What would rather Bowl for?

[Rikjpool]

After a few discussions on this thread about the prize fund payouts in Comps in Australia, I thought i'd take it to the bowlers themselves and ask.

Would you rather pay "ex" amount of dollars to compete in a tournament that provides a payout down to the first cut, resulting in 1st place to maybe winning only 2 - 3 times their entry fee?

Or,

Would you rather pay "ex" amout of dollars to compete in a Tournament where winner takes all resulting in a 10x or more payout?

 

[wchester]

Gotta be in it to win it. Second place is the first loser!

 

[GeorgeF]

1:4 is about the norm overseas and most of their payouts tend to be top heavy. As an example, if you took the recent Joodalup Cup in Perth's prizefund and paid out like they do in Asia 1st place would have been $5000, 2nd $2000, 3rd, $1000, 4-5th 750, etc you get the drift.

I think in Australia we are not in a position to do that as the same group of bowlers are dominating the events, if that continues and the prizefunds change the 'fringe' bowlers won't show up.

Because the formats are long, the better bowlers are in a position to run over the field. As I've said all along (even though it is disadvantageous for me), shorten the formats, and there will be new winners and renewed interest in the sport. The new AO format is great, short, cut throat and interesting.

Keep the prizefunds the same........ or the bowlers won't show

 

[Rikjpool]

Well Majority is certainly in favor of how how it is. THought it would be that way....

 

[wchester]

In all fairness Rikki, I think your two poll choices were a bit skewed. You asked the bowlers whether or not they would bowl a tournament wherein only the winner gets paid. That's an unrealistic option. If you had said that the first place bowler were to see at 10-to-1 return on their entry fee and maybe 1-in-4 or 1-in-5 receive some prize money back, then you might get a more accurate result of the poll.

 

[$$Pricey$$]

In all fairness Rikki, I think your two poll choices were a bit skewed. You asked the bowlers whether or not they would bowl a tournament wherein only the winner gets paid. That's an unrealistic option. If you had said that the first place bowler were to see at 10-to-1 return on their entry fee and maybe 1-in-4 or 1-in-5 receive some prize money back, then you might get a more accurate result of the poll.

i think that is a better option.

somewhere in the middle of rikki's choices.
so the winner gets a great payout but if you do well in the tournament you will at least get your money back.

 

[Rikjpool]

I was refering to Comps like on the PBA - The high rollers i think they are - where the winner takes home like $150,000 and second is left with nothing.

But over all i'm trying to get an idea of the difference in comps that people have in America - such as the PBA Tour, to the ones held in Australia. In Particular i thought that Chester and George would have a fair idea of what the difference would be...

 

[wchester]

I was refering to Comps like on the PBA - The high rollers i think they are - where the winner takes home like $150,000 and second is left with nothing.

No such thing.....
The PBA regionals pay 1-in-3 and the High Roller, even when 1st place was an amazing $200,000, while being heavy on top, did pay out 1-in-4

 

[ratty133]

I was refering to Comps like on the PBA - The high rollers i think they are - where the winner takes home like $150,000 and second is left with nothing.

But over all i'm trying to get an idea of the difference in comps that people have in America - such as the PBA Tour, to the ones held in Australia. In Particular i thought that Chester and George would have a fair idea of what the difference would be...

The only event the PBA competes for a prizefund like that, i think youll find is the Motel 6 Roll to Riches where the event is usually $150,000 - $200,000 Winner Take All

 

[doug81]

rather bowl in the one with more payouts, but I think a winner takes all is good to have every now and then for a big prize. works similar to poker I guess...

 

[mattimatt]

rather bowl in the one with more payouts, but I think a winner takes all is good to have every now and then for a big prize. works similar to poker I guess...

well said

i also like the 1-4 thing coz i'm constanly coming 2nd or 3rd
so i'd like a lil' bit of return sucks if you pay $300 to get into a tourney and loss it all

but also have a few winner take all coz a $50000 prize can be a trophey to work up to

 

[twenban]

You have to payout the minor places or else no one but the fortunate few would end up bowling. My usual comment here is a structure that promotes the less experienced to grow using the funds they can win by entering tournaments.

Rather than look at the PBA we should be looking at very professional organisations like the US PGA, I think from memory they have the winner get 18% of the total prize fund and it is distributed via percentages on a consistent basis across all their events.

 

[Anamul]

Most major Poker Tournies are around a 1 in 10 Payout, with the funds being very heavily skewed to the top 3 to 4 places. First is usually around 30% of the prize pool.