Gale Vaughn Memorial

I agree that the percentages of added cash should be based from the percentages of participants, but ... show more ›

I agree that the percentages of added cash should be based from the percentages of participants, but I do not agree, nor do many clubs who are more women friendly agree, that the added cash should the weighted more to the open division. Its my preference to support clubs who choose to support women and I am disappointed that Motor City changing chooses not to be one of these clubs.

please explain the math then. in theory if there are three women and three open men then how much w ... show more ›

please explain the math then. in theory if there are three women and three open men then how much would go to the men vs women? thank you. I think its important to have the right expectations should I choose to play this event. The info is much appreciated.

Sarah, do not write that the Motor City Chain Gang does not support women. That is not what I wrote. ... show more ›

Sarah, do not write that the Motor City Chain Gang does not support women. That is not what I wrote. If 15 Open Men play in an event where 1 Open Woman plays, and there is $100 added cash, just to speak to, than giving that 1 Open Woman $25 might make her happy but there would probably be a few upset Open Men players. We cannot speculate how much will get divided until we see how many people actually participate.

actually in this scenario you just mentioned it would be $31.25 to the one woman who equals 6.25% of ... show more ›

actually in this scenario you just mentioned it would be $31.25 to the one woman who equals 6.25% of the field and $31.25 is 6.25% of $500. the way to define women friendly verses women neutral verses women unfriendly isrelated directly to the percentages. anything less than thirty one dollars is women unfriendly because you do not allocate the same percentage as that which the participants represent. At 31 dollars of any cash you achieve when neutral status. paying more than the percentage which we represent women friendly status. its very simple it's not the least bit about name calling. Its simply stating the clubs value on women participating.I I think that setting expectations properly is important for helping players to decide whether to play or not. The unfriendly women policy(not adding the same percentage of add cash to that which we represent) dissaudes me from partucipating if my participation is not valued equally to the men.

furthermore I'm good friends with a lot of a really excellent disc golfers in the state and I've pol ... show more ›

furthermore I'm good friends with a lot of a really excellent disc golfers in the state and I've polled them on this question and none of them have said they'd begrudge women getting a women neutral percentage. So who are these upset open players that feel women do not deserve as much as them? I'd be very curious to know who they are because they are and why their opinion means more than mine, or the opinions of the women friendly open men that I know.

The percentage will be exactly what I stated in my first post: "The percentages of added cash and u ... show more ›

The percentage will be exactly what I stated in my first post: "The percentages of added cash and ultimate payouts are/should always be based from percentages of participants". The reason I stated "weighted more to the Open division" is because most events, if I am not mistaken, have more Open Men than Open Women, except Woman only events, of course. The MCCG has not, as far as I know, slighted Women, Open or Amateur, at any event. I also said "but there would probably be a few upset Open Men players" but I did not mention anyone specific. Even though I am educated, I am not versed enough as to actually write how someone other than myself would feel in any given situation. It really comes down to this, Sarah, do you want to play or don't you? If you have more important things to do, we understand. Only you can decide. We can say this, we will pay out fairly and for the most part, over what we advertise. This is not indifferent to most MCCG events.

Sarah - I understand you enjoy creating conflict to draw attention to the issue of added cash for an ... show more ›

Sarah - I understand you enjoy creating conflict to draw attention to the issue of added cash for an Open Women's division, but you can't go putting words into peoples' mouths. You always do that. If you construe what John said TRUTHFULLY: He gave the example of "If $100" cash is added - then $25 is too much in the event of a 15:1 field split. He used $100 to keep the math simple. Extrapolated out to $500 what he was saying was in the event of a 15:1 ratio of men:women, then $125 added to the one woman would be too much. I'd call it a simple misunderstanding but you do it all the time.

No it wasnt intentional, i mistook the 100 example for 500 and i agree adding 25% of the ac to a per ... show more ›

No it wasnt intentional, i mistook the 100 example for 500 and i agree adding 25% of the ac to a person (of any gender)who represents 6.25% of the field would be wildly off base, which is why i assumed we were talki g about $500 not $100. i am NOT putting words into anyones mouths, women unfriendly, neutral and friendly are simply terms utilized to describe how the ac is distributed. what would be a better label for when women dont receuve the same % of ac as that which they represent? please tell me, i would be willi g to change the terminology ive coined. its possible we are on the same page? John seems to be reassuring that womenwill not get gypped at mccg's events, so i will trust that apparent reassurance and hope for fairness. nice personal attack, though, woj, herea one backatcha: if you met susan b anthony youd be one of thosw men that tried to silence her and get her thrown in the slammer! i may hate disc golf but i dont hate women. hows that for words in the mouth woj? km the susan b anthony of disc golf b****es!

As for your Susan B Anthony thing... I have no need to defend myself against you. My time spent work ... show more ›

As for your Susan B Anthony thing... I have no need to defend myself against you. My time spent working with Spectrum at UToledo and Womens Issue Circle at Bluffton U in the past matter to those that matter to me. You've put words in peoples' mouths in an effort to cause conflict for YEARS, on the PDGA.com Forums and apparently now here. You misconstrue statements and make decent people sound like misogynists on a frequent enough basis that it is completely noticeable. Your cause is fine - the way you go about it is awful.

Your love of math is to be admired... but love does not correlate with knowledge. As evidenced above ... show more ›

Your love of math is to be admired... but love does not correlate with knowledge. As evidenced above by your determination that a 15:1 split of $100 leads to your earning $31.25. Diophantus is rolling in his grave now Sarah. Your equal rights motivation is also to be admired... but at this point your attitude makes me wonder: do actual women want YOU as their Susan B. Anthony.... or just the voices in your head telling you you're worthy of that title. Making comparisons like that indicates a serious perception issue, there are specialists you could talk to about this egomaniacal streak of yours you know, megalomania is no laughing matter.

And before you accuse me of sexism - please note that I am all for equal payout ratios. If anything ... show more ›

And before you accuse me of sexism - please note that I am all for equal payout ratios. If anything I am ageist and anti-masters cash added. I'm just saying maybe women would prefer someone (yes I mean someone female, before you put more words in my mouth) capable representing them.

I think that you need a more complex algorithm to account for the fact that it costs less to get int ... show more ›

I think that you need a more complex algorithm to account for the fact that it costs less to get into the pro women's division versus the pro open division. What about basing the payout on the percentage of the money collected form the open women, versus just their percentage of the field? So calculate the cash collected from open women divided by the total cash from all open players, and then multiply that by the added cash. For example, if there were 5 OPEN @ $20, 5 OPEN MASTERS @ $10 and 5 OPEN WOMEN at $10 there would be a total of 15 players and $200. Even though OPEN WOMEN are 33% of the field, they only account for 25% of the cash. So from the $500 added, only $125 would go to OPEN WOMEN (with $125 to OPEN MASTERS and $250 to OPEN). Bottom line, I agree with Sarah that it makes sense to base it on mathematics.

Not that I care, but just basing the percentage of the added cash on the percentage of the field isn ... show more ›

Not that I care, but just basing the percentage of the added cash on the percentage of the field isn't exactly fair based on the lower cost of the tournament entry fee for the women and masters. We definitely want to keep the women and masters coming back!

I see your point Mark, but tournaments are expensive so I think players have a right to have certain ... show more ›

I see your point Mark, but tournaments are expensive so I think players have a right to have certain expectations (such as a standard for added cash disbursement). Certainly debatable, so I understand why it's being debated.

a. I 100% agree with Paul. accounting for entry fee differential is necessary for accuracy. B. I ... show more ›

a. I 100% agree with Paul. accounting for entry fee differential is necessary for accuracy. B. I agree with Mark; distribution of added cash is at the TDs discretion, but he nust be willing to state how it will be distributed before the event so that players may plan properly. c. commonly accepted labels must be developed and utilized to convey the distribution of added cash. It seems the terms women friendly, women neutral, and women unfriendly are not acceptable or not able to be understood properly. 3 new terms must be developedfor use in communication. d. a protocol should be developed to convey necessary information if requesting that information is not acceptable on disc golf scene without unconcerned parties participating with inflammatory nonsense.