Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 101
  1. #31
    CC resident nutcase Trent Parker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Picton, The Dilly, NSW
    Posts
    2,934
    I have changed it. Happy now?
    GO THE DRAGONS!
    GO Western Sydney Wanderers!
    Quote Originally Posted by Adamski's signature
    God exists. Short and to the point.
    This is the reason I do not wade into religion threads.

  2. #32
    Account Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,680
    ^^
    tcn

    Yes, you have improved the response.
    Just keep an eye on the posts of that nice Mr Barry Cox if you are wanting to master subtlety. He is an exemplary poster.

    regards
    starter

  3. #33
    CC FIDE Master george's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    713
    Hi All,

    Well it looks like there will be no Women's Championship and no women's prize which is OK for the bottom line which is in the RED.

    Kindest Regards
    George Howard

  4. #34
    CC International Master Brian_Jones's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    2,055

    The 2005 Australian Women's Champion is .............

    Not a good decision. Why penalise the Women that have already entered?
    In my view the Women's Championship should proceed and the title should be awarded irrespective of how many entries there are. We need to promote Women's chess not spit the dummy when things don't go as planned.
    Get on the blower George and Garvin - ring every female chess player in the land! Be positive - maybe try some bribery?

  5. #35
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,073
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian_Jones
    Not a good decision. Why penalise the Women that have already entered?
    In my view the Women's Championship should proceed and the title should be awarded irrespective of how many entries there are. We need to promote Women's chess not spit the dummy when things don't go as planned.
    Get on the blower George and Garvin - ring every female chess player in the land! Be positive - maybe try some bribery?
    if you want to call it bribery, we already tried that, it is called the $1000 first prize to the Australian Womens Champion. We cant award the title as we have to follow the by laws laid for the Australian Womens Championship.

  6. #36
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,483
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian_Jones
    Not a good decision.
    The decision is not a decision but is forced by virtue of ACF policy. Following the complete fiasco with the 2002 Australian Womens Championship (which ended up being held as part of the Australian Masters with only 3 females competing none of whom were serious pretenders to the title of strongest female in the country) Evelyn Koshnitsky submitted a proposal to the ACF, under which the Australian Womens Championships would be run as part of the Open with the title only awarded if there were at least six females from at least three states competing. This proposal was accepted by Council, albeit not unanimously, after an amendment to remove the minimum number restriction failed.

    I moved that amendment but I voted for the motion after the amendment was defeated. I now think that if we are going to persist with this title at all we need to find some way to ensure that there is at least one ACF 2000+ rated female competing every time the title is awarded. If the title is not valued by the strongest female players I see very little purpose in having it, and really cannot see what having a minnie-mouse AWC title does to promote women's chess.
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 22-12-2004 at 12:27 PM.

  7. #37
    Account Suspended jenni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    2,701
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham
    really cannot see what having a minnie-mouse AWC title does to promote women's chess.
    I agree - having a title awarded to 3 competitiors is silly. However the real problem is that the wonderful male chess establishment does nothing to nurture female chess.

  8. #38
    Account Suspended jenni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    2,701
    [QUOTE=Brian_Jones] Be positive QUOTE]

    This is the bit they have trouble with.....

  9. #39
    Account Suspended jenni's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canberra
    Posts
    2,701
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian_Jones
    Not a good decision. Why penalise the Women that have already entered?
    As I have said I don't believe you can award a creditable title. However why should the women who have entered be penalised and have no prize money to aim for. Even if not $1,000 prize there should be a small prize for the best performing woman. In the interests of promoting women's chess in Australia.

    I have a vested interest here - I have a very pissed off daughter. She was one of the first entries in the tournament. She is staying at the Mercure and paying $120 a night for a room and now, at the last minute, a prize that she was hoping to compete for has been snatched away.

    Normally all advertised prize-money has to be paid out. The organisers are using a loophole of not having to award the title, because there are not enough females, to claw back the money. A reduced prize fund of $500 would not be unreasonable.
    Last edited by jenni; 22-12-2004 at 02:27 PM.

  10. #40
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    399
    Quote Originally Posted by jenni
    I agree - having a title awarded to 3 competitiors is silly. However the real problem is that the wonderful male chess establishment does nothing to nurture female chess.
    as a side note,
    in the us they offer half entry fee for women
    (and also to any player who can show an plane ticket to attend the tourny ie. interstate players).
    i would suggest one step further and give free entry to all women to boost numbers.

  11. #41
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,444
    There must be a prize given for the best women in the Australian Open. It would be a disgrace if this did not happen. The title cannot be awarded as has been stated but some prize money must be awarded.

    I worked out last night that to get 6 women players to play we are asking 1 in about every 26 rated and active women players to enter the competition. I did a quick count and got to 155 active rated women. I probably missed a couple, but I doubt more than ten. We have no where that rate of men playing in the tournament as per the list Garvin put up on the 16th. It is about 1 in every 42 men, and with 4 women entered it is about 1 in every 38 women. It is therefore no real surprise that 6 females did enter.

  12. #42
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    3,444
    There must be a prize given for the best women in the Australian Open. It would be a disgrace if this did not happen. The title cannot be awarded as has been stated but some prize money must be awarded.

    I worked out last night that to get 6 women players to play we are asking 1 in about every 26 rated and active women players to enter the competition. I did a quick count and got to 155 active rated women. I probably missed a couple, but I doubt more than ten. We have no where that rate of men playing in the tournament as per the list Garvin put up on the 16th. It is about 1 in every 42 men, and with 4 women entered it is about 1 in every 38 women. It is therefore no real surprise that less than 6 females entered.

  13. #43
    Account Suspended Libby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canberra, ACT
    Posts
    1,127
    Quote Originally Posted by quanta
    as a side note,
    in the us they offer half entry fee for women
    (and also to any player who can show an plane ticket to attend the tourny ie. interstate players).
    i would suggest one step further and give free entry to all women to boost numbers.
    I don't know that I really agree with the idea of women getting a free ride to enter the event (if you want prizes you need to be expected to contribute in some way to the pool). However, it's not the fault of those women who do enter that others choose not to. You can only be the best of who is there to play. Have a look at the list of girls registered in the junior events to see where the problem starts from. Will we ever get equity in numbers with boys - I think not (and less in the pool to start with makes the prospect of equity in strength and depth a complete pipe-dream, whatever one might argue on the male/female chess merit bandwagon). So we may never get equity in numbers but if you can't do better than the number registered for the 2005 Aus Junior Girls events (disproportionally from the ACT as Jenni points out) then how does anyone ever expect to have a credible Women's field? I'm sure the active female players already counted by Freddy are themselves significantly juniors, not adults.

    Removing any prospect of a Womens prize from the Open does nothing but discourage those who do bother to play. By all means review the $$$s but do we want the female population sitting around next year and watching the numbers before they enter? Is a better solution a smaller, guaranteed prize with the main prize and title dependent on entries?

    I thought you guys wanted to see more gals at the events? Not just the type you pin up on the back of the door? And certainly not us mothers?

  14. #44
    Account Permanently Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    5,680
    Quote Originally Posted by Freddy
    There must be a prize given for the best women in the Australian Open. It would be a disgrace if this did not happen. The title cannot be awarded as has been stated but some prize money must be awarded.

    I worked out last night that to get 6 women players to play we are asking 1 in about every 26 rated and active women players to enter the competition. I did a quick count and got to 155 active rated women. I probably missed a couple, but I doubt more than ten. We have no where that rate of men playing in the tournament as per the list Garvin put up on the 16th. It is about 1 in every 42 men, and with 4 women entered it is about 1 in every 38 women. It is therefore no real surprise that less than 6 females entered.
    Mr Freddy

    Like your post mate. All those metrics...great stuff.


    starter

  15. #45
    CC Grandmaster Garvinator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Brisbane
    Posts
    13,073
    George and I have spoken and it looks like we will be offering a womens prize after all. How much it is is not certain, but there will most likely be a womens prize

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Next ratings list
    By Megaman in forum Ratings Arena
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 28-02-2005, 11:11 PM
  2. ACF December 2004 Ratings
    By Bill Gletsos in forum Ratings Arena
    Replies: 98
    Last Post: 18-12-2004, 12:11 PM
  3. Crown Australian Poker Championship
    By News Bot in forum Games Australia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 24-06-2004, 07:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •