Forums

When 500 credits is not as good as 500 credits

• DanWidget 1,307 Posts

  Sun, Apr 1 2012 3:56 AM

  Please tell me in the monthly tiered competitions why the prize money you can win gets bigger as tiers increase.  For example
  
  April Pro Tier Open

  1st - 10,000    2nd - 5,000    3rd - 4,000

  April Tour Pro Tier Open

  1st - 12,500    2nd - 10000    3rd - 7,500

  April Legend Tier Open

  1st - 20,000    2nd - 18,500    3rd - 15,000

  Now I understand that player quality increases as tiers increase but these are tiered comps where competitors are of a comparable skill level so it is as hard for any particular individual to win the Pro tier comp against similar skilled players as it is for a Legend to win against similar skilled players.

  The cost to enter for ALL TIERS is 500 credits so the question I am asking is why is the 500 credits paid by lower tiers devalued by the prize money they can win?  Surely is there is less prize money on offer the entry fee should be less.

• piztaker 5,743 Posts

  Sun, Apr 1 2012 3:59 AM

  I don't see anything wrong with that. It costs a lot of credits to make Legend.

• DanWidget 1,307 Posts

  Sun, Apr 1 2012 4:12 AM

  But we aren't talking about how much it costs to make any particular level we are talking about an entry fee against prize return.  In open tier comps a Legend will more often than not pick up the prize money over a Pro or Tour Pro etc.,  but these are tier specific where everybody plays against their own tier level.  If prize money is less then the entry fee should reflect that.

  So let me put this another way.....You say that a Legend spends more money on credits than lets say a pro,  why is that?  Perhaps they have more disposable income to play with. Therefore 500 credits to a Pro player is a far larger chuck of money than 500 credits to a Legend.  On the Basis of what you are saying If Manchester City win the Premier League should they win more prize money than Arsenal should because they spent more money putting their team together?

  I also notice that you yourself are a Legend,  wonder if you would be so keen to pay 500 for just a fraction of the prize money.

   

• JaLaBar 1,254 Posts

  Sun, Apr 1 2012 5:50 AM

  No, Legends spend more money, theoretically, because they have advanced farther.  In reality, with variables in ability and sand-bagging etc. some lower tiered players have been here a lot longer than some Legends.

  Having said that, there is absolutely no problem with the higher tiers playing for more credits.  It is as it should be.  The winnings on the lower tours in real life are not as high as those on the PGA Tour.  The winnings are as they should be.  If you want to play for the higher prizes, elevate tiers.  As it is, there is absolutely no incentive to elevate except that we get higher purses.  Now you want to take away the only advantage Legends have.

  Let me repeat that:  Higher purses is the only tangible incentive to tier elevation.

• Jerm65 1,413 Posts

  Sun, Apr 1 2012 6:24 AM

  DanWidget:

  On the Basis of what you are saying If Manchester City win the Premier League should they win more prize money than Arsenal should because they spent more money putting their team together?

  No.  But they should certainly win more than Swindon does for winning League Two.  City and The Ar se are both "Legends"....Swindon are Pros.

  As for tourney payouts....it has nothing to do with how much you've spent to get to that tier....that's a baseless and hollow argument.

  Think of it as being the same as your local club championship.  It likely costs the same for a 20 handicap to enter as it does for a 2 handicap to enter....yet the Championship flight prizes are invariably better than the C flight prizes.  It's the same here.