Why tournaments should hold multi events!

[avalon]

Obviously am writing this from a personal perspective, but would be interested in knowing what some of the rank and file think, hopefully it will stay serious.
Much has been made recently of the defections, not just Buntys and a few others but more specifically by the scores of regular and previously staunch BDO supporters over to Q School and the challenge tour, which it would appear is now looked upon, certainly from a financial and logistical angle a more cost affective alternative. The view of the JDO, particularly in view of this, and totry and stop future en mass desertions, is that we must collectively raise the game, and not just us, but everyone, governing body, organisers, associations as to what we all offer the players and in doing so offset the reasons for our players to stray.
As every governing body are entitled to, the JDO applied to have three ranking events at this years Festival, and was promised two years ago. As we speak the BDO have turned the request down, without any explanation or elaboration other than to suggest that to allow it will have a "detremental affect on all other events in the diary" something we will bitterly dispute at our appeal. Since we first held two events which as most know as also frowned upon, other countries have now follwed our lead, and Germany, Ireland, Poland and IOM to name but a few are now organising two events on the one weekend, which us great news for all the circuit players.
We vehemently believe, that if allowed to organise three, and their is no rule to prevent this happening, and even Vic Sexton the BDO own rules director confirmed the fact, then next year more events will again follow our lead, and if a small island can manage it, can raise the finances to hold three then any country could if they so wished.
When applying for our third event, our further request for making one of the events a CAT A was also turned down, even though we were prepared to up the prize money to the mininum £7,000 required. Reluctantly we accepted that decision even though they allowed the new event in Ireland, clashing on the same day, that privilige x 2 events. We genuiney wish the Irish event well and am sure they will recieve at worse a huge indiginous entry, but can this be right. Holding three events anywhere can only be advantageous for all those who travel, and for the following reasons...............................

You mean the Welsh or Finland lead

Wales did it with the classic and masters years ago, well before Jersey was resurrected.

That aside the only thing I can see against it is the point Trotter made about it being a deterrent from travelling to other events. Yes I could see more local people entering but I could also see the loss of sponsors for events if no `big` names were in attendance because they wouldn`t have the need to travel. I can also see the loss of entries because there are a lot of players out there who know they have no chance of winning but like the idea of rubbing shoulders with the faces they see on TV. Add that to the fact that some people really only enjoy pairs or mixed pairs ( they think they have no chance on the singles ) and have a good enough partner to earn some money and prestige, if one or both pairs events are lost due to time restraints then some people will not go at all.

The final point I would make is where is the extra prize money going to come from in some countries. Pairs events pay out a lot less than the singles, if an event becomes a double header they will need to find extra funds. If people stop travelling to Romania, Switzerland, Sweden etc because they don`t need to they will lose entries, possibly lose sponsorship and not have the money to hold a double header to tempt people to attend.

Personally I am all for multi single events over a weekend because my other half has a chance of winning points in both, but I do think it would jeopardise the future of a lot of the smaller events

[The H]

Then not wanting to sound controversial the smaller events need to surely step up to the plate, even if it is all relevant to the size of the event to start with, indeed, as Jersey has and few if any can be smaller than the JDO, I think there is 350 league players which is pretty good considering the size of the island, and its just about thinking out the box.

If you have 250 people there and charge them all £10/£20 then you have enough money for a CAT B event, that or get it sponsored, If the Czech for example held a second one at their hugely popular tournament, and did the same then they would have enough to finance a CAT A. If you asked the players which we most certainly have, every one thus far has agreed. Thats not to say everyone else would, this is about making things better for the players, making it cheaper, making it more practical and is a darn sight better than being allowed to clash intenetionally or otherwise which surely must be loads worse for the players who then are forced into making a choice on the same bllomin dates

As for Wales holding two events correct me if I am wrong isn't that held over ten days or something like that, I dont count that (lol)ours as indeed could be the case with any governing body would bejust three days and there is no rule whatsoever exisiting that says it cant be done, and it benefits the players which it would, then for once...happy days

I cant deny doubles are popular, and if one still had time, absolutely do them, but again asking the players, given the choice between mens, mixed and or ladies and an extra ranking event, its a no brainer, and whilst I am no expert of the outcomes of the doubles aren't they invariably all won by the top playere, which hardly I am further assuming helps distribute prize money to the lesser players.

It's why we introduced the cabbages event which even Pauly got to the quarters of I think!!!! lol

[The H]

Just thinking, if as you say it might stop other players going to events to reach their twelve, does not then suggest, by its very inferrrence that the current system almost forces them to go to those events, which surely has to be fundamentally wrong.

The other sound part of the arguement, is just how many players actually tick all twelve boxes anyway, very few in fact, and a lot that do get invited to a lot, so they would still appear, but very few circuit regulars do, and why, its too bloody expensive, its why so many have taken the challenge tour route. We simply have to stop that if we can by making the ciruit cheaper if we can, dont we?

[avalon]

Welsh Masters and classic were consecutive days or just one day break between them........... so not ten days between them.

It`s easy to suggest that other countries step up to the plate when you are living and earning or have UK income. I know I will sound like a broken record here but what you are saying is that a country such as Romania has to find the equivalent of over 1 years local average salary to meet category B criteria and if they were to hold 2 in one weekend then over 2 years equivalent of the average local salary. In jersey you need to find a couple of months worth, maybe 2 1/2 months for one event and 5 months for 2 events.

Surely you cannot expect a country like Romania to take a chance and publish over 2 years local salary in the HOPE that people from outside of the country travel there.
If they cannot meet the BDO criteria for uk financially based prize money there is no way they could hope to meet the criteria of one category B let alone 2.
They could of course take a flyer.... advertise the prize money for 2 events and hope that players respond with their entries but if other countries are already doing double headers and getting points they wont need to travel to Romania would they. It is going to leave someone in a very serious financial situation.

Let each country have at least one category A and one category B event, have the prize money based on local economy and then go ahead with double header weekends.
It won`t bankrupt any of the `poorer` countries and by offering cat A and B events it may well just be enough to boost entries, which can lead to an increase in prize money the following year. At the worst they won`t cripple themselves financially from the start.

[The H]

Welsh Masters and classic were consecutive days or just one day break between them........... so not ten days between them.

It`s easy to suggest that other countries step up to the plate when you are living and earning or have UK income. I know I will sound like a broken record here but what you are saying is that a country such as Romania has to find the equivalent of over 1 years local average salary to meet category B criteria and if they were to hold 2 in one weekend then over 2 years equivalent of the average local salary. In jersey you need to find a couple of months worth, maybe 2 1/2 months for one event and 5 months for 2 events.

Surely you cannot expect a country like Romania to take a chance and publish over 2 years local salary in the HOPE that people from outside of the country travel there.
If they cannot meet the BDO criteria for uk financially based prize money there is no way they could hope to meet the criteria of one category B let alone 2.
They could of course take a flyer.... advertise the prize money for 2 events and hope that players respond with their entries but if other countries are already doing double headers and getting points they wont need to travel to Romania would they. It is going to leave someone in a very serious financial situation.

Let each country have at least one category A and one category B event, have the prize money based on local economy and then go ahead with double header weekends.
It won`t bankrupt any of the `poorer` countries and by offering cat A and B events it may well just be enough to boost entries, which can lead to an increase in prize money the following year. At the worst they won`t cripple themselves financially from the start.

Everything is relative. I have no idea of the costings for Romania and as such cant comment on how they should or may possibly finance any supplementary events, but I think one only needs a couple of grand to have a CAT C event, anf if any country cant afford or get sponsorship to hold further events, fine. The answer is surely straightforward, dont do it, no-one has a problem with that and its why I assume the BDO have different qualifying regions

Could they take a flyer, and advertise extra events you say. Of course "they could" after all isn't that exactly what everyone else does, certainly starts of doing?

One never knows how many will turn up at any event, but the JDO as the one of the smallest governing bodies are prepared to take as you say that flyer, and if you believe in something why not. If anyone cant, or doesn't want to, then of course you wouldn't do it. Nobody is suggesting anyone should overstretch themselves, now that would be pointless, madness in fact, but the more organisations that held multi events, as opposed to holding three seperate ones, the more the players would benefit.

Many outside the Dutch, Germans, and UK don't even utilise their maximum allocation, so there is a tremendous opportunity for them to do something about it.

Your last suggestion though is, and only in my opinion, absurd. How can anyone, never mind the governing body, possibly justify or allow country's to have one A and or one B, but base it not on the prizemoney as has to be the case and as I think you are advocating against, around the strength or not of their local economy. That then just directly punishes everyone who has a stronger one and actually could lead to a huge reduction of prize monies offered throughout Europe. Why should, if I understand you correctly say Holland, Germany, IOM or anyone for that matter have to put up more prize money, just because their residents by concencus are a bit wealthier.

That not with standing Avalon, who on earth would determine and rule on such a subjective issue? Market forces will surely determine which players goes where and when, as it should be and not surely local economies. For many UK players they have to hop on a plane at least 6,7 times a season to fill their quota whereas many players in mainland Europe can open their car doors.

Cut down the costs increase the benefits and more will surely travel, not rocket science. If you disagree with our view my friend, we genuinely have no problem with that at all, as I mentioned earlier, someone will be the first to do, as you are he, and I respect that, simply cant buy into it at all sorry, and nor it would appear would all the players who have thus far given their support. But I get your points sir

[towlie]

Can you not arange it to hold a singles event with no ranking points but with the same prize fund in the middle of the 2 ranking comps, that way the players will all be there and are going to enter anyway and have a chance to win more prize money.

[Skewball]

Can you not arange it to hold a singles event with no ranking points but with the same prize fund in the middle of the 2 ranking comps, that way the players will all be there and are going to enter anyway and have a chance to win more prize money.

maybe make it a true 'open' on this middle day and you could get a few PDC players rock up!
Actually it sounds a very sensible suggestion!

[avalon]

Welsh Masters and classic were consecutive days or just one day break between them........... so not ten days between them.

It`s easy to suggest that other countries step up to the plate when you are living and earning or have UK income. I know I will sound like a broken record here but what you are saying is that a country such as Romania has to find the equivalent of over 1 years local average salary to meet category B criteria and if they were to hold 2 in one weekend then over 2 years equivalent of the average local salary. In jersey you need to find a couple of months worth, maybe 2 1/2 months for one event and 5 months for 2 events.

Surely you cannot expect a country like Romania to take a chance and publish over 2 years local salary in the HOPE that people from outside of the country travel there.
If they cannot meet the BDO criteria for uk financially based prize money there is no way they could hope to meet the criteria of one category B let alone 2.
They could of course take a flyer.... advertise the prize money for 2 events and hope that players respond with their entries but if other countries are already doing double headers and getting points they wont need to travel to Romania would they. It is going to leave someone in a very serious financial situation.

Let each country have at least one category A and one category B event, have the prize money based on local economy and then go ahead with double header weekends.
It won`t bankrupt any of the `poorer` countries and by offering cat A and B events it may well just be enough to boost entries, which can lead to an increase in prize money the following year. At the worst they won`t cripple themselves financially from the start.

Everything is relative. I have no idea of the costings for Romania and as such cant comment on how they should or may possibly finance any supplementary events, but I think one only needs a couple of grand to have a CAT C event, anf if any country cant afford or get sponsorship to hold further events, fine. The answer is surely straightforward, dont do it, no-one has a problem with that and its why I assume the BDO have different qualifying regions

Could they take a flyer, and advertise extra events you say. Of course "they could" after all isn't that exactly what everyone else does, certainly starts of doing?

One never knows how many will turn up at any event, but the JDO as the one of the smallest governing bodies are prepared to take as you say that flyer, and if you believe in something why not. If anyone cant, or doesn't want to, then of course you wouldn't do it. Nobody is suggesting anyone should overstretch themselves, now that would be pointless, madness in fact, but the more organisations that held multi events, as opposed to holding three seperate ones, the more the players would benefit.

Many outside the Dutch, Germans, and UK don't even utilise their maximum allocation, so there is a tremendous opportunity for them to do something about it.

Your last suggestion though is, and only in my opinion, absurd. How can anyone, never mind the governing body, possibly justify or allow country's to have one A and or one B, but base it not on the prizemoney as has to be the case and as I think you are advocating against, around the strength or not of their local economy. That then just directly punishes everyone who has a stronger one and actually could lead to a huge reduction of prize monies offered throughout Europe. Why should, if I understand you correctly say Holland, Germany, IOM or anyone for that matter have to put up more prize money, just because their residents by concencus are a bit wealthier.

That not with standing Avalon, who on earth would determine and rule on such a subjective issue? Market forces will surely determine which players goes where and when, as it should be and not surely local economies. For many UK players they have to hop on a plane at least 6,7 times a season to fill their quota whereas many players in mainland Europe can open their car doors.

Cut down the costs increase the benefits and more will surely travel, not rocket science. If you disagree with our view my friend, we genuinely have no problem with that at all, as I mentioned earlier, someone will be the first to do, as you are he, and I respect that, simply cant buy into it at all sorry, and nor it would appear would all the players who have thus far given their support. But I get your points sir

You are totally missing the point. Maybe my explanation or maybe you are speed reading, or maybe some other reason. but please read everything. I am on your side with multi events. I just believe that basing qualification for a WORLD championships should not be based on the financial strength of one country and that to encourage the growth of bdo/wdf events throughout the world, then encourage them to have a double header of one category A event and one category B based on their own economy.

Firstly if you read back I am TOTALLY for multi events.( I will repeat this until you manage to read it at least once )
Secondly, how is anyone/any country going to be punished if every country could hold at least one category A or one category B event. It does not force anyone to spend more money on travel, it would encourage more people in each country to attend their own events or those of a neighbouring country.
If you read back I did say at ``at least one category A and B` so how would that effect Jersey or England etc.... it wouldn`t. You can still do the same as you are doing or improving upon it. Having Romania, Hungary etc having a category A event isn`t going to effect the number of entries you get in any way whatsoever.

If, after failing to fill enough boxes or getting enough points, from UK events a player chooses to fly to one of the smaller events where there are category A points on offer then that is their choice, no one is forcing them to do it.

Lets say for example that if a country or in the event of Jersey or IoM had a double header, one category A one B, and Belgium, Germany, the Netherlands etc did the same. It would free up a few weekends, as you have already stated. So on one of these free weekends Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland etc organise a double header, one category A and one category B with prize money related to their own economy not that of the UK. This would not effect in the slightest your own events. It would encourage more people to travel to these countries, not only from the vicinity but maybe from other parts of Europe too. This can and probably would lead to larger entries, this in turn will lead to greater prize money at these events, shouldn't that be encouraged?

You are right of course that people in Europe can just open their car doors, but many people in the UK do not even need a passport or visas to get to enough category A or B events. And, also as you seem to be unaware, because of Ryanair, easyjet etc mainly flying from the UK, for someone from the Netherlands or where we live in Germany, there are no direct `cheap`flights to places like Poland. It costs far more in petrol money or by train to get to places like this than it costs someone travelling from the UK and it takes longer.

Just coming to your point over your reaction to organisations taking a flyer....... If you guarantee prize money for a category B event... you risk just over 2 months average income in the UK. For someone in the Romania it is over a years income. You think you all carry the same risk? Think again.

There are, in the men`s list, 14 Category A events, 9 are in the UK, 5 in the rest of the world, a bit of an imbalance don`t you think. In the ladies list there is just ONE category A event in mainland Europe, 5 in the UK.

Just to summarise and make it clear........ I am ALL for multi events
No way would giving some of the smaller countries at least one category A and one category B event for a multi weekend effect anyone in the UK. It would just give players further opportunities to get points in the chase to get to Lakeside.
No way would this bring prize money down and push travelling costs up.
It is all about opportunities and choice.......

[Paddy McGinty]

Can you not arange it to hold a singles event with no ranking points but with the same prize fund in the middle of the 2 ranking comps, that way the players will all be there and are going to enter anyway and have a chance to win more prize money.

maybe make it a true 'open' on this middle day and you could get a few PDC players rock up!
Actually it sounds a very sensible suggestion!

Why would you want to dilute the standard?

[The H]

Can you not arange it to hold a singles event with no ranking points but with the same prize fund in the middle of the 2 ranking comps, that way the players will all be there and are going to enter anyway and have a chance to win more prize money.

Actually the JDO does just that with a £2000 open and last year the aptly named £1500 'No Hopers and Cabbages' which you can only enter if you haven't earnt any money in the main events. What astonished me, towlie, whilst happy the prize money was decent, were the amount of players, male, female, top ranked and circuit regulars that said the points were more important!

Its why the JDO so badly want to rank their third event. They were told in year one because the third event had not been run before that they would have to wait two years of it being held before it would be granted status, thats now passed and they just want what they were promised, and I would really like to have a bet, so firm is our conviction that when it happens as surely for the players sake (not to mentione fairness) it will be, that next season others, and it will be the smaller ones follow suit, and suddenly the circuite becomes a lot cheaper for the players and hat in itself will hopefully self perpetuate more entries at a lot more events.

[The H]

Welsh Masters and classic were consecutive days or just one day break between them........... so not ten days between them.

It`s easy to suggest that other countries step up to the plate when you are living and earning or have UK income. I know I will sound like a broken record here but what you are saying is that a country such as Romania has to find the equivalent of over 1 years local average salary to meet category B criteria and if they were to hold 2 in one weekend then over 2 years equivalent of the average local salary. In jersey you need to find a couple of months worth, maybe 2 1/2 months for one event and 5 months for 2 events.

Surely you cannot expect a country like Romania to take a chance and publish over 2 years local salary in the HOPE that people from outside of the country travel there.
If they cannot meet the BDO criteria for uk financially based prize money there is no way they could hope to meet the criteria of one category B let alone 2.
They could of course take a flyer.... advertise the prize money for 2 events and hope that players respond with their entries but if other countries are already doing double headers and getting points they wont need to travel to Romania would they. It is going to leave someone in a very serious financial situation.

Let each country have at least one category A and one category B event, have the prize money based on local economy and then go ahead with double header weekends.
It won`t bankrupt any of the `poorer` countries and by offering cat A and B events it may well just be enough to boost entries, which can lead to an increase in prize money the following year. At the worst they won`t cripple themselves financially from the start.

Everything is relative. I have no idea of the costings for Romania and as such cant comment on how they should or may possibly finance any supplementary events, but I think one only needs a couple of grand to have a CAT C event, anf if any country cant afford or get sponsorship to hold further events, fine. The answer is surely straightforward, dont do it, no-one has a problem with that and its why I assume the BDO have different qualifying regions

Could they take a flyer, and advertise extra events you say. Of course "they could" after all isn't that exactly what everyone else does, certainly starts of doing?

One never knows how many will turn up at any event, but the JDO as the one of the smallest governing bodies are prepared to take as you say that flyer, and if you believe in something why not. If anyone cant, or doesn't want to, then of course you wouldn't do it. Nobody is suggesting anyone should overstretch themselves, now that would be pointless, madness in fact, but the more organisations that held multi events, as opposed to holding three seperate ones, the more the players would benefit.

Many outside the Dutch, Germans, and UK don't even utilise their maximum allocation, so there is a tremendous opportunity for them to do something about it.

Your last suggestion though is, and only in my opinion, absurd. How can anyone, never mind the governing body, possibly justify or allow country's to have one A and or one B, but base it not on the prizemoney as has to be the case and as I think you are advocating against, around the strength or not of their local economy. That then just directly punishes everyone who has a stronger one and actually could lead to a huge reduction of prize monies offered throughout Europe. Why should, if I understand you correctly say Holland, Germany, IOM or anyone for that matter have to put up more prize money, just because their residents by concencus are a bit wealthier.

That not with standing Avalon, who on earth would determine and rule on such a subjective issue? Market forces will surely determine which players goes where and when, as it should be and not surely local economies. For many UK players they have to hop on a plane at least 6,7 times a season to fill their quota whereas many players in mainland Europe can open their car doors.

Cut down the costs increase the benefits and more will surely travel, not rocket science. If you disagree with our view my friend, we genuinely have no problem with that at all, as I mentioned earlier, someone will be the first to do, as you are he, and I respect that, simply cant buy into it at all sorry, and nor it would appear would all the players who have thus far given their support. But I get your points sir

You are totally missing the point. Maybe my explanation or maybe you are speed reading, or maybe some other reason. but please read everything. I am on your side with multi events. I just believe that basing qualification for a WORLD championships should not be based on the financial strength of one country and that to encourage the growth of bdo/wdf events throughout the world, then encourage them to have a double header of one category A event and one category B based on their own economy.

Firstly if you read back I am TOTALLY for multi events.( I will repeat this until you manage to read it at least once )
Secondly, how is anyone/any country going to be punished if every country could hold at least one category A or one category B event. It does not force anyone to spend more money on travel, it would encourage more people in each country to attend their own events or those of a neighbouring country.
If you read back I did say at ``at least one category A and B` so how would that effect Jersey or England etc.... it wouldn`t. You can still do the same as you are doing or improving upon it. Having Romania, Hungary etc having a category A event isn`t going to effect the number of entries you get in any way whatsoever.

I concede I might be missing your point, thats always possible

But reading it again, unless I am having a blonde moment, am struggling ona couple of the points you make to work out where. Are you not advocating that any country should hold a CAT A or B event, but should be allowed to do so with less prize money than offered by other coutries that do similar?

Its not as simple as affecting numbers somewhere else, be that in jersey or elsewhere. If you allow, and we'll use your examples if we can Avalon, Hungary or Romania, to do that,(if in fact thats what your suggesting, the point I could be missing ) then how unfair would that be on all the other CAT A and CAT B events that have to adhere to the BDO's prize money structures. If you were one of those concerned, surely you would take a view, that if country A was holding a CAT A event with half the prize money as your own equivalent, you woul be fully entitled to reduce yours accordngly. Hence the danger I spoke of earlier. You surely cant on the min diary circuit have one rule for one and run for another can you?

If you can, then Jersey being the smallest of all organisations would perhaps have a right to upgrade both of theirs and the third hopefully to come to the top grade. I would settle for that, but in my opinion it still wouldn't make it right

[Booji Boy]

The point I think is pretty obvious, the BDO points structure is not related to the economy of the country.

I am in total agreement with Avalon on this one.

[The H]

It would free up a few weekends, as you have already stated. So on one of these free weekends Bulgaria, Hungary, Poland etc organise a double header, one category A and one category B with prize money related to their own economy not that of the UK. This would not effect in the slightest your own events. It would encourage more people to travel to these countries, not only from the vicinity but maybe from other parts of Europe too. This can and probably would lead to larger entries, this in turn will lead to greater prize money at these events, shouldn't that be encouraged?

You are right of course that people in Europe can just open their car doors, but many people in the UK do not even need a passport or visas to get to enough category A or B events. And, also as you seem to be unaware, because of Ryanair, easyjet etc mainly flying from the UK, for someone from the Netherlands or where we
live in Germany, there are no direct `cheap`flights to places like Poland. It costs far more in petrol money or by train to get to places like this than it costs someone travelling from the UK and it takes longer.

Just coming to your point over your reaction to organisations taking a flyer....... If you guarantee prize money for a category B event... you risk just over 2 months average income in the UK. For someone in the Romania it is over a years income. You think you all carry the same risk? Think again.

There are, in the men`s list, 14 Category A events, 9 are in the UK, 5 in the rest of the world, a bit of an imbalance don`t you think. In the ladies list there is just ONE category A event in mainland Europe, 5 in the UK.

Right lets take them in order Avalon if I may mate.

We will have to agree to disagree on the first one. The thought of handing out ranking status based not on one offers but based on ones economy is fundamentally crazy. A ruling has to be applied fairly and neutrally, and since we first organised Jersey, we have suffered more than any other event from the fact that this doesn't happen, but it should. Change the principles of that and it surely leave the whole system not only open to abuse in chaos. As one so clearly intelligent Avalon, I really cant believe you can even suggest such a thing.

Anything that boosts attendance at these events you mention and others, has to be applauded and ecnouraged, but it has to be done so on the same rules that everyone else is subjected to, if you dont whay have the rules in the first place?

The points you make about travelling from central Europe is off course valid as well, but it actually endorse my whole arguement. If the Polish and again only because you mentioned it, held three events, then the cost of getting there against the cost of going to one, two or possibly three separate ones will boost attendances from everywhere, but more certainly from their immediate neighbours.
The same way if, for example Sweden, who compared to many dont get huge numbers from the UK, and because of exactly the same travelling and financial reasons you cite, but who always attact a great Scandanavian entry held two or three events at one tournament, whilst it may not encourage too many extras from the UK, it will as surely as night follows day attract a bigger indiginous entry and more from its neighbours and with those with access to cheaper flighs. Holding multi vent isn't a benefit that just those from the Uk will gain from but everyone. If these hypothetical examples we mentioned other players amass more points that they would do ordinarily then dont you think, armed with those extra points then they too might be tempted to try out other events when previously they may not have bothered?

I am also showing my genuine ignorance then because I really didn't know the EDO, WDO, and SDO ran three CAT A events as your comment suggests, even now on reflection I am struggling to work out which events they are, and I most certainly cant think of the five CAT A events in the ladies game you mention that the respective bodies organise. I know I am leaving myself open to ridicule here, but dare I ask what these events are?

[The H]

The point I think is pretty obvious, the BDO points structure is not related to the economy of the country.

I am in total agreement with Avalon on this one.

Then Col, I am missing the point compleely and I apologise for being such a tart, because as I read it that was exactly the point Avalon was advocating.................in parts of Europe, they should be

[The H]

Can you not arange it to hold a singles event with no ranking points but with the same prize fund in the middle of the 2 ranking comps, that way the players will all be there and are going to enter anyway and have a chance to win more prize money.

maybe make it a true 'open' on this middle day and you could get a few PDC players rock up!
Actually it sounds a very sensible suggestion!

Why would you want to dilute the standard?

Humour Paddy...good'un mate!

[avalon]

Right lets take them in order Avalon if I may mate.

We will have to agree to disagree on the first one. The thought of handing out ranking status based not on one offers but based on ones economy is fundamentally crazy. A ruling has to be applied fairly and neutrally, and since we first organised Jersey, we have suffered more than any other event from the fact that this doesn't happen, but it should. Change the principles of that and it surely leave the whole system not only open to abuse in chaos. As one so clearly intelligent Avalon, I really cant believe you can even suggest such a thing.

Anything that boosts attendance at these events you mention and others, has to be applauded and ecnouraged, but it has to be done so on the same rules that everyone else is subjected to, if you dont whay have the rules in the first place?

The points you make about travelling from central Europe is off course valid as well, but it actually endorse my whole arguement. If the Polish and again only because you mentioned it, held three events, then the cost of getting there against the cost of going to one, two or possibly three separate ones will boost attendances from everywhere, but more certainly from their immediate neighbours.
The same way if, for example Sweden, who compared to many dont get huge numbers from the UK, and because of exactly the same travelling and financial reasons you cite, but who always attact a great Scandanavian entry held two or three events at one tournament, whilst it may not encourage too many extras from the UK, it will as surely as night follows day attract a bigger indiginous entry and more from its neighbours and with those with access to cheaper flighs. Holding multi vent isn't a benefit that just those from the Uk will gain from but everyone. If these hypothetical examples we mentioned other players amass more points that they would do ordinarily then dont you think, armed with those extra points then they too might be tempted to try out other events when previously they may not have bothered?

I am also showing my genuine ignorance then because I really didn't know the EDO, WDO, and SDO ran three CAT A events as your comment suggests, even now on reflection I am struggling to work out which events they are, and I most certainly cant think of the five CAT A events in the ladies game you mention that the respective bodies organise. I know I am leaving myself open to ridicule here, but dare I ask what these events are?

Point one: Why should basing prize money on local economy be fundamentally crazy? The costs of almost everything in a country are based on local economy, so why is it fundamentally crazy to apply this to darts? How is it fair and neutral to have the UK`s financial structure imposed on other countries for a `world` championship ranking event?

Point 2: I am not suggesting that other countries have different rules to the UK, I am suggesting a change in the rules. I am suggesting that minimum prize money be calculated in a different manner and not a simple....... minimum £7,000 and you have a category A. That rule stops many countries in the world ever having the chance to have a category B let alone a category A. This prevents players from all over the world ever having the chance to qualify automatically for Lakeside, it in turn acts as a hindrance to the growth of darts worldwide.

A bit of simple maths is all that is required: The English Open prize money, arguably the bet paid open event as far as prize money is concerned, equates to just over 5 months average monthly income for the mens event. Quite rightly a category A event. Romanian Open total prize money is equal to over 9 months average income in their country. That should be applauded, rewarded, not penalised by having a category C event.
Have a simple rule change from so much money in pounds sterling to something like: Category A minimum of 3 times average local monthly income. Category B 2 times and so on. it is not at all complicated to work out as all the figures are available on internet every year and the countries just supply a link to find out that info when applying for a category status to be awarded when they send their request to the BDO.

They wouldn`t necessarily need to check every year as the finances of each country never really changes that much from year to year.

People travel to events for basically 2 reasons ( beside the fun of playing darts ) one is prize money and two, points. There is nothing some countries can do about prize money, they are already over achieving based on local economy but they could attract more players if the points on offer were higher... greater entries can lead to greater prize money, isn`t that a good thing?
Every country would be playing by the same rules, no reason why Jersey could not have as many high category events as they choose as long as they hit the 3 times or 2 times average monthly income. Is that a bad thing?

Lastly the 5 ladies events in the UK which are category A are English Open and Classic, Granite City Open, Welsh Open and IoM. The one in Europe is the Dutch Open. And just to complete the numbers there are 2 more worldwide, both in Australia. So the Uk 5, RoW 3. Totally fair and neutral.

[The H]

We will just have to agree to disagree sir, as I'm afraid, tho getting the principle of you gib,I totally disagree with just about everything regarding the way you believe CAT A points are given or distributed and am more adamant that if multi events were to become the norm, as hopefully for the players sake they will, then the so called smaller events will witness a rise with an increase in idniginous entries and those from their neighbouring countries as they will surely believe they have a btter chance of winning, and with a small economy, perhaps money and not points is the driving factor. Not saying I'm right, just my opinion

As for any inblance of CAT A events, I have to say I think you're wrong again. You said earlier there were nine mens, and I couldn't for the life of me work out where and run by whom, of which you now offer indefence the English Open, English Classic, GCO, Welsh Open and IOM, as the five who run ladies CAT A and of those the GCO has no ranking status at all. So the EDO, run two, and with their great prize money, understandable, the WDO one, and the IOM one, so four for the ladies, and run by three different governing organisations, its hardly an inbalance by anyones definition. Especialy when you consider the journey time to get from Scotland to Wales or Selsey is it. Probably quicker, (for some it could be an 7/8/9 hour jourey) and probably as cheap to go too many European destinations. To go to many of those, people in central Europe in particular will be able to get to other countries, by car far quicker. Incidentally where are the five other mens CAT A events you mentioned by the way, as on that matter Avalon, am still none the wiser mate.

[avalon]

We will just have to agree to disagree sir, as I'm afraid, tho getting the principle of you gib,I totally disagree with just about everything regarding the way you believe CAT A points are given or distributed and am more adamant that if multi events were to become the norm, as hopefully for the players sake they will, then the so called smaller events will witness a rise with an increase in idniginous entries and those from their neighbouring countries as they will surely believe they have a btter chance of winning, and with a small economy, perhaps money and not points is the driving factor. Not saying I'm right, just my opinion

As for any inblance of CAT A events, I have to say I think you're wrong again. You said earlier there were nine mens, and I couldn't for the life of me work out where and run by whom, of which you now offer indefence the English Open, English Classic, GCO, Welsh Open and IOM, as the five who run ladies CAT A and of those the GCO has no ranking status at all. So the EDO, run two, and with their great prize money, understandable, the WDO one, and the IOM one, so four for the ladies, and run by three different governing organisations, its hardly an inbalance by anyones definition. Especialy when you consider the journey time to get from Scotland to Wales or Selsey is it. Probably quicker, (for some it could be an 7/8/9 hour jourey) and probably as cheap to go too many European destinations. To go to many of those, people in central Europe in particular will be able to get to other countries, by car far quicker. Incidentally where are the five other mens CAT A events you mentioned by the way, as on that matter Avalon, am still none the wiser mate.

Points Allocation per placing
1st 2nd Jt 3rd Jt 5th Jt 9th Jt 17th Jt 33rd
CATEGORY ‘A’
Antwerp Open (BDB) 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
Belgium Open 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
BDO International Open 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
British Classic 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
British Open 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
Dutch Open 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
England Classic 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
England Open 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
German Open 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
Granite City Open 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
Isle of Man Open 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
Scotland Open 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
Sunparks Masters (BDB) 24 22 20 18 16 14 12
Welsh Open 24 22 20 18 16 14 12

copied from the bdo website...... okay GCO will not have points this year so I believe, but that is still 8 events in the UK. I never said anything about different organisations, I was making the point that in the UK, there are that many and honestly it doesn`t really matter who the organisers are. The point I was making was that one recognised state ( as in the UK is a member of the EU and the UN, not GB or the countries separated ) has so many A category events. But if you want to be picky 5 of those are in England. Whichever way you wish to look at it one country hosts 5 category A events, regardless of who organises it. How can that not be an imbalance?

So what you are saying in the rest is that the smaller countries will experience a rise in entries solely if they have a double header but remain category C. Winning 2 category C events in a weekend is not going to help them too much towards automatic qualification.... just ask the Americans. They get one person through to Lakeside via the regional rankings, what happens is that the person who finishes second does not qualify even though they could have won a couple of events, second or third in others but their points are equivalent to a European category C event. Now try to tell me that their travel is easier than in the UK.

It is no surprise that the only people who cannot see the UK bias in the ranking system are organisers in the UK.

I noticed you made no comment concerning how well a country such as Romania does by paying out prize money over 9 times the average monthly income of the country when none of the various organisers in the UK get close to that figure. Yet you want to see them kept down. The questions I would like to ask are ........... why should countries such as this have such an effect on your own event? Why do you feel that is beneficial to keep them down as a category C despite over achieving on the prize money for a. their local economy and b. for the fact that in many of these countries not only is darts a minority sport it is a minority sport within minority sports.

I personally would like to see darts grow in all parts of the world through a fair ranking system, we can`t do anything about the economy of their countries but the BDO could help with something that costs nothing to anybody... points.

Oh and something I forgot.... some of these smaller countries also get TV coverage, which invariably is also streamed. Some of the UK based events we can`t even find regular updates on internet... unless you call a few tweets every couple of hours a regular update.

[The H]

But you have to bring different organisations into the equation, because they represent different countries, why does that create such a problem for you, I just don't see the imbalance you mention at all, not even in part. Wales run one, they could run three, as too could Scotland and I assume IOM, England run two, but could also run three, where is the problem with that. Players will then choose to go or not.

I'm showing a bit of geographical ignorance here, but what is the difference between England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales holding multi events if they so choose than say any of the following groups?

Romania, (who I most certainly don't want to 'keep down' where on earth did you get that from btw) who will, can, could presumably get entries from their neighbours in the same way the UK can, Moldova, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Hungary, Serbia, Slovakia, and Poland. Not a bad catchment area

Poland has direct neighbours in the same way as the UK have in Slovakia, Czech Rep, Germany, Belarus, Lithuania

Germany has borders with Denmark, (I think) Austria I assume, Holland, Belgium Czech Rep, France, Liechtenstein(I think) Luxembourg, which is not bad either

The point being Avalon they have as many, one could argue more transient possibilities regarding entries than UK events do, how unfair is that by the way. If they wanted to run multi events, or CAT A events, then they have the same possibilities as anyone else. I just don't get your fascination, almost fixation, with the Romanian economy and how the current rules stymie any such possibilities growing.

You make great play of the fact that because they 'somehow manage' to offer nine times their average monthly wage as prize money and those in the UK don't as though it definitively proves something tho I don't know what exactly. It means to Romanians and perhaps some of the their neighbours it represents good value and people tell me its a really nice, well run and enjoyable event to got to, to which I response with genuine applause, but shouldn't that be the case with every event. In Jersey it worked out we paid out nigh on an average £100 to every player who went. What does that stat prove Avalon, other than value for the players who went, in the scheme of things nothing really, merely highlighting we can all quote stats of one kind or another, and for the record have never said, not even whispered that Romania or other events would affect us at Jersey, where did you get that from? The principle of our view is improving things generally for the players and we contend that to do that we all have to give them better value than they currently receive, regardless of geography

Our view is if many other bodies ran ,multi events, and if nothing else in doing meant the diary is made less congested, that in turn will automatically mean less clashes, something which Germany, Belgium, Romania, Poland and Czech and particular Jersey among many have had to endure this past couple of years and that alone would prove beneficial to everyone, players and organisers. Were it to be the case then all these other 'smaller' events you mention, especially by virtue of having so many neighbours (more then the UK)will logically increase, and even more so, regardless of their economy if they too then ran not one but two events, not two but three.

As you rightly say, some of these countries do manage to get TV coverage which is brilliant, and highly commendable, but it also suggests they do so with the approval/help of either their government, sponsors or TV stations or all three, and one assumes because relatively is much cheaper to do, especially in countries who pay out prize money nine times their average wage, than the UK

Players would surely much rather go to an tournament with two ranking events, even if they weren't CAT A than an event with just one that was.

I do agree with your point about up to date feeds and the like, a lot to be desired that for sure, and agree more with the predicament of those in say America and Australia. IMO more use should be made of these players to dilute the apparent lop sided UK/Holland bias at Lakeside, certainly to make it more a creditable WC but that is a totally different argument all together

[avalon]

But you have to bring different organisations into the equation, because they represent different countries, why does that create such a problem for you, I just don't see the imbalance you mention at all, not even in part. Wales run one, they could run three, as too could Scotland and I assume IOM, England run two, but could also run three, where is the problem with that. Players will then choose to go or not.

I'm showing a bit of geographical ignorance here, but what is the difference between England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales holding multi events if they so choose than say any of the following groups?

Romania, (who I most certainly don't want to 'keep down' where on earth did you get that from btw) who will, can, could presumably get entries from their neighbours in the same way the UK can, Moldova, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Hungary, Serbia, Slovakia, and Poland. Not a bad catchment area

Poland has direct neighbours in the same way as the UK have in Slovakia, Czech Rep, Germany, Belarus, Lithuania

Germany has borders with Denmark, (I think) Austria I assume, Holland, Belgium Czech Rep, France, Liechtenstein(I think) Luxembourg, which is not bad either

The point being Avalon they have as many, one could argue more transient possibilities regarding entries than UK events do, how unfair is that by the way. If they wanted to run multi events, or CAT A events, then they have the same possibilities as anyone else. I just don't get your fascination, almost fixation, with the Romanian economy and how the current rules stymie any such possibilities growing.

You make great play of the fact that because they 'somehow manage' to offer nine times their average monthly wage as prize money and those in the UK don't as though it definitively proves something tho I don't know what exactly. It means to Romanians and perhaps some of the their neighbours it represents good value and people tell me its a really nice, well run and enjoyable event to got to, to which I response with genuine applause, but shouldn't that be the case with every event. In Jersey it worked out we paid out nigh on an average £100 to every player who went. What does that stat prove Avalon, other than value for the players who went, in the scheme of things nothing really, merely highlighting we can all quote stats of one kind or another, and for the record have never said, not even whispered that Romania or other events would affect us at Jersey, where did you get that from? The principle of our view is improving things generally for the players and we contend that to do that we all have to give them better value than they currently receive, regardless of geography

Our view is if many other bodies ran ,multi events, and if nothing else in doing meant the diary is made less congested, that in turn will automatically mean less clashes, something which Germany, Belgium, Romania, Poland and Czech and particular Jersey among many have had to endure this past couple of years and that alone would prove beneficial to everyone, players and organisers. Were it to be the case then all these other 'smaller' events you mention, especially by virtue of having so many neighbours (more then the UK)will logically increase, and even more so, regardless of their economy if they too then ran not one but two events, not two but three.

As you rightly say, some of these countries do manage to get TV coverage which is brilliant, and highly commendable, but it also suggests they do so with the approval/help of either their government, sponsors or TV stations or all three, and one assumes because relatively is much cheaper to do, especially in countries who pay out prize money nine times their average wage, than the UK

Players would surely much rather go to an tournament with two ranking events, even if they weren't CAT A than an event with just one that was.

I do agree with your point about up to date feeds and the like, a lot to be desired that for sure, and agree more with the predicament of those in say America and Australia. IMO more use should be made of these players to dilute the apparent lop sided UK/Holland bias at Lakeside, certainly to make it more a creditable WC but that is a totally different argument all together

Okay last post on this as until you learn to read what I am writing I am just wasting my time.

a. I do not have any problems with so many category A events in the UK, I do have problems with the level of prize money required being based purely on the UK economy. Other countries haven`t a cat in hells chance of reaching that level of prize money because the amount required is not realistic for them.

B. If you cannot understand the differences between England, Wales and Scotland and their borders, the fact they all have one passport which is not required anyway to travel between the countries, they have one currency, one language, one economy, one head of state etc etc and some of the examples you have used where they have different economies, different languages, different laws, real borders where you have to show passports and/or visas, different governments, heads of states etc then I suggest you get out more

c. I keep mentioning Romania not because of any fixation but because you seem to struggle with the concept of one example so why should I include other countries in the same position. It would just serve to confuse you even more.

d. I am all for multi events, have been and always will be wherever they are held, ever since Wales started it off....... BUT with the categories based on the UK economy a lot of countries could only hold a double header with category c, some possibly might make one category B. Now, it isn`t just there are fewer points available for each individual, for example Cat A winner gets 24 category C winner 20, it is also the number of people who are able to get points. Category A up to 64 men can win points, in Category C up to 32.

All I am suggesting is a change to the financial structure of each category, different for each country.
I am not trying to say there are too many in the UK, I am saying the way it is currently structured it prevents other areas of the world from having them. That makes for an imbalance. You cannot dispute that it is a fact that there are more in the UK. It is financially impossible for many. And despite doing a fantastic job in their own country, the amount of prize money being very high in relation to their own economy, a concept you do not seem to understand, having TV coverage in some cases, internet streams in some cases, regular internet updates in some cases. Very often performing as well as UK events and at some events even better, they will never have the chance to offer a double header of a cat A with a cat B, because that type of money is just not available in their own countries.
Having 2 cat C events with the lack of points available just isn't going to attract enough entries because the prize money when converted to sterling is just not enough for people from all over Europe who live in a better economically sound land.

If that level of money was available for darts then it would be available in other areas and the UK would not now be host to so many immigrants.

On a different note... although linked... it is far easier for players from the UK to visit Poland, Romania ( yes them again ) Hungary, Bulgaria etc etc because the amount of money they earn in the UK makes them rich in these other countries. Hotels are dirt cheap comparatively, drink and food too. For players from other areas to enter, for example the English Open or BDO international, they face a huge outlay in monetary terms in relation to their income. The caravans alone could cost them two weeks salary, everything costs them more compared to their own countries, travel within the UK, food and drink etc. Yes if they win some money it will be a lot compared to what they are used to but they can`t afford to get there in the first place.

And that is the last I will post on this matter.