That’s exactly what you do.
Why should Mike, who is also eligible for the U1800 prize, get less money than King? That wouldn’t be fair, and hence the prizes are combined and split between the two.
Jeff. . .I figured it out. Each of the remaining 3.5 point players evenly split the U1800 and U1600 prizes total ($80 + $70) ÷ 2 = $75 Each for
King(1730) - $75
Mike(1530) - $75
I ended up with a combination of your idea of finding the (eligible) smallest prize that covered the cap plus sliding the player down until that prize would be awarded. So for the original example from David Hater:
| Name | Rate | Score | Prize | For |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| C | nnnn | 4.5 | 375.00 | 1st |
| B | nnnn | 4.5 | 375.00 | 2nd |
| A | nnnn | 5.0 | 100.00 | 3rd[capped] |
| E | nnnn | 4.0 | 25.00 | 3rd[remainder] |
| D | nnnn | 4.0 | 25.00 |
In this other example in the thread (which is based upon an actual Chicago Open under section from a few years ago) where A, B and C all have caps of various sizes:
| Name | Rate | Score | Prize | For |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D | nnnn | 6.0 | 4000.00 | 1st |
| A | nnnn | 6.5 | 1000.00 | 2nd[capped] |
| B | nnnn | 6.0 | 1000.00 | 3rd[capped] |
| C | nnnn | 6.0 | 400.00 | 6th[capped] |
| E | nnnn | 5.5 | 700.00 | 4th[augmented] |
| F | nnnn | 5.5 | 700.00 | 5th |
| G | nnnn | 5.5 | 700.00 | 7th |
| H | nnnn | 5.5 | 700.00 | 8th |
(9th and 10th would be split among the 5.0’s).