Give Grand Seniors a Fair Go!

[Belly]

Having looked at the results of the Ranked events so fair in 2015 it is obvious that the Grand Senior bowlers (men) are being dudded when it comes to prizefund payouts. In events where there is no separate prizefund for Grand Seniors you can see the issues

In the South Australian event
43% of Entries Grand Senior Bowlers Prizefund payout 21%
57% of Entries Seniors Bowlers Prizefund payout 79%

In the Sydney event
42% of Entries Grand Senior Bowlers Prizefund payout 29%
58% of Entries Seniors Bowlers Prizefund payout 72%

If you apply the SA results to the next two Senior events it gets worse
West Australia
43% of Entries Grand Senior Bowlers Prizefund payout 14%
57% of Entries Seniors Bowlers Prizefund payout 86%

Venuto's
43% of Entries Grand Senior Bowlers Prizefund payout 19%
57% of Entries Seniors Bowlers Prizefund payout 81%

Given that every year there are more bowlers becoming eligible for Grand Seniors and the Senior bowlers increase as more Bowlers turn 50 the task for Grand Seniors becomes even harder in one Senior division. There simple needs to be a Grand Senior division in every event or numbers will drop off rapidly!!

 

[strop]

Stephen,

I see your point but, when you have little sponsorship to do anything, it makes it hard.
And there are many Grand Seniors that are more than capable of being competitive against the younger folk...not you of coarse ...he...he....

Show me the money!!

Tony

 

[Belly]

Tony,

Mate I fully understand the limited sponsorship available, but are we better off paying the top 10 in two divisions slightly less than putting all the money into 1 division that way the Grand Seniors are the biggest sponsor!! I agree that Grand Seniors are competitive but they results show that on average only 3 finish in the top 15 that is 20% result for 40% of the entries the balance is not right. Personally I would rather win a smaller Grand Seniors division event than bowl exactly the same average and run 5th or 10th in the Seniors division and get less prizemoney

 

[Glennell]

Hi Belly

It's good hear from you - I thought you had fallen of the edge of the earth. Statistically you are absolutely correct and we need some consolidated thinking to get things back into balance. I see a couple of options;

1. Split the prize pool according to the percentage of bowlers in each grade.
2. Change the age for Grand Seniors. Again, you would need to look at the stats but 65 may bring it back in to balance, and
3. Give Grand Seniors a handicap of 1 point (or 2) for each year over 60 and just bring it back to one grade.

With all 3 options, you would need to study the results of the past couple of years so I am not suggesting any one of the above as the silver bullet. But I do agree that as we age, the balance of seniors to grand seniors and prize pool distribution needs to be looked at.

Cheers

 

[strop]

That's great if you only want to make 1st place 500 for both division, and even worse for the women.

While we love to do the same as the Vic AO, we just don't have the funds to cover the prize fund.
Unless maybe the ATBSO od SA want to back us and put some funds in then Woo Hoo...
We are having to base our tournaments on high entries now.

As I say, show us the money....and I'll do it!

Tony

 

[CT]

Not 100% certain how your prizefunds are broken down but i believe that no bowler should be paying into a prizefund that he or she isn't playing for (with minor exceptions for high female/youth finish etc). If grand seniors is a seperate division then their prizefund should stand alone. I'm not sure if that is well Belly is getting at but i assume it is.

 

[strop]

The SA Seniors Classic doesn't have separate division, we just choose to pay the Grand Seniors some bonus prize money.
TS

 

[Belly]

Glenn,


Seniors Grand Seniors
1st 1000 750
2nd 700 500
3rd 500 400
4th 400 300
5th 350 275
6th 300 250
7th 275 225
8th 250 200
9th 225
10th 200

 

[Belly]

Hi Glenn

Thanks for your input into this matter

1. Split the prize pool according to the percentage of bowlers in each grade.
Yes split prize pools are the correct way to go

Seniors Grand Seniors
1st 1000 750
2nd 700 500
3rd 500 400
4th 400 300
5th 350 275
6th 300 250
7th 275 225
8th 250 200
9th 225
10th 200


2. Change the age for Grand Seniors. Again, you would need to look at the stats but 65 may bring it back in to balance, and
I don't agree with this idea as making Grand Seniors at 65 in one prize pool, still does not help the 60+ bowlers beat the 50 year olds

3. Give Grand Seniors a handicap of 1 point (or 2) for each year over 60 and just bring it back to one grade.
Sorry I don't agree with idea either as it becomes a handicap event a bit like the Asian Zone events

 

[Belly]

Sorry for the multiply happens when you get old!

My suggestion above of separate prize pools is based on increasing the entry fee to $240 so it can support two prize pools if additional sponsorship can't be found

 

[strop]

Are you talking both male and female?

 

[strop]

Even at $240 per person and having the below payout for the women as well and based on 75 it still leaves us $2500 short of sponsorship based on last years game rate, and providing last years sponsors come back.
We don't have the funds you have Steve.

We would love to be able to have 2 payouts, can only do with little money we have.


Women / GS Women
1st $ 750.00 $ 600.00
2nd $ 500.00 $ 500.00
3rd $ 400.00 $ 400.00
4th $ 350.00 $ 350.00
5th $ 300.00 $ 300.00
6th $ 250.00 $ 250.00
7th $ 200.00 $ 200.00
8th $ 175.00

Tony

 

[Belly]

Tony

No I was only talking about the men's division I don't have any
Ideas for the women you are correct the Numbers are to
Small

 

[Brenton_Davy]

Where the prize funds don't allow for a decent GS prize structure I would suggest a similar bonus pins system to that used at Asian Zone Seniors Championships. I would envisage something like this:

60-65 yrs - 5 pins/gme
65-70 yrs - 10 pins/game
70-75 yrs - 15 pins/game

and so on.

Ranking points for Grand Seniors to remains as is.

 

[Belly]

Brenton,

I said earlier when Glenn suggested a similar idea that I didn't agree, but I am starting warm to the idea as it would also help the Women's division

Thanks

 

[Brenton_Davy]

Brenton,

I said earlier when Glenn suggested a similar idea that I didn't agree, but I am starting warm to the idea as it would also help the Women's division

Thanks

Whether we agree with it or not, handicapping has become more and more commonplace in scratch tournies since the +8 for females format has come into being. I can see a bonus pin format for the Grand Seniors actually leading to increased entries from the GS. In addition, as an ex tournament player, I can see entries increasing as the increased overall prizefund actually make the events more financially viable for those who travel. While this might be seen as flying in the face of the social aspect of these events, it was always a consideration for me.

 

[Belly]

Brenton,

I now agree with you completely, hopefully all the Tournament organisers take heed in 2016, it would also be great if WA and Venuto's events made these changes to the upcoming events.

 

[strop]

Brenton says..."In addition, as an ex tournament player, I can see entries increasing as the increased overall prizefund actually make the events more financially viable for those who travel......."

Entries increasing for won't help that much as we are close to capacity now without making it a marathon.
Sponsorship is needed, and we all know how difficult that is.
I do like the handicapping system Brenton, but that would need a committee vote for us to do that.

Tony

 

[caboolture bowl]

Hi everyone, The 2016 QLD Seniors Classic will be introducing a 1 pin per year over the age of 60 (64 Years of age 4 handicap) on each game bowled. Feed back is welcome but we believe this the only way forward to still have a worthwhile prize fund, sponsors are not easy to come by and we believe this the direction for all senior events into the future. Subject to TBA approval.

Brian/Animal/Carol

 

[Alberto]

I think you also need to take into account peoples ability. Does not seem fair to give someone handicap who is well capable of averaging over 200 when you have younger people who are 180 - 190 average bowlers not receiving anything. Does this also mean we need to start looking at handicap based on which hand you bowl since one side seems to have it better than the other?