Canadian Open July 8-17 questions

[Roger Patterson]

Re: Canadian Open July 8-17 questions

Fred: The CFC handbook states: "no winner should receive more than one cash award for which he is eligible."
a split from the U2200 prize + a split from the U14 prize = 2 cash awards.
The CFC handbook needs to be updated to cover this situation.

From the handbook:

1603. Cash Prizes:

a) no winner should receive more than one cash award for which he is eligible. The award may be one full cash prize (if he is a clear winner) or parts of two or more cash prizes (if he wins tied with others). Such special prizes as "upset" or "best game" may be excepted from this rule.

b) a clear winner of more than one cash prize should be awarded the greatest prize.

c) tied winners of place prizes, or tied winners (in the same class) of class prizes, should be awarded all the cash prizes involved, summed and divided equally, but no more than one cash prize (in order of amount) should go into the division for each winner.

d) if winners of class prizes tie with winners of place prizes, all the cash prizes involved should be summed and divided equally among the tied winners, no more than one cash prize, in order of amount, to go into the division for each winner, unless the class-prize winners would receive more cash by dividing only the class prizes.

e) an announced class prize must be awarded even if only one player in that class completes his schedule of play.

Seems pretty clear to me: The case in question is covered and it calls for both prizes (U2200 and U1400) to be added together and divided among all the tied players.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Canadian Open July 8-17 questions

Seems pretty clear to me: The case in question is covered and it calls for both prizes (U2200 and U1400) to be added together and divided among all the tied players.

I think it is U14 not U1400 ;) And it is still more complicated as should involve a player who got a U2400 prize too

[Ed Zator]

Re: Canadian Open July 8-17 questions

From the handbook:

1603. Cash Prizes:

a) no winner should receive more than one cash award for which he is eligible. The award may be one full cash prize (if he is a clear winner) or parts of two or more cash prizes (if he wins tied with others). Such special prizes as "upset" or "best game" may be excepted from this rule.

b) a clear winner of more than one cash prize should be awarded the greatest prize.

c) tied winners of place prizes, or tied winners (in the same class) of class prizes, should be awarded all the cash prizes involved, summed and divided equally, but no more than one cash prize (in order of amount) should go into the division for each winner.

d) if winners of class prizes tie with winners of place prizes, all the cash prizes involved should be summed and divided equally among the tied winners, no more than one cash prize, in order of amount, to go into the division for each winner, unless the class-prize winners would receive more cash by dividing only the class prizes.

e) an announced class prize must be awarded even if only one player in that class completes his schedule of play.

Seems pretty clear to me: The case in question is covered and it calls for both prizes (U2200 and U1400) to be added together and divided among all the tied players.

Roger, I believe the organizer read the rules carefully, and they have made a
correct decision here:

U2200 is not a place prize, and U14 is not a class prize, and the reason why
you cannot apply d) more generally is that not necessarily do all the players
who tie for both prizes qualify for both.

For instance, in the U2000 section, one of the U1800 players who was also
a senior tied for the Top Senior prize with 2 other players, but was
restricted to a (greater) share of only the U1800 prize.

It would have made no sense for the other two seniors both rated over 1800,
to share in that prize.

[Ed Zator]

Re: U2000 Section - FIDE rated?

Why wasn't the U2000 section submitted to be FIDE-rated?

I understood before the tournament that it would be FIDE-rated if there were enough eligible players.

If this effects 16 players, that sounds like a good reason to have the U2000 section FIDE-rated.

I emailed the organizers about FIDE rating the U200 section from the outset, but they both wanted
to wait to see how many FIDE-rated A players signed up for the U2000 tournament before committing.

Instead, most of the FIDE rated A-players joined the Open section for that reason,
and not enough in the U2000 to justify the extra expense there ($3 or so per player).

[Jonathan Berry]

Re: Canadian Open July 8-17 questions

I think it is U14 not U1400 ;) And it is still more complicated as should involve a player who got a U2400 prize too

The organizer might have regarded the U14 prize as a peer group prize, i.e., neither a place prize nor a class prize. Otherwise, as there were 4 players (including one U14) tied for the 3 U2400 prizes, normally Wang would hoover that prize into the group. 4 players, 4 prizes, OK. If the organizer wants to make a special interpretation about these peer group prizes, for example that they cannot be shared with players outside the peer group, that doesn't explain why Preotu wouldn't just choose that as his prize, because it's larger than his share of the class prize. I'm not saying it's wrong, I just want to see the logic.

The CFC prize rules were pretty much copied from the USCF rules of a certain time. In a recent thread it was pointed out to me an instance (not this one) in which the CFC rules lead to an illogical result. The Govs might want to revisit the rules for that reason, and perhaps compare with USCF rules that are less than 30 years old. Shoulders of giants, etc.

In the Northwest (BC, Washington, Oregon), there was once a prize division method that I'll call the "graft system". Let's say there's an under-2000 prize of 100, and an under-1800 prize of 50. Two players, rated 1900 and 1700, tie for those prizes. Under CFC rules, it's simple: 75 each. Under the graft system, the 1700 player asks the 1900 player "how much is it worth to you that I don't choose the under-2000 prize (which would result in 50 each, plus a third player getting the under-1800)? The answer: $25. Then you split the difference (each side profits equally). This "negotiation" was done by the tournament director. As a result, the 1700 player would get $87.50, the 1900 player $62.50. Does the third player also get in on the action? I don't remember. This is more complicated than the CFC method, especially if more than one player is in a position to make a choice. But in the almost four decades since the graft system was used, we now have computers and spreadsheets. The graft system does address the common complaint about players getting shares of prizes for which they would otherwise seem to be ineligible.

[Ed Zator]

Re: Canadian Open July 8-17 questions

The graft system does address the common complaint about players getting shares of prizes for which they would otherwise seem to be ineligible.

So does the "only gets a piece of what they're entitled to" system.

For your example, the 1900 player gets $50, the 1700 gets $100.

For the example from the COCC, the 4 U2000 U14 players with
5 points would have each earned $100 ($55 + $45), the other 7 U2000
winners with 5 points only $55, while the two U14 with 4.5 would
have gotten 0.

[John Brown]

Re: Canadian Open July 8-17 questions

Personally
I don't see why anyone should be allowed to get two prizes.
If it is an Open tournament and the prize winner is the top U2400 for ie why should they also get the U 14 prize as well.
Is not the idea of keeping people coming out to events to share the wealth or is just to make the most advantage to those who can make the most by taking all the prizes.

If an under 2400 player is also U14 then are they not also entitled to the U 18 prize as well?
Really are people that greedy that they got to discourage others from taking a piece of the pie.
I did not win a prize in the CDN OPEN but if I had one a big Prize and I was also eligible to Win the Top Senior, I would have declined the Top Senior Prize as I was already a Prize winner. At the Niagara Falls Open events we give out many upset Prizes but we do not award an Upset Prize to a Cash Prize Winner.

Give everyone a piece of the pie and you'll have return customers. Give little and you'll have starvation.

[Ed Zator]

Re: Canadian Open July 8-17 questions

Personally
I don't see why anyone should be allowed to get two prizes.
If it is an Open tournament and the prize winner is the top U2400 for ie why should they also get the U 14 prize as well.

Me neither -Mr. Berry and I are proposing alternative ways of SHARING prizes
among winners tied in two prize categories. These systems have rules
against dividing up more prizes than there are cowinners.