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.
Strategy Games in Ottawa wouldn't give me my money back for the return of the useless clock they sold me, even though it was unopened and in mint condition. They did, however, give me store credit. Since I was soured by the whole event and didn't really want to buy anything else, I decided to order (from their Montreal store) 200 of the carbon NCR scoresheets which I will be donating to you. They should be in next week.
Also, if I'm able to do it from home, I am willing to input games.
I plan to see you Thursday at the RA to pay for the next Tournament - hopefully the scoresheets will be in by then.
Keep doing the great work you do and don't let the few who are negative bring you down.
Strategy Games in Ottawa wouldn't give me my money back for the return of the useless clock they sold me, even though it was unopened and in mint condition. They did, however, give me store credit. Since I was soured by the whole event and didn't really want to buy anything else, I decided to order (from their Montreal store) 200 of the carbon NCR scoresheets which I will be donating to you. They should be in next week.
Also, if I'm able to do it from home, I am willing to input games.
I plan to see you Thursday at the RA to pay for the next Tournament - hopefully the scoresheets will be in by then.
Keep doing the great work you do and don't let the few who are negative bring you down.
Hi Billy,
I am sorry that you had a bad experience at our Ottawa location. I was under the impression that the Saitek Blue clock could do anything the Saitek grey clock could do except you had to program things manually ... and that even if you programmed it manually, it would not remember the settings for the next game. Aris tells me that is not the case.
We do appreciate your business and I have instructed our Ottawa shop to issue a full refund...and we hope to see you back again in the future.
... This causes no problem at all wherever this is applied, which is in most open tournaments in Quebec and outside North America. Players just hand out their scoresheets signed with the result. That's all. A few special nutcases having problems dealing with the outside world and giving away their precious gamescores may stay home. My guess is that for some reason or another they would stay home anyway. ...
People who are interested in their games having world-wide viewership are free to enter their games onto the myriad of chess sites that want such things. There is no shortage of sites nor of people wanting their brilliancies getting international acclaim. Why should all of the chess world be held hostage to the whims of the "stamp collectors" of chess?
Sadly we continue down the road where nothing is private including the right to keep one's own property for oneself.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
Through entry fees, players pay for them (if there is no sponsor...) which probably adds up to less that 1$ per player per tournament. To me that is "cheap" even if I have to pay for it.
I think that's cheap too. But as you correctly say later on in your post, "cheap" is relative; and since the cost of carbons comes out of the TDs profits and/or the prize fund, it might be more relevant to consider whether the prize winners think its cheap to reduce their prizes by whatever is necessary to subsidize the collection of game scores.
This causes no problem at all wherever this is applied, which is in most open tournaments in Quebec and outside North America. Players just hand out their scoresheets signed with the result. That's all. A few special nutcases having problems dealing with the outside world and giving away their precious gamescores may stay home. My guess is that for some reason or another they would stay home anyway.
The problems involved in collecting scoresheets are not caused only by people who do not want others to see their game scores, but also (as it says in the excerpt you quote), by Monroi devices and personal score books.
Judging by the continuing debate in Chess Cafe's "The Arbiter's Notebook" (linked and commented on in an earlier post), it is not true that this causes no problem at all.
If you don't have the scoresheets, of course you wont need the volunteers to enter the games and one can be sure never to see those games, as if they had never been played....
But even if finding enough volunteers may not be so easy, entering the games can wait and eventually be achieved, whenever someone is available. But this is possible only if the scoresheets have been collected by the TD (arbiter) or an assistant.
I'm not sure that it's true that if there is no organized effort to collect scoresheets then "one can be sure never to see those games, as if they had never been played". All the players I know enter their own games into their own databases. Wouldn't it be possible (and easier?) for them to email their games from their own databases to a public one like Hugh Brodie's? If players did that then we could see their games without the need to collect scoresheets.
But I think in his main point here Jean H is agreeing with me. Not by reminding us (twice) of the obvious truth that if no scoresheets are collected then there is no need for volunteers to enter games into a Db from those non-existent scoresheets. But in the part where he says that it requires volunteers to do the transcribing, which is the main difficulty and expense.
As for volunteers to enter the games, there must be quite a few around besides Hugh and I, otherwise Hugh would not have that many canadian games in his database.
There could be a lot of volunteers, which would be good news, but his database has been compiled over many years, and the people who entered the games years ago might not be willing or able to do so today. We'd have to ask Hugh where he got most of those games and where he gets new games to add to it. Judging from posts by Hugh and Tony F, the common situation is to have lots of gamescores sitting around waiting for someone to read them.
Inferring through an obvious lack of good will that everything would have to be done by one single person is clearly unworthy of someone with even an average common sense.
I think I agree (but maybe I don't understand your point).
Attributing an inconsistent and foolish thought to someone else is justified only if you think that person does not have "average common sense". Here are two reasons to embarrass anyone who might read these posts and then make that mistake by underestimating me:
First, my comment "welcome to the team" should make it clear that I do not think "everything would have to be done by one single person".
Second, anyone who has been reading this thread (and the one that started it) already knows that there are several people who collect and upload Canadian games. And Jean H already knows that I am one of them because I posted games in cbv format to this discussion board at Jean's own request.
I think noone with even average common sense who has been paying attention here would attribute to me the thought that only one person should do everything.
Since I still assume Jean Hébert has an average level of common sense, I cannot see how he could reasonably attribute to me a thought which is so obviously inconsistent with what I have written. So, maybe I don't understand the point of his last remark?
A question for anyone for anyone who has slogged their way through this post. What do you think when you read a post that:
1) refers to someone's arguments in scare-quotes as "thinking";
2) calls people who prefer not to share their game scores "nutcases"; and
3) attributes an obviously stupid and self-contradictory idea to someone and then accusing that person of "an obvious lack of good will"?
Is it a language issue? The malevolent influence of Fox News? Something else?
People who are interested in their games having world-wide viewership are free to enter their games onto the myriad of chess sites that want such things. There is no shortage of sites nor of people wanting their brilliancies getting international acclaim. Why should all of the chess world be held hostage to the whims of the "stamp collectors" of chess?
Sadly we continue down the road where nothing is private including the right to keep one's own property for oneself.
In pro golf tournaments you don't sign your scorecard, you get disqualified. Make a mistake on the scorecard, like forgetting to mark a hole, and sign it, you get disqualified.
Why should they hand in a score card? To follow your reasoning, the players should only have to report the score. They know what they scored so why should how the score was arrived at be anyone business?
Many of the games I get for CanBase have already been posted - on provincial or club websites, or on boards such as Chesstalk. If a strong Canadian is playing in Europe - it's fairly easy to find his games (either from "The Week in Chess", "Chess Mix", or from the tournament's or national federation's website). Currently, I am entering games from old CFC magazines which I didn't already have. Every update of the Chessbase "MegaBase" brings forth more unpublished Canadian games.
For example - the Manitoba Chess Association provided games from 21 tournaments during 2010.
Many of the games I get for CanBase have already been posted - on provincial or club websites, or on boards such as Chesstalk.
Thanks for the answer.
If you had to guess, about what % of the most recently played games do you think come from electronic sources like online dBs or websites or email?
For anyone who's interested in keeping a database of Canadian games going when Hugh is no longer willing or able to do so, it might be worth picking his brains now.
In pro golf tournaments you don't sign your scorecard, you get disqualified. Make a mistake on the scorecard, like forgetting to mark a hole, and sign it, you get disqualified.
Why should they hand in a score card? To follow your reasoning, the players should only have to report the score. They know what they scored so why should how the score was arrived at be anyone business?
Sure, in pro golf tournaments. Do you think that the local Ottawa tournaments consist of a bunch of professional chess players?
People seemed very concerned that the games "actually happened" as if this somehow guarantees no funny business. It is totally naive to have this view.
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
Sure, in pro golf tournaments. Do you think that the local Ottawa tournaments consist of a bunch of professional chess players?
People seemed very concerned that the games "actually happened" as if this somehow guarantees no funny business. It is totally naive to have this view.
If a tournament is being played with the rules of golf then rule 6 will apply. It doesn't only apply to Pros.
I don't know how you play tournaments at the Ottawa club. Does touch move apply or is it kind of loosey goosey?
Explain to me how a written record of the game is proof against anything untoward happening. I have played in literally dozens of tournaments that were FIDE-rated and no one wanted the scoresheets. Having the scoresheets does absolutely nothing to prevent cheating since no one is going to be investigating the games, are they?
"Tom is a well known racist, and like most of them he won't admit it, possibly even to himself." - Ed Seedhouse, October 4, 2020.
Unless an organizer places the condition that carbon scoresheets or Mon Roi style devices, or some other means of gamescore capture are to be provided by the organizer, and must be used as a condition to playing in their events, it seems to me that a player can simply buy his own scorebook or scoresheets and keep his gamescores to himself after his game are finished (unless an organizer demands that he can photocopy gamescores after the game is completed, as condition to a player participating in an event).
The rule that a player's scoresheet (even if bought by the player) belongs to the organizer, it would seem to me, only applies while a game is in progress. As I said, after the game is over, if the player's scoresheet was bought by him, he owns it and can keep it to himself.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
If a tournament is being played with the rules of golf then rule 6 will apply. It doesn't only apply to Pros.
I don't know how you play tournaments at the Ottawa club. Does touch move apply or is it kind of loosey goosey?
If it's not golf unless all the rules of golf are rigorously used, then 99.9% of activity on golf courses is not golf. Even pros don't know all the arcane interpretations of the rules.
In any case, although the FIDE rules do insist on the use of a scoresheet and give the organizer the clear right to impose the choice of scoresheet and clear ownership of the scoresheet, they don't impose a requirement on the organizer to do anything with that right.
As to the discussion elsewhere in this thread on how to practically enforce that right, it's pretty easy. I've played in any number of tournaments where there is no pairings sheet to mark the result on (removed shortly after the start of the round). The only way to record the result is by handing the scoresheet in.
Otherwise, I'm with Tom, I don't hand in the scoresheet unless I'm forced to, the game is noteworthy in some way, or circumstances demand it (playing in some championship for example). And really, how many games in the average Swiss are worth putting in the effort to record for all eternity?
Explain to me how a written record of the game is proof against anything untoward happening. I have played in literally dozens of tournaments that were FIDE-rated and no one wanted the scoresheets. Having the scoresheets does absolutely nothing to prevent cheating since no one is going to be investigating the games, are they?
The CFC has a handbook. It's on their web site.
In the handbook there is Section 4. The Laws of Chess. That section has a link to the FIDE laws of chess which apply.
If you follow the link it goes to the FIDE Laws of Chess. Now scroll down to section 8. That deals with the scoresheets. Article 8.3 in the section goes even farther. It says "The scoresheets are the property of the organisers of the event".
We weren't talking cheating but archiving. For cheating I'd use rules dealing with sportsmanship.
Possibly the Ottawa Chess Club should start applying the rules regarding scoresheets.
I tend to agree with Tom's philosophy on this subject, though I have been willing to annotate my more interesting games for publication.
Databases of course represent a greater threat than old magazine issues, when it comes to having one's opponents prepare against one. This can even compromise a Canadian player (or team)'s chances at the international level.
I'm less worried about my own games being in databases, since many Ottawa locals already know some of what I play, and I seldom travel. More importantly, I have a large repertoire, which is thus tougher to prepare against than say Tom's (in past times at least), and I try to re-invent myself as a player to some extent every now and then.
I sent Hugh a large number of my games some years ago, partly since I felt I owed him for being one of many governors not heeding his warning against the CFC proceeding with the affiliation of the FSQE (disaffiliated since). I also liked having my better or theoretically relevant games captured (now they have gone international, in big databases). As for opponents studying my weak points, based perhaps more on my lesser games, well I am hoping life will be different, perhaps in a couple of years, and I may not take chess so seriously any more after then.
Last edited by Kevin Pacey; Friday, 21st January, 2011, 09:31 PM.
Anything that can go wrong will go wrong. Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer
Tweet
Comment