BYEs

[Zeljko Kitich]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: BYEs

That about says it all... But it would be slightly more convincing to let others say it.

not you Mr Hebert, I'm not on here to satisfy you - as astounding as that may seem to you, in fact if you ever agreed with me it would scare me to no end, I would then know I had crossed over to the 'dark' side

and as to the hour I quote from Mr Scott's hissy fit for imagined slights by Bob Armstrong, in addition we have a post from David Cohen saying that Hal Bond left the CFC AGM to discuss the pairings, I think even you are now able to figure it out

Re: The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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"?

[Jean Hébert]

Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: BYEs

not you Mr Hebert, I'm not on here to satisfy you - as astounding as that may seem to you, in fact if you ever agreed with me it would scare me to no end, I would then know I had crossed over to the 'dark' side

and as to the hour I quote from Mr Scott's hissy fit for imagined slights by Bob Armstrong, in addition we have a post from David Cohen saying that Hal Bond left the CFC AGM to discuss the pairings, I think even you are now able to figure it out

Re: The U 2000 Canadian Open Blog

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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"?

Why am I not surprised that after your "Thus is explained the not so quiet revolution and the deplorable state of the financial sector in Montreal today", you completely fail to see what is relevant and what isn't ?
Whether Mr Scott argued about the pairings for an hour or only 53 minutes with the TD or with a bunch of people is hardly significant. The point is that possibly (I am not passing judgment here) wrong pairings have been knowingly posted through negligence and above all reluctance to admit a mistake. This would hardly have been a first time in Canadian Chess. I still have vivid recollection of a well documented case in 1985, also in Toronto...

[Zeljko Kitich]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: BYEs

Why am I not surprised that after your "Thus is explained the not so quiet revolution and the deplorable state of the financial sector in Montreal today", you completely fail to see what is relevant and what isn't ?
Whether Mr Scott argued about the pairings for an hour or only 53 minutes with the TD or with a bunch of people is hardly significant. The point is that possibly (I am not passing judgment here) wrong pairings have been knowingly posted through negligence and above all reluctance to admit a mistake. This would hardly have been a first time in Canadian Chess. I still have vivid recollection of a well documented case in 1985, also in Toronto...

my humblest apologies for not walking your strictly defined line of what is relevant and what is not relevant and in not using the English language as per your strict definition as to what an organizer is & isn't, of course Voltaire is relevant to any discussion I can see that and I can also see that what happened in Toronto in 1985 is relevant to 2010 even supposing that whatever you are referring to 25 years ago did not involve the same people as are involved today, different people, same city - yes I can see how you could say that was relevant

the point it that quite possibly he was given a lengthy explanation, which this statment of his points to, with one hour being his specificaiton, and the point is that possibly he has chosen to throw a fit (as he did against Bob) on Chesstalk because the pairings were not altered to his specifications ie he didn't get the opponent he desired to be able to have a better chance of winning prize money which he is now possibly making a paranoid (your word remember?) attempt to say he was targeted to not win and its possible he's totally misleading us here and its quite possible that he's one amongst a number of chess players that feel they have a right to hurl invective at everyone and anyone who doesn't do precisely what they want, since we are talking about possibilities - and yes I have seen that possibility in action at more than one tournament in Toronto

but I'm not passing judgement either, merely thinking about possibilities the same as you

[Jean Hébert]

Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: BYEs

my humblest apologies for not walking your strictly defined line of what is relevant and what is not relevant and in not using the English language as per your strict definition as to what an organizer is & isn't, of course Voltaire is relevant to any discussion I can see that the point it that quite possibly he was given a lengthy explanation, which this statment of his points to, with one hour being his specificaiton, and the point is that possibly he has chosen to throw a fit (as he did against Bob) on Chesstalk because the pairings were not altered to his specifications ie he didn't get the opponent he desired to be able to have a better chance of winning prize money which he is now making a paranoid attempt to say he was targeted to not win and its possible he's totally misleading us here and its quite possible that he's one amongst a number of chess players that feel they have a right to hurl invective at everyone and anyone who doesn't do precisely what they want, since we are talking about possibilities - and yes I have seen that possibility in action at more than one tounament in Toronto

Wow! A 9 (!) line long sentence with about 200 words! That defends it well against the threat of being read and understood. :)

[Zeljko Kitich]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: BYEs

Wow! A 9 (!) line long sentence with about 200 words! That defends it well against the threat of being read and understood. :)

read it or don't, as I said when I have to ask Professor Hebert for English lessons, I will give up speaking the language

this is the internet, get over it

[Jonathan Berry]

Re: BYEs

no there is not and no more questions, you seem to be the only one who is complaining, the loud minority as it were

The point about players using half-point byes to catapult themselves into contention for Class prizes was also brought up by your ob't s'r'v't during an earlier discussion of half-point byes here. The facts remain that it is poor netiquette to make a post that says "Me, too!", and that this board has no mechanism to applaud or boo a post. One can only add to the rep of a poster, which is a much different thing. A perfectly-worded complaint might have the support of scads of thinkers on the board, but be quite alone in board-space.

I am a supporter of the half-point bye concept. I don't see the need to offer three byes in a one-game-per-day tournament, except as a way to lure local players who continue to work during the event. Bravo to the organizer who wants to welcome as many players as possible, but there may be competitive consequences.

The typical Canadian Open schedule has two games on the first Sunday. That is a perfect opportunity for half-point byes for players who will not play more than one game per day. But in 2010 they decided to go to nine rounds and have only one game on the first Sunday.

There used to be disagreements about the distribution of prizes, particularly in the case of ties involving place prize winners and class prize winners. Following the precedent of the USCF, the CFC got together and produced a brief set of rules for prize distribution. It's in the CFC Handbook. The only case I remember where that was insufficient was where a CFC President didn't understand the Handbook and tried to use his authority to get me to give a player more money. Hah. So instead of having pages of detailed rules on prize division, pre-tournament announcements have a lovely sparse look.

I think that byes deserve a similar treatment, one or two Handbook pages. To start with, unless announced, all requested byes would be of the 0-point variety. If half-point byes are allowed, there'd be guidelines which would apply unless exempted in writing by the organizer in the pre-tournament announcement.

[Jean Hébert]

Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: BYEs

read it or don't, as I said when I have to ask Professor Hebert for English lessons, I will give up speaking the language

this is the internet, get over it

I don't teach to people who do not want to learn. Internet or not there is no valid point to write if being understood is the last of your concern.

[Zeljko Kitich]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: BYEs

I don't teach to people who do not want to learn. Internet or not there is no valid point to write if being understood is the last of your concern.

you've really lost the debate of ideas when all you can do is complain about the typesetting

[Zeljko Kitich]

Re: BYEs

The point about players using half-point byes to catapult themselves into contention for Class prizes was also brought up by your ob't s'r'v't during an earlier discussion of half-point byes here. The facts remain that it is poor netiquette to make a post that says "Me, too!", and that this board has no mechanism to applaud or boo a post. One can only add to the rep of a poster, which is a much different thing. A perfectly-worded complaint might have the support of scads of thinkers on the board, but be quite alone in board-space.

I am a supporter of the half-point bye concept. I don't see the need to offer three byes in a one-game-per-day tournament, except as a way to lure local players who continue to work during the event. Bravo to the organizer who wants to welcome as many players as possible, but there may be competitive consequences.

The typical Canadian Open schedule has two games on the first Sunday. That is a perfect opportunity for half-point byes for players who will not play more than one game per day. But in 2010 they decided to go to nine rounds and have only one game on the first Sunday.

There used to be disagreements about the distribution of prizes, particularly in the case of ties involving place prize winners and class prize winners. Following the precedent of the USCF, the CFC got together and produced a brief set of rules for prize distribution. It's in the CFC Handbook. The only case I remember where that was insufficient was where a CFC President didn't understand the Handbook and tried to use his authority to get me to give a player more money. Hah. So instead of having pages of detailed rules on prize division, pre-tournament announcements have a lovely sparse look.

I think that byes deserve a similar treatment, one or two Handbook pages. To start with, unless announced, all requested byes would be of the 0-point variety. If half-point byes are allowed, there'd be guidelines which would apply unless exempted in writing by the organizer in the pre-tournament announcement.

the much larger problem in my opinion remains pre-arranged draws, a problem which more than one commentator has indicated is a serious threat to chess and makes this issue of 1/2 point or 0 point for byes like rearranging the proverbial deck chairs on the titanc

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: BYEs

FYI:
This year Labour day Open in Toronto will have double type byes:
asked in advance before the tournament - 1/2
asked during the tournament - 0.

[Jean Hébert]

Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: BYEs

you've really lost the debate of ideas when all you can do is complain about the typesetting

Of course how could I win any debate with you ? You have already stated that: "your views are accurate". :)
P.S. Sorry, that is the only part of your arguments I can remember. I am too lazy to try to break up a 200 word sentence into digestible bits.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: BYEs

Of course how could I win any debate with you ? You have already stated that: "your views are accurate". :)
P.S. Sorry, that is the only part of your arguments I can remember. I am too lazy to try to break up a 200 word sentence into digestible bits.

Would you mind to transfer your disputes in this and other threads into private messages.

[Jean Hébert]

Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: BYEs

Would you mind to transfer your disputes in this and other threads into private messages.

Why didn't you send me this message privately then ? Good for us but not for you ?

Just like you, Mr K likes the attention :)