Would spreading the payouts...bring more money and competition?
Lets say a contest pays $10,000.
Overall Top 5 Get Paid:
GC - Gets $2000
RGC - Gets $1200
3rd - Gets $400
4th - Gets $240
5th - Gets $160
Would you consider those payouts weak for 1st & 2nd?
Category Gets:
1st - $400
2nd -$300
3rd - $200
4th - $150
5th - $100
6th - $90
7th - $80
8th - $70
9th - $60
10th - $50
In a scenario like this...I would say that probably 3-4 teams would make money or break even. Possibly another 4-6 teams would recover at least half of their expenses.
My opinion is this...if an event has a lot of teams competing (50 or more), there are probably 3-5 teams that could say they had the best stuff on that day IMO. However, with different judging tables, no matter weak or strong, the top can be separated by only a few points.
Currently, it seems like 2-3 people make money or break even and 2-3 teams might get half back, maybe. I compete with a team that has had some pretty good success, but in a comp with 70 teams and getting 3 mid range category calls and a finish less than 2nd...we walked with a $100. 1 bad table away from making some real noise (chicken was good, judges were wrong). In this scenario, we would have walked with $440 and probably only lost $250. Instead, we eat $650 and walk back with so many trophies it looks like we robbed a senior bowling league.
Trophies are nice, but I'd rather compete more often.
Are more people in favor of winner take all (McCain/Palin) or share the wealth (Obama/Biden)?
Trickle Down Economics meets BBQ! And if this is my 3rd Strike...let it be...Obama 2012! Don't you remove this Jorge!
