Najer retains Word Open title, Nakamura needs just two days to share first

13 Responses to “Najer retains Word Open title, Nakamura needs just two days to share first”

1. me on July 8th, 2009 10:56
   

   I don’t understand a thing. It is only one tournament – a 9 round swiss, right? How do you make pairings if some players already completed some rounds before the other ones even start playing? Also I don’t see how a player can simply chose to take a bye and score half a point. Why am I not on the list then – I chose a bye in every round, so I should ber listed with 4.5 points

   This strange format when some participants play at one rate, some at second rate, and some a third rate, is simply stupid.
2. Arne Moll on July 8th, 2009 14:09
   

   I agree, me, the rules are an absolute chaos in my opinion. How can people take a tournament with such regulations seriously? It’s a joke!
3. Hugo van Hengel on July 8th, 2009 14:38
   

   Quite a peculiar way to play a tournament.
4. me on July 8th, 2009 16:19
   

   “How can people take a tournament with such regulations seriously?”

   They probably don’t.
   Nakamura played 5 rapid warm-up games against low rated opponents, then drew and won against two high ranked opponents in “standard” games, and then left for San Sebastian.

   It was most likely just a wam-up before San Sebastian for him.
5. Thomas on July 8th, 2009 18:34
   

   @”me”: Maybe for Nakamura it was “just a warm-up before San Sebastian”, but then 15.000$ prize money is quite a nice icing on the cake, isn’t it?
6. CAL|Daniel on July 9th, 2009 00:17
   

   All the playing schedules eventually merge. It provides us multiple opportunities to play the tournament since many of us have to work with our work schedules.

   The reentry stuff is just Bill Goichberg’s method of squeezing more money out of stupid people who wish to try for the large “icing on the cake” prizes.

   I think if there was any decent tournaments around then Goichberg’s monopoly would fall apart but since his events are all there is to play in America… what can we do? Cheating is rampant fyi: http://chaoschess.blogspot.com/
7. Arne Moll on July 9th, 2009 09:03
   

   That’s a terrible story, CalDaniel. Personally, I have always found it absurd that weak players can win so much money. (I have been at a US tournament once where first prize in the category U1200 was 200$!) And it’s just paradise for cheaters.
8. Ruben Kuijper on July 9th, 2009 11:25
   

   True, I head some time ago I heard a story about how an strong IM had dropped his rating so he could play lower groups.
9. CAL|Daniel on July 9th, 2009 14:01
   

   well $200 isn’t that much money really because that is usually barely the cost of the entry fee. Most of the times the entry fee is $105~ dollars.

   In the case of World Open, entry fee is $350!! And then U1200 is $5,000. Still this setup is pure cheater paradise. Many strong players and IMs sandbag.
10. Arne Moll on July 9th, 2009 14:27
    

    At the time I remember thinking $200 was a lot for playing chess at the level of … well, of someone who has just learned the rules… $5000 is completely beyond me. I’m baffled.

    (Also, why is the entry fee so ridiculously high? Aren’t poor people allowed to play chess in the US or something?)
11. CAL|Daniel on July 9th, 2009 20:49
    

    Well here is the problem…

    World Open has: 98 masters in the open section which amounts to $350 x 98 $34,300. Now they paid out to the open section: $45800.05 Don’t forget that the organizer takes a 50% cut for his profit so actually the open is generating $17,150 and paying out $45,800.05 so where is the other $28,650.05 coming from?

    The u1200, U1400, U1600, U1800, and U2000 sections which pay for the open, U2400 and U2200 sections.

    Watch: U1800 had 212 participants x$350=$74,200 divide by 2 for organizer profits = $37,100 but the prize total for this section was only $33,500.04 creating a surplus of $3599.96 to help cover the open costs.

    Why is the entry fee so high? 2 reasons: The weaker players are paying for the GMs prize fund and the organizer is always taking a 50% profit curve. If $250,000 is paid in prizes than $250,000 is the organizer’s profits.

    So tell me who made out ahead Najer’s $15,200 or Bill Goichberg (the organizer)’s $250,000 or your average 1200 player who had a -$1000 ($350 entry+hotel+food+gas).
12. Arne Moll on July 10th, 2009 07:55
    

    Interesting calculations, CalDaniel. In Europe, the concept of ‘organizer profit’ is totally unknown as far as I know. I guess it’s normal that weaker players to some extend pay the prize money of the professionals but your example is quite extreme. I can’t understand why people are willing to pay so much money for just one tournament. Where do they get the money from??
13. Thomas on July 10th, 2009 11:23
    

    Considerable amounts of prize money also in the lower sections may be surprising, but I generally disagree with Arne that it’s “absurd” – well, maybe 5000$ is. However, it has to be weighed against the player’s expenses (as CalDaniel already pointed out) and the ‘objective’ (statistical) chances to win this prize.

    Winning the U1200 section may well require a TPR of 1500 or higher, quite an achievement for a beginner. Relating this to a 2700 player having a >3000 TPR may be comparing apples and oranges, but … .

    Yes, this format is prone to cheating/sandbagging – which measures are taken to make this difficult if not impossible?

    In the Netherlands and Germany, one-day blitz tournaments (so no hotel expenses) also have prizes in the lower sections. The format usually is preliminary qualifiers followed by final groups, say, A-E. It can also happen that player X plays badly on purpose in the qualifier to reach a ‘winnable’ final group.

Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!