skip nav

Forums

Monthly & Weekly Tournament Payout Totals Are Changing

Sun, Sep 29 2019 12:04 AM by BrodenSpeer23. 162 replies.
  • el3n1 United States
    2,894 Posts
    Mon, Oct 29 2018 9:24 AM

    DodgyPutter:
    I reckon it sounds like most of the other proposals here have been dismissed although one that hasn't, a new tier, would be very good to have.

    I wouldn't say they have all been dismissed.  Also, if I recall correctly (don't want to reread every post), #champ indicated he was advocating for the new tier.  I believe he was going to present it again in an upcoming meeting.  

    That said, even if support and approval is given to move in that direction.  It would take time to do so, and possibly some very thorough discussions by WGT. 

    If I were to put myself in their position, they need to brainstorm and think through how to best implement any changes while also trying to minimize or avoid creating the same problem that appears to have developed in the champion tier.  I imagine they may also be giving Fmagnets suggestion on earnings a good look as well.  The possible adjustments to tournaments was also believed to be unsettled, but something needed to be done in the meantime.

    Personally, I suggested to #champ in a PM that the big tournaments potentially be managed with their prize pools in a similar fashion to Poker tournaments.  The prize pool is based more on entries than a guaranteed monster payout with a small field that doesn't even come close to covering the prize pool.  

    It is then on players to get involved if they want to see larger payouts.  To exemplify how distorted the current monthly tier Open tournaments were becoming... consider the number of entries did not even cover a fraction of the payouts.

    Currently -- Champion tier 39 entries credits spent 7,800 --  prize pool  52,500

    Tour Legend 18 entries credits spent 3,600 -- prize pool 52,500

    Legend tier 82 entries credits spent 16,400 -- prize pool 52,500

    In these three alone, WGT is projected a loss of 129,700 credits.  Now entries may jump a little at the end of the month for a few players waiting to see what the target score needs to be, but many won't participate because of the target score that is needed.

    These three examples alone are massively distorted for the number of entries.  In my opinion, and from a business standpoint, WGT would be stupid not to do something.  Hence, the need to reassess the structure or payouts.  

    I would suggest even fewer would participate if the payouts were not worth the gamble when you only need a 1 in 75 chance for 3rd place or better.  And, therein is the problem... even with such incredible odds... many feel the scores being shot by the top 3 are even less than a .013 chance of winning or basically zero.  

     

  • WGTChampion United States
    1,562 Posts
    Mon, Oct 29 2018 9:45 AM

    LuckySkreet:

    The "Golden Calf" distribution...      Let's say, hypothetically, there was a CC named The Georgian.....or.... Champ's Chumps... or  ...Icon's Idiots....or whatever.....           

    Bro. I thought we were friends. 

    There's a lot in here to address. Some of you were mentioning other things that cause strife, and please take into consideration that this game is 10 years old. If this game was coming out today I would be fighting with everyone who makes decisions on things like a 250-player cap on CC. A player can't even have that many friends without causing issues for their account. But here we are 10 years later, we can't all of a sudden lower the number of members a club can have. 

    In the few years I have been here I've seen a number of strange things in CCs. I wouldn't want to add your credits into that. Like what happens to a CC bank if the club owner decides to never play again or close the club without warning. There's a number of things to consider. 

    Clash Prizing and Scoring isn't something I would necessarily like to change, but rather I'd like to come up with new CC events that we could use instead of having the same event every other week. Despite the many complaints in the forums about clashes, there are way more people playing in them than you would expect. 

    As for why any player can enter their club in a clash is because there's no single time zone our players are from. World Golf Tour really has players all over the world. If a player wants to enter the clash right when it starts, this may be when the owner (or permissible user to start a clash) is asleep. Of course if a club doesn't want to play in the clash other than that one player who started it, that doesn't mean they have to play. It's still entirely optional. 

    _CHAMPION 

  • DodgyPutter United Kingdom
    3,509 Posts
    Mon, Oct 29 2018 11:38 AM

    Not much time now but a couple of things.

    el3n1:

    DodgyPutter:
    I reckon it sounds like most of the other proposals here have been dismissed although one that hasn't, a new tier, would be very good to have.

    I wouldn't say they have all been dismissed.  Also, if I recall correctly (don't want to reread every post), #champ indicated he was advocating for the new tier.  I believe he was going to present it again in an upcoming meeting.  

    I was saying the new tier had not been dismissed and would be a good thing.

    el3n1:

    Currently -- Champion tier 39 entries credits spent 7,800 --  prize pool  52,500

    Tour Legend 18 entries credits spent 3,600 -- prize pool 52,500

    Legend tier 82 entries credits spent 16,400 -- prize pool 52,500

    In these three alone, WGT is projected a loss of 129,700 credits.

    These numbers are meanigless, what you have given are not the number of entrants they are the number of people to have completed the round.  Take for instance the Champion tier as soon as you can't score 43 it's as well to quit and the vast majority of entrants will have done just that.

  • el3n1 United States
    2,894 Posts
    Mon, Oct 29 2018 12:22 PM

    DodgyPutter:
    Take for instance the Champion tier as soon as you can't score 43 it's as well to quit and the vast majority of entrants will have done just that.

    Was not aware of this nuance, every other tournament I am aware of shows WD upon entering and quitting a round.  This would be an exception.  

    That said, I have no personal experience because I have never entered one of them. It may help increase the field if people did see those who entered and WD because as it stands most feel these events are targeted by specific players who tend to win them all the time, especially in the lower tiers. 

    I have never entered or attempted them before, in part due to some of the reasons already shared by others.  But if they are now going away or I should say being revised... maybe I will finally try … who knows if WGT smiles upon you, gives you good heavy wind conditions while others may have drawn more challenging heavy winds conditions, then a few putts fall... may feel like winning the lotto albeit a smaller one of course.

     

  • WGTChampion United States
    1,562 Posts
    Mon, Oct 29 2018 12:22 PM

    DodgyPutter:

    These numbers are meanigless, what you have given are not the number of entrants they are the number of people to have completed the round.  Take for instance the Champion tier as soon as you can't score 43 it's as well to quit and the vast majority of entrants will have done just that.

    I wouldn't call them meaningless, but even with the full number of entrants it's not a lot. 

    _CHAMPION 

  • DodgyPutter United Kingdom
    3,509 Posts
    Mon, Oct 29 2018 2:28 PM

    WGTChampion:
    I wouldn't call them meaningless, but even with the full number of entrants it's not a lot. 

    Unless we know what percentage of the entrants finish they are, it's possible to show lots of things with numbers especially made up ones.  To suggest a projected loss of 129,700 credits and then message you saying it should be something like the usual 80% of credits returned is damaging to other players, at least.  

    Lets say you get 150 entries, that's $300.  As has been much stated in this thread, including by you, "the same people keep winning these things", so the 52,500 credits can only be sold at the rate of 660 to the $, making them worth $79.84.  You'd need 40 entrants to make a profit at that rate.

    Someone who doesn't buy gift cards may win sometimes but it's still not money they're winning, it's virtual equipment.

    I know there are cheats in my numbers (entry fees from those that buy gift cards etc) but they are not less accurate than what is much quoted by you and the others that equate entry numbers (fees) to payouts, unless you are going to let folk cash in credits at 100 to the $ that is completely inaccurate.

  • el3n1 United States
    2,894 Posts
    Mon, Oct 29 2018 4:34 PM

    #dodgyputter -- I only based my post on the information available to me.  I never stated it accounted for everyone.  But it was correct based on the information I could view, I didn't make up or fabricate any false data. 

    I also stated it could be viewed as a projected loss... which does illustrate why it makes sense WGT would be concerned even if those numbers are not 100% accurate they likely still give a ballpark number that shows WGT is noticing it on their end due to a lack of participation.

    As far as I know, this entire thread is about offering suggestions.  It doesn't mean we will all like what someone else suggest, it is ultimately up to WGT to weigh the pros and cons.  I simply suggested a model that does work and is based on participation.  

    As for the other aspects, I can't even imagine or conceive of building a bankroll of hundreds of thousands of credits to sale them back for gift cards.  It seems that is more likely a rather small segment of elite players who are able to do that.  So we are definitely thinking or approaching the game from a different mindset.  

    The majority of my credits were built up watching 2 credit videos and that is what has sustained my game.  I am only now reaching a point where I can participate in tier level ready go's and feel comfortable risking credits that took me over a year to save up, but it also allowed me to purchase clubs and balls without needing to put a ton of money into the game.  Yes, I sort of worked as a bot clicking through videos each day, which earned WGT advertising revenue I believe, but at least I could enjoy the game without putting real money into it. 

    Something everyone may not have the option to do, but this is why we see some clubs offer to help those who don't have the means to do these things themselves.  Another bright spot in WGT's community.

  • DodgyPutter United Kingdom
    3,509 Posts
    Tue, Oct 30 2018 6:05 AM

    el3n1; I do think you reckon what you're doing is fair and honest but I don't think it is and the fact you're suggesting wgt reduces purses on the basis of it makes that important.  How long until we hear "the players suggested to us that we reduce purses to keep these fine tournaments going"?  When the purses are reduced participation will follow leading to reduced purses leading to..............

    Fair enough you didn't realise WD's weren't shown, it's not as you suggested the only tornament where this is the case, but you still seem to persist with the view that your numbers have some sort of vadility. 

    el3n1:
    I also stated it could be viewed as a projected loss... which does illustrate why it makes sense WGT would be concerned even if those numbers are not 100% accurate they likely still give a ballpark number that shows WGT is noticing it on their end due to a lack of participation.

    They don't give a ballpark number, I'd guess (and it's all I can do) that a lot more people WD from that tournament than finish it, how can it be when you are dividing by a totally arbitry number? Actually I suppose it's not totally arbitary we know it's way too low.

    el3n1:
    As for the other aspects, I can't even imagine or conceive of building a bankroll of hundreds of thousands of credits to sale them back for gift cards.  It seems that is more likely a rather small segment of elite players who are able to do that.  So we are definitely thinking or approaching the game from a different mindset.  

    I spent years doing what you are then decided I'd rather use the money from 30min work that spend 4 hours on ad's and surveys (one particular holiday ad' I watched thousands of times at 1c a time still pops into my head sometimes). 

    Lol, I think with our relative progression you're more likely to get there than me but that doesn't matter for what happens. The point is that the small segment of players you mention are the ones winning the credits.

    Lets at least look at a finished one, Septembers. Joe won it Ujjbnjk second and FrenchConnect third so all the credits went to them.  None of them will buy credits so thats 52,500 credits. Joe and FC are verified and will most likely cash most of them in at 660 to the £, so that's $53.  Uj isn't so probably gifts most of them meaning in effect it's costing wgt close to the $ per 100 they suggest every prize does = $175.  They would need to have needed 115 entries to make a profit, on that over simple basis (not counting ball use, etc) in that one.  From next month with the prize fund down 28.6% from what it was that would be 82 entries needed. 

    I said earlier that it was just a guess as to how many withdrew, but lets try something.  This is a quote from Champ on p4 of this thread...

    The tournament payout changes were to make them make more sense. In the top tiers we were giving 3x the credits compared to the tournament entries, and that's essentially been cut to 2x. It was illogical (and kind of still is). We also made it so that Champion and Tour Legend (and in some cases Legend) tier players were not competing for the same purse amount. 

    I think Champ will view the numbers as you do, $=100credits entry and prize.  Take these numbers at face value, the prize was 52,500c so a third of that is 17,500c giving 88 entrants.  From November 37,500c, with half being 18,750 giving 94 entrants.  I appologise for now guessing again but, I assume he's not rounding numbers down and there were at least 100 entrants.

    I actually don't really get the last bit of the quote from Champ', both he and you argue strongly that the prizes need to go down because of the numbers playing these.  You've suggested that a lot more legends play (assuming all tiers have a similar % of WD's), a Legend for every  2.1 champs and one for every 4.56 (!)TL's.  Suddenly prize funds are tier based too, "made not the same" doesn't mean dropping one and raising another in case that wasn't clear ;-)

    The prize pool for all three tiers was 52,500c; next month it will be Champion 37,500c, TL 27,000c and Legend 21,000c. So the legend one, with by far the highest participation has been most savagely cut, having had a prize fund in October that was 150% more than the one it has been "changed" to.  

    el3n1:
    As far as I know, this entire thread is about offering suggestions.  It doesn't mean we will all like what someone else suggest, it is ultimately up to WGT to weigh the pros and cons.  I simply suggested a model that does work and is based on participation.  

    I think that's fair but I also think they know this model, every RG pays exactly 80% of the entry fees for a start.  I don't pretend all this gives an entirely accurate picture, Joe even gifted me a set of balls after beating me in a recent CC mp game, I think he generally does, so even that would change the numbers as it's $5 I now wont spend :-)

    I just think instead of slowly killing tournaments there must be better things wgt could do starting with listening to Mags and generally stop folk selling credits, perhaps looking at how to get players from all countries verified etc etc.  This is penny pinching and daft. 

  • el3n1 United States
    2,894 Posts
    Tue, Oct 30 2018 7:31 AM

    #dodgyputter... I don't have a lot of time right now... but I still sense you are approaching this with different assumptions than myself.  It doesn't dismiss your concerns or input doesn't mean my input is more valid than yours, if anything it may help look at the issues from a variety of angles to help WGT tackle what may be a lingering issue or concern and based on his earlier post... participation is something WGT wants to see increase based on #wgtchamps posts... it was also suggested as part of the rationale of reducing some of the prize pools.  

    If you would like to connect as friends and chat, I will send an invite.  I try to learn as much as I can about this game and I have done a lot of reading, research, and watched videos on youtube and twitch to try and help myself improve.  I don't try to presuppose to know everything and can only speak from what I observe, read, and know about. 

    Pretty much everything I have learned I owe to others on WGT, so it doesn't surprise me when others shine a light on something I wasn't aware of and maybe every once in awhile, I offer a new perspective that refreshes interests in the game of someone that had fallen into a routine.  Either way, I would like to keep the doors open for communication.  

  • DodgyPutter United Kingdom
    3,509 Posts
    Tue, Oct 30 2018 8:04 AM

    Faie enough :-)

RSS