What divides us
I've been out of the tournament Scrabble scene for almost 3 months now. I'm rarely on ISC and have purposely limited myself to Words With Friends and iPhone Scrabble games. Even took a break from those for 2 weeks in September. Now that I've been removed from the scene and observe it more as an enthusiast than a tournament player, I honestly think that it's worth noting the difference in the two main schisms in North American Scrabble. The NASPA/WGPO rift does not directly affect expert players (except those in Minnesota, granted), nor will it ever. The OWL/Collins rift, however, does directly affect expert players. Even then, both schisms are somewhat connected. How?
Let's look at prize money for Nationals right now. This year we gave out $10000 to Nigel. Not so long ago we gave $25000 to Trey Wright. Even factoring in that Hasbro sponsored us in the past, we've still lost revenue for prize money because we've lost attendees. Experts, whether we like it or not, non-expert players are crucial to our prize fund because they contribute to it. Without their entry fees contributing to a larger prize fund, we will not attract big names to Nationals, and thus our level of competition is diluted.
Now, let's look at NASPA vs. WGPO from a non-expert's POV. Who charges membership fees? NASPA. Who charges ratings fees? NASPA. How much of the ratings fees and entry fees do the non-expert players see? Not much, if any, unless they earn a class prize. How much of the entry fees did the non-expert players see in Word Cup this past summer? Lots, because there were tons of prizes (we may not have liked that there were so many, but for someone who's not necessarily in tournaments for high-level competition, it's appealing). What's the difference in level of competition for a non-expert? Negligible. In the end, given a choice between the two organizations (in the case that a WGPO tournament and a NASPA tournament are equally accessible), what will a statistically significant number of non-expert players choose? WGPO. Which option will a non-commital, non-expert player wanting to try out the tournament scene end up choosing? WGPO. What happens if existing non-expert players jump the ship to WGPO? NASPA loses players (read: money) for Nationals. What happens when NASPA has less money to pay out at Nationals? Less players, less money.
Let's move on to TWL vs. Collins. Let's just simplify part of the argument here: unless Collins is adopted as the default dictionary over here, we will never see it take off among non-experts. Why? Because right now a large majority of North American Collins players are experts. It is incredibly daunting to have to play a number of high calibre players in a dictionary that one is not familiar with. It is nothing short of masochism, even more so than tournament Scrabble already partially is. Add to that the general resistance of mankind to long-term change that isn't considered compulsory, and it should not be surprising that few North American non-experts try and stick to Collins.
Keeping this in mind, let's transition to expert players in North America, because right now TWL vs. Collins largely affects us over anyone else. What incentive is there for us to switch to Collins when it's not the default dictionary here? Sure, it's played everywhere else in the world. That being said, how many of us can actually afford to travel internationally often enough to make Collins a worthwhile investment of time? Unlike US Nationals, Worlds is invitational. That is a small handful of people. How many Scrabblers would be willing to give up their current tournament social scene to fully commit to a Collins switch? This doesn't affect more introverted or competition-oriented individuals as much, granted, but there are also a number of extroverted experts that would weigh this into their decision. The camaraderie between individuals in our collective love-hate relationship with Scrabble is tainted in that we can't relate to the game in the same way anymore. People on either side tend to be vehement in their defense for their lexicon decision, which doesn't help the issue at all.
I'm all for diversity when it unites us. I don't like diversity when it creates idiocentric individuals at either end of the spectrum; I'm guilty of having been one myself. What I offer is my own opinion, so take it as you will. I am personally biased towards the adoption of Collins, BUT -- that doesn't mean I think it's what is best for NASPA. Here's what I think is best for NASPA on the dictionary front: choose one. "Coexistence" of dictionaries is dividing players. It is diluting player fields, and therefore prize money. Regardless of which dictionary it is, we should only use one. It is simply not possible to generate long-term revenue and bring in more players if we are divided from within. In trying to please everybody, we aren't pleasing anybody. People are mad with NASPA now, so why not just make a lexicon decision and live with the consequences? The only other possibility is the cessation of TWL/Collins tournaments occurring simultaneously at the same location. If NASPA insists on keeping both dictionaries, then let each dictionary have a distinct tournament, separated either by sufficient distance (at least X number of miles/kilometres, if held at same time) or by sufficient time (minimum 1 month, if held at same location).
Feel free to add your thoughts, criticisms, etc. This is intended to be an outlet for rational thoughts on the situation. It is not intended to become a maelstrom of emotionally-charged opinions, which are only further dividing us as a community rather than bring us together to find an ideal solution.
Let's look at prize money for Nationals right now. This year we gave out $10000 to Nigel. Not so long ago we gave $25000 to Trey Wright. Even factoring in that Hasbro sponsored us in the past, we've still lost revenue for prize money because we've lost attendees. Experts, whether we like it or not, non-expert players are crucial to our prize fund because they contribute to it. Without their entry fees contributing to a larger prize fund, we will not attract big names to Nationals, and thus our level of competition is diluted.
Now, let's look at NASPA vs. WGPO from a non-expert's POV. Who charges membership fees? NASPA. Who charges ratings fees? NASPA. How much of the ratings fees and entry fees do the non-expert players see? Not much, if any, unless they earn a class prize. How much of the entry fees did the non-expert players see in Word Cup this past summer? Lots, because there were tons of prizes (we may not have liked that there were so many, but for someone who's not necessarily in tournaments for high-level competition, it's appealing). What's the difference in level of competition for a non-expert? Negligible. In the end, given a choice between the two organizations (in the case that a WGPO tournament and a NASPA tournament are equally accessible), what will a statistically significant number of non-expert players choose? WGPO. Which option will a non-commital, non-expert player wanting to try out the tournament scene end up choosing? WGPO. What happens if existing non-expert players jump the ship to WGPO? NASPA loses players (read: money) for Nationals. What happens when NASPA has less money to pay out at Nationals? Less players, less money.
Let's move on to TWL vs. Collins. Let's just simplify part of the argument here: unless Collins is adopted as the default dictionary over here, we will never see it take off among non-experts. Why? Because right now a large majority of North American Collins players are experts. It is incredibly daunting to have to play a number of high calibre players in a dictionary that one is not familiar with. It is nothing short of masochism, even more so than tournament Scrabble already partially is. Add to that the general resistance of mankind to long-term change that isn't considered compulsory, and it should not be surprising that few North American non-experts try and stick to Collins.
Keeping this in mind, let's transition to expert players in North America, because right now TWL vs. Collins largely affects us over anyone else. What incentive is there for us to switch to Collins when it's not the default dictionary here? Sure, it's played everywhere else in the world. That being said, how many of us can actually afford to travel internationally often enough to make Collins a worthwhile investment of time? Unlike US Nationals, Worlds is invitational. That is a small handful of people. How many Scrabblers would be willing to give up their current tournament social scene to fully commit to a Collins switch? This doesn't affect more introverted or competition-oriented individuals as much, granted, but there are also a number of extroverted experts that would weigh this into their decision. The camaraderie between individuals in our collective love-hate relationship with Scrabble is tainted in that we can't relate to the game in the same way anymore. People on either side tend to be vehement in their defense for their lexicon decision, which doesn't help the issue at all.
I'm all for diversity when it unites us. I don't like diversity when it creates idiocentric individuals at either end of the spectrum; I'm guilty of having been one myself. What I offer is my own opinion, so take it as you will. I am personally biased towards the adoption of Collins, BUT -- that doesn't mean I think it's what is best for NASPA. Here's what I think is best for NASPA on the dictionary front: choose one. "Coexistence" of dictionaries is dividing players. It is diluting player fields, and therefore prize money. Regardless of which dictionary it is, we should only use one. It is simply not possible to generate long-term revenue and bring in more players if we are divided from within. In trying to please everybody, we aren't pleasing anybody. People are mad with NASPA now, so why not just make a lexicon decision and live with the consequences? The only other possibility is the cessation of TWL/Collins tournaments occurring simultaneously at the same location. If NASPA insists on keeping both dictionaries, then let each dictionary have a distinct tournament, separated either by sufficient distance (at least X number of miles/kilometres, if held at same time) or by sufficient time (minimum 1 month, if held at same location).
Feel free to add your thoughts, criticisms, etc. This is intended to be an outlet for rational thoughts on the situation. It is not intended to become a maelstrom of emotionally-charged opinions, which are only further dividing us as a community rather than bring us together to find an ideal solution.