1 / 34

Road Warrior Booty: Prize Structures In Motorcycle Racing

Road Warrior Booty: Prize Structures In Motorcycle Racing. M.T. Maloney & Kristina Terkun Contributions to Economic Analysis & Policy : 2002, vol. 1: No. 1, Article 3. Tournament Literature. Q: Do workers/players respond to prizes and prize structure? A: Seem to

roland
Download Presentation

Road Warrior Booty: Prize Structures In Motorcycle Racing

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Road Warrior Booty: Prize Structures In Motorcycle Racing M.T. Maloney & Kristina TerkunContributions to Economic Analysis & Policy: 2002, vol. 1: No. 1, Article 3.

  2. Tournament Literature • Q: Do workers/players respond to prizes and prize structure? • A: Seem to • Q: Do firms/organizers rationally structure tournaments? • A: ?????

  3. Motorcycle Racing • Offers Empirical Possibilities • Multiple Independent Sponsors • Vary level and structure of prizes • Direct, simultaneous competition for racers • When a racer chooses one sponsor, the prizes paid by sponsors of similar products are foregone

  4. Theory – Lazear & Rosen • Two Identical Risk-neutral Competitors • Two Prizes Paid by Firm/organizer • Competing takes effort • Expected prize depends on purse • Effort determined by prize spread

  5. From players' perspective: Given prize spread, determine optimal level of effort Given optimal effort, is expected payoff enough? Two-fold process From organizer's perspective: Bigger prize spreads generate more effort More effort requires higher purse in compensation

  6. Prior Empirical Work • Bull, Schotter, and Weigelt (1987) • experimental evidence • Ehrenberg and Bognanno (1990) • golf • Knoeber and Thurman (1994) • chickens

  7. Application of Model • Competition among heterogeneous tournament organizers • Different levels of brand name • Tournament sponsorship is advertising • Objective: Enhance b/n value • Winning is best

  8. Differences in Brand Name Value • Higher value of brand name means more value in winning • Firm sets higher prize spread to optimally induce more effort • Firm must pay more to compensate for the extra pain • See Figure 1

  9. Figure 1 • Comes from the three behavior equations in L&R model: • Player/workers choose effort based on spread • Tournament organizer chooses spread based on value of output • Organizer must pay competitive purse

  10. Tournament organizers wish to elicitmaximum effort • Load prize money on the highest finishing places • However, this imposes costs on players • Thus, must increase the purse along with the spread of prizes to be competitive

  11. Purse and Spread • Unrelated outside of competition • Purse does not directly affect behavior of worker/players • evidence from chicken farming • Across non-competing motorcycle sponsors, any relation is possible

  12. Field Tournaments Two Problems: • Prizes paid to overall winners • Definition of prize spread

  13. Overall Winners • Sponsors pay 1st prize to 1st place overall • Nonetheless, some riders will race for lower prizes/purse • If prize spread is lower, less work required • Creates same effect as heterogeneous talent

  14. Payoff to Overall Winner • Does not change the basic prediction of Figure 1 • More b/n value=>higher purse • Higher purse =>higher spread

  15. Measurement of Prize Spread • Ladder of Prizes • Some contentiousness in literature • We measure this characteristic in several different ways • Gini Coefficient • Difference between top prizes

  16. The American Motorcyclist Association • Founded in 1924 • AMA Pro Racing is the largest motorcycle racing sanctioning body in the world • The MBNA Superbike Tour main pro series • Classes: Superbike, 600 Supersport, 750 Supersport, 250 Grand Prix (GP), Formula Xtreme, and Pro Thunder.

  17. Riders are eligible for a track purse and industry bonus awards. • Rider must use the sponsor’s products, display sponsor decals • Many of the industry bonus award sponsors are in direct competition. • Sponsor purses can vary dramatically across sponsors within the same product category.

  18. Table IIndustry Bonus Awards

  19. Table II • Sponsor Purse is the sum of the prizes paid to each place • Class Purse is the sum of the sponsor purses across the entire racing class. • Product Purse is the sum of the sponsor purses within a product group.

  20. Table IIStatistics on Purses

  21. Prize structures • Vary greatly across sponsors • A rider can receive anywhere from $150 to $600 on helmets • Sponsors also vary the number of places that they pay out

  22. Table III: Places Paid

  23. Table IV: Tire Sponsors

  24. Incentive Intensity • Measures of incentives created by the prizes • Spread of Top Prizes • Gini Coefficient

  25. Incentive Intensity forTire Sponsors

  26. Test of the Theory • Ratio of Sponsor's Prize Spread to Rival’s • Should be positively related to ratio of sponsor’s purse to rival’s • From Figure 1:

  27. Specification

  28. Table VISummary Statistics

  29. Table VII Regressions

  30. Estimated Effects • Doubling Sponsor’s to Product Purse • Allows firm to double the prize intensity

  31. Conclusions • Firms that pay lower expected prizes must pay less incentive oriented prizes

  32. Importance of Finding • Tournament theory is based on the premise that workers respond to prize incentives by working harder, and working harder is not free. • This is confirmed by observing that firms recognize this response and anticipate this behavior when making their wage offers.

More Related