Back to Miscellany
From: MBaron1949 <MBaron1949@aol.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 1997 02:06:59 EST
Subject: WSC Global Meeting: WSC representation
Message-id: <9e253b38.34598367@aol.com>
CGPers:
SN 135 reported there will be a "Global Meeting" 11/21/97 at
the WSC in D.C. to discuss, in part, "the current system of
determining allocations for countries participating in the WSC."
I am hopeful that participants at that meeting, as well as
discussants among CGP and scrabble-uk groups, might consider not
only the "current system," but alternative systems of determining
allocations for future WSC participants.
Below are 7 systems of determining allocations, and some of the
pros and cons for each.
- Present: 82 reps from 36 countries + World Champion + Gulf
Champion. Pro: Diversity of representation. Con: Competitive
level of overall field weakened by disproportionate
geographic considerations. Allocations are not entirely based
on size of respective countries' association memberships, such
that some countries (Malaysia, Kenya) may be sending 1 player
for every 15-25 and another (Australia) sends 1 player for every
375 tournament playing association members. While a slot for the
reigning World Champ makes intuitive sense, the allocation for a
regional championship winner (Gulf), especially as the
winner's country (Bahrain) has been allocated slots, seems
counter-intuitive.
- Equal % of tournament playing association members, the "House
of Representatives approach": Representation proportionate to
the number of tournament players within each country, e.g.,
top 1% or 2% from each country. For example, present WSC total
slots by country (80) represents 1.28% of the World's estimated
total tournament playing association members (6,247), or about
1 in every 78 such players[1]. Pro: Intuitively fair. May
serve as an incentive to grow each country's organization.
Will encourage maintenance of membership records. Con: May serve
as an incentive to, ahem, "artificially" grow each country's
membership, i.e., provide inflated numbers. Any country
presently "over-represented" may put up considerable resistance
to such an idea.
- Equal # of slots for each country, the "Noah" or "Senate Solution,"
e.g., 2 (or n) players from each country. Pro: Intuitively fair.
Con: Go ahead, convince Australia, Canada, New Zealand, UK, and
the US they should have the same combined total of, say, 10 or 15
players as Eire, Guyana, Pakistan, Romania, and Seychelles. :)
- All countries + proficiency. All countries can send at least 1
player, but all other allocations dependent upon a demonstrated
profiency level. With 36 countries and 80 slots, all 36 countries
would have at least one representative. The remaining 44 slots
would go to the 44 "best" players not already chosen, where
best might be determined by ratings (e.g., 1950$/180?#) and/or
prior WSC performance. Pro: Accomplishes the goals of diversity
of representation and increases the competitive level of the
overall field. Con: Determining "best," while we still have no
unified ratings system, is arguably too subjective.
- Prociency only, the "Superstars approach": Slots allocated to
the top 80 (or n) players in the World, based on a demonstrated
proficiency level, e.g., ratings and/or prior WSC performance.
Geography disregarded. Pro: The WSC becomes a showcase of the
World's best players without regard to the soil from which
that player hails. Meritocracy prevails. If a small country
generates a "disproportionate" number of great players, it would
not be prevented (otherwise by some imposed small limit) from
sending all its great players. Con: Geographic diversity, a major
drawing card for publicity purposes, might be sacrificed.
Determining "best," while we still have no unified ratings
system, is arguably too subjective.
- Multi-divisional: All countries + proficiency. A multi-divisional
("open") WSC, where the top division ("World Champ Division") is
in conformance with option 4 above, with the "very best" players
receiving sponsorships to attend, but with the addition of one or
more other divisions, with entry fees for these other divisions.
Pro: Inclusiveness provided and diversity maintained without
compromising competitiveness. Indeed, The "World Champ Division"
would have the strongest assemblable field while maximizing the
diversity of representation at the event. Responsive to more
association members' desires [10/9/97 Unified Word Source CGP survey
showed 84% of 74 respondents would attend, if affordable. 12/90 WSC
survey sent to 66 >1900-rated NA players showed 82% of 32 respondents
preferred a multi-divisional format, and 88% would attend such if
held yearly in US, 50% if held yearly in UK. Recent posts by some
WSC97 participants (e.g., Tiekert, Hersom) indicated support for
such.]. Promotion of internationalization of the game. Lower division
participants become those extra (300? 400?) goodwill ambassadors of
the game, and that many more local and regional media opportunities
("Local Player Goes to WSC"), getting more free Scrabble media "hits"
in cities around the World. Enhanced p.r. to have a few hundred vs.
few dozen seen watching the finals. Entry fees for those non-
subsidized players can underwrite many expenses (e.g., prize fund) for
those other divisions. Such an Open may lead to greater support from
the rank and file membership for a unified word source. Con: Corporate
sponsors may balk at expanding the number of players. Host country
would have a "disproportionate" number of players in lower divisions.
Total number of players may seem unmanageable. (Solution: limit number
of registrants in the lower divisions to "the first X who register.")
- Multi-divisional: Proficiency only. A multi-divisional ("open") WSC,
where all divisions, including the top division ("World Champ
Division"), are based solely upon demonstrated proficiency levels.
See options 5 and 6 above for pros and cons of such. This would be
analogous to the present NA NSC, except that the very top players
for the World Champ Division of such a WSC would still be sponsored.
Hoping players worldwide who cannot attend WSC will convey their thoughts
on the future directions they would like to see the WSC take before
the 11/21/97 Global Meeting in DC.
An option 6 kinda guy (though wouldn't mind option 7 after a unified
ratings system is established),
Mike Baron
[1] Included within "The State of the World of Scrabble update" was
"(C) WSC 'UNDER/OVER' REPRESENTATION." Herewith is an edited
version of that section:
C# = Country number
(1) = Current rated assoc members, as reported in "State of the
World of Scrabble update" 10/31/97. Figure of "(50)"
assigned to those countries for which data not as yet
received, a figure similar to those provided by Israel
and Malaysia.
(2) = number of WSC97 reps
(3) = number of WSC97 reps, if each country sent same 1.28% of reps,
rounded to whole number. 1.28% (80/6247) represents the total
number of WSC reps from each country (80) divided by an
arguably "best estimate" of the total number of current
association members who participate in tournaments. In effect,
every country sends 1 of every 78 tournament playing members.
C# COUNTRY (1) (2) (3)
01 Australia 1500 4 19
02 Bahrain (50) 2 1
03 Canada 188 6 2
04 Eire (50) 1 1
05 England see UK 7[1]
06 France (50) 1 1
07 Ghana (50) 3 1
08 Guyana (50) 1 1
09 Hong Kong (50) 1 1
10 Israel 63 2 1
11 Japan (50) 1 1
12 Kenya (50) 3 1
13 Kurdistan-Iraq (50) 1 1
14 Kuwait (50) 1 1
15 Liberia (50) 1 1
16 Malaysia 50 2 1
17 Malta (50) 2 1
18 New Zealand 350 4 4
19 Nigeria (50) 3 1
20 N.Ireland see UK 1[1]
21 Oman (50) 1 1
22 Pakistan (50) 1 1
23 Philippines 100 1 1
24 Qatar (50) 1 1
25 Romania (50) 1 1
26 Saudi Arabia (50) 1 1
27 Scotland see UK 1[1]
28 Seychelles (50) 1 1
29 Singapore (50) 2 1
30 South Africa (50) 2 1
31 Sri Lanka (50) 2 1
32 Thailand 100 3 1
33 Trinidad (50) 1 1
34 UAE (50) 1 1
35 United Kingdom 1000 11[1] 13
36 United States 1696 12 22
37 Wales see UK 2[1]
-------------------------------------
TOTALS to date: 6,247 80[2] 88
[1] UK's 11 = England 7 + N.Ireland 1 + Scotland 1 + Wales 1.
Only UK figures (Country# 35) are used in World totals.
[2] Excludes World and Gulf Champions.