Canada at the Olypmiad

[Bob Armstrong]

Bidders for Closed to Seek Sponsors

Hi Jean:

I don't know if you are aware of the motion by GM Mark Bluvshtein, to put some pressure on organizers to find sponsorship, by putting the condition right into the Handbook. His motion ( seconded by me ) is:

Motion 2010-13 – Canadian Championships – Rules of Procedure

Revision # 2 – March 6, 2010

Moved: Mark Bluvshtein Seconded: Bob Armstrong

That CFC Handbook Section 8 on Canadian Championships be amended as follows:

1. Section 801 be deleted, except for the section reference, and the following substituted for it:

“ Canadian Championship and Canadian Zonal Tournament:

A Canadian Championship shall be held each year. But there can be substituted for it a Championship Tournament known as the "Canadian Zonal Championship Tournament", hereinafter referred to as the "Zonal Tournament", which shall normally be held in Canada to coincide with the FIDE World Championship cycle. The winner of the Zonal Tournament will be that year’s Canadian Champion. “

........


4. Section 811 on “ Prize Fund “ be deleted and the following substituted for it:

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

The motion has been filed, and will come for vote at the Toronto July CFC AGM.

Bob

[Kerry Liles]

Re: Bidders for Closed to Seek Sponsors

Hi Jean:

I don't know if you are aware of the motion by GM Mark Bluvshtein, to put some pressure on organizers to find sponsorship, by putting the condition right into the Handbook. His motion ( seconded by me ) is:

Motion 2010-13 – Canadian Championships – Rules of Procedure

Revision # 2 – March 6, 2010

Moved: Mark Bluvshtein Seconded: Bob Armstrong

That CFC Handbook Section 8 on Canadian Championships be amended as follows:

1. Section 801 be deleted, except for the section reference, and the following substituted for it:

“ Canadian Championship and Canadian Zonal Tournament:

A Canadian Championship shall be held each year. But there can be substituted for it a Championship Tournament known as the "Canadian Zonal Championship Tournament", hereinafter referred to as the "Zonal Tournament", which shall normally be held in Canada to coincide with the FIDE World Championship cycle. The winner of the Zonal Tournament will be that year’s Canadian Champion. “

........


4. Section 811 on “ Prize Fund “ be deleted and the following substituted for it:

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

The motion has been filed, and will come for vote at the Toronto July CFC AGM.

Bob

I have a problem with the phrase "make a significant effort" since that implies a purely subjective interpretation of the idea. It would have been more interesting if it stated "...shall be to offer a prize fund not less than $C50,000"

Of course (!) I realize that such a statement would likely mean the instant kiss of death for such tournaments, but if the tournament is going to take place even if any Tom, Dick, or Harry can enter, then it should have never taken place.

Potential organizers can claim (in any number of creative ways) that their plans include elaborate attempts to do a lot of things. It is the *result* that is important and the *result* is NOT what is being mandated by that and similar motions or "rules".

Until someone establishes the bar high enough, it will continue to be set as low as possible.

[Jean Hébert]

Re: Bidders for Closed to Seek Sponsors

Hi Jean:

I don't know if you are aware of the motion by GM Mark Bluvshtein, to put some pressure on organizers to find sponsorship, by putting the condition right into the Handbook.

Hi Bob,

I believe that many people and I have already made comments about it in some other thread. It is well motivated but too vague and not binding at all. In my opinion it is not likely to change things much.

I would have welcomed a motion setting up strict minimal standards regarding format and conditions for the Canadian Closed, (assuming that I'd agree with those minimal conditions, of course) but apparently canadian chess is not ready to take on the challenge of doing things properly (according to established and recognised standards) or not doing them at all. We can't force people to look for sponsors if they don't feel the need to meet and surpass some clear goals and standards. So setting up those minimal standards should come first. Then the need to look for sponsors will come naturally.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Canada at the Olypmiad

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.

Then you wouldn't hold a position of organizing chess if you weren't interested in building the game and the strength of the players. Is that correct?

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.

I don't intend to donate.

It's pretty hard to lead. You see, the CFC has the FIDE lemonade stand. Organizers should be doing things that benefit the players or they should step aside. The organizers are no slouches when it comes to trying to exploit the titled players. Can't you hear it? Come play in our Canadian Open. Look at all the foreign GM's who have entered. Last time I looked there weren't any Canadian GM's. Why do you suppose that it?

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.

I pointed this out a few years ago and suggested right here on Chess Talk that the CFC build a members server and organize and run events so they would be more relevent in the internet chess age. I don't mention it much anymore because I'm not sure they would know how to make the most of such a server.

[Roger Patterson]

Re: Canada at the Olypmiad

Mark me up as another provincial association president who does not have much interest in sponsorship.


One of the problems with Bob Armstrong's and Mark's motion on funding, apart from a lack of reality, is that it assumes that we all agree that a "significant prize fund from sponosorship" is a good thing. I don't even think it is desirable.

I'm not above accepting offered money or looking for sponsorship as a business proposition but what you want is money for nothing. Your basic complaint is that not enough is being done to get someone else to pay for your (ouir) hobby. I have no interest in that problem.

[David Cohen]

Re: Canada at the Olympiad

Re: percentage based fundraising.

John,

I know that, but it's all the CFC can afford.

David

[Erik Malmsten]

Re: Canada at the Olypmiad

I would love to have an Olympiad team headed by such great contributors to chess as Hebert and Spraggett. But chess is not routinely present as part of the government/corporate funding arena, unlike non-Olympic sports like Dragon Boat racing or Rock/Paper/Scissors. In the recent past we had some successful funding from Belzberg and Hartman.

So the choices are:

1) Hebert's moral high ground

1a) do not send a team (most likely result) for the first time in recent history?
1b) in a few months quickly find some corporate sponsors to save the day.

2) send a team with players paying some of the bill.

For this year, 2) is the only option. But we don't have to be happy about it. We need to work on 1b for future teams.

Adsurd Option 3)
This year send a team of patzers who can raise the most money for the next Olympiad team. It'll cost you $10,000 to play board 1.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Canada at the Olypmiad

Mark me up as another provincial association president who does not have much interest in sponsorship.


One of the problems with Bob Armstrong's and Mark's motion on funding, apart from a lack of reality, is that it assumes that we all agree that a "significant prize fund from sponosorship" is a good thing. I don't even think it is desirable.

I'm not above accepting offered money or looking for sponsorship as a business proposition but what you want is money for nothing. Your basic complaint is that not enough is being done to get someone else to pay for your (ouir) hobby. I have no interest in that problem.

No sponsorship for that Keres Memorial you're advertising? Who's guaranteeing the prize money? Also the playing room.

I'm fishing to see if you're consistent or incontinent. :):D

[Roger Patterson]

Re: Canada at the Olypmiad

No sponsorship for that Keres Memorial you're advertising? Who's guaranteeing the prize money? Also the playing room.

that would be me - the organizer.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Canada at the Olypmiad

that would be me - the organizer.

I see. What do you need to break even? Around 50 or 55 players?

[Christopher Mallon]

Re: Canada at the Olypmiad

I didn't say I have no use for sponsors, I said I'm not involved in organizing anything that needs them. And the tag of President, OCA will be coming off on Saturday.

[Jean Hébert]

Re: Canada at the Olypmiad

I didn't say I have no use for sponsors, I said I'm not involved in organizing anything that needs them.

In what kind of "organising" are you involved exactly that would not benefit from sponsorship of some kind ? And what about the organising that you have been involved with in the past ? Nothing there that could have benefitted from sponsorship in some form (money, services, goods, etc.) ?

[Christopher Mallon]

Re: Canada at the Olypmiad

I'm not involved in any organizing at the moment except in the most general of terms, and the last event I was the sole organizer for I did in fact find a fair bit of sponsorship - money, services AND goods.

[Marc Ghannoum]

Re: Canada at the Olypmiad

I couldn't agree more.

I know several companies that would be interested in sponsoring chess events. I have chess-playing friends working in big law firms that wouldn't hesitate to fund chess activities. I myself have often offered sponsorship to any organizer that would just take 2 minutes to contact me and explain his/her project. Back in the day, the FQE had the good sense to approach high-profile chess enthusiasts (Claude Filion, Roger Lemelin, Gilles Carles, etc...) who thereafter attracted potential sponsors.

[Aris Marghetis]

Re: Canada at the Olypmiad

I couldn't agree more.

I know several companies that would be interested in sponsoring chess events. I have chess-playing friends working in big law firms that wouldn't hesitate to fund chess activities. I myself have often offered sponsorship to any organizer that would just take 2 minutes to contact me and explain his/her project. Back in the day, the FQE had the good sense to approach high-profile chess enthusiasts (Claude Filion, Roger Lemelin, Gilles Carles, etc...) who thereafter attracted potential sponsors.

Hi Marc, what part of the country are you located in?

My email address is : arismarghetis at rogers dot com

Thanks and regards, Aris (FA in Ottawa/Gatineau area)