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.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
Kevin Spraggett takes one entire month to slam our new CFC president...
Kevin Spraggett takes one entire month to slam our new CFC president...
Wonders never cease. Kevin Spraggett has finally broken his silence and attacked our new CFC president. Bob must be doing a great job for it to have taken this long; and the present attack (on attempting to attract someone to take on the organization of the 2011 Canadian Open) is feeble and weak and has no merit; at best.
Spraggett must really like what Bob is doing; if that is all he can find.
Or his research department is really getting lazy.
Here is my post on this on the members' CFC Chess Forum:
The 2011 Can. Open - Tackling the Problem
Kevin Spraggett, in his blog, seems unaware that the very classy and " successful " 2010 Can. Open was not successful financially - it lost money - organizers' money. It might be noted that the 2009 PwC Toronto Open, also a very classy event, with foreign GM's for a weekend 5-round tournament, also lost money.
Now, I am not aware of the CO's from 2006 - 2009 ( Kitchener, Ottawa, Montreal, Edmonton ) losing money though.
But I think Canadian organizers are clearly, and somewhat legitimately, concerned about holding another high class CO - and they are showing it by putting in no 2011 Can. Open bids at the CFC Toronto July AGM.
Despite Kevin's opinion, I think there is a problem. And Bob G. is right to open the debate about it. Bob G deserves some credit for tackling an immediate and concerning 2010-11 problem, and doing it in the open in a consultative way. And he is getting some CFC member support for his view that maybe all CO's do not have to reach the highest standard every year - that there is room some years for a more limited CO, if that is the type of bid that comes in. Can. organizers should be aware of whether such an option is available to them.
Here is my post on this on the members' CFC Chess Forum:
The 2011 Can. Open - Tackling the Problem
Kevin Spraggett, in his blog, seems unaware that the very classy and " successful " 2010 Can. Open was not successful financially - it lost money - organizers' money. It might be noted that the 2009 PwC Toronto Open, also a very classy event, with foreign GM's for a weekend 5-round tournament, also lost money.
Now, I am not aware of the CO's from 2006 - 2009 ( Kitchener, Ottawa, Montreal, Edmonton ) losing money though.
But I think Canadian organizers are clearly, and somewhat legitimately, concerned about holding another high class CO - and they are showing it by putting in no 2011 Can. Open bids at the CFC Toronto July AGM.
Despite Kevin's opinion, I think there is a problem. And Bob G. is right to open the debate about it. Bob G deserves some credit for tackling an immediate and concerning 2010-11 problem, and doing it in the open in a consultative way. And he is getting some CFC member support for his view that maybe all CO's do not have to reach the highest standard every year - that there is room some years for a more limited CO, if that is the type of bid that comes in. Can. organizers should be aware of whether such an option is available to them.
Bob A
I was on the organizing committees of the 2005 and 2009 Canadian Opens in Edmonton (I was also the head arbiter of both events) and I can tell you that a considerable amount of money was spent during both events. We did not actually expect to make a profit, instead we wanted to have a memorable event which would attract people to chess and to Edmonton. As such, I believe that we were successful in our endevours.
The idea is to create a long lasting positive impact, rather than an immediate financial gain, which is highly unlikely.
Your events were definitely successful - I didn't attend the 2005 one, but heard only praise for it. I did attend the 2009 one and it was a most enjoyable chess holiday. And it seems to me, like you, many of our organizers of the large tournaments do not expect to make much ( if anything ) for their substantial time and effort - a benefit we players maybe aren't thankful enough for. But the organizers certainly don't want to lose money.
The issue is whether the Edmonton models are typical, and can easily be duplicated.
I think, as organizers, you have a unique edge in Alberta. If I understand it correctly, you got substantial grants each time from Alberta casino money. I believe you were not able to use the funds for prizes, but you were able to use it for general expenses, as I understand it. Am I correct on this?
This is a government sponsorship not available to organizers in other provinces ( not sure about Quebec ). Without this, other province organizers are dependent on finding substantial private sponsorship.
If we are reading the lack of 2011 Can. Open bids correctly, it seems organizers are not sure they can obtain this type of private sponsorship, for a large budget, classy CO. This is definitely a problem. It seems we have to open up other options to get bids to come in.
Re: Kevin Spraggett takes one entire month to slam our new CFC president...
How does a sponsored event lose money? Unless maybe the sponsors do not really kick in any help unless the organizers meet their proposals to the sponsors.
So if the magic number was 300 and that is what the organizers threw at the sponsors for support and they did not meet those expectations then I can see why they lost money.
No matter what is set up I still believe that these venues will always lose money because of one known fact. CHESS PLAYERS ARE CHEAP.
Had the participants who were not working supported all side events and the dinner then the organizers would have not lost too much money.
Hey I attended one lecture and the dinner. I would have liked to have gone to more events but I had to work.
How many who took the week off work actually attended the side events.
I know of 6 players who did not work and did not attend anything.
I'm sure the organizers had to pay the GM's regardless of how much they collected and I feel that is some of their losses.
So no matter what type of event organizers run unless Chess Players support the whole venue you will never break even.
... I think, as organizers, you have a unique edge in Alberta. If I understand it correctly, you got substantial grants each time from Alberta casino money. ... This is a government sponsorship not available to organizers in other provinces [bold and italicized text added by P. McKillop]( not sure about Quebec ). Without this, other province organizers are dependent on finding substantial private sponsorship. ...
Bob, has your comment about government sponsorship not being available in other provinces been tested in Ontario? After all, if a provincial government agency (Trillium) will hand out $120,000 to an organization whose officers and members, during and after the fact, had/have next to no idea of what happened to the money (other than vague assertions that some went on equipment, some went on other stuff and a whole bunch of it went into somebody's pocket), then maybe that same agency would consider funding CO expenses on the same basis. You won't know for sure until somebody tries.
Can you name one child who benefitted from Trillium's $120,000? It would be nice to know that there was a beneficiary other than the guy who wound up with almost 75% of the money in his pocket, wouldn't it?
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Re: Kevin Spraggett takes one entire month to slam our new CFC president...
Paul, given the goings-on in Canadian chess politics over the last decade (and more), I don't think Kevin can be faulted for being cynical and disillusioned.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Re: The 2011 Can. Open - Trillium Funds for an Ontario CO??
Hi Peter:
I do know that for the 2010 CYCC, John Coleman was able to get some Trillium Funds, I think in association with the Ontario Chess Association ( because the CYCC itself is a federal tournament ). I do not know if any of those funds were able to be used as prize money, or whether they had to go to general tournament expenses. Also, the infamous Tillium/OCA grant of a few years ago, was obtained on the basis of youth chess promotion. And Gordon Ritchie, main organizer of the highly successful 2007 Ottawa CYCC ( it generated a surplus for the CFC youth program ) has said many times that private sponsorship money is available for youth chess, but it is very difficult to obtain for adult chess , or the CFC itself ( to my knowledge, they had no Trillium money - don't know if they considered it and rejected it ).
So, you may be right that the Trillium source of funds for an Ontario CO should be tested ( I don't know if the 2010 CO organizers considered it, and rejected it - I know they had no Trillium money ). Any application would likely have to be in asscoiation with the OCA, to establish the Ontario connection.
But from experience in Ontario to date, it seems that goverment/Trilliuim funds for the expenses of an Ontario CO are not likely available, and if they are theoretically, it will be a very hard sell for the organizer.
Bob
Last edited by Bob Armstrong; Thursday, 12th August, 2010, 08:28 PM.
Paul, given the goings-on in Canadian chess politics over the last decade (and more), I don't think Kevin can be faulted for being cynical and disillusioned.
Hi Peter:
Cynical and disillusioned is fine. But why is the lack of bidders the fault of Bob Gillanders? If *NO* Canadian Open happens next year because of a lack of a bid, exactly how would that be the fault of the current CFC executive, given that they've been on the job for, what? 4 weeks?
Steve
P.S. To whomever has this info handy: K.S. refers to having won "quite a few" Canadian Opens. Can somebody supply the exact number that "quite a few" is?
He is a 5-time Canadian Closed Champion ( and I think he tied for first twice and lost on playoffs ). His last win was in 1996. I don't know about Can. Open Championships.
Bob
Hi Bob:
Closed is different. The CFC (Can't Find Crosstables) website has stuff going back to 1996 which shows him as outright winner once and twice tied with the winner(s).
Can somebody explain to me why the CFC website does NOT have crosstables and results for CO's and CC's and CJ's going back, ummm, like forever?? Those crosstables should be part of the main database. The current database, such as it is, maintained on a haphazard basis by whomever can be plucked off the street, is one of the CFC's biggest assets.
I really think the CFC should pay more attention to both the integrity of its database (and its rating system) than the look-and-feel of its website, which seems to be a recurring proposal for spending $$$.
Tweet
Comment