Hebert vs. Bond

[Paul Bonham]

We need a new thread for this Hebert vs. Bond business. And since I seem to be the one with the most to say on it even though I'm looking down at Canadian chess from 30,000 feet, I might as well try and bring it to closure.

Here is a post made by Steve Douglas to Mr. Hebert, and Jean's rather pedantic replies; I changed the order of them to better make my points after each of Jean's replies

>>>
Originally Posted by Steve Douglas:
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.

Reply from Jean Hebert:
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. <<<

And we've all learned from Mr. Hebert how that criticism should be levelled: first, take the money the organizer worked hard to get for you. Spend it freely as you remove all thoughts of the impoverished conditions from your mind so you can focus on winning even more money. Once you've won, take the prize money with a thank you very much and a nice big smile. Not a word of criticism even yet. Then travel back home, hundreds of miles away, deposit your winnings, and then finally, get on a public forum and criticize away, where you don't have to look the person in the eye that you are criticizing. Then act surprised when the person you are criticising in this manner doesn't bow down and beg forgiveness.

Mr. Hebert could obviously use some time away from studying how pieces interact on the chessboard so that he might learn how real people interact in the real world. If Mr. Hebert is an example of what Quebec's chess-playing children are going to grow up to be, let's hope most of them ditch the game for more constructive pursuits.

>>>
Originally Posted by Steve Douglas
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.

Reply from Jean Hebert:
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. <<<

Don't forget, he also handed you your cheque, which you kept and spent in your pursuit of prize money. Oh, but that doesn't make you look very altruistic yourself, does it, Mr. Hebert?

Steve, if Jean really felt nothing at all would be preferable to a no-frills Closed, he would have returned his entry fee and expense money by the second day of the tournament and left for home. Instead, he took the cowardly, selfish route, and I'm calling him out on it. He doesn't react too well to criticism either, though, as his initial reaction was to ask me not to comment at all.

>>>
Originally Posted by Steve Douglas
Criticise the tournament all you want. But think twice about where you place the blame.

Reply from Jean Hebert:
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 ? <<<

Uhhh... can you say "SPONSORS"?

And when a very successful tournament is held in Quebec, who is praised for it? Not very likely is it the millions of Quebecers whose tax dollars, without their express consent, pay Mr. Hebert's entry and expenses so he could have restaurant meals, a nice workout and a swim before his games, even though 98% of those taxpayers couldn't give a cow turd for chess! It's a great life when you get it on the backs of the working class.

Can you follow THAT line of thinking, Mr. Altruism? Or do we have to spoonfeed YOU everything?

>>>
Originally Posted by Steve Douglas
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.

Reply From Jean Hebert:
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. <<<

We're all in admiration, Jean, of how you took responsibility for criticizing this tournament "before, during, and after the event".

So if the main organizer goes to 1,000 sponsors and begs and pleads for their support, and they all turn him or her down, saying "Who do you think we are, the Quebec government? We have to make a buck, and in chess, there are no bucks to be made in today's economy!"...

...we are supposed to criticize the organizer? This just goes to show you, folks, what happens to the brain when it is turned to mush by government handouts. Oh well, at least he can still play chess! Hooray! Or as the puppy dog Carl would say, "Bravo!"

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

Reply from Jean Hebert:
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. <<<

Jean, you have inspired me to keep up my criticism of your deplorable actions! Even if no one else will except for Steve Douglas, because you're the "hero of the day".

Hey Larry Bevand, you wrote on another thread that Hal has to take the "merde". Why don't you stand up for him then? Do you agree that he is solely responsible, or do you think Jean and others deserve some blame for not offering to help? Do you agree with the way Jean played the tournament anyway and then criticizes Hal Bond once he's safely back home with prize money in the bank?

I can only think that the Quebecers are trying to chase out the good, devoted people from outside Quebec and grab all the prestigious tournaments for themselves. Well, they should keep this in mind: economic conditions might deteriorate further. The Quebec government giveth.... and the Quebec government may taketh away.

>>>
Originally Posted by Steve Douglas
So, next year, when no Hal Bond's choose to step up to the plate, will you be happy?

Reply from Jean Hebert:
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... <<<

If it was done before outside Quebec, it was in much better economic times. As for even today, Quebec can certainly hold one, because the government (taxpayers) pays for it all.


IN CONCLUSION:

Hal Bond should never lift a finger again for chess in Canada. All the people who have benefited from Hal's efforts but who haven't come out against Jean's actions can suffer with the consequences. It isn't enough to offer congrats to Hal Bond for trying. Mr. Hebert is chasing Hal out of chess organizing, under the guise of "positive criticism" to make Hal "want to get better". Hal already responded that Mr. Hebert's rant won't make him a better organizer. Even for the world's best organizer, if no one sponsors and if people you are counting on to help walk out on you at the last moment, you just do the best you can. The show must go on. If Jean Hebert really thinks the show shouldn't go on under those circumstances, he should have withdrawn as soon as he knew the conditions and returned all monies received. But no, he'd rather take the money and run, then sit at home and be an armchair quarterback, now even questioning Hal's altruism (like the kettle calling the pot black). I think "asshole" in it's pejorative sense is a mild word to describe Mr. Hebert. Thank goodness it's not MY taxes he's at least partially living off of.

Also thank goodness that none of us have to work under Mr. Hebert. Can you imagine, you do your very best, something beyond your control doesn't work out, he offers no help whatsoever, and YOU foot all the blame?

Mr. Hebert's foolish rants have probably got all organizers in Canada, at least outside Quebec, wondering if any of their efforts are worth it. Maybe they should all just quit, then Mr. Hebert can attempt to fill their shoes outside of Quebec and find out what real life is all about.

[Zeljko Kitich]

Re: Hebert vs. Bond

ho hum, what's new Canadian chess players acting less than maturely and taking things out on one of the few organizers we have in Canada

one day organized chess will be on par with rock, papers and scissors tournaments and then all the tournament chess players will be happy because there won't be any

personally who cares, he won the closed so congratulations for the good chess, otherwise whatever - this type of behaviour might be tolerated by a player of the stature of Bobby Fischer but Jean Hebert is no Bobby Fischer and even with Fischer it grew tiresome

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Hebert vs. Bond

Mr. Hebert's foolish rants have probably got all organizers in Canada, at least outside Quebec, wondering if any of their efforts are worth it. Maybe they should all just quit, then Mr. Hebert can attempt to fill their shoes outside of Quebec and find out what real life is all about.

I have been to a few Hal Bond tournaments. They have always been well run. I have enjoyed playing in them and I have always tried to thank him and Patrick McDonald (who was usually in the back room running the Monroi and the pairing software) for their organizing and directing efforts.

From my own perspective it seems to me that Hal bailed out the CFC and as they say, "No good deed goes unpunished."

Once upon a time, the Canadian Closed was held in Windsor. It was a round robin tournament with 16 participants. The participants paid $100. $85 of that was returned to the players as a daily stipend for food ($5 per day). Accommodations at the university were provided for free as part of the fee. Presumably there was a reasonable prize fund.

The writeup in the CFC bulletin slagged the organizers, slagged the accommodations as not being good enough, the playing venue (the University of Windsor) as not being good enough, the times of the rounds were deemed offensive (at night when the volunteers who manned the demo boards got off work) and so on and on and on. It left a bad taste in the mouth of the organizers and sponsors and volunteers. Nothing like it was attempted again.

I missed the whole thing as it occurred just before the end of one of my decade or longer absences from chess.

Oh well. It doesn't look like I missed much.

[Carl Bilodeau]

Re: Hebert vs. Bond

We need a new thread for this Hebert vs. Bond business.

.....

Can you follow THAT line of thinking, Mr. Altruism?

.....

.... Oh well, at least he can still play chess! Hooray! ....

..... because you're the "hero of the day".

...... I think "asshole" in it's pejorative sense is a mild word to describe.....

I think you forget to talk about the effect on the community for doing such a poor quality event for the top Championship in Canada. Who will keep encouraging their kids on chess when we see how elite players are treated during the Championships and after?.

Dictators uses all kind of strategy to shut information and discourage journalism. Your strategy here is similar. This is why a web magazine is required since it can not be shut by people like you.

If I had not been informed by HPE I would probably have gone to one of HAL tournaments in the future. Now I am informed and for sure I won't go. This is capitalism in my view and not socialism. I think this is fair for MY private money.

But when I will see a nice story about an organizer, I go. HPE described very nice tournaments in Montreal, Jonquiere, Sherbrooke, Terrebonne, Montmagny and Ottawa in 2009 (with no government money) and for sure many people will go next year. Personnaly I have a very good opinion on theses organizers even if I don't know them all. This is very good for me. Normally the worst tournaments reports in HPE are the ones done by the FQE and paid by government so I don't feel Jean is so much in favor of government money for tournaments.

Think about it a bit. If I am not informed I will get pissed off by poor tournaments never knowing which ones to pick. I had this experience in the WYCC in Quebec city done by FQE in 2008 and I was very deeply unsatisfied.

With information each of us know where to go and should continue to love Chess Events. This way bad organizers will have to improve to get more players and they will copy the organizers they read about in HPE or other media. This competition between events and organizers is pure capitalism.

What you suggest is dictatorship and media control. I request the right to know and listen.

Thank you Jean for keeping me informed.

Carl

[Zeljko Kitich]

Re: Hebert vs. Bond

I think you forget to talk about the effect on the community for doing such a poor quality event for the top Championship in Canada. Who will keep encouraging their kids on chess when we see how elite players are treated during the Championships and after?.

Dictators uses all kind of strategy to shut information and discourage journalism. Your strategy here is similar. This is why a web magazine is required since it can not be shut by people like you.

If I had not been informed by HPE I would probably have gone to one of HAL tournaments in the future. Now I am informed and for sure I won't go. This is capitalism in my view and not socialism. I think this is fair for MY private money.

But when I will see a nice story about an organizer, I go. HPE described very nice tournaments in Montreal, Jonquiere, Sherbrooke, Terrebonne, Montmagny and Ottawa in 2009 (with no government money) and for sure many people will go next year. Personnaly I have a very good opinion on theses organizers even if I don't know them all. This is very good for me. Normally the worst tournaments reports in HPE are the ones done by the FQE and paid by government so I don't feel Jean is so much in favor of government money for tournaments.

Think about it a bit. If I am not informed I will get pissed off by poor tournaments never knowing which ones to pick. I had this experience in the WYCC in Quebec city done by FQE in 2008 and I was very deeply unsatisfied.

With information each of us know where to go and should continue to love Chess Events. This way bad organizers will have to improve to get more players and they will copy the organizers they read about in HPE or other media. This competition between events and organizers is pure capitalism.

What you suggest is dictatorship and media control. I request the right to know and listen.

Thank you Jean for keeping me informed.

Carl

There is a difference between rational criticism and irrational attacks. There is a difference between information and misinformation. Pointing out the difference is not 'media control' or 'dictatorship', it is someone's right to point out the truth.

Of course you are right, your money is your money, but good organizers like Hal are not beggars on the street pestering you for your almighty dollar, no one has the right to irrationally attack someone else just because you are going to spend a dollar there. Try it next time, go to a restaurant and criticize everything and everyone in the place because hey it is your money. I heard a guy at a gas bar the other day sceaming at the owner because the gas prices are too high in his opinion, I guess he would be your hero.

Funny you should mention kids, when I ran a chess program at the YMCA in Hamilton for 3 years the great benefit to the kids was going to Hal Bond's junior tournaments in Burlington, they enjoyed themselves immensley and did quite well. Our program would have not been as good except for this great opportunity provided by Hal not only in Burlington but also Guelph & Kitchener. I've seen plenty of children & adults having a great time at Hal's tournaments as well. So far there have been no reported cases of any children leaving chess because of the 'Jean Hebert effect'. There is no one that knows more about encouaging children's chess and adult chess than Hal Bond and Patrick MacDonald.

[Carl Bilodeau]

Re: Hebert vs. Bond

There is a difference between rational criticism and irrational attacks. There is a difference between information and misinformation. Pointing out the difference is not 'media control' or 'dictatorship', it is someone's right to point out the truth.

You don't agree with this journalist opinion. Me I do. So this is pure journalim and for sure he won't get 100&#37; of people agreeing.

Of course you are right, your money is your money, but good organizers like Hal are not beggars on the street pestering you for your almighty dollar, no one has the right to irrationally attack someone else just because you are going to spend a dollar there. Try it next time, go to a restaurant and criticize everything and everyone in the place because hey it is your money. I heard a guy at a gas bar the other day sceaming at the owner because the gas prices are too high in his opinion, I guess he would be your hero.

No this gas bar guy would not be my hero stop doing this. I don't think screaming in a restaurant is a good thing neither. But I read my newspapers ans critics about restaurants and I make my choices.

Funny you should mention kids, when I ran a chess program at the YMCA in Hamilton for 3 years the great benefit to the kids was going to Hal Bond's junior tournaments in Burlington, they enjoyed themselves immensley and did quite well. Our program would have not been as good except for this great opportunity provided by Hal not only in Burlington but also Guelph & Kitchener. I've seen plenty of children & adults having a great time at Hal's tournaments as well. So far there have been no reported cases of any children leaving chess because of the 'Jean Hebert effect'. There is no one that knows more about encouaging children's chess and adult chess than Hal Bond and Patrick MacDonald.

You think this guy did a good job somewhere else and you have the right to write it down. It is your right and a good thing to do. Congratulation to Hal for these events.

On my side even if you say Hal did a good job somewhere else, based on what he did on the Canada Championship I have to put him in an Organizer category I have seen here in Quebec too much. They do an event where there is 40 players who appreciate the job but this hide the fact that 120 players quit over the years without talking or yieling because of lack of glamour, lack of information, immaturity, absence of promotion, poor conditions, etc. In this category I have also chess teachers who don't even know how to write (illiterate) and their french vocabulary level is so bad your kid will have difficulty having a job one day if he starts talking like the teacher who spend hours with him, even more parents then quit.

Without informations like the one we get in HPE, we would see more and more parents investing in chess and quitting after only 2 years when they discover by themself the surprising lack of profesionnalism all over. We parents are in touch for our kids with the professional Tennis federation, Karate, Swimming, Hockey and we compare.

This is my opinion. Now go ahead, discredit me to discredit my message like Paul do for Jean.

Carl

[Zeljko Kitich]

Re: Hebert vs. Bond

I have no concern to 'discredit' you. You are comparing Hal to some unnamed organizer in Quebec? I don't know this organizer in Quebec and his or her tournaments but I do know Hal Bond and his tournaments.

If you have problems with your Quebec organizers I'm sorry to hear it.

Your rant about this Quebec organizer's 'They do an event where there is 40 players who appreciate the job but this hide the fact that 120 players quit over the years without talking or yieling because of lack of glamour, lack of information, immaturity, absence of promotion, poor conditinos, etc.'

Obviously you have a lot of problems in Quebec chess in your opinion, I hope those problems get resolved before more of your players quit. Best of luck with that. Although I would be curious to know what you mean by glamour, I'm not aware of many players that demand glamour in chess.

Children should be allowed to get involved in whichever activity they want to do because they enjoy it. They can participate in multiple activies, so a parent having a child switch from chess to hockey or soccer or tennis or golf based on the fact that their child could potentially make more money in the long term should at least have asked their child what they want to do.

I have played in Hal's tournaments and keep seeing the same players coming back year after year as well as new players

[Carl Bilodeau]

Re: Hebert vs. Bond

I have no concern to 'discredit' you. You are comparing Hal to some unnamed organizer in Quebec? I don't know this organizer in Quebec and his or her tournaments but I do know Hal Bond and his tournaments.

If you have problems with your Quebec organizers I'm sorry to hear it.

Your rant about this Quebec organizer's 'They do an event where there is 40 players who appreciate the job but this hide the fact that 120 players quit over the years without talking or yieling because of lack of glamour, lack of information, immaturity, absence of promotion, poor conditinos, etc.'

Obviously you have a lot of problems in Quebec chess in your opinion, I hope those problems get resolved before more of your players quit. Best of luck with that. Although I would be curious to know what you mean by glamour, I'm not aware of many players that demand glamour in chess.

Children should be allowed to get involved in whichever activity they want to do because they enjoy it. They can participate in multiple activies, so a parent having a child switch from chess to hockey or soccer or tennis or golf based on the fact that their child could potentially make more money in the long term should at least have asked their child what they want to do.

I have played in Hal's tournaments and keep seeing the same players coming back year after year as well as new players

Ok so if Jean had not talk about the problem then next year you would say to someone yho complaint in another tournament of poor quality: Last year Hal did the Canada Championship which is the top of Canada at chess and nobody complained and many returned so Hal is in the category of top organizers.

It does'nt make sense because it would make me continue to persuade my kids to continue Chess thinking at the high level there is professionnalism. This is not honest to hide such informations. We must have information to take the right decisions.

Carl

[Felix Dumont]

Re : Hebert vs. Bond

They do an event where there is 40 players who appreciate the job but this hide the fact that 120 players quit over the years without talking or yieling because of lack of glamour, lack of information, immaturity, absence of promotion, poor conditions, etc.

Mmm...

Do you talk about the organizer of the COM (where about 300 players play every year and come again), who you insulted last week?

:D

Or maybe is this the organizer of the ''tournois du mercredi'', where 60 players come every week? This tournament is so popular that he needs to refuse some players because there is only 60 places. There is more than 100 active players there, and I never heard any complaints about this tournament...


Zeljko Kitich, don't take what he says seriously, just do like us, in Quebec, and laugh at what he writes :)

[Carl Bilodeau]

Re: Re : Hebert vs. Bond

Mmm...

Do you talk about the organizer of the COM (where about 300 players play every year and come again), who you insulted last week?

:D

Or maybe is this the organizer of the ''tournois du mercredi'', where 60 players come every week? This tournament is so popular that he needs to refuse some players because there is only 60 places. There is more than 100 active players there, and I never heard any complaints about this tournament...


Zeljko Kitich, don't take what he says seriously, just do like us, in Quebec, and laugh at what he writes :)

The first organizer you talk about chose to have a referee called Cowboy Galactic and that dress like a cowboy. My critics are about this decision and I was not the only one in the thread. Galactic Cowboy came on the thread and said that is mission was also to make people laught!!! Read your comment again, you make me look like if I was against the COM which is false.

The second organizer your refer to, is or was the boyfriend of your mother and is paid by FQE from a special subvention to do this tournament that cost only 15$ per player. The only suggestion I have for this is not for the tournament but for the subvention. Now that this chess club work well for these 60 persons, lets put a publicity on the FQE website to have volunteers to take the lead and let our FQE employee paid from our taxes start other nice projects and clubs. I said in the past this tournament was a real success. I think this is a very good positive suggestion. You are changing my messages.

For a teenager I understand that you want to change my comments to make me look bad to protect your family friend or mother's boyfriend job with my taxes. I want more success for him so you should stop to do this all the time. Your mother is now newly elected at the FQE, I don't see how he could loose his job.

Carl

[Zeljko Kitich]

Re: Re : Hebert vs. Bond

Mmm...

Do you talk about the organizer of the COM (where about 300 players play every year and come again), who you insulted last week?

:D

Or maybe is this the organizer of the ''tournois du mercredi'', where 60 players come every week? This tournament is so popular that he needs to refuse some players because there is only 60 places. There is more than 100 active players there, and I never heard any complaints about this tournament...


Zeljko Kitich, don't take what he says seriously, just do like us, in Quebec, and laugh at what he writes :)

Felix, this is a guy in Quebec who is writing that you have really bad organizers causing 120 or more players to quit the chess scene in Quebec. I'm glad you find it a laughing matter, myself as a chess player I care about chess. Now I see why Jean Hebert is ultra-sensitive that this not happen outside of Quebec. I agree, let's not have the apparent Quebec disease of terrible organizers that result in comments like----

'They do an event where there is 40 players who appreciate the job but this hide the fact that 120 players quit over the years without talking or yieling because of lack of glamour, lack of information, immaturity, absence of promotion, poor conditinos, etc.'

As you point out I'm not in Quebec so I have to take Carl's word for it. As far as I know he has not played in Ontario so he must be refering to Quebec organizers.

If he's wrong I'm very glad. Is he wrong Felix? Well according to him you have a bias in saying so.

As for this 'glamour' that is wanted, can anyone tell me what they have in Quebec that adds all this glamour? Models dressed in check board paterns dresses giving out the top trophies as in the Tour de France? Champagne for the winner? Please I like glamour, how do we get more glamour into chess, I'd like to know.

[Gary Gladstone]

Re: Hebert vs. Bond

I do not wish to comment on the specifics of this discussion.

What I do wish to comment on is the fantastic effort that Hal Bond has put into chess, for at least, the last 6 years that my son has been involved.

I thank each and every organizer who takes the time and effort to put on a tournament so that my son, and countless others, can advance in OTB chess, have a great time and meet many people.

Some tournament organizers run good tournaments, some run great tournaments and others not so great.

I view Hal Bond (as well as Patrick McDonald) as running Super Tournaments. Although Kitchener and Guelph are about an hour from our place, and a bit of a pain to co-ordinate, my son insists on attending all of their tournaments because of how well they are run.

Any time there has been an issue with one of their tournaments, few and far between, when it is brought to Hal (or Patrick's) attention, it is fixed immediately. What more could one ask.

Thank you to all of the TD's who organize tournaments, and in this particular case, thank you to Hal Bond IA, FIDE Rep and Past CFC President for his tremendous efforts.

Gary Gladstone
CFC Governor

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Hebert vs. Bond

I do not wish to comment on the specifics of this discussion.

What I do wish to comment on is the fantastic effort that Hal Bond has put into chess, for at least, the last 6 years that my son has been involved.

I thank each and every organizer who takes the time and effort to put on a tournament so that my son, and countless others, can advance in OTB chess, have a great time and meet many people.

Some tournament organizers run good tournaments, some run great tournaments and others not so great.

I view Hal Bond (as well as Patrick McDonald) as running Super Tournaments. Although Kitchener and Guelph are about an hour from our place, and a bit of a pain to co-ordinate, my son insists on attending all of their tournaments because of how well they are run.

Any time there has been an issue with one of their tournaments, few and far between, when it is brought to Hal (or Patrick's) attention, it is fixed immediately. What more could one ask.

Thank you to all of the TD's who organize tournaments, and in this particular case, thank you to Hal Bond IA, FIDE Rep and Past CFC President for his tremendous efforts.

Gary Gladstone
CFC Governor

Gary, it is great that we have another person saying how great Hal Bond has been for tournament chess.

However, to Jean Hebert, all these statements about past tournaments don't mean a thing. Jean is attacking Hal Bond PERSONALLY; although Jean denies this, he has in various threads accused Hal of not seeking sponsors at all, of "standing around picking his nose", and of having less than altruistic motivations for running the Closed. So far there hasn't been any proof of any of this.

Friends of Hal's need to stand up and say that what Jean is doing is wrong. Jean is preaching a religion, if you will, that says if you screw up one time, not only are you not entitled to any help whatsoever (there can be no teamwork, the players can't lose their focus even momentarily to help out putting up signs, for example), but you are totally inept and must be eliminated. Past performance doesn't matter. If Jean thinks there must be sponsors, THERE MUST BE SPONSORS!

I have no vested interest in this whatsoever. I do not know Hal Bond nor Jean Hebert personally. I do not play organized chess any longer, since 1996. I don't even live in Canada anymore.

Therefore it is a very sad day indeed when someone like myself is the only one who has the balls to criticize the Canadian Closed champion when he pulls a stunt like this. Everyone else is too busy congratulating him on his chess result, when it is this very result that Mr. Hebert uses as a catapult for his diatribe.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Hebert vs. Bond

I do not play organized chess any longer, since 1996. I don't even live in Canada anymore.

That makes you uniquely qualified to comment on the event and pick sides.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Hebert vs. Bond

That makes you uniquely qualified to comment on the event and pick sides.

And Gary, when was the last time again that YOU played an OTB event? Yet you feel free to comment on almost every thread on this board. Which is your right, of course. But attacking me and my "qualifications" rather than my position just makes YOU look bad by comparison.

And I have not commented on the event itself.

And I did not "pick sides". I saw someone doing wrong to someone else and I called him out on it. His immediate response was to ask me not to comment on his threads, which made me realize I was dealing with more arrogance than I had first thought.

By the way, despite not playing since 1996 (after 10 years of playing tournaments regularly), I have for 4 years now followed both organized chess and organized poker thoroughly, because I am highly interested in the contrast between them. Doesn't make me an expert on either, but I know enough to spot trends. Kind of like you with your stocks, n'est-ce pas?