I’m creating an online TLA for our upcoming tournament and have a situation that isn’t clear and I’d appreciate some advice.
Our prize fund is based on 80% of total receipts less expenses of renting the site where we play. Example: If we take in $200 total entries and pay $25 for the room, that leaves $175. Our prize fund is then 80% of $175, or $140.
The online TLA form doesn’t seem to have a way of entering this, and if I indicate 80%, then the preview of the TLA shows “80 % of Entries Returned” which isn’t strictly true.
The other complication is that we have a discounted advance registration fee, which makes it nearly impossible to calculate a prize fund based on the number of players.
How do I enter the TLA in a way that properly reflects what we’re doing? I don’t want to give the wrong impression or cause a problem for our club.
In a word processor write your own TLA from scratch using the format(s) you see in Chess Life as a guide. When you are done send it to tla@uschess.org. Then you can insert something like: Prizes: 80% of (all EFs - expenses). The USCF will send you a proof and a bill.
You may want to say something on the order of $20 less than 80% of the entry fees rather than 80% of (entry fees minus expenses). That limits the deduction and doesn’t make people think that a variably growing TD fee is included to pad the expenses and minimize the prize fund.
Yes, this is an online TLA (it’s an affordably-priced local tourney so we aren’t shelling out for a full-blown TLA) – So the submission options are limited.
I guess I’ll fiddle around with the online TLA form prize fields and options until I find something that looks right for our event. At least you get to preview what the thing will look like!
Have you tried just putting in what you wrote in your initial post? Ignore the prize fund field, and just put in the written example you already gave. Also, you can just list the link to your web site and have people go there for more detailed information (and a detailed explanation of the prize fund) on the tournament.
would be vague enough to discourage me from playing.
I don’t know about others, but I usually spend most of my 1st round game (or 1st round after schedules merge) to total the number of players on the walcharts from all the sections and figure out the prize fund.
Oranizers have to assume some financial risks. If the prize structure is such that they do not, players figure they are the ones assuming risks (of paying entry fee and not getting any prizes) and don’t show up.
Anyway, to actually answer the question you asked, if in doubt, find the free text fields in the Onlina TLA form and put all the info there.
Which is interesting to me, because the Boylston Chess Club, where I got my tournament chess start, simply says, “Prizes based on entries,” with no further elaboration. (The BCC’s tournament director explained to me how he computes the prize fund, and while it’s usually north of 80 percent of receipts, it’s variable enough that no simple “xx% of entries” formula could represent it accurately.) Yet, despite the vagueness, the BCC seems to be maintaining pretty robust participation. I wonder what, if any, factors could persuade Michael Langer to participate in a tournament whose organizer advertised simply that there would be prizes, and that they’d be based on the entries. I also wonder how many players are as hyperconscious of their potential returns as he is.
I used to be a regular in the Boylston Chess Club during my college days (1993-1995). I remember getting mugged on Copley Square on the way to resume an adjourned game. I think my opponent (in the chess game) didn’t have the stomach to put up much resistance in a tricky exchange down ending after seeing what physical condition I was in. Those were the good old days!
I cannot think of any of the top of my head. I often play in tournaments that have no prizes at all. I got no problem with that. It’s the vagueness that I don’t like, which I perceive as being taken advantage of.
Edit: Oh, but of course there is one such factor: if I know and trust the organizer.
Of course, I speak strictly for myself. For everyone else, it might be best just to put big dollar signs where it says prizes. The tournaments I organize (more precisely, I am involved in organizing) either have guaranteed prizes, which are further increased if too many people show up or have prizes based on a set number of participants, proportionally reduced or increased based on the exact turn-out. Here are the tournaments I am talking about:
That is why I suggested subtracting a specific dollar amount (80% of the rental fee) rather than an unspecified amount (80% of [200-25] is the same as [80% of 200]-20). Of course, if larger and more expensive rooms are available if there is a larger turnout then a specified subtraction might not be feasible.
I don’t see why players should expect organizers to assume financial risks if there is no prospect for the organizers of a profit, and they are acting only from the motivation of providing recreation for themselves and other chess-players.
The original poster said he was organizing a tournament for a club. There are many clubs which aim only to cover expenses – that is, break even – and any profit from one activity is merely carried forward to cover possible losses on the next activity. In such a situation, the players shouldn’t be expecting the prizes to be more than nominal, and it is quite reasonable that the entry fees should be going mainly to cover rent, etc.
Why are chess-players, even non-professionals, so money-grubbing? Isn’t chess supposed to be fun?
I don’t understand. Why no prospect of a profit? What’s the significance of carrying the profit to the next event if there is no financial risk at the next event?
We have a club in Austin, Texas. We rent space for it on Sunday nights from the Bridge club of Austin for $100 a night. Once a year in early January, they have Regional Bridge Tournament in San Antonio and that’s when we can rent the space for the whole weekend (for additional fee, of course). That’s when we had the 2 tournaments I linked to. I strongly believe that if we had a prize structure as described in the original post in this thread, rather than guaranteed prizes as we did, then we would have gotten a lot less of a turn-out. As it happened, the turn out was a lot bigger than expected, so we had to hi-tail it to Sam’s club and buy 14 brand new 6’ tables that will now spend the rest of the year in storage.
I don’t agree with your observation that chess-players are more money-grubbing than lawyers, to take an example. In my opinion a human who plays chess is no more money-grubbing than a human who doesn’t.
If you think I am money-grubbing, I certainly won’t argue, since I won’t be objective. But you cannot possibly mean that I represent chess-players in general?
Is there any amateur adult sport where the participants expect cash prizes for their participation, besides chess? The answer is mostly No. The other exceptions, besides chess, are thinks like poker, pool, backgammon, and other hustler/gambling types of activities. There is a lesson in there somewhere. Not a feature of chess I particularly care for.
Sorry, but I have to disagree again. I don’t believe chess players expect cash prizes. Maybe the ones in the US do, but it’s simply because of being weaned by CCA over the years. Chess players in the rest of the World don’t. Because of where my rating is, I don’t expect cash prizes in any tournaments I participate in, US or abroad. I much prefer the conditions abroad, but cannot afford to play there as often as I wanted.
My point is simply as follows: if a player does not know the organizer, he/she makes the decision whether to play in a tournament from the information in TLA. The line about how the prizes are calculated is the proverbial litmus test, based on which one can infer whether playing conditions will be good, how many and how strong other players will show up, and whether organizer can be trusted.
The enduring counterexample of the BCC shows it not to be a very good litmus test. What it’s really a test of, if anything, is how low the organizer’s overhead is, and/or how much of a financial cushion he has with which to endure the hit and keep his bold promises if turnout is disappointing.
I mean, given the circumstances of my club, I can confidently promise that at least 60 percent of all entry fees will be returned as prizes. But 60 percent sounds pathetic. So I promise 75 percent – the lowest number that allows us to save face – but this means we typically lose $20 or $30 on each tournament, and that’s without the TD collecting a dime. We’re small, and even the relatively modest $50 site fee kicks our butt. It would be so much nicer to be able to do what the BCC does and say, “Prizes based on entries.” Then, in a typical 22-player open tournament with $10 entry fees ($6 for our club members), we could give out a $60 first prize, a $35 second prize and a $20 third prize, send our players home happy and break even on the day, without having to announce to anyone that the total prize fund was just 65 percent of entry fees collected.
Now, maybe your eyes are bugging out at our $10 entry fee, but this ain’t Boston. There isn’t a lot of money in circulation where I live. We have to take that into account.
Here is the Grand Conclusion for my contribution to this thread.
One can expect to make profit or at least break even if running a betting pool, a fantasy league, or a poker tournament.
Running a chess tournament is different. It’s more like having a party at your house. It’s generally not going to work if you try to word TLA in such a way that you are protected against losses. Many have tried to make money on running chess tournaments and only Goichberg can claim any success. And Goichberg is a very smart guy. Some others have tried and failed, some of them here in my region (Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana) are now locked up in jail for a long time. If you are totally broke, you shouldn’t be organizing a chess tournament. However, if you or any others are willing to sponsor the tournament by even a small amount, it can come to be a very rewarding experience. And you might end up not losing any money after all.
Not only touring professional bowlers, but also open individual and team events (entry open to amateurs without a tour card), and even your afterwork and retirees’ men’s and mixed leagues are nearly always driven by their cash prizes. E.g., in one competitive league, each team not only bowled each other, but also each member was head-to-head vs. their opposite number for prizes based on both pin-average and head-to-head percentages (similar to board prizes in chess). IMO, the percentage showing up on time week-after-week would be pretty terrible if the only reward for doing well was increasing one’s “Sanctioned league average” (the rough equivalent of a chess rating) or USBC patches.
The main exception for adults are the Summer team leagues, which are customarily “For fun”, where each week the participant is chipping in for merchandise (e.g., a new Resin ball) or a vacation trip.
There is also bowling, bridge, euchre, Monopoly, Scrabble, plus other board and card games. Yes, there are PLENTY of amateur adult “sports” where participants expect cash prizes, and no, they mostly are NOT hustler activities.
Keep it simple. Just say “Prizes based on entries. abc@xyz.com or 555-800-1234 for details.” (I trust those aren’t anybody’s actual email address or phone number.)
If the entry fee is small (say, $15 or less), players won’t be expecting too much in the way of prizes, and will show up just for the play.
If, on the other hand, you’re talking about heftier entry fees and heftier prizes, then you must be willing to take at least a small risk. That’s the way life is.
Try a plus-score format to minimize (but not eliminate) the risk.
My solution was to calculate the prize fund based on 20 players, which was the turnout we had in our January event, and list that. Then I computed the 1st and 2nd place prizes for each section and posted those along with their percentage of the prize fund. And for completeness I included a link to our website, which has the tourney flyer with all the prize details and entry form.
I understand the comments about prize funds and tournament desirability and avoiding the kind of fuzzy details that can make someone skip a tournament and appreciate all your input.
Our group is pretty new; we are trying to energize the local chess community north of Milwaukee, and I think we’re doing so by having very affordable ($15, or $10 in advance) one-day tournaments that ease people into competitive chess. That, combined with free, open chess play every week at our local coffee shop has brought out a good number of players. It has been a great experience so far, and using these free, online TLAs is a way for us to get the word out without a lot of unnecessary expense.
With our low entry fees, people won’t get rich playing in our events, but it’s cool to have prizes.
This all started about four years ago with me and a chess-playing friend deciding we wanted to see if we could get some chess interest going at the local coffee shop, and eventually we joined with another local informal chess group to form a USCF affiliate and host local events (tournaments and simuls) – sure is nice to see us growing our numbers.