Declined 64/32 Challenge tournaments

[DragonFodder]

What about running 32/64 challenges. 300 point buy in but 50 points back and 32 player prize structure if you don't get to 64. I'm tired of the 64s accumulating 50+ players and fizzling out...

 

[Firedrake]

I could be wrong on this, but I believe they've mentioned in the past why they can't do this.
The prize structure has to be "set in stone" when the tournament is posted, otherwise a fluctuating prize structure is considered "gambling."

 

[Selfeisek]

I agree about a movile structure could be possitive to don't cancel tournaments, and current tournaments have gambling as far you can control how many players would join and consequently how profitable are.

 

[Torbin]

As Firedrake said, this is not possible for us to do.

 

[DragonFodder]

I could be wrong on this, but I believe they've mentioned in the past why they can't do this.
The prize structure has to be "set in stone" when the tournament is posted, otherwise a fluctuating prize structure is considered "gambling."

I think if it is clear coming in and the fewer players equals a partial rebate it should be ok. I don't know the specific statute they are refferring to, so I am a bit in the dark. If I knew, I could advise better.

 

[DragonFodder]

As Firedrake said, this is not possible for us to do.

Can you tell me the statute code? I would like to look into it myself?