Maybe I should clarify why I'm curious, too.
There is a certain amount of... I hesitate to say frustration because it is shy of that but there isn't a better word... for those of us playing Open because I think that most of us want to play against the best. It is hard to say that is happening all the time when, especially on these types of courses, we don't get to play against Fred, Pete, CD, Eric, etc...
And then there is the secondary concern, the money. Let's say, hypothetically, that you are a 970s rated player that has accepted cash previously and is under 40. There is only one division you would be eligible and it can appear odd that an age protected division has more cash awarded than the 'top' division.
I also want to clarify, my goal in this post is to create and open discussion about this. I'm not upset or even miffed, just maybe confused a little and interested in trying to make these tournaments the best they can be. Well, that and I've always been a proponent of increasing masters age to 50. Most of the best players that I've grown up watching have been over 40, thrown further than I can and putted like maniacs. I've never felt that there was enough skill deterioration at 40 to justify protecting that age group, especially when in Ball Golf they only get age protected at 50.