But back in the day getting an invite to worlds was an accomplishment now anyone can do it.

Even under the old standard of 1000 points, how much of an accomplishment it really was depended on where you lived. If one lives close to Bowling Green, KY and can play BG Ams, getting 1000 points isn't all that hard. 106 of the 631 entrants last year got at least 1000 points, and several more got a lion's share of that.

Conversely, a player that plays ten B tiers in Advanced (and contributes a lot more to the PDGA's coffers in the process), faces a field of 12 in each of them, and wins them all, only gets 900 points. How is it fair that guy who worked his ass off is still 100 points short, while the guy who finished 20th in Intermediate at BGAC and doesn't play another tournament gets more than 1000?

That why I think it should be higher than 1000 points like 1500 and if you get the 1500 your entry should be reduced for worlds.

You're missing the point. My gripe is that getting an invite to Worlds should be an accomplishment that is earned by playing great in several events, not resting on playing reasonably well in one super large event.

There should be a tournament minimum participation standard (say five events), or better yet, a limit on how many points from one event can be applied towards an invite. All raising the standard to 1500 is going to do is convince people that they have to go to one of these mega tournaments, rather than playing a handful of smaller regional events. And if such a tournament isn't within driving distance? Well I guess those folks are SOL.

I would agree that we do need tiered invite lists with the highest point players getting priority status, followed by a second invite list with lower criteria, followed by open registration if still needed. I don't agree that the players with the most points should get reduced entry. The expense of putting on Am Worlds is generally on the burden of the host club or vendor and if you got your 1500+ points elsewhere, that's of no benefit to them to give such a player a discount.

I like the minimum number of tournaments to be played. Now if you look at bowling green using the 1500 points only 31 players would make it. Maybe the point need to be reduced also instead of 10 points for A tiers 8 for B tiers and for C tiers. So make it a minimum of 5 tournaments and 1500 points.

Do the open spots at the BSF sell out every year where you have to make things that exclusive? If so, that type of system works. Traditionally, Am Worlds (until last year) has never sold out, which is why the waiting list system was developed.

The spots didn't just sell out.. the entire event (all ~300 spots) sold out in 10 minutes, and crashed the server to boot. After that, Open spots were switched to ratings-based windows of opportunity to register, and Am. spots were switched to a lottery.

Worlds invites should be that you have to place top 20% in certain tournaments. Send those invites out first. Then after "blank" time send out invites to 2000 point plus people, then 1500, then 1000, etc. That will drive more and bigger tournaments for Ams to qualify. Plus then Am Nats could become even more exclusive by raising its standards.

Why have a tiered invite with tiers that would generate less than a full event?

If, for example, you have 500 spots at AmWorlds, and 25% of invited players tend to sign up, the first tier of invites should be 2,000 players. It wouldn't accomplish much to invite 400 people and get 100 entries; then another 400 people and get 100 entries; etc.

Prior to last year, it didn't matter a bit. Either you got an invite and went to Worlds, or didn't get an invite and went to Worlds, if you wanted to go. At the very least, the threshold for invites should be what is likely to fill the event, or a little less.

i feel like this year anyone who wants to play will be able to, next year that might not be the case, i also feel that one of the reasons things may get a little tighter getting in for years to come is the number of people playing seems to me to be on the rise, I could be wrong but i dont remember turnout being as big nor were there as many events 10 years or so ago

I brought it up cause someone said it was accomplishment to play am worlds when right now its not the way its set up.
When I went to am worlds in 04 and 06 we got a letter in the mail saying that we qualified for am worlds and I have kept those letters since I felt then it was accomplishment. The email I got from 2010 worlds was deleted after worlds was over. I feel the standard have fallen just like the tour pin. Getting a tour pin was also an accomplishment to me.