Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

[John Brown]

I have thought about why older adults do not want to come out and play low rated Juniors in lower sections.

I know that Juniors ,women and Seniors 60 usually get a discount to play.

I also have seen an increased number of juniors winning the lower sections.

I suggest that if the juniors are getting a discount then they should either get a discounted prize fund
or play with their entries less any TD deductions.
The adults in U2000 and lower sections would also play with their entries and their prize fund would be similar.

I'll use $100 entry and discounted $80 entry for an example.

Usually U 1600 Prize fund is around $700.
With the divided prize funds Adults could have $200,100,50 Juniors $160,80,30 Top Senior $60
Top woman $60 or you could bump up Prize fund so you get money back if you win Top Senior or Woman. I do not believe that anyone in an under 1600 section is good enough to win a Big prize of $400 for first. You spread out the prizes to more and give anyone an opportunity to win something and your numbers should go up. It is only a theory as you have to try it once to see if the results are justified.
There would also be a top senior prize and a top woman's prize in the other sections.

Now the adults and the juniors can play in the same lower section but there would be two prize fund structures. One for the top juniors and one for the top adults.
This way the adults and juniors are playing for their own prizes and joining in pairings. So even if you lose to a junior or adult you still have a chance at a prize in your own age group.

The Open or over 2000 sections would not use this system of prize structure as juniors with higher ratings deserve the big money they have shown their worth.

I think this may attract some adults who have given up O.T.B. competition because of the increased numbers of lower/underrated juniors.

[Walter De Jong]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

I have thought about why older adults do not want to come out and play low rated Juniors in lower sections.

Although playing lots of (knee-high, underrated) juniors has not yet deterred me from playing in lower sections, in part because I feel some responsibility to let kids thump me just like I once thumped adults when I was a kid, I do prefer playing adults. Chess, at least for me, is also a social activity, and the pre- and post-game interactions with an adult opponent are much more satisfying.

I was somewhat envious last week when I saw that Kitchener was hosting over-50 and over-65 events. I wish there were more events like those. And that Kitchener wasn't such a long drive :)

FWIW, the structure of the prize funds in lower sections has had no impact on my decisions on when/where to play.

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

FWIW, the structure of the prize funds in lower sections has had no impact on my decisions on when/where to play.

I have to agree with Walter.

Prize fund distribution has nothing to do with my decisions when/where to play, or whether to play up or not.

Bob A

[Alex Ferreira]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Hi John,


Maybe in your case, the prize fund is an issue. However I think Walter & Bob probably represent more accurately the adult pool when it comes to prize funds (I am in their pool). Most (older?) adults don't like to play against children for different reasons (losing points to possibly underrated kids, some kids can be... well kids, ego crusher, etc... ).

Personally as a player I couldn't care less about prize fund.
John, you're weak. So am I. We are weak chess players. Maybe I am being elitist but I am of the opinion that players below IM level (IMs & GMs being strong chess players) have no business trying to make money from (playing) chess. There seems to be heaps of money in teaching though. If our goal is to make money, we really should be doing something else (like working minimum wage anywhere, would already net more than a class prize most of the times, and would be guaranteed money). Chess is a game, a hobby, a passion, or at least that's how it started for just about everyone, even for those who eventually became professionals and may now have an added dimension to it. I don't agree with promoting mediocrity by bumping up prizes for lower classes (which would even include a U2400 in my personal opinion). They do this in some tournaments in USA and it causes a ton of problems. Winning a modest symbolic prize in a below-top class section is a nice bonus, but not something to strive for to my mind. One of my favourite tournament formats is the model adopted (developed?) in Guelph. Money prizes in top section, trophies in class sections, free coffee/tea and snacks for everyone.


Alex F.

[Kerry Liles]

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.

To me that is just ridiculous. 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. ;) Just kidding.

Even the business of allowing 'playing up' seems wrong to me - set the sections and the rating requirements and stick to them. Of course, it is a bit of a zoo when there are FQE, CFC, USCF, FIDE and even providional ratings to consider and a pecking order that has to be enforced to decide which rating is pre-emptive.

[Tony Li]

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.

To me that is just ridiculous. 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. ;) Just kidding.

Even the business of allowing 'playing up' seems wrong to me - set the sections and the rating requirements and stick to them. Of course, it is a bit of a zoo when there are FQE, CFC, USCF, FIDE and even providional ratings to consider and a pecking order that has to be enforced to decide which rating is pre-emptive.

I believe you are thinking of the World Open.

Personally, here is what is stopping me from playing more tournaments:

- Dearth of 1-day tournaments. There seems to be a saying "Active chess is not real chess". But it's difficult to free up time to play in a weekender. And perhaps the trade-off is quickish tournaments. With 5 rounds a day, 45 5 is feasible.
- Same sections, same opponents. The majority of tournaments that run 2-3 times a year have the same sections for each edition. I look at the Ottawa tournaments with the section overlaps as a good model. One can play in the lower section after a busy summer, and in the higher section after practising on internet all winter.
- Swiss grind. There is only one tournament that I get really excited about - the KW Team tournament - because of its different format. Perhaps there is room for knockouts?

Probably none of the above applies to the serious chess player in the open section but it could certainly help keep borderline players like myself.

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Entry Fees and Prize Funds in lower sections

Thanks Tony. Yes! it was the World Open.
Have a look at these U1600 results and prize money:

http://www.chesstournamentservices.c...-1600-section/

the winner of the U1600 section got the same monetary prize as GM Joshua Friedel who was alone in 2nd place in the Open section:

http://www.chesstournamentservices.c...-open-section/


3 people tied in the U1300 section and each got $1127.34

(the links to all the results are on this page: http://www.philadelphiaopen.net/ )


No wonder there is a lot of emphasis on anti-sandbagging measures in the USCF.
I am all for better prizes in general of course, but seriously??

[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)

[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 )

[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.

[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. :-)

[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

[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.

[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.

[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.