Counterintuitive economics of a chess tournament
davidsmerdon.com
Counterintuitive economics of a chess tournament
1–10 of 51 posts
Re: Counterintuitive economics of a chess tournament
#2I'm not sure that it makes a difference in this case, but it is insufficient in situations such as these to look at just the expected return. A rational agent's actions are determined by expected utility, which could be highly non-linear depending on myriad factors such as the player's net worth. i.e. it could be rational to trade a lower chance of the largest payoff for a more consistent payoff of a lesser but still substantial amount, even at the cost of a significantly smaller expected return.
Re: Counterintuitive economics of a chess tournament
#3"Top female Prize " and... no top male prize...We can never be equal while there is any discrimination even when it is possitive. And please don't start with "we need more women in chess thus...". No, we need good players in ches and not insert anything here. And tell, what forces us to improve more than competition? Why play better when you will get prize anyway?
Re: Counterintuitive economics of a chess tournament
#4"Top female Prize " and... no top male prize...We can never be equal while there is any discrimination even when it is possitive. And please don't start with "we need more women in chess thus...". No, we need good players in ches and not insert anything here . And tell, what forces us to improve more than competition? Why play better when you will get prize anyway?
What are you referring to? The phrase 'Top female prize' appears nowhere on the linked page.
Re: Counterintuitive economics of a chess tournament
#5"Top female Prize " and... no top male prize...We can never be equal while there is any discrimination even when it is possitive. And please don't start with "we need more women in chess thus...". No, we need good players in ches and not insert anything here . And tell, what forces us to improve more than competition? Why play better when you will get prize anyway?
What are you referring to? The phrase 'Top female prize' appears nowhere on the linked page.
They are referring to this page:
https://millionairechess.com/prizes
Also prizes in each division for "Top senior prize (65+)" and "Best child under 13 yrs old"
Re: Counterintuitive economics of a chess tournament
#6"Top female Prize " and... no top male prize...We can never be equal while there is any discrimination even when it is possitive. And please don't start with "we need more women in chess thus...". No, we need good players in ches and not insert anything here . And tell, what forces us to improve more than competition? Why play better when you will get prize anyway?
There are just too many male chess grandmasters. Look into places where men are outnumbered and you will see "to male X" as a separate category.
Re: Counterintuitive economics of a chess tournament
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
What are you referring to? The phrase 'Top female prize' appears nowhere on the linked page.
They are referring to this page: https://millionairechess.com/prizes Also prizes in each division for "Top senior prize (65+)" and "Best child under 13 yrs old"
Thank you. Exactly what I was refering to (was linked in article).
Re: Counterintuitive economics of a chess tournament
#8"Top female Prize " and... no top male prize...We can never be equal while there is any discrimination even when it is possitive. And please don't start with "we need more women in chess thus...". No, we need good players in ches and not insert anything here . And tell, what forces us to improve more than competition? Why play better when you will get prize anyway?
I agree with you. But this article states a few reasons, I think are a valid, why a female league is necessary: http://www.chessblog.com/2009/10/abolish-womens-itles-ridicu...
Re: Counterintuitive economics of a chess tournament
#9"Top female Prize " and... no top male prize...We can never be equal while there is any discrimination even when it is possitive. And please don't start with "we need more women in chess thus...". No, we need good players in ches and not insert anything here . And tell, what forces us to improve more than competition? Why play better when you will get prize anyway?
There are just too many male chess grandmasters. Look into places where men are outnumbered and you will see "to male X" as a separate category.
Mind providing examples of males having prize when outnumbered (preferably not once but consistently) or where men get headstart (like in marathon I can't remember name of, where women get head start)? Because I will be angry about that too. It kills competition, it kills meritocracy.
Re: Counterintuitive economics of a chess tournament
#10"Top female Prize " and... no top male prize...We can never be equal while there is any discrimination even when it is possitive. And please don't start with "we need more women in chess thus...". No, we need good players in ches and not insert anything here . And tell, what forces us to improve more than competition? Why play better when you will get prize anyway?
I agree that competition forces people to improve, and that's why a top female prize is a good idea. Awards for women in chess -> more women competing -> more competition in women's chess -> better chess players overall.