My take is that Mr. Collins is correct at least for the Agoura event that the other prizes were reduced in order to fund the Mixed Doubles prizes. But I am with Boyd in that the majority of the players seem to like them. I like them, and I have only played in one event offering it and I made no attempt to get a teammate. I don’t care that the prizes I compete for might be smaller. But then, I’m not driven by prizes anyway.
If they bring in a few ladies who might not play otherwise and they don’t cause men to stay away in droves (hardly likely), why not? And kudos to the TDs who do what the players like because they see TD work as an act of service to chess. No one directs tournaments for the money. The hourly rate ain’t that good.
I was not aware that players were forced to play in any chess tournament. I thought folks would choose not to participate in events whose prize structure the dislike.
I also thought that anyone could organize an event and make the prize structure pretty much anything they would like.
Willing to have the prize structure adjusted is certainly commendable, but I suspect at a chess tournament with a 9 to 1 ratio of males to females, your feelings would be in the minority.
When signing up online for an event, if there was a box that read,
“By checking this box you agree to have any prize you win reduced, to help fund the Mixed Doubles Prize. (Not checking the box entitles you to a larger prize.)”
I suspect that most males will not check that box.
And by not checking the box, this doesn’t mean we are bad people. It doesn’t mean we find Mixed Doubles “offensive.” It doesn’t mean we don’t want the organizer to make money. It doesn’t mean the tournament would be “better” if we weren’t there.
What it does mean is we have our own opinion on an ideal prize structure.
Seems clear to me that I’m telling the OP go do his own events and then he would never have to encounter such a prize structure. Vote with his $$ and don’t play in these events. It is a free country.
It seems many others are quite happy to play in these events.
In a based on entries tournament, if mixed doubles prizes bring in enough entries to cover their cost, then the prize fund is raised in proportion, so the rest of the prizes do not become lower.
In CCA tournaments with based on prizes, this does not happen only when entries are insufficient to pay the full projected prizes, because we increase the prizes in proportion when entries exceed the projection. (The prizes awarded at the Liberty Bell Open have exceeded the projection for the past 10 consecutive years, and we have had many other events sometimes exceed their projection).
A major idea behind mixed doubles prizes is to cause players to contact proposed partners in advance, thereby publicizing the tournament. Male players who do not try to find a partner in advance should not be disappointed if, as usually then occurs, they fail to find one at the tournament.
i wholeheartedly agree, mr collins. i give you a thumbs up on your post. i have asked numerous females at these events and all i have asked already have partenrs for the team prizes, which can be quite substantial. that’s the crux of the matter to me. the prize funds for the teams are often so blatantly out of proportion with some of the other prize monies…
OK then, what are your ideas to get more females involved with chess?? I will state tat every female attending the SW Classic felt
supremely appreciated or totally overwhelmed with the number of guys asking them to be partners. It makes the event more fun for all
and why not??
what do you suggest? i emailed the tournament director and they do not have a “seeking teammate” forum. maybe they should start one? some of us don’t get to tournamnets or clubs too often but i don’t think we should be “penalized” for being unable to recruit a teammate from a sparsely populated area in which we live.
Super - do your event and make the prize structure anything you want for it to be. We encourage more activity!! The more different types of events the better for everyone.
There’s no rule against teaching a female how to play, and then bringing her to an event as your partner. In fact, such an action would grow USCF in general, grow your local playing pool in particular, and make you eligible for mixed doubles prizes. As an added potential benefit, your own game might improve as a result of teaching another player. (Worked for me, anyway.)
In any event, players who do not have a mixed doubles partner are not being “penalized”.
