Canadian Closed - list of games I have

[Carl Bilodeau]

Re: Canadian Closed - Sponsors, Standards et al

Carl,

What Jean may have done in the past isn't relevant here. From what you write, he's good with kids and with presentations. That's all admirable.

But I still claim he was wrong to wait until after the Closed, after he'd gotten his prize money and left town, and then criticize Hal Bond on a public forum. That's spineless, to say the least. Even the best of people can make mistakes, and this was a very bad mistake on Jean's part. Even if Hal did deserve criticism, and I'm not saying he did, it should have been done in private and at the time Jean was aware of the problems.

Jean writes that if he'd mentioned this to Hal at the event, it would have created a bad atmosphere for him (Jean) at the event and not remedied the problems. Well, we can't go back in time and remedy the problems for that event now, can we? It is obvious to me and anyone with half a mind that Jean was focused only on minimizing his costs to be there, and on winning money. I can only think he must be struggling financially, but even that doesn't excuse him.

He wants free entries and all costs covered for titled chess players. If chess players could lose their titles and did so with regularity, maybe it wouldn't be so bad. But titles remain for life, and with chess being a game of pure skill, the cream remains at the top and the only changes occur very slowly over time. That to me adds up to elitism.

All I can say to all this is, the chess world has some evolving to do and thank goodness there's poker to look upon for common sense, good organization, and most of all, excitement. The top poker players pay their own entries and their own expenses, and none of them even suggest it should be otherwise, at least that I'm aware of. Of if it is paid for them by sponsors, it gets paid back out of their winnings.

It's kind of like socialism versus capitalism, where the top chess players are a union and can look forward to a regular income stream with no incentive or reward for extra work (just agree to a quick draw and take your money), and
the top poker players are the capitalists, always having to work for their money and take risks. But the socialists (elite chess players) get, in return for their easy life, minimal rewards. The capitalists (elite poker players) are a much hardier lot, and the rewards for them can be very rich indeed.

I think you mix up eveything. Poker is gambling with money and that is it. No country in the world has Poker federation to find the best hope in Poker of the country to represent the country in events. No country invest in Poker at school. You will never see Kellogg to be a sponsor for Poker players of any country.

Chess is an art and a sport. There are international competitions between contrys, between school and it could go in Olympic games. It has to be treated like any other sport where we develop an elite and consider them with some respect. If you organize the top level competition in Canada for any sport in Canada I can not imagine doing it the way it has been done.

How can you insult Jean Hébert and now try to bring with it the whole Quebec province? How can you on the other side keep asking for apologies of somebody? Come on, this is ridiculous. Yes Quebec is too much socialist and I agree totally with you. It kills entrepreneurship, make kids have no ambitions so they quit schools and it lowers everybodys will of succeeding like it happens in Cuba. I personaly would prefer it to be different but it will takes a lot of years like it did in France.

Anyway it does not change the fact that we, Canadians, can see this tournament is not at the level of quality and respect it should have. We do not need Government to achieve a success here. A Chess club could organized such an event like Jean suggested it.

When you drop 15 chess set on a 7 tables we do not call it "a lot of work done". I call it a typical day at a Chess Cafe not a Canadian Close Championship.

Carl

[Jean Hébert]

Re: A better organizer

I'm not sure what it is that you think I don't "get", since you decline to specify.

You did not get the fact that it is about chess organizing and promotion not about Hal Bond.

We are probably in complete agreement about what an "ideal" Closed should be. I objected to your posts because you seemed to be singling out Hal Bond as having done an atrocious job.

To me, organizing is about taking responsability, before, during and after the event. It's about taking charge and assume leadership. If the main organizer cannot be held responsible then who can ? If you have other names to put forward to lighten Hal's sorrow, please feel free to contribute.

My understanding was (and is) that Hal stepped in at the last moment to run a "modest" Closed rather than having none at all. If my understanding is wrong on that point then it is well overdue that somebody say so.

Your understanding without being flatly wrong is incomplete. In all likelyhood Hal's motivation was not merely "saving the Closed". Hal did one good thing during the Closed, he openly posted the tournament's budget. There you will find the other motivation, which is perfectly legitimate but not so altruistic.

You, apparently, feel that having nothing at all would be preferable to having a Closed below certain minimum standards which you (again) decline to specify to the "know nothing" governors (see Mr. Armstrong's query of you).

Really ? From all the shortcomings that I have painfully listed, is it possible that one cannot figure out by himself what those minimum standards might be? Do I have to spoonfeed everybody here ?

Your point of view with respect to "nothing is preferable to sub-standard" is certainly a legitimate argument, but to then publicly chastise Hal Bond, and *only* Hal Bond, who went into it with the opposite point of view (i.e. something is better than nothing), is what caused me to comment.

From experience I have observed that most people cannot take criticism in any shape or form. There is simply no easy way to say that things were not done right (or not done at all). In all cases some feelings will get bruised. If you have a miracle recipe to say the tough things that sometimes need to be told without hurting anybody's feelings, I am buying.

Criticise the tournament all you want. But think twice about where you place the blame.

I dont follow your line of thinking. Again, if the organizer is not responsible then who is ? If things had gone well who would have been praised for it ?

I think Mr. Bond is probably very personally hurt by your comments at the moment. And I wouldn't blame him a bit.

Neither would I. Bur surely at times in your life your feelings have been hurt, just like everybody else's including mine ( I have even been called a "bastard and a asshole". Can you believe it ?:). And did you always manage to avoid saying things that might not please everyone ? That's life. An honest and positive criticism is a gift for those who want to get better, even if at first Mr ego may suffer a bit.

So, next year, when no Hal Bond's choose to step up to the plate, will you be happy?

That is not the point. The point is to get a better Closed next time, not a perfect one, but at least a much improved one, and believe me, there is ample room for that, even without much extra money. There is no reason to believe that this country is unable of holding a decent canadian championship. It has been done before...

"Restlessness and discontent are the first necessities of progress."
-Thomas Edison

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Canadian Closed - list of games I have

I have quickly created a file of the 136 games I have from the Closed. There is still a lot of editing to do.
http://canbase.fqechecs.qc.ca/cbv/20.../2009canch.pgn

A slightly improved file with CFC ratings and ECO codes at http://kris-egis.com/chegis/p/2009_canadian_closed.htm (the same my webpage with a viewer.)

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: Canadian Closed - list of games I have

Last night, I sent a copy of the game file to TWIC (The Week in Chess), and received this reply from Mark Crowther:

"Dear Hugh

Thanks, have been chasing these. Even joined your bulletin board but
for some reason couldn't even download them there!

Best

Mark"

http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/twic.html

[Steve Douglas]

Re: A better organizer

Hi Jean:

Thank-you for the lengthy reply. I don't have time at the moment to go through it point by point but I did want to quickly say two things. First, in your initial posts, and several since, you seemed to be focusing on Hal Bond. Certainly he deserves to catch the merde as Larry puts it but the point that bothered me (and Kerry and a few others) was that the problem lies more with the CFC that decided that whatever Hal was going to do was "good enough". If he was expected to put on a first-class tournament and then didn't, certainly it's his fault. If he was expected to put on a "modest" (his word) tournament then the fault for it being modest lies where?

I mis-spoke (mis-typed?) in my comment about you not being specific. I was referring to your comments to Bob Armstrong about not wanting to deal with the governors or discuss things. You have certainly continued to posted a great deal about the Closed and what you felt its failings were.

Steve

[Steve Douglas]

Re: A better organizer

[QUOTE=Larry Bevand;13090]

something is better than nothing

Hi Steve,

In this case, Hal gets to take the "merde" while the rest of us get to sit back and say...good thing I didn't touch this event!

Larry

Hi Larry:

Yes it was Hal's tournament and he gets to take the merde. I'm just a bit concerned about him being buried in it.

Currently the CFC is escaping relatively clean and my experience with Canadian chess over the past years is that there are a lot of people who love scapegoats since it allows systemic problems to be ignored.

Steve

[Jean Hébert]

Re: A better organizer

... in your initial posts, and several since, you seemed to be focusing on Hal Bond. Certainly he deserves to catch the merde as Larry puts it but the point that bothered me (and Kerry and a few others) was that the problem lies more with the CFC that decided that whatever Hal was going to do was "good enough".

What is it with Hal that he seems to have that many "friends" on this message board willing to transfer the blame to a faceless organisation, but so few in real life willing to give him a hand to put on a decent canadian championship ?

Should the CFC write a contract with the organizer telling him in the smallest details what he could and should do ? Does a competent organizer need anybody to tell him to set up chairs and a few demo boards, put players names on the tables, send an e-mail to the local newspaper, put a few signs around the place saying "Canadian Closed and Zonal", and input the 14-15 games daily for the players and the public on internet ? These are not the standards that the CFC should impose on future Closed. These are the "subminimal standards", those that should go without saying.

Come on. We are not even talking about "first class" here, we are just talking about basic stuff needed for respectability.

[Steve Douglas]

Re: A better organizer

What is it with Hal that he seems to have that many "friends" on this message board willing to transfer the blame to a faceless organisation, but so few in real life willing to give him a hand to put on a decent canadian championship ?

Once again you choose to focus on personalities (now including me for some reason) instead of issues. With respect to your rather insulting question, I can only respond that you have no *&^%ing idea what you are talking about.

I had thought there was the possibility for dialogue here.

Steve

[Jean Hébert]

Re: A better organizer

Once again you choose to focus on personalities (now including me for some reason) instead of issues.

Steve,
Your reaction really surprises me. When I write: "Should the CFC write a contract with the organizer telling him in the smallest details what he could and should do... ?", isn't it about the issue of who is to blame and why, isn't it about what should have been done and wasn't ? Isn't this at the centre of your plea to "save" the organizer and put the blame elsewhere, preferably in a no man's land ? :)
How can one stick to the "issues" more than this ? It seems to me that you have simply run out of decent arguments.

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: A better organizer

Hi Jean:

If the CFC wants certain conditions met for the Closed in future, yes it probably will have to incorporate them into the contract - otherwise you are just relying on the good judgment of the organizer, who may come up short of general expectations and decide to cut corners to save $$.

Bob

[Paul Bonham]

Re: A better organizer

What is it with Hal that he seems to have that many "friends" on this message board willing to transfer the blame to a faceless organisation, but so few in real life willing to give him a hand to put on a decent canadian championship ?

Should the CFC write a contract with the organizer telling him in the smallest details what he could and should do ? Does a competent organizer need anybody to tell him to set up chairs and a few demo boards, put players names on the tables, send an e-mail to the local newspaper, put a few signs around the place saying "Canadian Closed and Zonal", and input the 14-15 games daily for the players and the public on internet ? These are not the standards that the CFC should impose on future Closed. These are the "subminimal standards", those that should go without saying.

Come on. We are not even talking about "first class" here, we are just talking about basic stuff needed for respectability.

You'd have a much better argument, Jean, if you had offered to help Hal yourself with much of these tasks. If you went to him, and he said "People quit on me at the last minute", and you replied, "How can I help?".

How much effort does putting players names on tables take? Making up some signs? Sending an email to the paper? Or inputing a few games?

Oh, I'm sorry, these tasks might have interrupted your daily swim in your indoor heated pool that helped you prepare for your games, and thus, they might have caused you to miss out on the top prize.

This is what socialism does to people, folks. They can only do one thing, don't ask them to do a job that isn't theirs. Even if it might help out a "friend".

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Canadian Closed - Sponsors, Standards et al

Unbelievable. When you think that you have seen the biggest idiot of all, someone comes up and becomes the new undisputed champ with incredible ease. What's the use Paul ? You can't even read...

Wow, I'm on a first-name basis with Jean Hebert!

The only thing that beats that is being called the biggest idiot by someone who has spent the great majority of his life moving little pieces around on a checkered board. Fabulous! Now if I can just get a professional golfer to call me an idiot...

When a debater can't put forth any logical arguments but instead just reverts to name-calling, that's the same as saying "I resign". Too bad. I would have liked to see Jean's attempt at explaining, without using the word "money", why he didn't return his Closed entry fee and withdraw on the second day, once he realized the tournament was below his standards. Now THAT might have been an action to admire, rather than the self-serving, cowardly way he went about it. But even with that, I would not expect such narrow-minded criticism of Hal Bond, but a wider criticism and maybe an investigation as to the root of the problem. For someone who is apparently so talented at analyzing the interplay of pieces on a board, Mr. Hebert (can I call him Jean now?) shows utter lack of understanding of the interplay of people and forces in real life.

[Carl Bilodeau]

Re: Canadian Closed - Sponsors, Standards et al

Wow, I'm on a first-name basis with Jean Hebert!

The only thing that beats that is being called the biggest idiot by someone who has spent the great majority of his life moving little pieces around on a checkered board. Fabulous! Now if I can just get a professional golfer to call me an idiot...

When a debater can't put forth any logical arguments but instead just reverts to name-calling, that's the same as saying "I resign". Too bad. I would have liked to see Jean's attempt at explaining, without using the word "money", why he didn't return his Closed entry fee and withdraw on the second day, once he realized the tournament was below his standards. Now THAT might have been an action to admire, rather than the self-serving, cowardly way he went about it. But even with that, I would not expect such narrow-minded criticism of Hal Bond, but a wider criticism and maybe an investigation as to the root of the problem. For someone who is apparently so talented at analyzing the interplay of pieces on a board, Mr. Hebert (can I call him Jean now?) shows utter lack of understanding of the interplay of people and forces in real life.

You're jealous of Jean. Your are not the first one I see. You try to reduce chess to golf, and the art of chess by IM and GM to pushing pieces.

You know sometimes it is good to read a different opinion but now I feel it is not interesting to read when you lose control.

Maybe you could tell us why you want to promote bad organizers instead of good ones?

[Carl Bilodeau]

Re: A better organizer

You'd have a much better argument, Jean, if you had offered to help Hal yourself with much of these tasks. If you went to him, and he said "People quit on me at the last minute", and you replied, "How can I help?".

How much effort does putting players names on tables take? Making up some signs? Sending an email to the paper? Or inputing a few games?

Oh, I'm sorry, these tasks might have interrupted your daily swim in your indoor heated pool that helped you prepare for your games, and thus, they might have caused you to miss out on the top prize.

This is what socialism does to people, folks. They can only do one thing, don't ask them to do a job that isn't theirs. Even if it might help out a "friend".

Socialims in my mind is associated to "Non profesionnal", "Amateur", "Unefficient", "Incompetent no mather how much money you put into it".

But here the organizer was not competent base on what we can see and the players were competent.

Jean was professionnal and won the tournament. He did the job that has to be done before the tournament to be well prepare. The organizer here receive players that work hard and who are used to hard work and good preparation. Seems like there was only one in the room not prepare!!!

The amateur organizer should make tournaments for amateurs and there will be no complaints. That's it.

Carl

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Canadian Closed - Sponsors, Standards et al

You're jealous of Jean. Your are not the first one I see. You try to reduce chess to golf, and the art of chess by IM and GM to pushing pieces.

You know sometimes it is good to read a different opinion but now I feel it is not interesting to read when you lose control.

Maybe you could tell us why you want to promote bad organizers instead of good ones?

"... reduce chess to golf..."

ROFLMAO