$ 400 in 5 hours work !!

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

I never knew that Brampton was 1000 km from Montreal!

[Roger Patterson]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

not reading things closely enough I guess.....

[Jean Hébert]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

It's one thing to not like a particular set of organizing conditions and decide yourself not to play. It another thing entirely to decide that nobody else should play either and do your best to stop an event from happening.

Here we have an event that is something like 1000km from you, that you wouldn't play in even if conditions were perfect. Heaven forbid that somebody, somewhere should play chess under conditions you consider "inferior".

Your rationale for this that there are good organizers being "forced" to sit on the sidelines because of all the "bad" events is not credible.

Further, there is nothing to guarantee your feelings represent the truth of what is considered "good" organizing or even that others agree with your feeling that no tournaments is better than having "bad" tournaments. Where would we be if all the people who feel the Canadian Open should be either run in sections demanded sections or no tournament at all and all the people who like one section demanded one section or no tournament at all?

If I understand you correctly you believe that this particular event as advertised is worth support, and worth playing in. Right ? If you'd live at a reasonable distance you would consider playing in it and supporting this kind of organizer. Right ? Otherwise you are just arguing for the sake of arguing rather than admit that sometimes things are just plain bad and should be exposed for what they are. And by the way sometimes I do play in events 1000 km or more away from home (and never in "perfect" conditions as they do not exist anywhere), I thought that you knew that by now.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Here in Quebec we have three weekend events coming up, all three benefitting from sponsorhip and offering respectively 5000, 5000 and 12000$ in prizes. One of them (the Ch. Ouvert du Saguenay) in its 2nd edition is heavily sponsored. Participants will get probably 4-5 times what they pay in entry fees. The "ch. ouvert de la Mauricie" gets enough entries to at least break even, but still gets some hard money from the city. Their prize fund is not garanteed but year after year it is given in full. And the "ch. de Lanaudière" is another event that gives more money than it gets from the players, thanks to a fair amount of support from the city.

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.

Support from the city? And where does the city get it's money? Can you spell "TAXES"?

I don't suppose it ever crosses your mind that "bad organizers" are those who allow unwitting taxpayers foot the bill for chess tournaments.

Even corporate sponsorship is not free. It gets paid for through higher prices for the products and services.

Chess, being such a fringe interest, should be solely a user pay system. If it were modelled after poker, it could be user pay and not require corporate or public sponsorship.

I feel sorry for Europeans that they have to fork out hidden sums of money to support chess players. Hopefully that will be changing as first Greece, then Portugal, Spain, then France, Britain and Germany finally implement severe austerity measures to begin paying for their high life of the past few decades. That's because in the euro countries, they can't just print more money like the U.S. Fed can. They are forced to cut, cut, cut, and it's only beginning now.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Your knowledge and understanding of France seems to match your understanding of chess. No surprise there.

Poor Jean, he tries! He wants everyone to think I wrote "France doesn't have hockey or curling".

As for "understanding of chess", if I had devoted over 40 years to chess, most of that in playing the game professionally, and my rating was only in the 2400's, I'd be too ashamed to say anything to anyone else about their understanding of chess.

Remember, folks, the ONLY reason Jean Hebert stuck his money-grubbing nose into this thread in the first place is because of the thread title: "$400 in 5 hour's work!!". And when he found out he'd been swindled again, he lashed out. If he lives another 40 years, he'll go to his grave cursing chess in Canada.

[Paul Bonham]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Roger,

Use your judgment if you can to set apart the good, the bad and the ugly. If you want to try a new but highly dubious move in your favorite Orang-Outang opening, its your business and the worst that can happen is that you will lose the game and please an opponent.

A so-called new organizer coming up with silly schemes to make a buck and cancelling them at the last moment has very negative consequences for the chess community, first of all in terms of image. It is our responsability that these things do not come off the ground. Encouraging them to "try" hopeless and potentially destructive schemes is not a good idea.

It seems that some people are so desperate to have things organised for them that they are ready to thrust anybody, no matter how foolish their plans may be. In the meantime the good organizers stay on the sidelines watching the experiments.

You see, Roger, we are not to question Jean Hebert's opinion. If it is his opinion that this particular scheme "has very negative consequences for the chess community", then it follows that "It is our responsibility that these things do not come off the ground."

I wasn't aware that Jean had been elected God of Canadian Chess, but there it is in black and white. If the ALMIGHTY HEBERT believes something is bad for chess in Canada, it MUST NOT EVEN BE TRIED. It also goes without saying that only the ALMIGHTY HEBERT knows just who the good organizers are and who the bad organizers are.

The WORD has come down. Someone go to this organizer's home now and put him under house arrest.

Let it also be noted that the ALMIGHTY HEBERT has questioned Roger's judgment, and Roger is now "under investigation".

And now that this has happened, everyone stand back and witness the MIRACULOUS appearance of vast numbers of good organizers who had been, upon witnessing this travesty, "staying on the sidelines". Welcome back, good organizers! Return to organizing!

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

As for "understanding of chess", if I had devoted over 40 years to chess, most of that in playing the game professionally, and my rating was only in the 2400's, I'd be too ashamed to say anything to anyone else about their understanding of chess

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

[Jean Hébert]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Support from the city? And where does the city get it's money? Can you spell "TAXES"?

I don't suppose it ever crosses your mind that "bad organizers" are those who allow unwitting taxpayers foot the bill for chess tournaments.

Even corporate sponsorship is not free. It gets paid for through higher prices for the products and services.

Not long ago the guy argued that there was no sponsorship for chess. Proven wrong as usual he now falls back on the "argument" that sponsorship in itself is a bad thing. What's next ? 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 ?

[Craig Sadler]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Anyway, a few years back, there was a gentleman, I believe in Waterloo, Ontario, who was running CFC-rated Actives on ICC. It was once a month on Sunday evenings, if I remember correctly, and attendance eventually was quite decent, I seem to recall.

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...

[Christopher Mallon]

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...

I actually inquired when I was CFC President and got no response.

[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?

[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.

[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 !!

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.

[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.