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.
So there are 8 active Scarborough Chess Club members in the U 2000 Class Prize group:
1. Robert Bzikot 1984
2. Pepin Manalo 1932
3. Jim Paterson 1889
4. Michael Song 1866 ( junior )
5. Alex Rapoport 1838
6. Ferdinand Cale 1806
7. Pino Verde 1800
8. Bob Armstrong 1800
I will in my blog be paying special attention to keeping everyone informed on how these 8 are doing.
Also, for those not aware, I am the editor of the SCC Newsletter ( longest-running current twice monthly/bimonthly chess newsletter in Canada - now completing its 11th year), Scarborough Community of Toronto Chess News & Views. We have an open, free subscribers' list - if anyone would like to receive it, just e-mail me : bobarm@sympatico.ca . So this is notice to the U 2000 SCC members that I will be expecting you all to pick out your most interesting game this tournament, and to provide it to me for an upcoming article on the U 2000 CO group. You could give it to me after the round, and then I'll return it to you the next day, or you could e-mail it to me. Looking forward to receiving some interesting games.
Day 1 - July 10: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog - Pt. I
The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog
Day 1/Rd. 1- Saturday, July 10
Tournament Opens Well
I got to the registration check in desk about 4:45 PM. There were already quite a few players around, and I said “ Hi “ to some friends and acquaintances, some I hadn’t seen for a while. I got my players’ package, and the souvenir golf shirt embossed with the Canadian Open logo. It will look nice hanging next to my World Chess Network ( now amalgamated with another playing site ) T-shirt, my 2007 Ottawa CO T-shirt, and my 2009 PwC Toronto Open golf shirt. I met a friend who is from my old hometown of Sarnia, Ontario, and so we went for a walk before the round, down on the harbour boardwalk – nice way to relax before a round.
The opening ceremony got started pretty close to 6:00 PM. One of the Toronto City Councilors, Joe Mihevic, gave a well researched welcome to the players, and touted the benefits of playing chess. The Organizing Committee gave a big welcome and thank-you to all attending. We broke the minimum goal the organizers had had for this tournament – 250 players. The registered total is 262 . It would have been nice to break 300, but Toronto chess players have been picky the last number of years about when they come out. And I did hear some complaints about the entry fee. Myself, I don’t agree the $ 175/ $ 195 is too high. We are trying to hold a credible national championship for our sport, with an up-scale atmosphere. We have invited a number of foreign GM’s, and their conditions/perks cost the organizers something. We are having it at an upscale downtown /harbour front hotel, the Westin Harbour Castle – 10 days of rental for a number of rooms does not come cheap in Toronto. The entry fee includes a welcoming T-shirt, and a closing banquet. It seems to me that if we do want an upscale championship, in the style of the Canadian nationals for golf, tennis, etc., then part of the costs have got to be borne by the entry fees. It is my view that chess is one of the cheapest and most enjoyable hobbies around. And for Toronto players, I can only say that it doesn’t get any cheaper – what were the total costs of playing in Edmonton in 2009, when you add up hotel room, meals, air fare, cabs etc.? Having it in Toronto was a big plus – it looks like you’ve shot yourself in the foot, if you didn’t enter because of the registration fee.
Rd. 1 Results
Since MonRoi was so quick on posting the results early this morning, I could finalize the number of players in our U 2000 Class – it is 56. 51/56 players in our A Class group played in Rd. 1 ( 5 byes ).
Because of the hyper-accelerated pairings system, 24 of our top players got paired up against experts ( they had been given 2 ghost points for rating purposes, like the bottom part of the expert class ). There were only 3 winners in this group:
Sean Rachar (1951 )
Simon Gladstone (1946 )
Laurent Allard (1934 )
10 players of our group got paired with another member of our group ( 9 of them
had been given 2 ghost points ). In this part, the 3 getting a full point were:
John W Chidley-Hill (1897 )
Ben Olden-Cooligan (1888 )
Paul Stephens (1882 )
That left 17 of us, including me, paired down against B class players ( we had 1 ghost point, as did the top part of the B class ). As might be expected, of that part, 16/17 got 1 pt.:
Oleg Tseluiko (1874 )
David Miller (1871 )
Ralph Deline (1869 )
Michael Song (1866 )
Lali Agbabishvili (1860 )
David Poirier (1855 )
Dmitry Chernik (1855 )
Ferdinand Supsup (1851 )
Stephen Lipic (1845 )
Arjun Bharat (1841 )
Ed Zator (1835 )
Jaime Solis (1825 )
Michael Zaghi (1817 )
Ferdinand Cale (1806 )
Pino Verde (1800 )
Jackie Peng (1800 )
Robert J. Armstrong (1800 )
So, out of 56 players in our group, after one round, only 22 have a full point.
But this does not mean all 22 winners will end up in the same pairing group now. This is because of the ghost points of the hyper-accelerated pairings system. Over 1/2 of our group had 2 ghost points. And the rest had 1 ghost point. Every member of our group will now lose 1 ghost point. So 6 of our winners will have 2 pts. for pairing purposes, but 16 of our winners have 1 point for pairing purposes. Thus our winners are still split into two different rating groups for Rd. 2.
The 8 Scarborough Chess Club U 2000 Results:
1 point – Michael Song; Ferdinand Cale; Pino Verde; Bob Armstrong
½ point – Robert Bzikot; Jim Paterson; Alex Rapoport
0 points – Pepin Manalo;
My Struggle.
As you saw above, I was fortunate to be one of the Rd. 1 winners in our A class. But it was not an easy win by any stretch. The opening was relatively equal. But I was positioning my pieces for an attack, and Ali missed a nice little tactic that had arisen, whereby I won a P. Ali then got a bit desperate, and tried for a counter-attack. The problem was that he opened up his K-side too much, and I got checks, and got one of his B’s pinned, and threatened by a P. He was unable to extract himself, and after an exchange of heavy artillery, I was just up a B and some P’s, and Ali resigned with less than one minute on his clock.
Projection for Rd. 2
Because I won, but have now lost my ghost point, I am in the 1-point pairing group. And joining me are the members of our group who lost to experts, because they still have 1 ghost point for pairing purposes. Along with them will come all the experts who lost, who had been given 2 ghost points. At the same time, all the lower-rated winners will also enter the 1-point group. So my rating group suddenly got stronger at the top, and weaker at the bottom ( but they are all winners !! ). So it worked out that I am paired up for Rd. 2 – I play Black against a member of my group, Yves Ber (1914 )
[ Continued in Part II below ]
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Sunday, 11th July, 2010, 02:42 AM.
Re: Day 1 - July 10: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog - Pt. II
Day 1/Rd. 1- Saturday, July 10 [ Continued ]
Some Random Thoughts on Playing in a Canadian Open
Though the 9 GM’s are all off in a top group, there is something awe-inspiring at playing in the same hall as these guys. They are so good ( and yet still not the best ). I sometimes try to explain to my non-chess friends, where I stand in the echelons of tournament chess. I fall back on rating points. I explain that a young junior who is just starting to play, but does know something, may be rated 800. I explain that I am in the middle of tournament players, and I am rated 1,000 rating points higher, at 1800. I try to explain that this is a long distance. The junior has a lot to learn about the game to jump up 1000 rating points. Then I advise that the top three players in the world are rated 2800 and over ( Carlsen, Topalov and Anand ). I note that this happens to be 1,000 rating points higher than me ! But there is a difference in the two 1,000 point differences. It is quite likely that with a passion for the game, the junior will reach 1800 ! But , despite my passion for the game, and playing it for 45 years ( always at the high B Class/low A Class level ), I will never make it to 2800. In fact I will struggle to get over 1900 ! What is the difference, I am asked. It is my opinion that the difference is something called “ talent “. For some reason, some people see the patterns, remember the positions, have a deadly intuition, that the rest of us don’t ( and constant hard study magnifies these abilities ). And that is despite perhaps a great deal of study on our parts ( not on mine , however, because I have always had difficulty putting my nose to the grindstone when it comes to chess ). So when I see a player over 2600, I am impressed – not necessarily with them as a person ( chess players run the gamut from heroes to villains ), but with their talent. And so playing in the same room with the 9 foreign GM’s, and going and taking a casual glance at their game every once in a while, adds something to the chess experience for me. I like to be surprised at the depth of their insight, from my rather beleaguered perspective.
Also, it is nice to look around, and see so many people who share the love of the game, that I love so much. We all have something in common. And it is something often not understood in the non-chess world. We appear sometimes to have lost our sanity; what are we doing with our time? How does this improve the state of the world? All I can say is that everyone in the hall is struggling towards something – a personal best ! Be it a move in a particular situation, be it a result in competition with peers, be it prize money, or be it those ever-valuable rating points. We understand each other on some levels, and this is part of the chess culture that is good, and satisfying ( we won’t go into the downsides of the chess culture at this point ! ).
Finally, it is just pure fun ! It is a game, though a challenging and wonderful one. But hopefully its prime characteristic is, and remains, that it is fun to play. It is fun to socialize with others who enjoy our passion, and to meet other chess players who come from all walks of life. Chess does have its social side as well, and this is fun. We do try to play well and hard. And losing is disappointing, especially if a win at some point was in sight. But the disappointment, I think, must be balanced off against a good dose of the game just being fun. I am sensitive to the fact that this opinion is being generated by a middle of the pack player, with no great ambitions ( I’ve been trying to go over 1900 since 2001 ! ). Is it different for those more talented players, who are playing for prize money? I’d love to hear their contribution on this topic.
I’m looking forward to Rd. 2 ! But before then, I’m going to play in one of the side events this morning, at 11:00 AM – the Mark Bluvshtein simul, to raise funds for the Olympiad teams. I’m treading far out of my league, but it will be fun !
I hope everyone will jump in with their comments/questions/criticisms - this is an open blog. I'd love to get some feedback from other members of our U 2000 group. So join in the fun !
A very interesting first day, I hope you will have enough time to keep this up.
Good luck, just surprise everyone. It looks like a good tournament.
Lynn Stringer
So it worked out that I am paired up for Rd. 2 – I play Black against a member of my group, Yves Ber (1914 )
Hi Bob,
I don't want to get you worried or anything :) but Yves Ber spends most of his time in Guadeloupe these days where he owns property. Plenty of time to enjoy the sun, water and...study chess :) His son Alexandre, works for the CMA in Montreal and over the years has developed into one of our better chess teachers and arbiters... lots of chess blood in that family :).
As Yves said to me yesterday, his son Alexandre is getting to do what he would have liked to do.
If Bob wins all of his games he will be Canadian Open Champion. 100% guaranteed.
I think the pairings stop being accelerated after round 4. At that time he would be on the top boards....
I don't think this is strictly correct. With 9 rounds of 'normal' pairings you can (without draws) guarantee a winner in a field up to 512 (ie 2 to the power of 9). However with acelerated pairings and upsets you can get a situation where more than one player ends with 9 points so it could be down to tie-break for Bob. With 512 in round 1 you get 256 winning for round 2, but after round 2 (with the upsets) you can get 160 on 2 real points in round 3. 7 more rounds only copes with deciding amongst 128 (with no draws) so a full-points tie for first is possible. At least Bob will get to split the money.
Day 2 - Sunday, July 11: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog
The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog
Day 2/Rd. 2 – Sunday, July 11
Starting the Day Off Right
During Canadian Opens, I don’t sleep much. Mind you, I don’t sleep a lot at the best of times. 1:30 AM – 7:00 AM ( 5 ½ hours ) is fairly normal. I do admit though, that being retired, I do rarely take an hour afternoon nap, but this is rather infrequently.
So how did I start off day 2? Well, I got home about 11:45 PM on Saturday night. I first wanted to check out the Canadian chess blogs, and some of the international ones. Then on Sunday early, I decided I was still wide awake and that it was a good time to do a post on the activity on the CFC Discussion Boards in the prior week – this took a bit of digging. I was the one who talked the CFC into reviving both the Governors’ Discussion Board, and the members’ CFC Chess Forum, after they had been let die for some time. It is gratifying to see that their activity has been slowly increasing, and that they both are now serving a useful purpose for the chess community ( though CMA’s ChessTalk is by far the more popular ). Being still wide awake, I thought I’d do my blog entry for “ Day 1 “. Since I was going to play Canadian GM Mark Bluvshtein at 11:00 AM Sunday morning, and I was not going to get to bed any too early, I couldn’t be sure I’d get up in time to do it before I had to leave. So I beavered away at the MonRoi standings and pairings, digging out the info I needed on our U 2000 group. Then I posted the “ Day 1 “ Blog. Finally, satisfied, and now getting a bit drowsy, I packed it in at 3:15 AM Sunday morning. I set the alarm for 9:00 AM, knowing that that was a joke. In the 4 consecutive prior Canadian Opens I’ve played in ( Kitchener, Ottawa, Montreal and Edmonton ), I average for about 6 of the 9 nights, 4 hrs. sleep. So when I woke up after 4 hours, at 7:15 AM, I was not surprised. Lo and behold, I suddenly had some time to do a draft of my “ Day 2 “ blog !!
The Simul
The CO Organizing Committee put together this year a great list of side events. The first was the simul by Canadian GM Mark Bluvshtein. Mark has generously volunteered that all proceeds from the simul will go towards the Canadian Olympiad teams. Seemed like a good deal to me – help out the teams, and get a game against Canada’s # 1 FIDE-rated player. Now my record in simuls against GM’s has not been great. In Edmonton, I played England’s sometimes top player, GM Mickey Adams. Unfortunately, in the early middle game, I got an N trapped, though I did get 2 pawns for it for a while, and some counter-play against his K trapped in the centre. But it was lost. Then this February, Scarborough Chess Club in Toronto, my home club, had GM Alexei Shirov in for a simul. I played my favourite Pirc Defence. Shirov, known for his attacking ability, played one of the sharpest attacking lines. At one point, I was up 2 pawns against him………….and dead in the water. Somehow English GM Gwain Jones got hold of the game for his blog. His comment on the game? “ Shirov blew his lower-rated opponent off the board. “ – I thought that was pretty accurate ! So I was not bringing a great track record into my game with Mark. How did I do?
Well, it started off well. Mark had white, and what did I pick? – my favourite King’s Indian Defence. The opening was pretty equal, but as time went on he was getting the initiative. At one point there was a lot of pressure on my f7P, and Mark exploited it with a nice B-sac to win the P. I did eventually win it back, but by then I was still losing the ending, and resigned. I lasted ‘til move 45, was one of the last ones to finish, and most of all, it was just a fun game.
So all in all, though I lost, I can say that my motto “ Chess is Fun “ is still in tact. And I wish Mark all the best in his upcoming Chess Professional year that he is starting out on soon.
Politicking
On Saturday, I had made arrangements to get together with two of the governors who I’ve worked with in the past on some of my motions to the CFC Governors, Michael von Keitz ( Ontario ), and Paul Leblanc ( B.C, ) – the one condition was that it was not to interfere with the World Cup final Sunday afternoon between Netherlands and Spain ( which everyone now knows Spain won ). So after the simul, I looked around to see if either of them really wanted to follow through on discussing all this exciting stuff that’s to go on at the CFC meeting today. Michael had made arrangements to meet someone re the World Cup, and so he didn’t have time to join Paul and I after the simul. I got myself a hot dog, and Paul and I sat down by the waterfront for a while, and chewed over some of the expected happenings. Then he left for a dinner engagement, and so I went and watched the World Cup game in a big sofa chair in the hotel lobby.
Round 2 – Sunday, July 11
The first thing to note, is that it appears my understanding of the Hyper-accelerated pairings system, which I used in my “ Day 1 “ Blog, may be wrong. I noticed Sunday morning, that in the pairings, they show the top quarter winners as now having 4 pairing points, their Rd. 1 win, and their 3 ghost points. I had thought in Rd. 2, everyone who had gotten a ghost point , lost one of them. So I had expected the top quarter winners to have only 3 pairing points. It seems they are not dropping any ghost points for Rd. 2. So someone better bring me up to speed on how this pairing system is working this year. Can anyone post here and explain it to me?
The second thing is that the pairings for Rd. 3 now show 258 registered players ( it had been 262, but some didn’t show, including 2 of the foreign GM’s )
.
There were 22/ 56 players in our U 2000 group who got wins in Rd. 1. Of these, 11 got paired up against experts for Rd. 2. None of these won their games:
10 of the winners were playing someone from our own group. 3 players got a full point:
Ferdinand Supsup
Ed Zator
Pino Verde
One of the winners took a Rd. 2 bye.
So at the end of Rd. 2, we still have 3 players in our U 2000 group with 2 full points.
The 8 Scarborough Chess Club U 2000 Results:
2 points – Pino Verde
1.5 points - Bob Armstrong
1 point – Michael Song; Ferdinand Cale;
½ point – Robert Bzikot; Jim Paterson; Alex Rapoport
0 points – Pepin Manalo;
My Own Game
I played Black against Yves Ber (1914 ). Larry Bevand, CMA Executive Director, had warned me about Yves:
“ I don't want to get you worried or anything but Yves Ber spends most of his time in Guadeloupe these days where he owns property. Plenty of time to enjoy the sun, water and...study chess His son Alexandre, works for the CMA in Montreal and over the years has developed into one of our better chess teachers and arbiters... lots of chess blood in that family “
So though I am generally terrified of my opponents, I’m especially respectful of CMA associated ones ! So how did it go? Well, I was winning. I was up a passed P on the 3rd rank, had active pieces, and was pressuring the f2 square in front of his K. I kept looking for some tactical attack/sac, and checked one possibility, but I missed the key characteristic of the position. I had a nice B-sac/R-sac to get a Q, and then would have won. But I ended up with an extra P with opposite coloured B’s. Looked hard to win, so I just offered a draw, which Yves was most happy to accept. So I have 1.5/2 now.
Random Thoughts After Day 2
One thing I’m noticing, is that I’m keeping busy ! These first two days have just screamed by. And later today, and Tuesday, I have 6 hour back-to-back CFC AGM’s, in which I’m trying to shepherd through no less than 10 motions; and if I’m successful on challenging three rulings of our President Eric Van Dusen, it will be 13 motions. So the pace is not going to let up in the near future. But I must say, I’ve been enjoying every minute of it so far – wonder if I’ll be able to say that after the AGM’s?
The venue for this tournament is really great. The room is spacious, and there is lots of room between boards. The lighting is great, and the noise level low. Having MonRoi project the first 6 boards makes watching the top players easy. The four arbiters are constantly circling the hall, and handling matters quite efficiently from anything I’ve heard. And chess players just love ice water on the side boards.
The AGM’s are rather tiring. They are a bit of a cramp on your style, going into a game after a 6 hour meeting. I remember in Montreal, in Rd. 3, I played after a long outgoing governors AGM. I was tired. So tired in fact, that although I won ( we were one of the last games in the hall of course ), I went directly home ……….and forgot to mark my result on the pairings page. As a result, the TD paired the game as a draw for Rd. 4. I only realized my mistake when I came the next afternoon, and saw the pairings. Fortunately, the TD took pity on me, and did make the correction for the following round. So although I am looking forward to the meeting, and CFC making some good progress there, I’ll likely have to draw on some reserve energy for Rd. 3 tonight..
Projections for Rd. 3
One would think that the pairings for our three with 2 points would now start to get pretty tough with Rd. 3 Not so! They are all paired against mid-C Class players – due to the fact that one ghost point has now been eliminated in Rd. 3. Here are their Rd. 3 pairings:
47 Matthew Scott (1506 : w : 2.0 [2.0]) Ferdinand Supsup (1851 : b : 2.0 [2.0])
48 Ed Zator (1835 : w : 2.0 [2.0]) Tian Lan (1510 : b : 2.0 [2.0])
49 Pino Verde (1800 : w : 2.0 [2.0]) Bryant Yang (1500 : b : 2.0 [2.0])
Wish me luck in Rd. 3 !! I play another SCC member, Dinesh Dattani ( 1393 ).
Bob
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Monday, 12th July, 2010, 08:25 AM.
Day 3 - Monday, July 12: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog - Pt. I
The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog - Pt. I
Day 3/Rd. 3 – Monday, July 12
Starting the Day Off Right
Monday morning, after Rd. 2, I did my Day 2 blog and posted it. I went to bed about 2:00 AM. I set the alarm for 8:00 AM, with some misgivings, since as I’ve mentioned, during CO’s, I often sleep only 4 hours. Well, true to form, guess who wakes up at 6:00 AM? Yup – 4 hours on the nose. But I said to myself – “ Self—this is ridiculous !” So I decided to lie there and see if I’d fall back to sleep. This almost never works, and I’m up in about 20 min.. But Monday morning, I actually fell back asleep until the alarm – was very helpful since I faced a 6 hour CFC AGM at 10:00 AM, and then Rd. 3 at 6:00 PM.
The CFC AGM
David Cohen, recording secretary for the Outgoing governors’ AGM, has already posted an executive summary of the meeting on this board, and there have been a few comments from others at the meeting – you can go take a look on that thread. I’ll only say that I was trying to shepherd through 16 motions ! I did pretty well. Only 3 of them got defeated ! Two got tabled to the Fall Quarterly Governors’ On-line Meeting Oct. 1-7 – at least they are still alive. The one I am most pleased about is the implementation of the procedures for the Governors’ On-line Meetings. We just made the 2/3 majority needed for a constitutional amendment, which this motion was, but we made it. Governor decision-making in the CFC just entered the 21st century !! I’d like to commend our Chairperson, Treasurer, Maurice Smith, who got us through all those 16 motions in the afternoon session ! And there were more than 50 % of the governors who showed up in person or by proxy – not great, but progress in terms of governor participation.
The Round 3 Pairings
In my Day 2 blog, I commented on the fact that the 3rd round pairings for our U 2000 class seemed odd. 3 of our group with 2/2 pts., were paired against C-class players. Also, I had expressed my confusion over the Hyper-accelerated pairings system being used. Well Erik Malmsten of the Organizing Committee explained it to me. The top quarter in Rd. 1 received 4 ghost pairing points. The second quarter – 3; third quarter – 2; bottom quarter – 1. Then form round 2 on, 1 ghost point is deducted, and pairings are according to the pairing points grouping. All well and good. But what about these strange pairings? Well, when I got to the playing hall, one of the players was yelling in a very loud voice about the pairings being absurd, and what was Hal Bond, Head Arbiter going to do about it? He apparently was right. Something had gone wrong. The CFC has a license to use a pairing system know as SwissSys. It is used across the country by organizers of CFC-rated events. And it is used at my club , Scarborough Chess Club. And it seems to work fine.
Well, apparently SwissSys just added a new module to their program to pair in a Hyper-accelerated system. I assume the CO organizers tested it out, maybe for a round or two. And it seemed to work fine. So they used it. Well the third round pairings clearly showed that there is a glitch in the Hyper-accelerated Pairings module. What a time to find out ! The organizers and Hal Bond put their heads together, to see if they could re-pair the round. That had many downsides – and they felt actually more than going with the wrong pairings, which by the way had been published on MonRoi early Monday morning, and so people had been preparing for their stated opponent. How many would have been happy with a re-pairing? They decided the lesser of two evils was to stay the course, weather the criticism, write SwissSys ( Help ASAP ! ), and pair manually for the final accelerated round 4 if necessary. I assume that when all ghost points are gone, they can just enter the results in the normal program, and have it pair from Rd. 5 onward. Stay tuned on this one.
Round 3 – Monday, July 12
As I’ve mentioned, there are 56 players in the U 2000 A Class, of which I am one ( the very last one ! ). After 2 rounds, there were only 3 of our group who had a perfect score – Ferdinand Supsup, Ed Zator, and Pino Verde ( SCC member ). Usually, the standings and pairings have been on the MonRoi site about 1:00 AM the day of the round. However, with the glitch I’ve discussed above, it was not there at 1:00 am this morning. So I was unable to complete all my blog and post it in the wee hours of the morning as I have for Day 1 and Day 2. I had to leave it ‘til later in the morning ( after my 4 hr. sleep?? – actually I got 6 hrs this morning ! ) to complete. By 8:00 AM, the pairings for the first 50 boards were up on MonRoi, so I was able to complete most of the blog before I had to head out to the 2nd half of the CFC AGM, the incoming governors AGM.
Of the 3 with the 2 wins, Ferdinand and Pino won ( as I said, they had been mispaired with C Class players with 2 wins )..
So here are the current leaders in our prize category:
3/5 . 2.5 points – John Doknjas ( 1896 ); Arjun Baharat ( 1841 ); Bob Armstrong ( 1800 )
Ferdinand and Pino, despite their perfect scores, because of the accelerated pairings, are not on the top boards yet. But they still have a tough task to keep their winning streaks going – they both have to play national masters. Here are their Rd. 4 pairings:
23 Ferdinand Supsup (1851 : W : 3.0 [3.0]) David Filipovich (2218 : B : 2.0 [3.0])
24 Paul Gelis (2216 : W : 2.0 [3.0]) Pino Verde (1800 : B : 3.0 [3.0])
Good luck guys !
The 8 Scarborough Chess Club U 2000 Results:
( note: only the pairings of the first 50 boards have been posted at this time, so I cannot give the 3-round scores yet for 3 of the members – a couple I knew from talking to them )
3 points - Pino Verde ( 1800 )
2.5 points – Bob Armstrong ( 1800 )
2 points –
1.5 points – Robert Bzikot (1984 )
1 point – Michael Song (1866 ) ( after 2 rounds ); Ferdinand Cale ( 1806 ) ( after 2 rounds );
½ point – Jim Paterson ( 1889 ); Alex Rapoport ( 1838 ) ( after 2 rounds )
0 points – Pepin Manalo ( 1932 )
My Own Game
The pairing glitch put me up against a D-class player from SCC, Dinesh Dattani ( 1392 ), who had one win and one draw, like me. I have seen Dinesh play at the club, and he can put together some nice moves sometimes. I felt I had to be careful. In the opening I did get some space advantage on the Q-side, and some initiative. Then it seemed, Dinesh felt a bit panicky about the pressure, and decided to sac the exchange to relieve it. Well it did do that, and gave him counter-play on the Q-side, but the sac decision is certainly dubious. But he then played well, trying to eliminate the Q-side P’s so my exchange up advantage would be less valuable with equal pawns on the K-side. But then he faltered and didn’t follow through with this pawn exchange plan, and I was able to get back the initiative, and develop an attack on the K-side. Dinesh was in difficulty throughout, and it had taken him a long time to make some of his moves. In the end, with the pressure on him, he flagged ( but I think the game was lost at that point ).
So I end up with an amazing 2.5/3 points – though admittedly not against strong opposition. If they solve the rating program problem for round 4, I felt I was likely going to suffer retribution in the form of a very high-rated opponent – but the accelerated pairings softened the situation…a bit. In round 4, with White, I play up and coming young junior, Tanraj Sohal ( 2094 ). He just happens to be the current Under 14 Canadian Champion – at the recently concluded CYCC, he had 5 wins and 2 draws in his section! Should be a challenge – that’s why we come – to play chess !
( continued in Pt II below )
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Tuesday, 13th July, 2010, 08:56 AM.
Re: Day 3 - Monday, July 12: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog - Pt. II
The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog - Pt. II
Day 3/Rd. 3 – Monday, July 12
Some Random Thoughts After Day 3
A good day for me – got a lot of my motions through the CFC AGM, and have an outstanding start to this year’s Canadian Open. It means I will have strong opposition for the next few rounds – that’s what I came for ! ( I entertain little expectation of prize money – we have many very good players in our section, and they will start to come on like gang-busters once the acceleration is stopped, and they start mopping up on lower-rated opposition, and even some higher-rated ones – and I am ranked # 56 out of 56 ! ).
Organizing a major Canadian tournament is no mean task. You have hundreds of players wanting everything to be perfect for them ( after all, they “ paid “ ). And chess players are not hesitant to criticize, if they feel slighted. I organized a weekend tournament once, and it was a small one, and it made me realize how much detail there is to pulling off one of these tournaments. I have the greatest respect for organizers. And I think I understand a bit, why we have such trouble getting bidders for our premier tournaments – the Open, the Closed, the Women’s Closed, etc. CFC needs to take a close look at our very fragile bidding system, to see how it can be strengthened. Your CFC governors took a first step at the AGM yesterday, when they passed my motion creating a new non-executive officer position of Tournament Coordinator. One of his tasks will be to help develop bids for our major tournaments. Hopefully this support for organizers will be part of trying to improve the situation. So I want to commend the COOC for the fine tournament they have provided, and I hope the pairing program glitch does not annihilate the thanks they deserve.
Shock !! – we are already 1/3 through the tournament already. The time is just flying by. What have I been doing? ( of course, you all know you can find out by reading my previous blog entries !! ). As the saying goes : “ Time flies when you are having fun ! “. And chess is fun, not only in playing, but in socializing, and even in CFC politicking ( hard to believe eh? – like putting pins in your eyes is fun??? ).
Round 4 – Tuesday, July 13
Wish me luck in Rd. 4 – there seems to be someone ( just a Canadian Champion ) blocking my continued way forward – and they’re not just stepping aside for me. Don’t they know that would be good manners? Mind you, I guess I’m not stepping aside for them either! Let the best player in the upcoming game win.
Very interesting observations, some of which are debatable. Unfortunately, I don't have much time to argue today, but maybe in the near future. One interesting subject that I would like your opinion is on this Canadian Open having one section with so called "hyper-accelerated" pairings, since in four previous years you played under variety of different formats.
A computer beat me in chess, but it was no match when it came to kickboxing
Very interesting observations, some of which are debatable. Unfortunately, I don't have much time to argue today, but maybe in the near future. One interesting subject that I would like your opinion is on this Canadian Open having one section with so called "hyper-accelerated" pairings, since in four previous years you played under variety of different formats.
if they want to want to promote norms i would think it would make sense to have a FIDE section and class sections (e.g. U2000, U1800, etc). the FIDE section would be for the norms, but for purists it would be open (e.g. even i could enter). the open part would suck for norm hunters, but scoring 0/9 would suck for U1700s playing in the FIDE section. someone (Jon Berry maybe) mentioned that you could discard games for a 9 round norm, so would something like this work better for a 10 or 11 round tourney, so if a norm hopefuly did happen to play someone like myself, it wouldn't be a waste of a week? thoughts?
Re: Day 3 - Monday, July 12: The U 2000 Can. Open Blog - Pt. II
Open tourneys are not well-designed to produce norms at all. In my opinion a better use of resources would be to make the Open the best overall tournament it can be for everyone (not just the small number seeking norms) and then run Round Robins or Schevenigens later in the summer for norms.
Hey Bob, you know, I think it's a bit crass to bold the favorites before the match starts.
It doesn't display much in the way of integrity. You might be interested to know that while it's true Supsup did go on to beat me, it was also after I had spent the previous hour arguing about the incorrectly done pairings, and was not at my best. Furthermore, I went on to beat one of the U2000 players who is ranked *above* Supsup tonight.
Furthermore, Tian Lan beat his opponent in Round #3.
It's certainly true that the higher rated player is the prohibitive favourite, but we all know that. Why do you need to bold it and call it a "projection"?
Tweet
Comment