I don’t have any experience with this and could use some input. I’m setting up my first swiss that will involve cash prizes.
When a tournament announcement says that x% of entry fees will be paid out as prizes, is there any standard or common expectation as to how many places will win prizes, and/or how much % will go to 1st vs. 2nd, etc?
Thanks!
I overlooked the recent thread about prize fund announcement, if that would have been a better place to post this, sorry. Looks like a few more details might help folks respond.
My situation is very similar to hers. We’re running a 3-round G/60 open on a Saturday, simulaneous with a scholastic. The scholastic sections are getting trophies, cash is just for the open. This is our first try at this type of set up, so we’re not sure what turnout to expect, but I would guess it’ll be on the small side. Our entry fee will probably be in the $20-$25 range, thinking that a lower fee might bring out more players.
I was thinking just announcing some percentage to be paid out without breaking it down would give us more flexibility once we see what turnout we actually get. But I want to make sure I’m aware of what the general practices are so we’re in the right ballpark when we make final decisions that day.
Thanks for your input.
Grant,
My experience has been that most 3 round events work best as mini-swisses, i.e. 8 player sections. You might want to talk to Tom Green in Delaware about this format as he runs two of these each year.
With 8 player sections I would suggest you have either 1st, 2nd, and 3rd or just 1st and 2nd. If you are giving 75% of a $20 entry fee as prizes I would go $60, 40, 20.
That’s an accepted practice although you may need to advertise to assure some players that it will be “fair”.
I went to a tournament once that advertised only that some percentage would be paid out and it ended up being one prize, winner take all. I like to have at least a remote hope of winning a prize so I didn’t like that arrangement at all.
-Kevin
I’ve never used this for a “real” tournament (doubt I’d get any players), but it works OK for small blitz events and such. My usual practice is to give 1st/2nd/3rd, plus a class prize for (roughly) the bottom half of the field, with half the total going into first prize. Of course, this all depends on the number of players. More players should mean more prizes, but as a matter of principle I don’t think first should ever be less than a third of the total.
John, out of curiosity, is there a point at which your “1/3 for 1st place” rule breaks down? Do you assume that lower sections will help beef up the prize fund of the open section?
If an event is planned to draw 100 players in the open section, at $75/head, would you plan on 1st place being $2500?
What was the planned size of the open section of the Southern California Open last September? It drew 76 players at an advance entry rate of $81/head, first place was $1700. Was the prize fund increased based on entries?
(Before anyone jumps on me for picking on John, the Southern California Open is a long-running successful event that I would love to be able to emulate if I had the player base, I’m just trying to get an idea of the mindset that goes into planning that type of event.)
Probably, but I would never use an “xx% returned in prizes” format for anything over about 20 players.
Your second question involves some invalid assumptions. The 2005 SCO was a two-section tournament, and the total was about 145. The prize fund was based on 200, 60% guaranteed, so it paid out a little over 70%. The prize fund was designed so that 40% of the total would go into the place prizes. (This is a specific requirement for the SCO.) I picked $1700 for the first prize so that it would be over $1000 even at the minimum. The prizes would not have been increased, but of course we could have made it “$6000, increased proportionately if over 120” instead of “$10,000 b/200, 60% guaranteed.” I have some sympathy for this idea, but I’m not prepared to adopt it unless everyone else does.