Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

After getting back to my LFGS ( summer and life!), I discussed with some good acquaintances recent events and tournaments. I soon found out that the people/clubs who were running the tourneys won the tourneys. This just did not set right with me. Is this a problem that other Dakka members have seen in other areas? Or am I just tilting at windmills?
Thanks for responding!

No. Never. The only time they should is if they need a ringer and they can't get anyone else. Even then, I dislike it since they should be focusing on TO'ing and not playing a game.

Having a stake in the tournament you have total power over is just a bad idea.

pretre wrote:No. Never. The only time they should is if they need a ringer and they can't get anyone else. Even then, I dislike it since they should be focusing on TO'ing and not playing a game.

I agree with this as far as TOs go. I always hated having to play ringer, and then take time out of the game my opponent was there to play to go answer questions at another table. I think the club thing is a completely different situation though. Since I can only use my local club as an example, if the members who are not playing judge/TO decided to sit out of events, it would be a very very small tournament. This may not be true of all areas, and I'll acknowledge that part of my viewpoint may be because my club has 40+ members and generally tournaments will have more than half the field filled by club members, but just because a club member wins an event being run by another club member doesn't mean there is anything shady going on. As in all competition, transparency is key.

I think before you go tilting at your windmill (to use your term, cause it's awesome) you need first hand knowledge and observation of what is going on, not just relying on someone's retelling that could very well be exaggerated. If you witness a club doing something shady, then you have your answer. Though I think the consensus of replies to this will be the TO/Judge shouldn't be playing in the tournament unless there it's to alleviate a bye situation, and even then, they shouldn't be playing anyone but the person that would have had the bye that round.

Nope. TO's shouldn't participate, ever. Even if everything goes legally and above board, it's too much inherent risk of perceived shenanigans. This is especially true for TO's who are good at the game, of course.

TOs = never
Club Members = depends

Clubs can sometimes be like 40+ people and without the club there may be no participants. A member who made terrain but is not judging, I see no reason he couldn't participate.

Anyone WORKING the event shouldn't participate. No playing judges.

I'd rather play a ringer or organizer than get a bye and have to sit for 3 hours or go home early. But that is the only time a non-participant should get a game, and only against the person who would otherwise have had to sit and do nothing.

BladeWalker wrote:I'd rather play a ringer or organizer than get a bye and have to sit for 3 hours or go home early. But that is the only time a non-participant should get a game, and only against the person who would otherwise have had to sit and do nothing.

I agree. I don't go to tournaments to sit around. I go to play. I think I have the attention span to wait while he answers a question or two.

TO's should definitely not participate outside of being a ringer if necessary, certainly not be in the running for any prizes.

Club members yeah should be allowed, I don't see any reason why they shouldn't since it's a club event.


But TO's...no.

This there is some grey area here.

As a starting point, the default answer is "no". The individuals running an event should not participate as they will have conflicts of interest.

Any large event, especially if people travel for it, certainly this should be run professionally.

However, in smaller events I think its okay sometimes. This requires the other participants to trust and feel good about the TO's participation. The TO should also have a 3rd party be appointed to judge his game should the need arise. The second anyone feels like there is a conflict of interest, the gig is up and the TO should withdraw or at least forgo any prizes.

So rule of thumb is a solid "no", but of course some groups might be okay with it.

TOs are already participating in the event, as a TO. TOs should never award themselves prizes or staff; I won't allow anyone on my staff to have raffle tickets for this very reason.

Club members playing in the tournaments as regular participants is fine. I think there can be questions of favoritism if a club member is getting to influence special rules or scenario design and participating, but generally publishing the rules and scenarios ahead of time handles that concern.

I have zero problem with a TO playing in an event as a ringer or whatever, as long as their is adequate staff to handle judging and scoring while they do it. I played in 3 games Sunday at WGC this last year, as we had drops in the Champs bracket and I think I and my opponents had a good time in each game.

We as TO's never play unless as ringers as other have said, and we alternate rounds so it's never the same TO playing as ringer through the event, that eliminates a lot of the issues.

We always let, and encourage our Club Mates to play. You just have to be sure to judge everyone fairly on rules issues to avoid even the appearance of unfairness.

LordVonDoom wrote:After getting back to my LFGS ( summer and life!), I discussed with some good acquaintances recent events and tournaments. I soon found out that the people/clubs who were running the tourneys won the tourneys. This just did not set right with me. Is this a problem that other Dakka members have seen in other areas? Or am I just tilting at windmills?
Thanks for responding!

Yes this I have seen first hand. I refuse (as well as a few friends of mine) to go to a certain tournament in Northern California now because seeing this happened first hand. Not once but several times. Not acceptable.

Club members playing in the tournaments as regular participants is fine. I think there can be questions of favoritism if a club member is getting to influence special rules or scenario design and participating, but generally publishing the rules and scenarios ahead of time handles that concern.

Seen this happen as well and of course that pissed me off too.

Not going to waste my time dealing with people who have no life except within their little sphere of influence.

Anyone participating in a tournament in any way shape or form should not be allowed to play.

The only exception to this is to have one assigned as a ringer, be it the TO or someone else. But that person is assigned as such and is not allowed to share in any prize support what so ever.

No one involved in running or judging a tourni should be allowed to play in it. thats just how i feel. if they fill in for a missing player, then maybe its ok as long as in the end they forfeit any prize they might win to the runners up.

In Finland, where I'm from and where I organize tournaments, it's actually hard to find a tournament where the TOs AREN'T playing. It propably has a lot to do with how small our tournaments and the whole scene is. I'm not a serious tournament player myself, but most of the other "big" tournaments are organized by guys who also win most of the tournaments, often even including their own. It's a very typical situation that the player who was third or fourth actually is the one getting the first price since everyone ahead of him was a TO...

When I started organizing tournaments I used to just be a ringer/alternate if needed, but found that rules disputes were so rare that if I wasn't needed to replace someone I had nothing to do and was extremely bored. Sorry, but I just won't do that anymore. If I'm organizing a tournament I'm playing in it, and here people are used to it. Propably one reason why it's not seen as much of a problem is that our prices are almost non-existent compared to US and UK tournaments, we usually have no price support what so ever, it's just a little something that the TOs have bought with ticket money and they obviously won't take anything for themselves if they happen to win.

I have never played in any of the Tournaments i have hosted. In a smaller one i would have no problem with a TO serving as ringer as long as he doesnt play for prize.
Usually if we have uneven matchings we always have a club member available to serve as a wringer just in case.
We allow club members to play in tournaments and we actually encourage it.

As a TO, NEVER compete in a tournament I am organizing, because I know all the scenarios before hand, and how I will rule on things.

I have had to play as ringer if an odd number sign/show up. Even then, I offer my opponent two options, either they take whatever score they get playing against me, or they get a minor victory score, and they make that decision before we start. Then we play a game no matter what.

So once again, NEVER competitively, for score, or prizes, or even bragging rights.

Anyone that is a TO should never win or even participate in the tourney they have put together it is kind of a conflict of interest sort of thing.

thanks for the replies! Seems the consensus is what I thought it would be.I agree that TO's could be ringers, but in one of the tourneys in question, I know that the TO won AND took the prize support, what a class act.......

Yikes, really?

Like MLKTH said, you should just differ the prizes down to the next players.

I assume most people are of their stated opinion regaurdless of the tournements size. I can't imagine there's enough time to do both in large tournement like there is in small and medium.

I can understand the position, I had to stop running a local small tournement series because the general opinion was that I should not be playing in it (outside of making the numbers even). Even if I let actual prizes default to to 2nd, 3rd, and 4th if I was to win first place.

Even when I stated that I wasn't willing to run the series anymore because I wanted to play in tournements without travelling being the only option for me. Since no one else wanted to run the tournements in the future the consenus essentially meant that having nobody playing in local tournements was better then having the TO participate.

In my area, almost all the TO's play themselves. It's disappointing that the same person who decides whether Imperial Armour is to be allowed gets to bring his Imperial Armour toys when no one else has them and stomps the opposition.

Imo, this should never happen. TO's are TO's not players.

Few issues I guess, granted I am old and grey and it has been a long time since I went to a regular tournament game.

What type of tournaments are these?

If it is tied to a convention or something like that - then...no, the people who will organize and rule on conflicts should not play. Same applies if it is a larger independent tournament.

However, a lot of tournaments are just slightly above a bunch of people getting together to game. In those cases it is a bit different. The TO and any supporting people generally do it because they like to game, and if no one else did it - it would never get done. Prizes tend to be limited to some overstock from a local store and maybe a gift card to Applebee's.

In cases where they will be playing, it is very important that everything is planned out well in advance in order to avoid conflicts. It isn't that difficult to do - just need to plan ahead.

I have seen areas dry up for lack of someone willing to organize the events. And if they never get a chance to play themselves - the organizers will likely decide to just not do it anymore.

Only if they do not get any prizes etc an if they win the tournament then the runner up gets the title of winning and the to or Judge is not recognized at all. That's the only fair way... And this should only be done if its an odd number of playerS. It is the price for being a figure head. If a to wanted to play then they should not be organizing points, who plays who, or anything that involves anything with the tournament , but could be involved with "setting the tournament up" the pre logistics of the tourn, or/and money collecting for the tournament.

This all just my opinion and of course not a final say or anything if I came across that way.

i can only "assume" you may be talking about the Inner Circle guys. I agree that TO shouldnt play. In larger events you should have a ringer on stand by. im sure you can find a guy. small inner club events with like 10+/- players its cool to make even numbers and usually everyone there knows the deal.

To throw in my two cents on the matter I have TO'd events that I both played and took prizes in. However these were, IMO, very unique circumstances. Due to, IIRC, bad weather we only had 7 people show up for the local tourney and I jumped in to be the ringer. Before the event, roughly ten fifteen minutes ahead of time, a number of player then approach me seeing if I would increase the pot. They wanted me to add in so that prize would flow easier. I then gathered all the players attention and told them the deal. Either way I would be the first round ringer, but if they wanted a higher pot then I would stand a chance at taking said pot, because I didn't have the money to just give them an entree fee for nothing. Everyone was fine with it and the tournament was run smooth with no problems. There were some jokes slung back and forth when I took second, from the home crew as none of the out of town crew had any problems at all and I didn't know any of them, but nothing serious.

I do realize this more often then not does not work that way. recent tournament nearby had almost the same thing happen. TO offered to increase the pot, telling everyone there that if he put money in he would have the chance to take a prize, everyone agreed and diced were rolled. After the tournament the TO took third, which didn't sit right with one group. That group then proceeded to call everything into question. The TO was accused of fudging the scored numbers to advance other players, making BS calls, and a variety of other things. It was all BS of course as several players testified in the TO's defense that nothing funny had gone down, and he (the TO) even allowed these frustrated player to double check his math on the points breakdown. By the end of the night it was quite clear they were just bad sports, but even still I can see someone making the argument that had he not taken a prize nothing would have happened.

[quote=arinnoorI do realize this more often then not does not work that way. recent tournament nearby had almost the same thing happen. TO offered to increase the pot, telling everyone there that if he put money in he would have the chance to take a prize, everyone agreed and diced were rolled. After the tournament the TO took third, which didn't sit right with one group. That group then proceeded to call everything into question. The TO was accused of fudging the scored numbers to advance other players, making BS calls, and a variety of other things. It was all BS of course as several players testified in the TO's defense that nothing funny had gone down, and he (the TO) even allowed these frustrated player to double check his math on the points breakdown. By the end of the night it was quite clear they were just bad sports, but even still I can see someone making the argument that had he not taken a prize nothing would have happened.

Ok so here is a real life example from yesterday's tournament. I was the rules judge and had the store owner as the other person running it. I had to jump in for two rounds and play as the ringer. At that point I stopped being a judge and wouldn't even make calls for other games, and had the owener jump in to judge, so as not to take time away from the player I was playing. My scores were removed from the overall rankings as not to effect the prize support for the paying players.

OP: While I agree the Inner Circle could improve a bit in transparency, I think you or your friend should contact them directly.

One other item I think is having truly random first round pairings. At the ICGT, club members were not paired round 1. While I can see the logic in this, it has no place in a GT, imo. Ends up feeling a bit like "IC vs all"! I mean that as constructive criticism, but it didn't come up this year since the event was cancelled, or I'd have brought it up to them.

As to winning their own events, it's a large club. Are you sure it was the TO, not just a member? Might want to make sure, then contact them directly with your concern. Their president, Scooter, occasionally posts here, and they have their own forums, as well. They're nice guys, and frequent tourneygoers (Scooter won this year's Adepticon Big Brawl, and another member placed 3rd). I think they would take the feedback well, and it may just be a misunderstanding. Worth a shot, right?

I never mentioned any club or specific individuals to prevent possible negative attention. it is the same reason I also did not reference a game system to prevent any speculation. I think the Blobs park event is a well run event ( run by Scooter and the inner circle guy's, for those who don't know the area) Another in the area that is outstanding is Berk' s Spring assault. I play in events covering 4 states and have seen lots of good and bad. I mostly play at a newer store where we are just getting the fantasy side of things off the ground and sometimes the store owner plays to help fill out the spot. He always pays his entrance fee and never takes a prize ( class act!). My curiosity was peeked by some comments from friends at another store I also visit.

I agree (about Blobs Park). Shame it didn't happen this year!