Philadelphia tournament a scam??

I received the advertisement for a tournament in Philadelphia for March.

Now, the price of the entry fee is quite high: 375 dollars, but maybe someone could think:  "I will win the first prize," let's say in the section U1800, which is 5000$.

But, here there is the scam!

Prize limits: 1) if post-event rating posted 3/26/12 - 3/26/13 is more than 30 pts above section max, limits $1500.

Sorry but how is possible that a player would win the first prize and not raise his/her ratings of at least 30 points??

So the organizers take 375$ of entry fee, but to avoid to lose money they cunningly limit the prize to 1500$ (Which means they just need to have 5 players to cover the prize)

Now we know why chess will never get a status as a real sport, if tournament organizers just try to con chess players.

5 players covers first place only but is there prize money for 2nd? 3rd? also prizes for different sections? does it say anywhere if part of the entry fee is set aside for cost of running the tournament? i'm assuming they aren't running it for free.

It says "30 pts above section max," which would mean if the section was U1800 30 pts above would be 1830.

Look the problem is that they try to CON people into believing they would get a 5000$ prize if they win, when in reality they are going to give a max of 1500$, since I'm pretty sure the math isn't that hard, and out of 7 rounds a winner of the first place MUST gain more than 30 points. (but please don't believe me, check a 5 min live chess tournament here and see how many points the winner will gain out of 7 rounds, my guess is at least 100-200 points, also for the tournaments which are 1200-1499 rated)

Notice that the scam is repeated also for the second prize that they claim is 2500$ but since also the second player will make more than 30 points, then he/she is going to get a max of 1500$.

So instead of giving 7500$ they just give 3000$, and keep the other 4500$ in their pockets!

ah, okay. but that's only if they go over the max rating. that isn't for sure going to happen. still kind of strange though but i'm assuming they're doing it so people won't purposely drop their rating to play lower and guarantee a win.

No, you guys are all reading it wrong!

Here's the catch.  Many players are sandbaggers.  They are truly rated 1950, but since their rating floor is 1700 (assuming they've never been 2000), they will throw games at their local club to get their rating below 1800, then go to events like this with a large prize fund, and play in the Under 1800 where they really don't belong.

Therefore, if your rating AT ANY POINT in the 12 months prior has above 1830, the most you can win is $1500 if you play in the Under 1800 section.  However, if you play in the Under 2000 section, you can win the full $5000 as long as between March 26, 2012 and March 26, 2013, your rating was never 2030 or higher!  If it was at any point, say, 2031, then you'd have to play Under 2200 for full prize eligibility.

If you think people aren't out there that sandbag, they are all over the place.  Before this restriction was put into all of the large prize fund tournaments, you'd really be playing players of 1900 strength in the Under 1800 section, 2100 strength in the Under 2000 section, etc., due to sandbagging.  If you were blatantly caught, USCF could impose sanctions, but it's hard to prove as long as you didn't throw every game.  At least conceal it enough where you might draw a few players 200 points below you, etc.  But if you throw 20 local tournaments at $20 a pop ($400) and then proceed to win $5,000, nice profit, huh?

It's not a con, it's protection against sandbaggers. If it were a con, they wouldn't publish it! 

the prize money listed goes to the players.  the prize money limits only apply to the unrated players or players that were 30 pts. over the section BEFORE the tournament started. if a player who is unrated or was 30 pts over the section limit at some pt in the last year wins a prize over the limit imposed --- the remainder of the prize money goes over to the players next in line to receive a prize [not the organizers].

I don't know the rules for the Canadian Chess Federation. in US, the USCF already solved this problem with "floors" practically if you are 1700, you cannot become magically a 1400 player, because you have already passed a certain floor. The same happens for master level players, those above 2000, they don't become 1800, also if they lose against a 1200 player.

After the U1800 there is the U1600, which means that all players are above 1600 in order to play in U1800.

Further, I try to be clear why this is a con: the advertisement doesn't say they will give the 4500$ to the other players, e.g. the first 2 passed the 30 points, the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th and so on get a bigger prize.

So it was done just to scam people into believing they would win money, while the one getting the money are the scammers who invented this con,  and this reflect quite poorly on chess.

Here's how it works: Let's say a person's pre-tournament rating is 1750. She plays 6 games in the tournament against an average rating of 1750.

If she wins 6/6, her new rating will be 1869, and she was almost certainly sandbagging.

If she wins 5/6, her performance will still be expert level, but her new rating will only be 1823. At 5/6, she still has an excellent chance to win the whole thing! 

If her original rating was 1710 and she scored 5.5 against an average of 1750, she would also win the entire prize!

@Thrillerfan - It says post-event rating.

Oh wait. I guess i was reading it wrong. It meant any post-event rating between 3/26/12-3/26/13. So Thrillerfan got it right.

Oh. I didn't even see that. Then the OP's complaint is completely unfounded. 

Umm, who is this "she" you're referring to?!  It's either "he/she" or "he" unless you're referring to a specific female. 

Anyway, yeah, $350 sounds like a rip-off, especially when you take into account gas, lodging, food, and other accommodations.  Aaaaaannnd... Internet Chess grows even more, where your opponent may very well have his master uncle giving him move advice...

Wow. I said, "let's say a person..." And I can't make that imaginary person female? Have fun justifying that one to yourself.

I generally don't because it confuses people. If everyone just uses one standard, it's easier to know when someone is being general or specific. That standard could be "she," but since "he" is more common, it's more convenient to leave that as the standard. And of course you can argue for saying "one," or "they" instead -- unfortunately they all seem to have their own small drawbacks.

i think a better idea is to stay at the hotel and leave your car at the train station and take the train to philly.  less expensive, sometimes quicker, and you don't have to worry about driving in philadelphia [if there is an accident around exit 331B leaving philadelphia can take a long, long time as I discovered when going home from Liberty Bell ].

did we meet pellik?  i'm very talkative, and take the initiative (always it seems) and introduce myself sometimes, don't think we met however.

lol, no that is not true. you can use 'he' or 'she' or 'he/she' as long as you stay consistent throughout the piece of writing.

I don't understand what you are saying, I believe smyslovfan made a clear example of someone who is 1750, and post-event becomes 1860, because he/she won (but smyslovfan makes the mistake of saying he/she is sandbagging, when it can be based on luck, especially in a tournament with high number of participants) he/she will just get 1500$, while you are saying, if I understood well, that if this person before the event was 1750, and after the event (which is what post-event means) 1950, he/she will get the full prize?