Ottawa Autumn Open

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Ottawa Autumn Open

    Originally posted by Aris Marghetis View Post
    Perhaps you can catch my maybe-too-subtle hint, that YOU NOT speak on their behalf?! ;)
    Where/when did I speak on their behalf? I merely offered a suggestion.
    Christopher Mallon
    FIDE Arbiter

    Comment


    • #62
      Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Ottawa Autumn Open

      Originally posted by Louis Morin View Post
      So you are another Canadian from the ROC who does not like Quebec? Not surprising, there are so many...
      No, Louis, I am not that. I have an immense liking and respect for Quebec. I've had some French Canadian friends in my past and I liked them a lot. I went to a fully bilingual high school and loved the merging of cultures.

      My point was that if you open doors to allow any form of cheating or gaming the system, there will be those who take advantage. Under your proposal, someone from Quebec can and will leave the province entirely and get to play N number of CFC tournaments "free" before someone finally figures things out.

      I do like your desire for simplicity. You know what the simplest thing is? A rating system that is simple enough for anyone to calculate their own rating game by game, and thus have no need for ratings fees to any organization. But organized chess is hard up for money, and ratings fees, as outdated as they are, are nonetheless the only way to keep up the status quo.
      Only the rushing is heard...
      Onward flies the bird.

      Comment


      • #63
        Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Ottawa Autumn Open

        Originally posted by Paul Bonham View Post
        You know what the simplest thing is? A rating system that is simple enough for anyone to calculate their own rating game by game, and thus have no need for ratings fees to any organization.
        There is a rating calculator on the FQE website. After any tournament, any player can input his own rating, his opponents' ratings and his results (win, loss, draw) to get immediately his new rating. This takes about 15 seconds.

        So anybody in Quebec can already calculate his own rating for free. But players do not only want their own rating, they also want to compare their rating with other players they know. This is why there will always be at least one organization calculating and publishing ratings, and asking a rating fee for this.

        Comment


        • #64
          Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Ottawa Autumn Open

          Originally posted by Matthew Scott View Post
          And this right here is why the whole "agreement" makes absolutely no sense. It would be much simpler to abolish the FQE and stick with a national organization for ratings - but that would make life far too simple for everyone and, as usual, Quebec has to be "special".
          Well then, let's push it a little bit further! Why do we need these 'national' ratings and organizations? We can just switch to a continental organization! Much simpler and nobody will be 'special'.

          So, let's arrange a hypothetical agreement between the CFC and the USCF. For every CFC member, 9$ goes to the USCF and: i-you can have your tournaments rated by the USCF; ii-you can participate in USCF tournaments.

          Does that make sense?

          No! And that's exactly how I feel about the current agreement.

          Mathieu

          Comment


          • #65
            Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Ottawa Autumn Open

            Originally posted by Louis Morin View Post
            There is a rating calculator on the FQE website. After any tournament, any player can input his own rating, his opponents' ratings and his results (win, loss, draw) to get immediately his new rating. This takes about 15 seconds.

            So anybody in Quebec can already calculate his own rating for free. But players do not only want their own rating, they also want to compare their rating with other players they know. This is why there will always be at least one organization calculating and publishing ratings, and asking a rating fee for this.
            I agree with you, but the only reason this is the case is that the actual rating calculation, which I'm assuming is ELO, does actually require a calculator for most people. That is, most people wouldn't bother doing the calculation on their own, it is too complicated.

            I was meaning an even simpler system that 90% of people could do even in their head or with one or two math operations no more complicated than subtraction and addition of integer numbers. If the calculation were that simple, then a player would have no need of any organization to do it for them, nor a web site. All they would need to know is all the results for the players they want to compare to (and the rating at the time of the opponents). Since it is a simple operation, even pgn game files could include the pre-game and post-game ratings of both players. The person compiling the game file could add it in easily. So as long as one could get such pgn files, they could keep up with everyone's rating.

            You are likely right that organized standard chess will always use ELO ratings and thus need organizations to do the ratings for the players. But since you seem to crave simplicity, I offered up the simplest possibility. And in fact, my corporate entity beginning about mid-2013 will be using the much simpler method, and it won't be charging anyone membership fees or ratings fees. This entity will not be offering standard chess, so there will be no competition with any chess organization.

            Well, at least not DIRECT competition. Because it will be offering a much more exciting version of chess, there will be competition in the sense of siphoning away chess players from standard chess.
            Only the rushing is heard...
            Onward flies the bird.

            Comment


            • #66
              Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Ottawa Autumn Open

              Originally posted by Paul Bonham View Post
              My corporate entity beginning about mid-2013 will be offering a much more exciting version of chess, there will be competition in the sense of siphoning away chess players from standard chess.
              Why wait one more year? Why not right now?

              To be very honest, several people came to the FQE over the years to show their revolutionary chess variants. They usually had very nice demos, with detailed rules, and many of these board games seemed very interesting. But none of them went beyond this stage... somehow, the FQE was expected to put lots of money in their projects... none of these guys believed enough in their own ideas to invest their own money...

              Comment


              • #67
                Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Ottawa Autumn Open

                Originally posted by Louis Morin View Post
                Why wait one more year? Why not right now?
                Logistical reasons. It's not a question of "waiting", it's a question of getting the infrastructure in place. A lot of the infrastructure is software related, which is something I am very good at but which nevertheless takes time.


                Originally posted by Louis Morin View Post
                To be very honest, several people came to the FQE over the years to show their revolutionary chess variants. They usually had very nice demos, with detailed rules, and many of these board games seemed very interesting. But none of them went beyond this stage... somehow, the FQE was expected to put lots of money in their projects... none of these guys believed enough in their own ideas to invest their own money...
                Yes, I'm sure you are relating the truth. There is one that comes to mind that probably had no interaction with the FQE, and that is Yasser Seirawan's and Bruce Harper's S-Chess. Very ambitious when it began, but it seems like nothing has been happening for some years now.

                Nevertheless I have taken a unique approach that has earned intrigue and interest from many quarters. There are people out there who know potential when they see it.
                Only the rushing is heard...
                Onward flies the bird.

                Comment

                Working...
                X