Forums

Rules are rules but...

• SOYEL1 698 Posts

  Sat, Dec 29 2012 9:44 PM

  It sucks to see that a 29 barely made any profit in a Ready Go. A 30, lost money.. a lot of people tied with 28 and 29...If  a few more make 29, probably not even that was good enough.  We all agree to the terms and conditions(any options?) but WGT should do something about it. It is simply not fair that 5 or 6 under par lose money. Anyone agrees?

• courteneyfish 15,796 Posts

  Sat, Dec 29 2012 9:57 PM

  The players with the lowest scores won. I don't see a problem.

• SOYEL1 698 Posts

  Sat, Dec 29 2012 10:10 PM

  courteneyfish:

  The players with the lowest scores won. I don't see a problem.

  If you say so.. has to be right then. I won so I don't have to worry.

   

• Tightrope 1,072 Posts

  Thu, Jan 3 2013 3:57 AM

  SOYEL1:

  It is simply not fair that 5 or 6 under par lose money. Anyone agrees?

  I actually think they should go the other way - reward the top ten only and stop giving half the credits back to those at place 30. I recently won a 50c tourny and got 300 credits and same day I tied for win a 100c tourny and got 300c. If you can not really win anything in a tournament you pay to enter, fun of playing is reduced. Would anyone buy a $1 lottery ticket where first price is $3?

• borntobesting 9,740 Posts

  Thu, Jan 3 2013 4:38 AM

  Tightrope:

  SOYEL1:

  It is simply not fair that 5 or 6 under par lose money. Anyone agrees?

  I actually think they should go the other way - reward the top ten only and stop giving half the credits back to those at place 30. I recently won a 50c tourny and got 300 credits and same day I tied for win a 100c tourny and got 300c. If you can not really win anything in a tournament you pay to enter, fun of playing is reduced. Would anyone buy a $1 lottery ticket where first price is $3?

  Do we really want to start something like this again??? About 2 years ago WGT changed the ready-go payouts making them top heavy like you are suggesting and there were so many negative posts about it that WGT changed back to the previous payout. I don't think we need to go through something like that again.

• CerinoDevoti 3,232 Posts

  Thu, Jan 3 2013 6:41 AM

  SOYEL1:

  It sucks to see that a 29 barely made any profit in a Ready Go. A 30, lost money.. a lot of people tied with 28 and 29...If  a few more make 29, probably not even that was good enough.  We all agree to the terms and conditions(any options?) but WGT should do something about it. It is simply not fair that 5 or 6 under par lose money. Anyone agrees?

  Nope. Getting beaten by better players is competition.

• Tightrope 1,072 Posts

  Thu, Jan 3 2013 8:09 AM

  borntobesting:

  Do we really want to start something like this again???

  I did not start it. But yes, I think it is worth going through again. You think "negative posts" is should be the guidelines for WGT? I think not, there is much better ways of getting opinions from players that includes opinions also from those who are not negative.
  
  Actually, WGT should make much more surveys to allow us to give more feedback without complaining in the forums. Remember - most of WGT's customers never post here.

• GlassMan27 573 Posts

  Thu, Jan 3 2013 9:08 AM

  Tightrope:

  I actually think they should go the other way - reward the top ten only and stop giving half the credits back to those at place 30.

  The biggest problem is the 20% WGT rake. 20% for doing absolutely nothing is outrageous and absolutely unjustifiable. Once the tourney conditions are set, there is absolutely no work involved in hosting these tournaments. And, currently, we are lucky to get the tourneys switched up more than once a month. (3rd of January, still playing the same tourneys from December). 5% percent seems more than enough for doing nothing. Even 10% would be more fair. I do agree 30 places is too many. At very most, only the top half of entrants should get anything in return. My suggestion... cut the rake to 10% and only pay out to the top 25 (or 20). I honestly think more people would be playing RG's if the prizes were worth playing for. More people playing would offset the 'loss' in per-tournament rake.

• SOYEL1 698 Posts

  Thu, Jan 3 2013 10:53 AM

  Don't get me wrong. I actually wrote this in favor of the players that didn't win(I did) in spite of being only 2 strokes behind the leader. The leader posted a 28, all other 28's were second, third 29's barely made any profit.. and 30's were losing money. There have to be a first place, but also don't agree that second, having scored the same may only get half or less sometimes. I don't make the rules.. but at least can question them.

   

  And rake 20% is outrageous, after all, players exchange real money for the chance of making 6 times the entrance fee and only a few are fortunate, so WGT gets everything in the end...all the money goes to WGT, since nobody can exchange it backwards for real money.

• alosso 21,083 Posts

  Thu, Jan 3 2013 11:32 AM

  FWIW, a RG winner takes 15 % of the purse, 10 % for a sole second. Alas, he's subject to splits due to ties.

  SOYEL1:

  all the money goes to WGT, since nobody can exchange it backwards for real money.

  Congratz, you looked into the thick of all money games here.

  Mind you, ten turnovers of credits through the rake take away 89 % of it:

  0.8**10 = .107