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.
No need to be so condescending. I've made a mistake, and only looked at Nikita and David (who were both announced as winners).
So, let's see what we have :
1) Nikita is announced as the winner.
2) David is then announced as the winner.
3) The tie-breaks that were used (as announced during the closing ceremony) show that Konstantin should be the winner.
I imagine the real tie-breaks are not yet decided
I suggest we flip a coin. It will look less ridiculous than all this nonsense.
If I seem condescending it's because this is as nice as I can force myself to be when all of your mistakes about the CYCC are in one direction: they all make it out to be worse: overstating the entry fee, grossly underestimating the $$ collected for the CFC, saying that the $75 of CFC-allowed organizer expenses per CYCC entry is "stealing from children"...
BUT, one one point we both look like uninformed idiots.
I'm sitting with Les Bunning right now, and he tells me that the tie-break rules we followed were the ones passed in the CFC AGM which ended July 1. Those rules are not yet in the CFC Handbook. So your selective quoting of the outdated Handbook is moot, as is my quoting the Handbook in response.
Who finished third?
The website says it's Nikita and during the closing ceremony the organizers said it was David.
I cannot find a complete list of winners (1st, 2nd & 3rd) on the official site. Please post a complete list, and the tie-break rules - the ones passed in the CFC AGM ended July 1. This is getting very very confusion. Thanks.
Who finished third?
The website says it's Nikita and during the closing ceremony the organizers said it was David.
I was at the closing ceremonies and was not announced as the third place finisher. They announced that they made a mistake previously and Konstantin Semianiuk is actually 3rd. I was never 3rd place.
Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Posting of Rd. 6 Standings?
The usual practice has been (as long as I have been involved in youth chess) that if someone finished tied for third place then they can go to WYCC as one of the representatives though only first place gets the bursary. If the first place finisher does not go then second place goes as the official representative. As far as I am concerned tie breaks only come into effect if we are dealing with the additional bursary which will probably not be an issue for third place and also for the rights of first refusal on being the official Canadian representative at the other tournaments (Pan Am and North American Youth Chess Championships).
The usual practice has been (as long as I have been involved in youth chess) that if someone finished tied for third place then they can go to WYCC as one of the representatives though only first place gets the bursary. If the first place finisher does not go then second place goes as the official representative. As far as I am concerned tie breaks only come into effect if we are dealing with the additional bursary which will probably not be an issue for third place and also for the rights of first refusal on being the official Canadian representative at the other tournaments (Pan Am and North American Youth Chess Championships).
So will we have a complete list of winners (1st, 2nd, 3rd) and will the tie-break rules be publicized? Simple Yes, No please.
I was at the closing ceremonies and was not announced as the third place finisher. They announced that they made a mistake previously and Konstantin Semianiuk is actually 3rd. I was never 3rd place.
I can confirm that David's statement is 100% accurate. I too was at the closing ceremonies where Les Bunning announced that it was a mistake that Nikita was listed as 3rd, and that Konstantin was actually 3rd.
I was at the closing ceremonies and was not announced as the third place finisher. They announced that they made a mistake previously and Konstantin Semianiuk is actually 3rd. I was never 3rd place.
Wow, the XXX continues. Bad enough when he was just interpreting stats wrong and convicting people (Ivanov) on flimsy evidence that supports his XXX viewpoint, now he's been kicked to the curb by both John Upper and David Itkin for getting the stats themselves wrong. The lesson for Felix here is "pride comes before a fall."
Meanwhile, I do want to commend the CYCC organizers for using most wins as the primary tiebreak factor, if that is in fact what they did. Playoffs are great if you have the time and resources and the players have the time and resources. Playoffs are played with each player knowing they have to win; draws are just going to stretch things out.
The point isn't just to "fairly" award the titles / prizes to the best players. On that basis, you could just not hold the event and award the titles / prizes based on rating. The point is, you're holding an event, and you want to award titles / prizes to the players who best exhibit the creative and dynamic choices that make for exciting chess, and do so in a way that produces respectable results.
So you wouldn't award the last-place finisher a title or prize because s/he played the most exciting chess of anyone (although in that case, I would argue for some kind of "fighting chess" consolation prize, so that player can come away feeling s/he did something that has value in chess competition).
But in a group of players tied for a prize, if one stands out with the most wins (and losses), that player can be arguably said to have played the most daring and creative chess among that group. That's what you reward, and everyone knows it from the beginning, so they are motivated to play daring chess.
It's not so much a factor at these age groups as it is in elite-level chess. But by using most wins as the primary tiebreak, you are getting these kids ready for the higher levels. The message is, play strong, but don't play "fortress" chess. Take some intelligent but aggressive chances, be willing to fight off counterplay to achieve your goals.
If humans are never to be as good as computer engines at chess (with the still-possible exception of Borislav Ivanov), they can at least be more exciting.
Last edited by Nigel Hanrahan; Monday, 15th July, 2013, 04:09 AM.
Reason: personal attack, what else?
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
I'm sitting with Les Bunning right now, and he tells me that the tie-break rules we followed were the ones passed in the CFC AGM which ended July 1. Those rules are not yet in the CFC Handbook.
I've been asking for:
1) A complete list of winners (1st, 2nd, 3rd) of CYCC 2013,
2) The tie-break rules.
If the organizers are too busy to answer, could someone (likely CFC governors) help to post the tie-break rules which John Upper stated that Les Bunning said that "it is the tie-break rules passed in the CFC AGM which ended July 1". At least we can clear the confusion on the that part.
If the organizers are too busy to answer, could someone (likely CFC governors) help to post the tie-break rules which John Upper stated that Les Bunning said that "it is the tie-break rules passed in the CFC AGM which ended July 1". At least we can clear the confusion on the that part.
The motion concerning CYCC tie-break rules can be seen on the CFC Forum (along with rest of the AGM, for those who are interested) linked here. However, that doesn't completely answer your question - the motion only recommends certain systems, it won't tell you what was actually used at this year's CYCC.
Tweet
Comment