Team Rapidplay Format & Prize Money

[John Sargent]

Hey everyone,

Looking at organising another team rapidplay event at Imperial College after the success of the previous one at very little notice. Due to various hoops to jump through in these times of budget-cutting, it has been suggested that it's easier to budget for and get an event approved (i.e. venue secured etc.) if there was no prize money at a tournament (although I believe this is still possible, just makes things more complicated). This presented an interesting question that I thought I'd put to the members of the forum.

I was wondering if people would be more or less interested in an event if there was no prize money at a one-day rapidplay tournament (There would still be prizes for weekend congresses I think, this question applies only to the 4-man team rapidplay event) but entry fees were reduced? For instance, we may be able to offer (subject to confirmation so this isn't set in stone yet) £10-per-person entry fees for the entire day (6 graded games) and possibly also subsidise with free tea/coffee at the venue for all players, and still have trophies for the winning teams. This would be in lieu of prize money. Alternatively, a more expensive format (something like £15 per person perhaps) with some prize money could be kept.

For those in London who have played in events in the past or may consider playing in this one, I'd be interested in hearing your views on the format - and even for everyone else, do you think this is a good idea? Please note that in either case, the event would not be able to offer conditions anyway (although with prize money there is an obvious incentive for strong players to pop along and attempt to mop up, I acknowledge). Would be interested on hearing your views which would help us make a decision, and looking forward to announcing an event before the end of the month!

All the best,
John

[Roger de Coverly]

(There would still be prizes for weekend congresses I think, this question applies only to the 4-man team rapidplay event)

There's much less of a tradition or an expectation of cash prizes for team events. A trophy perhaps and your team name recorded for posterity. Think of many leagues and county matches where team events can be popular in the total absence of a prize money motive. So if it solves issues with the proposed venue, go ahead. As you also indicate, it hasn't been possible to establish no prize weekenders or individual rapid-plays. It's been tried from time to time without success.

[Alex Holowczak]

Sean Hewitt's e2e4 All-Play-Alls are week long individual events with no prize money. The only prizes you compete for are norms and trophies. This doesn't seem to have stopped them from being a success. So it may not be a weekender, but the prizes are nil cashwise.

However, I agree with Roger that in a team environment, people tend not to be too bothered about prize money. We don't have prize money for the BUCA event, and we don't miss out on entries we'd otherwise get because of its absence.

I guess it's all about what people expect. A fledgling event (such as BUCA, and even Sean's e2e4s) may get away with no prizes because it was new and there was no expectation of financial prizes from similar events. By contrast, a new congress offering no prize money would be so against the grain that they'd be brave to do it!

[Adam Raoof]

Normal entry fee, no prize money!

[Alan Burke]

Adam, are you sure you didn't mean "No entry fee but lots of prize money" ???

[Adam Raoof]

Adam, are you sure you didn't mean "No entry fee but lots of prize money" ???

No, I genuinely meant what I said. For team events, where I am representing my club, I don't care about prize money at all but it would be nice to win the club a trophy. For individual tournaments I care slightly more about prize money, despite the almost certain knowledge that I won't win it! I think that having more prize money can increase the status of the event and the quality of the entry. On the flip side I don't think having massive prize funds for a tournament makes a proportionate difference (ie increase) in the number of entries.

What really does make a difference is if an organiser reduces the prize fund on the day of the event, or merges sections, or cancels an event at the last minute - they then lose most of their credibility immediately.

[Mike Gunn]

I remember seeing an event organised recently with a two-tier entry fee structure. For a "normal" entry fee you would be competing for prizes but for a much reduced entry fee you would forgo the right to win a prize. I believe it was a rapidplay in Essex (possibly Basildon). Does anyone know if this strategy met with success?

[Joey Stewart]

With Seans things I think the ratings aspect of it is important too, as it can take years and years to improve a fide grade if the only events you play are 4ncl (and even then, the system is pretty harsh and only really rewards constant winning which is not easy against such standard of opposition)

But I do think if I am playing for no prize money then I would rather not have a trophy either - it kind of feels like you did win a prize but it has been spent on your behalf.

[Alan Walton]

When we have played Bolton Team Jamboree, the prize is normally a new clock (digital nowadays)

This at least gives the club something to use, we have normally purchased a small engraved plaque to stick onto it to show the achievement

[Joey Stewart]

A clock prize is a really good idea for team events actually, especially local leagues where the clubs provide their own equipment (in the national competitions the clock would more likely end up in the captains house in a draw somewhere) and clocks can often be a bit shoddy - it would certainly be a better way to reward the players then small trophies.

[Adam Raoof]

When we have played Bolton Team Jamboree, the prize is normally a new clock (digital nowadays)

This at least gives the club something to use, we have normally purchased a small engraved plaque to stick onto it to show the achievement

Hendon Chess Club printed their own T-Shirt to celebrate winning the City of London Rapidplay League in 2009.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/adamraoof/5004291263/

[John Sargent]

Thanks for the posts and opinions, they are appreciated! Due to various bits of procedural stuff I can't promise anything this week but will definitely announce something before the end of Feb.

[Michael Jones]

With Seans things I think the ratings aspect of it is important too, as it can take years and years to improve a fide grade if the only events you play are 4ncl (and even then, the system is pretty harsh and only really rewards constant winning which is not easy against such standard of opposition)

But I do think if I am playing for no prize money then I would rather not have a trophy either - it kind of feels like you did win a prize but it has been spent on your behalf.

Unless the organiser has gone really overboard with it, a trophy will almost certainly cost considerably less than the prize money which might have been awarded instead of it - in fact it may well have cost less than your entry fee, so if you were playing solely for the money it would have been better not to enter in the first place. In the absence of prize money, it's just a way of recognising that you won.

As to the original question, I don't mind either way.

[Ian Stephens]

Hello John, if you could organize a tournament whereby you pay an entry fee and then dependant on your performance you would win back whole or part of the Entry minus tournament expenses, say 50% for an even score, maybe this could work? I feel this would give some type of incentive to the also rans and would cure a lot of last round withdrawals knowing there is still something to play for.