Then I guess he would have to suffer the “Ultimate Agony of the Feet”. (LOL)
David A. Cole, USCF Life Member, Franklin, NJ
I have heard that Albert Einstein, upon being told that his feet smell, responded “Let me correct your grammar. My feet stink.”
Bill Smythe
Yes, but the reason for that rule is to keep events from being cancelled when people have travelled to attend them. Cancelling months in advance hardly sounds like a problem we need to worry about.
Is it not reasonable to assume that people buy plane tickets when they enter a tournament?
Alex Relyea
According to Millionaire Chess #15 Newsletter, a final decision will be made by Monday, April 7th. To the
March 31st Deadline date, only 76 players have entered this tournament.
Respectfully Submitted,
David A. Cole, USCF Life Member, Franklin, NJ
For comparison purposes, what’s the average turnout for the World Open?
Somewhere around 1250 for all sections, but the average entry fee is probably a third of what the Millionaire Open was charging.
As the advertising was very clear about the possibility of cancellation if the turnout was not sufficient by the end of March, I would imagine that most who have entered have not yet made nonrefundable travel arrangements.
I would hope you’re right, Boyd, but rule 23A2 doesn’t say “…unless you give advance notice that you might cancel the event for poor advance registrations.”
We should be finding out pretty soon whether or not the Millionaire Chess Open is being cancelled for lack of entries. That is one steep entry fee.
Rule 23A2 wasn’t designed for a situation like this.
I have trouble even remotely entertaining the possibility that the MC organizers might be sanctioned if they decide not to hold the tournament six months in advance. That seems counterproductive on several levels.
So how or where would you draw the line?
Has the tla appeared yet? I don’t see it on-line.
I’d start with common sense, as applied by Potter Stewart in Jacobellis v. Ohio.
I think the problem here is the wording of this sentence in rule 23A2: “A disappointing number of advance entries is never a valid reason for cancellation.” While that sentence is clear on its own, the situation with the Millionaire Chess Open is exceptional. The advance entry period is still open. The organizers do not know (and can not know) how many advance entries there will be at the end of the advance registration period.
However, the rest of rule 23A2 does discuss cancellation of a tournament with timely notice. Rule 23A2a allows cancellation with a timely notice in an appropriate issue of Chess Life. The sentence immediately following the one I quoted starts “Organizers who cancel a tournament in a non-emergency situation without proper notice …” It is difficult for me to imagine that six months’ notice of cancellation is not “proper notice.” Moreover, the pre-tournament publicity was quite clear about the possibility that the tournament would be cancelled and explicitly advised registering players to avoid making non-refundable travel arrangements before the deadline for the decision.
Let’s take the approach of “restoring equity” (borrowing the concept of “the tournament director’s role is to restore equity”). Who is hurt if the tournament is cancelled six months in advance? With the notice the organizer has given, does the organizer have any duty of restitution beyond the full refund of the entry fee in the case of cancellation?
I have to believe that the quoted sentence from rule 23A2 is intended to prevent cancellation of, say, a weekend Swiss because the advance entries as of the preceding Thursday night are poor and the organizer sees a financial loss coming. Perhaps the sentence could be better worded, though I think that would be a mistake. Instead, I would turn to rule 1A and say that it is unreasonable to try to craft a rule that covers both that weekend Swiss and the Millionaire Open in a reasonable manner.
I’m sure those who know me will raise an eyebrow at what I’ve written here, since I am usually quite the stickler for enforcing clearly written and clearly understandable rules. In this case, however, I just don’t see where there is any harm done to the players who register before the cancellation decision deadline. As to the question of where to draw the line, I can only appeal to the adage “hard cases make for bad law.” It is not as though there are million dollar prize fund tournaments being set up every week. I’m willling to consider this on a “case by case” basis.
Ken,
So where do we draw the line? You’ve sited Thursday for a weekend Swiss is too close but six months out for a large tournament is fine. While the rule seems to clearly say that poor advance registrations is not a valid reason to cancel a tournament, you have said that as long as you tell people you might cancel, it’s okay.
Mike Regan
I agree that the question of where to draw the line is a thorny one. But I would also argue that the relevant question here is what constitutes sufficient advance notice. Again, I don’t see how the organizer has harmed players who register more than six months in advance by deciding to cancel the tournament. The advance entry period did not close March 31st (the advertised deadline for deciding whether to cancel). The lowest entry fee is still available until July 31. The organizer clearly advises players entering before the decision deadline:
I remain unconvinced that anyone who registered before the decision is harmed in the case of cancellation. Six months should still be enough lead time to allow finding a low fare flight, so the player has not been deprived of an opportunity to save money on the travel arrangements. (If the decision were to be made closer to the tournament, I would think differently.)
Now, if you ask me what the incentive was for a player to register before March 31, I’d have to just shrug my shoulders and mumble “I dunno.” I admit that I was skeptical when I first learned of this tournament and this policy.
What is the alternative here? Maybe the sentence in question in rule 23A2 could be modified to read “A disappointing number of advance entries at the close of the advance registration period is never a valid reason for cancellation”, but I don’t like that either. Nonetheless, is it reasonable to apply a rule intended (I think) mostly to protect players in situations such as my hypothetical weekend Swiss to this case? I’m not sure what the organizer did in this case makes sense, but I’m still not seeing the harm to the player that calls for restitution beyond a full refund of the advance entry fee.
Put another way, what would the point be of trying to penalize the organizer?
Maybe a better basis of comparison would be what the advanced entries were 6 months before the 2005 HB Global Chess Challenge in Minneapolis? It is true that the HB Foundation did eventually go bankrupt, and the foundation most definitely took a big time hit. I seem to remember the entry fee for that event was $500 and total prize fund was $500,000. GM Ashley did not disclose that figure prior to the Minneapolis event in the MC #15 Newsletter, and I am sure that others would be interested in that figure. It may still be an “Apples to Oranges Scenario” and will be interested in seeing if a lot more entries are received over this weekend, to assure that the event would take place.
David A. Cole, USCF Life Member, Franklin, NJ
I thought the entry fee for the HB was more in the $350 range. I could be wrong.
Looks like the HB Global was $345 if you registered online by March 1, 2005, $400 on-site. But there were a variety of other offers, including a $295 ‘bring a friend’ rate and a ‘register 5 club members get one free’ rate advertised on the back cover of the February 2005 Chess Life.