This is a cool idea!

# Super Online Bonanza Tournaments

Hello, if you ever wanted to win prizes in an event but couldn't because t**he titled players constantly win**, then this is the club for you https://www.chess.com/club/super-online-bonanza. There will be class prizes and place prizes so that everyone can win if they have a good result

Why do titled players get free entry then? ._.

Hello, if you ever wanted to win prizes in an event but couldn't because the titled players constantly win, then this is the club for you https://www.chess.com/club/super-online-bonanza. There will be class prizes and place prizes so that everyone can win if they have a good result

Why do titled players get free entry then? ._.

to incentivize them to play therefore more people play because of strong competition. They can still play and win the place prizes but lower rated people can win the class prizes.

Non titled players can win a prize, but titled players don't have to pay. So essentially the majority of players lose money (only a few people can win prizes and every nontitled has to pay entry fee) and the only real winners in the system are titled players. They play free and have (on average) a better chance of winning the prizes. So this event, while I admit is a very nice idea, has to solve some practical problems before it can claim to achieve its objective.

Non titled players can win a prize, but titled players don't have to pay. So essentially the majority of players lose money (only a few people can win prizes and every nontitled has to pay entry fee) and the only real winners in the system are titled players. They play free and have (on average) a better chance of winning the prizes. So this event, while I admit is a very nice idea, has to solve some practical problems before it can claim to achieve its objective.

I guess I would say the objective is to do it better than everyone else meaning giving lower rated people more of a chance. In some events there are absolutely no chances for lower rated players to win money but in this, assuming we get enough entries in a tournament, will give out many class prizes to lower rated players.

and the problem is, to clarify, that titled players don't have to worry about paying, and so they never have net loss, and can only gain, while the majority of players (nontitled) would lose money as a whole. Examples: 20 nontitled with a $5 entry fee. 5 titled, no entry fee. Lets say 4 nontitled players come in cash postions, and 1 titled player comes in a cash position. If we presume that less then 100% of entry fees are given anyway (in order for a profit to be made) then it won't really matter what numbers we use in this scenario. I will say $80 is given away as prizes, distributed in $20 amounts. In this case titled players had a 20% chance of getting 25% of the prize fund (these numbers are special to the scenario, and these percents aren't truly chances since they are one time unchangable odds, but bare with me as this is meant as an example. We could argue these odds are predictable anyway given our player groupings, with the key being we are ignoring ratings). Next we see that nontitled players lost a net of $40 (100 from entry minus 60 in prizes, which can also be viewed as a loss of 40%) while titled players walked away with a $20 profit, which can't be viewed in percent since they had $0 in entry fees. Now this is a specific case, but it demonstrates a general truth: Titled players can't lose, nontitled players will lose. Off course the only way for nontitled players to not lose, is to use additional money unrelated to entry fees in conjuction with 100% of entry fees, which is equivilant to the orginizer ending up at a deficit. Now this ignores another point which I briefly brought up: Rating odds. If u had to bet on a 2600 GM or a 2000 expert in a standard OTB time control (not blitz or rapid) I think it is fair to say u would bet on the GM. This only makes sense, as he/she is the favorite in the match, as conveyed by the rating system. Essentally, the 2600 has rating odds, and is most likely going to win, not that he can't be beaten by the 2000, its is just very unlikely. So in our pool of players (going back to the tournament at hand) the titled players will most likely be favorites to win cash prizes, thus adding another factor to why the system is flawed, and prefers titled players. (to be fair titles do generally mean a bit less online, and so the rating odds isn't quite as big of an issue as u might easily have as many 2200+ non masters as 2200+ masters in a given event.)

These problems can be solved by 1. Same entry fees 2. Reduced entry fees for titled players, and 3. prizes given out by rating class. Now they all have their own logistics, but all three make it more fair. I would elaborate further, but I have already written an "essay" and its 1:40 am so I need sleep

The rating odd problem would be a problem regardless if they paid or not. The point of having titled players play for free is to increase competition. More titled players = more competition which equates to more players as a whole (even untitled). If I were to charge titled players then you could make the argument that it could harm the tournaments competitivity and therefore harm the amount of players and overall decrease the total paid out in prizes. Also, not that it makes a difference, but until we have a substantial amount of players, I am paying out 100% of entry fees in prizes just to increase competition and players.

Hello, if you ever wanted to win prizes in an event but couldn't because the titled players constantly win, then this is the club for you https://www.chess.com/club/super-online-bonanza. There will be class prizes and place prizes so that everyone can win if they have a good result