Forums

Help › Forums

Thoughts please - New Tier Above Tour Legends?

Wed, Oct 22 2014 7:22 PM (179 replies)
  • chris2345
    528 Posts
    Sun, Jun 15 2014 3:59 PM

    How about a 59 "average"  with 500 ranked rounds played. Increasing from what you as WGT have already put down.

    Seems logical bur shite... so I expect it to happen to soon then!

  • 2DAMFLASHY
    1,141 Posts
    Sun, Jun 15 2014 4:32 PM

    personally ...

    i think the way ya have .RG 'S an tourneys set up is fine...

    the fake  TL's   don't get in em anyway....and i despise folks that want to change the rules or game...to where the ones that have worked the hardest to win..are not allow'd to do so...

    i would just like to see the TRU ELITE.... be honor'd or acknowledged properly ...

    NOT punished ..and booted out so..... the  FAKE..ego..(bpage ) one's with the IMA WGT tour legend... bumper stickers on there carts,,, can win a few creds...

    the BEST ....should win... an they are doing it  now..

    ....im ok ..with that...

  • Richard4168
    4,309 Posts
    Sun, Jun 15 2014 4:49 PM

    @DAZZA,

    Shouldn't the Q-School be reserved for 'Legend' tier players wanting to make it into the 'Tour Legend' tier?

    This way we wouldn't need a new tier.

  • JimbeauC
    5,835 Posts
    Sun, Jun 15 2014 5:06 PM

    Re: Main question. After reading all this, I'd probably vote NO, at least for now. 

    I do have a way of addressing JimboG's concern. It's really pretty simple. Use slope/rating to adjust scores recorded for RRs for advancement. Play easy courses? Less bang for the buck. Hit a 29 at Oak? gets you there quicker. 

    ----

    I was a TM about to become L when TL came about. Ironically, I'm dangerously close to TL. (Several in this thread know me. I play all courses, or at least everything the CC throws at me.) 

  • SOYEL1
    698 Posts
    Sun, Jun 15 2014 5:20 PM

    I don't think I want another tier. One year from now people will be asking the same again. I'd rather vote for keeping the current one, but  substitute the useless and failed WGT Nation flag for something that reads, "Hall of Famer"... based on real achievements, like Tournament wins, Winnings, or something of the kind. Even two or three flags would do, with different colors. 

    There were countless threads before the Tour Legend tier was created asking for a new tier... but WGT blew an opportunity to make it work well by creating it and basing it on average and a certain number of games. If they create another and do the same, one year from now people will ask for the same again and we will need a new tier because the problem is not how many tiers there are, but how you qualify for them.

    I hate to see someone with a 54 or less average that creates a CC and creates its own tournaments with easy conditions, playing it over and over to lower the score as it if really meant they are that good. Or someone playing a Tour Legend and being tiered up because of a few  wins. That sucks, anyone can beat a Tour Legend, since some Tour Legends made the cut by playing the same course 500 times or when VEM strikes you can be the Galaxy`s best, you won`t win.

  • MBaggese
    15,367 Posts
    Sun, Jun 15 2014 6:20 PM

    I've been thinking about this today, and my vote/answer is no.

     

    Would it benefit me?  Heck ya, not having players like Mags, Seb, Notonthis, etc., in my tier for RG's would be a great thing...but come one, separating 40-50 players because the rest can't keep up, just isn't right.

     

    Wait until the TL Tier gets big..in the 3-4K player range.

     

    That said, having some achievement Tier like Andy and Dazza mentioned is a good idea.

     

    I'm not mad because the same guys (for the majority) are at the top of the leader board above me, I'm mad for not hitting the shots the way I want to.

     

    Recognize the best here if you will, but don't take even the top 10% of TL's and separate them from the rest, it's not fair to them for what they have worked for.

  • MBaggese
    15,367 Posts
    Sun, Jun 15 2014 6:29 PM

    Richard4168:

    @DAZZA,

    Shouldn't the Q-School be reserved for 'Legend' tier players wanting to make it into the 'Tour Legend' tier?

    This way we wouldn't need a new tier.

    There's a good idea.

     

    Also, we could have an "Intermediate" Legend and TL tier, with "intermediate" Tier specific level RG's/Tourneys.

     

    Have it set so say the first 100 rounds a new "intermediate" Legend or TL, plays in "intermediate" tiered tourneys against like same players.

    Ofcourse they could still enter open-tiered tourney as well.

  • TNP56
    510 Posts
    Sun, Jun 15 2014 6:50 PM

    I see no sense in any kind of new tier...........

    but to help other people have a more fair chance of winning tourneys is to have say the us open ( which I know is open to all )  should be for all but the tourlegends should have their own  separate  tourney to play this on......ya know like a tour legend us open....then the other tourney should be for everyone else from hack to legend all in the same tourney bunch. I'm not sure if that's very fair but it would be more fair for others to win besides all the great players winning every "open" tourney that comes out.....It would be a little more fair and somewhat fun doing this way because then the other thousands of player who want to play in it WOULD PLAY MORE  knowing they at least having a chance not playing  against  the BEST PLAYERS all the time. 

  • bhoese
    679 Posts
    Sun, Jun 15 2014 8:06 PM

    The Q school / Tour model is the way to go.

    The current saturated average / minimum rounds / no demotion model is a flawed compromise, necessary to prevent bagging.  The elite tier (or tour or whatever)  wouldn't need those restrictions if it was so awesome that nobody in his right mind would ever bag out of it.

    There are probably 30-50 players who win 90% of all the open tournaments, and perhaps another 100-150 who are capable of occasionally winning when at their best and with an assist from good fortune.  I don't think these rough numbers will change all that much no matter how big WGT gets.  The law of the bell curve keeps it that way.  The names of those players will change as some of the big dogs leave and get replaced by others.

    Therefore, the elite group should be small, and needs to have an out door.  100 with 50 in /50 out was suggested, but I think that's too small of a group with too much turnover...150-200 members with 20 in / 20 out seems better if it's done every month.  

    It might be best if the "out" group is determined by a rolling 3 month average.  You wouldn't want to give dansamcam (for example) the boot just because he took a vacation.

    So...back to the awesomeness mentioned earlier:

     

    • Prizes.  Real world goodies.  Gift cards.  100 bucks at Amazon the first time you make the tour, and 250 bucks every time tour membership is maintained for 12 consecutive months.    
    • Pro shop:  All gear available, and free.  Yes, free.  Do PGA Tour players buy their gear?  Most of the players in this group are playing for free already.  This is the trade-off for perhaps restricting some RG entry.  (obviously with a ball-stockpile limit - can acquire a free sleeve only when owing 3 balls of that type or fewer?  or perhaps all ball inventories show "unlimited" when in and revert to previous quantities when out?) 
    •  Unique "I made it" pro shop accessories - custom (or at least exclusive) avatars.  Balding spare-tire middle aged guy, perhaps?   
    • Fame, glory, attention, front page, golf channel, whatever.  Groupies?  Okay, too far...

    Make it small, make it awesome...all of WGT is a better place.  A thing to aspire to, and more opportunities for everybody.  No new tees or green speeds needed.

     

     

    Edit (add):  I'm thinking the Elite Collection disappears from the pro shop since those items could be earned on the Tour.  Big credit prizes for Tour events so the money-list grinders wouldn't need RGs.  WGT, perhaps you track (or could determine) how many players play for free?  perhaps this could be a guide to the size of the new tier.

  • TheSpaghettiKid
    424 Posts
    Sun, Jun 15 2014 11:23 PM

    Dunno if alosso was suggesting a name but...

    Title for new tier:  CHAMPION LEGEND

    Same tees, same green speeds... so you go from TL to Champion Legend.

    Whatever the average needed to get there is... 54, 57, whatever... it should be calculated using SINGLE PLAY Premium Tourneys, RG's, Brackets (with a min number entered and within a certain time frame?  500 in 6 months?).  Free tourneys don't count toward the CL avg calculation. 

    Also, why not incorporate total career winnings or average place finish in above mentioned tourneys into the criteria to advance to CL.

    For example, need to be TL with avg of 55 and avg place finish of 5th in Prem's and RG's... or instead of avg place... X number of top 5 finishes... 100 top 5 finishes.  (just brainstorming here but I hope you get the idea)

    Most, if not all of the very best TL's are playing Prem's, RG's and Brackets... and doing quite well.  

    Incorporating a paid entry tourney avg finish into the equation would eventually separate out the serious TL competitor into his own tier and leave the casual competitor in TL (who plays 1 or 2 RG's a week).

    Just an idea.

RSS