see, i told you.
actually, what i should have said is to start with the lowest prize that the unrated could win without applying the dollar figure restriction. In the previous examples, that was the bottom prize.
In this case it is 3rd place.
This is in effect what your algorithm does, as I end up with the same prizes.
There is no general rule because there can be no general rule; or the attempt at a general rule is too complicated to be practical (and prone to misinterpretation) and require pages of examples, what if’s, and even if explained to the nth degree, will be still misapplied.
yes
but it is pointless to quote it here. Like I said earlier, there can be no general rule.
Solution:
Have a structure in your tournament that avoids the issue. For example (only one of many possibilities.)
In any section other than the “Open” that allow unrateds to enter, either allow the unrated to play for any place prize (no limit) or have a seperate “unrated” prize independent of all other prizes. A simple statement like “unrated players elegible for unrated prize only” will suffice.
I do not think any more needs to be said within this thread.
In a related question. When you are using based-on prizes and have a limit for unrateds, is that based-on also or absolute? For example:
($600 b/30, $300G): 300-200-100, unrated may not win more than $100.
I treated it as absolute, but I was normally paying 85-100% of the prizes and the differences would be minimal. If prizes were cut in half though, then it would be significant.
Here is my proposal for a compromise: Unrateds get to compete in
lowest section for FREE (first tournament). If they cannot win a prize,
don’t charge them. This will be awkward if they indeed win 1rst place,
though. I guess then you pat them on the back and tell them what
a great player they are.
I frankly don’t see the big deal about an unrated winning a prize.
Folks with provisional ratings can win prizes, and this rating can be
more deceptive than “unrated.”
I guess in a tournament with major bucks at stake, it can be an issue.
A really good player enters just one big event, and cleans up. For the monthly Saturday swiss, I just don’t get the big deal.
If USCF wants to attract new members and tournaments players, I don’t
think disallowing them prizes will help. If unrateds put their money on the
line, they should have a real chance to win.
Just my thoughts,
William “Tom” Hales, TD newbie
Asheboro Chess Club
We’ve always done that at our Pittsburgh events and never had any problems. The important thing is having a policy and keeping it over time. As long as people see that you are being consistent, I don’t think there will be complaints for events with less than a hundred entrants. The only time that I would expect problems to arise would be for larger events with non-locals who are used to a different default. That’s why setting some limits on unrateds in those larger events makes sense.
Some issues to think about:
If you have a lot of sections (say 6 or more), it is often good to put the scholastic unrated in the bottom section and the adult unrated in the section above that. Or for scholastic events you can even seed unrateds into different sections based upon their age/grade.
Giving the place prizes to unrateds is based upon them being in the correct section. It is important to try to catch experienced players who are unrated in the US and seed them into an appropriate section. For events without big prizes that shouldn’t be a problem as they will want to play people of similar ability. (Usually the biggest problem is persuading an unrated who wants to play in the open that they will be better off in the bottom section. Often they won’t want to be switched until after getting crushed in the first couple rounds.)
Have folks ever just had a separate (lower) entry fee for unrateds, with no participation in the prize structure? It would seem to eliminate some headaches, and perhaps encourage the unrateds to get rated ASAP, while giving them a chance to do so at lower cost. I’m not advocating this, just wondering if folks had tried it.
In my tournaments I just let unrateds play in any section they want but tell them they may only qualify for place prizes, e.g. 1st, 2nd or 3rd and only receive 50% of the prize money. The other 50% goes back into the Club funds and so I spend all tournament “hoping” that an unrated will win a prize or two!
