An Open Letter to all TDs - No More "Mixed Doubles"

Running Chess Tournaments
1

Greetings,

Lately, several of the tournaments I’ve entered have had a “Mixed Doubles” prize. The rules are simple: For no additional charge, a player can “team up” with a member of the opposite sex and compete against other such teams for additional prizes.

This prize was a feature of last year’s American Open held in Orange, California over the Thanksgiving Day holiday. The top scoring team (1st Place) won $500.00, the second highest scoring team won $250.00 and the third highest scoring team won $125.00. The prize was also a feature of this past weekend’s Western Class Championships, held in Agoura Hills, California.

I’d like to see the Mixed Doubles Prizes eliminated (or changed)… because it’s not fair to most of us guys!

We are all aware that most chess tournaments have a very large percentage of males vs. females. In fact, as I glance over all of the entries at the above mentioned American Open, I see the male to female ratio for this tournament was about 9 to 1. (There were approximately 284 entrants and based upon the names of the entrants, just 28 of them were female.)

I’m going to guess that 9 to 1 ratio is probably pretty close to average for many tournaments. (Scholastic tournaments are most likely an exception.) For some tourneys, the ratio may be a bit more or even a bit less.

I’d love to team up with someone and be eligible to compete for an additional prize! How much fun would that be! However, I can never find a female who wants to team up with me!

I’m a 53-year-old male. The few females who play, most of which are far less than half my age, don’t wish to be on my team. And why should they? They want to team up with their friends or classmates or brothers, or kids their own age.

Trust me, I’ve asked at every tournament I’ve entered that offers such an prize. Are you on a team? Do you want to team up with me? Have you found a teammate yet?

The answer is always the same. Sorry, they tell me. They are already on a team or plan on signing up with a friend/their brother/classmate, etc.

If 10% of the entrants are females, then 89% of us guys are “out of luck.” 89% of us won’t be able to join any team at all. (The math is easy: Assume 100 entrants 90 of which are males. 80 of these 90 won’t be able to join a team. 80/90 = 88.9%. This percentage will remain true for any number of entrants, as long as the 10% female number remains constant.)

If I’m wrong about the percentage, and a full 15% of the entrants are females, then 82% of the guys are out of luck. (Assume 100 entrants 85 of which are males. 70 of these 85 won’t be able to join a team. 70/85 = 82.3%. This percentage will also remain true for any number of entrants, as long as the 15% female number remains constant.)

89%! 82%! Those are very high percentages! It is isn’t fair to the guys!

Why? Why set up a feature that is so unfair? It’s known that most tournaments are top heavy with males compared to females!

A portion of my entry fee, and that of the all of other males who are in the same boat as I, are helping to contribute to the Mixed Doubles Prizes that we can’t possibly win. We can’t win it at all. We can’t win it through no fault of our own.

That just isn’t right. We’d love to compete for such a prize, but it’s impossible.

Now, I’m all in favor of getting more females to participate in chess tournaments. I really, really am. I love seeing girls compete. But a) I’m not convinced this Mixed Doubles prize helps to bring in additional females that wouldn’t play otherwise and b) creating a feature that is unfair to such a LARGE percentage of the male players can’t possibly be right, even if you DO get an additional gal or two to enter.

Why can’t we just have a “Doubles Prize?” Why does it have to be “Mixed” Doubles? Why can’t a guy team up with another guy? I’d love to team up with a buddy of mine, and the two of us complete together for an additional prize!! His strength would be irrelevant. That would make the entire tournament more fun for both of us, as we cheer each other on during the tourney!

Why can’t a girl team up with another girl?

TDs: Please be fair. Please consider an alternative:

(1) Change the format so that ANY two players are able to to compete for a team prize. Gender should not be a part of chess.

(2) Eliminate the Mixed Doubles Prize completely. (But feel free to create other prizes that everyone is eligible for. Biggest upset, best game, etc.)

(3) Require the Mixed Doubles players to pay an additional entry fee, and only use their entry fee for the Mixed Doubles prizes.

(4) Change the format so that a random guy is selected with a random girl. (This still isn’t fair to the guys who won’t be selected, but at least over time all of the guys will have a chance to be a partner with someone.)

I’d love to hear from the tournament directors, the ones who share my opinion and the ones who don’t. For those who don’t I’d like to know the reasons why such an unfair feature is implemented. It must be a numbers game. How much does it help the tournament? How many dissatisfied male players will it take before the feature is changed or eliminated? What do you say to someone who is unhappy they can’t find a player to team up with? I’m sorry?

Thanks for listening.

Ed Collins
Southern California

2

I have a feeling that “Mixed Doubles” participants are less of a threat for the main prizes due to socializing taking some focus away from chess. I wonder if any statistics are available for “Mixed Doubles” participants performance.

Regardless, I enjoyed your post - wish there was a like button.

3

I’m told it, along with a thanks button, ain’t needed :laughing:

4

Perhaps the best person to address this is Steve Immitt. I believe the mixed doubles idea was originally his. With that in mind, I’ll offer the following comments.

As the prizes don’t cost the players anything, I have a hard time believing they harm an event. I’ve seen what I believe is increased female turnout for most CCA events I’ve run with mixed doubles prizes over prior years in the same event without mixed doubles. Admittedly, my evidence is anecdotal, but it does come from over 10 years of running CCA tournaments.

Some tournaments offer individual prizes aimed solely at juniors, or women, or seniors. These prizes are even more exclusionary than mixed doubles prizes. Yet, I haven’t heard a similar objection to those.

IIRC, the Delegates passed a motion last year encouraging organizers to add mixed doubles prizes. Based on that, I don’t foresee them being eliminated from events any time soon.

5

I don’t see what TDs have to do with it.

Alex Relyea

6

1-0!

7

Some people are under the impression that the TD and organizer are always the same people. They aren’t used to the concept of somebody like me who is an NTD, has directed in over three dozen nationals, has been the chief TD of hundreds of tournaments with more than 100 players, and has never organized an event with even 50 players.

In my experience the combination of multiple part-time organizers who do one or two events a year (with multiple man-days of effort needed for each) meshes quite well with a non-organizing TD who works just the day(s) of the tournament. Some effective organizers did not even know how to play the game, but did know how to organize an event.

8

It’s actually caused my wife to have an interest in playing - because chess would be more “together”.

Makes one wonder if there should be some sort of mixed prize at the amateur team.

9

Thanks. I appreciate that comment.

10

Based upon this 2012 article,

uschess.org/content/view/11768/671/

and Steve’s enthusiasm in promoting it at the tournaments he directs, I’d say he was all for it. Maybe he will see this post someday and respond as to what his reasons are.

The above article and comments from Steve help to make my point. 189 players entered that 2012 New Yorker Open. About 18 Mixed Doubles Teams entered. In the article he says that every female at the tournament was on a team (10%) and EVERY ONE OF THEM had been asked by someone else to be on a team! If you do the math that’s 153 males who were out of luck.

I love that comment about one female who was overheard dictating the terms. (“No, 60% for me, 40% for you.”) I don’t blame her. Why not? Heck, I’d take a 30% cut of some possible prize money. That’s better than what I have now… 0%.

11

My suggestion for anyone having difficulty finding a female partner: recruit your wife, girlfriend, sister, mother, daughter, granddaughter, neice, aunt, cousin, co-worker, car pool partner, etc.

I look forward to the opportunity for my wife and I being able to compete as a mixed doubles team. That is if she doesn’t find a better prospect.

12

I suppose my response to this is, “So what?”

Please don’t take offense. It isn’t meant to be flippant. I just don’t see why it matters that some players don’t get to be on a mixed doubles team.

I will also note that not every female in a CCA event with a mixed doubles prize is on a team. Some younger players aren’t allowed to be on a team by their parents. And some just don’t get picked (believe it or not).

Again, I don’t understand how having a 0% chance of sharing in a pool of extra prizes where you paid $0 into the pool hurts you.

If you’re really wanting to get in on the mixed doubles fun, I suggest coordinating with a local female player who you know will be entering an event, and getting her to team up with you in advance. Alternately, you could always get a friend or relative to learn the game and come play with you.

13

Ah. Apparently you don’t quite understand. I DID pay into the pool. Where do you think the Mixed Doubles Prizes come from?

I will tell you. They come from a part of my entry fee… and a part of the entry fee from all of the other players. (There is no additional entry fee required to enter a Mixed Doubles Team.)

That’s my whole point. 89% of the male players are paying into the pool… and all of these players aren’t even allowed a chance to win anything… because of 90-10 male to female ratio.

14

Well, I guess you can vote against it by not playing in those events.

I see events all the time with special prizes that many cannot win at all - top senior, top junior, top woman.

15

I agree with Allen’s idea of voting with your feet. I’ve seen tournaments with abysmal prize to entry fund ratios. Should we legislate those too? Nope, the players will decide with their dollars.

16

Ah. Apparently you don’t quite understand. CCA events that introduced mixed doubles prizes did not increase their entry fees or reduce their prize funds over previous installations that didn’t have those prizes.

Exhibit A: the Pittsburgh Open. In 2011, the Pittsburgh Open had a $12,000 minimum guaranteed prize fund, a $103.50 early entry fee, a $120 on-site entry fee. In 2015, the Pittsburgh Open had a $12,000 minimum guaranteed prize fund, a $105 early entry fee, and a $120 on-site entry fee.

Exhibit B: the Cleveland Open. In 2011, the Cleveland Open had a $16,000 guaranteed prize fund, a $103 early entry fee, and a $120 on-site entry fee. In 2014, the Cleveland Open had a $16,000 guaranteed prize fund, a $105 early entry fee, and a $120 on-site entry fee.

(I did not use the 2014 Pittsburgh Open for comparison because it was held in a relatively undesirable location, and had a reduced prize fund and entry fee in anticipation of lower entries as a result. The 2015 Cleveland Open isn’t scheduled until August, so 2014 is the latest year available for that event.)

The point of these year-over-year comparisons, of course, is to demonstrate that the mixed doubles prizes are simply extra money thrown into the prize pool by the organizer. Obviously, it’s an investment in the hopes of generating additional entries. However, it’s not like players are being charged more, or the prize fund is being reduced, when mixed doubles prizes are being introduced, when compared to previous versions of the same event.

17

Kevin fan club.

18

The irony of this post is astounding.

19

The only thing I don’t like about the mixed doubles prize is I haven’t won one yet.

Mr. Collins, I’m likely playing the Chicago Class in July. How about you? I need a mixed doubles partner.

20

If Mr. Collins isn’t playing, I’ll take you up on that offer as I’ll almost certainly be at the Chicago Class.