Criteria for holding a National Event

[Jase]

I think the Criteria for holding a National Event needs to be seriously looked at…

From what I am lead to believe you only need a $ 2000.00 first place and a separate Ladies division…

Please correct me if i am wrong there!

After looking at some of the Latest entry forms to hit TotalBowling, are they are using this criteria to there advantage to gain ranking points but the rest of the field are playing for peanuts…

E.g.…1st place $2000.000 2nd $1000.00 3rd $750.00 4th $500.00 and so on…Based on 60
E.g.…1st place $2000.000 2nd $1300.00 3rd $900.00 4th $800.00 and so on…Based on 72

Firstly why does first place have to be $2000.00 to gain ranking points?
Why cant it be $1500.00 and spread the money further down and
Why are Tournament Directors basing payouts on Numbers that aren’t even close to showing up at most tournaments…

Lets face it, the only way to boost numbers is to try and help a certain amount of bowlers in the field to cover cost’s, not just a handful in the top 5…If they are wanting more people to travel to these events then they seriously need to look at what costs are involved when traveling to these events or they will just end up folding…

I am not blaming the TD's I just think we need to look at the Criteria TBA require for holding a National Event…

Maybe it’s just me but I would like to know what others think…

 

[GeorgeF]

I dont want to point the finger but I don't think Canberra should be Nationally ranked. There's just too many events on, not to mention the 5 double ranked events that are on (which I also don't agree with).

I think TBA should up the ante with minimum requirements and cut the National events back to maybe 8 events only. Up 1st to $3000K minimum and 1:3 ratio payout with finalists at least doubling their money.

I know its easy to say that and I appreciate alot of sponsorship dollars are needed to get the tournaments off the ground but I think having 13-15 ranked events in Australia including 5 double ranked events is crazy.

Too late for this year, lets hope next year changes

 

[JWhitty]

I agree with a bit of both here, I generally will travel if the cut is close to my cost - so spreading more money down the ladder is in my opinion a good way to get more participants.

And I agree with George, there's too many ranked events for our bowling community to support - but only because of the costs. If it was more affordable we could support this many events, but at the moment it's simply those with the money to travel that have a mile head-start. I'm not suggesting that any of the top ranked bowlers with a dozen tournaments on the board don't deserve their rank or that they're not the best, but the current system is majorly geared towards those that bowl the most and not necessarily the best.

I'm really pleased to see George suggesting it should reduce, it's always positive when those the system helps want to even out the playing field a bit more.

*