Millionaire Chess 2!!

Thank you NM aww-rats, for the change in topic. 

I will do a small correction - the $880 entry fee is applicable to either first 500 registrants or 31st January 2015 - whichever comes first. So I will assume, first 500 wont come by January 31st and let's say a rough number 250 will be by that time. Then from Feb 1st - the 251st person will have to pay $1000.

I was actually thinking that the registration list is again growing slowlyafter the first few days of rush took it over 100. I know several people from MC#1 who didn't register yet and I am sure they will register for MC#2. I guess they are waiting for the registration list total count to go closer to 300/400 or the date going closer to 31st January. In that case, I am expceting a sudden rush around end of January and then another rush around end of March.

What will be the total number of entrees by October? I guess I will add couple of hundreds on top of your number, being a bit optimist!

I still think it's an uphill climb though. MC 2 is not the same as MC 1. no 21st to 50th places, and less money for the lower classes. suppose they get 750 entries, and only lose say $600,000. MC 3 may lose a high percentage of those who finished below 21st place simply because they realize they just don't have what it takes and they didn't even have a chance to get their entry fee back as they did in MC 1. Plenty of speculation. We will know a lot more in 3 more months, and know it all in 9 months.

If they get that many entries (which they won't) then yes, MC is BAD for amateur chess.

Why?

Because presumably many of those entrants would have gone to other Opens instead. But if they are going spend thousands of dollars to fly, stay and play Las Vegas, that's chess money that could well be lost to those other Opens. 

$1000 is at least four or five Opens. Hundreds of players suddenly not attending four or five Opens a year will mean many of those tournaments could shut down. Meaning all the amateurs who went to them lose that opportunity to play.

Meaning MC, if successful, could be damaging for amateur chess. THAT is why turning chess into a money chase is a bad idea.

https://millionairechess.com/mc-skeptics-%E2%80%93-mentioned-ashik-uzzaman

I tried to capture this thought in point#9 of the above post. But what we saw in recent North American Open in Las Vegas that just finished 2 weeks back (in same place just after 2 months of MC#1 - so the target market is similar) is that there was no bad impact for MC in this tournament. But still just one tournament may not rule out this logic...

Well, I'm not overly concerned about it because I think this time they won't get more than 250 and will finally have to smell the coffee and cancel. That may be why there's not hotel commitment yet. 

And when they do, watch the blame game begin. Mr. Ashley is already on record complaining in Chess Life about "lots of doubters" in "the various online forums." As far as I know there was exactly one thread in one forum that raised any doubts, and I never counted more than three or four contrary opinions, my own included. 

I certainly could never find anything but glowing praise and anticipation anywhere else on the Internet.  But true believers tend to magnify a few opposing voices into vast conspiracies, and when MC fails, I strongly doubt its organizers and supporters will ever understand the reasons why. 

I think that everyone agrees that MC needs sponsors.  I've just been looking at the sponsorship information for the TATA STEEL Tournament.  Corporate packages run from about $15,000 to $30,000 (assumes $1.50 to the euro).  If this is what a premier tournament can command, MC will need a large number of sponsors to cover their costs (TATA STEEL have 11 listed sponsors).

MB

I don't agree with you that a large participation in MC#2 will hurt other tournaments.  Tournament participation fluctuates yearly and the number that MC#2 siphons off from any individual tournament will be within the normal fluctuation.

I have to disagree(partially) since MC is much different then any other tournament. Lets say you have someone who budgets $1000  on chess each year. They can play in roughly 4-5 other tournaments or MC. This is ignoring all other costs, of course. Most people cant just "add" MC to their tournament schedule. They have to replace several to make it work. Granted, everything I said might not matter because $1000 might be a drop in the bucket to majority of their players. 

That is kind of neat that a public figure acknowledged you guys.  You should clip that article out and frame it.  I mean have it framed professionally.

Then when you take home a chick you can walk her past the article hanging on your wall, and slying lean in and say "not to brag, but, um ... check this out..."

MB

I don't know how typical I am, but no matter which tournaments I play in (even "local" ones), I have travel costs, hotel costs, meals, sightseeing expenses, etc.  These expenses far exceed the entry fee.  So I only play in one major tournament and a few minor tournaments each year.  

If I were to play in MC#2 (which I am not), the higher MC#2 entry fee would be offset by reducing meal and sightseeing expenses rather than skipping other tournaments.

How much are you spending at other tournaments that make you think you can offset the costs?

>Most people cant just "add" MC to their tournament schedule. They have to replace several to make it work. <

Exactly. If 550 go to MC, that could mean hundreds not going to several other Opens that year, or at least in that season. 

>Granted, everything I said might not matter because $1000 might be a drop in the bucket to majority of their players. <

What will likely happen (and probably already is), is that MC is becoming a "membership" type tournament where the same group of people sign up every time. People who can afford the time and money for a $2000 (at least) chess vacation to Las Vegas every year. 

If that's the case, then the rest of the chess world will go on unscathed. Of course, MC has to find about 1000 of these players, and that's going to be a real trick. I would wager they don't exist in that number. 

>That is kind of neat that a public figure acknowledged you guys.<

Maurice Ashley is not a public figure. He's a chess player known only to other chess players.

Chess Life is not a public forum. It's a chess magazine, barely on sale in bookstores. 

Depends on where the tournament is being held.  Typically, I stay in the hotel where the tournament is being played, eat in the hotel (or a nearby) restaurant.  There are usually cheaper hotels and restaurants around (might mean either a short subway ride or short walk).  I estimate that the difference between playing in the World Open and MC#2 to be $400, maybe $500.  I may not be able to recover the entire cost, but I'll get enough of it back.

I doubt MC will really siphon off any significant numbers from other events. If it continues I think MC will revolve around a small core of players who have the money to attend each year while being filled out (to whatever extent) by people who might not be regular tournament players, but basically use MC as an excuse to take a vacation with the added fun of being in a chess competition.

The idea was great but it was horribly implemented. If the organizers were willing to take a large hit why not decrease the entry fee but keep the same prize fund in an effort to encompass more of the chess population. The amount of people will get them sponsors, nothing else. 

I don't think that Amy Lee anticipated being MC#1's benefactor.  Her early comments indicate that she believed that MC#1 would draw 1500+ players.

It was only after reality set in that the tune became all businesses lose money at first and we're in it for the long haul.

You think they would change the format for MC#2 around then. From what I see it seems they decreased the total amount of prizes... which wont attract more people at all. Imagine an entry fee of $100 with winnings in the thousands. I cant see that not attracting a ton of people. More people = a better opportunity for sponsorships. Then you could work out a deal with a hotel if you can guarantee them guests. The opportunity for a new player to win a couple thousand dollars should bring more players to the game. Which would bring more players to your tournament. I really think this tournament could easily get thousands of people to show up if you implement everything properly.

>Her early comments indicate that she believed that MC#1 would draw 1500+ players.<

How she got this notion is anyone's guess. There is no evidence that she knew anything about chess tournaments or US chess culture before MC started up. Had she bothered to poll this forum, anyone here, even the biggest MC supporter, could have honestly told her that no chess tournament has ever brought in that kind of number, and very few have made half of it. 

I've wondered before about how MC did their marketing analysis before launching this Titanic. I'm now thinking they didn't do any, which might explain the lack of sponsors - they tend to like to see some marketing data before cutting checks.

Apparently it was all just wishful thinking, an assumption that a thousand chess players would just crawl out of the ground like zombies because the word "million" was flashed around a lot. It's a total misread of the culture, one that continues here on this board.

MB

This pretty much tells the amount of thought that went into the project:

http://amylee.biz/2-millionaire-chess-how-it-started/