| |
BGonline.org Forums
Message from an anonymous players to the community
Posted By: Chiva Tafazzoli
Date: Tuesday, 5 June 2012, at 5:12 p.m.
Here is a message I am posting on behalf of a player who would like to remain anonymous (completely uncut and unchanged):
Dear Fellow Backgammon Players,
I have read the many posts regarding the attendance issues at the ABT events as well as the thoughts that some have shared to increase attendance and the growth of the game in general. I too would like to voice my thoughts, but because I am not one that attends ABT events anymore due to a lack of income I feel perhaps it is best to stay anonymous.
How many times have you heard these favorite saying? • “There are only so many pennies in a dollar.” • “You can’t squeeze blood out of a rock.” • “The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”
Let’s take these same quotes and equate them to the backgammon community. • “There are only so many backgammon players available to draw from for ABT events.” • “The economy has been hard on many players where the money to attend events must be spent on bills at home.” • Directors trying to find the “new and improved” dates, locations, formats, and rakes yet expecting higher attendance when drawing from the same pool of players.”
Is it just me? Am I the only one asking, “Why are we trying to fix the symptom of the problem instead of addressing the real problem?” The real problem of attendance is directly related to the first quote above, “There are only so many backgammon players available to draw from for ABT events.”
Ok, so maybe you draw a few players because of the format, or the location, or the lower rake, or whatever you want to choose from, but at the end of the day until we grow the player community we will still be discussing this issue down the road.
In one of the post’s I read, Bob Koca said, (paraphrasing and not picking on Mr. Koca) “I can do the basic math, lower rakes creates a bigger prize pool and draws more players.” I don’t know the facts, but I will accept it as truth. But when the smoke clears aren’t you still drawing from the same pool of players? The players that have X events they plan to travel too will now go to the lower rake events and take away players from the higher rake events. If a player is only going to X events he is really deciding on which X events he goes too.
Let’s imagine for a moment that all Directors lower their rakes. Will that grow attendance? I don’t think so. It only shifts where the players from the same available pool of players play.
Let’s raise the entry fees to create a bigger prize pool. Yes, that will be an attraction for those that can afford it and are capable of winning more tours than others. Maybe a higher prize pool to pay more places is a better idea for now. Or maybe better yet is to help those players that really don’t have the ability to win consistently to help offset the expenses of the weekend. This is all good, but will it change attendance in the short term? I don’t think so. It only helps the same core pool of players we have now.
Whose responsibility is it to bring in fresh blood? Is it the USBGF? Is it the ABT (Bill Davis)? Is it the Directors of the ABT events? Is it the Directors of the local clubs? Or, are the players as a whole responsible? And while I'm at it, let’s add Carol Joy Cole to the mix because she has a boutique and would love to sell more product and Xavier because he can sell more software. Yeah, that was all tongue in cheek, but really, don’t they win too when we grow the game? Of course they do. And that is what we all want, for everybody to win, isn’t it? I think so.
Surely we all can point fingers at one or more of these groups and make a strong case why they, and not others should be responsible. Think about it; The USBGF makes fees to promote the game. The Directors of Clubs and ABT events earn money (forget for a moment how much or how little) so they should do it. Oh yeah, its Bill’s baby let him do it. Or, hey I just play so don’t look at me.
I think if we are to promote and grow the game we must take on Phil Simborg’s model and hit the colleges, high schools, coffee shops, etc and start introducing people to the game. I would love to get involved in this area, but I do not have discretionary dollars to pay for my expenses.
Strato suggested in a post that players should pay a required fee of $10 to be paid into a pool for cash payouts. I agree with Bob Koca when he says (paraphrasing) why would players do that for only a few that will benefit from it? Instead, I propose the same required $10 to be put into a pool to pay someone like myself and others that will take time to grow the game and the venues that will attract new blood.
I would gladly put myself to work in this endeavor and show that I will stand up and do, instead of sitting down and talk. Chiva can give you my name and email should anyone want to get in touch with me to discuss this further.
This is something everybody can benefit from. More available players can create bigger fields. Bigger fields will create better prize pools. Directors win because they can make a better profit for their time and energy. The USBGF grows with more fees coming in to them. Let’s face it – EVERYBODY WINS!!!!
You may think I’m a paid spokesman for Phil Simborg, (I’m not nor does he know I am writing this post) but he also brought up another idea that nobody wanted to listen too. Why do we have to have prize pools for all events? Phil has suggested in the past to have a non prize pool event at an ABT stop and has backed it up with why it should be done. I will say this, “Why not create a 5pt single elimination tour with a $5 to $10 entry fee. Instead of a prize pool you give out some very nice trophies to the top two finishers. Maybe I am being a bit ambitious, but a field of 32 or maybe even 64 players of any strength plays for bragging rights sounds awesome to me. Ok, you can stop laughing now. We all know 32 players is unreasonable in the beginning. But is 4 an unreasonable number? We have to start somewhere to draw bigger numbers, don’t we? Anyways, back to my point. The small entry pays for the trophies and a profit to the Director to run the event. Eventually some of these players, if not many of them will get tired of playing for bragging rights and want to dive into the events that have a prize pool (side or main). In the meantime these players in the event are learning the game and are not afraid of being fish food for the seasoned players. Hmm, I think these were Phil’s reasoning as well when he proposed it.
Once again, everybody wins. The new players learning the game from the outside venues get to taste what a backgammon event is all about and the game grows. And let’s face it, isn’t this what we really want; to grow the game? I think so and I hope you do too.
I have a few more thoughts, but for now let’s think about this for awhile and see if we act on it, or we can simply keep asking why attendance is what it is.
Thank you for your time to read this post.
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.