$ 400 in 5 hours work !!

[John Coleman]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

In another thread, Neil Sullivan quotes from a new chess book "When you can take something away from your opponent, wisely resist the urge and falsify the idea first before biting into the apple."

That sounds like good advice for this organiser. I mean, if you are gonna pay out only 40% of the entry fees as prizes, charge $15 for processing CFC memberships, and intend to postpone (cancel?) the event if you don't get 100 suckers to sign up, it would really have helped to "falsify the idea first".

[Roger Patterson]

Re: Brampton Active Chess Tournament

you should be careful about that - demanding that organizers work for free for you.

As I recall, one of the Ottawa events also had different fees for people renewing membership with the organizers (Aris - is this correct?)

FYI, the organizers of the Grand Pacific Open have discussed several times not processing CFC memberships at all - although providing a internet station for people to purchase a membership themselves directly. There are several reasons for this - the additional work involved, the hassle of getting the CFC to process the memberships correctly, the question of who is liable if something goes wrong (e.g. the wrong membership fee is charged or something else), and the problems we had when we sold memberships to people explaining that they would get a magazine 4 times a year and nothing happened. Online registration seems to work better (although there are periodically posts here about that not working well either.) We may still do this at some point.

[John Coleman]

Re: Brampton Active Chess Tournament

I'm not sure the CFC should allow a surcharge or processing fee on their memberships.

I agree, though there is not much the CFC can do about it. In view of the fact that the organiser has to submit the ratings report and pay the ratings fee, it isn't exactly a lot of work to send in membership fees at the same time.

Let's not get too excited, I suspect this "organiser" will sink without making too many ripples.

[Christopher Mallon]

Re: Brampton Active Chess Tournament

Please note that on the flyer, it was clearly stated that the tournament is a "CFC Rated". Simply means that before you play in this tournament, you should have paid your CFC membership or CFC membership renewal fee, otherwise you should pay a surcharge of $15 if you want the organizer to do that job for you.

I'm not sure the CFC should allow a surcharge or processing fee on their memberships.

[Ferdinand Supsup]

Brampton Active Chess Tournament

BRAMPTON ACTIVE SPRING CHESS TOURNAMENT
Saturday, April 24, 2010
10:00 a.m. sharp
Courtyard Marriott Convention Center
90 Biscayne Crescent
Brampton, Ontario

Time: Opening Ceremonies 9.00am; Games start 10:00 am sharp

Type: Swiss, No byes, CFC rated

Rounds: 5 (R1 10:00-11:00 R2 11:15-12:15 Break 12:15 R3 1:30- 2:30 R4 2:45-3:45 R5 4:00-5:00)

CFC Membership: Required

Section: Open, Under 2100, Under 1800, Under 1400

Time Control: 30 minutes

Prizes: $2000 prize fund

Entrance Fee: $50.00 Pre-Registration only by April 1, 2010 (no cheques post-dated April 24 accepted)
Confirmation of pre-registration will be sent to the players via email provided.
Check in at registration desk by 9:30 am or you will not be paired for the first round. $70.00 cash on site.

No cheques will be accepted at the event and entrance subject to available seats per room capacity. If not enough seats are reserved, the event will be rescheduled to an alternate day in May to allow sufficient time to promote this amazing one-day event.

Registration: Online at http://www.littlechessmates.com/cgi-...e/storepro.php or mail cheque made payable to Little Chess Mates (140 Beechnut Rd, Woodbridge ON L4L 6T7) or via Paypal and fax entry form to 416


Organizers: Mario Adragna (416 885-8142) and TD- Devon Thomas (905 495-6834)


Must bring clocks. TD will decide which clock will be used between players. All chess sets will be provided. CFC membership required or can be purchased onsite. A surcharge of $15 will apply in addition to the CFC membership fee.





PRIZES - $2000
(Based on min of 100 players)

Open U2100 U1800 U1400 Best All U900
1st $400 $300 $250 $175 $50
2nd $200 $150 $125 $75
3rd $75 $75 $75 $50

Tournament triple-weighted chess sets supplied are available for purchase at the end of the tournament at half Little Chess Mate’s retail cost - $14.99 plus applicable taxes. 1 per player. See website for details.

Email: mario@littlechessmates.com

Tournament website: www.littlechessmates.com/parks.php

Side Events: Booth with chess equipment for purchase and raffle draw. Giant chess set to interact with. Opening and closing ceremonies.

Ample free parking at an award-winning convention center. Plenty of amenities: Tim Horton's, Wendy's, Applybe’s and more. Games projected on giant screen. A professional chess atmosphere.

This is a Little Chess Mates sponsored event. Facilitated and sponsored by Little Chess Mates, a chess facility exclusively for children.

LOCATION:
Courtyard Marriott Convention Center
90 Biscayne Crescent
Brampton, Ontario
Map: http://www.marriott.com/hotels/maps/...onto-brampton/



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BRAMPTON ACTIVE SPRING CHESS TOURNAMENT
Entry Form



By Mail Send Entry to: ______________________________ ______________ __/___/__ ________
Little Chess Mates Name CFC# Expiry CFC rating
140 Beechnut Road ______________________________ Please check box:
Woodbridge, ON L4L 6T7 Address
____________________________ Open Under 2100 Under 1800
Under 1400
Or Online at
www.littlechessmates.com ____________________________

____________________________
Entry Fee Enclosed: ____________________
____________________________
Telephone Numbers CFC Membership $58*: __________________

____________________________
Email Address

Please make cheques payable to Little Chess Mates. Preregister by April 1, 2010. Seats are limited.


*Includes a $15 surcharge.

This flyer is similar to the one posted at http://torontochess.org/drupal/

FYI,

FYI

[Ferdinand Supsup]

Brampton Active Chess Tournament

It seems to me that by saying both

"A lucrative one day $2000 unconditional guaranteed prize fund" and also
"If not enough seats are sold, the event will rescheduled" the organizer is trying to have it both ways.

The organizer does not take any risks or what so ever to loss money in the event that the minimum number of participants is not met and re-scheduling is necessary until the quota is met, only then the event will go through. Hence, the $2000 is guaranteed. Entry fee refunds are also guaranteed to be returned.

And what's with "A surcharge of $15 will apply in addition to the CFC membership fee" for people paying their membership dues?? Doesn't seem reasonable at all.

Please note that on the flyer, it was clearly stated that the tournament is a "CFC Rated". Simply means that before you play in this tournament, you should have paid your CFC membership or CFC membership renewal fee, otherwise you should pay a surcharge of $15 if you want the organizer to do that job for you.

Does anyone have any experience with this organiser?

This is the debut of the chess organizer

[John Coleman]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

In view of the fact that the organiser has not replied to my email, I suspect this event might not happen.

Storm in a teacup, flash in the pan, if you can't stand the heat stay out of the kitchen, etc etc and so forth.

[Paul Bonham]

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

I don't understand your point. Chess is a sport, and in any sport a professional player usually experiences a peak after a comparatively early age. For chess this age lies between 30 and 35-year old. Canadian Grandmaster Kevin Spraggett does not have a higher rating than 20 years ago. When he died, Canadian Grandmaster Igor Ivanov was less strong than 20 years before. Take any great champion of the past after their prime, and you will see the same pattern. The Capablanca of 1938 (losing four games in his last great tournament) had lost a lot of ground compared to the invincible Capablanca who did not lose a single game between 1916 (against Chajes) and 1924 (against Reti).

Well, Jean was implying that I have little understanding of chess, further implying that is some indication of one's value as a commentator on this forum. This is the Hebert method: use chess prowess as the main indicator of one's value to Canadian chess. Thus he can use his 2400+ rating to exalt himself and denigrate those organizers who don't produce tournaments where the level of sponsorship is such that Jean can participate free of charge and be given red carpet treatment.

If this is true - chess understanding is directly related to the value of one's comments here - then I'm highlighting Jean's stagnation to show that his own value hasn't gone anywhere in the past 20 years, despite his best and full-time efforts. I'm just turning his logic against him, it doesn't mean I agree at all with his logic.

By contrast, I haven't yet reached my peak in terms of intellectual understanding in my field. I'm accomplishing things I couldn't have dreamt of 18 years ago, using the same coding language I was using then. I haven't stopped learning or improving. Yet according to your post, chess players peak around 35 and stop improving after that. Perhaps it says something about chess professionals, that very early on they reach a certain plateau, their life becomes a somewhat easy one of appearance fees and grandmaster draws, and their chess understanding undergoes no further improvement?

I believe that truly devoted chess professionals should continue to improve into their 50's, and only then would I grant them some leeway due to aging.

Jean at 50-something is out pursuing GM norms as if he's somehow getting better at chess, and he's probably using other people's money to do it (but I don't know that for sure). And while he's over in Europe doing this, he's criticizing Canadian chess organizers as I outlined above. His bitterness and anger is due not to his concern for chess in Canada, but because Canadian taxpayers / corporations aren't paying his way to the extent he sees happening for other chess professionals over in Europe.

And as previously pointed out, he's particularly angry in this thread because his eyes got so big when he saw the thread title and thought he might be in for an easy $400.

[John Coleman]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Compare this with Jean Hebert, whose whole life is chess yet whose chess rating 20 years ago was about where it is now.

Jean Hébert was the Canadian champion in 1978, and is the current Canadian champion. Is that what you mean by not getting anywhere?

[Louis Morin]

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

If my profession over those 18 years had been chess, I'd expect nothing but the same line of progression.

Compare this with Jean Hebert, whose whole life is chess yet whose chess rating 20 years ago was about where it is now.

I don't understand your point. Chess is a sport, and in any sport a professional player usually experiences a peak after a comparatively early age. For chess this age lies between 30 and 35-year old. Canadian Grandmaster Kevin Spraggett does not have a higher rating than 20 years ago. When he died, Canadian Grandmaster Igor Ivanov was less strong than 20 years before. Take any great champion of the past after their prime, and you will see the same pattern. The Capablanca of 1938 (losing four games in his last great tournament) had lost a lot of ground compared to the invincible Capablanca who did not lose a single game between 1916 (against Chajes) and 1924 (against Reti).

[Gary Ruben]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Not proven wrong, the one thing I guaranteed was that top echelon chess prize monies will never approach half the level of top echelon poker prize monies, because of the built-in barriers chess maintains around itself (the main one being insisting that luck should never play a part in results).

Sponsorship money, like taxes, can be seen as a bad thing when it is taken from the many to pay the few AND when the many are against or at least not interested in the activity or event their money is paying for. There will always be some who have to pay and don't care about what they are paying for. But we do live in a democracy, in which majority rules, so if the majority want sponsorship of hockey or tennis or golf, it's something the minority have to live with. One might have no admiration at all for Tiger Woods, but the majority of Americans are fine with buying Nike products that have built-in costs to pay Tiger Woods. One may at least have the choice to not buy Nike products.

Still can't get over your debating inadequacies, Jean? Here it is again, the last refuge of the beaten, the deflection attack. It's like you're about to be mated on the Kingside, and you do what a computer engine with no concept if resignation would do. You move a Pawn over on the Queenside, threatening a promotion or an attack. It's quite hilarious, I can play with you like a cat with a mouse.

PB don't hate chess, PB knows that chess is an enjoyable activity and a beautiful game that is nevertheless taken seriously by only a very small percentage of overall population. PB understands the reasons for this, and PB wants the skills of chess to migrate into some other hybrid form that will appeal to both a much larger group of players and a much larger audience (while leaving standard chess it's place, undiminished).

PB does not want to pay any non-voluntary fee or tax to support any chess professional. Seeing Jean Hebert as an arrogant and haughty example of such only makes that feeling stronger.

Wow!! It sounds like you had a bad day at a proctology clinic.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Not long ago the guy argued that there was no sponsorship for chess.

I'm sure what I wrote was that there is little sponsorship for chess, and even your Quebec success stories are very, very small. You define a few thousand dollars as "heavy" sponsorship. Well, I suppose for someone who makes a subsistence living playing chess, that must be heavy. For many others, and for many other competitive activities, it's chump change.

I predict the day will come when you will be at the center of a controversy in which some chess event sponsor will withdraw it's funding due to something you say or do that is negative for chess. It's the Jean Hebert way: open mouth, insert foot. You already chased David Ottosen and the company he works for away. They don't need your attitude.

Proven wrong as usual he now falls back on the "argument" that sponsorship in itself is a bad thing.

Not proven wrong, the one thing I guaranteed was that top echelon chess prize monies will never approach half the level of top echelon poker prize monies, because of the built-in barriers chess maintains around itself (the main one being insisting that luck should never play a part in results).

Sponsorship money, like taxes, can be seen as a bad thing when it is taken from the many to pay the few AND when the many are against or at least not interested in the activity or event their money is paying for. There will always be some who have to pay and don't care about what they are paying for. But we do live in a democracy, in which majority rules, so if the majority want sponsorship of hockey or tennis or golf, it's something the minority have to live with. One might have no admiration at all for Tiger Woods, but the majority of Americans are fine with buying Nike products that have built-in costs to pay Tiger Woods. One may at least have the choice to not buy Nike products.

I guess at this point the real question is: why do PB hate chess so much ? What has it done to him besides giving him a chance to grow by exposing pointblank his deep thinking and behavioural shortcomings ?

Still can't get over your debating inadequacies, Jean? Here it is again, the last refuge of the beaten, the deflection attack. It's like you're about to be mated on the Kingside, and you do what a computer engine with no concept if resignation would do. You move a Pawn over on the Queenside, threatening a promotion or an attack. It's quite hilarious, I can play with you like a cat with a mouse.

PB don't hate chess, PB knows that chess is an enjoyable activity and a beautiful game that is nevertheless taken seriously by only a very small percentage of overall population. PB understands the reasons for this, and PB wants the skills of chess to migrate into some other hybrid form that will appeal to both a much larger group of players and a much larger audience (while leaving standard chess it's place, undiminished).

PB does not want to pay any non-voluntary fee or tax to support any chess professional. Seeing Jean Hebert as an arrogant and haughty example of such only makes that feeling stronger.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

"That" - did it mean the CFC rated?

What is your "English" rating, Egidijus?
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

[Paul Bonham]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

So, what is your rating, Paul?
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

I'm laughing too, Egidijus! Anyone who wants to judge people by their chess rating is deserving of a good laugh!

In my profession, I have over the last 18 years gained extensive knowledge and understanding and my skills are much more respected and in demand then they were when I became self-taught in 1992. I could go further to explain that I've gone further in my field than many Masters Degree and even some PhD level people, and that I am part of a very small team that has achieved a U.S. patent, but then I'd be bragging, and that's not what this is about or what I seek to do.

If my profession over those 18 years had been chess, I'd expect nothing but the same line of progression.

Compare this with Jean Hebert, whose whole life is chess yet whose chess rating 20 years ago was about where it is now. And he's the one sitting high on his self-created throne lecturing others about their understanding of chess.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

yes. i believe there was a falling out between ICC and the CFC. i have inquired a number of times about getting that monthly tournament renewed...

"That" - did it mean the CFC rated?