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!)
Why I Am Supporting Richmond Hill Team For CYCC Hosts
Re: Why I Am Supporting Richmond Hill Team For CYCC Hosts
Hi Micihael:
The Gillanders' post of Nov. 11 I am referring to was on the confidential CFC Governors' Discussion Board, which started the govenors' debate on the 2 bids. So you do not have access to that post I am referring to.
Re: Why I Am Supporting Richmond Hill Team For CYCC Hosts
Hi Bob,
I will trust you on that. When deciding whether to accept CIC's "late" revised bid, CFC may want to take the following into consideration:
1) It was a bit confused in different messages posted whether the deadline is before Nov. 19 or before the end of Nov. 19th.
2) CIC is taking CFC & the public forum's suggestions seriously and is willing to put in the effort to revise their bid.
3) David Cohen has notified CFC that they were working on and will submit a revised bid.
If CFC's decision is to accept CIC's revised bid, to be fair to the other bidder, may I suggest to allow the other bidder to submit a revised bid, say, within 3 days time.
In the original post by President Bob Gillanders on Nov. 11, he said:
" We will be calling for a vote on Nov 19th. "
I interpret that to mean 12:00 AM Friday, Nov. 19. So as I interpret it, the voting period has already started, and the Toronto Bid is trying to submit a " revised " bid DURING the voting period - this would be very unusual to accept I would think. Votes have already been cast perhaps on the bids as originally submitted, and were what was to be voted on as of 12:00 AM Today.
I do not know if the " revised " bid has even yet been filed with the Chairperson/President.
And is there any issue of " fairness " here to the Richmond Hill bid??
But we will need to await a formal ruling on this issue of " late " revision, from the Chair of the Governors' Meeting, President Bob Gillanders.
Bob
It's always been my position that the bidders could modify their bids as late as today.
It was perhaps unfortunate that the vote is also starting today. I have advised Governors they might want to wait until the end of the day before voting.
In any event the amendment to the Toronto bid is what is being voted on
(dates and format change).
For kids and non-Governors (who can't access the CFC's Governors Discussion Board):
Toronto's revised CYCC bid is for a 4 day CYCC at the Westin Harbour Castle, Mon.-Th. before the Canadian Open.
This of course changes everything. But completely changing bids (we are not talking details here) this late corrupts the whole process which may make potential future bidders on such events stay away. If the Richmond Hill people had known beforehand that the Toronto bid would revert at the last minute to a four-day CYCC before the CO, would they have spent time and energy putting together their bid ? It is like bidding on E-Bay knowing that at any time the competition can always outbid you by one cent...
On that front too the CFC needs to straighten up its act in order to provide fair conditions for bidding.
This of course changes everything. But completely changing bids (we are not talking details here) this late corrupts the whole process which may make potential future bidders on such events stay away. If the Richmond Hill people had known beforehand that the Toronto bid would revert at the last minute to a four-day CYCC before the CO, would they have spent time and energy putting together their bid ? It is like bidding on E-Bay knowing that at any time the competition can always outbid you by one cent...
On that front too the CFC needs to straighten up its act in order to provide fair conditions for bidding.
I think the issue here is that in general a CYCC bid alone will lose out to a CYCC/CO joint bid. In this particular case the joint bid had to remove their "innovative" format within the timeframe allowed or risk certain defeat.
We are just learning how to do things in the more transparent world where everybody wants to know the details of everything, ASAP. There will be hiccups along the way. Perhaps this was one of them. Some people like the full disclosure up front, allowing for "negotiations between the bidders and the voters" while others prefer keeping things totally quiet and no negotiations.
Certainly, Richmond Hill team must have realized that Toronto could change their bid, just as they could have changed their own bid up until the final day. They were advised this every day by the President.
This of course changes everything. But completely changing bids (we are not talking details here) this late corrupts the whole process which may make potential future bidders on such events stay away. If the Richmond Hill people had known beforehand that the Toronto bid would revert at the last minute to a four-day CYCC before the CO, would they have spent time and energy putting together their bid ? It is like bidding on E-Bay knowing that at any time the competition can always outbid you by one cent...
On that front too the CFC needs to straighten up its act in order to provide fair conditions for bidding.
I'll tell you straight, Jean, if it were me I'd pull the bid to hold the CO and CYCC.
I have little patience for this nonsense. This thread is a blueprint for failure of the event. Also, chess isn't a democracy.
Another small point, and you can check on Jonathan Berry's site which lists Canadian Opens and the number of players. When the events were held in the same area two years in a row the participation was less the second year.
That would be Kapaskasing two years in a row and Toronto one year and Scarborough the next year (or maybe it was Scarorough and then Toronto). This is an indication the attendance will be lower this time and last time was no great turnout for Toronto.
You're right, but the bid from Richmond Hill and the subsequent discussions were valuable. If the result is a better bid from Toronto, then I think everyone, including Richmond Hill organizers, should be happy.
Viktor,
Hotel dates are still flexible. If it's really an issue, the CYCC can still be changed to Tues-Fri.
Another small point, and you can check on Jonathan Berry's site which lists Canadian Opens and the number of players. When the events were held in the same area two years in a row the participation was less the second year.
That would be Kapaskasing two years in a row and Toronto one year and Scarborough the next year (or maybe it was Scarorough and then Toronto). This is an indication the attendance will be lower this time and last time was no great turnout for Toronto.
I checked Jonathon's website, below is listed the location and attendance for the last 20 years. If my geography is correct, the only times the CO has been held in the same area twice in a row is Kapuskasing in 2003 and 2004.
You're right, but the bid from Richmond Hill and the subsequent discussions were valuable. If the result is a better bid from Toronto, then I think everyone, including Richmond Hill organizers, should be happy.
In chess a bad move may win a game or two but down the line if repeated it is certain to bring disaster. The end does not justify the means.
This time the procedure may produce decent CYCC and CO but it should be much improved in the future, otherwise people might become even more reluctant to bid on CFC events. As I have said many times before the CFC has to set up proper rules on the national championships, including minimal standards, to avoid repetition of this kind of circus where bidders feel (justifiably because of lack of guidelines) that they can propose anything at first, and then change it according to circumstances. This is unsettling for everyone (mostly for kids and their parents who dont know what to expect), time consuming and discouraging for bidders.
Having clear rules and guidelines does not make it harder on organizers, quite the opposite. Knowing precisely what you have to do makes things much easier.
I checked Jonathon's website, below is listed the location and attendance for the last 20 years. If my geography is correct, the only times the CO has been held in the same area twice in a row is Kapuskasing in 2003 and 2004.
2003 Kapuskasing 141
2004 Kapuskasing 125
Jonathan's chess site goes back more than 20 years. It starts in 1956 and I'm not sure why you used 1990 as a cutoff date.
1987 Toronto 208
1988 Scarborough 201
Scarborough is now part of Toronto rather than being a suburb. The Scarborough location was easy to get to and had free parking, as I recall.
In any case, it shows a tendency for the second year to have a smaller entry that the first year. The Canadian Open held in Toronto in 1983 had 330 entrants.
While you might think Scarborough was a problem, the Canadian Open held there in 1992 had an entry of 254.
In any case, history tends to indicate to me if the CO is held in Toronto in 2011 the entry will be lower than it was in 2010. I'd like to see the trend reversed but wouldn't bet on it.
Re: Why I Am Supporting Richmond Hill Team For CYCC Hosts
I agree with Victor that the Toronto Bid can cause some problems as I am planning to go to the World Open this year. The Richmond Hill Bid seems much more suitable.
Re: Why I Am Supporting Richmond Hill Team For CYCC Hosts
Would it be fair to say that the CFC might have wanted to put some special conditions on the successful bid of hosting the tourney, like it has to be a four day event instead of seven, and it can not be within some time (like two weeks) within another major tourney? I have to agree with the idea that if one guys knows what the other is bidding then that is not a good thing. The concept of deadline could have been a little tighter perhaps. I know that everyone can see this for themselves. Just a thought, not looking to point fingers but hoping to avoid this from happening again. We are all learning here and I appreciate reading the views of all who care to share their views. This is how we grow. This is as the English say, 'a sticky wicket.' (i.e. an awkward situation);)
Comment