[GTA] Century-Richmond Hill Open Nov 9-10 registration

[Grey Guo]

https://mrhcc.ca/century-richmond-hill-open-2019/
Date: Nov 9-10, 2019

Location: Century Private School, 11181 Yonge St, Richmond Hill, ON L4S 1L2

Sections:
Crown, U2100 (FIDE/CFC rated)
U1700, U1300, Junior U900 (CFC rated)

Format:

Crown, U2100, U1700 and U1300: 5 rounds Swiss. Players must be CFC members in good standing to register.

Junior U900: Under 18 yrs old, 4 double rounds Swiss, each round include two games for same pair players switching Black and White.

Time Control:

Crown, U2100, U1700 and U1300: 90 minutes with 30 seconds incremental for each move

Junior U900: 60 minutes

Default Time:

60 minutes for first round; 30 minutes for all other rounds

Round time:

Crown, U2100, U1700 and U1300:
Nov 9, 9:30AM, 1:30PM, 6PM
Nov 10 10AM, 3:00PM

Junior U900:
Nov 9, 9:30AM, 1:30PM
Nov 10 10AM, 3:00PM

Playup:
A player can enter the higher Section if his/her rating is within 100 points than the Section floor limit. $20 play up fee applied.
To play up for Crown section: rating >= 2000
To play up for U2100 section: rating >= 1600
To play up for U1700 section: rating >= 1200
For junior to play up for U1300 section: rating >= 800

Bye:
Crown, U2100, U1700 and U1300: Up to two 1/2 points bye for round 1-4.
Junior U900: Up to one bye with point for round 1-3. As it’s double round (two games in each round), you will get 1 point for that round.

Registration fee:
Early bird, till the end of Oct 21: $80
Regular, Oct 22 – Nov 7: $100
Onsite (pairing for 2nd round) : $120
Note: the registration is integrated with Paypal, but you do not need a Paypal account to use it. Just click Paypal and pay with credit card information.

Discount:
GM/WGM/IM/WIM free entry if confirm by Oct 21 (send email info@mrhcc.ca)
FM/WFM: 50% off
Senior (65+), CCYC registered students and MRCC members: $10 off

Prize and Award (based on 120 full paid entries):
Crown Section: 1000/500/300/100
U2100: 500/300/150/70
U1700: 400/200/120/60
U1300: 300/150/100/50
Junior U900: Trophies for overall top 3 and top girl

Special award (stackable on top of prize/award)
Top 3 female players of the tournament (based on the performance rating in this tournament): 200/100/50
Mixed team award (a team with a male and a female, with highest combined points): 100
Family team award ( a team with two immediate family members, with highest combined points) : 100
Note: Teams must be registered before the start of 2nd round, each player can only join one team for one team award.

Refund policy:
Full refund before Nov 3rd with $10 processing fee to cover bank charges and other cost
No refund from Nov 4th.

Notes:
– Prize will be equally distributed for players with same score
– Maximum prize $100 for unrated players and players with CFC provisional rating (<25 games)
– Chess sets and clocks will be provided by organizer
– Maximum of 150 players

[David Ottosen]

$80 times 120 players = $9600

Total of all prizes = $5350

Seems like an excessive rake to me.

[Grey Guo]

Many players will qualify for the $10 discount or 50% off, we all count as full paid, and also if count venue/cleanup fee, insurance, arbiter, rating, the trophy also expensive, our goal is still try to balance the budget only.

This type discussion is not positive for chess community, just discouraging people from organizing opens. I would appreciate if the discussion is about where we can find lower cost venue, where we can get cheaper insurance, where we can get low cost trophy. Frankly speaking, all the organizers worked hard to lower the cost burden, if people really want to make money, organizing Open is the last choice, if they are lucky, the return could be $1/hr or something like that. I was in communication with some Vancouver chess club, and help them to promote their open in US west chess community; also tried hard to promote all Ontario opens in the chess player groups, there is no competition among chess clubs, we have to collaborate to survive.

[Bob Armstrong]

The issue of the amount made by organizers in tournaments has always been a bone of contention.....I've now played tournament chess for 50 years....I've seen these posts innumerable times.

It is clearly NOT the case that all chess organizers only "break even"......I know for a fact that Hart House Chess Club makes money for the club on both its Holidays Open, and Reading Week Open. There are other organizers who I strongly suspect, based on years of watching, also make something substantial enough to keep them doing it - they may love the game, but my guess is they might take a pass if the effort leads to absolutely no gain generally, and a loss sometimes (I'm not saying they are "raking"; I believe organizers SHOULD get a decent hourly wage for their time, effort and contribution to chess players, by their private enterprise effort.......no organizers? What will ordinary, sometimes (Often?) complaining chess players do??)

But chess players are also justified in being suspicious.....because the general organizer rule is NOT to publish a full financial showing the extent of the organizer's profit NOR the hours they spent.

Is it legitimate that organizers fear losing reputation in the chess community if they actually admitted that chess organizing is a successful private-enterprise business for them? Will chess players ALWAYS complain that the disclosed hourly rate of pay, even when very modest, is TOO much, and the registration fee is TOO high???

I think, IMHO, that the issue would much lessen in intensity, if the ordinary chess player knew:

a. the hours an organizer puts in;
b. the size of the expenses they put up front;
c. the risk of loss (Yes, we know organizers who have lost up to $ 10,000 on tournaments);
d. the resulting hourly rate paid to an organizer.

The only way this will happen is if organizers en masse adopt a protocol of full financial statements being posted in tournaments prior to the last round. Possible???

And I am quite aware this is not the rule in capitalist private enterprise......

Also I have organized a small weekend chess tournament, as well as organizing a multi-week rapid tournament series a couple of times for a chess club. Both were real eye-openers as to the amount of detail involved!

My 2 cents on this issue I've been writing on for 50 years now.

Bob A

[Grey Guo]

This tournament is organized by Markham Richmond Hill Chess Club, we are a weekly community based non-profit chess club with about 100 members, 60-80 people show up each Weds night. Hopefully if people understand the volunteer hours we already spent weekly, they should trust us. If there is any profit, it will all roll into the club, not organizer's pocket.

Thanks Bob's comments, we do understand people's concern, but based on my experience, it's very hard for organizer to make money if there is no support from sponsorship, Hart House or some others may profit through cheaper venue cost, but not fit for other scenarios. After helping a few tournaments, I really understand the challenges, and always try to educate club members to respect any organizer for their contribution.

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Grey:

Problems:

1. Some will trust you - I do; some will not: David Ottosen (Post # 2 above) - this is why full tournament financial statements should be published, even if the tournament breaks even, or loses.

2. You posted: "They should trust us." - This is the very nub of the problem - this is the protocol position of most current organizers; this is the status quo that has led to posts like David's and mine (plumping for full tournament financials being published) - it is the only way to get around chess players' lack of trust of many organizers, some they don't know, and even some they do know personally.

I won't say anything more now unless there is some future post that raises something new for me - I am for full tournament financial statements being posted by ALL chess tournament organizers - full transparency.

Bob A

[Fred Harvey]

Goodness me, what a lot of huffing and puffing! If an organizer wants to run a tournament with his/her rules, so be it. If players feel they're being ripped off, then don't go, the world will unfold as it should. Unless of course it is somehow sanctioned with rules and regulations......

[Tom O'Donnell]

Raking = poker term meaning the house cut, not "raking" as in the more generic "raking in the cash"

... (I'm not saying they are "raking" ...

Bob A

[Bob Armstrong]

Hi Fred:

Problem - since the organizer protocol at present is NO DISCLOSURE, a chess player who wishes to object by avoiding no disclosure organizers, has to give up chess tournaments.

So.......I agree.......I simply have to accept the organizers' rules to play chess, and I play often (Most are non-disclosure......and I do NOT harass the individual organizers on the issue at the time).

But this thread has raised a matter of teasing out WHY there is a post # 2 from David Ottosen.

We SHOULD discuss and debate these issues here - maybe enough organizers would change their rules that it would affect the percentage of NO DISCLOSURE tournaments. Here it does not have to get personal - it is simply a tough general chess nut about organizing in general.

Doesn't mean the current system is right, just because I have no "effective" choice but to accept........just sayin'......

Bob

[Erik Malmsten]

I think a prize fund is quite nice to compete for. Maybe guarantee the $1,000 first prize for the masters. Do class players really care about the amount? I still have my Scarborough Chess Club B-Class trophy.

I don't like prizes below the entry fee, and it is likely that 3rd and fourth place will have the same points and split the prize. It is easier to calculate if the last place price (fourth, or third and fourth combined) is divisible by six. Then if 2 or 3 people are tied it is a zero cents amount.

Always nice to have a prize donated from a sponsor, top junior prize is the chess school or pizza shop prize. But I've seen that rarely in chess, usually only when the sponsor is a chess parent. Cold selling the surrounding neighbourhood is alot of work. But it's a possibility to always be aware of.

[Gary Hua]

Sounds like a great tournament to play in.

Most likely will register and join the fun and maybe spend some time shopping in Markham ( if time allows ). Hope to win some money for the shopping then....

It's always great to see initiatives by tournament organizers in new tournaments and thanks to them that we players have tournaments to play in. Winning some $$$ is an added bonus.

Would I really care what is their profit and loss looks like ? Should I ? I don't think so.....I am more happy to have a good tournament to play in and if I am good and lucky enough, maybe to win some $$$....

[Grey Guo]

I don't like prizes below the entry fee, and it is likely that 3rd and fourth place will have the same points and split the prize. It is easier to calculate if the last place price (fourth, or third and fourth combined) is divisible by six. Then if 2 or 3 people are tied it is a zero cents amount.

I had talks with many players' parents during the past few months, try to find something encourage the junior players, and some parent proposed to have prize for 4th place which give more chance for many players to share, maybe it's not big deal for adults, but even $5 is big money for the junior class players.

Another thing we proposed here is to promote the high rating female players, actually I had many discussion with team member to convince them this is the right thing to do, instead of have top female prize in each section. This is based on performance rating of the tournament, encourage female players to play in higher section if possible instead of staying in the lower section to be the top player. And this prize is stackable, if the female player won the section, she can get extra money for this. I'd like to see more girls continue to play chess after high school. (https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/too-ma...body-1.1911967)

[Erik Malmsten]

Another thing we proposed here is to promote the high rating female players, actually I had many discussion with team member to convince them this is the right thing to do, instead of have top female prize in each section. This is based on performance rating of the tournament, encourage female players to play in higher section if possible instead of staying in the lower section to be the top player. And this prize is stackable, if the female player won the section, she can get extra money for this. I'd like to see more girls continue to play chess after high school. (https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/too-ma...body-1.1911967)

You also have discount entry fees for IWM and WFM which I like. The team prizes is a good, more social idea. The mixed team sounds more like a couple, I tend to think of a chess team as four players. The family team could also be open to the score of the top two family members ( may be 3 or 4 or 5 family members). If you want an encouraging prize, could be for highest rating gain rather than performance.