$ 400 in 5 hours work !!

[Peter McKillop]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

... blah, blah, blah ... I will continue to expose Hebert for the negative force he is to Canadian chess.

I suggest you take the blinders off. You're so focussed on trying to impale Jean Hebert that you're failing to see the bigger, more accurate picture. For example, have you read what Carl Bilodeau wrote about Jean elsewhere in this thread? Here it is:

He writes a weekly chess magazine for 1500+ readers and spend one day a week doing it. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

Also he beated the young Canadian top players to become the Canadian Champion 2009. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

He stay in Canada and play in Canada's tournaments so our kids can chalenge him. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

He gives many good advices base on his long carreer as a teacher, as a chess newspapers writer and as a chess player. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

Carl

How do you reconcile your viewpoint with what Carl wrote?

[Jean Hébert]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

I'm not convinced, the US GM Ben Finegold ain't no lightweight. Surely there is hope for we fatties.

That's one nice feature of chess. Everybody, young and old, men or women, rich and not so rich, physically handicapped, slim and not so slim can play and enjoy the game at various levels. The one possible exception being the PB type looking for brainless lottery type games with a high level of chance and randomness. Fortunately thinking games like chess have built-in features to keep those really handicapped people away. :)

[Jean Hébert]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

If you look at Jean on pictures he is very slim and in good shape since he decided to go for GM norms.

Well I wish that it would be completely true but actually I may look slimmer than I am. No doubt that losing 10-15 pounds would not hurt my resistance and performances. Last summer I did quite a bit of biking which I believe was an important part of my success at the Canadian Closed. I felt more relaxed and fcused. But it didn't make me lose any weight. Nonetheless I will bike again this spring and summer...

[Carl Bilodeau]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

I'm not convinced, the US GM Ben Finegold ain't no lightweight. Surely there is hope for we fatties.

In an interview after he became world champion Bobby Fischer was asked: Do you do some sport?

- Yes I have an intensive training a lot, I swim and play tennis but all this training is only a preparation for Chess, you sit for hours, have to be concentrate..... a lot of blood go in the head....

Click here to see the video. (I think this is the interview)

In my opinion GM Ben Finegold is losing more than 50 pts because of his exta 50 pounds, just like Louis is losing 280 pts (450 pounds - 180 normal weight = 280 extra pounds).

[Ernest Klubis]

$ 400 in 5 hours work !!

He writes a weekly chess magazine for 1500+ readers and spend one day a week doing it. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

Also he beated the young Canadian top players to become the Canadian Champion 2009. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

He stay in Canada and play in Canada's tournaments so our kids can chalenge him. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

He gives many good advices base on his long carreer as a teacher, as a chess newspapers writer and as a chess player. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

Carl

Merci, Carl

[John Coleman]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

The brain simply need a good slim and trained body to perform at the top no matter the age.

I'm not convinced, the US GM Ben Finegold ain't no lightweight. Surely there is hope for we fatties.

[Carl Bilodeau]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

...
Jean will not do any of the work himself, he feels above doing that, unlike his Facebook friend Mikhail Egorov, who just played in the Hamilton Winter Open where he also helped make name cards for the tables and helped run the demo boards. Now THAT'S the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

He writes a weekly chess magazine for 1500+ readers and spend one day a week doing it. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

Also he beated the young Canadian top players to become the Canadian Champion 2009. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

He stay in Canada and play in Canada's tournaments so our kids can chalenge him. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

He gives many good advices base on his long carreer as a teacher, as a chess newspapers writer and as a chess player. This is the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

Carl

[Carl Bilodeau]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Paul

I am 54-year old. I began to play chess in 1976 (34 years ago). Around 1982 I got an expert rating (more than 2000), and it went up and down several times. My last 2000+ rating was in 1994. Since then my rating steadily dropped, today it is between 1850 and 1900 most of the time.

Does this mean than my chess understanding is lower than before? Not at all. Actually I understand chess a lot better now than 30 years ago. Now I understand better positional play, opening and endgame theory, and I know better chess history and the games of the great champions. So why did my rating go down? The answer is: because chess is NOT a purely intellectual endeavour. Chess is mainly a SPORT. It takes stamina to play two 5-hour games a day at a constant high level.

So today my chess understanding is better than before, but my rating is lower, because I get older... in particular, I cannot calculate long combinations as well as before... also I get tired sooner... since I take more time to find good moves, I get more often in time trouble... and I blunder more often... but fortunately my overall chess understanding is better than ever, which partly compensates for my numerous tactical slips...

It does not take so many more blunders to lower significantly a chess rating. I hope you understand better now the difference between chess understanding and chess rating.

Louis,

54 years old yes, but you forgot to say that you are now more than 400 pounds. The brain simply need a good slim and trained body to perform at the top no matter the age.

If you look at Jean on pictures he is very slim and in good shape since he decided to go for GM norms. The guy is doing a come back, before he was simply teaching chess and played in minor weekends tournaments.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Paul

I am 54-year old. I began to play chess in 1976 (34 years ago). Around 1982 I got an expert rating (more than 2000), and it went up and down several times. My last 2000+ rating was in 1994. Since then my rating steadily dropped, today it is between 1850 and 1900 most of the time.

Does this mean than my chess understanding is lower than before? Not at all. Actually I understand chess a lot better now than 30 years ago. Now I understand better positional play, opening and endgame theory, and I know better chess history and the games of the great champions. So why did my rating go down? The answer is: because chess is NOT a purely intellectual endeavour. Chess is mainly a SPORT. It takes stamina to play two 5-hour games a day at a constant high level.

So today my chess understanding is better than before, but my rating is lower, because I get older... in particular, I cannot calculate long combinations as well as before... also I get tired sooner... since I take more time to find good moves, I get more often in time trouble... and I blunder more often... but fortunately my overall chess understanding is better than ever, which partly compensates for my numerous tactical slips...

It does not take so many more blunders to lower significantly a chess rating. I hope you understand better now the difference between chess understanding and chess rating.

Louis, it is not I who easily dismisses the chess understanding of others, it is Jean Hebert.

If you want to rail against someone, do it against Jean. He writes that I have virtually no chess understanding, something he would know nothing about. It is a personal shortcoming of Jean, that he can just dismiss anyone he disagrees with and accuse them of having no understanding. He honestly believes only he has true understanding of the issues he writes about.

I can understand that you cannot keep your rating level, much less improve it, but what I wrote was about chess PROFESSIONALS. Anyone who devotes every day, their entire life, to chess should overcome all the stamina issues you mention. Since their understanding is supposedly improving much more than yours is, they should see continued improvement in their rating right into their 50s at least. If it's a stamina issue, they need to work out.

If in my profession I just stayed level and didn't improve, I'd be out of work by now. And my profession requires at least 8 hours a day of intense concentration, not unlike playing a game of chess. I have to have stamina also, and there are also young people right out of university who are very bright and talented for me to contend with, just as there are young talented chess players for the likes of Hebert to contend with. If I can continue to improve and not lose out to these youngesters, then mature chess professionals should be able to do the same.

I personally believe they don't improve because once they reach a certain level, they operate on cruise control, which they can get away with. Even with some decline in their ratings, they still maintain an easy lifestyle (which is not to say a rich lifestyle, but "easy" meaning they don't have to work hard). So for me, these people are underperforming and are not truly devoted to their profession. They are not pushed hard enough, by others or even by themselves.

I, on the other hand, continue to push myself very hard and continue to improve. This verifies my viewpoint, I can see that improvement is possible even 18 years into my profession. I would truly say to Jean Hebert that he can and should become a GM and improve his rating. But obviously for 20 years he hasn't done that, so it seems either he is one of those who lives the easy life, or perhaps he's had personal issues blocking his way, I really can't say.

One thing is clear, he wants more of an easy life here in Canada, which is why he's trying to get organizers to do all the grunt work to get sponsors to pony up for all the freebies Hebert thinks he deserves. Jean will not do any of the work himself, he feels above doing that, unlike his Facebook friend Mikhail Egorov, who just played in the Hamilton Winter Open where he also helped make name cards for the tables and helped run the demo boards. Now THAT'S the kind of player you need more of in Canada!

[Paul Bonham]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

This obsession you appear to have for following Jean Hebert around wherever he goes and verbally abusing him can't be healthy, can it?

I only respond to Jean when he undeservedly and arrogantly attacks others, specifically organizers. Which I suppose pretty much would by 90% of his posts. I think I told Kerry Liles several weeks ago that I wasnt' attempting to troll all of Jean Hebert's posts. But I feel a compulsion to defend organizers because they are (with possibly a few exceptions) the true workhorses of Canadian chess. Jean has no regard for their efforts, all he sees is conditions that don't meet his approval and so he attacks the organizer. He flippantly uses terms like "retarded" (Sarah Palin better not hear about that!) and "dumbell". He sees tournament conditions in one part of the world and believes those same conditions should exist here in Canada, and if they don't, it's the organizers' fault. He's extremely narrow-minded.

That's all it is, Peter, plain and simple. On this particular thread, I've responded to just about all of Hebert's posts because they're all in that category. I will continue to expose Hebert for the negative force he is to Canadian chess.

[Jean Hébert]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Most organizers do not get sponsorship because it's a pain in the ass to do (since an average business gets exactly zero ROI for sponsoring a chess tourney) so just so your tournament can get picked over and criticized (before and after) by every average IM who thinks he is entitled to world class conditions. Oh, and by the way, the organizer is expected to do all this in exchange for no money for himself. Where do we sign up?

By twisting just about every word and even putting words and ideas into my mouth you are merely showing an inexcusable bad faith.

First of all there is no denying that some businesses do sponsor chess events, along with many municipalities for the exposure their city gets.*And that for a relatively small amount of money compared with other types of events. Whether they do it for ROI or something else is irrevelant. The point is that this sponsorship is good and available for chess.

I certainly do not expect "world class conditions", otherwise I would have been inactive for a long time. In Capelle-la-Grande recently I got hotel and meals, while the GMs got the same plus expense money. In Cannes later, I got similar treatment as winner of the first "French speaking countries championship". I did not have to ask for it. I had earned it in front of a GM and half a dozen "average IMs".

You find that as an organizer finding sponsorship is tiring ? Well, that just tells what kind of organizer you might be and what kind of a person you are. Not necessarily a bad person but a lazy dumbell of an organizer. Obviously the best chance that a capable organizer has to make some money for himself is to find sponsors, private or public. Just sucking out blood from low income chess players your way is a hopeless endeavour.

[Jean Hébert]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

This obsession you (PB) appear to have for following Jean Hebert around wherever he goes and verbally abusing him can't be healthy, can it?

Actually it could be some kind of self-therapy but unfortunately the patient does not seem to get any better. Quite the opposite.

[David Ottosen]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

I have wrote it before and I will stick to it because it is a fact: most organizers do not get sponsorship because they don't search for it or/and don't know how.

Most organizers do not get sponsorship because it's a pain in the ass to do (since an average business gets exactly zero ROI for sponsoring a chess tourney) so just so your tournament can get picked over and criticized (before and after) by every average IM who thinks he is entitled to world class conditions. Oh, and by the way, the organizer is expected to do all this in exchange for no money for himself. Where do we sign up?

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Sorites Paradox

Philosophically, the last question relies on a fallacy, based on the sorites paradox.

The discussion changed. It is no longer based on there being a fee or no fee added. Now the discussion is based on the size of the fee which may be added.

In any case, I can't recall anything in the CFC bylaws which prohibits the practice.

[Benoit St-Pierre]

Sorites Paradox

Philosophically, the last question relies on a fallacy, based on the sorites paradox.