If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
But, I'm trying to shift the focus of the discussion from recognition and listing problems and complaints to being proactive and doing something about them.
So what are you going to do about them?
Mr Nunes,
The Canadian Championship's problem is not my personal problem. I spent 20 years without playing in one of them (when I could have played in all of them) and this one in 2009 could very well have been my last, unless I can come back in 2038 to try to win titles 60 years apart! :)
Nonetheless I will always be available to share my knowledge and experience with interested parties. Doing simuls and lectures, talking to journalists when needed, meeting potential sponsors, no problem with that.
He's got a point Garvin, and its not your nor my personal problem either unless we get our rating over 2200 and have to consider playing in it. So I suggest we don't bother ourselves about it. :):)
If you're not a CFC Governor then you have a point.
If you are a governor then you are management. Governors have the ability to make changes.
Are you a CFC Governor?
He receive this ridiculous Governor title being Champion of Canada. Like a diploma it should be honorific. The Champion of each year should not be invited to take decisions on chairs, boards, etc. Let this kind of thing to organizers. We want the Champion to play chess. Come on.
The Champion of Canada should not receive this title of Gouvernor but receive an honorific Senator Title.
He receive this ridiculous Governor title being Champion of Canada. Like a diploma it should be honorific. The Champion of each year should not be invited to take decisions on chairs, boards, etc. Let this kind of thing to organizers. We want the Champion to play chess. Come on.
The Champion of Canada should not receive this title of Gouvernor but receive an honorific Senator Title.
Carl
There is a choice to accept or not accept such an appointment and the responsibility and work which go with it.
There is a choice to accept or not accept such an appointment and the responsibility and work which go with it.
I'm waiting for the reply.
He made an official announcement in a Newspaper in Canada saying he will go for GM norms. For the Canadian Champion this should be a normal course of event we can expect. We expect organizers to do their jobs and we should expect the Canadian Champion to play in important events.
This Governor thing is simply not important. Saying nothing means everything.
He will go in France in a few days so don't expect him to print name tags for a tournament in Yukon?
You have the cart before the horse I think. The sports you talk about have a visiblity factor that creates sponsorhip opportunities. ... Chess does not have that visibility factor & so needs both the CFC and the players who would benefit to improve this. ...
I think we're not far from agreement here. To improve visibility, chess does *need* the players who potentially stand to benefit from whatever improved visibility may bring. My point was that such players shouldn't be *expected* to take on uncompensated promotional or other duties when playing in a Canadian chess tournament is already a money-losing proposition for them.
... If the players don't want to [help out] then fine, but they shouldn't be surprised if the money doesn't materialize. They can lay this on the doorstep of the CFC forever if they like but it won't fix things. We can unelect CFC executive & governors, change the ED but none of that is likely going to change anything, it hasn't in the past 30 years, why should it now? ...
I guess we Canadian chessplayers would have to be pretty lucky to wind up with a CFC executive that was highly skilled in promoting/marketing/fundraising/etc. However, just because certain skills are lacking among the CFC executive members doesn't mean that the CFC can't work towards creating opportunities where someone who is interested can learn to be successful in these fields (keeping in mind that 'success' would be measured within the context of Canadian chess). The recent Canadian Open in Ottawa and the 1994 Canadian Closed in Hamilton, just to pick a couple of examples from our province, were both tournaments where the organizer(s) had extraordinary success in finding sponsors and putting on first-class events; a team of people was involved in Ottawa and Brian Hartman was the driving force in Hamilton. We can learn from people like this. And these are just two examples. It isn't fair to expect the CFC executives to be masters of all trades. But we can and should expect them to foster an environment in which needed skills/knowledge can be developed.
... am I going to take time to basically fund raise for someone else's benefit. Again no, I started playing chess for my enjoyment not to raise money for someone else. Sorry, I'm not that altruistic.
And that's fine. I'm the same way. There's nothing wrong with being a consumer in the chess marketplace.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
He made an official announcement in a Newspaper in Canada saying he will go for GM norms. For the Canadian Champion this should be a normal course of event we can expect. We expect organizers to do their jobs and we should expect the Canadian Champion to play in important events.
This Governor thing is simply not important. Saying nothing means everything.
He will go in France in a few days so don't expect him to print name tags for a tournament in Yukon?
Carl
What's that got to do with the price of Poutine in Quebec City? :)
Let me approach from a different perspective - I'm exactly the sort of person the chess world looks for right now. A chess lover at a relatively high level in a company that would be open to the idea of sponsoring chess to some degree.
I cannot say that Jean's remarks make me particularly motivated towards pushing this in our company; sponsors thrive on predictable ROI for their marketing dollars spent. In chess, you have highly individual and opinionated participants who cannot be counted on to ensure that ROI is realized (this individuality, it could be argued, is nearly essential for high quality of play!).
On the other hand, I fully recognize Jean's point that there should be no expectation of a "professional" level of behaviour or commentary in an event that is not run in a professional way. For example, I have no issue with anyone withdrawing from this event - they paid to play, and how they participate is their choice.
So, what you get is a classic chicken vs egg debate; the sponsors won't come because they don't believe the players will be professional, and the players won't fulfill all professional obligations unless there are sponsors.
In the end, the sponsors will find other places to invest their money if not in chess, and it won't make a micron of difference to the sponsors. It's only chess players that will suffer. But then again, there's no guarantee that even if the top players are in suit+ties and on behaviour that would satisfy the Queen of England, that any sponsors will come.
So what's the upshot? If you as a chess player believe that chess is sponsorable and has upside, you should work as an incredibly positive force publicly and hope for the best. If you believe that chess is a fringe game with little mass market potential (or that organizers are incapable of obtaining sponsorship no matter what you do), hell, you might as well just speak your mind.
First of all, David, EXCELLENT post! Absolutely, positively excellent.
You and I don't know each other (just making that clear to readers), and if you followed my rather ascerbic exchanges with Jean Hebert on other threads related to this one, maybe you think I'm a little over-emotional as some others probably do. But my emotion in those exchanges was motivated by the apparent need for Mr. Hebert to get a rude awakening.
Thank you for writing that "If you as a chess player believe that chess is sponsorable and has upside, you should work as an incredibly positive force publicly and hope for the best". I hope Mr. Hebert reads this and weeps for his mistakes. Keep in mind that I don't know Mr. Hebert at all and there is nothing personal, but it seems there WAS something personal between Mr. Hebert and the Closed organizer, Hal Bond. Hebert claimed there wasn't, but I really at this point can't believe that. The result was very, very bad for chess in Canada.
David, you mention sponsors wanting some some form of ROI from chess, and then you talk about player professionalism and then later mention that even the utmost professionalism won't guarantee sponsorship. So, from a potential sponsor's point of view, can you tell us what is needed for chess to get serious sponsorship? I'm speaking of something like a North American tour of events, where there might be something like a cumulative point system to determine a yearly overall winner (maybe even a playoff system, similar to golf's current FexEx Cup playoffs).
Let me ask you right out: do you think any such thing could happen for chess as it is played currently? Or do you think there needs to be a change or changes in chess itself, to give it more mass appeal; that is, more appeal to the non-chessplayer, so that ROI would be easier to realize?
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
The 10th Montreal International that finished last night had several sponsors (private companies, no taxpayers money by the way) whose contribution totalled around 50,000$. Check out the names for yourself Mr Bonham and at least open your eyes if you cant open your mind. You too Mr Ottosen. In any case writing a post approved by Mr Bonham must be such a downer...:) The kiss of death.
Few personal notes about the Montreal International
Unfortunately - the Montreal International suffered from one of the "faults" of the Canadian Closed - no signs or directions. At least three people told me they couldn't find the place - they had the correct address - but there were no signs directing them to the room where the tournament was. Up the stairs there is a restaurant (that was not always open during rounds) and a closed (but unlocked) door next to it - but no indication that you had to go through this door and along a maze of passages and stairways to see the games. A friend asked at the restuarant (and it sounded like they had been getting used to people askeing where the site was). It would have been hopeless for anyone who had difficult walking or climbing stairs.
I enjoyed the Igor Nataf analysis (but prefer Jean Hébert in the analysis room - much more audience participation) - but again - there were no signs. If you were a spectator at the "live" games - you had no idea that Nataf was analyzing - unless you knew it in advance, and asked someone where it was.
At least twice, I suggested to Richard Bérubé to put up some signs, but there was still nothing during the last round. Last year, they had a sandwich-board type of sign on the sidewalk in front - nothing this year.
"This 10th edition of the Montreal International has been something of an embarrassment both to the local organization (ineptly lead by local organizer Andre Langlois) and to the main sponsor Empresa. One would think that going into your 10th effort (of anything!) one would be able to produce a quality event and one that the world would be interested in.
Instead, both local and international coverage of the tournament was a deception. The tournament web site, http://www.echecsmontreal.ca/, despite numerous complaints, was never fixed and remained an embarrassment to all. I mean, how much effort is required to change Cananda to Canada?
One of the most important internet news sites (http://www.chessvibes.com/) simply stopped covering the tournament after the first rounds because of difficulties getting daily information !
Shame on both Empresa and Langlois!
One would hope that for 2010 either the organizers or the sponsor part company and try to produce something that does not remind one of Mickey Mouse or back to the future!"
The Canadian Championship's problem is not my personal problem. I spent 20 years without playing in one of them (when I could have played in all of them) and this one in 2009 could very well have been my last, unless I can come back in 2038 to try to win titles 60 years apart! :)
Nonetheless I will always be available to share my knowledge and experience with interested parties. Doing simuls and lectures, talking to journalists when needed, meeting potential sponsors, no problem with that.
What you are agreeing to here (playing simuls and meeting people) is exactly what I'm talking about.
And no, it's not your personal problem, its everyone's problem who plays chess in Canada.
Tweet
Comment