PDA

View Full Version : Canterbury Summer Swiss



Publicist
22-04-2011, 06:05 PM
Due to this yearís Australian Championship schedule in Geelong. The Box Hill Chess Club has decided to switch itís popular Canterbury Summer Swiss to the 2012 Australia Day weekend in accordance with the following schedule
Thursday January 26, 2 rounds
Friday January 27, 1 round [evening]
Saturday January 28, 2 rounds
Sunday January 29, 2 rounds

ER
22-04-2011, 06:23 PM
Due to this yearís Australian Championship schedule in Geelong. The Box Hill Chess Club has decided to switch itís popular Canterbury Summer Swiss to the 2012 Australia Day weekend in accordance with the following schedule
Thursday January 26, 2 rounds
Friday January 27, 1 round [evening]
Saturday January 28, 2 rounds
Sunday January 29, 2 rounds

Hi Captain, I am most certainly in it, unless it clashes with something else that I can't remember at present! Looking for my diary to check!

Bereaved
23-04-2011, 09:20 PM
Hi Captain, I am most certainly in it, unless it clashes with something else that I can't remember at present! Looking for my diary to check!(Bolding by Macavity)


Something like the MCC Australia day Weekender which we have been running for a number of years? some event like that say?

I am repulsed that these dates were considered appropriate by the Box Hill/Canterbury conglomerate.

Take care and God Bless, Macavity

ER
23-04-2011, 09:32 PM
Something like the MCC Australia day Weekender which we have been running for a number of years? some event like that say?
....
Take care and God Bless, Macavity

Oooops not really! Usually I am in Sydney during that period of the year and I go to the Norths' Tournament! I missed it last year because they changed the date with little notice! Apologies for the confusion Malcolm!

Grant Szuveges
23-04-2011, 09:33 PM
I fully agree with Malcolm's sentiment here.

The MCC has run a weekender over that weekend for years.

Surely there is another appropriate timeslot for this event which doesnt clash with a weekender from another big club.

Many people are members of both MCC and Rochester Road, why not schedule it another time, then these people have the chance to play in two events rather than picking just one.

MCC does everything it can to avoid clashes with other clubs events - we actually moved a blitz marathon last year at short notice to avoid a clash with Croydens "Guy West Classic" weekender. Id like to think that other clubs would show the same common courtesy.

That said, Ive got no idea if this was deliberate or just an oversight, so lets wait for a reply from Rochester Road...

Grant Szuveges
23-04-2011, 09:36 PM
JAK is a perfect example of the people I am referring to in my previous post. He is a member of MCC as well as Box Hill/Canterbury...

Which one are you playing in JAK?

Why should he even have to make a choice?

Publicist
23-04-2011, 09:47 PM
Well as you folks are so fond of saying first in best dressed

NRMASIFD&GKFKBBK
23-04-2011, 09:50 PM
The consequences of what should be a happy event for Victorian chess players (i.e. the return of the National Championships to the state) appear, so far, to be all very unfortunate. And could have been avoided if the national body was better at coordinating advance notice of its intended schedule, so that regional organisers could be better prepared.

Now, we have:
- The Gold Coast tournament cancelled; and
- the two largest Melbourne clubs in disagreement.

Personally, I dislike the idea that any one club should "own" a particular weekend on the calendar. Clubs should be free to organise their calendars as they see fit. On the other hand, they need to also appreciate the potential likely net-benefit that arises from cooperating with other clubs so that everyone gets a fair opportunity to organise viable competitions. It may hurt the clubs if there were to be two unviable tournaments at different venues on a weekend rather just one viable tournament at a particular venue.

I have an idea: perhaps BHCC and MCC should collaborate on this occasion and organise a superweekender. In the same way that just the recent past, Linares was split into two venues (i.e. Morelia and Linares), or some of the matches between Karpov-Kasparov were also split between two cities. Perhaps, BHCC can host the first two days and MCC the latter two days.

Then after 2012, the arrangement of tournaments can revert back to normal.

Thoughts on this proposal?

Grant Szuveges
23-04-2011, 09:51 PM
Well as you folks are so fond of saying first in best dressed

What do you mean by that?

ER
23-04-2011, 09:54 PM
JAK is a perfect example of the people I am referring to in my previous post. He is a member of MCC as well as Box Hill/Canterbury...

Which one are you playing in JAK?

Why should he even have to make a choice?


Oooops not really! Usually I am in Sydney during that period of the year and I go to the Norths' Tournament! I missed it last year because they changed the date with little notice! Apologies for the confusion Malcolm!

OK let me give you a very specific answer since your question is very specific too!

Usually I am in Sydney during 2nd half of Jan, so I go and play at North's when I have the time because I love the venue, I see old friends etc!

Now to business!

If I don't go to Sydney (or overseas) I will play in MCC's tournament!

Reasons:

1) The Club is much closer to my place
2) It's a stronger tournament
3) Fitzroy's eateries are much more enticing than Maling Rd's
4) As it has been noted, MCC's is a traditional tournament whereas BHCC's was just placed on that date due to unforeseen (Aus Champ) circumstances!

Clear enough?

Grant Szuveges
23-04-2011, 09:55 PM
Well as you folks are so fond of saying first in best dressed

Melbourne Chess Club has NEVER had this attitude. Our attitude is as I said in a previous post:

"MCC does everything it can to avoid clashes with other clubs events - we actually moved a blitz marathon last year at short notice to avoid a clash with Croydens "Guy West Classic" weekender."

Please explain "Publicist"...

Grant Szuveges
23-04-2011, 09:57 PM
OK let me give you a very specific answer since your question is very specific too!

Usually I am in Sydney during 2nd half of Jan, so I go and play at North's when I have the time because I love the venue, I see old friends etc!

Now to business!

If I don't go to Sydney (or overseas) I will play in MCC's tournament!

Reasons:

1) The Club is much closer to my place
2) It's a stronger tournament
3) Fitzroy's eateries are much more enticing than Maling Rd's
4) As it has been noted, MCC's is a traditional tournament whereas BHCC's was just placed on that date due to unforeseen (Aus Champ) circumstances?

Clear enough?

I love it! Thanks JAK. Sorry to put you on the spot there!

Carl Gorka
23-04-2011, 10:48 PM
Disappointing. The interclub spirit (http://www.chesschat.org/showthread.php?t=12840) that I and many others are trying to foster doesn't seem to be getting through to everyone :(

Kevin Bonham
23-04-2011, 11:07 PM
And could have been avoided if the national body was better at coordinating advance notice of its intended schedule, so that regional organisers could be better prepared.

Which is fine in theory, but in fact the ACF doesn't have an "intended schedule" as having one would limit the freedom of Aus Champs/Open bidders in terms of arranging the tournament that best fits in with their desires, constraints and bottom lines. Unfortunately in this case we did not receive any bids until very recently.

There was a history of the Aus Champs/Open starting on the last four or so days in December, up until 2006-7. It is just the last four years in a row that the events held in NSW have started in the New Year, resulting in short events springing up or moving to grab the gap created. CV wanted to return to the traditional one-game-a-day format.

It's unfortunate there have been clashes and that people who tried to organise events well in advance have had to cancel. However, since the Aus Champs is a paramount title event, if you're planning on running an event around Aus Champs/Open time it is better to keep plans and public information as flexible as possible until you find out what the actual dates for the Aus Champs are.

Grant Szuveges
23-04-2011, 11:34 PM
There was a history of the Aus Champs/Open starting on the last four or so days in December, up until 2006-7. It is just the last four years in a row that the events held in NSW have started in the New Year, resulting in short events springing up or moving to grab the gap created. CV wanted to return to the traditional one-game-a-day format.

It's unfortunate there have been clashes and that people who tried to organise events well in advance have had to cancel. However, since the Aus Champs is a paramount title event, if you're planning on running an event around Aus Champs/Open time it is better to keep plans and public information as flexible as possible until you find out what the actual dates for the Aus Champs are.

What Kevin is saying here is correct. The Canterbury Summer Swiss (as far as I am aware) is an event which traditionally caters for players who are not going to NSW for the Australian Championship. The only "problem" now is that the Australian Championship is in Victoria - which means that the clash is relevant to some degree.

Obviously Box Hill/Canterbury want this event to grow and prosper (and so they should), and thus dont want to let it go for a year. Although instead of putting it on to clash with an event at another club (an event which is much more similar to it than an Aus Champs is), in my opinion they shouldve run the tournament in its usual timeslot and simply had a smaller tournament than usual. This is exactly what MCC did this year with our ANZAC Day event. We want it to succeed and become a big big event and based on last year it is rapidly growing (45 entries up from 25 in 2009). This year unfortunately it clashed with Doeberl - but we ran it anyway in its "correct" time slot and simply accepted that it would be a very small event this year. If I was running Box Hill/Canterbury, this is exactly what I wouldve done here - it offends nobody and then the event goes back to its normal field size the next year. Even if it did clash with the Australian Championship in Victoria, Im not even convinced that it would lose that many players to it anyway.

NRMASIFD&GKFKBBK
23-04-2011, 11:48 PM
Which is fine in theory, but in fact the ACF doesn't have an "intended schedule" as having one would limit the freedom of Aus Champs/Open bidders in terms of arranging the tournament that best fits in with their desires, constraints and bottom lines. Unfortunately in this case we did not receive any bids until very recently.

There was a history of the Aus Champs/Open starting on the last four or so days in December, up until 2006-7. It is just the last four years in a row that the events held in NSW have started in the New Year, resulting in short events springing up or moving to grab the gap created. CV wanted to return to the traditional one-game-a-day format.

It's unfortunate there have been clashes and that people who tried to organise events well in advance have had to cancel. However, since the Aus Champs is a paramount title event, if you're planning on running an event around Aus Champs/Open time it is better to keep plans and public information as flexible as possible until you find out what the actual dates for the Aus Champs are.

It is understandable, given how hard it is to market chess as a sport or past-time worthy of sponsorship and event tendering, that the ACF is in the invidious position of having to delay the announcement of the timing of its events until less than 8 months out.

However, from the perspective of organisers of regular tournaments, the current situation is unsatisfactory. I hope that it is one of the ACF's Key Performance Indicators (which it ought to set itself) is the smooth and timely organisation of its tournaments.

Perhaps, assuming such a KPI is set and not met, it could consider recompensing adversely affected affiliated parties?

NRMASIFD&GKFKBBK
24-04-2011, 12:06 AM
What Kevin is saying here is correct. The Canterbury Summer Swiss (as far as I am aware) is an event which traditionally caters for players who are not going to NSW for the Australian Championship. The only "problem" now is that the Australian Championship is in Victoria - which means that the clash is relevant to some degree.

Obviously Box Hill/Canterbury want this event to grow and prosper (and so they should), and thus dont want to let it go for a year. Although instead of putting it on to clash with an event at another club (an event which is much more similar to it than an Aus Champs is), in my opinion they shouldve run the tournament in its usual timeslot and simply had a smaller tournament than usual. This is exactly what MCC did this year with our ANZAC Day event. We want it to succeed and become a big big event and based on last year it is rapidly growing (45 entries up from 25 in 2009). This year unfortunately it clashed with Doeberl - but we ran it anyway in its "correct" time slot and simply accepted that it would be a very small event this year. If I was running Box Hill/Canterbury, this is exactly what I wouldve done here - it offends nobody and then the event goes back to its normal field size the next year. Even if it did clash with the Australian Championship in Victoria, Im not even convinced that it would lose that many players to it anyway.

One major difference between the current clash of Doeberl and the MCC ANZAC Day event and the forthcoming clash of the Australian Championships and the BHCC Summer Swiss, is that everyone would have been on notice for well over 12 months of the current clash - all that would have been required would be to check the dates of Easter and ANZAC Day for 2011. All organisers knew (or should have known) where they stood with these events. The same cannot be said for the latter clash as we have just been informed of the timing of the Australian Championships.

Further, just because MCC have elected to hold their event concurrent with a big tournament, does not mean BHCC should do the same with their event. They certainly should not just accept either the running of a very small event or foregoing organisational options for fear of offending other clubs. It may still be good to run a very small event and avoid clashes with other clubs as that may create some goodwill with the chess community, but if the BHCC committee feel that benefit of such goodwill is inadequate for any losses incurred, then they are well within their rights to consider running their event at a different time or not at all.

Finally, I must disagree with your point that the Australian Championship may not affect the BHCC Summer Swiss numbers. It is very much likely to have the same effect as the last time when the national event was held in Melbourne - a lot of the local players played. The same is likely to happen again, unless the potential cost and distance of traveling to (and maybe staying in) Geelong is a major deterrent. Looking over the field for the 2010 Summer Swiss and you can see that many of the field will want to play at the national event.

Bill Gletsos
24-04-2011, 12:07 AM
However, from the perspective of organisers of regular tournaments, the current situation is unsatisfactory. I hope that it is one of the ACF's Key Performance Indicators (which it ought to set itself) is the smooth and timely organisation of its tournaments.

Perhaps, assuming such a KPI is set and not met, it could consider recompensing adversely affected affiliated parties?The Canterbury Summer Swiss Weekender only started in 2009 running in that period.

The Gold Coast Chess Festival only began in 2010 and picked that period.

As Kevin noted the period after Xmas and prior to New Years day had traditionally always been part of the Australian Championship/Open.
As such organisers who chose to run events in that period should have always realised they were taking a risk.

Grant Szuveges
24-04-2011, 12:11 AM
Perhaps, assuming such a KPI is set and not met, it could consider recompensing adversely affected affiliated parties?

So it could recompense Box Hill and Canterbury because the Australian Champs clashed with their event and recompense MCC because Box Hill/Canterburys event clashed with ours? Does the ACF have this sort of money?

Maybe clubs who want to clash with another clubs events should have to apply to the ACF to have their clashing event rated? It could be done on a case by case basis and in reasonable circumstances (such as the Doeberl/MCC ANZAC Day event) the ACF could rate their event whereas in other cases not deemed reasonable (such as the 2010 Vic Teams Champs clashing with the MCC Allegro Champs in my opinion), the ACF could refuse to rate the tournament. I know that it is harsh, but at least clubs and state bodies etc would start working together a bit more...

Grant Szuveges
24-04-2011, 12:19 AM
if the BHCC committee feel that benefit of such goodwill is inadequate for any losses incurred, then they are well within their rights to consider running their event at a different time or not at all.

Finally, I must disagree with your point that the Australian Championship may not affect the BHCC Summer Swiss numbers. It is very much likely to have the same effect as the last time when the national event was held in Melbourne - a lot of the local players played. The same is likely to happen again, unless the potential cost and distance of traveling to (and maybe staying in) Geelong is a major deterrent. Looking over the field for the 2010 Summer Swiss and you can see that many of the field will want to play at the national event.

Yes, Box Hill are well within their rights to run an event that clashes with an event at another club, but it creates bad-blood. But, its up to them as you said.

As for how many people would choose the Aust Champs over the Summer Swiss, well there will be a lot who do and a lot who dont. The Summer Swiss would still get 30+ players (which although small is not a disaster). I think that the distance to Geelong is a pretty big deterrent for a lot of Melbourne people (I would play the Summer Swiss personally if I was still playing), but good luck to Geelong Chess Club in relation to running the thing (if it is them doing it).

Bill Gletsos
24-04-2011, 12:25 AM
So it could recompense Box Hill and Canterbury because the Australian Champs clashed with their event and recompense MCC because Box Hill/Canterburys event clashed with ours? Does the ACF have this sort of money?

Maybe clubs who want to clash with another clubs events should have to apply to the ACF to have their clashing event rated? It could be done on a case by case basis and in reasonable circumstances (such as the Doeberl/MCC ANZAC Day event) the ACF could rate their event whereas in other cases not deemed reasonable (such as the 2010 Vic Teams Champs clashing with the MCC Allegro Champs in my opinion), the ACF could refuse to rate the tournament. I know that it is harsh, but at least clubs and state bodies etc would start working together a bit more...The decision to submit an event for ACF rating held within a state rests with the State Association. I cannot imagine the ACF would to refuse to rate it simply because it clashes with another clubs event if the state Association submitted it for rating.

Also I seriously doubt the ACF would refuse to rate an event submitted for rating because it clashed with an event that is not submitted for rating.

ER
24-04-2011, 12:41 AM
Last December, I had a beautiful five day break playing at Gold Coast!
Then after two days rest in Melbourne, i had another 10 lovely days in Sydney playing in the Aus Open!
Then in Feb another week in SunCoast QLD, then Ballarat Begonia in March.
Now, in Sydney for SIO! :)
June in Tassie!
Meanwhile I 've managed to fit in great tournaments at Melbourne Chess Club, Box Hill Chess Club and Noble Park Chess Club!
And that's only in the first part of the year!
I love our chess scene!
Bring it on! :)

NRMASIFD&GKFKBBK
24-04-2011, 12:43 AM
The Canterbury Summer Swiss Weekender only started in 2009 running in that period.

The Gold Coast Chess Festival only began in 2010 and picked that period.

As Kevin noted the period after Xmas and prior to New Years day had traditionally always been part of the Australian Championship/Open.
As such organisers who chose to run events in that period should have always realised they were taking a risk.

I would argue that the ACF could assist in its role of facilitating chess by mitigating such risk through maintaining (as best as possible) regularity in the timing of its tournaments or, alternatively, by giving more advance notice.

The point has been raised that the Christmas to New Year period has traditionally been a time when the national event was on. True, but the point is that this custom has been deviated upon in the past few years and people seeing this deviation in custom, grasped the opportunity presented. Now, another deviation (back to what was traditional) has occurred and the same people who grasped the opportunity are now adversely affected. This should not be seen by anyone as desirable and all should work to prevent such scenarios from happening again in the future.

Kevin Bonham
24-04-2011, 12:51 AM
Although instead of putting it on to clash with an event at another club (an event which is much more similar to it than an Aus Champs is), in my opinion they shouldve run the tournament in its usual timeslot and simply had a smaller tournament than usual.

If they did run it to clash with the Australian Champs then it couldn't be a Grand Prix event as GP events that clash with the Aus Champs, Open or more than one day of an Aus Junior are not permitted. I reckon that running an event that clashes with the Aus Champs in a metro area hosting the Aus Champs would be an extremely unpopular idea anyway.

If they're seeking Grand Prix status for a weekender moved to a weekend that has been occupied by a GP event run by another club that still wants to run its own event, that could get interesting. I'm not aware of any ACF ruling on that probably because no-one has ever been brave/foolish enough to attempt to cross that bridge before. But as yet it is unclear whether they are seeking Grand Prix status.

ER
24-04-2011, 12:52 AM
WHAT HE SAID

"Last December, I had a beautiful five day break playing at Gold Coast!
Then after two days rest in Melbourne, i had another 10 lovely days in Sydney playing in the Aus Open!
Then in Feb another week in SunCoast QLD, then Ballarat Begonia in March.
Now, in Sydney for SIO!
June in Tassie!
Meanwhile I 've managed to fit in great tournaments at Melbourne Chess Club, Box Hill Chess Club and Noble Park Chess Club!
And that's only in the first part of the year!
I love our chess scene!
Bring it on!"

(JAK discussing the argy bargy created by the Canterbury Summer Swiss)

WHAT WE THINK HE MEANT

"As a chess player I dont want to (and shouldnt have to) get stuck in the middle of all this"

And fair enough too...


LOL NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!

I stick with this!


OK let me give you a very specific answer since your question is very specific too!

Usually I am in Sydney during 2nd half of Jan, so I go and play at North's when I have the time because I love the venue, I see old friends etc!

Now to business!

If I don't go to Sydney (or overseas) I will play in MCC's tournament!

Reasons:

1) The Club is much closer to my place
2) It's a stronger tournament
3) Fitzroy's eateries are much more enticing than Maling Rd's
4) As it has been noted, MCC's is a traditional tournament whereas BHCC's was just placed on that date due to unforeseen (Aus Champ) circumstances?

Clear enough?

The interstate escapade I just described above, has more to do with the diversity of events in various places of Australia and my fortune to be able to be a part of it, albeit due to time provided by a lengthy sick leave!


WHAT WE THINK HE MEANT

"As a chess player I dont want to (and shouldnt have to) get stuck in the middle of all this"

And fair enough too...

lol no way I thrive in controversy! :P

MichaelBaron
24-04-2011, 01:07 AM
Personally, I find the clash between our weekender and Canterbury swiss a bit sad. Surely some people would love a chance to play in both events and both tournaments' numbers may suffer.

Bill Gletsos
24-04-2011, 01:12 AM
Personally, I find the clash between our weekender and Canterbury swiss a bit sad. Surely some people would love a chance to play in both events and both tournaments' numbers may suffer.Actually it would be hard for the MCC Australia Day numbers to be worse than they have been the past few years.

MCC Australia Day Weekender players and rounds since 2003.

2011 - 13 - 7 rounds
2010 - 14 - 7 rounds
2009 - 13 - 7 rounds
2008 - 22 - 7 rounds
2007 - 26 - 7 rounds
2006 - 28 - 5 rounds
2005 - 21 - 5 rounds
2004 - 22 - 7 rounds
2003 - not held

NSWCA Australia Day Weekender (all 7 rounds)

2011 - 74
2010 - 73
2009 - 69
2008 - 56
2007 - 62
2006 - 76
2005 - 77
2004 - 54
2003 - 62
2002 - 49

Why are the numbers for the Victorian Australia Day event so much lower than that for the NSW event.

Grant Szuveges
24-04-2011, 01:20 AM
Why are the numbers for the Victorian Australia Day event so much lower than that for the NSW event.

Victorians have a life Im guessing?

Grant Szuveges
24-04-2011, 01:22 AM
Actually it would be hard for the MCC Australia Day numbers to be worse than they have been the past few years.

MCC Australia Day Weekender players and rounds since 2003.

2011 - 13 - 7 rounds
2010 - 14 - 7 rounds
2009 - 13 - 7 rounds
2008 - 22 - 7 rounds
2007 - 26 - 7 rounds
2006 - 28 - 5 rounds
2005 - 21 - 5 rounds
2004 - 22 - 7 rounds
2003 - not held

NSWCA Australia Day Weekender (all 7 rounds)

2011 - 74
2010 - 73
2009 - 69
2008 - 56
2007 - 62
2006 - 76
2005 - 77
2004 - 54
2003 - 62
2002 - 49

Why are the numbers for the Victorian Australia Day event so much lower than that for the NSW event.

Maybe we need to encourage Canterbury to run a clashing tournament, then our numbers may improve... People may even play as a protest...

Grant Szuveges
24-04-2011, 03:21 PM
I have had a chat over the phone with Box Hill Chess Club president Peter Tsai, and we have decided that MCC and BHCC will run the event TOGETHER over the Australia Day weekend!

Its still very early, but basically the event will have 2 rounds on Thurs, Sat and Sun with one round Fri night. 3 rounds will be held at one of the clubs while 4 will be held at the other.

Not sure which club will host which days, but probably MCC will hold the days where the shops and eateries are closed around Rochester Road as Brunswick street, near MCC never shuts.

A working group from both BHCC and MCC will organise the event together.

There is still a lot that needs to be organised, but things are looking very good so far.

jhughes
24-04-2011, 05:17 PM
I have had a chat over the phone with Box Hill Chess Club president Peter Tsai, and we have decided that MCC and BHCC will run the event TOGETHER over the Australia Day weekend!

Its still very early, but basically the event will have 2 rounds on Thurs, Sat and Sun with one round Fri night. 3 rounds will be held at one of the clubs while 4 will be held at the other.

Not sure which club will host which days, but probably MCC will hold the days where the shops and eateries are closed around Rochester Road as Brunswick street, near MCC never shuts.

A working group from both BHCC and MCC will organise the event together.

There is still a lot that needs to be organised, but things are looking very good so far.
This is fantastic, it will be great for development of this event in future years.

NRMASIFD&GKFKBBK
24-04-2011, 06:45 PM
I have had a chat over the phone with Box Hill Chess Club president Peter Tsai, and we have decided that MCC and BHCC will run the event TOGETHER over the Australia Day weekend!

Its still very early, but basically the event will have 2 rounds on Thurs, Sat and Sun with one round Fri night. 3 rounds will be held at one of the clubs while 4 will be held at the other.

Not sure which club will host which days, but probably MCC will hold the days where the shops and eateries are closed around Rochester Road as Brunswick street, near MCC never shuts.

A working group from both BHCC and MCC will organise the event together.

There is still a lot that needs to be organised, but things are looking very good so far.

Yes, great work. I seem to recall someone making this suggested outcome earlier in the thread...

NRMASIFD&GKFKBBK
24-04-2011, 06:49 PM
This is fantastic, it will be great for development of this event in future years.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves - If, as expected, Victoria does not host the annual national event immediately beyond the upcoming Australian championship then a return of the Canterbury Summer Swiss back to its usual timing is highly likely.

ER
24-04-2011, 07:18 PM
The consequences of what should be a happy event for Victorian chess players (i.e. the return of the National Championships to the state) appear, so far, to be all very unfortunate. And could have been avoided if the national body was better at coordinating advance notice of its intended schedule, so that regional organisers could be better prepared.

Now, we have:
- The Gold Coast tournament cancelled; and
- the two largest Melbourne clubs in disagreement.

Personally, I dislike the idea that any one club should "own" a particular weekend on the calendar. Clubs should be free to organise their calendars as they see fit. On the other hand, they need to also appreciate the potential likely net-benefit that arises from cooperating with other clubs so that everyone gets a fair opportunity to organise viable competitions. It may hurt the clubs if there were to be two unviable tournaments at different venues on a weekend rather just one viable tournament at a particular venue.

I have an idea: perhaps BHCC and MCC should collaborate on this occasion and organise a superweekender. In the same way that just the recent past, Linares was split into two venues (i.e. Morelia and Linares), or some of the matches between Karpov-Kasparov were also split between two cities. Perhaps, BHCC can host the first two days and MCC the latter two days.

Then after 2012, the arrangement of tournaments can revert back to normal.

Thoughts on this proposal?

An excellent, wise and progressive idea! :clap:
Congrats to NRMASIFD&GKFKBBK who conceived and suggested it! :clap:
Congrats to those who thought about it seriously and are now working toward its realisation! :clap:

jhughes
24-04-2011, 10:48 PM
Let's not get ahead of ourselves - If, as expected, Victoria does not host the annual national event immediately beyond the upcoming Australian championship then a return of the Canterbury Summer Swiss back to its usual timing is highly likely.
Yes but it will also increase publicity for the MCC Australia Day Weekender, an event that last year (at least in my opinion) received very little and with a field of most likely 60+ players in the CSS/ADW more people will find out about it, and will be more likely to play in it in future years.

MichaelBaron
24-04-2011, 11:20 PM
Good! :clap: Under the current circumstances - This is the best solution!

Garvinator
25-04-2011, 11:17 AM
The consequences of what should be a happy event for Victorian chess players (i.e. the return of the National Championships to the state) appear, so far, to be all very unfortunate. And could have been avoided if the national body was better at coordinating advance notice of its intended schedule, so that regional organisers could be better prepared. I think this part of the post I have quoted needs to be added to.

All the dates for the Aus Champs and Aus Juniors are based on no one wanting to clash with Queenstown. The Aus Champ organisers have decided their best chance of a good tournament is to start just after Xmas, which for many a year was the traditional time.

It has only been in the last few years that the Aus Champs/Open has started after new year.

The national body can not give advanced notice if no state has plans to run the Champs/Open. So, with no bids, how could the ACF announce dates of its intended schedule.

If the ACF had a policy that stated that the events had to start Jan 2, then they would be accused of not adjusting to the current environment.

A better question should be: Since the Chess Victorian President has been involved in the organisation of the Aus Champs bid, why was he not keeping one of his states affiliated clubs more informed of their plans, since it has an affect on that clubs tournament plans.

So, instead of criticising the ACF, how about instead asking more questions of the CV President and committee about the seemingly lack of information to Box Hill Chess Club?

Watto
25-04-2011, 11:53 AM
I have had a chat over the phone with Box Hill Chess Club president Peter Tsai, and we have decided that MCC and BHCC will run the event TOGETHER over the Australia Day weekend!

Excellent solution - should be a fun tournament. Well done, Grant and Peter!

trappistnight
28-04-2011, 10:04 AM
This qote looks like the Prezident in favour ov first in best dresed


Can we get some sort of assurance from CV that they are not going to hold the final for this event at the same time as the MCC Allegro Championship (or any other MCC event) this year? Last years clash was detrimental to both tournaments and totally avoidable.

The MCC 2011 calendar has been out since late last year, so lets hope that CV actually check it this time to avoid a clash with this or any other event run by an affiliated club...

But this nect post dos not.


Melbourne Chess Club has NEVER had this attitude. Our attitude is as I said in a previous post:

"MCC does everything it can to avoid clashes with other clubs events - we actually moved a blitz marathon last year at short notice to avoid a clash with Croydens "Guy West Classic" weekender."

Please explain "Publicist"...

Please explain Prezident

Grant Szuveges
29-04-2011, 01:26 AM
This qote looks like the Prezident in favour ov first in best dresed



But this nect post dos not.



Please explain Prezident

I can explain this very easily actually:

In response to your first quote of mine, the MCC puts its calendar out in the second half of each year. We put our 2010 calendar out in late 2009 (I cant remember exactly when). In this calendar, we announced the dates of our allegro championship. We have done the same in the 2011 calendar which we put out in 2010. Despite the 2010 calendar being out BEFORE CV even organised its interclub finals, they (CV) scheduled the final to clash with the second day of our allegro champs.

Now to put this into perspective, the final only needed a 4 hour timeslot (not a whole weekend like the Canterbury Summer Swiss) so it really could have been scheduled at any time. Our event finished at approx 6pm while theirs started at 5pm (from memory). So they couldve scheduled it for 7pm the same day! This wouldve given players ample time to get from MCC to Rochester Road - but instead they went ahead with the clash anyway and both events suffered for it. I actually addressed this with Leonid Sandler (CV president) publically at last years CV agm. Hopefully this year there is no clash... CV should be fitting in with their member clubs and not "cutting their lunch".

Now the second of my quoted posts says that MCC has NEVER had a "first in best dressed" attitude. I absolutely stand by this comment. Here is some proof to support it:

1. Last year we had a blitz marathon scheduled for a Sunday. It clashed with Croydens "Guy West Classic" weekender. On having the clash pointed out, we (MCC) IMMEDIATELY rescheduled it. If we had a "first in best dressed attitude" we would have asked Croyden to move their event - or something equally stupid. However we are a sensible (and ethical) organisation and we realise that it is less hassle for a club which is open every day (MCC) to move a one day event over a week than it is for a smaller club which does not own its own venue to move its showcase event which runs over 2 days.

2. Have a look at the MCCs 2011 calendar. Toward the end of the calendar, you will notice that the MCC Blitz Championship is to be held in December, but we have not specified a date. We have simply said "date to be announced". The reason we have done this is that we DONT want to clash with CVs Victorian Blitz Championship (which is held around that time of year). So we have kept the date open so that we can avoid a clash. If we had the "first in best dressed attitude" we wouldve just put a date to the event - but we didnt...

3. Before putting the MCC calendar out for the public to see, I personally send a provisional copy of it to officebearers from other Melbourne based chess clubs asking specifically if there are any clashes or any dates that we should change etc. When I did this for the 2011 calendar, there were a few date changes needed (due to a clash with a Croyden or Ranges event from memory) and thus we changed them.

4. When creating MCC events, we go out of our way to avoid clashes with other clubs established events. Notice that MCC dont run a weekend tournament over the Queens birthday weekend? Why not? Because Box Hill runs the Vic Open that weekend. Same thing with the Labour Day weekend as Ballarat runs the Begonia Open. Not only do we do this, we actually go one better - we dont hold a round of our Monday night event due to the clash with the weekender - check our calendar or the flyer/post for the recently completed MCC Championship or upcoming MCC Open. We do this so that our members can play in events at other clubs and so their members can play in ours too. We dont want to or need to "cut other clubs grass"...

5. If we really had this "first in best dressed attitude" then we wouldve just dug our heals in and ran our event over the Australia Day weekend - it wouldve gone ahead and been ok, as would Box Hills event but then people would have to choose and there would be bad blood etc. So instead, I got in contact with Peter Tsai (BHCC President) and had a chat. He suggested that we run the event together and I agreed. I think the joint event is a win-win for both clubs actually: MCC gets a bigger tournament than it would otherwise have expected, BHCC keeps good PR with the chess scene, it sets a precident for the clubs working together more, players get to experience 2 clubs and 2 different parts of Melbourne, and the list goes on...

I would think that these 5 cases in point are enough evidence to show that MCC are clearly not in favour of the "first in best dressed" concept...

Now "Trappistnight", would be please explain your appalling spelling and bizarre nickname??? You could even reveal your identity! Im sure that lots of people would like to know who you are...

lost
29-04-2011, 02:15 AM
I can explain this very easily actually:

In response to your first quote of mine, the MCC puts its calendar out in the second half of each year. We put our 2010 calendar out in late 2009 (I cant remember exactly when). In this calendar, we announced the dates of our allegro championship. We have done the same in the 2011 calendar which we put out in 2010. Despite the 2010 calendar being out BEFORE CV even organised its interclub finals, they (CV) scheduled the final to clash with the second day of our allegro champs.

Now to put this into perspective, the final only needed a 4 hour timeslot (not a whole weekend like the Canterbury Summer Swiss) so it really could have been scheduled at any time. Our event finished at approx 6pm while theirs started at 5pm (from memory). So they couldve scheduled it for 7pm the same day! This wouldve given players ample time to get from MCC to Rochester Road - but instead they went ahead with the clash anyway and both events suffered for it. I actually addressed this with Leonid Sandler (CV president) publically at last years CV agm. Hopefully this year there is no clash... CV should be fitting in with their member clubs and not "cutting their lunch".

Now the second of my quoted posts says that MCC has NEVER had a "first in best dressed" attitude. I absolutely stand by this comment. Here is some proof to support it:

1. Last year we had a blitz marathon scheduled for a Sunday. It clashed with Croydens "Guy West Classic" weekender. On having the clash pointed out, we (MCC) IMMEDIATELY rescheduled it. If we had a "first in best dressed attitude" we would have asked Croyden to move their event - or something equally stupid. However we are a sensible (and ethical) organisation and we realise that it is less hassle for a club which is open every day (MCC) to move a one day event over a week than it is for a smaller club which does not own its own venue to move its showcase event which runs over 2 days.

2. Have a look at the MCCs 2011 calendar. Toward the end of the calendar, you will notice that the MCC Blitz Championship is to be held in December, but we have not specified a date. We have simply said "date to be announced". The reason we have done this is that we DONT want to clash with CVs Victorian Blitz Championship (which is held around that time of year). So we have kept the date open so that we can avoid a clash. If we had the "first in best dressed attitude" we wouldve just put a date to the event - but we didnt...

3. Before putting the MCC calendar out for the public to see, I personally send a provisional copy of it to officebearers from other Melbourne based chess clubs asking specifically if there are any clashes or any dates that we should change etc. When I did this for the 2011 calendar, there were a few date changes needed (due to a clash with a Croyden or Ranges event from memory) and thus we changed them.

4. When creating MCC events, we go out of our way to avoid clashes with other clubs established events. Notice that MCC dont run a weekend tournament over the Queens birthday weekend? Why not? Because Box Hill runs the Vic Open that weekend. Same thing with the Labour Day weekend as Ballarat runs the Begonia Open. Not only do we do this, we actually go one better - we dont hold a round of our Monday night event due to the clash with the weekender - check our calendar or the flyer/post for the recently completed MCC Championship or upcoming MCC Open. We do this so that our members can play in events at other clubs and so their members can play in ours too. We dont want to or need to "cut other clubs grass"...

5. If we really had this "first in best dressed attitude" then we wouldve just dug our heals in and ran our event over the Australia Day weekend - it wouldve gone ahead and been ok, as would Box Hills event but then people would have to choose and there would be bad blood etc. So instead, I got in contact with Peter Tsai (BHCC President) and had a chat. He suggested that we run the event together and I agreed. I think the joint event is a win-win for both clubs actually: MCC gets a bigger tournament than it would otherwise have expected, BHCC keeps good PR with the chess scene, it sets a precident for the clubs working together more, players get to experience 2 clubs and 2 different parts of Melbourne, and the list goes on...

I would think that these 5 cases in point are enough evidence to show that MCC are clearly not in favour of the "first in best dressed" concept...

Now "Trappistnight", would be please explain your appalling spelling and bizarre nickname??? You could even reveal your identity! Im sure that lots of people would like to know who you are...

I would like to say this actually:

Even though I don't have much do with MCC, they try to always accommodate tournaments for everyone.

Well done to MCC in publishing there calendar out in advance and providing good tournaments.

Keep up the good work MCC committee.

lost

Grant Szuveges
22-07-2011, 08:03 PM
Unfortunately, the idea of a joint BHCC/MCC joint event over the Australia Day weekend has not been successful. Whilst myself and BHCC President Peter Tsai have tried our best to make this solution work, unfortunately our clubs havnt been able to agree on one fundamental philosophical aspect of the event: the venue.

While both clubs agreed with every other aspect of the tournament, including entry fees, shared workload, shared profits, discounts to members of both clubs, prizes etc, we were not able to agree on the venue: BHCC made it clear that they were adament that all rounds be held at Rochester Road (BHCC headquarters) whereas MCC were insistent that at least one round should be held at MCC. Neither club was willing to waver on this particular issue meaning that a joint event is no longer possible.

What this means now, is that BHCC will run their event and the MCC will run our Australia Day Weekender on the same weekend (as we had planned to before this situation arose). This is good for the consumer in that people have the option of two tournaments to choose from - a nice problem to have!

Good luck to BHCC with their event.

MichaelBaron
22-07-2011, 08:36 PM
Unfortunately, the idea of a joint BHCC/MCC joint event over the Australia Day weekend has not been successful. Whilst myself and BHCC President Peter Tsai have tried our best to make this solution work, unfortunately our clubs havnt been able to agree on one fundamental philosophical aspect of the event: the venue.

While both clubs agreed with every other aspect of the tournament, including entry fees, shared workload, shared profits, discounts to members of both clubs, prizes etc, we were not able to agree on the venue: BHCC made it clear that they were adament that all rounds be held at Rochester Road (BHCC headquarters) whereas MCC were insistent that at least one round should be held at MCC. Neither club was willing to waver on this particular issue meaning that a joint event is no longer possible.

What this means now, is that BHCC will run their event and the MCC will run our Australia Day Weekender on the same weekend (as we had planned to before this situation arose). This is good for the consumer in that people have the option of two tournaments to choose from - a nice problem to have!

Good luck to BHCC with their event.
So if i do play - I will play in the MCC event!

ER
22-07-2011, 08:40 PM
Unfortunately, the idea of a joint BHCC/MCC joint event over the Australia Day weekend has not been successful. Whilst myself and BHCC President Peter Tsai have tried our best to make this solution work, unfortunately our clubs havnt been able to agree on one fundamental philosophical aspect of the event: the venue.

While both clubs agreed with every other aspect of the tournament, including entry fees, shared workload, shared profits, discounts to members of both clubs, prizes etc, we were not able to agree on the venue: BHCC made it clear that they were adament that all rounds be held at Rochester Road (BHCC headquarters) whereas MCC were insistent that at least one round should be held at MCC. Neither club was willing to waver on this particular issue meaning that a joint event is no longer possible.

What this means now, is that BHCC will run their event and the MCC will run our Australia Day Weekender on the same weekend (as we had planned to before this situation arose). This is good for the consumer in that people have the option of two tournaments to choose from - a nice problem to have!

Good luck to BHCC with their event.

Hi Prez
After the above developments you might as well start a new thread for the MCC Australian Day Weekender, since this one is the Canterbury Summer Swiss's one. You don't want MOZ to start threnodies ie thread hijackings etc now do you? :P :lol:


So if i do play - I will play in the MCC event!

Lol :lol: no ifs and buts from me, :eek: ... Count me in for the MCC event please!

Reasons?



1) The Club is much closer to my place
2) It's a stronger tournament
3) Fitzroy's eateries are much more enticing than Maling Rd's
4) As it has been noted, MCC's is a traditional tournament whereas BHCC's was just placed on that date due to unforeseen (Aus Champ) circumstances!

Clear enough?

Grant Szuveges
22-07-2011, 08:42 PM
Well, he can write what he wants over on the other forum, but he has been banned from posting here... (Trevor Stanning aka "MOZ" that is)

Kevin Bonham
22-07-2011, 08:44 PM
Well, he can write what he wants over on the other forum, but he has been banned from posting here... (Trevor Stanning aka "MOZ" that is)

He is not currently banned from posting here. The only part of this site he is currently excluded from is the Coffee Lounge. He has not been banned from any other part of the site since 15 Dec 2009. He simply chooses not to post here.

Paul Cavezza
22-07-2011, 09:43 PM
Poor form from a club we hear constant criticism from- just to confirm we were willing to host one single round of this event which has been on the MCC calendar on this date for years.

We move tournaments for other clubs and for CV, I think Grant actually even went out to Box Hill a few months ago in his free time to show them a proposed calendar to see if we could coordinate better, then we get tournaments moved on to dates we've set up years ago, and we have to put up with snipes. I certainly won't be playing any chess at Box Hill- average.

Paul

jhughes
22-07-2011, 10:35 PM
Box Hill this is disgraceful. You agreed to host the event with the MCC, and yet you refused to give the MCC even one round of the event! First you stepped all over an already established event to promote your own, and after plenty of (justified) bashing you agreed to host the event with the MCC, then you try to take complete control of the event and refuse to co-operate with basic demands. I hope that the Canterbury Summer Swiss is a miserable failure and that BHCC can learn from their mistakes.

Grant Szuveges
22-07-2011, 11:03 PM
Box Hill this is disgraceful. You agreed to host the event with the MCC, and yet you refused to give the MCC even one round of the event! First you stepped all over an already established event to promote your own, and after plenty of (justified) bashing you agreed to host the event with the MCC, then you try to take complete control of the event and refuse to co-operate with basic demands. I hope that the Canterbury Summer Swiss is a miserable failure and that BHCC can learn from their mistakes.

We didnt give them any "demands" - only suggestions about what we considered to be basic requirements of a joint event.

Does this mean that I can put your name down for the MCC Australia Day Weekender on principle?

jhughes
23-07-2011, 06:48 AM
We didnt give them any "demands" - only suggestions about what we considered to be basic requirements of a joint event.

Does this mean that I can put your name down for the MCC Australia Day Weekender on principle?
Yes, put me down for the Australia Day Weekender.