Wildcard Prize Idea

Running Chess Tournaments
1

Fellow TD’s,

I’ve been giving quite a bit of thought about an idea that may have been tried before, but I wanted to run it by you. This is the 1st year that I’ve been directing 4 round events, and most events conclude with a couple of players who score 3 points but don’t win anything due to another player scoring 3.5, who is competing for the same prize. I’m thinking of adding a wildcard prize for the player(s) with the highest point total, who didn’t win or tie for a class, group or section prize. Since our culture loves the wildcard chance in sports, I think it would be great to have this concept in chess as well.

After thinking on this for a while, I thought occurred: “How would this be any different from a 2nd place prize?” A couple of ways came to mind: 1) A 2nd place prize requires a 1st place prize. If there are only prizes based on rating classes, the wildcard could still be used. 2) The wildcard prize would be equal to, or less than any of the class prizes (and my class prizes are always the same by the way). I think the 2nd place prize is more than a class prize in most tournaments.

Here’s an example of what I have in mind: In an event where there were 6 groups: (MX, A, B, C, D, U1200/unr), a player who doesn’t win or tie for one of these 6 prizes but scores 3 points, can still win (or tie for) the wildcard prize. In a 4 round event, with at least 30 players, there is bound to be at least one who has 3 points but doesn’t win their class (usually an X, A or B player). With a wildcard prize in place, a player can almost be certain that if they score 3 points in 4 rounds, they’ll win something. Then it occured to me, “Why don’t I just award a prize for those who get 3 points?”, but I’m thinking that as more players participate, there’s a possibility of a player needing 3.5 to win the wildcard.

I appreciate any feedback, as this may not be a good idea for reasons that are not coming to mind. I’ve thought over this for several days, but that doesn’t help what I don’t know.

Thanks In Advance

2

The first thought that comes to mind is that it is an interesting idea.

Second, you need to consider what happens in the event a $100 class A prize is split four ways and thus a $30 wild card prize becomes worth more for the otherwise non-prize-winning expert that scored the same as (or even less than) the $25-each-winning class A players. If the wild card winner scored more points than the class players then having the wild card winner earn more may be acceptable, but in this case you may end up having to split the $130 five ways so that everybody gets $26.

A second place prize is generally more than any class prize, but that is not absolute. The rulebook stipulates that the players get the largest prize that they are qualified for, and a class prize can be larger than a place prize (especially when the place prizes go fairly deep fot the size of the tournament).

The biggest difference I see between a second place prize and a wild card prize is if you have a master win 4-0, two A-players take their class with 3-1 and one expert that went 2.5-1.5. With a second place prize, the A-players share top A and second ($65 each with the above numbers). With a wild card prize the A players split top A ($50 each) and the 2.5-1.5 expert gets the wild card ($30). The final round in this example could have been M3-0 beat X2.5-0.5 A 2-1 beat B 2-1, A 2-1 beat C 2-1.

Have fun describing the wild card in the tournament announcements.

3

My first thought was also about what you do if a class prize gets chopped up to the point where a single “wildcard” was worth more.

So if you are doing one prize among all classes, then at least 1 person is going to qualify in each section as having the next highest point score. Most likely, several people will be at that score. So even if your “wildcard” prize was $100, it is definately going to be cut 6 ways, and could be split to the point where it is insignificant.

I take it that the top section might have people with 3 get their share (if 3.5 or 4.0 was the winner), while if in the B class 2.5 was the winner that 2.0’s would share, etc?

Rob

4

Robgetty,

If there were 4 sections (MXA, 1500-1799, 1200-1499, U1200/unr), then each section could have it’s own wildcard (4). In a class tournament, this would practically be the same as a 2nd place prize, and each wildcard winner would probably have 3 or 3.5 points.

Now If there was only 1 section (which is what I had in mind), but there were 4 prize fund categories (MXA, 1500-1799, 1200-1500, U1200/unr), I think the scenario that you shared would be more likely.

jwiewel,

It’s funny you mentioned the ad. Coming up with an appropriate one did give me a few anxious thoughts. I’m thinking something like “A (new) wildcard prize will be explained before round 1”, if this is allowed.

Wow, you’re right, if the wc prize is 1/2 a class prize and 3 people tie for the class prize, that’s ugly…hmmm. Maybe the wc prize should be at most 1/2 a class prize but not to exceed any divided class prize for the event. Yea, it could get pretty small if the class prize was say $120 and 6 players tied for it. The wc prize would be $20, but if there were no ties for 1st place, the wc prize would be $60. It seems to make most players feel good to be able to say that they won something, especially when it helps them continue a streak.

5

Instead of going by point totals, you could give the “wildcard” prize(s) based on performance rating instead. This evens the playing field a bit. Since the idea is to hand out more prizes, I’d limit folks to one prize per person, and just make the wildcard $ less than the “real” prizes.

Or use the plus score prize format (go back a page or so in the TO forum to see a discussion), which would give everyone with a + score a prize.

6

Of course this idea assumes that the same rating supplement is used for all players (Hey, we all know that many organizers/TDs use the MSA or even ratings generated by previous events. And, what about Unrateds?). And, how does this appeal to the organizer? Will it get him/her more players?

Tim

7

A slightly simplified version of this idea would be to guarantee each player scoring 3 points or more a minimum of $20 (or some other fixed amount) in prizes.

In practice, you might want to first compute all prizes in the standard ways (including the usual methods for handling multi-way ties involving both place and class prizes, for example). Then, after all prize computations have been made, simply up each player’s prize to $20 (if necessary) if he scored 3 points or better.

For example, if players X, Y, and Z earn respectively $100, $15, and $0 in prizes, and all score 3 points, you would award $100, $20, and $20 respectively.

Try it out with a few sample crosstables from earlier tournaments first, to make sure you won’t lose your shirt.

As with all new ideas, there are bound to be some practical problems nobody thought about beforehand. Enter with caution.

Bill Smythe

8

Thanks Bill,

A former TD and current friend once told me, “If no one else (meaning no other TD) in the country is doing it (regarding tournament organization ideas), it’s probably not a good idea”, but coming up with something new is fun, and of course more fun if you don’t “loose your shirt”.

I’ve tested your input on my 4 round event cross tables. Averaging 32 players, the most that have tied for a class prize so far is 5 (a $24 prize for a b/40, $120 class prize), so $20 for 3 points is a good idea for a b/40 projection where 6 players could tie. I plan to prorate the wilcard prize from the other prizes so that the prize fund b/40 stays the same.

9

If it takes 32 players in a section for your wildcard prizes to break even, that may be a problem. The average section has less than 20 players in it. Only around 11% of the sections rated in the last 18 months had 32 or more players in them.

I think you see it as a way to make an event that you know will draw that many players a bit more interesting for those who don’t quite make the other prize groups. If so, I hope it works well for you.

10

Thanks Mike, I hope it goes well also. I really like organzing and trying to make the tournaments fun to help offset the stresses that can occur.

These kinds of stats really help. My swiss events have all had 1 section. I’m trying a multi-section event in December. I was feeling a bit down that I’d not ever had 40 at an event (while a “retired” TD friend averaged 48 players over a 4 year period), but with the average section having 11 players, 32 is great.

I’m thinking that quad formats are reflected in this average and since they by definition, have sections of 4 players, they significantly decrease the section average. If this is the case, I wonder what the average number of players are in a section after quad formats are removed?

11

In the last 18 months there have been 16,960 sections rated with 5 or more players in them. The average was just under 21 players.

During those 18 months we rated 761 two-player sections, 327 three-player sections and 4291 quads.

12

You the man Mike :smiley:

13

Fellow TD’s

I’ve been trying to come up with a better way of both explaining and understanding how a wildcard prize would differ from a 2nd place prize. I think this illustration makes it clear.

Using the cross table from my tournament SwissZILLA back in March, the prize fund was as follows:

$400 guaranteed 1st; $240 1st X, A, B, C, D, U1200, $160 1st unr. b/80

A) I pretended that there was a $120 2nd place prize, and the result was that both Ken Thomas (X) and Darryl Jackson (A) would have won $120 each instead of $60 (Jim McLaughlin and Dwight Beasley would have split the sum of the 1st place (400) and 2nd place (120) prizes. As it turns out, they took half of the X (120 = 60) and A (120 = 60) prizes added to the 1st place prize (400) and split the different (Since 2 players can’t win 3 prizes, 1/2 of each of their class prizes was added to the 1st place prize (total = 520), then split), so they would have both still won $260 each. The prize fund would have looked like this instead:

$400 guaranteed 1st; $120 guaranteed 2nd; $240 1st X, A, B, C, D, U1200, $160 1st unr. b/80

B) I pretended that there was a $120 wildcard prize (b/80), and the result was that both Behrooz Vakil and Ray Kurczynski would have won $30 each for having 4 points (there were only 31 participants so I paid 1/2 the projected prizes), which was the highest point total for players not winning any class prize money. More players would have won money with a wildcard prize (12 prize winners instead of 10). The prize fund would have looked like this instead:

$400 guaranteed 1st; $240 1st X, A, B, C, D, U1200, $160 1st unr., $120 wildcard prize for the highest point total that doesn’t win a class prize, b/80.

14

If you need an explanation like that in your TLA to clarify things for the players, you’re going to end up with a lot of confused (and a few disappointed) players.

As I said before, enter with caution.

Bill Smythe

15

Bill,

I’ve ran this idea by several higher rated tournament players already and so far they seem pleased with it. I’ll continue to explain the concept and ask questions between now and July when I’m planning on using it in an event. I appreciate your advice and will take it under consideration. I honestly do think that it will be a welcomed breath of fresh air once players understand it. I’ve not heard any specific reasons as to why this wouldn’t work, nor have I heard anything along the lines of rule conflicts. Worst case scenario, it just doesn’ t go well. That will neither be the first, nor the last time that an idea of mine did so. I’d be far from discouraged in continuing tournament organizing/directing, as I have a passion for organizing, an enchantment with chess, and a customer base that emphatically welcomes my efforts.

Thanks Again,

16

Fellow TD’s,

After some extensive analysis over the possibility of wild card prize winners winning more than split class prize winners, I’ve decided to scrap the wildcard prize concept. I may instead just simply state in my adds that a player with 3 points in 4 rounds will at least have their entry fee returned.

Thanks for all of your efforts and input.

17

CCNY runs a 3 round tournament with a 20 enry fee.

3-0 gets $40, 2.5-.5 gets $20, 2 gets $10. So really the whole tournament is one big wild card. Since a side evet to the main event the tutnout depends who shows just play in that, and what players from the main even finish in time.

18

I was just going to ask (before you beat me to it), what if you have a three-way tie at 4.0 among three C players, each winning $40, and a fourth C player at 3.5 being the lone wild card winner at $60?

Anyway, you could just announce that any player scoring in the 3.5 group (or whatever the highest non-prize-winning score turns out to be) who does not otherwise win at least X dollars will have his prize raised to X dollars. (As you suggested, X could be equal to the entry fee, for example.)

Or, if you don’t mind ditching class prizes, you could simply run a plus-score event. For example:

Six rounds, entry fee $40
6.0 wins $200
5.5 wins $130
5.0 wins $90
4.5 wins $60
4.0 wins $40
3.5 wins $15

Properly planned, a plus-score event is almost guaranteed not to lose your shirt, and not to lose money at all except in the event of a TINY turnout. The total prize fund expands or contracts automatically (and proportionally) with the turnout, yet each individual prize is guaranteed.

See some of the older plus-score threads for details.

Bill Smythe

19

Thanks Bill,

Yes, I’m familiar with the plus score concept. The only drawback I see is that I always have equal class prizes, which give the D players who has more point that day than other D players, a chance to win the same amount as the A players who has more points than A players that day. In a 1 section plus score event, the lower rated players would not win nearly as much proportionately. Having said that, you point is well taken and I may keep the plus score concept in mind for multi section events. I think the best idea may be to ether return the entry fee for a 75% score (3 of 4, or 4.5 of 6), if they would not have otherwise won anything, or a flat $20 prize for the same scores.

Thanks again,

20

So here we are. After several months of working the pencil and eraser, here is what I’ve come up with concerning wildcard prizes (TD’s feel free to fire away at what I’m thinking is a bulletproof application of this concept :smiley: )

Wildcard prizes will now be awarded at HCA tournaments as follows:

  1. When the “based on” count for that tournament has been exceeded.
  2. Goes to the player(s) with the most points who did not qualify for a class prize.
  3. Is not to exceed the amount of any divided class prize for that tournament.
  4. Is to at most be half of the amount of an undivided class prize for that tournament.

So instead of increasing the prize amount per player when the “based on” count is exceeded, more players will win prizes. That was my objective.

YES!!!, I smell success.