Announcement from Chulalongkorn University WUDC 2014 Bid‏

Hi Everyone,
Chulalongkorn University WUDC 2014 wants to thank people for their the support, comments and questions. We will be responding to them as soon as possible for your further consideration. The organization committee will provide a smooth enjoyable tournament.

We know that we have people on the ground with experience in hosting international tournaments before, such as the Asians BP Championship – the first of its kind, managed within 4 months, with not only Asian participants but also subsidised adjudicators from around the world! All of these experiences, and more, make us aware and know what are the predictable concerns and issues that need to be address and fixed.

We have been working very hard to contact and confirm sponsorship. Our latest update is that the Chulalongkorn University Alumni Association, has principally agreed to be our sponsor if we win the bid! Their main objective is to make our tournament as accessible to all of you as much as possible.

I am very happy to announce that our registration fee will be reduced from 17,200 Baht (approx 430 Euro) to 16,000 Baht (approx 400 Euro)! and we will keep trying to make this tournament even more accessible to all of the participants because WUDC needs you to make it successful.

TCEB ( our current partner and sponsor has helped us negotiate with Thai Airways, the national carrier of the kingdom to become one of our official airlines. They will be offering participants discounts for flights to Thailand. We also have already confirmed Tourism Authority of Thailand (TAT) which will provide us with discounts on different culture attractions in the country also help us with our goodie bags, Green Spot Co. Limited (Thailand) has also confirmed to be providing us with non alcoholic beverages for the whole tournament.

We won’t stop there though, we are still finding more sponsors to cover our target of 200,000 Euro, but are confident that we can reach this because of the support from the university and our partners.

I would also like to Thank Marcus Ewald, the German Representative of Council which invited us to do the comparative sheet do please feel free to click on the link below:

We’re also pleased to answer questions from England below:


1) There is no separate subsidy in the budget to cover the A-team’s travel and registration costs. Should we assume that this will come out of the the $30,000USD allocated for adjudication? If so, how much do you expect to spend subsidizing the A-team?

Since Adj Core is part of the Organizing Committee, Chula will be subsidizing them with a separate budget, so the 30,000USD is purely for subsidizing independent adjudicators.

2) Budget assumes 340-370 paid adjudicators for 400 teams, this seems a lot, assuming that n-1 would still be in place. On what basis do you estimate you will have so many judges? As of yesterday, Berlin currently have 204 judges and 240 teams (and this is with the vast majority of 1st teams allocated with 2nd teams not guaranteeing extra judges)

Thailand is a strategic location which is extremely accessible for the regional countries, especially from Australasia. The adjudicators we expect are not only ones affiliated with participating institutions, but also independent adjudicators who are interested in participating.

3) Is Chulalongkorn University prepared to underwrite the event, if not, do you have a contingency budget (as Berlin produced for the most recent WUDC Council) to describe what you could offer with minimal sponsorship?

Chulalongkorn University has assured the Org Comm that they will be responsible in finding the necessary fund for the tournament. The University has already confirmed sponsorship from the Thailand Convention and Exhibition Bureau (TCEB), both during the bidding process and the actual event, and is negotiating with major contacts to finalize a deal within a few days, which will reduce the registration fee as well.

Even if somehow these deals somehow disappear, Chula will still be responsible for the funding.

4) Will you factor inflation (currently around 3%) into your budget?

It has already been factored in.


1) To what extent will ensuring gender balance contribute to the selection of a) the DCAs and b) independent adjudicators?

We think that it is equitable and valuable to have women represented on a CA team. The set of well-qualified women who are potential DCA candidates is large enough that we don't foresee that gender balance will be a problem. With that said, we do believe that both genders should be represented on a CA team, and in selecting DCAs, will take that into account, while at the same time weighing factors such as capabilities of individual candidates and concerns for regional representation. The same goes for independent adjudicator funding.

2) The 30,000USD allocated for judge funding is would allocated at the discretion of the A-team. What principles will guide the allocation of these funds? Would you operate a system similar to that proposed by Manila (but ultimately unnecessary as there were sufficient funds) that per-judge subsidies would be allocated on a cost-benefit basis, with prospective judges asked to state their minimum level of subsidy required to attend prior to allocation.

We think that the following principles should apply when deciding judge subsidies:

A. Having a strong track record should be a necessary condition for the receipt of a subsidy.

B. Regions that have strong judging pools, but are located further away, should be allocated more funding to offset higher travel costs, and ensure balanced regional representation.

C. When choosing between individuals in the same region, who have similar ability levels but require different levels of subsidy, we should maximize benefits per unit of money spent.

D. Individuals who are eligible for funding by their own institution should be required to also apply within their institution for funding, as a precondition of being considered for a judge subsidy.

We will not operate a system that is identical to Manila's, crucially because under Manila's system, it was not strategically optimal to report your true level of subsidy required for attendance. We do think that it is important to design a system that is simple to understand, but also makes it rational for judges to truthfully report their subsidy requirements. (Shengwu can help with this; he has PhD-level training in auction theory.)

And we would also like present a short video, so you can meet our convenor and deputy convenor:

Hope you enjoy the VDO, and do please keep in touch with us, our e-mails are below


Motoki - Convenor

Ponn - Deputy Convenor

Chief Adjudication Panel (CAP)



  • Amit

    Thank you and do hope to hear from you,

    Chulalongkorn University WUDC 2014

  • Location

    Syndicate content