FIDE level chess in Canada

[Alex Ferreira]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

Hi Jean:

In the past I've promoted the " Level Playing Field " prize distribution.

Each section pools its own entry fees. Each section pays a percentage of all tournament expenses, so that all are covered. The balance of fees left in the section are the prize fund.

The section with the most players gets the biggest prize fund!

Any problem with this?

Bob A

Hi Bob,


Firstly I'd like to say that I am speaking as a player and not an organizer.

I disagree with this entirely. Having these class prizes is promoting mediocrity. Most tournaments I've been to, the lower classes subsidize the top section, and so they should. Some people call me elitist, but I am actually quite indifferent as to whether an elite player has or not to pay an entry fee, so long as the prize fund is quite substantial.

It's incomprehensible to me how so many weak players seem to legitimately believe they should be in contention for a "prize". Truth is, there's very little money in chess (playing). Professionals have to teach to make money off chess. Whatever little money exists in chess, in my opinion, should be to improve the quality of tournaments (which is beneficiary to all players) and then prizes to the top finishers, in the top section.
One interesting example I can think of are the Guelph tournaments. Hal only gives prizes to the top section, although I don't think lower sections subsidize the top section. However, bottle water, fruit, coffee, granola bars are provided. Many players seem to like this format enough and the "classes" don't seem to be suffering that much in participation. Winners in the lower classes get a neat trophy, a symbol of achievement amongst our weak peers, great!
Over the past two Summers, I had the opportunity to play in a couple of tournaments in Greece, and all the tournaments over there seemed to follow a very identical format. One section open swiss, 9 rounds, only the top 10 finishers get prizes. Then they had a prize for top woman and a prize for best age category finisher (top finisher U18, U16, U14, U12). Everyone played together in one section, and people seemed quite content with that.

You and I, Bob, are weak. So is a 2200 and so is a 1200. I don't see why anyone below IM strength could think he/she should ever be winning any money from playing chess. We don't contribute anything to the game itself. It really bothers me this North American chess culture, particularly in the USA, where people really think their garbage chess should net them anything. I am (perhaps foolishly) of the opinion that we should all be playing chess for the love of the game, and that the elite players should in addition play for something else, since they (also, ideally) contribute to chess.
Someone gave this example once and I've repeated it and will again. When we go to the movies, we spend $15 per person on ticket alone these days it seems. $30 if you want to take someone, plus parking, plus popcorn or dinner etc... a 4 hour evening can cost $50-100. I believe chess tournaments range from $50-100 for 2-3 days or something like 30 hours worth of entertainment.
Surely I've won a few prizes in chess tournaments, and I welcome them as a neat bonus, not something I had been looking forward to. At best, it covered my expenses for the weekend.
Anyone out there who is not at least an IM and thinks he/she should be entitled to get money from playing chess, you're weak. Quit whining and get a McJob. You'll make more money over a weekend and it's guaranteed!

This is nothing against you Bob, just responding to the idea you presented. Unfortunately many people share that view and I am strongly against it.


Alex Ferreira

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

You and I, Bob, are weak. Alex Ferreira

Hi Alex:

Well, we do agree on one thing - the above! Though I'm not so sure about you!

Bob A

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

Having these class prizes is promoting mediocrity.

It is a slippery area. Slipping starts when an entry fee is high.
When a prize fund is based only on entry fees, players have an absolute right to demand class prizes. (It works slightly differently - players simple do not go to tournaments without classes prizes).

Alex, you as HH organizers may try to reduce fee, i.e., set as low as possible, just to get common Open prizes, and see the outcome. Who knows, maybe you'll need three Great Halls to sit crowds :D

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

You and I, Bob, are weak. So is a 2200 and so is a 1200. I don't see why anyone below IM strength could think he/she should ever be winning any money from playing chess. We don't contribute anything to the game itself.

I could live with no real prospects at prizes if I had opportunities to play some strong players. Class prizes are a mugs game as you point out. Only the hotels make money when it comes to out of town tournaments.

If I believed that I didn't contribute anything to the game itself then I would probably stop being a CFC governor and teaching children to play chess. An NM strength player or an 1800 player even a 1600 player can contribute something to the game by helping a child learn how to play a simple rook ending or checkmate a king with a king and queen or king and rook or by organizing a 1400 player children's tournament or helping someone else by volunteering at such an event. We all contribute what we can.

[Jean Hébert]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

But human mentors are less needed now, don't you think? Kids today
are just sparring with their engines, practicing on software like
Chess Hero, memorizing huge numbers of opening lines and master games,
and winning tournaments with much less experience than in the past.

This "no mentor approach" does not seem to work well for young canadians if we look at their results at the last WYCC. The truth of the matter is that with this abundance of tools and information available to them, young players need mentor help more than ever to profitably use those tools. Left to themselves they just taste everything with no sense of purpose and end up more confused than anything else. The human factor is still vital, but its nature has changed. It has become more guidance than teaching.

[Alex Ferreira]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

I could live with no real prospects at prizes if I had opportunities to play some strong players. Class prizes are a mugs game as you point out. Only the hotels make money when it comes to out of town tournaments.

If I believed that I didn't contribute anything to the game itself then I would probably stop being a CFC governor and teaching children to play chess. An NM strength player or an 1800 player even a 1600 player can contribute something to the game by helping a child learn how to play a simple rook ending or checkmate a king with a king and queen or king and rook or by organizing a 1400 player children's tournament or helping someone else by volunteering at such an event. We all contribute what we can.

Hi Vlad,

You make some good points, but I clearly meant making money from playing chess. If you have a job teaching, promoting chess, even organizing events, good for you! I am totally for that. It enriches the chess community, brings people in, etc... That's good for the community, maybe for you, maybe for people who want to learn chess. It doesn't contribute to the game itself. In my opinion, only professionals do that. By the game itself I mean ideas in chess, variations, etc...
Making money from chess (teaching, working in) is fine, but when it comes to playing, it's a different story in my mind.

Alex F.

[Jean Hébert]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

We'll just have to agree to disagree. I think we both have the same length of experience, though mine is " class " and yours " elite ".

You would also be wrong in feeling any kind of superiority on that field. I spend most of my chess time teaching and chatting with ordinary players, sometimes even beginners, with young players promising and not so promising, and their parents. At tournaments I also mostly hang out with the average guy and casually play and talk weekly with my chess club's members where no one is above 1900. I am well aware of their needs and points of view.
Chess politicians love to put "elite" and other players up against one another, in order to appear as the wise ones, the only ones capable of uniting conflicting interests, when in reality they are often the source of the problems. The interests of the stronger and the weaker, far from conflicting with each other, actually complement each other when understood and channelled properly.

[Nikolay Noritsyn]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

Mikhail,

Politicians often use "we" and "us", but some of them have real supporters, so it makes the statement at least a little bit valid.
Could you tell us chesstalkers, who belongs to the group "we" and "us" you mention?

Nikolay

[Steve Karpik]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

Hi Bob,

It's incomprehensible to me how so many weak players seem to legitimately believe they should be in contention for a "prize". Truth is, there's very little money in chess (playing). Professionals have to teach to make money off chess. Whatever little money exists in chess, in my opinion, should be to improve the quality of tournaments (which is beneficiary to all players) and then prizes to the top finishers, in the top section.
One interesting example I can think of are the Guelph tournaments. Hal only gives prizes to the top section, although I don't think lower sections subsidize the top section. However, bottle water, fruit, coffee, granola bars are provided. Many players seem to like this format enough and the "classes" don't seem to be suffering that much in participation. Winners in the lower classes get a neat trophy, a symbol of achievement amongst our weak peers, great!


Alex Ferreira

Alex,

In some ways, a chess tournament is just like another business vying for the dollars that consumers spend on recreation. So from that perspective, I'm going to compare chess to men's recreational hockey.

Men's recreational hockey is divided into divisions -- A to DDD (A is pretty good. DDD is god awful.) Every player pays the same league fees. Each team gets a chance to win their division and win a prize (hockey merchandise in some leagues, a trip to the national championships in others). The winners of the A division get exactly the same prizes as the winners of the DDD division. Players in A level are often ex-pros. The DDD players have trouble skating.

Would it be a good business decision for the league (which is in the business of maximizing the number of players in the league and therefore profit) to say that the top players will get big prizes and the players in DDD will get little or nothing. I don't think so. If it was a brilliant idea to do so, I'm sure the business men who run these leagues would do so.

So why from a business perspective is it a good idea go with unequal prize distributions in chess? I just don't see it from a marketing perspective. You can tell the DDD players that they're crap and they don't deserve anything but they might just take their money elsewhere. There are lots of leagues that will take your $500 for 24 games.

It's not that I'm against elite level play. I very much support whatever the CFC can do to help out our best elite players and I wish it could do more. But when it comes down to the structure of a tournament that is trying to attract all ability levels, I think you have to be wary of making the mid- and low-level players feel not valued. From a business perspective, as an organizer all the players from elite to beginner are your customers.

Steve

[Denton Cockburn]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

Alex,

In some ways, a chess tournament is just like another business vying for the dollars that consumers spend on recreation. So from that perspective, I'm going to compare chess to men's recreational hockey.

Men's recreational hockey is divided into divisions -- A to DDD (A is pretty good. DDD is god awful.) Every player pays the same league fees. Each team gets a chance to win their division and win a prize (hockey merchandise in some leagues, a trip to the national championships in others). The winners of the A division get exactly the same prizes as the winners of the DDD division. Players in A level are often ex-pros. The DDD players have trouble skating.

Would it be a good business decision for the league (which is in the business of maximizing the number of players in the league and therefore profit) to say that the top players will get big prizes and the players in DDD will get little or nothing. I don't think so. If it was a brilliant idea to do so, I'm sure the business men who run these leagues would do so.

So why from a business perspective is it a good idea go with unequal prize distributions in chess? I just don't see it from a marketing perspective. You can tell the DDD players that they're crap and they don't deserve anything but they might just take their money elsewhere. There are lots of leagues that will take your $500 for 24 games.

It's not that I'm against elite level play. I very much support whatever the CFC can do to help out our best elite players and I wish it could do more. But when it comes down to the structure of a tournament that is trying to attract all ability levels, I think you have to be wary of making the mid- and low-level players feel not valued. From a business perspective, as an organizer all the players from elite to beginner are your customers.

Steve

This is actually pretty good, and I find myself agreeing with most of it. Let's create an addendum though.

I believe masters (and I am being generous there because I am one, really let's say FMs) are more akin to professional hockey players. If we didn't have professional hockey, recreational hockey probably wouldn't do that well. Now imagine if those DDD players were told they could go over to the next rink and oh, look, there's the Red Wings playing the Maple Leafs, and is that Ottawa getting spanked by Montreal in that other rink over there (not likely, but hey, gotta represent for Quebec). The Recreational Hockey association is now making an offer where for double my league fees, I get to have those professional games right there. What's that? They'll also let me bring my kids to watch those professionals play? and the pros will give me tips for improving my game? and tips for my kids too?

It's not all about money (that's the CFC's current problem). It's about improving the number and quality of chess players in Canada. Masters can in a strange way teach by osmosis, and advertise by osmosis. I'm looking for the time when I get to play Bator Sambuev, not because I think I'll win, but because I know the game alone will be worth the entry fee. I still remember playing a simul against Spraggett years ago (I got a draw), and even memories like those are worth $20 (better than buying myself 4 bottles of beer).

I don't believe in extorting class players. I think the fees for most tournaments are ridiculous and efforts should be made to provide cheaper ones ( I wish we had a national organization where this was a goal ). I just know that I need those elite players around to help make me a better player.

P.S. I had created the Windsor Chess League, with entry fees of $10 and groups of players within 200 points. The masters had the same fees, but at least they were guaranteed to only be facing other experts or masters.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

Why don't you organize the kind of events you want? See how viable they are.

I used to organize what I wanted. I organized OTB. I also organized correspondence chess. One time I decided I wanted a big correspondence Canadian Open. I set a low entry fee, advertised it and ended up with just over 400 entrants from all over Canada. A few years later I organized another one that came in just under 300 entrants. One of the guys who writes here from time to time won that one.

[Denton Cockburn]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

Why don't you organize the kind of events you want? See how viable they are.

I used to organize what I wanted. I organized OTB. I also organized correspondence chess. One time I decided I wanted a big correspondence Canadian Open. I set a low entry fee, advertised it and ended up with just over 400 entrants from all over Canada. A few years later I organized another one that came in just under 300 entrants. One of the guys who writes here from time to time won that one.

Oh, I want to. I don't think it's even that hard to get organized here (from the chess side of things). I could probably convince the CEM (Montreal) to do it even.

The difficulty would be to convince enough players to take out a CFC membership as well.
I may try it though, see what interest there would be.

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

In Montreal, Steve Bolduc organized a few FIDE-rated round-robins a few years ago, and got some strong players to play. Unfortunately, he has moved to Trois-Rivieres in the meantime.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

I may try it though, see what interest there would be.

Give it a try. You are fulfilling the first rule of successful organizing. You're making sure players know who you are. It's important.

[Mikhail Egorov]

Re: FIDE level chess in Canada

Mikhail,

Politicians often use "we" and "us", but some of them have real supporters, so it makes the statement at least a little bit valid.
Could you tell us chesstalkers, who belongs to the group "we" and "us" you mention?

Nikolay

Hi Nikolay,

You are asking the wrong person here, since I am not a politician. In case you still wondering you should ask Mr. Gillanders, Mr. Barron,and other so call politicians here on chesstalk. They know more about, since they it and will be able to explain you in detail here. Hope they will be answer your interesting question. ;)

Good luck!