lonniescott711:
Robert1893:
kavvz: Surely, you realize that given enough time (probably won't take that long), that TC will just be C by another name.
Exactly!
Come come now , lets not act like this is anything new . We have all seen this before with the other new tier additions . By this coming June or July the crying will start and come the next virtual open , it will be in full mass . The top players will always dominate the game no matter the tier .
The Red Tee Bandits will steal their way into the tier as usual and then cry , because they cant compete . Others will actually play their way in and wont be able to compete as well . So until WGT actually create a true tier that can only be reached by certain conditions this problem will remain .
As I stated earlier if they would take the top 200 - 250 earners and then add the top 100 every year after , problem solved .
No one's pretending here Lonnie and yes, the best players will always be the best. That's why many have suggested a separation between them and the 95% that aren't and won't ever get there.
Players who achieved their status via red tee tourney's shouldn't bother anyone, they are only hurting themselves -- if and only if they have visions of playing in VT or tier opens and placing well. Many don't care. Someone who has a 49 avg. via red tees doesn't bother me 1 bit; that's all that needs to be said. It's their own fault given the current structure.
What I'm wondering however is what are the reasons the structure is that way. It is not because WGT doesn't listen, or because they are unwilling to change.
It's likely something else. Maybe the smart people at WGT determined its more profitable tied to avg. and # of ranked rounds. Maybe given the current software, it's very difficult to change that and not worth the money it'll cost make those changes to the software. Maybe it's because they have to cater to the entire world, not the very select few who post here and would like to complete/have a chance in a VT once in a while. Any of those are good reasons that make sense to me.
There's reason(s); just wondering if they could be shared that's all.