Non-elite adult chess in Canada

[Ken Kurkowski]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

I think the belief that everybody in tournament chess knows mountains of opening theory is a huge myth, certainly at the sub 1800 level (which is where I and almost all my opponents reside). An even bigger misconception is that knowledge (or ignorance) of opening theory decides most games at lower levels. Middlegame blunders, poor endgame technique and bad time management are more important factors. Analyzing my games and those of peers confirms this. That said, being able to get through the first dozen moves or so without spotting your opponent twenty minutes on the clock is a good thing. You don't want to be figuring out everything over the board almost from move one! My advice (which I try to follow :) ) is: avoid the sharpest, trappiest mainline openings in favour of more solid, flexible lines where not playing the 'best' line is less likely to get you in trouble, at least not at my modest level. Usually there's just a couple of standard traps to remember. If you must play the tactically messy stuff, go for offbeat, lesser known lines that your opponents are unlikely to know.

[Scott Richardson]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

I had a great time at the CO. Lost most of my games to kids whose heads just reached the playing field.
Could have won every single game but one if I'd paid more attention. Talk about making the game easier to play for less experienced players is not it.

I made one kid so friggin happy he was going to explode. !st tournament, 1st win. After his win he shook my hand, opened the door for me. His grandfather took a picture of the two us. We'll be friends for the rest of my life.
A few kids are pricks. They need to play more chess with us older dudes. Older dudes who have already been stars on other playing fields.

It's all about kid's in my opinion. I look forward to seeing the president's initiatives come to fruition. Especially to integrate internet chess to help hold events in remote areas and tie them into less remote areas. That would work, promote chess, pay some CFC bills and save me a few thousand $ a year.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

I think the belief that everybody in tournament chess knows mountains of opening theory is a huge myth, certainly at the sub 1800 level (which is where I and almost all my opponents reside). An even bigger misconception is that knowledge (or ignorance) of opening theory decides most games at lower levels. Middlegame blunders, poor endgame technique and bad time management are more important factors. Analyzing my games and those of peers confirms this. That said, being able to get through the first dozen moves or so without spotting your opponent twenty minutes on the clock is a good thing. You don't want to be figuring out everything over the board almost from move one! My advice (which I try to follow :) ) is: avoid the sharpest, trappiest mainline openings in favour of more solid, flexible lines where not playing the 'best' line is less likely to get you in trouble, at least not at my modest level. Usually there's just a couple of standard traps to remember. If you must play the tactically messy stuff, go for offbeat, lesser known lines that your opponents are unlikely to know.

Like Jason alluded to, there is a lot of weight behind that myth (or fear) you've mentioned, Ken. What I find is that only a small portion of class players are exceptionally booked-up, and even then only in a few openings. The evasive measures that you describe are in line with my own advice. Around master level is when a lot of experienced adults have accumulated a significant amount of opening knowledge after many years of skillful play and study. Still, it doesn't give them much of an edge over the course of many games, usually, against their peers, at least below 2400 level.

Sizing up the opposition can be very important. Even back in the 1970s, adults at my club were coping with juniors by avoiding tactical openings, unless they had discovered through observation or offhand games that a particular junior was weak at tactics or lacked knowedge of tactical theory that they themselves knew. Even if you fail to win your first few games against a given opponent because of the opening, what you learn gives you ideas on how to adapt. Sometimes though, players who are afraid to take a chance out of fear of an untested opponent's knowedge may perform more poorly against them in the long run, if this fear is sustained for a long time. In chess there is, at least initially, much 'bluff' that goes on between players who meet many times (or not) over the years.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

The good thing about the NFP process is that it reset things and we can start over again without being weighed down by what we did in the past. In a world where the CFC had infinite resources we could initiate many more programs but at a certain point you have to face reality and look at what you can do. Lower membership fees for seniors did not succeed recently and deservedly so, the proposers of the motion had no idea of what the cost to the CFC would be. If you define senior as 50 most of our players would be seniors and juniors based on what I see at the Canadian Open.

We cannot function without at least one person in the office and having one person is costly and puts a strain on that person. In addition the roles of FIDE rep and youth coordinator are extremely hectic at the moment. FIDE America is imposing all kinds of fees on us while our revenues are under constant pressure due to declining memberships. The healthiest area is youth chess but that could easily be torpedoed with one or two idiotic decisions like trying to move CYCC to a time of year that would be convenient to only one province or one region.

We have to pay our bills and lowering fees at this point is not in the cards.

We are talking to people about initiatives to integrate internet chess to help hold events in remote areas and tie them into less remote areas. That is something that needs to be encouraged.

The good news for the CFC, I see from another old thread, is that sponsorship and media coverage for Canadian chess is promising of late. Otherwise it appears that the CFC is 'stuck', as has often been the case over the years, as far as daring to raise or lower any of its fees (new or established types).

The last part you mentioned above (about internet chess) is an idea that occured to now retired Ottawa organizer Neil James Frarey years ago. Hopefully it can be realized on a substantial scale, but for that fresh (else seasoned) organizers are required, as more than ever is the case for CFC-rated events being held.

Another idea Mr. Frarey had was to have what I call a sort of Introductory Tournament Membership, available for the first event or two to CFC-rated event participants who had never been CFC members before. This was so that they might get their feet wet without paying a more substantial membership fee (as usual, it would be up to individual organizers whether to give newcomers a discount on their entry fee). Mr. Frarey wanted this type of membership to be free, in fact, but I suspect the CFC would at least want a nominal charge, say $3 for example.

The CFC has historically had an annual turnover rate (from renewing to new members) of one-third, I've heard. Someone may know what historically (of the next year's new members) the fraction is for those who have never had a CFC membership before AND who decided to buy only a regular Tournament Membership. If this can be known, the risk to the CFC for creating an Introductory Tournament Membership might be better estimated.

[Gordon Gooding]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

The good news for the CFC, I see from another old thread, is that sponsorship and media coverage for Canadian chess is promising of late. Otherwise it appears that the CFC is 'stuck', as has often been the case over the years, as far as daring to raise or lower any of its fees (new or established types).

The last part you mentioned above (about internet chess) is an idea that occured to now retired Ottawa organizer Neil James Frarey years ago. Hopefully it can be realized on a substantial scale, but for that fresh (else seasoned) organizers are required, as more than ever is case with CFC-rated events to be held in general.

Another idea Mr. Frarey had was to have what I call a sort of Introductory Tournament Membership, available for the first event or two to CFC-rated event participants who had never been CFC members before. This was so that they might get their feet wet without paying a more substantial membership fee (it would be up to individual organizers whether to give newcomers a discount on their entry fee, as usual). Mr. Frarey wanted this type of membership to be free, in fact, but I suspect the CFC would at least want a nominal charge, say $3 for example.

The CFC has historically had an annual turnover rate (from renewing to new members) of one-third, I've heard. Someone may know what historically (of the next year's new members) the fraction is for those who have never had a CFC membership before AND who decided to buy only a regular Tournament Membership. If this can be known, the risk to the CFC for creating an Introductory Tournament Membership might be better estimated.

I am running a one day active chess tournament in Campbellville on Aug 16th (register at miltonchess@hotmail.com (plug, I know.)) and I have a recreational/unrated section. The idea was to encourage people who have never played tournament chess an opportunity to experience it. So as to not scare them off they will not be inundated with oodles and oodles of rules (e.g. recording games, etc, but I will be giving handouts of how to record games to encourage their study of tournament chess). I have also noticed that there are people signing up who had cfc memberships and have let them expire and dont want to renew. It just seems hard to entice people to sign up to the CFC if all they want to do is play casual chess. I am still trying to encourage them to join the CFC though. I do hope to try and build up CFC membership this way. Baby steps. I think organizers that have a recreational/unrated section might have a better shot of displaying the perks of being in the cfc membership. A realtively painless, inexpensive way to promote non elite chess for adults and kids alike. This is my second one day acitve with this recreational section. I remember that the last one I ran, the recreational section was the second largest group and according to the prereg list for this one, it seems that way again. A one day tournament is better suited to newcomers in tournament chess. Play well and keep on enjoying the beautiful game!

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

I am running a one day active chess tournament in Campbellville on Aug 16th (register at miltonchess@hotmail.com (plug, I know.)) and I have a recreational/unrated section. The idea was to encourage people who have never played tournament chess an opportunity to experience it. So as to not scare them off they will not be inundated with oodles and oodles of rules (e.g. recording games, etc, but I will be giving handouts of how to record games to encourage their study of tournament chess). I have also noticed that there are people signing up who had cfc memberships and have let them expire and dont want to renew. It just seems hard to entice people to sign up to the CFC if all they want to do is play casual chess. I am still trying to encourage them to join the CFC though. I do hope to try and build up CFC membership this way. Baby steps. I think organizers that have a recreational/unrated section might have a better shot of displaying the perks of being in the cfc membership. A realtively painless, inexpensive way to promote non elite chess for adults and kids alike. This is my second one day acitve with this recreational section. I remember that the last one I ran, the recreational section was the second largest group and according to the prereg list for this one, it seems that way again. A one day tournament is better suited to newcomers in tournament chess. Play well and keep on enjoying the beautiful game!

With CFC membership fees being relatively high for newcomers who are not at all sure they want to commit themselves to a tournament membership (let alone a full year membership), 'newbie initiation' initiatives (such as yours, Gordon) are something the CFC ought to be encouraging from organizers on a nationwide basis. A section on the CFC website dedicated to breaking in newbies on a local level would be a worthwhile step, since there is little for the CFC to lose. Just make sure to show it prominently somehow on the website. As Tony Ficzere once put it, handling newbies at their first event kind of takes kid gloves. It's my intution that at least some organizers don't go out of their way to get them to their events, however.

Btw, in my last post I should have mentioned that Mr. Frarey also wanted the first event or two to be free entry for newbies, if memory serves. That would go against the way the CFC relates to organizers normally, however, in that they are left to set their own entry fees (if any).

[Ken Kurkowski]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

"...handling newbies at their first event kind of takes kid gloves." Reminds me of my newbie days. Having learned of the Toronto Chess Club at a Hart House lecture series in the fall of '75, I entered their Saturday afternoon 5-min speed tournament. Bad move! I got totally crushed in almost all my games. However, I quickly discovered the existence of saner time controls, and the rest is history.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

"...handling newbies at their first event kind of takes kid gloves." Reminds me of my newbie days. Having learned of the Toronto Chess Club at a Hart House lecture series in the fall of '75, I entered their Saturday afternoon 5-min speed tournament. Bad move! I got totally crushed in almost all my games. However, I quickly discovered the existence of saner time controls, and the rest is history.

I played my first CFC rated event in 1974. It was a small event, organized at Carleton University in Ottawa. Most of the opposition was about 1600 strength. I lost all four of my games, with a forced bye besides. I was anxious on how to cope with the (analog) chess clocks (a newbie I told about the RA club and CFC rated chess last year still prefers to avoid playing even in Active events, let alone blitz, but he may not be typical - he's middle-aged already, if that might make a difference). Within a couple of years I had a 1400 rating, after an initial rating of 999. Some players expected a much easier game from me, a somewhat quickly improving junior.

Prior to that, I played casual games without a clock on weekends for at least two years at the home of Bob Gelblum, who was about 1400 strength. I lost every game, until I borrowed his copy of My 60 Memorable Games, and discovered that Fischer had difficuly against the Winawer. I was getting slaughtered lots in tactical, trappy 1.e4 e5 games with Black before that. After that I played (and beat Bob with) the French, which I had assumed was weak because of the Advance Variation. Later I added 1.e4 g6 as Black (the Duncan Suttles influence), and used 1.d4 g6 along with the Nimzo-Indian (the Nimzovich and Botvinnik influence) and the Benko Gambit (a relatively hot new opening which I had trouble against as White - I played flank openings besides 1.d4, in an effort to be mainly a strategic player and mostly avoid heavy tactical theory). When you can't find or afford a coach, as was the case in those days, it's hit or miss whether you find a repertoire that suits you, for one thing. Anyway, perhaps I was more tenacious than the average newbie.

Later, in the 1980s, Bob won his class section at a World Open, winning $5,000 US, which for some time was the most a Canadian had ever won in an event.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

The CFC could improve things, if it had the resources and time, or some creativity in figuring out HOW, were it to promote chess as more than a sporting activity but also as a cultural activity. Chess as culture might include: chess history, the problem world and heterodox chess and variants, chess as a means of educational excellence for children, teaching competitive aspects of chess to those who have no intention, or ability perhaps, to play competitive chess, etc. But this is like politicians taking the long view, beyond their 4/5 year mandate, and perhaps is too much to ask for a small, volunteer-based organization.

Still, chess is culture in many parts of the world, and they continue to reproduce that culture, so maybe we could learn from them. We have artistic education, music education, and appreciation of both. Imagine the same for chess and it will be so.
...

Chess can be quite counter-cultural as well: back in the sixties folks in Greenwich Village frequented coffeehouses and played chess there, among other things.

Some time ago I floated the idea of Canadian chessplayer cards, much like baseball cards, which would be a cultural thing of sorts. A company had begun producing chessplayer cards elsewhere. Since then, last year a friend gave me some chessplayer cards that Chess Informant had produced. These featured some strong players (both alive and deceased). They doubled as postcards, with a charicature of a player together with a cartoon on the front side. On the back side the artist and the player's names were given (in English). No data on player accomplishments, favourite openings, style or anything else, though the cartoon or charicature was suggestive of the player's style or a famous incident, at times.

Anyway, there were concerns on chesstalk over whether a Canadian player might need to give permission to use their image on any sort of card, and if so, at what price. Perhaps a charicature/cartoon of a player would be different in this respect from a photo.

Regarding the educational aspect of chess, the CMA probably has a lock on selling that, at least to schools themselves. I imagine arguing concerning this and other aspects of chess happened during the time the CFC tried to preserve its tax-exempt status, which did not occur ultimately (perhaps a subsequent federal administration will be more sympathetic to chess).

The world of chess problems and variants has always been of secondary or peripheral interest to most people who get excited about the game, at least when they are introduced to it, I would think. Double chess seems rather popular with the young, or young at heart, though, and studying problems and endgame studies seems unavoidable if one wishes to improve.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

Eliminate the disadvantage of having to learn piles of opening theory by regularly running Fischer Random/Chess960 events. I think responses to Fischer Random are an equilibrium breaker between two groups of people who complain that: "There's too much opening theory". Some people who say this mean:

a) "Having to keep track of opening theory takes some of the fun out of chess";

and others mean:

b) "The amount of opening theory I know is fine, but when I have to play an opponent who knows more opening theory than me... that takes some of the fun out of chess."

People who complain that "There's too much opening theory" but don't want to play Fischer Random mean (b). I'd suggest that the main reason people don't like Fischer Random is the sunk cost of their opening preparation.

Once I joked to a friend that perhaps in basketball, the nets at each end should be raised or lowered according to the average height of the opposing teams' players. He replied that players who had spent all their time practising free throws with the standard basket height off the floor would be toast. It seems that in many sports and games, most folks are happy about a standard start position. Russian Backgammon (roll where the men start, from scratch) hasn't widely caught on, though my guess is that game would take longer than regular Backgammon. Nor really has Fischer Random caught on, nor has competitive Arimaa (may be due to the License requirement, but I don't know about the number of apps sold for the game though).

The oriental game of Go has no start position other than an empty 19x19 board, but it is somewhat popular, even worldwide. It may be more computer-resistant than Arimaa (which was designed to be, in stead of chess), as there seems to me to be more legal moves possible in an entire typical Go game than in Arimaa, if nothing else. Go has a history (culture) that's long (like chess), but chess pieces are so attractive to the eye, a shallow but important disadvantage for Go, perhaps. Another is that there are no kings involved. Chinese Chess and Shogi (Japanese Chess) do have kings, but again their pieces seem less attractive to the eye than is the case for chess, for one thing.

Computer-resistance could be important if many competitive players truly get sick of over-prepared opponents who look up their repertoire in databases - not such a great concern if one has a wide repertoire (advocated for even before computers: in the words of veteran GM Hort: "You should play everything", or in the words of long retired Toronto FM Rob Morrison: "You've got to play with a full deck"). A worse danger may or may not be the potential to cheat using a computer, although organizers and TDs seem to normally be on the lookout for this.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

I played my first CFC rated event in 1974. It was a small event, organized at Carleton University in Ottawa. Most of the opposition was about 1600 strength. I lost all four of my games, with a forced bye besides. I was anxious on how to cope with the (analog) chess clocks (a newbie I told about the RA club and CFC rated chess last year still prefers to avoid playing even in Active events, let alone blitz, but he may not be typical - he's middle-aged already, if that might make a difference). Within a couple of years I had a 1400 rating, after an initial rating of 999. Some players expected a much easier game from me, a somewhat quickly improving junior.

Prior to that, I played casual games without a clock on weekends for at least two years at the home of Bob Gelblum, who was about 1400 strength. I lost every game, until I borrowed his copy of My 60 Memorable Games, and discovered that Fischer had difficuly against the Winawer. I was getting slaughtered lots in tactical, trappy 1.e4 e5 games with Black before that. After that I played (and beat Bob with) the French, which I had assumed was weak because of the Advance Variation. Later I added 1.e4 g6 as Black (the Duncan Suttles influence), and used 1.d4 g6 along with the Nimzo-Indian (the Nimzovich and Botvinnik influence) and the Benko Gambit (a relatively hot new opening which I had trouble against as White - I played flank openings besides 1.d4, in an effort to be mainly a strategic player and mostly avoid heavy tactical theory). When you can't find or afford a coach, as was the case in those days, it's hit or miss whether you find a repertoire that suits you, for one thing. Anyway, perhaps I was more tenacious than the average newbie.

Later, in the 1980s, Bob won his class section at a World Open, winning $5,000 US, which for some time was the most a Canadian had ever won in an event.

I made some edits to the quoted post above a while ago, so I thought I'd bring it back in a fresh post.

I went back and looked at a database of my earliest competive games, and indeed my recollection was right about what repertoire I used, right up to the end of 1979. I switched to 1.e4 with White, to use in my second (and last) Canadian Junior Ch., and I tanked in the event, after finishing second the previous year. With Black, in the 1980s I widened my repertoire, and the results weren't disasterous, unlike for my fiddling with White.

In the new millenium, I brought back 1.d4 heavily into practice with White again, while still using 1.e4 heavily (flank openings I've always used sparingly). Again my results tanked, this time for many events over the remainder of the year. The moral seems to be that switching your repertoire with White (at least at move one) may be more hazardous than with Black, since you're likely having to cope with more unfamiliar openings than you would with Black, besides any greater feeling of insecurity at the board. This can happen even if one switches from Anti-Sicilian(s) to Open Sicilians (or to main line Ruy Lopez' from, say, quiet Italian Games) with White, for example.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

...
ensure that in rated events [adults] play only those close to them in chess strength. They just want a good, hard-fought game -- not to blow someone off the board or be similarly blown off the board themselves.
...

At the RA club in Ottawa, at least half the rated events/(pickup game sections) that are run with slow time controls use Round-Robins or pairings that try to play closely rated opponents against each other. Perhaps other clubs (or even event organizers) should try to do this if they are not doing so already. However, the way that the CFC works is that organizers submit the event results for rating, without requiring them to have a given event format (at least for non-national events).

Clubs and organizers might also try to use the old-fashioned event format of Congresses, where an entire event is run in sections of Round-Robins (the RA club often does this, without calling it such). If weekend events are run this way, prizes can still be divided between those who do well in each Round-Robin section. Again, up to individual organizers, however.

Btw, I made some significant edits to my last three posts. I know, I've now made five posts in a row in this thread, but at least I first noticed that there was a precident for that in another thread...

[Ken Kurkowski]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

Years ago, Scarborough Chess Club ran 'congress'-type events with several RR sections (in addition to Swisses). Over time, these became unpopular with TDs (and some players) because of the many postponed/rescheduled games. And back then SCC was open three days a week instead of the current one evening, so there were more opportunities to play those postponed games (and adjournments too!)

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

The Montreal CC runs one-game-every-Wednesday "congresses" of 6-player sections (by rating), with a one-week break before a new event starts. These are very popular, and there is usually a waiting list for the 54 (sometimes 60) available spots. Agreeing players can reschedule games, as long as all rescheduled games are completed before the last round begins.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Non-elite adult chess in Canada

In the late 1970s and 1980s I was club TD at the Brampton CC, which back then didn't have any CFC rated club events. The format over the season was much the same as I described for the RA CC (currently). I vaguely recall that for the Brampton CC Congress events back then, there weren't too many problems with no-shows. Like for the club swisses, I think 2 forfeits may have been the limit, after which such a participant was removed from their RR section. The club did have its own rating system, which at least some club members cared about as far as their rating went. Most club members who had trouble expecting to play all their games (or reschedule them) did not sign up. Currently, at the RA CC in Ottawa, the TD asks people before they sign up for a Congress not to do so if they expect not to make more than two games at the scheduled round dates, if my memory is correct.

On a different point, a problem with rated class sectional weekend swisses, as I see it, is that, compared to an open (i.e. one section) swiss, the prize money must be arbitrarily weighted in some fashion to favour the top section with more prize funding. In an open swiss, anyone can win the place prizes, in theory. Hence I think I've noticed over time a trend that there is a greater turnout for open swisses when these are run (big World Open [actually sectioned] tournaments, etc. aside). At least for rated weekend Congresses with prize money, if held, there is the attraction of being certain to play someone close in rating to you every round, normally, in spite of the fact that more prize money is put into higher rated RR sections in the Congresses (which I assume would need to be done, to at least try to attract top players and thus raise attendence).

[edit: for those unfamiliar with the way organizers advertise their events, my understanding is it is often done in an ambiguous or flawed way, as far as distinguishing class sectional swiss events from open swisses. For example, the Eastern Ontario Open is normally a class sectional event of three sections, where the top section might be limited normally to those above, say, 1900 CFC (there may be, at least some years, an option to pay a higher entry fee to play above one's section - can't recall). Then there are truly 'open swisses' that are just one section. Sometimes what is described in the advertising as an Open (swiss) has more than one section, but allows anyone to play in the top section, and with no one allowed to play in a lower section than their rating allows. Someone else might know better than me, though.]