$ 400 in 5 hours work !!

[Gary Ruben]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Gary,
To make such statements you clearly have not understood the CFC financial crisis of the past decade. :(

If you are suggesting we should have kept spending until all the Foundation money was gone also, thankfully most governors disagree with you!:)

I seem to recall years when the CFC was making donations to the Foundation. Also, where has the money from the condo gone? The foundation didn't pay for that Condo as far as I know.

[Bob Gillanders]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

What terrible financials? The foundation, where so much money has gone over the years, had over $200,000.00 last time I saw the figures at the CFC site.

Crying poor and being poor are two different things.

Gary,
To make such statements you clearly have not understood the CFC financial crisis of the past decade. :(

If you are suggesting we should have kept spending until all the Foundation money was gone also, thankfully most governors disagree with you!:)

[Jean Hébert]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

The CFC strategy should be based on building ground up, not trickle down. Trickle down has failed.

Do not let reality or facts ruin your theory. The CFC has never tried to build from the top or use a significant part of its resources for that purpose. Never.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

In a vaccuum, perhaps. In the situation the CFC currently finds itself (terrible financials, dropping membership, minimal resources), there is not the luxury to do things that do not directly improve the bottom line. The CFC strategy should be based on building ground up, not trickle down. Trickle down has failed.

What terrible financials? The foundation, where so much money has gone over the years, had over $200,000.00 last time I saw the figures at the CFC site.

Crying poor and being poor are two different things.

[David Ottosen]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

However it should be obvious to most people that these accomplishments are worth pursuing and supporting for themselves even if they would have zero effect on the membership of a particular federation or club.

In a vaccuum, perhaps. In the situation the CFC currently finds itself (terrible financials, dropping membership, minimal resources), there is not the luxury to do things that do not directly improve the bottom line. The CFC strategy should be based on building ground up, not trickle down. Trickle down has failed.

However everytime some other "champion" gets through the general media, it is undoubtedly positive to promote the game and foster people awareness about chess. This is what may push individuals to knock at the door of chess clubs.

Even assuming that this is true (which you and I clearly disagree on, so I won't rehash), the problem is the local chess clubs are dying.

But to benefit from that our organizers and clubs must get their act together to present chess in an appealing way and work towards presenting people the whole chess experience, not just the glamourless part.

Agree, and the CFC needs to focus on this, rather than anything else. Organizing the Olympiad team or the Canadian Closed and interacting with GMs etc is the "glamour" part of organizing. Running the club September swiss where the #1 player is rated 1938 is not. The CFC as currently structured gives the local organizer zero reason or interest in doing that, other than love of the game, which can only sustain for so long.

Our canadian chess fabric is already of low quality, it should be improved not worsen by people who can't see the difference.

To stretch this metaphor to the breaking point, having one or two golden threads in the fabric isn't going to change the fact that it's poorly woven and of low quality, with holes everywhere. Until the underlying structure is solid, there's no way that high level goals with uncertain return can succeed.

[Jean Hébert]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

This is where we disagree. What has been the impact on CFC membership in the last 15 years of CYCC/CMA? Nothing that I can see. What has been the impact of Spraggett reaching the candidates, Bluvshtein beating Shirov, Pascal beating Anand, or (if we want to take credit for it) Nakamura challenging to enter the world top 10? Nothing that I can see (not to take away anything from those accomplishments of course).

It is obviously difficult to quantify the effect of these events because many other factors at in play. However it should be obvious to most people that these accomplishments are worth pursuing and supporting for themselves even if they would have zero effect on the membership of a particular federation or club. If the CFC, provincial affiliates, clubs and individuals get no pride from one of their players successes and cant figure why they should support it, then the people involved are simply in the wrong business, which I suspect may be your case.

The Fischer case is not likely to happen again in our lifetime, granted. However everytime some other "champion" gets through the general media, it is undoubtedly positive to promote the game and foster people awareness about chess. This is what may push individuals to knock at the door of chess clubs. But to benefit from that our organizers and clubs must get their act together to present chess in an appealing way and work towards presenting people the whole chess experience, not just the glamourless part.

The "elite" in Canada are simply the best of a fairly average group of players (on the world scale). If every GM/IM in Canada gave up the game tomorrow, the current group of 2300s would now be "the elite", and there would be little change in my eyes to the fabric of chess in Canada.

I am sorry to learn that your eyesight is not too good. What you describe would simply mean a much lower quality of fabric. And surely you know the disadvantages of low quality fabrics ? Less durable, less resilient, less appealing (bright colours fade easily), and more difficult to wash. Our canadian chess fabric is already of low quality, it should be improved not worsen by people who can't see the difference.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

David, I think it's possible to have a large membership of average chess players and support the elite players.

I built up a large membership in the correspondence club and we still maintained an active international program.

I do agree with your idea of putting games from the lower rated players in the publication. I did that the years I was the editor and publisher of the CC publication. Players like to see their games.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Thnx David for your post on a vision.
Seems that the last posts were more healthy and contributed more than other 150 posts on this thread :)

Later I'll start a new thread and give my thoughts.

[David Ottosen]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Imagine a national sporting federation having no interest in its elite and no interest in its youth (and its future). Of course they provide benefits (short and long term) for the membership. We need many more strong players to give simuls, to teach, to coach and to write about the game to promote it, not less. Exploits of sportsmen does have an effect on memberships.

This is where we disagree. What has been the impact on CFC membership in the last 15 years of CYCC/CMA? Nothing that I can see. What has been the impact of Spraggett reaching the candidates, Bluvshtein beating Shirov, Pascal beating Anand, or (if we want to take credit for it) Nakamura challenging to enter the world top 10? Nothing that I can see (not to take away anything from those accomplishments of course).

Again, such a "creative" proposal in order for the CFC to save peanuts on the back of an already largely abandoned elite.

Take care of the peanuts, and the elephant may have a chance to live. There isn't one magic bullet that is going to save the CFC - it has to be a combination of many small items. The "elite" in Canada are simply the best of a fairly average group of players (on the world scale). If every GM/IM in Canada gave up the game tomorrow, the current group of 2300s would now be "the elite", and there would be little change in my eyes to the fabric of chess in Canada.

Local magazines with local content should be made at the local level. When you provide a national magazine (like the CFC) your goal is to reach the greatest number of people possible, not just a couple of Joe Blow happy to see their own names in print.

The goal of the national magazine should be to benefit the readers and help grow the game. It needs to be a promotional tool and give up pretensions of being a chess magazine.

In a few months one Bobby Fischer has manufactured millions of Bob Smiths, almost by miracle. The masses are very much influenced by the stars.

Sigh, again with Fischer. This is a once in a lifetime phenomenon with factors way beyond just him being a great chess player (cold war, his weird eccentricities, greater chess culture in the USA) that cannot be counted on to ever repeat even if we somehow develop a world class player, which is a long enough shot to begin with. The counter example I always like to give to Fischer is Jonathan Power.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Power

Clearly an all time great at the game of squash including being world #1, as well as (according to that site) a relatively colorful character. Did he somehow spark a massive explosion of interest in squash in Canada? No - it's a niche sport, just like chess is a niche game.

We rather need to offer more for the player's money and build a real chess life, not just offer mere survival.

Well, at least we agree on this. My argument is that everything you are suggesting has been tried by the CFC and the results have been a failure.

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: Organizer Obligation to Seek Sponsors

Hi Alex:

Good idea to start the thread on the members' CFC Chess Forum. I've answered you there.

Bob

[Alex Ferreira]

Re: Organizer Obligation to Seek Sponsors

I am not sure of the extent to which organizers outside of Quebec make significant effort to find sponsors.

But GM Mark Bluvshtein has brought a motion, seconded by me, to strengthen the national standards for major tournaments in Canada. One of the amendments he has proposed to Section 8 of the Handbook, dealing with the Canadian Closed , is:

" Section 811 ( b ) The organizers shall provide a prize fund; part of this obligation shall be to make a significant effort to find sponsors; .............

( d ) Bidders for the Canadian Championships shall take into account in their bids this section 811 of section 8 of the Handbook, and if they intend to exempt themselves from any of the conditions herein, they shall clearly note such in their bids, so the CFC can determine whether such bids will be accepted. "

Mark hopes that his will make clear that organizers have an obligation to at least try to find sponsors, and that they risk non-acceptance of their bid should they try to exempt themselves from this condition of bidding.

Bob

Hi Bob,

I responded to this on the CFC Forum, hoping it'll generate more feedback from governors. Also this thread is getting hard to follow with so many different subtopics, I felt like it could be a topic of its own.

http://www.chesscanada.info/forum/showthread.php?t=869

Alex F.

[Jean Hébert]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Vision: To build the CFC membership by supporting local clubs and tournaments

Action plan:
a) Reduce the cost of playing:

This is good if you want to attract low income or jobless people but bad if you want to attract people with money to spend on their pastime, people with money to pay for private tuition for their kids, and finally people with connections to help organizers find sponsors. On the other hand, the bigger part of the costs of playing are unrelated to the CFC, namely travel expenses, food and accomodations. The CFC only has control over its membership fee. Whatever its level it should simply match the quality and quantity of its services, including national programs for its elite.

1) Drop the rating fee in half, and outsource the rating function.

Agreed. But it is not likely to reduce the playing costs by much or solve the CFCs financial problems.

2) Reduce CFC membership fee to something like $10. $20 maximum. I believe from my time as an organizer that it was a huge roadblock to new players when they showed up for a tourney and I told them $36 to join the CFC, $20 for the tourney, and yeah, you are pretty much likely gonna get $0 back while a bunch of experienced players get the prizes.

Since that there are usually only a few new players at a time, why don't organizers waive the entry fee for first timers instead of waiting for the CFC to solve their "problem" ?

b) Focus resources and reward organizers:

1) Make a percentage of every membership payable to the organizer who submits it. This gives organizers a direct incentive to look for new members, and to retain existing members.

This has been done for years in Quebec with no perceptible results for an obvious reason. By definition chess organizers are volunteers and do not expect financial rewards for their involvement. A few bucks apiece make no difference.

2) Drop all junior, women, and Olympiad program funding/organizational resources. If there are organizers who wish to run these events, wonderful. They provide no long term benefit to the CFC in terms of membership.

This is probably the most idiotic proposal I have seen in my lifetime, especially considering that the CFC is already devoting very little to these vital programs. Imagine a national sporting federation having no interest in its elite and no interest in its youth (and its future). Of course they provide benefits (short and long term) for the membership. We need many more strong players to give simuls, to teach, to coach and to write about the game to promote it, not less. Exploits of sportsmen does have an effect on memberships.

3) Require players to pay all FIDE fees for their ratings.

Again, such a "creative" proposal in order for the CFC to save peanuts on the back of an already largely abandoned elite. No chess federation in the World has ever to my knowledge thought of a thing like that. Again, we need more strong players to promote the game, not less.

c) Emphasize local results:

1) Re-design the newsletter/magazine to essentially be a compilation of provincial magazines. There would be no coverage of world chess. I believe that seeing their names in the "National magazine" is a huge motivator for people to come and keep playing.

Local magazines with local content should be made at the local level. When you provide a national magazine (like the CFC) your goal is to reach the greatest number of people possible, not just a couple of Joe Blow happy to see their own names in print.

My belief is that chess will not grow in Canada from miraculously developing one Magnus Carlsen. It will grow from developing 10,000 Bob Smiths.

In a few months one Bobby Fischer has manufactured millions of Bob Smiths, almost by miracle. The masses are very much influenced by the stars. Imagine golf without Tiger Woods despite his faults...
But of course the Fischers ans Carlsen cannot be planned and manufactured. However most other GMs, IMs and masters are made, not born. We need those dedicated people to promote the game.

I recognize some of these things might be against CFC constitution
, or would have no chance of passing governors, or whatever, but that is how I think the CFC has to move forward - become lean, realize what it can and can't do, and realize what is stopping their customers from coming back.

The CFC it seems to me has become quite lean recently even touching the bone. When you don't communicate with your customers for more than a year, you have become very lean... Apart from the fact that the game of chess is quite tough, especially for newcomers, the bulk of the reasons why people don't come back lays at the local and club level, not at the CFC level. Seeing how most clubs and organizers operate is depressing, especially for newcomers who have other pastimes to compare with. One example being the way most weekenders simply die out on Sunday nights, with people leaving one by one without even a closing ceremony to leave them a sweet taste in their mouth.

Right now, I believe it's the cost of the game, a feeling like the CFC only cares about juniors/titled players, and that the local clubs/remote provinces feel no connection to the CFC.

The accountant's view is good to balance a budget but quite useless to build a vision on how to promote chess. Simply reducing membership fees is not going to do much. We rather need to offer more for the player's money and build a real chess life, not just offer mere survival.

[Kerry Liles]

Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Kerry, I promise I wasn't attempting to bait you in any way. After your apology, I have great respect for you. Please attempt to have at least some respect for me. I'm not out to destroy Jean Hebert, that is really absurd. I just don't agree with his arrogant Father-Knows-Best attitude. Are you blind to his arrogance? If he could change his arrogance and be really open to ideas and dialog, I'd be really impressed. But look even at how he treats David Ottosen (whom I should state I do not know and don't communicate with). Pure arrogance and demeaning attitudes. Even the usually gracious Bob Gillanders is losing patience.

Kerry, I did not say a newsletter was of no value to chess in Canada. Of course it is of value, but only to those already playing chess. What I wrote or at least meant was that it doesn't contribute to the growth of chess in Canada. Unless there's something more in it than mere analysis of chess games.

When it comes to growth of chess in Canada, Jean's newsletter is a non-factor, that is what I was saying, and it is simply my opinion. I'm not saying his newsletter is a bad thing or has no value.

You also say in so many words that the CFC has been a non-factor for this growth. But let's forget about the CFC for a moment and focus on Jean's criticisms of organizers. Do you agree with these criticisms? Do you agree that organizers, and specifically those outside of Quebec, are either not seeking sponsorship at all or are not seeking it aggressively enough?

Again, this isn't any kind of baiting. Jean has made accusations, very general ones, and we that care about chess in Canada need to come to some kind of conclusion as to the truth of them.

Ok, I see your points I think. I think Jean's criticism of some organizers (even his original criticism of Hal Bond's efforts) have merit since they were applicable to very high-level events. I think that Jean primarily focuses his interest on those events, not weekend swiss tournaments or the like. I believe that if you offer a well organized, high quality event for high level players, that event will succeed based on the skill of the organizers and the time they have to plan and execute... If the planning or the time is at all short, the event will suffer (and in extreme cases like the event that started much of the nasty exchanges) should likely NOT be held at all.

I think most organizers are not seeking sponsorship (I almost want to say "...at all" but that is a little harsh and perhaps too far off the mark). Gordon Ritchie and the Canadian Open Committee come to mind as exception as did the PWC event recently in Toronto... It *can* be done, but isn't being done. The CFC isn't doing it (in my view the CFC is dysfunctional and needs to be disbanded and replaced by a benevolent dictatorship - we just have to find the proper benevolent dictator. I very much like some of the suggestions David Ottosen elsewhere today in this thread -although some are hard pills to swallow.

I will leave it at that; Jean has valid points and so does almost everyone else, but no-one has all the answers. Nasty dialogue is worse than NO dialogue. I do not want to pit one group against another and create even more fractions of effort.

I think the CFC has to regroup to concentrate on growth of chess in clubs and associations and at the same time provide support for the "elite" players that we have or we can grow - as far as FIDE support, opportunity for Norms and a few top-class events that Canadian players would be proud to enter. I don't mind some of my CFC membership money being used for the latter purpose - provided that it is properly managed and proportioned (neither at the moment in my opinion).

[Mark S. Dutton]

100 PLAYERS is very tough for any organizer to get - Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

Prize fund is 2000 with min 100 players paying a 50$ fee (5000 total collected). 2000/5000 = 40% return to the prize fund

I wish organizers to succeed, as to attract 100 CFC players might be very difficult.

You are so right Egidijus! All the very best of luck to the organizers of this event.

2000-2002 Saturday ACTIVE Series
at the DUTTON CHESS CLUB ON BAYVIEW
1681 Bayview Ave – 2nd floor
(2 blocks south of Eglinton – above Chess’n Math store)

1. August 14, 1999 - The 1999 "First Saturday ACTIVE" - 35 PLAYERS
2. September 25, 1999 - Saturday Active Series #2 - 22 PLAYERS
3. October 23, 1999 - Saturday Active Series #3 - 30 PLAYERS
4. January 8, 2000 - Ser #4 "New Millennium ACTIVE" - 36 PLAYERS
5. AUGUST 26, 2000 - 5TH (Summer Active) - 39 PLAYERS
6. SEPTEMBER 23, 2000 - 6TH (Fall Active) - 38 PLAYERS
7. OCTOBER 21, 2000 - 7TH (Hallowe’en Active) - 34 PLAYERS
8. NOVEMBER 25, 2000 - 8TH (November Active) - 34 PLAYERS
9. DECEMBER 23, 2000 - 9TH (Christmas Active) - 36 PLAYERS
10. JANUARY 6, 2001 - 10TH (New Year's Active) - 39 PLAYERS
11. FEBRUARY 24, 2001 - 11TH (February Active) - 32 PLAYERS
12. MARCH 24, 2001 - 12TH (Spring Active) - 39 PLAYERS
13. MAY 5, 2001 - 13TH (May Day Active) - 25 PLAYERS
14. JUNE 2, 2001 - 14TH (June Active) - 18 PLAYERS
15. JULY 28, 2001 - 15TH (July Sizzler Active) - 41 PLAYERS
16. AUGUST 25, 2001 - 16TH (Summer Active) - 40 PLAYERS
17. September 22, 2001 - 17TH - (Fall Active) - 43 PLAYERS
18. October 27, 2001 - 18TH - (Hallowe'en Active) - 34 PLAYERS
19. November 24, 2001 -19TH - (November Active) - 45 PLAYERS
20. December 22, 2001 - 20TH - (Christmas Active) - 40 PLAYERS
21. January 5, 2002 - "Series #21 - New Year's Open" - 55 PLAYERS
22. February 2, 2002 - "Series #22 - February Open" - 40 PLAYERS
23. March 2, 2002 - "Series #23 - March Active Open" - 33 PLAYERS
24. April 6, 2002 - "Series #24 - Spring Active Open" - 22 PLAYERS
25. May 4, 2002 - "Series #25– May Day Active Open" - 38 PLAYERS
26. June 1, 2002 - "Series #26 – June Active Open" - 24 PLAYERS
27. July 6 - "Series #27 – Summer Sizzler Active Open" - 34 PLAYERS
28. August 17 - "Series #28 – August Active Open" - 32 PLAYERS
29. September 28 - "Series #29 – Fall Active Open" - 23 PLAYERS
30. October 26 - "Series #30 – Hallowe'en Open" - 32 PLAYERS
31. November 23 - "Series #31 - November Open" - 31 PLAYERS
32. December 21 - "Series #32 - December Open" - 53 PLAYERS

[Mark S. Dutton]

100 Players for an ACTIVE is very ambitious - GOOD LUCK! Re: $ 400 in 5 hours work !!

http://webhome.idirect.com/~mdutton/DECACT32.htm

That link above is the last ACTIVE tournament I directed in 2002 at the Dutton Chess Club on Bayview.

From 1999 to 2002, we ran 32 CFC-rated ACTIVE tournaments.

50 players was a good turnout. 30 was about average.

As for large active events... how about the Canadian Active Championship that used to be held each year at the Estonian Chess club on Broadview in Toronto?

100+ players in 5 sections was the norm for the Estonian Active events.

Other than those events, as a Tournament Director and Organizer, I found that many players in Canada don't even have an ACTIVE rating and/or only have a provisional rating.

You can check crosstables at the Chess Federation of Canada prior to 2002 for better attendance at Active tournaments.

ON Crosstable List

Use ACTIVE from drop down menu

http://chess.ca/crosstables.shtml


Parry Sound vs North Bay



12/27/2001



A

DCC Christmas Active U1600



12/22/2001



A

DCC Christmas Active Open



12/22/2001



A

RA Club Active Championship



12/20/2001



A

Burlington Active at End of 2001



12/19/2001



A

ICC December Active



12/16/2001



A

London December Junior Active



12/15/2001



A

Kingston Fall Active Group 2



12/10/2001



A

Scarborough December Active



12/10/2001



A

Kingston Fall Active Group 1



12/10/2001



A

Kingston Fall Active Group 3



12/10/2001



A

Chess for Charity Active



12/2/2001



A

DCC Saturday Active 19 U2000



11/24/2001



A

DCC Saturday Active 19 U1600



11/24/2001



A

DCC Saturday Active 19 Open



11/24/2001



A

1st Polonia Active Championship



11/24/2001



A

ICC November Active



11/18/2001



A

Scarborough November Active



11/18/2001



A

DCC Halloween Active 18



10/27/2001



A

Ottawa Halloween Active



10/27/2001



A

ICC October Active



10/21/2001



A

London October Junior Active



10/20/2001



A

September 2001 Active



10/14/2001



A

London Junior Active



9/27/2001



A

KWCC September Active



9/25/2001



A

DCC Saturday Active 17 U2000



9/22/2001



A

DCC Saturday Active 17 Open



9/22/2001



A

Brantford CC Summer End Active



9/20/2001



A

September ICC Active



9/16/2001



A

Polonia Chess Club September Active



9/16/2001



A

Hamilton CCC End of Summer Active



9/14/2001



A

Lesiege Spraggett Active Fundraiser



9/9/2001



A

KW Fall Active U1600



9/8/2001



A

KW Fall Active Open



9/8/2001



A

Parry Sound Public Library RR



9/8/2001



A

RA Intro Active



9/6/2001



A

Greenstone Summer Active



9/1/2001



A

ICC August Active



8/31/2001



A

DCC Summer Active 16



8/25/2001



A

Summerfest Active



8/19/2001



A

Concordia Club Active



8/9/2001



A

St Catharines CC Active Champs



8/2/2001



A

Scarborough Tues Summer 2



7/31/2001



A

July Sizzler U1600



7/28/2001



A

July Sizzler Active



7/28/2001



A

Scarborough CC Tues Summer Active 1



7/17/2001



A

ICC CFC July Active



7/15/2001



A

Scarborough June Bug Active



6/23/2001



A

ICC June Active 2001



6/20/2001



A

Polish constitution of May 3rd



6/5/2001



A

Junior June Active



6/2/2001



A

DCC Sat Active 14



6/2/2001



A

MidScar Double RR1 Active



5/26/2001



A

Scarborough Mayflower Active



5/26/2001



A

ICC May 20th Active



5/20/2001



A

Junior May Active



5/19/2001



A

ONeil Pisanski Match



5/15/2001



A

Blenheim CYCC Qualifier



5/15/2001



A

Chatham May Kent Junior



5/15/2001



A

Addley Pisanski Match



5/15/2001



A

Fryer ONeil Match



5/15/2001



A

Addley Beacock Match



5/15/2001



A

Last chance before the Ontario Open



5/12/2001



A

DCC Saturday May Day Active U2000



5/5/2001



A

DCC Saturday May Day Active Open



5/5/2001



A

Hamilton Out of Hibernation Active



5/4/2001



A

Xth An Polonia Juniors U13 Active



5/1/2001



A

Scarborough April Showers Active



4/28/2001



A

Langill May Active



4/15/2001



A

April 15 2001 ICC CFC



4/15/2001



A

Xth An Polonia Juniors U20 Active



4/7/2001



A

April 1 Den Otter Active



4/1/2001



A

March 31st Junior Active



3/31/2001



A

DCC Spring Active U2000



3/24/2001



A

DCC Spring Active U1600



3/24/2001



A

DCC Spring Active Open



3/24/2001



A

ICC March 18th Active



3/18/2001



A

Al Den Otter Feb Double Active



3/18/2001



A

Scarborough Shamrock Active



3/17/2001



A

March Break Junior Active



3/16/2001



A

Polonia CC March Active



3/14/2001



A

2001 Niagara Falls Open Active



3/10/2001



A

Hamilton City Winter Active



3/2/2001



A

Burlington Chess Club Winter Active



2/28/2001



A

DCC February Active U1600



2/24/2001



A

DCC February Active Open



2/24/2001



A

ICC Feb 18th Active



2/18/2001



A

Scarborough Groundhog Active



2/17/2001



A

Polonia Chess Club February Active



2/14/2001



A

Al Den Otters Active Jan Swiss



1/28/2001



A

Windsor January Junior Active



1/20/2001



A

Scarborough Winter Active



1/20/2001



A

Bachynsky vs Boyes Active



1/20/2001



A

Polonia Chess Club Jan Active



1/17/2001



A

Mid Scarborough CC Double RR Active



1/13/2001



A

DCC New Year Saturday Active Open



1/6/2001



A

DCC New Year Saturday Active U2000



1/6/2001



A

DCC New Year Saturday Active U1600



1/6/2001



A

Mad Man Active Chess Champ



1/4/2001



A

KW December Active



1/2/2001



A

Snowflake Cup Active Championship



1/1/2001



A

Kids Family Christmas Active



12/23/2000



A

DCC Saturday Active 9 U1600



12/23/2000



A

DCC Saturday Active 9 Open



12/23/2000



A

RA Active Club Championship



12/21/2000



A

Poplawski vs Pisanski Active



12/17/2000



A

Addley vs ONeil Active



12/17/2000



A

Chatham Kent December Junior Active



12/13/2000



A

Windsor December Active B



12/9/2000



A

Windsor December Active A



12/9/2000



A

Polonia Chess Club November Active



11/15/2000



A