The Goose that Laid the Golden Egg: A Parable for our Time

[Mike Truran]

1. Hotel provides free playing venue for congress in expectation of decent bedroom bookings and bar/restaurant takings.

2. Fewer than 20% of players stay at hotel.

3. Players bring own food and drink into hotel or eat/drink elsewhere.

4. Hotel decides it's not making any money and pulls the plug.

5. Er ...... that's it.

[John Upham]

That is not good news.

What was the difference between the normal and discounted room rates?

[IM Jack Rudd]

The mathematical analysis of this scenario bears some resemblance to the Prisoner's Dilemma. The best outcome for the chess players as a group is for them all to stay in the hotel and eat and drink there, so the congress carries on. But each one individually has the decision to make as to whether to defect from that scenario, and presumably many will reckon that the chance of their being the one extra defector that tips the hotel over the edge is low, whereas the benefit of staying or eating somewhere else is quite high. Hmmm. It's a difficult one to resolve as an organizer.

[Paul Buswell]

1. Hotel provides free playing venue for congress in expectation of decent bedroom bookings and bar/restaurant takings.

2. Fewer than 20% of players stay at hotel.

3. Players bring own food and drink into hotel or eat/drink elsewhere.

4. Hotel decides it's not making any money and pulls the plug.

5. Er ...... that's it.

Unfortunate, but did the congress organisers realistically expect anything different, or did they give the hotel reason to expect anything different?

PB

[Mike Truran]

What was the difference between the normal and discounted room rates?

The rooms were heavily discounted. Despite that, players chose (not for the first time in the case of this congress) to seek cheaper accommodation elsewhere and not to avail themselves of the hotel's catering facilities.

That's absolutely their right, and entirely understandable; Jack's Prisoner's Dilemma post is spot on. However, in my experience the economic facts of life are that you tend to get what you pay for. The hotel eventually ran out of patience; so if the event continues at at all, expect it to be in a school hall or equivalent in future.

Nothing at all wrong with that, of course, if that's what you want.

[John Swain]

Deja vu.

I recollect being one of the local organisers assisting the planning of the 1996 Nottingham British Championships. We negotiated a free and excellent venue (the East Midlands Conference Centre on Nottingham University's campus); the hope/assumption was that many would stay on the university campus, near the EMCC. I can't remember the exact figures, but I recall many players and their families chose to find cheaper or more attractive accommodation than the university offered.

Fortunately, the event went ahead as planned but with limited revenue for Nottingham University.

[Roger de Coverly]

1. Hotel provides free playing venue for congress in expectation of decent bedroom bookings and bar/restaurant takings.

I'd guess this is the 4NCL Individual and Team Rapidplay. The thing about rapid-play is that it's usually perceived as a one-day event, so you think in terms of how long it's going to take to get there in the morning and how long to get back in the evening, rather than as a weekend away. Tolerance of the length of the journey is increased if you only have to do it one day, rather than two or three as with a conventional Congress. So I would imagine the market for overnight stays is somewhat reduced compared to a long play Congress with a number of players who may elect to play one event but not both. So if fewer than 20% of the players stayed in the hotel, what percentages only played one day or were plausibly local?

[Mike Truran]

I'd guess this is the 4NCL Individual and Team Rapidplay.

Wrong.

[Andrew Zigmond]

It would be helpful to know which Congress this is referring to. I have a horrible feeling it's Blackpool where I was weekend before last. To be fair you can't blame players for not staying in the hotel when there's a lot of cheaper accomodation nearby. I must admit I didn't eat at the hotel on either day (I ate elsewhere) largely because the queues for food were always quite big and it wasn't always easy to find a table. However if people were openly bringing their own food in those people should be ashamed of themselves.

[Roger de Coverly]

The rooms were heavily discounted. Despite that, players chose (not for the first time in the case of this congress) to seek cheaper accommodation elsewhere and not to avail themselves of the hotel's catering facilities.

So are you going to say which Congress this is? You might then get some feedback as to why participants don't stay in the "official" hotel. If it was Blackpool, that was a Congress with no particular tradition of the event taking place in a hotel, so regular participants were used to choosing accommodation to their taste and budget. No doubt they also expressed their usual choice of eating establishments. We've been spoilt by the excellent value at e2e4 and 4NCL Hotels, so other Congresses are judged by whether they can match these rates.

[Andrew Zigmond]

On balance what was the bigger cause of the hotel withdrawing, players eating elsewhere or players bringing their own food in? If the former then perhaps the organisers/ hotel need to consider how the offer could be improved (if it was Blackpool and I'd been aware that not eating there could kill off the Congress I would have made a point of eating there).

If it's own sandwich players I don't see why a zero tolerance rule couldn't be introduced. They do it once then warn them, they do it twice sling them out of the tournament. The same with events that are held in upmarket venues with a smart casual dress code and players turn up in T shirt and shorts or a tatty sweater - don't let them in (and don't refund their entry fee). We're far too tolerant of the cheapskate brigade in my opinion. Rant over.

[Matt Mackenzie]

If it was Blackpool then I am surprised, given the wide choice of accomodation there (much of it pretty cheap) - what did the hotel in question expect?

[Martin Benjamin]

Taking one's own food and drink into a hotel is an indefensible practice and creates unnecessary embarrassment for the organisers. I take my hat off to tournament organisers for the time they put in setting up chess events, and I sympathise with Mike's frustration. I feel embarrassed when I see people openly eating their own food and drink in hotels, and I wonder why the hotel staff do not insist on them desisting immediately or make them leave. It is simple enough to take one's own food and drink outside!

That having been said, the situation is less clear when it comes to a "moral" duty for the competitor to book a room and eat at the hotel in order to keep an event viable. On the rare occasions I can play chess at the weekend, I feel a sense of obligation to help the organisers and maintain the viability of the event in future, so I try to support the event by staying, but I have found that sometimes family and work require me to come home on the Saturday evening. Also, when I have eaten at hotels, I have found some offer a less than appealing menu at high prices with long waits for service, and eating out is far more pleasant and better value.

If the future of the event depends on room and meal bookings, maybe the solution would be to include these overtly as part of the entry fee. Perhaps with the certainty of a fixed income and profit, the hotel management would be willing to offer even better discounts and more attractive menus (thus benefitting the participants), as they could calculate demand and supply precisely, and not risk making a loss.

[Mike Truran]

If the future of the event depends on room and meal bookings, maybe the solution would be to include these overtly as part of the entry fee.

An option rejected by the organisers. Rightly or wrongly? No doubt time will tell.

[stevencarr]

Shock news.

You can't make money out of chess-playing amateurs.

And now the weather....

Incidentally, how many congress reports have I read that never mention the sponsors (if there are any)? Answer - a lot.