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.
I'm sorry, I thought I banned your fake name account. If you want to post, do so with your real name. Thanks.
HAHA Nice one Christopher :)
Precy's allegation is clearly baseless.
With two rounds to go, Ron was two points behind the leaders. Why shouldn't he withdraw if he is having a bad tournament? Should an IM be forced to play a couple of Experts in the last rounds of a tournament where his chances of winning any prize money is zero?
The CYCC in Montreal was really really bad. We didn't attend CYCC since 2005 but it is shocking to me that they would allow Quebec City to be bad in any way given the current fragility of organized chess in Canada. Memory seems to be they had a lot of controversy about sections and prize eligibility.
So one has to say the premise Quebec runs better tournaments is highly questionable; certainly on the surface they seem incapable of running a good CYCC.
The CYCC in Quebec was very very bad. It was held by FQE employees mainly and paid by government. The good tournaments I have been in Quebec are normaly the private ones.
No wonder you were the first and only one who withdrew from the tournament. Top notch tournament like this,
you should not be allow to withdraw because you knew that it will take 9 straight days and you should have
planned ahead of any conflict of schedules. The main and primary reason you have withdrawn from the tournament
was that you want to protect your rating for your GM norms and to reach 2500 minimum rating for eligibily and
you know for sure that you will be paired with lower rated players that a loss or draw with them will
greatly affect your current rating. You have been notorious for doing this strategy of withdrawing early
in tournaments if you perform bad in the early round. Check your Canadian tournament history if my allegation
prove me wrong!
I'm sorry, I thought I banned your fake name account. If you want to post, do so with your real name. Thanks.
Now if only I could win winning positions when I get them ... :)
Ron,
No wonder you were the first and only one who withdrew from the tournament. Top notch tournament like this,
you should not be allow to withdraw because you knew that it will take 9 straight days and you should have
planned ahead of any conflict of schedules. The main and primary reason you have withdrawn from the tournament
was that you want to protect your rating for your GM norms and to reach 2500 minimum rating for eligibily and
you know for sure that you will be paired with lower rated players that a loss or draw with them will
greatly affect your current rating. You have been notorious for doing this strategy of withdrawing early
in tournaments if you perform bad in the early round. Check your Canadian tournament history if my allegation
prove me wrong!
There should be demo boards - at least for board one. And some spectator chairs for the games with demo boards. Not everyone wants to stand for hours. Some like to take a break and sit for a while rather than walk around to all games all the time. Some are more elderly and wish to sit for a while to watch a game.
Putting up demo boards will not draw spectators. Advertising draws spectators. There were only a few spectators the day I was there - and that was the last round. And there was still at that point no clear winner. Exciting stuff. But the spectators weren't there. It was a last minute bid, as we know. Could more advertising to the public have been done ?- definitely. Did the organizer have the time, $$ and volunteers - don't know. Hard to say. Hal has given some indication that it wasn't easy.
And demo boards demand volunteers. Players should not be expected to make the demo board moves. And there should be a volunteer per demo board. There is nothinig more frustrating to a spectator than to see moves being made on the board, and the volunteer is over at another board and no moves are being shown then on their demo board.
These seem like reasonable bid conditions to impose.
You mean Jean said put up demo boards for no reason? That if you did there could easily be no spectators?
Where were the spectators that came by and said there are no demo boards, I'm going home? Set aside space in the playing hall and chairs, pack the players in closer together, have someone go from board to board updating the moves on the demo boards or ask the players themselves to do this?- all for what one person who might spectate?
Thanks for the logic lesson professor but some of us can think for ourselves & do it every day.
Pedantic logic is the last refuge of those that want to get away from the plain meaning of what they say when what they are saying is found to be wanting common sense.
Oh my, Zelko, are you serious??? So you're just like the other overly-emotional posters who picks a side and defends it with whatever garbage they can muster, even though your defence is unwarranted. I thought you were more intelligent than that, but apparently you not only missed the point of my post, you miss the point of the entire discussion. But hey, at least you picked a side and you're playing the game!!!
I'm not going to spend precious minutes of my life re-explaining everything to you, because my post did not address you. I will simply add you to a list of now two people who are apparently more emotional than intelligent, therefore do not get the benefit of a response from me.
Congrats Zelko... go sit quietly in the corner with Sheldon until you two can learn to play nice, and then you can join the rest of us.
I'm not sure if you understand what Modus Tollens means. It is used very commonly in classical logic: If A then B; Not B therefore Not A.
Jean didn't say that if you put up demo boards then there would be spectators. He said there were no demo boards, therefore there could not be any spectators.
Do you understand the difference?
Jordan
You mean Jean said put up demo boards for no reason? That if you did there could easily be no spectators?
Where were the spectators that came by and said there are no demo boards, I'm going home? Set aside space in the playing hall and chairs, pack the players in closer together, have someone go from board to board updating the moves on the demo boards or ask the players themselves to do this?- all for what one person who might spectate?
Thanks for the logic lesson professor but some of us can think for ourselves & do it every day.
Pedantic logic is the last refuge of those that want to get away from the plain meaning of what they say when what they are saying is found to be wanting common sense.
Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Sunday, 30th August, 2009, 08:06 AM.
So if you have demo boards, you will "thus" have spectators?
Paul,
That's not what Jean said.
I'm not sure if you understand what Modus Tollens means. It is used very commonly in classical logic: If A then B; Not B therefore Not A.
Jean didn't say that if you put up demo boards then there would be spectators. He said there were no demo boards, therefore there could not be any spectators.
Do you understand the difference?
Jordan
Last edited by Jordan S. Berson; Sunday, 30th August, 2009, 02:58 AM.
Reason: Added hyperlink
A bare bone event with tables, sets and clocks... with no media coverage, no demo boards and thus no spectators, no signs or posters anywhere, no money but high entry fees, no internet presence to speak of, no games available after each round, no tables of results, no one taking pictures, no press releases or even a report to famous chess websites such as Chessbase.com, etc., etc., a "top notch" tournament ?? I am scared of what you would call a "bad" tournament! :)
So if you have demo boards, you will "thus" have spectators?
Sure it would have been nice to have some sponsors but the tournament was well run. Hal is one of the few organizers who consistently organizes top notch tournaments year in and year out.
A bare bone event with tables, sets and clocks... with no media coverage, no demo boards and thus no spectators, no signs or posters anywhere, no money but high entry fees, no internet presence to speak of, no games available after each round, no tables of results, no one taking pictures, no press releases or even a report to famous chess websites such as Chessbase.com, etc., etc., a "top notch" tournament ?? I am scared of what you would call a "bad" tournament! :)
The CYCC in Montreal was really really bad. We didn't attend CYCC since 2005 but it is shocking to me that they would allow Quebec City to be bad in any way given the current fragility of organized chess in Canada. Memory seems to be they had a lot of controversy about sections and prize eligibility.
So one has to say the premise Quebec runs better tournaments is highly questionable; certainly on the surface they seem incapable of running a good CYCC.
I am in complete agreement with Victor. I think Hal organized a very good tournament in a short period of time. Sure it would have been nice to have some sponsors but the tournament was well run. Hal is one of the few organizers who consistently organizes top notch tournaments year in and year out. If you want to make money then chess is the wrong place to look for it. As for organizing pleasant well run tournaments Hal is a class act. Now if only I could win winning positions when I get them ... :)
Almost 2 weeks from the finish of Canadian Closed. Enough time to get into some conclusions about this tournament.
1. First of all I want to thank Hal Bond for organizing this event. I believe
we, chessplayers, had all necessary things to make it successful: very strong field, sets and clocks provided, air-condition, spacy playing hall, good lighting, sharp start of each round and last but not least nice atmosphere in tournament.
It's always could be better. Some improvements could always be done. But generally it was well-organized tournament.
2. It's good to have a sponsor. Chess organizers can dream what the can do with 20-30 thousand dollars. But since 2006 we have no sponsor. So what to do? Cancel Canadian Championships till better time? May be current conditions will stay (hopefully not) for pretty long period of time. My opinion is that tournament like this is much better than nothing.
3. Pretty funny to see the winner (Mr. Hebert) criticizing otganization of this championship so intensively and player who had just poor tournament (me) is thankful to organizer.
I look at chess as a hobby, like many others. For me chess is a very interesting, pleasant and very cheap hobby. For person like me this tournament is just great.
But how can this tournament be great for professionals ( I am talking about adults)? Even second prize hardly covers all expenses, probably even doesn't (especially if you are not from Ontario). In any case ratio profit/time is extremally low.
It's very tough to be a professional chessplayer right now (I mean player, not chess teacher). What rating is high enough for normal life? I think, at least 2650. At least, probably more. From naked financial point of view even 2700 player could earn more in other fields. OK, I know, chess is more interesting than some boring jobs. Right, it's nice to play 40, 50 games per year. But what about 200? And I personally know few GMs who play this amount each year. I don't believe they have fun.
In Canada we don't have any player above 2650, that means chess tournaments should be amateur-oriented. Everyone likes to win prize. Personally I suggest myself very competitive. But I don't play chess for money. For money you can do a lot of other things.
What is important for amateurs? Fun, rating, norm, titles, attitude, atmosphere, prizes. For professionals where are no conditions here.
Every time I play in Guelph I see a lot of players in lower-rated sections without any cash prizes. Actually they provide some profit (or at least balance) to organizers and cash prizes in open section.
4. It was a usual argue here between Quebec and other provinces (mostly Ontario). In my childhood (in 70-s) I knew nothing about Toronto and lot of information about Montreal - the biggest city in Canada, place of Olympic games 1976, place of one of the strongest chess tournaments in 1979...
Since 2004 ( year I returned to play slow chess) I played about 20 tornaments here in Canada. Two worst experiences were in Quebec:
Canadian Open 2008 in Montreal (no clocks, no opponent in 1-st round) and CYCC-2008 in Quebec-City (of course, I didn't play... my son did). May be it's just random distribution.
And last one to conclude...
5. For some reason I play very poorly in Guelph. I counted loss of more than 150 rating points altogether. (My current rating is above 2300, but it doesn't mean I am 2500 player without playing in Guelph). But I can blame only myself. Conditions are good, organizers ari friendly, opponents... the same opponents.
I just wrote my Personal notes.
Leave a comment: