I notice that upset prizes are not quite as common as they use to be. I think this is in part due to the fact that more and more tournaments are class tournaments. This made me think about the following potential situation. There is a class tournament with upset prizes. During this tournament cross-class pairings occur [i.e. side games]. I note that sometimes (although rather infrequently) the cross-class game will count for the tournament for one of the players. So should any cross-class games count towards the upset prize? I would like opinions on this, and I wonder if it is specifically addressed in any USCF rule. Obviously whatever way is to be used should be at a minimum announced at the beginning of the tournament.
The only reference to upset prizes I remember seeing in the 5th edition of the Official Rules of Chess is the statement in rule 33D1 that prizes such as “biggest upset” are standard exceptions to the “one non-monetary prize per player” rule.
If I were deciding this, I would not count side games when determining upset prizes. While it may be true that the lower rated player scored an upset victory, this violates the rule that players compete against other players in their section for prizes in that section. In a sense, by considering a side game to be eligible for an upset prize, you are rewarding a player who has done poorly enough to receive a bye by giving him an opportunity to face a higher rated opponent in a side game than the other players in the lower section would face.
It seems to me that class tournaments and upset prizes are incompatible – at least if the class divisions occur every 200 points. How can a result be considered an “upset” if both players are in the same class?
If players are allowed to play up a section, then there is a strong likelihood that the players playing up will be the only ones to win upset prizes.
At the start of each round at the Eastern Open upset prizes are offered as follows:
New Special Prizes! Upset: Each rd in each section: 1st $50 & 2nd book prize.
I think this is a neat idea since it encourages lower rated players and gives them some recognition. It is modest compared to the winning prizes awarded for the top 3 prizes. I wish more tournaments tried this idea.
My first thought when I saw the question was: As the extra games are rated, they should count toward the upset. Then I thought, which section’s prize goes to the upset? As I rate a cross section pairing it in an extra games section the answer is not necessarily clear. Some TDs make the game count toward the tournament for the higher section player and give a bye to the lower section player. In this case, as the game is listed in the higher section, I would award the upset to the higher section. An interesting question that I am glad someone brought up. Although I lean toward counting the upset sand counting it toward the section of the winner, I want to discuss this with the organizer and Mike Atkins.
Forgot one point I wanted to make. We are all expecting that the lower rated player will come from the lower section. This is not necessarily true.
Regards, Ernie
That is certainly true. Someone with a bye from the U2200 section could be higher than a bye in the Open since a few more lower rated players just decide to have an “Open” experience. Once the lower sectioned player moves up a section for that round, I think the game should definitely count toward upset prizes. It is part of the tournament and a rated game. No need for “extra games” sections.
Except, perhaps, in the event of a draw. You’d like to give both players a full point in their respective sections. If the result is decisive, you can do this by including the actual game result in the winner’s section, and giving the loser a full-point bye in his section.
When the option is explained (lower section player with a bye moves to higher section to play player with bye - Results counts as tournament game in the higher section - and lower section player gets full point bye in lower section) they can opt out and keep their full point bye or opt in and play. You WOULD NOT include the actual game in the lower section because the upper section player’s rating could exceed the section, for example a 2210 in the Open playing a 1950 in the u2200 and winning.
Would you really put the 2210 into the u2200 section?
An “Extra Games” section that gives both “odd” players a full point in their respective sections and a game in the Extra Games section (that is declared exempt from upset or special prizes) is to be considered here.
Much better than putting the game into just the winner’s section, but again this too is style, isn’t it? Many players, in a long tournament like the eastern open, value the free point and time off to relax and it is hard getting anyone to agree to play as is their right. Your system would work, I prefer mine. We don’t need to legislate it do we?
As long as it is consistently done one way every round it is fair.
Actually I like to give the player a choice of playing in the extra game section or just taking the free point and relaxing. Both methods work fine and, as you point out, it is a matter of style.
