If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
Nice, did you notice you just did what I was complaining about?
At this point I am not involved in organizing anything that needs sponsors, so I'm not sure what I need all of your "advice" for?
In case you missed my point, it was that people on here are always preaching that others should go and do this or do that (voluntelling) but virtually never offering to do it themselves without conditions (volunteering).
So unless you want to revise your statement to be more along the lines of "I'd love to use my prestigious titles (Canadian Champion, IM, etc) to help find sponsors for _x_ event, when can I start?" then all you're really doing is proving my point.
It is pretty unbelievable to see someone who signs his messages "President, Ontario Chess Association" write that he has no use for sponsors. Why then would anyone volunteer to help you out find sponsors you have no need for ? Is it that you are not aware of your responsibilities or that you have taken up too much for your actual capabilities ? No one pretending to be an organizer should say (or think) that he has no need for sponsors. It would be like a player saying that he needs no opponents.
Regarding your "point" that for some reason you seem to consider very important to "win", it is a non-starter. Jean Hébert as a player with some achievements, coach, teacher, author is and always has been available to meet and talk to people involved or potentially involved in chess, including organizers and sponsors.
Jean, my point is that since a team has already been formed of players who have agreed to pay their own way they should be allowed to do so.
My understanding is that these players were the top ones accepting to play, and that afterwards they decided to offer to pay for their own way. But if you are right and that they were chosen BECAUSE of their willingness to pay their way, then things are even worse.
I hope you do not think I support the way this has been done.
No, but by saying that they should be allowed to go by paying their own way you are actually encouraging things to be done the same way in the future! If you say A) things should not be done this way, you must say B) it can't be done this way this time.
But if you are right and that they were chosen BECAUSE of their willingness to pay their way, then things are even worse..
I think the team consists of the best players at this moment. Compare the initial team:
Women's team:
Dina Kagramanov (Canadian champion)
Yuanling Yuan (qualified by rating)
Nava Starr (qualified by rating)
Yulia Lacau-Rodean (qualified by rating)
Yelizaveta Orlova (selected by the Selection Committee)
and the final:
Yuanling Yuan,
Dina Kagramanov,
Iulia Lacau-Rodean,
Yelizaveta Orlova,
Dalia Kagramanov.
Thus only one player declined. (There were 3 declines for the National ;)
I personally love how top players are always complaining along the lines of "you guys need to do a better job organizing chess in Canada" and "I can't believe how bad you are at organizing. I would never do it that way!"
All are completely self-serving statements as they would be the main beneficiary of more funding. I sure wouldn't. Why should organizers do things only with them in mind? How about the majority of players who are just playing for fun? Just because they have chosen it as their life's work, doesn't mean everyone should go along for the ride to make things better for them.
I am waiting for the day when they all realize that chess in this country is not an important activity to the masses and even to us most of the time. If they want to promote themselves, let them go and do it. If they want to get someone to sponser them, go do it.
As for complaing about the CFC, the fact that it has never been able to do a better job to give them their Utopian federation should tell them something beyond the fact that the people involved are not competent. There has to be other reasons!
To more than 99% of us, it is just a game. Go earn your own living. Stop complaining about others. If you want something to change, take up the job yourself.
To more than 99% of us, it is just a game. Go earn your own living. Stop complaining about others. If you want something to change, take up the job yourself.
Uh Brian - this is Jean Hebert that you are talking to. He has been around a long time and knows a lot better than any of us both how the chess world, and the real world, work. I advise you to just stop posting and let the expert educate us.
You gotta be kidding! Who else should be responsible for attracting sponsors if not the officials chosen to organize and manage the operation?
I mean... what is it you're supposed to be doing?
No, I had to turn the CFC down. No time. I wanted to do it on a percentage basis only. Unfortunately, I have some fixed expenses that cost about $500. I don't want to ask the CFC to pay for this up front with no guarantees of results. So, they should find more people to volunteer; or find someone with time to work on a percentage basis.
David
Thanks for the clarification David. Of course, I did not know the details of any offers that were made or the results of any discussions. I know nothing about 'professional fundraising' but I would have thought that having the organization cover reasonable expenses would be a no-brainer. I had no idea that it might be considered "improper" in some circles. It just seems like (another) lost opportunity.
Just a reminder that if funding does not come through the B team is ready...
Unofficial pay-your-own-way grassroots team
1st board: Vlad Drkulec
2nd board: Paul Beckwith
3rd board: Gary Ruben
4th board: Ed Seedhouse
5th board: Bob Gillanders
6th board: Paul Bonham
Just a reminder that if funding does not come through the B team is ready...
Unofficial pay-your-own-way grassroots team
1st board: Vlad Drkulec
2nd board: Paul Beckwith
3rd board: Gary Ruben
4th board: Ed Seedhouse
5th board: Bob Gillanders
6th board: Paul Bonham
I don't play on B teams.
I recently rejected an invitation to play in a correspondence event organized by Argentina. I think it celebrates their 200 years of independence. The invitation I got (they send it through the federation) was for the B section which is ratings of 2400+ and was only for a category 8 section. I normally play category 9 and higher.
A few years ago their board 1 couldn't beat me in the Pan Am games and now they invite me for a B section. I played the 15 player round robin board undefeated.
A couple of years ago the organizers were having a hard time getting enough teams for the North Atlantic Team Tournament. I let a couple of GM's from nations which didn't have teams know I was playing board 1 and asked if they would be having a team. The teams materialized and the event took place.
Of course. He has a high rating so then he must know how the world works as well as how to move those little chess peices. He must already realize that there are many people just sitting around waiting to give their money away to chess players for an unclear return on their investment. I await more of his knowledge to be bestowed upon me.
Of course. He has a high rating so then he must know how the world works as well as how to move those little chess peices. He must already realize that there are many people just sitting around waiting to give their money away to chess players for an unclear return on their investment. I await more of his knowledge to be bestowed upon me.
Now you're getting it, Brian. I'm glad you've seen the light!
Of course. He has a high rating so then he must know how the world works as well as how to move those little chess peices. He must already realize that there are many people just sitting around waiting to give their money away to chess players for an unclear return on their investment. I await more of his knowledge to be bestowed upon me.
While you guys are getting your jollies from laughing at Jean, he would have been a fine addition to the team. He's very well known in the correspondence chess circles, as well as across Canada and would have brought interest to the team. His games, and probably the rest of the team, would be watched. It might even have brought some donations for the teams. His playing would have brought interest from the veteran players.
If it wasn't for the players the organizers wouldn't be needed. Judging from the number of active players in Canada, I'd say many of the players have voted with their feet.
If you REALLY want "knowledge to be bestowed upon" you, send a donation to the CFC. An education is never free. :)
You gotta be kidding! Who else should be responsible for attracting sponsors if not the officials chosen to organize and manage the operation?
I mean... what is it you're supposed to be doing?
Do not ask yourself why chess is in such a poor state in Canada and why the CFC has been on the verge of bankrupcy and still is in more ways than one. When we read about a former CFC president and current Ontario Chess Association president stating flatly that he or his events have no need for sponsors and that he has no use for advice on how to find any, then we understand what the problem is. Turning away even the possibility of sponsorship is in effect giving up on involving the community into what you are doing for the good of that community. No decent organizer (whether its chess or something else) can think like that.
What bothers some people here is not so much that I push organizers to find sponsorship (I use this word in the largest sense possible, which includes donations and any other support that is possible to get from public, private or corporate sources when you simply bother to make contacts and ask) it is that I regularly underlines real life examples where it is being done successfully by several people in Canada. That seems to make people like Chris and others feel ill at-ease, if not inadequate, incompetent and useless. And not without reason.
The easy way to react is to shoot at the messenger. But the reality of things is that the CFC has been run for the last few decades by level 1 organizers (with one or two exceptions), that are satisfied with simply collecting entry fees and giving back the little that is left after expenses and then saying to justify themselves that "everyone had a good time."
Only in chess do we find people thinking that it is enough. If someone like a chess organizer has no interest in getting better and more efficient at what he is doing and could/should be doing, then maybe he should consider stepping down and leave the spot completely vacant for someone else with a little more ambition and drive.
All these things only matter to someone if they believe their money should be spent to make sure it happens. I would rather have my money for myself and not to promote someone else's career or hobbies.
Don't get me wrong. I will cheer for the team and will most likely donate money to the cause. But I don't have to listen to someone who keeps criticizing others for not doing things that would benefit him first and foremost. That is just crap. Lead or shut up.
Judging by the number of active players in Canada, one can easily conclude that most, past and present, consider this a hobby and now they can do it online and not have to travel to find opponents. Any other interpretation of that observation would not be correct. The correlation is clear – internet use goes up, chess playing goes down. Anyway you slice it, chess is not of primary importance to Canadians.
Tweet
Comment