PDA

View Full Version : 2005 Doeberl Cup



Pages : 1 2 [3]

Lucena
19-05-2005, 11:06 AM
All these report about faulty digital clocks is an excuse to throw them away and get back to guillotine, ie, real chess.
....

So here is another cause for you Gareth to take up with your eloquence, logic and clarity of expression.

Make at least half of tournaments guillotine finish.
I'll drink to that.

I'm flattered AC but this is an issue I'm not particularly interested in arguing over. I suggest you make a poll ;)

antichrist
19-05-2005, 12:37 PM
I'm flattered AC but this is an issue I'm not particularly interested in arguing over. I suggest you make a poll ;)

Gosh GC, I never thought to make a poll. Busy today as have just finished booking 14 flights at $28 bucks a go. First one this arvo. But it's coming.. not like JC

Garvinator
19-05-2005, 01:52 PM
Gosh GC, I never thought to make a poll. Busy today as have just finished booking 14 flights at $28 bucks a go. First one this arvo. But it's coming.. not like JC
where are you off too, sorry for the thread diversion :eek:

peter_parr
06-07-2005, 12:32 PM
Doeberl Cup 2005

I note with concern the problems a number of players had with the time display disappearing during the game in the Doeberl Cup 2005.

This problem is listed by DGT Projects on their website http://www.dgtprojects.com/clock_dgtxl.htm and applies only to the DGT-XL version 1.4 – the first version of the DGT-XL shipped in July and August 2003.

DGT advised all retailers on October 14th 2003 of the problems of the DGT-XL version 1.4 serial numbers 27671 to 28500 and DGT Projects arranged the expense for return of these clocks to be replaced by their updated model the DGT-XL version 1.10.

Chess Discount Sales, Sydney recalled its sold DGT-XL version 1.4 clocks and returned the entire shipment by AIR to the Netherlands and later received the DGT-XL version 1.10. Slight updates appeared with DGT-XL version 1.12 and in June 2005 I received the latest version 1.14.

Werner Stubenvoll, Chairman of FIDE Technical commission confirmed in 2004 that the DGT-XL completely meets the FIDE standards of Electronic clocks.

Every DGT-XL has a serial number attached to the clock and the version number is printed on the back of the clock.

I would strongly recommend that all arbiters and players check the clocks and any DGT-XL version 1.4 serial number 27671 to 28500 be referred to the chief arbiter or supplier.

I have not heard of problems with the DGT-XL version 1.10, 1.12 and 1.14 which have been selling well world wide over the last 18 months and used by FIDE.

Peter Parr (OAM)
FIDE International Arbiter (27 years)
FIDE Arbiter’s Commission (1990-1994)
FIDE Rules Commission (1982-1986)
Former Chief Arbiter Doeberl Cup (20 years)

Bill Gletsos
16-03-2010, 10:43 PM
Charles,

I see where the Doeberl Cup website once again incorrectly shows Ian Rogers as the sole winner in 2005.

In 2005 there was no tiebreak and Ian Rogers and Alex Wohl were the joint winners of the Doeberl Cup.

This was clearly stated in ACF Bulletin #312 here (http://www.auschess.org.au/bulletins/acfb312.htm).

Can you please arrange for this to be corrected on your website.

Denis_Jessop
17-03-2010, 03:28 PM
Charles,

I see where the Doeberl Cup website once again incorrectly shows Ian Rogers as the sole winner in 2005.

In 2005 there was no tiebreak and Ian Rogers and Alex Wohl were the joint winners of the Doeberl Cup.

This was clearly stated in ACF Bulletin #312 here (http://www.auschess.org.au/bulletins/acfb312.htm).

Can you please arrange for this to be corrected on your website.

That is indeed correct. The Convenor of the Organising Committee, Roger McCart, consulted me as ACTCA President about whether we should declare a tie. We agreed that we should and consulted the two players jointly neither of whom expressed an objection. One of the arbiters, Shaun Press, complained to Roger and me that the arbiters should have been consulted but it was considered that the decision was not a matter for the arbiters, something that I think is beyond dispute. I note that the matter was not mentioned by Shaun in his report to the ACF Newsletter. I believe that the engraved permanent Trophy shows the tied result.

DJ

Charles
19-03-2010, 03:48 PM
That is indeed correct. The Convenor of the Organising Committee, Roger McCart, consulted me as ACTCA President about whether we should declare a tie. We agreed that we should and consulted the two players jointly neither of whom expressed an objection. One of the arbiters, Shaun Press, complained to Roger and me that the arbiters should have been consulted but it was considered that the decision was not a matter for the arbiters, something that I think is beyond dispute. I note that the matter was not mentioned by Shaun in his report to the ACF Newsletter. I believe that the engraved permanent Trophy shows the tied result.

DJ


Hi all,

This is an issue well before the period in which we took over organising the Doeberl Cup. The engraved trophy only lists Ian Rogers as the winner of 2005. I suggest you take this issue up with the ACTCA as I dont have any more information than this. Happy to have the website reflect the outcome.

Bill Gletsos
19-03-2010, 04:28 PM
The engraved trophy only lists Ian Rogers as the winner of 2005.Are you sure of this by having actually checked the trophy yourself or is your comment just based on hearsay.

Charles
19-03-2010, 05:15 PM
Are you sure of this by having actually checked the trophy yourself or is your comment just based on hearsay.

Bill,

Sorry but I dont have time for whatever is driving this. The arrival of our international players and getting ready a week out combined with interstate travel for work are taking up most of my waking hours. I dropped it at the Kambah trophy shop this afternoon for engraving along with the Bedi Cup and the Pooja Cup. I checked it then visually. I dont have documentary or photographic evidence but the cup will be at the Hellenic Club from the 1st to the 5th of April to check. If you wish to continue this please do it with the ACTCA or I can help after the 6th of April when I return from driving the international players to the SIO. As I said well before my time.

Bill Gletsos
19-03-2010, 07:12 PM
Sorry but I dont have time for whatever is driving this.The only thing driving this is historical accuracy.
It would appear what is on the cup is merely the opinion of the arbiter. However it was not his decision to make.
Therefore if the cup only has Ian Rogers name on it and not Alex Wohl's then it is inaccurate as the decision by the 2005 organisers of the Doeberl Cup whose decision it was to make was that the title was shared.

If you wish to continue this please do it with the ACTCA or I can help after the 6th of April when I return from driving the international players to the SIO. As I said well before my time.It may be before your time, but as you are the apparent current custodian of the Cup then raising it with you to get the cup corrected would seem to be appropriate. I'll remind you of this post 6th April.
As for getting your website updated to accurately reflect the 2005 winners that would seem to fall totally under your control.

Libby2
20-03-2010, 06:47 AM
:rolleyes:

Anything helpful to say? Anyone who actually lives in the ACT tried making helpful, direct contact with Charles to discuss this, check the trophy themselves and sort it out? Especially anyone involved at the time?

Take a deep breath guys and occasionally remember a to slip in a small complimetary footnote to your efforts No matter how valid your points, how valid your criticisms it would be nice to see ACF officebearers (current and past and even unofficially) notice that some of the people repeatedly crapped on with this BB are actually those running many of the most successful chess events in Australia. You might even miss them when you (ACF or AusJCL) are trying to find somebody to run a national event for you and they think they've had a gutful.

Denis_Jessop
20-03-2010, 11:52 AM
:rolleyes:

Anything helpful to say? Anyone who actually lives in the ACT tried making helpful, direct contact with Charles to discuss this, check the trophy themselves and sort it out? Especially anyone involved at the time?

Take a deep breath guys and occasionally remember a to slip in a small complimetary footnote to your efforts No matter how valid your points, how valid your criticisms it would be nice to see ACF officebearers (current and past and even unofficially) notice that some of the people repeatedly crapped on with this BB are actually those running many of the most successful chess events in Australia. You might even miss them when you (ACF or AusJCL) are trying to find somebody to run a national event for you and they think they've had a gutful.

Have a look at post #64. I was one of those involved in making the decision.

I was also involved in organising the Doeberl Cup when you were a baby.

DJ

Charles
20-03-2010, 12:33 PM
The only thing driving this is historical accuracy.
It would appear what is on the cup is merely the opinion of the arbiter. However it was not his decision to make.
Therefore if the cup only has Ian Rogers name on it and not Alex Wohl's then it is inaccurate as the decision by the 2005 organisers of the Doeberl Cup whose decision it was to make was that the title was shared.
It may be before your time, but as you are the apparent current custodian of the Cup then raising it with you to get the cup corrected would seem to be appropriate. I'll remind you of this post 6th April.
As for getting your website updated to accurately reflect the 2005 winners that would seem to fall totally under your control.


No Bill I will not make changes based purely on the basis that you told me to. There is also some unnamed arbiter that you and Denis keep referring to, and seem to have an issue with and I am not buying into that personal agenda either.

The Facts. I have a cup with one name engraved, you have an article with two names, Denis has a verbal statement that he was there and there should be two names and this decision was agreed by an organiser I have never met. The Wikipedia site lists one winner Ian Rogers.

Take it up formally with Stephen Mugford (President of the ACTCA) and investigate it through the ACF and ACTCA. I am happy to make whatever changes to the website and the cup that are required from that investigation.

Libby2
20-03-2010, 01:00 PM
Have a look at post #64. I was one of those involved in making the decision.

I think I'd worked that out. I'm therefore wondering why you wouldn't have spoken to Charles directly - you both come from the ACT - rather than just lob in here with a gripe that appears fairly easy to resolve.

I'm also wondering why those involved in organising it "back then" didn't manage to get it engraved properly at the time (if that is the case) and now make it Charles' responsibility?


I was also involved in organising the Doeberl Cup when you were a baby.

DJ

Well that's a lovely historical reference. I also organised more events a few years ago than I do today. However that won't help anyone organising a 2010 (or future) event. However turning up to still assist with events, support & promote events, and still run a few, probably does help. So does finding a positive word occasionally for those who run things that actually still attract players, still grow and still promote the game.

Kevin Bonham
20-03-2010, 01:41 PM
I think I'd worked that out. I'm therefore wondering why you wouldn't have spoken to Charles directly - you both come from the ACT - rather than just lob in here with a gripe that appears fairly easy to resolve.

Denis wasn't lobbing in with a gripe. He was providing information concerning an inaccuracy mentioned by Bill.

I do agree that dotting is and crossing ts on issues from several years in the past is not a priority for someone with a major event about to get underway but this is something that has been perpetually misreported and needs to be fixed once and for all by all sources.

Note here: http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=52584&postcount=479 is a contemporaneous report confirming that Wohl and Rogers should have been listed as co-winners.


The Wikipedia site lists one winner Ian Rogers.

Not any more. :lol: Incidentally the source of the error there was Shaun Press when the article was created.

Wikipedia title-holder winner information is often wrong. For instance I saw recently that David Dick was listed as tying with Murray Chandler for the 1975 Aus Junior in Hobart. Actually Dick came third behind Chandler and another ineligible player. I fixed that one too.

Libby2
20-03-2010, 02:00 PM
Denis wasn't lobbing in with a gripe. He was providing information concerning an inaccuracy mentioned by Bill.

I do agree that dotting is and crossing ts on issues from several years in the past is not a priority for someone with a major event about to get underway but this is something that has been perpetually misreported and needs to be fixed once and for all by all sources.

Sorry - so easy to misread the tone.


Note here: http://chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=52584&postcount=479 is a contemporaneous report confirming that Wohl and Rogers should have been listed as co-winners.

I also note there who seems to be responsible for making sure it was done in such a case


ACTCA President(and ACF President) Denis Jessop and the organising committee confirmed with Wohl and Rogers that the names of both players would be engraved on the Doeberl Cup permanent trophy.

So why not try that phone call, or drop in for that conversation? Charles is a very reasonable person but he's also gobsmackingly busy yet still available to help me out with interschool events and the management of those ACTJCL activities in which I am still involved. But he can't always drop everything for me to deal with whatever I happen to think is urgent when it realistically is not, especially if the success of an actual event is not being compromised. So I don't see anything unreasonable with his position at the moment.

If people can't make a phone call, or lack a relationship with chess at a local level, then the best course remains official contact with the ACTCA whose past presidents could have fixed this years ago. I've seen a lot of positive action on the ACTCA front of late, after a few very quiet years, so I'm sure they'd actually respond to correspondence - which is a good habit for any organisation ;)

Igor_Goldenberg
20-03-2010, 02:37 PM
Can I suggest to split discussion of 2005 Doeberl Cup to a thread of it's own.
While the topic is no doubt important it is not directly relevant to 2010 tournament. Personally I don't want to miss announcements because of that and have no doubts many would share the same opinion.

Oepty
20-03-2010, 02:46 PM
Can I suggest to split discussion of 2005 Doeberl Cup to a thread of it's own.
While the topic is no doubt important it is not directly relevant to 2010 tournament. Personally I don't want to miss announcements because of that and have no doubts many would share the same opinion.

I agree, it is a seperate issue, nothing to do with the current tournament or even the current organisers of the tournament as far as I can see.
Scott

Denis_Jessop
20-03-2010, 06:54 PM
Rogers and Wohl share permanent trophy.
Peter Parr

Grandmaster Ian Rogers and International Master Aleksander Wohl,the two highest rated players on the Australian Chess Federation Rating List, tied for first place ($1650 each) in the 43rd annual Doeberl Cup Easter Weekend tournament in Canberra. ACTCA President(and ACF President) Denis Jessop and the organising committee confirmed with Wohl and Rogers that the names of both players would be engraved on the Doeberl Cup permanent trophy.

for more info
http://users.tpg.com.au/adsl279h/news.htm

In light of this succinct statement by Peter Parr (post #479, above), which co-incides with my recollection of what happened, plus the lack of any dissent from it on this BB thread or anywhere else public to my knowledge, I'm not sure what the fuss is about. All that needs to be done is to ensure that the record is correct.

DJ

PS Although already ACF President then, I was not acting in that capacity in this matter.

Bill Gletsos
20-03-2010, 07:39 PM
There is another relevant post on the subject here (http://www.chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=96546&postcount=252) by Peter Parr.

Bill Gletsos
20-03-2010, 09:23 PM
No Bill I will not make changes based purely on the basis that you told me to.It isnt a matter of just what i told you but what was said in the ACF newsletter that my link pointed to and was corroborated by the ACTCA President at the time of the event in a post above.

There is also some unnamed arbiter that you and Denis keep referring to, and seem to have an issue with and I am not buying into that personal agenda either.
The point regrading the arbiter is that they had no authority in determining whose name appeared on the trophy. That authority rested with the organisers and the ACTCA and they deemed there were joint winners.

The Facts. I have a cup with one name engraved, you have an article with two names, Denis has a verbal statement that he was there and there should be two names and this decision was agreed by an organiser I have never met.Whether you have met the organiser or not is irrelevant. The simple fact is that the Cup has been engraved incorrectly.

The Wikipedia site lists one winner Ian Rogers.So you are prepared to believe what is on Wikipedia and cite it as a source rather than accept what was is in the ACF newsletter of the time, was reported by Peter Parr in the Sydney Morning Herald of the time and corroborated by the comments of the ACTCA President at the time of the event.

The Bennett
20-03-2010, 10:24 PM
I don't meen to but in like this but I think this should really be dealt with AFTER the Doeberl has finished. Chalres has a lot to do in the next week or 2 and doesn't need this unneccesary interferance.

I do however agree that the historical in-acurracy should be fixed but I believe that there really shouldn't be so much fuss over it that it turns into an arguement/heated discussion.

MB

Kevin Bonham
21-03-2010, 08:25 AM
I notice that someone reverted the Wikipedia edits but without giving any reasons for doing so.

I personally couldn't be bothered with a Wikipedia edit-war over the matter since Wikipedia is known to be an unreliable source but others may wish to take that matter up there. However I doubt there is a solution that will satisfy everyone unless the ACTCA makes a fresh ruling one way or the other. I had an email from Ian Rogers who believes he was sole winner.

The problem is that the original Wikipedia text was put there by the arbiter who "overruled" the organisers although his standing to do so was questionable whether his basis for doing so was correct or not.

I agree that Charles shouldn't have to deal with it now as the matter is complex and can't be high on his list of priorities.

Denis_Jessop
21-03-2010, 09:50 PM
I notice that someone reverted the Wikipedia edits but without giving any reasons for doing so.

I personally couldn't be bothered with a Wikipedia edit-war over the matter since Wikipedia is known to be an unreliable source but others may wish to take that matter up there. However I doubt there is a solution that will satisfy everyone unless the ACTCA makes a fresh ruling one way or the other. I had an email from Ian Rogers who believes he was sole winner.

The problem is that the original Wikipedia text was put there by the arbiter who "overruled" the organisers although his standing to do so was questionable whether his basis for doing so was correct or not.

I agree that Charles shouldn't have to deal with it now as the matter is complex and can't be high on his list of priorities.

The problem with any fresh involvement of the ACTCA (apart from the real doubt that it could now validly make a decision on the matter) is that thereupon the arcane world of ACT chess politics will fully come into play; not a pleasant thought.

The whole thing is quite weird enough anyway. I, jointly with Roger McCart, made the "tie" decision. I remember that so clearly that I can tell you where and in what positions Roger, Ian, Aleks and I were in the hall when Roger told them of the decision. On the other hand, Ian Rogers, who has been in touch with me too, has a different recollection of the result. I know Ian well enough to say that I don't doubt his integrity in this. As appears from the thread, to which Bill gave a link yesterday, 12 months later certain allegations were made about the application of the tie-break rules. As far as I know that matter had not been raised in previous comments on the result. When I made the decision with Roger, there was no extended discussion of tie-break rules that I can remember though I vaguely remember the matter being referred to me because it was said that those rules did not split the two centenders. Had the tie break rules had any other result there would have been no need to involve me. Roger was the Convenor of the Organising Committee. There was certainly no suggestion put to me that the tie-break rules should not apply or that there was any dispute about what they were.

I am putting this down as a matter of record and not as part of an ongoing dispute.

DJ

Desmond
22-03-2010, 09:25 AM
hi a/c

When Bill called you a demented carrier pigeon did you happen to notice which of the three words he bolded?

starterAn interesting quotation from the starter in 2005. Isn't there a saying about mimicry being the sincerest form of flattery?

:lol:

peter_parr
22-03-2010, 10:59 AM
The Facts. I have a cup with one name engraved, you have an article with two names, Denis has a verbal statement that he was there and there should be two names and this decision was agreed by an organiser I have never met. The Wikipedia site lists one winner Ian Rogers.
Take it up formally with Stephen Mugford (President of the ACTCA) and investigate it through the ACF and ACTCA. I am happy to make whatever changes to the website and the cup that are required from that investigation.


There is another relevant post on the subject here (http://www.chesschat.org/showpost.php?p=96546&postcount=252) by Peter Parr.

Yesterday afternoon 11th April 2006 Paul Dunn ACTCA Treasurer advised me that the Doeberl Cup Permanent Trophy will be engraved with the names of both A.Wohl and I.Rogers for the year 2005. This confirms the decision of the ACTCA (the governing body of the Doeberl Cup) made last year as stated by the then ACTCA President Denis Jessop.

The last time the permanent trophy shared was in 1970 when no count-back method had been announced before or during the event the same as in 2005.

I have today advised Aleks Wohl who is in Germany making his final preparations for the Torino Olympiad.

I will ask Amiel to take a photo of the engraved permanent trophy so I can email it to Aleks as he has requested.
Note the last sentences – Dunn/Amiel

The Doeberl Cup trophy was updated by ACTCA Treasurer Paul Dunn clearly with the names I.Rogers 2005 and A.Wohl 2005.

The photo of the Doeberl Cup with both Rogers 2005 and Wohl 2005 has been available since the photo was taken on 18th April 2006 by Amiel Rosario.

The photo can be seen at Flickr
http://www.flickr.com/photos/closetgrandmaster/130709700/in/set-72057594110303179/
with many other Doeberl Cup 2006 photos.

Charles advises in 2010 that only the name of I.Rogers 2005 is now on the trophy.

If the plaque with both names has been removed after 18th April 2006 and replaced with only I.Rogers 2005 who replaced it? Who authorized it?

If the plaque was removed and replaced with only one name without authority of the ACTCA the new plaque is surely a fake bring the game into disrepute.

The governing body of the 2005 Doeberl Cup was the ACTCA as it had been for many years.

Wohl and Rogers tied for first place. The ACTCA had to determine who won the permanent trophy in the absence of a count-back system from the chief arbiter.

After consulting with his colleagues ACTCA President and eminent lawyer Denis Jessop spoke together with Wohl and Rogers advising that both players be equally on the Doeberl Cup permanent trophy. There was no dissent from the decision. No appeal was lodged either verbally or in writing over the five year period since the decision was made.

Finally – the arbiter of any tournament is answerable to the governing body of the event or he should not be chief arbiter. The correct process was followed and the arbiter should confirm the process was correct and should confirm that both Rogers and Wohl shared the 2005 Doeberl Cup permanent trophy.

Peter Parr
5 times Doeberl Cup participant (tied for 1st place at my last attempt but lost the count-back for the trophy).
20 times chief arbiter Doeberl Cup always with a written count-back system.
4 times NSWCA President including 2010.

Denis_Jessop
22-03-2010, 12:40 PM
The governing body of the 2005 Doeberl Cup was the ACTCA as it had been for many years.

Wohl and Rogers tied for first place. The ACTCA had to determine who won the permanent trophy in the absence of a count-back system from the chief arbiter.

After consulting with his colleagues ACTCA President and eminent lawyer Denis Jessop spoke together with Wohl and Rogers advising that both players be equally on the Doeberl Cup permanent trophy. There was no dissent from the decision. No appeal was lodged either verbally or in writing over the five year period since the decision was made.

Finally – the arbiter of any tournament is answerable to the governing body of the event or he should not be chief arbiter. The correct process was followed and the arbiter should confirm the process was correct and should confirm that both Rogers and Wohl shared the 2005 Doeberl Cup permanent trophy.

I can confirm that this is a correct account of what happened subject to the following.

The brochure for the rournament stated that "In the event of a tie for trophies, the winner will be decided on a countback of scores." (I still have a copy of the brochure.) That alone is ambiguous as it is not clear what a "countback of scores" means. I cannot say whether any clarifying announcement was made at the tournament. This matter is covered in some detail in the Doeberl Cup 2006 thread.

Actually, Roger McCart, the Convenor of the Organising Committee, consulted me for my opinion though I can't remember precisely what caused him to do this. At the time the chief arbiter complained that the arbiters had not been consulted. Roger McCart and I took the view that the decision was not one that should involve the arbiters.

Also, I might abstain from the view that I am an "eminent" lawyer though I thank Peter for the compliment. :)

Kevin Bonham
22-03-2010, 06:09 PM
Shaun has made a comment on the Wikipedia discussion page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Doeberl_Cup) to the effect that he disagreed with the decision but thinks since it was made by the organisers it should stand.

Denis_Jessop
22-03-2010, 07:12 PM
Shaun has made a comment on the Wikipedia discussion page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Doeberl_Cup) to the effect that he disagreed with the decision but thinks since it was made by the organisers it should stand.

Shaun's account pretty much lines up with my recollection except that I don't remember being told that Ian was first on tie-break or that Aleks' only question was whether his name would be on the trophy. I would not have agreed with the tie proposal had I been told that a countback had determined otherwise. My recollection on this point is not clear but I think that I was told that after a countback the players were still tied. As Shaun's statement implies, I was not involved in any discussions with him at the time. Any relevant discussions would have been with Roger McCart. Also I understood that I was being consulted by Roger as the ACTCA President, not as a member of the Organising Committee though I probably was one (but not a key one).

Charles
22-03-2010, 07:52 PM
And before we all get any more het up about false plaques etc can I suggest I double check the trophy next week when it returns from the engravers and is at the tournament. I looked at it and saw 2005 I Rogers. A second engraving may be elsewhere on the cup or it may not. I may not have read a second name that was there. Human error has been known to occur.

Adamski
22-03-2010, 10:36 PM
Wikipedia title-holder winner information is often wrong. For instance I saw recently that David Dick was listed as tying with Murray Chandler for the 1975 Aus Junior in Hobart. Actually Dick came third behind Chandler and another ineligible player. I fixed that one too.Wasn't that ineligible player one J Sarfati, then living in Wellington, NZ?

Bill Gletsos
22-03-2010, 10:50 PM
Wasn't that ineligible player one J Sarfati, then living in Wellington, NZ?No, it was New Zealander Kai Jensen.

Capablanca-Fan
22-03-2010, 11:01 PM
No, it was New Zealander Kai Jensen.
Yes, this was a bit before my time. It was the 1981 champs where I was ineligible despite tying because I was a NZ resident.

Adamski
22-03-2010, 11:01 PM
No, it was New Zealander Kai Jensen.Ta, Bill. I played Kai Jensen many years ago in the South Island champs. Very sadly, IIRC, he died young. He was a talented chess player.
There was a year that Jono played in Aus Junior as a Kiwi, and finished second or so. Jono or Bill or Kevin, which one was it? (Edit: Just saw Jono's post above!!)

Metro
23-03-2010, 10:54 PM
Ta, Bill. I played Kai Jensen many years ago in the South Island champs. Very sadly, IIRC, he died young.

I think this is incorrect.I met him at Hobson's Bay C.C.Here is an interesting profile http://www.hobsonsbaychess.info/archives/members/kaijen.htm Looking further,he was working at Monash Uni.in Melbourne last year.

Adamski
23-03-2010, 11:14 PM
I think this is incorrect.I met him at Hobson's Bay C.C.Here is an interesting profile http://www.hobsonsbaychess.info/archives/members/kaijen.htm Looking further,he was working at Monash Uni.in Melbourne last year.Thanks, Met. I am really pleased to hear that as somebody had told me a rumour he had died. Might have been someone else with the same name. My deepest pologies to Kai if he reads this thread. I should know better than putting unsubstantiated material in the public domain. Kai was (and no doubt is) a really nice guy.

Capablanca-Fan
24-03-2010, 12:12 PM
Thanks, Met. I am really pleased to hear that as somebody had told me a rumour he had died. Might have been someone else with the same name. My deepest pologies to Kai if he reads this thread. I should know better than putting unsubstantiated material in the public domain. Kai was (and no doubt is) a really nice guy.
One time when it is good to be wrong. I agree with you. I lost to him when I was 11.

Oepty
24-03-2010, 01:57 PM
I think this is incorrect.I met him at Hobson's Bay C.C.Here is an interesting profile http://www.hobsonsbaychess.info/archives/members/kaijen.htm Looking further,he was working at Monash Uni.in Melbourne last year.

Quite an interesting story in the profile.
Scott

Adamski
24-03-2010, 11:18 PM
Quite an interesting story in the profile.
ScottIndeed. Quite the longest profile of a non -master player I have read. A pity he's a Buddhist (but that's not this thread...). I still have my scoresheets from the South Island where Kai Jensen was second and beat me. The year was 1976. Also, a J Adams loss to K Jensen in NZ Junior Chps in the same year (the only 2 times I recall playing him - I lost both games) is in chessgames.com. Google "Kai Jensen and New Zealand Chess" and you even find this thread!!! Plus books he has written on masculine theme in literature.

Kevin Bonham
26-03-2010, 07:28 PM
I see Wohl has written the following on Amiel's blog:


Seriously? This is still a topic of discussion? Really Amiel, I didn't care then and I couldn't possibly care less now.

Amir K.
26-03-2010, 09:26 PM
I see Wohl has written the following on Amiel's blog:

To many rabits, to many St Claus, to many people comments but what is the final decission?

Kevin Bonham
26-03-2010, 09:27 PM
To many rabits, to many St Claus, to many people comments but what is the final decission?

Who knows? I can see the matter being left in limbo for another five years if nobody really cares enough to get it fixed.

It does look like Wohl, rightly or wrongly, was officially =1st to me.

Charles
30-03-2010, 06:22 PM
Drum Roll, There are two names on the trophy when I picked it up today so I guess that decides it. When I looked I assumed that they would list two winners as

2005 I Rogers
A Wohl

But it was engraved twice between the other names with
I Rogers 2005
A Wohl 2005

Over the weekend we will update the website when everything settles down.

Adamski
30-03-2010, 11:37 PM
Drum Roll, There are two names on the trophy when I picked it up today so I guess that decides it. When I looked I assumed that they would list two winners as

2005 I Rogers
A Wohl

But it was engraved twice between the other names with
I Rogers 2005
A Wohl 2005

Over the weekend we will update the website when everything settles down.Thanks for that, Charles. Once the web site is updated, this issue should be finally, officially dead.

Kevin Bonham
31-03-2010, 12:05 AM
Thanks for that, Charles. Once the web site is updated, this issue should be finally, officially dead.

Although the anonymous unsubstantiated Wikipedia reverter might not agree. :lol: