the supposed Big Dawgs, why do you suppose that is...I have an idea, but I would like your input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 USPSA Pro-Am Circuit - 4 matches / year (start small) - USPSA accepts proposals from prospect host clubs and announces venues WELL in advance. - USPSA provides guidance to hosts (match structure, PRO-AM slot ratio, finances, prize $ distribution, et. al) - TV coverage and sponsors. Doesn't USPSA have consultants for that now? Suggestion: At this year's nationals, poll the participants in the entry questionaire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted March 18, 2008 Share Posted March 18, 2008 when I shoot and BEAT the Pro's I want to be in the running for the same prize!!! not some lesser prize simply because I'm not sponsored. Trapr Pay the PRO entry fee, Trapr. Most respectfully. 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