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.
But again, yes, the question needs answering, and not only that, but if there was such crossfunding, perhaps someone such as Felix Dumont should follow up, send out letters to each set of parents whose kids attended the CYCC, let them know where $75 of their money went, and ASK them if they approve or disapprove, to help make a decision on next year.
There is no need to make such a survey to know if they approve it or not.
For next year, the Quebec Chess Federation already announced that all the profit would be given back to the kids (that represent a large amount, even without sponsors!). Obviously, they could have used this money for the CO, which will create a huge deficit, even with sponsors, but the mentality is not the same. If only we had known that people outside of Quebec think it's normal to keep the money
By the way, for many CO and CYCC the venue is free or not expensive at all (especially if the turnout is great), even for great venues. Hotels love to be able to book hundreds of nights in advance.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
There is no need to make such a survey to know if they approve it or not.
For next year, the Quebec Chess Federation already announced that all the profit would be given back to the kids (that represent a large amount, even without sponsors!). Obviously, they could have used this money for the CO, which will create a huge deficit, even with sponsors, but the mentality is not the same. If only we had known that people outside of Quebec think it's normal to keep the money
By the way, for many CO and CYCC the venue is free or not expensive at all (especially if the turnout is great), even for great venues. Hotels love to be able to book hundreds of nights in advance.
Fantastic Felix !! You are doing a great service for chess in Canada in particular for the young generation!!! My son is already looking forward to the next year CYCC and I am sure it will definitely surpass this year CYCC in terms of QUALITY. Thanks again to your for your contribution for chess in Canada...I am certainly encouraged with people like you. Wish Canada will have more people like you in chess scene !!!
Peter, I must agree with Hal and Roger. The $75 organizer entry fee share is reasonable, approved, and recommended in the CFC handbook. They put on a quality event at a premium cost site. Whatever portion was leftover for the TD's and organizers, I am sure it was meagre compensation for the many hours of work required. What they choose to do with it is their own business.
If they choose to (allegedly) donation a portion of their hard earned fees to the CO, good for them. It only shows a greater commitment to the chess community. Whatever success you may have in spinning this into something that smells, doesn't make it so. Instead of smearing the organizers, we should be thanking them for their efforts.
Is it any wonder we have so few organizers willing to tackle these major events?
Let me approach this topic from a slightly different angle. We're already expecting these CYCC parents, via high CYCC entry fees, to pony up for a sizable chunk of the winners' travel/etc. expenses if they attend the WYCC, are we not? In fact, at $150 per child (the CFC's portion of each entry fee) the 2013 CYCC should generate almost $42,000, coming straight out of approximately 278 parents' pockets for the benefit of about a dozen children. And now people like Roger, Hal, Ken and you are suggesting that it's ok to stick the parents for additional cash to help fund the CO? Am I missing something here? Please explain to me why this cross-funding, **IF** it is happening (and I haven't heard anyone deny it yet), is fair to CYCC parents?
I know of a worthy, annual tournament held in Niagara Falls and run by a dedicated, hardworking, honest guy who certainly deserves our support. Why don't we ding these CYCC parents for an extra $500 or $1,000 to 'donate' to his tournament? How about our governors who all donate their time (some of them a lot of time) for free? Don't they deserve an honourarium for their efforts? Hell! CYCC parents to the rescue!! Let's ding them for an extra $50 each for governors' honourariums.
The CYCC is a one-shot annual deal; a monopoly if you like. Parents don't have other CYCCs they can attend if they think the fees at one CYCC are too high. The CFC, given all of the time and effort and operational risk they're devoting to the CYCC, apparently value highly their contributions to chess for children in Canada. Explain to me why we're not at least being up front with parents by advising them that a portion of their entry fees may, at the organizers' discretion, be used to help fund another tournament being run by the same organizers? At least then everything would be aboveboard.
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Re: Question for CFC and Organizers of 2013 CYCC & CO
I don't see this as a question of fairness or a question of ethics, Peter. The fee for the tournament is $225. Out of that fee $150 of it goes to the CFC to pay for expenses related to the WYCC. The other $75 is to be used by the organizers at their discretion. If the organizers turn a profit that is fine. I think it is legitimate that organizers, tournament directors etc get paid for their time and effort. If they choose to forgo that pay and donate that money to another tournament which they are organizing I see that as legitimate. The only accounting necessary is that $150 goes to the CFC and $75 goes to the organizer.
For next year, the Quebec Chess Federation already announced that all the profit would be given back to the kids (that represent a large amount, even without sponsors!).
That brings up 2 questions:
1) What exactly is meant by "given back to the kids"? Will it be entry fee rebate checks sent to each set of parents? Or will it be more indirect, in the form of something like a national program of some kind for youth chess?
2) Does this decision mean 2014 CYCC organizers are not going to be compensated in any way financially for their efforts, i.e. they are working on a pure volunteer basis? No monies coming to them from the FQE?
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
And now people like Roger, Hal, Ken and you are suggesting that it's ok to stick the parents for additional cash to help fund the CO? Am I missing something here? Please explain to me why this cross-funding, **IF** it is happening (and I haven't heard anyone deny it yet), is fair to CYCC parents?
Peter, you are twisting my comments. I am not defending nor attacking the practice of cross-funding tournaments. If indeed, the organizers had cheated the kids out of a quality national championship, held the event say for example in an abandoned barn somewhere, so that funds could be diverted to the Canadian Open, then I would agree with you. The CFC Governors have approved the allocation of $75 per kid as an acceptable level of funding for the organizers to cover all tournament expenses including any fair and reasonable fees for TD’s and organizers. As long as they deliver the goods, that’s the end of it.
If you feel that $75 is too generous, then you have two choices. Submit a bid for a future CYCC where more funds are returned to the parents and/or youth chess (as Felix/FQE has done), or lobby the governors to reduce the $75 allowance.
1) What exactly is meant by "given back to the kids"? Will it be entry fee rebate checks sent to each set of parents? Or will it be more indirect, in the form of something like a national program of some kind for youth chess?
2) Does this decision mean 2014 CYCC organizers are not going to be compensated in any way financially for their efforts, i.e. they are working on a pure volunteer basis? No monies coming to them from the FQE?
1) The exact way is still not determine (as it will depend on how much profit we get). We already decided to offer bursaries to CYCC participants who wish to participate in the CO (as it is quite expensive for parents to pay for both tournaments). Probably that we would offer additional prizes for 2nd and 3rd place, but this is far from being certain (there are so many possibilities).
2) Most people will be volunteers (they might have free pizza on the last day though :) ). The FQE employees will work lots of hours on this project this year, but the FQE will obviously not pay itself back from the profit (I guess it could be considered as a form of sponsorship from the FQE). The TD might not be a volunteer (they usually are, but for a tournament like the CO or the CYCC, it might be good to offer something).
Re: Re : Re: Re : Re: Question for CFC and Organizers of 2013 CYCC & CO
As a parent of a young chess player, i don't care much how the organizers use those $75.
But the fact that they didn't have enough clocks for a national and official tournament really bothered me a lot. This was not a weekend and local tournament. Be honest in my opinion this was a kind of shame for the country, CFC, or the organizer.
But the fact that they didn't have enough clocks for a national and official tournament really bothered me a lot. This was not a weekend and local tournament. Be honest in my opinion this was a kind of shame for the country, CFC, or the organizer.
I don't get it. What has "the country", Canada, got to do with it? What do you think Canada should have done to make the event better, considering the government had no part in organizing the event?
By the way, the kids events in the 1950's had clocks. Farther back than that I don't know because I didn't play chess in the 1940's.
I don't see this as a question of fairness or a question of ethics, Peter. The fee for the tournament is $225. Out of that fee $150 of it goes to the CFC to pay for expenses related to the WYCC. The other $75 is to be used by the organizers at their discretion. If the organizers turn a profit that is fine. I think it is legitimate that organizers, tournament directors etc get paid for their time and effort. If they choose to forgo that pay and donate that money to another tournament which they are organizing I see that as legitimate. The only accounting necessary is that $150 goes to the CFC and $75 goes to the organizer.
OK. If you and I were to agree it's not a question of fairness or ethics, that leaves money. I'll agree it's a question of money.
As far as I'm concerned, $225. is too much to charge kids and their parents, particularly if a family has several children who would like to play. Chess is supposed to be for everyone and not just for those who can afford exorbitant entry fees.
If you feel that $75 is too generous, then you have two choices. Submit a bid for a future CYCC where more funds are returned to the parents and/or youth chess (as Felix/FQE has done), or lobby the governors to reduce the $75 allowance.
A one third rake off from the entry fee and people feeling it's too generous. You might not be able to understand it but I can.
Re: Question for CFC and Organizers of 2013 CYCC & CO
I am going to specifically address the point raised that the 2013 CYCC did not have enough clocks available. This is unfair and misplaced criticism.
First point to realize is that this was the largest CYCC in history, ever staged, anywhere, with 278 players. The Ottawa organizers had expected about 250, but entries kept coming in, right up until the first round began. Organizers promised they would provide sets, boards, and clocks for each game, and had plenty of extra sets on hand, dozens of them purchased just for the event.
Halldor Palsson, CYCC Chief Arbiter, and I spent many hours the day and night before the event started, working on getting the clocks ready, and making sure the settings were correct and uniform across the three models used (Saitek original model, Saitek newer model, DGT North American). When, at 7 pm that night, Tuesday July 9, we opened the box containing the 50 clocks which had been lent to us by the Ontario Chess Association, we found that more than half of them did not work properly (either needing new batteries, needing major tinkering, or were unusable even after everything conceivable was tried on them). We were then short about 25 clocks, and the Committee immediately purchased 20 brand-new DGT North American models from Chess 'N Math, which gave us an excellent price, that evening. These new clocks were then outfitted and made ready to go; I personally opened each box and inserted the batteries, while Halldor set them; we probably set new land speed records in that operation. We purchased several boxes of fresh batteries later that night, and got the rest of the usable OCA clocks ready in time for the first round. Needing about 150 (140 for play and ten spare, in case of problems or breakdowns), we were short perhaps half a dozen clocks for the first round, and got around this by borrowing clocks from some players willing to lend them -- thanks to those who helped! For each round except the last two, it is true a handful of games began without clocks, but were assigned them as they became available, once some games had finished, usually ten or fifteen minutes into the round. By the end of the CYCC, we had about 150 available, once we got the bugs out of most of those which hadn't worked earlier; Halldor spent many more hours, during the days and late into the evenings, on this.
I am going to specifically address the point raised that the 2013 CYCC did not have enough clocks available. This is unfair and misplaced criticism.
Thanks for this clarification and it helped to understand why this happened.
You know the report that a player had to buy a clock on the site really hurt the image of the organizers.
Tweet
Comment