2020 Canadian Open

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Hi Bob,

    I am not sure yet. Will provide more information later on

    Gary

    Comment


    • #47
      I really like Mississauga's bid

      I feel using the one section idea would help take the emphasis and the rating part of the game and have people just play,

      I like their commitment to increase the media levels of this tournament (something id imagine happening in the coming years for chess in canada i.e broadcasting said tournaments)

      the venue looks very good and accessible


      I hope Mississauga and EMC win the bid!

      Comment


      • #48
        Originally posted by Henri Hughes View Post


        I hope Mississauga and EMC win the bid!
        They have won the bid. They were the only bid. After some discussion to resolve slight ambiguities in the bid we (the CFC board of directors) accepted the bid.

        Comment


        • #49
          ahh okay lovely but what changes did you make ??

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by Henri Hughes View Post
            ahh okay lovely but what changes did you make ??
            Ahhhh yung grasshoppah .... When you can snatch the Queen from Bator Sambuev's hand ... it will be time for you to leave.
            Only the rushing is heard...
            Onward flies the bird.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by Paul Bonham View Post

              Ahhhh yung grasshoppah .... When you can snatch the Queen from Bator Sambuev's hand ... it will be time for you to leave.
              did I say something to offend you????

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Henri Hughes View Post

                did I say something to offend you????
                "Kung Fu" from 1973: the young student ("Grasshopper") attempts to snatch the pebble from his teacher's hand:

                https://www.bradford-delong.com/2017...asshopper.html

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Henri Hughes View Post
                  ahh okay lovely but what changes did you make ??
                  None to speak of. We simply clarified the ambiguities in the bid and received assurances that the rules of CYCC would be followed. We don't micromanage organizers most of the time.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    I have long believed that our National Open could have made much better use of smart pairings / sectional groupings to produce more frequent possibilities of international title norms.

                    I know I will be condemned for writing this, but if a player under 2000 rating wants to play a GM, that can be done in a simul, not in the Canadian Open. If there is only one section, too many games for everyone wound up being against opponents with ratings very dissimilar from one's own.

                    At the 2004 Canadian Open in Kapuskasing, where I served as a Deputy Arbiter, there were just under 130 players, with 14 GMs, and about another ten or so IMs and FMs. The organizers had obtained significant grant funding for their event, and were able to bring in a very impressive field. Until Ottawa 2007 (where I also had a major role, writing the original bid, and then serving on the tournament arbiters' staff), this may have been unmatched for GMs in a Canadian event.

                    At Kap 2004, accelerated pairings were used for the first four rounds (I believe), of the ten (not my call). There was one GM norm scored, that by Canadian Mark Bluvshtein, age 16, who may have completed his GM title with that achievement. But there had to be some trickery used to get Mark enough highly ranked opponents, and to avoid too many unranked opponents, and it went overboard; I believe he played 8 GMs in ten rounds! I received numerous questions about how the pairings were being done, and I deferred almost all of them to the organizers. And, of course, there were class prizes, and a lot of money for this, as per the grant funding. I thought it was a very successful event, even though today it may be better remembered for the death of one of the players, which occurred during a round, and an infamous cheating incident in the last round. A remote geographical location, large grant funding, one section, and some (overly) imaginative pairings, all combined for a very good Open!

                    :) Frank Dixon, NTD, Kingston

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Frank Dixon View Post
                      ...

                      At Kap 2004, accelerated pairings were used for the first four rounds (I believe), of the ten (not my call). There was one GM norm scored, that by Canadian Mark Bluvshtein, age 16, who may have completed his GM title with that achievement. But there had to be some trickery used to get Mark enough highly ranked opponents, and to avoid too many unranked opponents, and it went overboard; I believe he played 8 GMs in ten rounds! I received numerous questions about how the pairings were being done, and I deferred almost all of them to the organizers. ...
                      The 1998 Quebec Open treated Alexandre Lesiège in a similar manner. He achieved his final GM norm via allegedly "favourable" pairings to enable him to play the strongest opposition possible. The reader can judge for himself via the crosstable:

                      http://fqechecs.qc.ca/tournois/afficher.php?id=899

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X