Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

[John Brown]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Hi Alex;
I guess then tournaments from now on are to encourage Junior participation and let the other chess players be forgotten.
I have discovered that all will be well once we have all retired and can reminisce "What a Great Game Tournament Chess Was"

[John Brown]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

J.Brown, you are ignoring Aurora Opens :) What's the matter? You don't like prize funds (example for the Summer: http://summeropen-2014.aurorachessclub.ca/prize-fund ) We don't give discounts for age or sex. Only for accomplishments (free entry fee to IM/GM) and for relationship to the Aurora club (what makes a club fee almost free.

After Summer ratings where calculated I did not see big jumps, or that players rose to a different section. Thus, while the young player strength lags to his rating, it is not a big difference. I think that the cure is more tournaments and more players activity. For a city like Toronto to have only several weekend opens is [censored LOL]

Hello Egidijus;
So far your Aurora tournaments have been on weekends that I work. Also for me to get to Aurora on public transit from Brampton would be a nightmare ( I don't drive). Cost of a hotel maybe cheaper than Toronto but that is another cost that could become an addition. I like Toronto based tournaments they are easy to get to from Brampton. I usually key in on the Best tournaments Labour Day , Hart House events and Kitchener Amateur Open any others also interfere with my work schedules as I stated above I have two jobs so that limits my days I can play. Maybe when I'm retired I can run the circuit.

[Ken Kurkowski]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Probably an accident, I've done the same.

[John Coleman]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Hi Tony

My tip for you is not to quote a person's entire post, unless it is necessary.

[Tony Li]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Hi John,

As I understand it, not that many tournaments that are organized in Canada have a "junior only" or "best junior" prize. Yes in many tournaments juniors and seniors have a discounted entry fee. This kind of thing encourages junior participation significantly and allows a small break for senior citizens, as is customary with many aspects of society (ie bus fare). Many juniors also play in many events and their (parents') bills add up quickly. After that everyone plays for the same prizes.

Lets imagine someone decides to organize a tournament which includes prizes based on age group. Lets say Juniors (under 18), Seniors (65 ) and Adults (18-64). Within the juniors category, competition is already completely lopsided as a 2-3 year difference is crucial. In the middle group, how would one compare the 'style of play' or advantages vs disadvantages, of a 20 year old vs a 60 year old? Maybe in a Canadian Open type turnout (300 people) it may be possible to separate age groups for prize purposes. For example 2 year gaps for juniors, 10 year gaps for adults, not sure how it would work for seniors. Someone would have to make a survey on everyone's age. I personally don't think this is a feasible idea.

Chess is chess. We can choose to play the board or the opponent. We can definitely discuss stereotypes based on age. IE: Juniors play faster, more tactically, are usually heavier on the opening theory. Since when are those the only possible advantages? Older players then in contrast may have a better positional sense, more patience (and hopefully less likely to make a mistake in rushing a position), better judgement of critical moments. Juniors have disadvantages too! I imagine many get super bored by the 4th hour of a game. Some chess tournaments run for 12 hours a day. Even juniors will be tired by then! Some people argue they need to sleep more, and weekend tournaments are not a cakewalk for that. I think the sad reality for us adults is very simple... juniors dedicate a lot of time to chess. Practicing, studying, updating their database knowledge, getting coaching, blitzing with friends at lunch hour or after finishing their homework, etc etc... Adults don't have the time for that (usually). How / why should we be able to compete? If a junior with the same rating as mine is doing all these things and I am not... he's totally expected to win!
There are definitely certain things we can try to do to steer the game into our advantage when playing juniors. To avoid a ton of theory, we can play stale openings or openings where no moves are forced. There are also many openings that are poor on tactical options. But if we're doing it because we're lazy and don't know this strategy that well, we may lose anyway later in the game.


You mentioned above:

"The one thing you have forgotten is that a tournament relies on players. Players generate money for prize funds and expenses."
I get the impression you're addressing this to me as an organizer. I haven't forgotten. Players make tournaments happen, not organizers, arbiters or TDs. That does not mean that every request can be accommodated. Organizers have to balance the players' interests, requests and demands with what is workable practically and financially.

"So unless the younger ( TD's to be )start joining the older ones to learn the ropes, I think tournament chess will slowly die out."
There is a ton for younger organizers to learn from the older guard, no doubt. The established organizers pave the floor for new ones, train them, etc... but times are also changing and people need to adapt and evolve. 30 years ago (from what I hear) there were nearly no juniors in tournament chess. Today they are the bread and butter of tournament chess. Today children start playing chess at a young age and thrown in the deep end right away. Organizers (for adult tournaments) are now having to consider junior-only-events in the calendar if they don't want their own tournaments to suffer considerably in numbers.


Decline in adult chess seems to be quite justified given the approach that many adults take. Younger adults have too many things going on in life, and often stop or significantly slow down their chess involvement. Returning adults (after a long absence) are often completely unprepared to compete the way they once did. They get their teeth kicked 4 out of 5 games in a weekend by someone half their age and struggle to accept this new reality. Many simply go on another long absence. Some fight on and after a few months / tournaments regain their strength after doing the work it takes to even maintain a specific level of play. Today there are also other options, such as the Internet. Adults are probably more likely to have to resort to this option as their 'chess fix' as weekend tournaments are too time demanding. Kids usually do both!

But there's hope! Whereas weekend tournaments may have declining numbers of older players (percentage wise), clubs still seem to be an option (once a week) where many adults / seniors still play. Juniors will also always be there because they just can't get enough. I don't know how the rest of the country is doing, but the Toronto Senior is in good health, and Kitchener has been putting on more and more successful seniors-only tournaments. The scene looked bleaker about 10 years ago in this department.


Alex F.

Alex,

You seem to be one of the rare players who has improved a lot as an adult.

Did you want to share some tips?

[Alex Ferreira]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Hi John,

As I understand it, not that many tournaments that are organized in Canada have a "junior only" or "best junior" prize. Yes in many tournaments juniors and seniors have a discounted entry fee. This kind of thing encourages junior participation significantly and allows a small break for senior citizens, as is customary with many aspects of society (ie bus fare). Many juniors also play in many events and their (parents') bills add up quickly. After that everyone plays for the same prizes.

Lets imagine someone decides to organize a tournament which includes prizes based on age group. Lets say Juniors (under 18), Seniors (65 ) and Adults (18-64). Within the juniors category, competition is already completely lopsided as a 2-3 year difference is crucial. In the middle group, how would one compare the 'style of play' or advantages vs disadvantages, of a 20 year old vs a 60 year old? Maybe in a Canadian Open type turnout (300 people) it may be possible to separate age groups for prize purposes. For example 2 year gaps for juniors, 10 year gaps for adults, not sure how it would work for seniors. Someone would have to make a survey on everyone's age. I personally don't think this is a feasible idea.

Chess is chess. We can choose to play the board or the opponent. We can definitely discuss stereotypes based on age. IE: Juniors play faster, more tactically, are usually heavier on the opening theory. Since when are those the only possible advantages? Older players then in contrast may have a better positional sense, more patience (and hopefully less likely to make a mistake in rushing a position), better judgement of critical moments. Juniors have disadvantages too! I imagine many get super bored by the 4th hour of a game. Some chess tournaments run for 12 hours a day. Even juniors will be tired by then! Some people argue they need to sleep more, and weekend tournaments are not a cakewalk for that. I think the sad reality for us adults is very simple... juniors dedicate a lot of time to chess. Practicing, studying, updating their database knowledge, getting coaching, blitzing with friends at lunch hour or after finishing their homework, etc etc... Adults don't have the time for that (usually). How / why should we be able to compete? If a junior with the same rating as mine is doing all these things and I am not... he's totally expected to win!
There are definitely certain things we can try to do to steer the game into our advantage when playing juniors. To avoid a ton of theory, we can play stale openings or openings where no moves are forced. There are also many openings that are poor on tactical options. But if we're doing it because we're lazy and don't know this strategy that well, we may lose anyway later in the game.


You mentioned above:

"The one thing you have forgotten is that a tournament relies on players. Players generate money for prize funds and expenses."
I get the impression you're addressing this to me as an organizer. I haven't forgotten. Players make tournaments happen, not organizers, arbiters or TDs. That does not mean that every request can be accommodated. Organizers have to balance the players' interests, requests and demands with what is workable practically and financially.

"So unless the younger ( TD's to be )start joining the older ones to learn the ropes, I think tournament chess will slowly die out."
There is a ton for younger organizers to learn from the older guard, no doubt. The established organizers pave the floor for new ones, train them, etc... but times are also changing and people need to adapt and evolve. 30 years ago (from what I hear) there were nearly no juniors in tournament chess. Today they are the bread and butter of tournament chess. Today children start playing chess at a young age and thrown in the deep end right away. Organizers (for adult tournaments) are now having to consider junior-only-events in the calendar if they don't want their own tournaments to suffer considerably in numbers.


Decline in adult chess seems to be quite justified given the approach that many adults take. Younger adults have too many things going on in life, and often stop or significantly slow down their chess involvement. Returning adults (after a long absence) are often completely unprepared to compete the way they once did. They get their teeth kicked 4 out of 5 games in a weekend by someone half their age and struggle to accept this new reality. Many simply go on another long absence. Some fight on and after a few months / tournaments regain their strength after doing the work it takes to even maintain a specific level of play. Today there are also other options, such as the Internet. Adults are probably more likely to have to resort to this option as their 'chess fix' as weekend tournaments are too time demanding. Kids usually do both!

But there's hope! Whereas weekend tournaments may have declining numbers of older players (percentage wise), clubs still seem to be an option (once a week) where many adults / seniors still play. Juniors will also always be there because they just can't get enough. I don't know how the rest of the country is doing, but the Toronto Senior is in good health, and Kitchener has been putting on more and more successful seniors-only tournaments. The scene looked bleaker about 10 years ago in this department.


Alex F.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

J.Brown, you are ignoring Aurora Opens :) What's the matter? You don't like prize funds (example for the Summer: http://summeropen-2014.aurorachessclub.ca/prize-fund ) We don't give discounts for age or sex. Only for accomplishments (free entry fee to IM/GM) and for relationship to the Aurora club (what makes a club fee almost free.

After Summer ratings where calculated I did not see big jumps, or that players rose to a different section. Thus, while the young player strength lags to his rating, it is not a big difference. I think that the cure is more tournaments and more players activity. For a city like Toronto to have only several weekend opens is [censored LOL]

[Gary Hua]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Hi John,

I can understand how you feel and I totally agree with you. If TDs do not care how to cater to the customers / players, they are not likely to get a good crowd. Everyone may have different objectives in playing in a tournament and the TDs must try hard to cater to the needs of most players.

There is no doubt that chess will not make anyone rich but the excitement of getting a prize/trophy makes players want to join the tournament.

It's never fun to play against much under rated juniors as we older generation sometimes gets trashed by them and we feel awful after the game.

[John Brown]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Hi Alex;
The one thing you have forgotten is that a tournament relies on players. Players generate money for prize funds and expenses.
If you do not offer a reason for older players or younger players to come out to an event ( whether it be in the form of Trophies or cash prizes) you won't get a big turn out. This to me is the way chess is going and one reason you have very few tournaments offered and why the older TD's are not running as many or any tournaments any more.
So unless the younger ( TD's to be )start joining the older ones to learn the ropes, I think tournament chess will slowly die out.

I did not say that the lower sections needed big prizes. You misread my post. I said offer something to give a reason to bring out the older players. My example was a theory idea not law.
When I go to a tournament I shoot for 50% anything over that is a bonus. DO NOT group me with your idea that everyone goes to a tournament to win big money. I go to see old friends which are starting to dwindle. So I make new friends with some younger players. I'm not rich and I have two jobs so never say that I come to tournaments to make money.
If you are not giving a cash prize or a trophy in a lower section then don't expect players to pay your entry fees.

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Hi Kerry:

This sort of issue seems to be a never-ending debate (along with multi-section versus single-section and the value of accelerated pairings).

I've always liked the "Pro-Am" approach that Hal Bond took with his Guelph tournaments. There were/are typically four sections: Open, U2000, U1700, and U1400. Prize money is only given out in the Open section. The other sections get trophies.

As for playing kids, personally I would prefer not to. There are a lot of reasons for that. Some of it relates to ego. Nobody likes to be beaten by a kid :o Some of it has to do with style of play: kids will usually be very booked up on openings and be very tactical. That can clash with adult playing styles where adults can go down in flames quickly in games. Also kids tend to play very quickly which can cause their opponents to play faster than they want to, leading to blunders. Another issue which has happened with me is that since I teach kids, its very easy to get into "teacher mode" and forget that your opponent is quite capable of beating you. (Nava Starr may have had a "teacher moment" yesterday.)

And sometimes kids are just, well, kids and can be disruptive. Among my junior opponents more annoying habits: (noisy) post-mortem analysis in the playing hall, fidgeting constantly (chair rocking, banging swivel chairs against the table constantly, fiddling with candy wrappers), running up to a table to see how their friends are doing and either bumping the table or bumping one of the players, offering draws constantly and/or incorrectly, calling check on every move, resigning incorrectly, etc.

(Please note: I am a chess parent and become displeased with my own kids if they behave this way.)

Not all kids are like that, and more than a few "adults" exhibit many of the same annoying habits.

And there are adult players who are quite rude to kids, which is just as bad.

Steve

Hi Steve,

I agree with just about everything you have written. Playing (some) kids is rather annoying for many of the reasons you stated (I would add: failure to have and use kleenex)
I appreciate that I used to be one of those young kids coming up and I *know* we were well schooled at the old Scarborough CC in chess manners (Howard Rideout was very kind in providing guidance in that regard as were many others). I am not so sure these days - many of the kids are very disruptive although they may not mean to be...

I don't mind playing kids per se; I am getting tired of playing a lot of very weak players - I recall fondly the days of the "A" "B" and "C" class round robins of the old days.

[Steve Douglas]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

I cannot recall which tournament exactly, but a recent US Open? tournament featured what I thought were 'massive' prizes for lower rated sections like U1800 or U1600.
I wish I could find that now, but I remember being astounded that the winner of the U1600 section (I think) won much more than several of the GMs who tied for 2nd place.

Hi Kerry:

This sort of issue seems to be a never-ending debate (along with multi-section versus single-section and the value of accelerated pairings).

I've always liked the "Pro-Am" approach that Hal Bond took with his Guelph tournaments. There were/are typically four sections: Open, U2000, U1700, and U1400. Prize money is only given out in the Open section. The other sections get trophies.

As for playing kids, personally I would prefer not to. There are a lot of reasons for that. Some of it relates to ego. Nobody likes to be beaten by a kid :o Some of it has to do with style of play: kids will usually be very booked up on openings and be very tactical. That can clash with adult playing styles where adults can go down in flames quickly in games. Also kids tend to play very quickly which can cause their opponents to play faster than they want to, leading to blunders. Another issue which has happened with me is that since I teach kids, its very easy to get into "teacher mode" and forget that your opponent is quite capable of beating you. (Nava Starr may have had a "teacher moment" yesterday.)

And sometimes kids are just, well, kids and can be disruptive. Among my junior opponents more annoying habits: (noisy) post-mortem analysis in the playing hall, fidgeting constantly (chair rocking, banging swivel chairs against the table constantly, fiddling with candy wrappers), running up to a table to see how their friends are doing and either bumping the table or bumping one of the players, offering draws constantly and/or incorrectly, calling check on every move, resigning incorrectly, etc.

(Please note: I am a chess parent and become displeased with my own kids if they behave this way.)

Not all kids are like that, and more than a few "adults" exhibit many of the same annoying habits.

And there are adult players who are quite rude to kids, which is just as bad.

Steve

[Tom O'Donnell]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

I seriously considered playing in the Millionaire event, but two rounds per day is not very attractive. At least with one round per day I can seriously prepare and get in some poker, too. :-)

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Hi Kerry, So what do you think of the Millionaire Open coming up in Las Vegas in October run by GM Maurice Ashley? (sorry cant find the link when I need it although its in another thread here on chesstalk)

Hello Hans,

Well, first off I am surprised this actually will go ahead. It seemed to be off to a shaky start but now it looks like it will happen.

There isn't much to say about an Open event with $1000 - $1500 - $2000 entry fee. I think they might be able to pull it off once
but I can't see it becoming an annual thing. Given the extremely high entry fees and fairly steep attendance costs (airfare, hotel, meals etc)
I think it is what Vlad Dobrich would definitely call a 'suckers bet' for anyone whose rating is close to their actual strength.

This tournament looks like an ideal tournament for underrated juniors or sandbaggers since the posted prizes are relatively astronomical.

[Bob Armstrong]

Sandbaggers" Club

That is also why I am working on getting my rating as low as possible - yeah, that's my story and I'm sticking to it. ;)

Hi Kerry: Well, if you won't admit to sandbagging, then neither will I ! ;)

Bob A (going below 1600 on Wed. night )

[Hans Jung]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Hi Kerry, So what do you think of the Millionaire Open coming up in Las Vegas in October run by GM Maurice Ashley? (sorry cant find the link when I need it although its in another thread here on chesstalk)